Arta, thanks for posting this. I followed the various links, as I hope you did too rather than that you just posted your comment for the incriminating headline.  Reading the various links brought back memories of what I have known, believed, and hoped for regarding Nicaragua for more than forty years and which are totally in line with the aspirations expressed in that letter. 

By coincidence, I arrived in Managua on my first trip to Nicaragua on January 20, 1981,  Ronald Reagan’s inauguration day. In the cab from the bus stop with three or four European travelers we came to a detour around a parade. The driver told us with what I took as a bit of cynical sarcasm that the people were celebrating because they think their troubles are over since Reagan, who had sent a mercenary army trained and supported in terrorist methods to try to destroy the socialist revolution that had defeated Somoza, was finally gone.  The driver smiled and chuckled just a bit. Turns 0ut the U.S. caused troubles were not over. 

From one of those links:  And yet we signed: Behind the letter to the president of Nicaragua: 

 I remembered that exhilarating day a few weeks ago when my friend Linda John asked me to sign a letter strongly condemning the increasing political repression under the current regime of Ortega and Murillo. The letter stated:

We the undersigned went to Nicaragua to support the heroic and noble efforts of the Nicaraguan people to rebuild their country into one of justice, equality and democracy. We also went to witness and oppose the illegal and immoral actions of our own government that violated the Nicaraguan people’s right to self-determination.

We are well aware of – and detest – the long, shameful history of U.S. government intervention in Nicaragua and many other countries in Latin America. However, the crimes of the US government – past and present – are not the cause of, nor do they justify or excuse, the crimes against humanity committed by the current regime of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo … the targeting of women’s organizations, independent journalists, and environmentalists and indigenous communities opposing construction of the proposed canal.

My underlining is to note the qualities of government that must have existed at least at some point so that they must now be rebuilt. Those qualities did not exist under Somoza so they must have been provided by the Sandinista government, at least at some point. I do not believe they have been lost to the extent claimed. Describing her trip to Nicaragua to celebrate the fourth anniversary of the revolution she says:

It was a heady moment for the North American activists who had traveled to Managua to celebrate the fourth anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution. 

I get a feeling reading the letter that she and some others of her ilk speaking from the U.S. are persuing another ‘heady woke moment’ among their peers by once again being righteous voices speaking up for justice.  I know that that suspicion may be an injustice to her, it certainly would be to some.  All that said, I can relate to the message of the signers of the letter saying that they started out as, and for a long time continued to be, supporters of the Sandinista revolution. [And of course it gives them great credibility, right? Makes for a great headline] And, for the most part they supported Ortega for a long time and still support what Ortega played a significant part in building, as do I.  

 Ortega and his wife may have been corrupted by the circles they entered and ran in. There was some hint of that among some of the educated and seemingly informed Nicaraguans I talked to during my last trip there about four years ago.  The good things I had heard about the Nicaraguan economy, although the country was still obviously poor, were evident. Services, necessities, health care, education, decent main roads, and reliable cheap transportation etc,etc  Not everyone I talked to about local politics and culture and conditions was an Ortega or Sandinista supporter.  Among his non supporters I thought I probably heard the most incriminating political attacks that were in the local attention and conversation. What allusions I heard to that effect had to do with them wanting to hobnob with the international set and that they wasted money doing so and were losing touch with the ordinary people. Quite likely true but I never heard any suggestion of brutal strong-man tactics from those locals or from the snowbirds I talked to and who were there by the thousands, many from the U.S., some from around the world, but mostly from Canada. The reason they were there was because it is cheap [Nicaragua is a very poor country] and because they felt safe, a feeling and reputation of the country that had developed over many years.  The troubles started there, or at least broke out openly, not long after I left and the reporting on them from alternate sites which has the ring of truth to me was much different than the standard fare from our MSM. 

Whatever the actual truth, I am willing to bet and give long odds that any legitimate complaint as well as those fabricated about and against the Ortega leadership is greatly exaggerated by the usual stenographers in the MSM who report on what is reported to them by the State Department or the CIA. or that they hear in other slanted reporting  It has always been like that for the whole of modern history. It always is like that regarding international plays by the U.S.  That said, if Ortega is guilty of a tenth of the charges being made against him then I am very disappointed at his fall and believe he should resign or be legally and peacefully removed from office. It does not mean that I agree with U. S. methods of interference or very often even its right to interfere and it does not mean I have changed my mind about past and continuing support of the Sandinista revolution and the part that Ortega played in it. 

 If the characterizations  of the situation by the usual suspects here in the U.S. is anywhere near accurate then I am very disappointed and saddened by Ortega's fall from grace much as I have been over the years by any number of politicians in whom I had placed some faith and some hope, but I will continue to have hope for the best for Nicaragua and want it to be under a legitimate government but not one deemed legitimate because it was installed by the U.S.A. using nefarious and so often deadly methods. Regarding this sort of situation I often consider how things might now be in various countries if we had honestly spent a small portion of the money and effort helping a country in question as we have spent trying to manipulate it.

From the very beginning of the Sandinista's success the U.S. has interfered in their running of their own government. I continue to have admiration for the Sandinista revolution and I continue to be offended by how my country treats Nicaragua. I continue to not see any sense of it. I cannot see Nicaragua as any threat to the U.S. now or in the foreseeable future. I cannot see how anybody justifies some of our international policies as demonstrated in Nicaragua but also in many other places either legally, morally, ethically, or pragmatically. I am against hurting people for no good reason. I am offended that we are sanctioning Nicaragua and hurting people there for no good reason that I can see. Maybe I already said that. Maybe someone can give me a good reason for our continuing to do as we continue to do.  The article I posted shows that we are keepin' right on keepin' on.