Record UN vote against US blockade of Cuba

by The Insider Thu Nov 06, 2003 21:15

"international support for the Cuban Revolution"

Anyone who supports what the Cuban revolution has become is a moron. It's one thing to support the overthrow of the old regime, but the current regime is hardly any better.

It's not socialist, it's not democratic and it's not free. The US sanctions are only helping the current revolution now and should be lifted, but let's not give socialism a bad name by calling Castro a socialist. He's a fucking dictator and that's it.

by bernie the bird Fri Nov 07, 2003 03:18

Democracy is freedom? Not really, democracy is majority rule, and we are all well versed on how easily the masses are manipulated, and how tragically minority lifestyles and subversive opinions are marginalized.
Fidel a dictator? I disagree, as do my Cuban friends. The guy is a relic... like the Queen of England... he holds little executive power... decision making is mostly done on a local level.
Yes, the sanctions propogate the regime, though I'm not an apologist for Castroism, I could say all government is regime. The last 40 years of Cuban history have been relatively its most peaceful.
I have a story to tell...
During the mid and late 1980's as the Guatemalan Civil war raged, Britain sent thousands of troops to it's tiny protectorate of Belize to defend the border (though, apparently no incursions were authenticated). The small jungle nation of roughly 130,000 mostly Afro-Carribeans was treated to an invasion of another sort- From interviews I conducted in Dangriga some years ago, I learned how British soldiers would arrive with truck-loads of Nike sneakers, Levi's jeans, televisions and stereos and 'award' families and individuals who were supportive of the British presence (this I also had confirmed by ex-squadies who served there). Within a few short years a new culture of consumerism was developed in the once poor nation, through neighbour envy, new zoning laws and property taxes, and foreign investment on the Cayes. Southern Belize up to then was a center for a hybrid Garifuna-Rastafarian community that flourished in the promised land of Monkey River, soon to feel the pressure of the newly introduced market-state by means of police oppression, beatings and forced evictions. After continuous harrassment many of hundreds emigrated to perhaps the last nation in the Caribe to support the Rasta way of life (not just the image)... Cuba!
Freedom means different things to different people... Indeed, freedom to me would be travelling to somewhere where I do not have to see a McDonalds sign every five minutes I am outside... Let us remember that there exists in the world a place yet immune to the assaults of the hyper-consumer culture, and yet has managed to harbour among the worlds best education and health care systems...

by cabhog Fri Nov 07, 2003 09:54

maybe if castro stopped imprisoning those who express an opinion and executing people whoses only crime is to non-violently highack a ferry to go to the USA, then maybe the USA would think better of the sanctions.

Isn't it amazing that the current castro clampdown on free speech occured when they were increasing signs that support in both parties in the US for ending the sanctions had grown?

by Pro-Cuba Fri Nov 07, 2003 10:01

I just can't stand it when so so-called left winger waffle on about socialism, how capitalism is bad and how workers are raise and smash the capitalist state.
When it all boils down to it all these ultra-leftist morons, most of whom where never working class hate socailism. Deformed Workers States, Degenerate workers state, state capitalism blah,blah, blah!
The fact is Cuba is a socialist state, its not perfect, its got flaws to beat the band but it is an anti-Imperalist state.

by silo Fri Nov 07, 2003 14:10

"non-violently highack a ferry"

explain that one, please.

by kokomero Fri Nov 07, 2003 16:46

As anyone who has visited Cuba in the past 10 years would know, the Cubans themselves are driving change on the ground similar to the Chinese, and not the Americans or other foreigners who should take care of their own sorry systems.

In the meantime, unlike us, the Cubans at least have an excellent healthcare and education system, more than we have in this sorry example of free-market capitalism.

by bernie the bird Sat Nov 08, 2003 02:14 berniejbird at yahoo dot ie

just as a footnote, I'm off to Cuba for the month of April 2004, half of which will be a cycle/hiking tour of the Sierra Maestra. The other half I havn't yet decided, but probably hanging out around Havana and Santiago, avoiding the resorts and scams...
I'll be the last two weeks of March in Orlando and Key West, a proper vacation at Universal studios, the first in my life, and plan to write a piece on the disparity of standards and pace of life between the distance akin to the trip from Dublin to Holyhead
If anyone has any suggestions for 'must-see' (like Calle Bobby Sands), or casas they can recommend, do drop me a line at the above address...
Smileys!
berniebird

by Soledad Sat Nov 08, 2003 04:08

Should we not get to hear the voices of the Cuban people even once????

by berniebird Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:57

querido soledad...
Yes, there are elections held in Cuba, the last parliamentary elections were in January... To get things in perspective, you should recall Eamonn deValera's 40+ year run in Irish politics... so was it "DeValera's Ireland" then?
si, fueron elecciones alla al empeza de este ano... mira este vinculo...
http://www.cubaminrex.cu/Mirar_Cuba/La_isla/elecciones.htm
you should really do your research, or at least think before you write...

by berniebird Sun Nov 09, 2003 18:41

If the Dail could have this kind of composition, rather than the crowd of balding businessmen running Ireland right now, I wonder if it would still be "Ahern's Ireland."
Again, Cuba gives us an exemplory standard in politics-not-bought...


La nueva legislatura Cubana en números


La nueva legislatura cubana que quedó instalada este jueves tiene 609 diputados. Algunos datos:

- 390 hombres, 219 mujeres: 8$ féminas más que la legislatura anterior.

- La edad promedio es de 47 años.

- La escolaridad es superior'' en 80$ de los legisladores.

- Hay 409 personas blancas, 67 mestizos y 133 negros.

- Entre los legisladores 144 son trabajadores, 21 son investigadores o científicos renombrados.

- Nueve son deportistas famosos, 38 son intelectuales

- Hay 40 altos militares y 68 dirigentes políticos

- Hay 47 funcionarios de gobierno, tres pastores y 57 dirigentes juveniles

- 378 legisladores no participaron en el parlamento anterior y por lo tanto se renovó en un 62$.

Fuente: Comisión Electoral

by ciaran Tue Nov 11, 2003 21:26

a bit late in the debate, but cabhog the hi-jackers, dissidents etc. are paid functionaries of the us. specifcally james carson of the us interests section has organised these dissedent groups. there is a wide range of debate on znet concerning the cuban conundrum of a few months ago.
another thing to consider is also the fact that bushII has drastically cut the amount of emmigrants allowed from cuba - it was 20,000 per year, but less than one thousand have been allowed to emmigrate this year. the us has also changed it's laws so that if there is another wave of cuban emmigration, it will view this as an attack. so when there's an attack, there'll be retaliation.

also you mention that cuba was getting support in the us - bullshit. during the clinton years - and he was the supposed democrat - the helms-burton act 1996 further strangled cuba. there will be no let off of the embargo - it's better for votes to further strengthen it, there's an election next year.

also i'm sure you know that the aleternative for cuba - if not the castro socialism - is to be like the rest of latin america - that is completely screwed with the us creaming all resources at any cost.

by cabhog Tue Nov 11, 2003 22:07

ciaran, i trust your irish isn't that good, a cabbage is a cabaiste not a cabhog (which is a ignorant or stupid person, i'm being ironic or incredibly honest)

James Carson provided the dissidents with rooms to meet in. That is 100% true and its a damning reflection of any state where you have to go to a foreign consultate in order to be able to meet in relative security. Could Ciaran remind us about rules governing freedom of assembly in Cuba?

Secondly, the approach of the Cuban dissidents on this occasion was an attempt to comply fully with the law. Under the old consitution (amended over the past 18 months) if you gathered 30,000 signatures or there abouts you were entitled to a referendum. When the dissidents were about to recent this threhold (they did eventually), Castro held another referendum which got almost 100% support that refused anyone the right to challenge the position of the communist party. Also, severe presure has been placed on those who signed the petition to withdraw their name & the organisers eventually got 20 years in jail by the state apparatus (Do you support that Ciaran?).

Just out of comparision. Prisoners of conscience in Cuba got opn this occasion almost 20 year sentences on average. They committed no crime that could legitimately deserve such a sentence, or did they Ciaran?

No with regard to the Ferry? 3 men attempted to seize control of a ferry in cuba, a redivert to the USA. they did not mantain control of the ferry, were arrested and executed within a week of the sentence being past. No one was injured or killed according to any 3rd party evidence of the hijacking.
Questions
Question One: Do you deserve to die for hijacking a ferry?

Question Two: Does Ciaran believe that these men got a fair trail?

Question three: Why did the clamp down on dissidents and the execution of the 3 take place during the first week of the US invasion of Iraq?

Question Four: Since you don't believe that there is any movement towards improved US-Cuban economic ties, could the almost continued pressure from Mid-Western senators, governors and congressmen both republican and democrat to re-open the grain trade between the two counbtries

Question Five: Do you support castro's actions against the dissidents and the jail sentences they received?

Question Six: What would your reaction be if the Irish goivernment insituted a similar policy against those who protested against their policies and sought to leave the country?

by cabhog Tue Nov 11, 2003 22:12

There were elections in the past few years in North Korea, and they've more female Members of parliment than we do (both numerically and percentages). Elections don't prove anything its the condition theu take place under

Castro's cuba is not free

Currently their is an asylum seeker from Cuba on hunger strike in Mosney. If Cuba was so great why did he flee here?

by ciaran Wed Nov 12, 2003 19:42

cabhog,
my irish is unfortunately not the greatest, but that’s not the issue – and no offence intended.

first of all regarding james carson giving dissidents rooms to meet in, this is absurd surely. imagine during the cold war, if the russians allowed their embassy in the states to be used by communists so as to have meetings (I think this is a fair analogy). this would not be tolerated at all. but you say in order to meet in “relative security” – well by meeting in the us embassy does this not suggest something sinister?? and isn’t it co-incidental that the us are “aiding” these dissidents with a meeting place – why are the meetings not happening in the spanish embassy??? I don’t have the cuban constitution beside me – but why are you asking me to quote the rules governing freedom of assembly?? why don’t you tell me?? and did carson not provide financial and material support??

I obviously do not support the fact that organisers of the referendum got twenty years in jail – but who were these organisers?? what’s their background ?? and who was supporting this referendum??

regarding the hi-jacking.
answer one: I am not a supporter of the death penalty.
answer two: I honestly do not know – depends what you read and where you read it.
answer three: because that’s the way it happened?? I could offer a few tangents – but could you shed some light??
answer four: I did not say that there is not any movement towards improved us-cuban relations – I merely suggested that with the current administration, it’s a better vote winner keeping the embargo. obviously there are groups within the us who would like to see the embargo lifted.
answer five: If the dissedents were supported by the us then I agree with castro. if they were not then it’s unfair. but where’s the truth??
answer six: the irish government uses a different tactic – carry out the policies and to hell with those who are against it, and the media doesn’t even expose the lies and the hypocrisy, that fails to ask the obvious questions. yeah??


and back to the original topic. the sanctions.
question seven: do you agree with the sanctions???
questions eight: your original comment seems to suggust that executions = embargo?? is not that the embargo has increased tension within cuban as it’s aims are more difficult to achieve, embargo = hijackings.
question ten: where do you get your information from??
question eleven: and in your opinion, if the revolution had never happened what do you think cuba would be like, would it be a haiti?? or maybe a northern mexico?? or a jamaica?? or a sort of third world florida?? (I know speculation is pointless, but for where it is, and considering it’s colonial history, the ordinary person in cuba has more of the fundamentals than other parts of latin america. do you think so?)
question twelve: do you support us terrorist interventions in cuba over the last forty years??
question thirteen: what’s your view on the cuban five??

I support the cuban experiment, but only wish that the embargo was never implemented, so that cuba could reach her full potential - she has been devestated by the sanctions.

ps. have you ever been there??

by ciaran Thu Nov 13, 2003 08:11

quickly reply, come on answer my questions, provoke debate, expand consciousness, sooner rather than later because we're running out of newswire space!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by cabhog Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:00

Do I support the embargo? No, it is self defearting as it gives an ego maniac a form of legitimation. Do I believe that the US has a right to prevent international free trade as it has done with Helms-Burton? No.

I get my infomration from everywhere. Although I would not consider my self in any way left wing, I believe that it is important to note the infomration coming from left wing organisations, human rights organisation, the miami cubans, and internal and international dissenters with regard to cuba. So i don't have one source and I try to get a balanced view on everything.

I often disagree with amnesty sentiments, but their work is based on fact . If the left are willing to give credence to amnesty stories about other nations in latin america, the should look at amnesties web page, in particular

http://web.amnesty.org/web/wire.nsf/July2003/Cuba


Iff Cuba didn't have the revolution in th 1950s? Could have had a democratic one ten years later, maybe? Bastia might have died and a similar process such as in post-Franco spain could have occured?

Does the average Cuban have more fundamentals than anyehwere else inn Latin America? I'm just going to say that to my mind the three most important fundamentals are Free Speech, Free Asssociation and a Freedom to actively campaign for the non-violent removal of my government. Do the Cubans have better access to these fundamental rights than other citizens of latin AMerica? No. They do have better healthcare and educational arrangements than any other part of LAtin America, but should we take economic arguments as a legitimising force for an undemocratic regime? Pre-1936 and the Ethiopian adventure, Mussolini had improved the standard of living in Italy, darined the marshes, reduced malaria, got rid of the MAfia, etc. Had only killed one dissident politican for sure. Would you support a righ-wing dictator if he imporved economic living standards, with only a small human cost? I'd hjope not, so why support a 'left-wing' one? Although I would argue that Castroism does share a number of close similiarties with itlaian fascism:
Cult of the leader
Masculinity - the promotion of sports in Castro's cuba is similiar to that in fascist Italy - look at the investment in amateur boxing, basball, etc.
Foreign Aggrandizement: Look at Venezula today (overt Cuban influence, probably welcomed by a small majorioty in the country) or Angola (ask any angolan the next time you see one what they think of Cuba and their efforts to free aNGOLA from western imperialism and bring them into the fraternity of socialist nations).
the oppostion of the government to free speech and democratic debate - speaks for itself

Do I support Us interference (terrorism is a bit harsh and shows a slight bias to my mind) in Cuba over the past 40 years? Yes, but only some. I believe that all democratic governments should provide support for pro-democracy movements in other countries. The US should continue to provide intellecutual support, some finacial and logistical support for free cuban, free Iranian movements as they do know and they should expand it to free Saudi and other tinpot nations as well. So i support the Florida radio stations being braodcast into Cuba by anti-castroites. I don't support an invasion or any bay of bigs fiasco. During the cold war, the western forces never stoped communists from listening to Radio Moscow (it was no crime) or reading literature poublished by moscow or bejing (although it could be hard to come by and many places didn't stock it, there was no ban on importing the stuff yourself). In cuba, the government jams the radio singnals from Florida. Make of that what you will.

The Cuban Five, got a seven month trial and have excerised their right to appeal. Although i would accept that their are some nutters in Florida, I do believe that you can get a fair trial in the US. (http://www.freethefive.org) amazingly, , the free the five organisers have been free to hold rallys and distrube literature, the five got a seven month trial and are appealing. Although i fully accept that it is possible to be unjustly convicted in the US, i find the case but forward by the five unconvincing on the website is unconvincing. If the US is really the imperialist fascist state as, then why are they allowing the free the five to operate freely?

All i want is that the Cuban people have choice. THe choice if they wish to rject or accept capitalism, socialism, the USA, the USSR, whatever, just allow the people the choice.

Ciaran, you support the Cuban experiement, but its now 43 years old> it has failed by any onjective standards, for 30 years the economy was solely supported by the USSR (to the detriment of the people in the USSR standard of living). It is now more profitable for cuban doctors to work as barmen in the apartheid like tourist resorts. Why aren't cubans allowed full and free access to these tourist resorts and to the services the European tourist are offered?

by cabhog Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:05

just one last question?

If i started a campaign for the British to reassert control over all ireland and use the offices of the british embassy to do that. should i be given 15-28 years jail? of should i be allowed put my ideas to the people and have them rejected by the people? If castro is so popular, why does he need to use such 'low-handed tatics? Why not let the people not the security forces reject the ideas? after all a communist has stood for more or less all elections in the past 50 years for president

by ciaran Thu Nov 13, 2003 21:03

cabhog,

regarding what could have happened in cuba had the revolution not occurred, and I do note that you use “might” – to suggest that something akin to post franco spain is, in my opinion not feasible. spain went the way it did because it made economic sense for it to join back with europe, europe wanted spain back in the fold (obviously there are multiple reasons, but this must be one?). cuba was a resource for the us, I’m sure you know that the united fruit co owned many estates etc, so it would have mostly likely followed the same course as other countries within the region, that is a supplier to the north (the us and canada). I think this view is supported if one looks at other countries within the region, and current developments in terms of nafta, ftaa, and such trade agreements as the one recently between the us and chile.

fundamentals defined by the un charted are access to healthcare, food, lodging, education, and also the rights that you qoute. cubans have these, haitans do not, and many other countries don’t either. 75% of mexicans live in poverty. that’s an amazing statistic. (also I do believe that in cuba no one has to pay more than 10% of their earnings in rent payments.)

interesting the mussolini reference – but did he not beef up big business and ruthlessly destroy unions and worker’s rights?? cuba on the otherhand seeks to maximise workers rights. regarding the similarities that you say exist between italian fascism and the cuban experiment:

cult of leader: there is to a certain extent, but if you’re head of a state for forty years then obviously you are the face of it. it is not as strong.
masculinity: arts are also promoted – cuba has numerous literary awards. I do believe that the women’s volleyball is also pretty successful. What’s wrong with having sports as an important part of society?? in the west there’s an obeisty problem, in the cuban education sytem exericise is promoted, and an important part of everyday sc hooling.

foreign aggrandisement: you must be joking.
firstly venezuela: chavez invited cuban doctors(nearly 1000) to help implement health reforms for the bottom 80%. there is also a massive literacy drive – which the cubans are helping implement. if I were venezuelan I’d be the bottom 80% - so it’d be nice to learn how to read and get some basic healthcare.
also besides being able to purchase oil at a reduced price (along with other carribean countries), I know of no cuban involvement in the strikes of the managers, the coup of last april, and I don’t know of cuba trying to acquire any of the publically owned venezuelan oil industry.
angola: did cuba not help bring about the withdrawal of the south africans from this conflict which eventually led to the falling of the apartheid regime. were you supporter of apartheid? (and I’m assuming you weren’t but at least acknowledge that cuba played a small part in it’s downfall).

us terrorism is terrroism if you blow up airliners and ships, try to introduce diseases to wipe out crops, supply exile gropus with training and arms to attack from miami. come on, can you not see this is terrorism intended to terrorise. radio stations – no problem, but terror, no.

the us is not a democracy either, it may have the trappings, but it’s a plutocracy. plenty of freedoms, but look at it, for god’s sake, it’s crumbling.

a fair trial in the us, bullshit. and of course the free the five are allowed operate freely – but they will never be on the front page of the nyt, or even on the ass of cnn in some twilight hour. freedom, but controlled freedom.

finally. how has it failed if the people are better off than other nations in the region? cuba didn’t turn to the ussr immeadiately after the revolution, in an attempt to isolate her, the us forced her to do so.

and why is it more profitable for doctors to work as barmen, but only because cuba is on her knees. tourism is allowing socialismo to extend it’s life, but will be it’s undoing, as it’s chaning the nature of cuban society. why aren’t cubans allowed access to the beaches – because they’re out of the price range, and for tourist protection maybe because you’ve got these western gluttinous shower on holidays.

finally (again). would you answer me this:
if cuba had been allowed to exist as it wishes within the international domain, with no sanctions, do you think it would have worked??

the sanctions cripple her - impede her development, and do not allow development. and please comment on us terrorism.

thanks.

by cabhog Thu Nov 13, 2003 22:48

Question from Ciaran:
Finally (again). would you answer me this:
if cuba had been allowed to exist as it wishes within the international domain, with no sanctions, do you think it would have worked??

No. Firstly the success of th Cuban model has only occured when it has been subsidised by other nations. Upo to the 1980s the Cuban economy was financed by the USSR, purchasing sugar at inflated prices, selling heavy industrial goods, oil, and other resources at prices that cost the USSR economny. even today if it wasn't for Charves' genorisity, cuba's economny would probably be dead.

With regard to the US embargo, while I disagree entirely with the Helms-Burton act, the US should be under no obligation to sell any goods to Cuba. TYhe Helms-Burton act is disgusting as it restricts third party countries from freely trading with Cuba. But the principle problem with Cuba is a lack of hard currency, with the exception of tourism, Cuba has very little to sell to the oputside world ( their sugar production is woefully uncompetitive), so the idea that if sanctions were lifted tomorrow the place would take off, is to my mind simplistic.


So thats that answered, I hope.

Please, it hurts me deeply when people look at the sub-saharan africa in black and white (literally and metaphorically). Cuba were supporting the ruling MPLA against right wing insurgents backed by South africa and The USA. The MPLA were a disgusting organisation given to a hugh amount of barbarism. Eventually South Africa were forced to withdraw from Angola, which resulted in another outpost for the USSR in Africa (Cuba also supported some interesting characters in the Congolese wars), SA's withdrawal from Angola leading to the downfall of Apartheid?? Only in the sense of the chaos theorey, butterflies in brazil, stroms in France. Apartheid collapsed because the Boers lost out, the liberal influence of the Cape eventually converted enought Boers to the relaity ot the stupidity of Malan's great idea. Cuba's actions in Angola benefited no one, and they appear to have been entirely reactionary in that the Cuban involvement was inspired by US involvement.

Did I support Apartheid? Wasn't old enough to have had intelligent thought on the issue, but I'd hope that I'd have oppossed it.


I hate the word terrorism, to me its bombing a supermarket or shotting down a passenger jet.

Quote " us terrorism is terrroism if you blow up airliners and ships, try to introduce diseases to wipe out crops, supply exile gropus with training and arms to attack from miami. come on, can you not see this is terrorism intended to terrorise. radio stations " Supplying exile groups with weapons is not terrorism, it depends on what the weapons were used for, I suppose you'd aggree with that? Cuba is as guilty as finacing 'revolutionary' groups as the USA really. Don't let you ideological constraints blind you to that. Does that mean their terrorists? Porbably not, though if links with FARC are true, I hope you'd agree with me that any organistaion that plants car bombs in urbana areas is terroristic and their finacniers the same? Don't try that USA have done this so Cuba can, this debate is a cuba debate, i'm no huge USA fan, though i would agrue their revolution has proven far more inspirational to the people of the world than Cuba's.

Cuba has also being running agents high in the US state department and FBI. make of that what you will.

but lets get back to mmy point.

In the USA anyone can say what they want, organise protests stand for election even if they believe in subverting the US consitution. why can't the same rights be given to cubans. The Castro regime can continue to use the media to expand their message, the party can continue to be the civil administration, but please just allow the people with out fear of arrest or persecution to have their say. Surely they deserve that right?


I like the mussolini (pre-1936) angle though. Mussolini did crush the Unions, but he also brought big business to heel (agnellis and co were placed under a govt ministry), corporatism being founded on the idea of bringing owner and worker together. Castro isn't too fond of independent unions himslef though, is he? Surely its a workers right to a job (not a job title and social welfare which is what most workers in the sugar industry receive). Surely
a worker should be allowed to tell castro to get lost, that he wants a new government and wants to go to the beach.

free speech is a fundam,ental right and even in 'proto-fascist' states such as the UK and USA people have that right, surely Cubans in a 'scoialist paradise' should be granted the same right. I appreciate the economic argument, but wouldn't it be better if it was coupled with real democratic freedoms?

The one thing i can say is that when castro dies in his bed, the revolution will die with him. whether thats good or bad who knows.

by ciaran Fri Nov 14, 2003 04:10

you’ve misunderstood my question. immeaditaley in 1959 could the new cuba have excelled?
you’re waffling on about what happened later - that’s not my point and I agree wit your points. having cuba’s trading partners in europe, she might aswell just have traded with the moon. of course it’s uneconomical to trade everything to partners that are that far away, it increases the costs – eg. tranpsort.

so I’ll ask again -if cuba had been allowed to exist as it wishes within the international domain, with no sanctions, do you think it would have worked??

before you answer – it’s 1959 the changeover has happened. cuba sells her sugar to the us, trades with us and the us have no problem with castro, the output is still sugar, industry begins to murmur. do you get what I’m asking.

I agree with you about the third party countries not being allowed to trade with cuba is sick – but you have to admit it, it’s an ingenious move by the us.


south africa/angola
look at ethiopia and somalia. one was with the us and the other with the ussr and then they switched – so the good guys and the bad guys change sides all the time, and who were they in the first place?? from what I’ve said about angola and cuba’s involvement I believe that it did play a part in bringing the downfall of apartheid. you disagree, and I agree with you points and I’ll admit to not having an indepth knowledge of SA, but I do think cuba played a part in bringing about change. if you don’t mind me asking, how old are you??

your terrorism piece. read it again – you make a point that backs up what I said and then go off on a tangent. the us funded orlando bosch who blew a cuban airliner out of the sky in 1975 killing most on board. you agree that terrorism is “shotting down a passenger jet”. so is this act of terrorism combined with others legitimate?? when was the last time cuba actually carried out acts of terrorism in the us?

us revolution I’m not going into that – but was it not just the replacement of britian ruling form abroad with the best of society from the new colonies. ruling elite = ruling elite. columbia, I don’t support farc or any who support farc, but columbia’s a mess – it’s screwed and I’d prefer not to go into that as we’d be here until christmas.

the reason the same rights are not given to cubans is because some (and I don’t know what percentage) are opposed to the state and it’s aspirations? so if suddenly everyone is allowed do what they want then it’ll all change and be back to the banana republic – i.e. resouces sold off, everything privitised, sweatshops, or would you disagree. the embargo has put the revolution in limbo.

mussolini. forget it – I ditched a few of your points about that comparison and now you’re on about the unions. jobs in cuba not being real jobs etc – we’re touching on everything here – if cuba were allowed reach her full potential….blah blah blah. it’s pointless because we’re going to go back and forth and back and forth. a job?? what’s a job?? comodification of labour etc?? or maybe a job is sittiing in a office adding numbers or..maybe even arguing/ sorry debating on indymedia.

to summarise:
there are points and counter-points, and tit for tat. there are restictions within cuba, and these are not to be supported, but what I’m trying to suggest is that these restrictions exist because of the embargo. if for arguments sake, the embargo didn’t exist and castro was ruling for forty years and still doing the same then I’d be dead against it, but I support cuba because it’s an alternative that has not been allowed to develop – it could in the words of george shutlz (I think) : be a danerous example to others.

the west has it’s problems, cuba has hers, but the us imposed the embargo which I believe has caused cuba’s problems.
thanks.

by Chekov Fri Nov 14, 2003 04:41

"SA's withdrawal from Angola leading to the downfall of Apartheid?? Only in the sense of the chaos theorey, butterflies in brazil, stroms in France. Apartheid collapsed because the Boers lost out, the liberal influence of the Cape eventually converted enought Boers to the relaity ot the stupidity of Malan's great idea."

That is hogwash. I've never even come across anybody before who claims that South African Whites voluntarily decided that apartheid was a bad idea. They extremely reluctantly bowed to the twin pressures of the UDF uprising in the townships and, probably more importantly, the fact that their capital was cut off from what it considered its natural economic hinterland by a series of military defeats in Angola, then Mozambique, then Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, then finally in South West Africa/Namibia. Without the ability for South African capital to invest in any of its northern neighbours, the country was doomed to economic collapse. Check where it is on a map and how close anybody else is!

The end of apartheid was a deal largely between the seven giant corporations of the South African economy (mostly mineral exploitation) and the leadership of the ANC. The corporations got SADC, the ANC got state power. Everybody else got pretty much nothing or worse. Today the South African economic backyard stretches as far north as Dar es Salaam and Katanga in Southern DRC, although it is owned by a tiny minority, many (if not most) of whom are resident abroad.

by cabhog Fri Nov 14, 2003 18:13

My age? I was born in about 70 years after the alst free elections in Cuba

If the US never placed an embargo on Cuba?

Best Case:
I think her economic development would probably have been similar to Tito's Yugoslavia in the southern regions (Kosovo, Bosnia-H) not Slovenia. Maybe a bit more stunted as Cuba doesn't have the geo-political advantages that Yugoslvia had during the Cold War which enabled her to pursue a egotisitcal regime, with a good education and medical system while getting trade at preferential rates from everyone. at a guess the GDP per head would possibly be in the region of 2,000 - 6,000 a year.

Worst Case:

The regime lacks a motivating force with out the embargo and Cuba becomes a bannana republic in which the leader goes off with Oliver Stone and occasionally supermodels, interfderes in the affairs of neighbouring countries and bear hugs the leader of North Korea.


Chekhov, maybe your right about the fact that the English speaking Whites had nothing to do with the collapse of Apartheid. If thats so how could you explain the fact that since the Cape got Responsible government in the 1860s its representatives have consistently sought to have representative government?

Who controled the seven corporation by the way? Whites maybe???

by Fri Nov 14, 2003 18:21

Quote:That is hogwash. I've never even come across anybody before who claims that South African Whites voluntarily decided that apartheid was a bad idea.

Of course your right the ANC must have rigged the referendum.

by Chekov Fri Nov 14, 2003 18:28

A tiny, tiny proportion of whites. If the seven biggest Irish corporations did a deal for their own interests would it neccessarily be what the 'Irish' wanted?

For one thing, the white working class was completely ditched by the deal that ended apartheid. Suddenly all of their social welfare and guaranteed jobs disappeared as their status was equalised downwards to the rest of the working class. The white middle class also lost out heavily as the security state was dismantled which was necessary for the maintenance of the incredible economic inequality in the country. The ensuing crime wave has driven most of them out of the country at this stage. Not that I sympathise with them in any way, by the way, but they did lose out through the deal. The black working class gained a tiny measure of political freedom, but lost out just as much in the neo-liberal GEAR program of the ANC government. The only people who gained were the tiny number of capitalists who owned the big corportations and the upper echolons of the ANC and SADATU who got the political power.

by ciaran Fri Nov 14, 2003 19:20

before checkov joined and before we went on a rant about SA etc.

could you kindly explain to me why us acts of terrorism against cuba are not acts of terrorism?

could you also withdraw comparisons between mussolini and castro. the treatment of unions and big business are the only things that are similar in terms of your original point, eg. masculinity in sports etc.

you failed to cover both of these points in your last reply.

and you don't need to be so rude about me asking your age, or so stupid about your worst case scenario. relax, it's just a discussion you won't be sent to the gulag.

thanks.

by cabhog Sat Nov 15, 2003 12:51

I don't like the word terorism and i believe that if the US is to be accussed of consistent terrorism there needs to be definite proof of it.

Firstly I dno't believe that the US finacning Cuban dissident Radio Stations is terrorism, nor do i believe that if the US finacnes an expedetion such as the Bay of Pigs that is terrorism. The passenger jet incident is terrorism, but there is no convincing evidence that the US leadership knew it was going to occur. If they did thats terrorism, if not its not. Having spies in Cuba is not terrorism, nor is seeking to overthrow the government terrorism. Attempt to assinate Castro are not terrorism to my mind. What is terrorism is when you or someone acting on your behalf and with your full knowldege deliberately targets the murder of citizens. I don't believe that a clear minded person could accuse the US of terrorism in Cuba. If they have done I condmen it wholeheartedly.

Does Cuban support for revolutionary movements that have committed terrorist actions in the COngo, Colombia and anti-democratic movements
(as in movements that have sought to overthrow throught force democratically elected governments) in LAtin America quailify it as a terrorist nation?

I should have said that i was born in and about 80 yearrs since the lst free elections in Cuba which would make me in and about of 20. If you think speaking indirectly and incorrectly is rude, my humble apologies. :-)

I offered two relaistis possiblities about Cuba, one was a positive case, the other negative. I don't believe that the US opposition to third party trade to Cuba has interfered in the overall development of the state as it is a relatively new phenomen(Helms-Burton). I don't believe it is at all possible that Cuba would have devloped as a carribean Sweden if there was no sanctions.

Since you believe my worst case scenario is stupid, could you provide me with a best/worst case scenario within the confines of plausibilty - i.e. Cuba not becoming a Utopia. Thanks.

Finally could you rank which is more importatnt to you and society in gerneral:
1) Education (A strond education system but with very clear idological confines and otivating forces. I.e. if you where stuying history, being only thought through marxist deterimism)
2) employment
3) Health care
4) Free Speech
5) The right to challenge the type of government you live under through peaceful and democatric means
6) The right to leave the country freely and easily
7) the right to elect your government

Lastly, could we go back to my original point - No matter what the form of their ideological protest, if a group of people espouses a view point (communist, democratic, calling for the overthrow of the govt throught the ballot box, US annexation of Cuba, fascism, etc) and provided they don't engage in any violent actions or encourage violent actions, do those people deserve to be sentenced to prison sentences as long as 28 years? Essentially, if you woke up today and sought for the Irish consitution to be abolished, for a communist state to be established in Ireland as part of a communist federation of the British Isleas and using aid from a foreign nation, do you believe the Irish government would be entitled to jail you for up to 28 years?

You have condemned the murder of the 3 hijackers. Do you believe that the deprivation of their right to appeal, coupled with the fact that they were given a sentence far in excess of their crime (it would have got about a 6 year sentence here probaly with at least 2 years suspended) is a form of terrorism?

Since you don't want to explore Castroism vs. Fascism, ignore it. I do think & I hope that I have alwayes tried to answer your questions as presicely and as well as possible, could you now return the favour and I have always resistede the urge to calls be tupid and rude. I think you may like to follow that aima s well.

by cabhog Sat Nov 15, 2003 12:53

you cndemned my point about the influence of the english speaking whites with regard to the cape. Could you then respond to my point on responsible govt in the Cpae and the continued influence of the Cape inspired progressive which climaxed in 91?

by ciaran Mon Nov 17, 2003 05:44

The terrorist thing.
I agree we need proof that the us is engaged in terrorism against cuba. well if one looks at the facts regarding the airliner bombing incident that I mentioned: orlando bosch supposedly did it. venezuela (I think) was, a few years back trying to get him extradited so he could face trial for the bombing. his extradition was blocked by the country he’s living in – where does he live?? miami, which happens to be in the us. the the cia have blown up ships, tried to poison crops and other acts of violence. if crops are destroyed people starve – this is terrorism to my mind.

the embargo as a form of terrorism.
in the early nineties, the clinton/torricelli further cut off trade with cuba. 90% of the trade that was cut off was medicine and humanitarian aid – the result of this was that child mortality and malnutrition increased. is this not a form of terrorism?? children dying because proper medicines cannot be aquired. what right does one nation (the us) have to overthrow another?? you’re ok with this, but by your logic, ireland whould have had no right for independence back in 1916/1921??

the embargo, and it’s aim:
the aim of the embargo is to force castro to give up power, through fermenting forces within cuba so they’ll overthrow him. the reason before the ussr disappeared was that they were communists, then it was human rights, and recently there’s even been the terror threat with the whole biological weapons scare tactic. drawing a comparison to iraq, the us had sanctions that killed supposedly half a million children – madeliene albright commenting her famous “whatever the price” comment. now it’s a common enough view that if saddam were to be rid of, remove the sanctions and let an organic resistance/liberation/democracry group rise up and knock him down. the sanctions though kept the people weak, and the result was that saddam was able to stay in control until foreign intervention. now regarding cuba, it is also a common view that the sanctions have merely allowed castro to retain power for longer – so why not move them??

the us and her morality:
why does the us have the right to liberate the cuban people?? why is it all democracy pep talk about cuba, when in uzbekistan for instance they’re thowing money at the government there. the uzbek gov. is boiling dissidents to death, but it doesn’t matter because uzbekistan is helping out in the war on “terror”. see the guardian recently for reports. how come the different standards??

also, columbia, the us throws money at her (though something like 90% of aid comes back to the us via arms/technology purchases – us tax payers money by the way, the greatest democracy in the world where 20% of children live below the poverty line), and uribe in an attempt to fight drugs and the farc. but uribe and his paralitiaries are kicking the ordinary persons ass. as are farc. uribe has descibed over 80 human rights organisations as in league with farc because they were critical of the government. what about the trade unionists murdered? how come the different moral standard from the us towards columbia?

cuba supporting anti-democratic forces in latin america:
besides maybe farc many moons ago who else is there?? but how about we look at the us in latin america. the overthrow of the allende government in 1973, the crushing of the sandanistas and their election victory in 1984 – which wasn’t recognised by the us, but was by everyone else, including a un monitoring group, what about the us military in chiapas since the zapatista unprising – I suppose they’re protecting the rest of the americas from commy mayans. how come all these double standards in us policy towards latin america. why not wthdraw the embargo save a lot of kids dying, and let cuba free herself? (if she needs freeing that is.)

when castro-ism does fall, or if it survives and eventaully socialismo goes down the drain – I expect that the united fruit company will get it’s lands back, resources will be further sold off and it’ll be more of a tourist playground than it is now – is this the democracy that you’d like to see.

your possiblites for cuba:
“The regime lacks a motivating force with out the embargo and Cuba becomes a bannana republic in which the leader goes off with Oliver Stone and occasionally supermodels,
interfderes in the affairs of neighbouring countries and bear hugs the leader of North Korea” – you say this is serious, this is fair enough if you think that, but by the second word I’m lost.

my possibility: it’s pointless speculating too much, but I don’t think cuba would have developed into a sweden. looking at where cuba is located, I think that she could have kept trading with the us – her sugar cane profits though flowing back to cuba rather the united fruit co. then she could have slowly developed her industries. an educated work force would have allowed her to attract industry. also as time went on she could have enhanced her exporting capability, eg. cuba’s biotechnology industry. I hope I’m not too utopian, but kind of like ireland has in the past, educated workforce, cheap rates, market access. who knows??

prefernces in society:
I think all your points are equally valid – utopian maybe. but I’d like to comment specifically on your comments in brackets regarding education. even in our ireland, and you may be aware of this, but education also serves the idealogy of the state.
for example when studying ww1 for lc history, we learn about generals, and battles, arch dukes, the main movers and shakers, the dates etc. you get the picture. we don’t learn about the massive passivist movements in the us, britain and germany. there were working class strikes, demonstrations, and much more in an attempt to stop the war. we don’t learn about this. a futher comment, hitler was so impressed by the british propaganda effort that he based his own on theirs. point is that education serves whatever society it fits in – even our own.

finally those 25 year sentences:
if they’re agents of the us then that’s what they deserve, if not then it’s unjust. (you seem to agree with foreign intervention – I don’t.)

castro fascism thing: I taught I explored it, and dismissed it, maybe you misread what I said.

excuse me for calling you stupid and rude – sometimes this whole indymedia debate gets the better of me. but we basically have different view points, but at least we’re being civil, and your points regarding what’s important for society - we both agree. anyway there’s a few more points, enjoy and I look forward to your reply.

by cabhog Mon Nov 17, 2003 14:37

I agree wholeheartedly that the embargo on Cuba should be ended with immediate efffect, however there are two factors which prevent this. Firstly, the extreme Cuban right in Florida who support the embargo. However, it should be noted that these people are generally losing influence. With the ever increasing migration from CUba to America (10,000 Visas are issued annualy to Cubans), the dominance of the Cuban right in the Cuban community is being steadily diluted. Increasingly, Cubans in the state are finacing through remittances their extended families back home. They have no gra for the sanctions nor for the overly aggresive attitude of the extreme right in the Cubans. Witht the ever increasing migration, the extreme rights grip on Florida's electoral college's votes will diminsh, as was evidenced in the Elian debacle.

the other more difficult factor is Castro. Castro is probably the biggest obstacle to the removal of the embargo himself. Anytime when their is a genuine attempt by the US to reudce the effects of the embargo(i.e. moves to re establish direct tourism, sale of grain, etc), Castro responds by clamping down on dissidents. Castro would appear to be of the view that the forces holding his revolution together within cuba (i.e. popular support, the party system, etc) as much lesser than the external factors (the embargo creating a sense of national crisis and identity, acting a unifying force behind him and his party). If you find that hard to comprehend, take a look at the Coal-Cattle trade wars of the 1930s here, where deV quite clearly imposed economic hardship on the country in order to gain popularity through confrontation with the UK.

If Castro would act reasonably when there is internal US support for improved relations rather than engaging in US bashing, the possibility of an end to the embargo is quite relastic.

I'm not here to defend the US in this matter, but the intervention i was refering to in Latin America was in venezula in the early 90s and cCharvez's attempted coup. (out of curiousity why do Charvez's supporters in ireland never mention that when they praise him as a great democrat?)


The FARC link would appear to be of current standing judging by much of the commentary from teh country.

Even if the sanctions were lifted Cuba would stillbe in serious trouble because of the price of sugar. Cuba sugar industry was is uncompetitive because it was given a guaranteed market of the USSR for almost 30 years at inflated prices. When that gureanteed market was ended and Cuba had to search for new markets it found it could not compete with the other nationas of africa and central and south america.

education - i appreciate the point about all states attempting to impose their ideology on education, but look at the new hsitory syablus, look at the education of hisotry iun 3rd level insitute where marxist and capitalist historians teach side by side. Their is some evidence of state prefered history in Ireland, but you are free to disagree with it, to challenge it. Does the same apply to Cuba? I'd agrue that it doesn't.

Embargo as a form of terrorism? No - The US is under no obligation to provide medicines for the people of Cuba, obviously it would be better if they did, but children die in Africa every day during the 80s because of food defeciences, and sugar was one. Cuba at that time was exporting sugar to the USSR - Why didn't they export it for lower prices and less political gain to Somalia??? Rhetorical question.

Why the different standards between Cuba and Ubezhistan - Same reason why Cuba whinges about the US imperialist-fascist regime but that Castro has quite close relations with North Korea. Cuba lies more or less of the coast of Florida, hundreds of thousnads of cubans live in the US, and they care about their country - hence the US outcry on all sides (those for ending the embargo and those for) against the clamp down on dissidents. The Uzbhecki don't matter, they don't have an effective lobbying machine, no one is aware of where the country is, the understandable but undesirable preference in the USA to defend its borders against al queada and to us any support it can get in that struggle.

QUOTE: finally those 25 year sentences:
if they’re agents of the us then that’s what they deserve, if not then it’s unjust. (you seem to agree with foreign intervention – I don’t.)

Presumably if you don't agree with foreign intervention you'd have no problem condemning that Argentine's involvement in the Cuban revolution? Or Cubans involvement in Angola? Or do you only condemn US involvement?

Finally, amnesty international considers those dissidents prisoners of conscience. Even if they were funded from the US (like the US communist part was funded from Mother Russia), does that justify their detainment, after all they were planning an invasion of the place.

similarily, if it emerged that a political grouping outside of cuban got aid from the Cuban government, should all those in thgat political group be jailed for a great number of years

by ciaran Mon Nov 17, 2003 22:05

castro and the embargo:
yeah maybe you’re right about him using the sanctions for keeping himself in power, then remove them, the ordinary cuban is hurt.

20,000 visas were given by the us to cubans, there have been less than 1000 granted this year. I’m not sure if I’d agree with your assessment of miami and the changing attitudes of the cuban community due to immigration – those who leave, would they not be anti-castro? maybe even 50/50? which would keep miami anti-castro?

embargo as a form of terrorism:
it won’t let cuba trade, cuba cannot get essential raw materials – it’s terrorism in my “unclear mind”.

us intervention:
you’re not here to defend us intervention, but by looking at their track record in the western hemisphere, I don’t think they’ll be making cuba the 51st state. resource extraction, cheap labour. maybe that’s ok in your opinion.

chavez was indeed involved in a coup:
and while I may not agree with his tactics, sme of them are very heay handed, 80% of venezuelans are in shit, so they’re enjoying his “reforms”.

sugar:
you talk about the market now – I was on about 1959. so while you’re point is valid, it’s not related to the worst best case scenarios we were on about.

education:
I haven’t had an opportunity to see the new sylabus, but by the time there is a more open discussion in university you’ve lost most of school leavers – how many make it to university, and then how many take history.

moral standards:
so if cuba is the source of all evil then there’s no problem it supporting north korea, but on the otherhand the us supports uzbekistan, for example, (throw in egypt, columbia, isreal) is ok because it’s fighting terror?? two different moral standards. you’re using one moral standard to condemn cuba, and a different moral standard when dealing with the us – “The Uzbhecki [uzbeks?] don't matter….the understandable but undesirable preference in the USA [is] to defend its borders against al queada and to us[e] any support it can get in that struggle”. but cuba can’t use any means to defend itself??

Foreign intervention:
I mean state intervention with the aim of altering that state for one’s own state gain.
so an argentinian fighting in cuba is ok, though if the argentine army was then it wouldn’t be ok if it was trying to alter the situation for it’s own ends. angola: cuba went in after south africa, ok in my mind. I don’t just condemn the us – I support them for their 1983 invasion of the nutmeg capital of the world – grenada. they were about to go commie, so it was ok in my book- even though elections voted the government into power. though I guess kissinger is right – never turst people to govern themselves. I also supported us controlled organisations crushing micheal manley’s efforts to bring reform to jamaican society, and improve jamaica’s atanding. he was a commie too.

those dissedents:
their aim is to roll back socialismo, return the elite. so why should cuba not defend itself, in the face of over forty years of us terrorism, economic and diplomatic hostility – is it likely looking at the rest of the western hemisphere that cuba will just return to being servile to us needs??

the wider view:
you say:” I'm not here to defend the US in this matter,”. right then. but the reason I’ve been quoting all the us examples in latin america and the carribean is to suggest that cuba is just going to fit into a similar roll as these countries – and in my opinion that for the ordinary cuban is not preferable than what they experience now. maybe though we should go to cuba and do a survey???

by spook Mon Nov 17, 2003 22:23

Re. US "terrorism" in Cuba ....

You guys obviously need a little history lesson about Operation Northwoods .....

http://www.rense.com/general18/harm.htm

http://members.austarmetro.com.au/~hubbca/northwoods.htm


And ye shall know the TRUTH and the TRUTH shall set ye free ...

by cabhog Tue Nov 18, 2003 18:09

40 years ago in the height of the cold war - exactly how is it relevant today? Also, it was a a discussion paper.


Quote: their aim is to roll back socialismo, return the elite

Ciaran, would you mind placing a link in this thread to any independent website which backs up the claim that the dissidents have ever sought to bring back to Cuba the 1959 exiles (i presume thats your elite)?

Cuba have succesfully intereferee in Venzula, their getting cheap oil from the country from Charvez, a man they once supported in a coup attempt.

Members of this discussion board, indymedia, have on a number of occasions have held public meetings (tcd nov 7th) on revolutionary discourse - the desirablity for a revolution, for total redistrubtion, dictatorship of the proletatriat. By your logic, these people seek to overthrow the system in Ireland, and establish new elites. Would it be right to arrest them and imprision them for 30 years without them having engaged in any violent activity, just trying to persuade people of their point of view?

by cabhog Tue Nov 18, 2003 18:18

ciaran, you quoted me out of context, all i said was that to the US, Ubzehistan didn't matter as much as Cuba for a number of reason, geographic, political, to do with the demographic situation in America, close historical links. I don't think of those reasons apply in the case of Ubezihstan, which is tough luck for those poor unfortunates.

But don't whinge about US double standards. Do you think the world would spend some much time caring about the Palestinians if their oppressors were not jews, and the closeness of Palestine to the oil fields?

by ciaran. Wed Nov 19, 2003 00:13

cabhog,

noam chomsky gives significant details of us terrorism against cuba in numerous articles and books. regarding the elite taking back control and returning it "to 1959" – I didn’t say that, I merely suggested that cuba would follow similar paths as other latin american countries, though this may in some ways resemble 1959.

the venezuelan thing – numerous countries in the carribean region get reduced oil prices when they buy from venezuela. so by your logic, maybe they all helped in the coup.

1 .“which tough look for those unfortunates” – that’s a nice attitude towards the people of uzbekistan. (why not have the same attitude towards cubans???)

2.” Do you think the world would spend some much time caring about the Palestinians if their oppressors were not jews?”
the world doesn’t give a fuck about the palestinians, most coverage in mainstream news is pro-isreali, and when not pro-isreali, it just ignores the plight of the palestinians. to suggest that people only care about the palestinians because their oppressors are isreali zionists is just ridiculous. many jews are against the occupation – einstein for one was.

cabhog, your two comments outlined here are very disturbing. I think it better to dis-engage from this debate, thanks for your time.

until again,
yours in discussing,
ciaran.

by ciaran Wed Nov 19, 2003 00:32

cabohg,
i misquoted you in my last post with regard to uzbekistan, but just because it doesn't play a significant role in us domestic politics, it does not excuse the fact that the us are supporting a regime that's crazy.

anyway, whatever.
ciaran.