Just How Specious is Latin America's Revolutionary Rhetoric?

Although Cuba's Fidel Castro, as one of the fathers of revolution, continues to verbally assault the U.S. and essential democratic principles, Cuba is playing it safe and cautious not to stagger too far off the beaten path of a much better informed world audience.

An exception to this apparent rule is Castro's admiration for his protégé, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Castro does not hesitate to wave the much tattered Cuban revolutionary flag when speaking of his admired pupil.

An op-ed column last week by Fidel Castro graphically demonstrated his remaining true moniker of world dictator. He remarked, "Given its exceptional educational, cultural, social development and its immense energy and natural resources, Venezuela is called upon to become a revolutionary model for the world." And with what must have been a monumental attempt to be sincere and appear rational, he added, "I had long conversations with (Chavez) yesterday and today. I explained to him the intensity with which I am devoting my remaining energies to dreams of a better and more just world." (Digital Granma Internacional, Havana, Cuba, Oct. 19, 2011; translation Granma)

While both Castro's have been pandering for world support and U.S. mercy to lift the decades old trade embargo against Cuba, Fidel could not resist his usual venomous hatred of U.S. governance and culture. "... (T)he empire [the U.S.] is already showing the symptoms of a terminal illness.... Saving humanity from an irreversible disaster, these days, could depend on the stupidity of any mediocre president among those who have led the empire in the most recent decades, or even one or another of the constantly more powerful heads of the military-industrial complex which controls the destiny of that country."

While praising the "friendly nations" of Russia and China, Castro said that "together with the peoples of the so-called Third World in Asia, Africa and Latin America, (they) could attain" the goal of saving humanity from capitalism.

Castro's usual heady dialogue always fails to confess the financial and institutional destruction of the Cuban mainland and the horrible sacrifices imposed on the populace by iron-fisted communist dictatorial rule. And the Castro agenda, once again, telegraphed the proverbial passing of the now dimly lit torch of radical rhetoric to Hugo Chavez's narrowing optical imagination.

Furthermore, Castro's revolutionary hysteria appears to have taken a curious back seat with Cuba's silence on the death of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, while having and maintaining a very strong mutual support relationship.

To the verbal rescue of those revolutionaries remaining mute, Venezuela's Chavez stepped up quickly to say, "(Gaddafi's death is) an outrage. We shall remember Gaddafi our whole lives as a great fighter, a revolutionary and a martyr." Owed loyalty could be attributed to Chavez's ego, after having been awarded the "Algaddafi International Prize for Human Rights," a prize granted by the Libyan leader. Cuba's Fidel Castro and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega were also past recipients of the award.

Fidel Castro's fading revolutionary tenure and factual recollection remained to remind that Chavez "is a supremely humanitarian person and respectful of the law; he has never taken revenge against anyone. The poorest and most forgotten sectors of his country are profoundly grateful to him for responding - for the first time in history - to their dreams of social justice."

Considering apparent major voids of factual events in praise by Castro, Chavez and (Nicaragua's) Ortega of each other's human rights achievements, one must question their words and thoughts related to national liberation and social revolution - and then refuse support to the overwhelming majority of Libyans in their battle for freedom against dictatorial rule and public dissent.

Leftist leaders Rafael Correa of Ecuador and Bolivia's Evo Morales have also been noticeably quiet recently, as citizens of their respective countries have amassed in verbal and demonstrative posture in protest.

More than 1,000 Indians opposing a jungle highway in Bolivia's Amazon paraded last week into the capital after a 63-day protest march. Government "baton-swinging police" attempts to break up the marches "fueled charges that leftist President Evo Morales discriminates against Bolivia's Amazon-based indigenous groups."

Ecuador's Correa too has had problems. Last year Correa's own brother, Fabricio Correa, said the nation is being "directed" from Venezuela in an effort to impose "a political model" that is widely rejected. "Now everybody rebels, and students, indigenous people and professors are against a Venezuelan project that nobody wants in Ecuador. A totalitarian model is intended to be established."

Rafael Correa was attacked in 2010 in what he described as "an attempted coup d'état (and ‘kidnapping')" from his own police force. Soldiers subsequently arrived with tanks and submachine guns, opened fire on the police, and a fierce gun battle ensued.

Even with a world "media revolution," that is apparently demonstrating new messages these days, leftist regimes in Latin America are having serious trouble with credibility. Consequently, many are silent - for now.

By Jerry Brewer
Source: Mexidata

Go to Home Page

Cuba, Venezuela pose subtle, but real dangers to United States

Havana Malecon, summer 1994

This bicoastal discussion with a colleague began on Twitter. We are often — to avoid the absolutes — on different sides of most issues. This one exchange over the weekend was no different.

We were tweeting along, disagreeing respectfully, when she came up with a question that was difficult to answer in 140 characters. What danger do Cuba and Venezuela represent to the United States?

This was not a question of human rights, or of democracy, or even of communism. The question was simple and direct. I was stumped, particularly when limited in space. I have to admit that, in that Twitter conversation, I was check-mated.

This is why I resort to a lengthier format; one in which I am more comfortable in responding to my colleague.

Cuba and Venezuela do represent a serious dangers to the United States, but not directly in a militaristic way.

Cuba did at one point represent a very real danger to the United States — during the 1962 Missile Crisis, when armed with Soviet missiles the world came closer than ever to a nuclear war. That, however, was almost five decades ago — it will be 50 years ago in October 2012. Certainly, that is not the case now.

Still both Cuba and Venezuela, each in its own way, present a real and present danger to the United States today. No, the danger is not of a military invasion, or of terrorists attacking this country, or even of invading other countries in the region. Still, they represent a real and present danger to this country in many other ways.

First, let's start with Cuba. The Cuban regime has repeatedly used its people as weapons against the United States. It has done so at least three times, and could do it again at any point as a way of relieving the pressure from its failed economy. South Florida felt the brunt of its fury in the 1960s when Fidel Castro opened the Port of Camarioca in 1965, forcing the United States to adopt an orderly flow of exiles from Cuba that brought 270,000 Cubans to the United States over the next seven years.

Fifteen years later, Castro did it again when he opened the Port of Mariel and allowed 125,000 Cubans to cross the Florida Straits in less than five months. And in the mid-1990s, he allowed more than 33,000 people to flee on rafts in a few short weeks.

Back in the 1980s, then-Ambassador Victor Palmieri, director of Refugee Affairs in the State Department when Jimmy Carter was president, wrote in an unpublished paper that Mariel had been "an act of war." And this is a weapon Cuba can always use on the United States to test the will of a U.S. president.

Venezuela and Hugo Chávez, Castro's most advanced disciple, represent an enormous danger to U.S. diplomacy in the region. In much the same way that Castro tried to oust regimes in Latin America by helping guerrilla movements, Chávez now is the chief financial officer of the movement to elect socialist leaders in countries to set up an anti-American block in Latin America. For starters, we can talk about Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. All have been helped by Chávez, whose petrodollars feed anti-American sentiment in the region.

Cuba and Venezuela still support Iran, as well as Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, who is now probably fighting for his life in the city of Serta against Libyans rebelling against his regime. They also back the Palestinian effort to be recognized as a nation, and quietly oppose the state of Israel.

Furthermore, Venezuela's armed forces have billions in new weapons purchased from Russia to please its generals, who are now heavily Involved — albeit secretly — in the drug trade. As Colombian rebels have lost power, it has moved across the border to Venezuela where its own armed forces supervise the drug trafficking to Europe and the United States.

The elected authoritarian regimes rising in Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua are not a direct danger to the United States. They do represent, however, represent a danger to the freedoms of people in the hemisphere. Freedom of the press and human rights are constantly violated in these countries. People live in fear of their governments and thousands have been forced to flee their homeland.

But no, none of this represents a clear and direct danger to the United States; just to the type of government we would like our neighbors to our south to have. So point, set and match go to my colleague on the West Coast. Or does it?

By Guillermo I. Martínez

Source: Sun Sentinel 

Go to Home Page

Why the Left Loves Castro, Guevara, and Chavez

Those we look to as heroes speaks volumes about whom we are, and our character. Most of us identify heroes who exhibit qualities of character that we admire and we desire to emulate ourselves. Such character is manifest by actions, and what our heroes do to deserve such respect and veneration.

The passing of the dictatorial baton in Cuba from Fidel Castro to his equally totalitarian brother Raul provides a case study in hero worship. Fidel was the revolutionary who deposed Cuba’s corrupt dictator, Fulgencio Batista. Yet Castro became much worse than the ruler he led a revolution against, torturing and executing more than five times as many Cubans as his predecessor. He nationalized business interests in the country, abolished freedom of religion, took over the media, erased free speech, and turned the tropical island into a totalitarian “paradise” stripped of human rights and freedom. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Cuba trails only China in the number of journalists and reporters behind bars.

Political prisoners are beaten, starved, denied that acclaimed Cuban medical care, locked in solitary confinement, and forced into slave labor. Castro long ago eliminated due process of law, and the right to leave the country.

Freedom House, the international human rights watchdog, rates Cuba with the lowest possible rating for civil liberties and political rights. It shares that inauspicious ranking with North Korea and Sudan as the most repressive regimes.

In short, under Castro, a once-flourishing island paradise has been transformed into a poverty-stricken, desolate hellhole where basic human liberties do not exist.

In spite of all this, American media and the Hollywood left heaps praise and adulation on Fidel. Norman Mailer, for example, proclaimed him “the first and greatest hero to appear in the world since the Second World War.” Oliver Stone has called him “one of the earth’s wisest people, one of the people we should consult.”

The paragon of objective documentarians, Michael Moore, holds up Castro’s health care system as the preeminent example. I guess if you don’t mind being stripped of all liberties and can survive the firing squads, the Cubans have something to look forward to.

Why is it that to the left a ruthless mass-murderer and totalitarian dictator would be so adored and worthy of emulation?

For that matter, why is Castro’s primary executioner of the revolution, Che Guevara, still lionized by the left? Even today, kids wear t-shirts with his gnarly image emblazoned on them. Even Angelina Jolie has a Che tattoo, which is immensely ironic considering she travels the world denouncing violence as a U.N. ambassador of good will.

Che longed to destroy New York City with nuclear missiles. He promoted book burning and signed death warrants for authors who disagreed with him. His racism against blacks makes Jeremiah Wright’s racism against whites pale by comparison, yet he’s a hero to Jesse Jackson. He persecuted homosexuals, long-haired rock and rollers, and church-goers. Daniel James writes that Che himself admitted to ordering “several thousand” executions during the first few years of the Castro regime. He carried out Castro-ordered executions on a more expansive scale per capita than Hitler’s Nazi Germany did, prior to implementation of the Final Solution.

We can even lump Hugo Chavez into the mix, for he is well on his way to doing to Venezuela what Castro did to Cuba, and he is receiving the characteristic leftist praise for it.

When analyzed logically, the left in America should hate Guevara, Castro, and Chavez. After all, they did all the things they accuse George Bush of doing: torture, capital punishment, imprisonment without due process, elimination of freedom of speech and the press. They’re probably fine with the elimination of freedom of religion.

So why is he so adored by them? What is it about Guevara, Castro, and Chavez that captures the left’s imagination like none other?

There are two possibilities. All three revolutionaries hate, or hated in the case of Guevara, the United States. In 1957, Castro wrote in a letter, “War against the United States is my true destiny. When this war’s over [the revolution], I’ll start that much bigger and wider war.” Maybe the reason the radical left loves those murderous dictators and Castro’s executioner is because they share a disdain for this country.

The other possibility is that the left more frequently judges people for their intent than their actual accomplishments. The current presidential campaign illustrates this aptly, as Clinton’s “experience” seems to have no match for Obama’s “hope.” It doesn’t matter that neither one has really accomplished anything of substance, it’s their intent that matters most.

We are left to conclude that the radical left is totally ignorant of history, and devoid of logic, or their mutual contempt of the United States trumps all else.

Apparently the Obama campaign was attracting that type of ideologue. When his campaign office was opened in Houston before the Texas primary, the volunteer director had a Cuban flag with the image of the Communist mass murderer Che Guevara’s face printed on it. I can only pray that that’s not an omen. And next time you see someone with a Che shirt on, ask them why. Their answer may be illuminating.

By Richard Larsen

Source: Larsen Financial

Go to Home Page

Is the people who are changing things. Tyrants beware!

The above leaders have all pledged support for Gadhafi. Who's next?

To say that uprising in Libya and Syria is a foreign plot is an insult to people who are fighting for their freedom

Last Tuesday, in a joint statement, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez denounced what they called the West's “imperialist aggression” in Libya and Syria.

It is a wonder they did not try and get Cuba’s retired President Fidel Castro or Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to endorse their condemnation. They would have certainly obliged. Back in March, Castro’s verdict on the Libyan uprising was that it was an American plot. Just over a week ago Mugabe called NATO “a terrorist group” because of its airstrikes against Qaddafi’s forces.

The notion that the uprisings in Syria and Libya are a Western plot is not merely a gross distortion of the truth; it is a vicious slap in the face of ordinary Syrians and Libyans. They are the authors of the uprisings, not the Americans or the French or the British. The hundreds of thousands of Libyans who rose up against Qaddafi's iron grip on power and the young Libyans fighting, and dying, to free their country did not do so because of a foreign plot. They did so because they wanted to be free and were inspired by the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. They took their destiny into their own hands. It has been the same for the hundreds of thousands who have taken to the streets of Syria's cities, willing to die for freedom and, in some cases, doing so. The suggestion that they are agents in a plot devised by NATO and the CIA is an insult to them and the memory of the thousands who have been killed.

In any event, if it were an American plot, it was one for which the Americans should be congratulated for getting their Middle East policies right for a change and doing something that was genuinely in tune with mass public sentiment.

The fact that men like Chavez trot out this lie says everything about them and their politics and nothing about reality. They have a world view that is hopelessly outdated — a world divided into thieving imperialists and, battling against them, anti-colonialist liberation movements led by themselves. That has long gone. The world has moved on. But it is a vision these dictators are desperate to retain. It is their justification for their dead hand on the levers of power.

The same was said by the ousted Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak of the protests in Egypt before he fell; they were organized by outsiders, he said. Qaddafi and Assad have come up with different villains behind the opposition to them — they accuse hard-liners — but the thinking is the same. They need someone to blame for the crisis and refuse to admit they are the problem.

For all their populist rhetoric and their glorification of their “people's struggle” against “imperialism,” it is their own people that the likes of Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Qaddafi and Assad fear their most. So they come up with nonsense about foreign or terrorist plots.

No one is taken in. The Syrians and the Libyans, like the Egyptians and the Tunisians beforehand, know that their uprisings are their alone, not something cooked up in the Pentagon. Others may support them, morally or with money or even arms and air raids, but the Arab Spring is a genuine Arab affair. Those who have to pretend otherwise show how little they understand the momentousness of what is happening.

Source: Albawaba

Go to Home Page

Venezuela: The Final Handover?

The Cuban regime has access to the Venezuelans’ identity data. (Photo: Cubamatinal)

It has been denounced time and again that the Hugo Chávez administration has been handing over strategic areas and areas of national security to the despotic Cuban regime.

The Barrio Adentro Mission gave it the excuse to penetrate the country’s shanty districts with health workers, who have also been engaged in indoctrinating the population, the same as the contingent of Cuban sports “instructors” have been doing country.

The interference of Cuban officials in any and all sensitive decision-making areas is common knowledge in military circles.

It is a fact that the System of Registries and Public Notaries is under Cuban control: today, no one in Venezuela moves a paper relating to any property or personal data without Cuba knowing about it.

There are even fears that the submarine communications cable between Cuba and Venezuela will violate the confidentiality of people’s telephonic and electronic communications even more than they are violated at present.

Now, as though all that Cuban control were not sufficiently intolerable, Sunday’s El Nacional revealed just how far the handing over of Venezuelans’ identity data to the dictatorial State of Cuba has apparently gone.

According to the report in El Nacional, the Cuban state-owned company Albet Ingeniería y Sistemas, the same company that was in charge of Venezuela’s electronic passports, “won” the contract for modernizing the National Identification system, which is worth an estimated $170 million.

This contract has several aspects that need to be looked at carefully:

1. The secrecy surrounding the contract: a country’s sovereignty depends to a large extent on its national identity system, which means that everything to do with handling that system should and must be absolutely transparent and be made public.



2. The high cost: Albet Ingeniería y Sistemas subcontracted the multinational Gemalto, headquartered in Mexico. This will make the Venezuelan electronic identity cards one of the most expensive cards with biometric identification technology acquired by countries in Latin America.



3. But the most serious aspect of all is that the national identity data of the Venezuelan population is being handed over to a foreign power. According to El Nacional, all the software and security guidelines of the identification system will be controlled by Cuba, who will keep “the originals of the source codes (the codes that describe the functioning of the software and allow changes to be made) of the developed computer applications for as long as the technical support period lasts.” To make matters worse, “the Venezuelan party may not have access to the source codes to make changes or adjustments to the developed computer applications for as long as the contract is in force or the technical support period lasts, except when the Cuban party expressly states its agreement to this action.”

Now that Chávez is even governing from Cuba, what else is needed in order to finally hand over Venezuela to Castro?

Source: Latin American HT

Go to Home Page

Doubts over Chavez's health spur talk of successor

Speculation that Hugo Chavez could be suffering from a serious illness is putting attention on a predicament for the president's allies: It's unclear who could step forward if he had to step down.

Few Venezuelans are talking publicly about the possibility of President Hugo Chavez leaving office, partly because top government officials and close relatives have repeatedly said the president is recuperating in Cuba following surgery there two weeks ago.

Still, Chavez's silence and seclusion since the operation have spurred growing talk about his health, stirring fears among some supporters that their leader could be seriously ill.

The speculation has prompted some to ponder what would happen if failing health were to force Chavez to relinquish power. Until recently, even contemplating that possibility would have been considered absurd.

Under Venezuela's constitution, Vice President Elias Jaua would take the president's place during "temporary" absences of up to 90 days. And Jaua would serve the rest of Chavez's six-year term if the socialism-preaching president were to die or resign.

With a presidential election looming next year, such a scenario might put Jaua and other ruling party leaders in a tough position.

None of Chavez's close confidants share his charisma and knack for connecting with Venezuela's poor majority. That constituency has ultimately decided elections in this politically divided South American country.

Steve Ellner, a political science professor at Venezuela's University of the East, believes the future of Chavez's political movement would largely depend on whether ill health prevented Chavez from designating a successor.

"There is no second-in-command in the Chavez movement," Ellner said. "If Chavez is unable to endorse anyone, there will inevitably be dissension." Ellner said the situation would be much different if Chavez threw his support behind a would-be successor.

"There is a great sense of loyalty within the Chavez movement," he said. "If Chavez himself is unable to run for physical reasons, but endorses a given candidate, the movement will not fall apart." While there are no obvious candidates, some observers believe the president might tap Jaua or Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's energy minister.

Diosdado Cabello, a former army officer who joined a 1992 coup attempt led by Chavez, was once perceived as Chavez's closest confidant. But Cabello's standing seems to have faded since he lost a 2008 re-election bid as the governor of Miranda state to a prominent opposition leader.

Venezuelan officials have limited their comments on Chavez's health to saying he's recuperating but have provided few details.

Jaua told an auditorium packed with government supporters Saturday that Chavez "is recuperating to continue the battle." He condemned Chavez's opponents for speculating about the president's health, accusing them of using the president's surgery to score political points before the next presidential election.

"They know they cannot beat our commander, Hugo Chavez, in an election," he said, adding: "Chavez is going to be around for a long time." Meanwhile, Chavez's Twitter stream has been active while not providing any information about his health. One message on Friday saluted Venezuela's military on a holiday marking a decisive independence battle.

Three messages appeared within 30 minutes Saturday afternoon, including one mentioning visits by Chavez's daughter Rosines and grandchildren. "Ah, what happiness it is to receive this shower of love!" the Twitter message read. "God bless them!" Nobody has heard Chavez publicly speak since he told Venezuelan state television by telephone on June 12 that he was quickly recovering from surgery two days earlier for a pelvic abscess. He said medical tests showed no sign of any "malignant" illness.
It remains unclear when he will return to Venezuela.

Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro urged Venezuelans on Friday to wish for Chavez's complete recovery and express their "most authentic love so that his health is re-established." "The battle that President Chavez is waging for his health must be everyone's battle: the battle for life, for the immediate future of our fatherland," Maduro added.

Miguel Tinker Salas, a Latin American studies professor at Pomona College in Claremont, California, said he thinks some people "are jumping the gun" by expressing doubts on Chavez's health and raising questions about a potential successor.

"I imagine that Chavez is enjoying this because people seem so concerned about his health," Tinker Salas said.

"I can imagine him joking about all this speculation in front of a crowd of supporters" sometime in the near future.

Source: Ahram Online

Go to Home Page

Can Hugo Chavez govern Venezuela from Cuba?

Opposition in Venezuela lunches offensive on resident Hugo Chavez, after he approved a law while he is abroad having a surgery in Cuba.

Opposition lawmakers were angered Wednesday that President Hugo Chavez enacted a law from Cuba, arguing that his absence was unconstitutional and that he could not govern from abroad.

The 56-year-old Venezuelan leader arrived in Cuba on June 8 on the final leg of a trip authorized by the National Assembly that also included Brazil and Ecuador.

He was rushed into emergency surgery last Friday after suffering sharp pain that was diagnosed as a pelvic abscess that required immediate surgery.

Chavez is reportedly recovering well, though the government has given no date for his return to Caracas.

Opposition legislators, who control 40 percent of Venezuela's single-chamber legislature, argue that his prolonged absence means that Vice President Elias Jaua should replace him.

They traded insults with pro-Chavez lawmakers, who insisted -- as government loyalist Iris Varela put it -- that Chavez does not stop being president "even if he's on the Moon, or in Beijing."

Another legislator, constitutional scholar Carlos Escarra, said it was "absurd" to claim that the president could not govern simply because he was abroad.

According to Venezuela's constitution, the National Assembly must authorize any presidential trip abroad lasting more than five days, and any "temporary absences" of up to 90 days are filled by the vice president.

Escarra said the government is complying with the constitution because the legislature authorized his trip abroad.

Opposition lawmakers, however, demanded that a "temporary absence" be declared and that the vice president replace Chavez.

The president "cannot govern from abroad," said lawmaker Omar Barboza, who was especially angered over the measure that Chavez signed into law from Havana.

It is "absolutely irregular to enact laws from abroad," said Enrique Sanchez Falcon, a professor of constitutional law at the Central University of Venezuela. "The vice president should temporarily take over," he told AFP.

"Venezuela has been humiliated because either it is governed by Chavez from Cuba or by (Cuban leader) Fidel (Castro)," charged opposition lawmaker Maria Corina Machado.

Communist Cuba is Chavez's staunchest ally in the region. Eventually the National Assembly authorized Chavez to stay in Cuba "until he is in condition to return."

A pelvic abscess is a pus-filled cavity normally caused by an infection. Treatment usually involves a surgical drainage and dead tissue removal, experts said. Most patients are able to walk within 24 hours after surgery, however, they often experience some discomfort for several days, according to experts.

Source: Abraham Online

Go to Home Page

Eurolat lawmakers call for freedom in Cuba and fair elections in Venezuela

The resolutions were agreed during the two-day meeting in Montevideo of the Fifth Ordinary Plenary Session of the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly, Eurolat.

Regarding the Castro brothers regime lawmakers expressed solidarity with the “Cuban democrats that struggle inside and outside the island for freedom and full compliance with human rights in the Republic of Cuba”.

They also underlined support for the “legitimate aspiration of the people of Cuba for the immediate launching of a political and democratic transition process that fully respects the people’s sovereignty”.

Lawmakers expressed support for “the demands of freedom of the press, freedom of action for political parties in a pluralist framework, free democratic elections and equally fair conditions for parties and candidates” and similarly, solidarity with demands for the liberation of political prisoners in Cuba.

Regarding Venezuela Eurolat lawmakers expressed their satisfaction with the successful political measures taken by the opposition parties that are part of the Democratic Unified Panel to present a plural and democratic alternative for Venezuela's future.

They also urged the Venezuelan government to observe the basic conditions to ensure a fair election within the framework of full respect for human rights, freedom of expression and pluralism. Further, they urged authorities to “allow the presence of international observers”.

Eurolat lawmakers also requested the Venezuelan government to refrain from using state institutions to the service of a political party, from using public propaganda and from obstructing the actions of opposition political parties, so as to ensure respect for democratic coexistence. The plenary sessions had the attendance of lawmakers from Uruguay, Spain, France, Chile, Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Slovakia, Italy, Paraguay, Luxemburg and Guatemala among others.

Source: MercoPress

Go to Home Page

Qaddafi's Friends in Cuba

A friend in need is a friend indeed?

With the unrest in Libya and particularly with his recent public relations debacles, leader Muammar Qaddafi is rapidly losing any remaining fans. Yet down in South America, apparently, a few stalwarts remain.

Fidel Castro penned a column in Cuba's Granma, warning of Libya's appeal to the United States because of it's vast petroleum reserves. "For me it is absolutely evident that the United States is not worried about peace in Libya, and will not hesitate to give NATO the order to invade this rich country maybe in a matter of hours or very few days," he wrote. Perhaps tellingly, though, while the two leaders have been allies at times, Castro was reticent with outright support for Qaddafi, noting that "we have to wait the necessary time to know with rigor how much is fact or lie."

In a look at the history of Qaddafi's relationship with Venezuela, Caracas daily El Universal reported that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez proclaimed his support for Qaddafi in 2009, claiming that "Qaddafi is to Libya as [Simon] Bolívar is to us." Simon Bolivar was involved in the liberation of much of Latin America from colonial rule. The superlatives didn't end there, Chavez calling Qaddafi a "revolutionary soldier," "a leader of of the Libyan revolution," and a "leader of all of Africa as well as Latin America."

Chavez and Qaddafi, both leaders of oil-rich nations, have had an unlikely relationship blossom between them in the past few years. El Universal reports that Chavez has visited Libya five times. Libya awarded Chavez with the "Qaddafi Human Rights Prize" in 2004. In March 2009, Qaddafi named a football stadium in Benghazi after Chavez. On his end, Chavez made Qaddafi the special guest at a conference between African and Latin American countries held on Venezuela's Isla Margarita later that year, where he also presented Qaddafi with a replica of Simon Bolivar's sword. Rumors were swirling as recently as last night that the Libyan strongman had made his way to Venezuela to seek shelter.

By Eli Rosenberg

From: The Atlantic Wire

Go to Home Page

Castro misreads WikiLeaks, Washington misreads Castro

Courtesy: Alfredo Pong

WikiLeaks poses an interesting dilemma for governments that share Julian Assange's hostility to Washington, but not his enthusiasm for information. Case in point: Havana. Cuban dissident blogger Yoani Sánchez offers a glimpse:

"I remember the first mention of Julian Assange's site in our official media was accompanied by a certain complicity on the part of the article writers, a hint of laughter anticipating the damage that the publication of these classified documents could cause the U.S. Government. But when the name of Cuba began to appear along with reports about the interference of Venezuela and the testimonies of coercion against their own medical personnel, the enthusiasm of the newspaper Granma turned to annoyance and the initial applause gave way to silence. Not even the Maximum Leader referred to Wikileaks again."

She's presumably referring to this cable from the Caracas embassy, which alleged that Cuban medical personnel were being forced against their will to work in Venezuela. Aside from old-school communist credibility, medical expertise is the main export Cuba has to offer Venezuela, which under Hugo Chávez has become an essential trading partner and oil supplier for Fidel and now Raúl Castro's government.

Speaking of which, a February cable published Friday -- one of only a couple to emerge from the U.S. interests section in Havana, signed by Jonathan Farrar, the top official there -- offers a sweeping view of the crumbling Cuban economy: Chávez's support is the only thing keeping Cuba from falling back into the deprivations of the Special Period, Farrar reports, and the country is defaulting right and left on its trading partners. But the cable also suggests that American diplomats badly misread the seriousness of Raúl Castro's economic reform agenda:

"Despite how badly Cuba needs them, significant economic reforms are unlikely in 2010, especially with the continued delay of a policy-revising Communist Party Congress... . The [government of Cuba]'s direction and leadership remains muddled and unclear, in great measure because its leaders are paralyzed by fear that reforms will loosen the tight grip on power that they have held for over 50 years. Faced with political uncertainty regarding future Cuban leadership and relations with the United States, the Cuban people are more likely to endure a slow erosion of state-subsidies than a much-needed radical restructuring."

Less than a year later, a radical restructuring may in fact be on the way.

Charles Homans

From: FOREIGN POLICY

Go to Home Page

Cuban dictatorship: Fidel Castro Is Not Augusto Pinochet

Castro with Pinochet in Chile, 1971

My essay "Fidel Castro is not Augusto Pinochet" is the traditional story of the Third World’s apathy towards the Cuban Dictatorship...For many reasons, I think that Castro is much worse dictator than Augusto Pinochet...

INTRODUCTION:
Since 1960 Fidel and Raul Castro have send a sinister example to Third World nations. The number of countries which democratically governed and respect human rights is decreasing since 2004. Today there are many dictatorships: Thailand [2006], Venezuela, Zimbabwe…


OPPOSITION BY ANTI-PINOCHET GROUPS
Miss Chile, Jenny Purtho Arap, was eliminated in the first round at the Miss Universe Pageant on July 26, 1982, in Lima, Peru’s capital city. Certainly, she, a girl with charming personality and beautiful eyes, was the big favorite by the international journalism. I think that Chile should have been crowned Miss Universe in my country. I believe that she was robbed of title for political reasons.

One of the major problems which Chilean dictatorship had to face was the international boycott campaign. From 1973 to 1989 Chile suffered international sanctions. Different from Cuba, many countries did not have diplomatic relations with Augusto Ramon Pinochet Ugarte, who ruled from 1973 to 1990. Many Chileans did not get VISA, an example was Claudio Arrau, one of the best pianists in the history. The same history of Israel, Taiwan, Rhodesia (currently Zimbabwe) and South Africa (Apartheid).

Ironically, The People’s Republic of China and Romania recognized the Chilean dictatorship. Under the leadership of Mao Tse-tung and Jiang Qing, First Lady of the Chinese Revolution, China and Chile had maintained good diplomatic relations. However, Pinochet Ugarte was harshly attacked by the USSR, Cuba, East Germany, Mexico, Sweden, Italy and Norway.

In 1980 Ferdinand Marcos, dictator of Philippines, invited Augusto Pinochet to come to his country. On March, 1980, he left Santiago de Chile for Philippines and made transit stops in Fidji, an ex British colony, and Tahiti. When Augusto Pinochet arrived Suva, the capital city of Fiji, a small country in the South Pacific, some human rights activists were waiting for him. There were protests against Chilean dictator’s visit. His tour had already begun when the tour was cancelled abruptly at the last moment by the dictatorship Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos.

1976: In the Davis Cup final match, the Chileans lost to Italy, but the team from Chile had a particularly difficult tournament. In Rome, a group of people blocked the entrance to stadium before the match between Chile and Italy, chanting: "Pinochet is a dictator"…"He is a genocide"…Pinochet is Hitler"…and "Pinochet is the worst dictator in the history". Certainly, Chile’s participation again became an issue.

Many famous people went to Festival Internacional de la Canción Viña del Mar, but they were criticized by human rights activists and journalists. Camilo Sesto, Spanish singer, was called "Camilochet". In July 1978, the Mexican government objected to the presence of Miss Chile, Marianne Muller, in the Miss Universe Pageant beauty in Acapulco, Mexico. Another example: Jorge Luis Borges was considered one of the best writers in the 20th Century. He was nominated several times for the Nobel Prize for Literature, but Borges was never awarded the Noble Prize by Swedish Academy. Why? In 1976 Argentinean writer Jorge Luis Borges visited Chile. Cuba would have wanted to have a writer like him…

The Chilean dictator Augusto Jose Ramon Pinochet never was accepted by the Latin America Community and Third World countries. Pinochet became notorious for human rights abuses and corruption. From 1973 to 1989, more than 3,000 Chileans were killed by Pinochet’s Secret Police Force. His autocratic and anti-communism style of rule earned him many enemies.

THE STUDENT SURPASS THE TEACHER
In comparison to Augusto Pinochet and Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina, Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, whose father was a Spanish immigrant, is not famous like dictator… He is called "Third World spokesman" Why? Unfortunately people that don’t know Cuba very much think that Castro is a "good man". Honestly, he never has been compared to Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier, former dictator of Haiti, and Charles Taylord. "The student always surpass the teacher" is my favorite slogan. In my opinion, I think that Castro´s Communist dictatorship is worse than the former Chilean. Dictatorship.

Cuba is one of the few nations in the world in which a family controls the government. From 1960 to 2006 Fidel Castro was President of the Council of State and Council of Ministers, First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba…Currently, Raul Castro Ruz, Fidel’s brother, is the Head of State. They claim that Cuba has the most highest human development rate in the Third world and that Cubans live better in the Island than in South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and India. During Cold War, Cuba received more money per capita than the Socialist Republic of Ethiopia, one of the most poorest nations on Earth.

The country’s resources are used to build Olympic projects devised by dictator’s megalomania. Cuba has one of the most highest suicide rates in the world and the Island has the highest number of abortions in Latin America in relation to its population. Ironically, the standard of human development is going down. Ultimately the prostitution is increasing alarmingly in the Island. The dictatorship restricts such liberties as freedom speech and freedom of the press. Under the socialism, the government has imposed sharp restrictions on artists who criticize the dictatorial system. Reports Without Borders considers Cuba one of the "15 enemies of the Internet". More than 300 artists and writers have defected since 1960: Jose Manuel Carbonell (poet), Lydia Cabrera (writer), Ernesto Caparros (photographer), Ernesto Lecuona (pianist), Guillermo Cabrera Infante (writer), Enrique Labrador (writer), Jesus Diaz (film maker) Nestor Almendros (film maker) and Jorge Esquivel (dancer).

KILLINGS FIELDS AND GAYS
Cuba’s dictatorship was one of the first states in the world that prohibited homosexuality. The general gays rights situation under Cuban Revolution was catastrophic during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.Many gays were jailed, tortured and exiled by Castro’s "Olympic Paradise"…Reynaldo Arenas, a gay writer, was imprisoned several times because of his longtime opposition to Cuban rule. After release, Arenas wrote his autobiography, with the title "Antes que anochezca" (Before night falls).

The Cuban Secret Police is extensively used by Fidel and Raul Castro to suppress and disrupt pro-democratics movements. However, a number of protests against human rights violation are organized by Las Damas de Blanco. Las Damas de Blanco have been compared to Las Madres de la Plaza de Mayo (Argentina), who fought against the dictator Jorge Rafael Videla.

Unfortunately, some Third World democracies support the Cuban government for economical reasons. Cuba has sent more than 6,000 doctors, coaches, technicians and teachers around the world. Furthermore there are 15,000 foreign students in the Island.

I would like to finish my essay "Fidel Castro is not Augusto Pinochet" with my favorite personal motto: "Only oppression should fear the full exercise of freedom" by Jose Marti.


By Alejandro Guevara Onofre

REFERENCES:
Alzota, Julio. "Hoy en el Perú surgirá la más bella del Universo", La Prensa, Lima, 26 de julio 1982.
-Bonilla, Juan José-Payan, Miguel-López, José-Villalba, Susana. Diccionario Mundial de Actores, Ediciones JC, Madrid, 1998
-Caputo, Robert. "Ethiopia Revolution in Ancient Empire"; National Geographic, Washington DC, may 1983
-Diccionario de Literatura Cubana (tomos I y II), Editorial Letras Cubanas, La Habana, 1980
-Diccionario Sopena de Literatura de Literatura (tomo I), Editorial Ramón Sopena, Barcelona, 1991
-Documental: El Caso Pinochet /Chile/ 2001
-Encyclopaedia Británica Book of The Year 1977, 1981, 1984, Encyclopaedia Britannica. Chicago
-Freedom in the World. The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties 1992-93, Freedom House, 1993
-Gasparini, Juan. Mujeres de Dictadores, Ediciones Península, Barcelona, 2002
-Grondona, Mariano. "La otra Cuba", Visión, Miami, diciembre de 1993
-Guevara Onofre, Alejandro. "Crisis de Supervivencia en Cuba", Diario El Peruano, Lima, 25 de agosto de 1992
-Guía del Mundo 1993-94, Instituto del Tercer Mundo, Montevideo, 1992
-Guzmán, Patricio. Documental: La Batalla de Chile (II)/Chile/ 1977
-Huntington, Samuel. The Third Wave. Democratization in the Latre Twentieth Century, University Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1991
-Informatodo 1970, Editorial Reader´s Digest, México, 1969
-Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano 1991-2006, PNUD, New York
-Jorge, Antonio. The Cuban Economy: Dependency and Development, University of Miami, Miami, 1989
-Lande, Carl. "The Return of People Power in The Philippines", Journal of Democracy, Washington DC, January 2001
-Miller, Nicola. Soviet Relations with Latin America 1959-1987, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989
-Roca, Ana. "Charlemos con Reinaldo Arenas: un escritor en el exilio", Americas, Washington DC, septiembre de 1981
-Roca, Sergio. Socialist Cuba: Past Interpretations and Future Challenges, Westview Press, London
-Rodriguez Elizondo, José. Crisis y Renovación de las Izquierdas, Editorial Andres Bello, Santiago, 1995
-Suchlicke, Jaime. The Cuban Military under Castro, University of Miami, Miami, 1989
-Taufic, Camilo. Chile en la Hoguera, Ediciones Corregidor, Buenos Aires, 1974
-The World Almanac and Book of Facts 1975-2006, The World Almanac Books, New York, New Jersey
-Vargas Llosa, Mario. "El Lenguaje de la Pasión", Peisa, Lima, 2000
-Zandrox. "Una de ellas puede ser Miss Universo", Extra, Lima, 26 de julio 1982 

From: Buzzle

Go to Home Page

Wikileaks reveal US concerns on Cuba-Venezuela ties

Chavez and Castro.

Cuban intelligence agents have deep involvement in Venezuela, according to a 2006 US diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks. 

Then-US Ambassador William Brownfield wrote that Cuban spies had "direct access" to President Hugo Chavez.

Another cable sent in 2010 said Cuban agents controlled spying operations against the US embassy in Caracas.

The left-wing governments of Cuba and Venezuela are close allies and outspoken opponents of the US.

The secret diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks were published by the Spanish newspaper, El Pais.

Similar allegations of Cuban intelligence influence in Venezuela have been made by Venezuelan opposition groups, but US officials have not publicly expressed such concerns.

The leaked cable from Ambassador Brownfield says the ties between Cuban and Venezuelan intelligence are so close that the two countries agencies "appear to be competing with each other for the Venezuelan government's attention". Indoctrination

The ambassador wrote that Cuban spies were so close to President Chavez that they provided him with intelligence unvetted by Venezuelan officers.

"Cuban agents train Venezuelans on both Cuba and Venezuela, providing both political indoctrination and operational instruction".

The ambassador concludes that the Cuban involvement could impact US interests directly.

"Venezuelan intelligence services are among the most hostile towards the United States in the hemisphere, but they lack the expertise that Cuban services can provide".

The level of Cuban involvement in other agencies of the Venezuelan government was harder to confirm, he wrote.

The embassy "had received no credible reports of extensive Cuban involvement in the Venezuelan military", but there were reports that Cubans were training Mr Chavez's bodyguard.

But Cubans were likely to be involved "to a great extent" in agricultural policy, as well as in an identity card scheme.

The ambassador added that it was impossible to tell how many Cubans were working in Venezuela.

Cuba's biggest and most public involvement in Venezuela is in the provision of tens of thousands of doctors and nurses who provide basic health services in poor areas.

In return, Venezuela provides Cuba with subsidized oil.

From: BBC News

Go to Home Page

China company to lead $6B Cuba refinery update

Venezuela has already invested more than $1 billion at the Cienfuegos refinery according to the authorities.

Project will include refinery, LNG terminal

HAVANA - A unit of China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) is set to begin in 2011 a $6-billion expansion project at Cuba's Cienfuegos refinery in one of the biggest investments ever on the communist-led island, a source close to the project said Monday.

The blockbuster deal will be financed mostly by China's Eximbank and backed by financial guarantees in the form of oil from Venezuela, Cuba's close socialist ally and leading trade partner, the source said.

State-owned CNPC's Haunqiu Contracting and Engineering Corp is expected to start the project in the first quarter with completion planned for the end of 2013.

The Italian unit of French oilfield service company Technip will do design and engineering for the project and assist in construction.

The expansion will increase the capacity of the Soviet era refinery 155 miles southeast of Havana to 150,000 barrels per day from 65,000.

But it will also include construction of a liquefied natural gas terminal with capacity to process 2 million tons of gas annually, and a 150 megawatt electricity generation plant.

"It is one of the biggest investments in the history of Cuba. It's a minimum of $4.5 billion just for the refinery and another $1.3 billion for the LNG terminal," an executive involved with the project told Reuters.

The expanded refinery could play an important role in processing Cuban oil if the island finds significant quantities of petroleum in its waters in the Gulf of Mexico.

Several companies are planning to sink exploratory wells off Cuba's northern coast starting next year.

The project greatly expands China's role in Cuba's energy sector, which, at least publicly, has been small. China is Cuba's No. 2 trade partner.

Beijing is assisting in production of oil along Cuba's northern coast and has leased an onshore block for exploration near Havana.

CHINESE FINANCING, VENEZUELAN GUARANTEES

The offshore drilling rig to be used in exploring Cuban waters next year has been under construction in China, but whether the Chinese government has had a role in that project is not known.

Although final details are still being negotiated by the governments of China and Venezuela, the source said about 85 per cent of the cost will be financed by China's Eximbank and secured by China Export & Credit Insurance Corp.

"But the investment is totally guaranteed by the Venezuelan government, through off-takes of PDVSA crude oil," said the source.

The Cienfuegos refinery, operated by state-owned CubaPetroleo and state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), has been the centrepiece of the strategic alliance between Cuba and Venezuela.

The refinery was built during the Soviet era, but never operated until it was activated in 2007 after Venezuela helped refurbish its antiquated facilities to process part of the 115,000 barrels a day that Venezuela sends to Cuba at preferential terms.

The most recent official figures showed Cienfuegos was producing about 55,000 barrels per day of oil products.

Refinery expansion will become important for Cuba if significant offshore oilfields are found in its waters, and the Cienfuegos project is being done with that in mind.


"The expansion of the refinery is tied to the exploration in the Gulf of Mexico," the source said.

The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated Cuba has about 5 billion barrels of oil and 10 trillion cubic feet of gas offshore, but Cuba says it could have at least 20 billion barrels of oil.

A consortium led by Spanish oil firm Repsol YPF is planning to drill an exploration well next year, as is Malaysia's Petronas in conjunction with new partner, Russian firm Gazprom.

Other oil companies such as Brazil's Petrobras, ONGC Videsh, a unit of India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp, PDVSA, PetroVietnam and Russia's Zarubezhneft have exploration leases in Cuban waters, with plans to develop them.

Oil expert Jorge Pinon at Florida International University in Miami said Cuba has been installing oil storage tanks in Matanzas along the northern coast and reconstructing a pipeline that runs from there to Cienfuegos.

"The pieces of the puzzle are falling into place," he said.

By Esteban Israel, Reuters

From:  Calgary Herald

Go to Home Page

Cuba To Promote Foreign Investment

Cuba in future will be a country that promotes foreign investment, expands the private sector and dutifully pays off its debts, according to a proposal revealed on Monday by the ruling Communist party.

But it will not renounce the socialist system installed half a century ago after Fidel Castro took power in a 1959 revolution, according to the 32-page document that will guide debates at a Communist party congress in April.

"The economic policy in the new phase will correspond with the principle that only socialism is capable of overcoming difficulties and preserving the gains of the revolution, and that in the updating of the economic model, planning will be paramount, not the market." - it said.

The document, entitled "Guidelines of Economic and Social Policy," is the program of reforms President Raul Castro will place before the party congress for its consideration.

They could be modified during extensive public discussions ahead of the congress, which was announced by the president on Monday night and will be the first since 1997.

The congress is where Cuba's only legal political party sets direction for the country, supposedly for the next five years, although it will have been 14 years since the last meeting.

The April gathering will be particularly important because, given the age of current leadership, it will be the last for the generation that fought the revolution and has held power since then, hewing hard to communist ideology.

President Castro, 79, took office in 2008 after older brother Fidel Castro, 84, ruled the island for 49 years and finally resigned due to ill health.

He promised to improve the daily lives of Cubans and has focussed on economic improvement, including major reforms announced in September to cut a million government jobs and expand the private sector by granting 250,000 new licenses for self-employment.

ONLY THE ECONOMY
He said Cuba's economy will be the only topic at the congress.

The guidelines include reforms already begun by Raul Castro -- among them the reduction of the state's role in the society and the decentralization of agricultural management.

They include a proposal to eliminate the monthly food ration Cubans receive, symbol of decades of state paternalism and a particular target of Raul Castro, who says handouts have discouraged productivity.

They also call for provisions for bank credits for the new self-employed and wholesale stores to cut their costs, but also for them to pay taxes to finance public spending.

In contrast to past policy, state-owned businesses that do not make money will be completely liquidated.

And the authorities will look to improve the country's international credibility "through the strict fulfilment of contract commitments."

Cuba's standing with the international business community has been damaged the past two years as a cash crunch forced the freezing of Cuban bank accounts held by foreign businesses and of payments to many of them.

The party also proposes "to continue encouraging the participation of foreign capital in Cuba, complementing national investment in those activities of interest to the country."


The document mentions, for example, the development of golf courses, marinas and luxury condominiums to attract wealthier visitors to the Caribbean island.

Raul Castro said that before being distributed, a copy of the guidelines was submitted to Fidel Castro for his consideration. Even though he is no longer president, he is still head of the Communist party.

By Esteban Israel

From: SwissInfo

Go to Home Page

Why Do Progressives Defend Communists and Terrorists?

As incredible as it may seem, the giant labor federation, the AFL-CIO, used to be run by a staunch anti-communist. George Meany had his disagreements with conservatives on domestic issues but he mostly agreed with them on foreign policy. Indeed, Meany was so anti-communist that he was dubbed a “right-winger” by liberals in the media. He criticized détente with the Soviet Union. He didn’t like communists and refused to allow them into his coalitions.

All of this changed over time. When the AFL-CIO staged a “Solidarity Day” rally in 1981, in order to protest President Ronald Reagan’s domestic policies, then-AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland refused to tell communists they were not welcome. 

When John Sweeney, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, became president of the AFL-CIO, the communists and their fellow travelers were officially welcomed in. He hired veterans of the Venceremos Brigades such as Karen Nussbaum and Karen Ackerman. These were the groups of radical young people who had gone to Communist Cuba for indoctrination sessions back in the 1970s. Some went for training in guerrilla warfare. The trips were arranged by Bernardine Dohrn of the terrorist Weather Underground. 

As we noted in a recent column, Nussbaum, executive director of Working America, a community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, is in charge of getting the unemployed to the ballot box on November 2 in order to prevent a conservative takeover of the U.S. Congress. Nussbaum, who served under Sweeney at the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), has refused to talk about her time in Cuba and the media won’t ask her any questions about it. 

Ackerman, AFL-CIO political director since 2003, is also close-mouthed about her Cuba trip. 

In this day and age, with the liberal media so willing to act as megaphones for the Obama Administration and left-wing labor leaders, it is not “news” that Ackerman, in charge of overall strategy and the spending of millions of dollars on behalf of liberal candidates, once went to Cuba for indoctrination. Nor is it “news” that the AFL-CIO, now under President Richard Trumpka, has joined a “One Nation Working Together” coalition staging a Saturday rally with the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and other openly communist and socialist groups. 

Consider Thursday’s Washington Post story about the “liberal” and “left-leaning” groups planning the October 2 march in Washington, D.C. Reporter Krissah Thompson says the coalition includes “environmentalists, antiwar activists, church and civil rights groups, union organizers and gay rights coalitions…” Nothing is said about the fact that the “One Nation Working Together” official list of “endorsing organizations” includes the CPUSA, best known for receiving Soviet funding and direction during the Cold War. But the CPUSA is not the only far-left group on the list. All that a reporter has to do is read it. But to report the facts would mean that organizers of the rally, led by a veteran Democratic Party operative, might have to be asked embarrassing questions. So the facts are ignored.

The liberal media bias and dishonesty aside, the change reflects how the progressive movement has capitulated to the forces of the anti-American left, in order to swell their ranks. It is a terrible development that is ominous for the future of the United States because of the hold that the progressives now have on the White House and Congress. It makes sensational reports of a few extremists in the conservative-oriented Tea Party movement look silly by comparison. 

We noted in our recent column that the “peace director” of the “One Nation Working Together” rally ran an organization that defends accused Army traitor Bradley Manning. He talks openly about inviting communists to the rally. It doesn’t bother him in the least. 

Unfortunately, this is the continuation of a trend we have seen since Barack Obama became President and hired communist Van Jones. After Trevor Loudon broke the story about Jones’ communist background and Glenn Beck of Fox News raised a ruckus, Jones left the administration, only to return to the group in Washington, D.C. where he had previously worked—the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress. This revolving door proves that the modern-day progressive movement is willing to work with communists and tolerate their destructive ideology. It is a tragic turnaround from the days when liberal Democrats shared the anti-communism that characterized U.S. foreign policy. 

These communists are people who have always put the interests of foreign countries, most of them totalitarian in nature, ahead of the United States. They may not have the Soviet Union to depend on anymore, but they continue to get inspiration and guidance from Cuba. They represent an alien philosophy that has cost the lives of 100 million people through failed socialist schemes, violence, terrorism, and murder. As former FBI informant Larry Grathwohl has testified, the Weather Underground itself had plans to “re-educate” 100 million Americans and eliminate the 25 million who couldn’t be converted to communism. 

To cite another example of this troublesome trend, consider that a so-called “progressive” media outlet called “Truthout” is circulating a column on women active in politics that glorifies convicted terrorists Lolita Lebron, Marilyn Buck, and Aafia Siddiqui. These women are called “political prisoners.”

The piece by someone named Linda Ford explains, “Lebron and Buck were anti-white supremacy/anti-imperialist activists from the 1950s-80s. Lebron, who was a Puerto Rican nationalist, died on August 1 at the age of 90. From the 60s through the 80s, in a serious, comprehensive and all-encompassing attempt at revolution, women participated in groups that favored radical action—even armed resistance—against what they saw as an oppressive American state.”

“In March of 1954,” Ford acknowledges, “Lebron wanted to dramatically tell the world that Puerto Rico was ‘a U.S. colony.’ Shouting ‘Viva Puerto Rico Libre!’ she led a small group which opened fire in the House of Representatives, firing 30 shots and wounding five Congressmen.”

Ford assures us that Lebron claims she only shot at the ceiling, not intending to hurt anyone. She was pardoned by President Carter and returned to her “activism.” 

As for Buck, she “was an activist in the intense, politically charged atmosphere of the 60s and 70s, part of the huge movement challenging the American system: the capitalist state and white supremacy.”

In fact, Buck was involved with the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army (BLA) and served decades in prison, “where she wrote prize-winning poetry and analytic articles on the psychology of female repression,” Ford tells us. She was in prison for her involvement in multiple terrorist incidents, including bombings, murders and helping a BLA member named Joanne Chesimard escape from prison to Cuba.

Ford goes on, “Stewart and Siddiqui, who were also arguably victims of white supremacy and imperialism, have both felt the enormous consequences of the anti-‘terrorist’/anti-Muslim era, beginning with the 9/11 bombings.”

Aafia Siddiqui, known as “Lady Al Qaeda,” was sentenced to 86 years in prison for trying to kill American soldiers and was implicated in other terrorist plots. But Linda Ford questions the evidence and cites claims by “human rights groups” that “she is not an extremist.” 

Stewart is terrorist lawyer Lynne Stewart, now serving 10 years in prison for providing illegal support to a client, terrorist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, responsible for the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. But Ford casts doubt on these charges as well, saying that “Stewart thinks she was being made an example to deter other lawyers, male or female, from defending ‘controversial figures and causes.’”

These claims would be laughable were the issue of terrorism not so serious. How have we come to the point in the United States where a progressive media outlet, bankrolled by liberal foundations, would run such garbage?

But the “Truthout” site not only runs columns defending and praising terrorists. It distributes columns by such liberals as Paul Krugman and E.J. Dionne. 

A statement on the website boasts the names of dozens of leading “progressives” and says that “We value and support Truthout in its efforts to promote democracy, social justice, accountability and peace. Truthout is an invaluable source of independent news and commentary, and provides a powerful voice for the progressive movement.”

The names and signers include Bernie Lunzer, President of The Newspaper Guild/Communication Workers of America; Michael Winship, President of the Writers Guild of America, East; Jeff Cohen, founder of Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting; Carol D. Rothman, Secretary-Treasurer, The Newspaper Guild-CWA; and Mike Elk, labor writer for In These Times and The Huffington Post.

It is tragic but telling that the cause of “social democracy, social justice, accountability and peace” apparently justifies publishing not only a defense of terrorism but a glorification of terrorists who have served or are serving prison time. 

But this is what the progressive movement has become. It is shocking and dangerous.

By Cliff Kincaid

From: NewsWithViews

Go to Home Page

Kudos to Castro

Castro back in the old days with his friend Yasser Arafat

Palestine and Iran are giving nothing to Castro. Not anymore. Their political support has little value and the economical is non existent. And Israel has money. Jews have money. It's time to change sides, maybe people would not remember "little" mistakes from the past. 

Israel should rejoice in Castro’s holiday gift of a positive message on Israel, which might just mark the beginning of a trend.

A belief in the capacity inherent in every individual to fundamentally change for the better is one of Judaism’s most important and redeeming tenets.

The recent Day of Atonement is the annual apex of that notion, and penitents are welcomed into society and revered as bearing more rights than virtuous people.

It is tempting to view former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro as now being repentant of his longtime sin of backing those who act toward the eradication of Israel, following the support of the Zionist entity he expressed in a recent interview with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, in which the aging revolutionary also criticized Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his repeated Holocaust denial.

“Yes, without a doubt,” was Castro’s unambiguous answer to Goldberg’s inquiry as to whether he thought Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish State. The Cuban leader, who passed over the presidency to his brother Raul in 2008 but remains First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba, also expressed understanding of how the history of persecution of Jews, most notably the Holocaust, would influence Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s decision-making process, and even noted his desire to meet with the premier’s father Ben-Zion, the leading historian of the Spanish Inquisition.

President Shimon Peres issued a warm letter to Castro over the weekend with gratitude for the “moving” and “unexpected” words that bore “an original and unique intellectual depth.” And a Prime Minister’s Office’s statement defined what Castro had said as a testimony to his “deep understanding of the history of the Jewish people and Israel.”

ONE NEED not be a great historian like Netanyahu Sr., however, to recall Cuba’s anti-Israel track-record under Castro. In 1967, Cuba’s ambassador to the UN described Israel’s preemptive attack against the onslaught of Arab armies in the Six Day War as “a surprise attack in the Nazi manner,” and Havana’s military advisers provided instruction to PLO terrorists both in Cuba and in southern Lebanon in the seventies and early eighties. Diplomatic relations with Israel were cut in 1973 after Castro sent Cuban tank commanders to join Syrian forces in the Yom Kippur War, and Cuba remains on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism.

I'm just following the money baby...

In fact, one needn’t be a historian at all to encounter a revolting diatribe the same Castro, still idolized by the extreme Left in Europe and Latin America that often does not recognize Israel’s right to exist, published on June 10 on his CubaDebate website.

“The state of Israel’s hatred of the Palestinians is such that they would not hesitate to send one and a half million men, women and children from that country to the gas chambers in which millions of Jews of all ages were exterminated by the Nazis,” he wrote just a few weeks before his interview with The Atlantic, following the IDF raid on the Gaza-bound flotilla. “The Führer’s swastika would seem to be Israel’s banner today. This opinion is not born of hatred,” Castro continued, noting his country’s history of absorbing Jews during “the harsh days of World War II.” (Cuba’s Jewish community has since dwindled, from an estimated 15,000 in 1959 to a current 1,000 or so.) Interpreting the inner workings of the mind of this 84-year-old, who might or might not be rethinking his long-time stance on Israel, may be beyond us at this stage. But whatever his motivations, the very day after the initial segment of the interview was published on The Atlantic’s website on September 7, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez declared he’d be meeting with the leaders of his country’s Jewish community.

Chavez, who considers Castro an influence and has close ties with Ahmadinejad, a week later indeed heard the Jewish leaders’ concerns over anti-Semitism in the state media and their desire to see diplomatic ties with Israel, which Chavez cut in 2009, reinstated.

Castro’s standing as the radical Left’s elderly statesman puts him in a unique position to generate a move toward making pro-Israel sentiment somewhat fashionable, or at least to help distance anti-Semitism from the realms of the political discourse. Without forgetting his problematic past, and accordingly without attributing uncritical weight to this refreshing draft from the Caribbean, Israel should rejoice in Castro’s holiday gift of a positive message on Israel, which might just mark the beginning of a trend.


Source: JPost

Go to Home Page

Capitalism sees new birth in Cuba

Capitalism Vs Socialism. Who wins?

The dominos stopped falling at Cuba. When the Soviet Union collapsed, capitalism was in the ascendance, but it didn’t reach as far as Cuba. And that brings us to an irony. On the eve of the credit crunch, when some argued capitalism was dying, it seems Cuba is at last embracing the profit motive as a way to kick life into the economy.

In 1992, soon after the Soviet Union collapsed, the author Francis Fukuyama penned the book “The End of History and the Last Man”. In essence, he argued that capitalism had won, and that moving forward there would be one economic and political system, hence the description “the end of history”.

Then in 2008 and 2009, when some argued capitalism itself was tottering, many dusted off their old copy of Fukuyama’s book and argued instead we were seeing the end of capitalism.

And yet, through it all, Cuba remained steadfast in its communist ways. In the land of cigars there is one wage – at least in theory. In theory, there are no wealthy or poor people. Instead, everyone has the same, which in practice means just about everyone is poor, with a few privileged exceptions.

But not even Cuba is immune to the harsh economic times. It has no choice but to cut 500,000 jobs. It’s a disaster in Cuba, and brings with it the risk of total disenchantment with the economic system.

But the government has responded by allowing Cubans to work for themselves in 178 categories. And in no less than 83 categories they will be allowed to employ non-family members.

And so it is that the genie that is the profit motive, is out of the lamp.

But which way next?

Clearly Cuba will not want to go the way of the Soviet Union. Not only will words like Perestroika and Glasnost, which mean openness and transparency, be taboo, but so will the spirit that these words conjure up.

Instead, Cuba will try and go down the Chinese route.

But Cuba differs from China in one important respect. For the island of the Caribbean has one rather large and distrustful neighbour separated by a bit of water. How this story will pan out will be truly fascinating.

From: Investment & Business News

Go to Home Page