Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts

Friday, August 26, 2011

Would-be Cuban defectors from Guyana face tough times- Wikileaks


Several Guyana-based Cuban doctors, who wanted to defect to the United States, had fled the airport and gone into hiding, fearing that Guyanese and Cuban officials would have tracked them down and return them to Cuba, a cable released by Wikileaks has revealed.

Having worked for meagre salaries and unable to save enough, they usually have to endure months of waiting to know whether their parole applications are approved.

Six Cuban doctors had gone into the United States embassy and were interviewed for Signficant Public Benefit Parole under the Cuban Medical Personnel program.

“Three of the pending applicants are in hiding, reporting that they cannot move freely for fear that Guyanese police or Cuban embassy personnel may apprehend them and repatriate them to Cuba,” the cable stated back then.

One of the doctors complained that the Cuban government canceled his passport after he refused to board a plane to ostensibly accompany a six doctor back to Cuba. He told the US embassy that he felt that he was being tricked after Cuban authorities might have been informed that he had visited the American embassy here to request parole.

“The applicant refused to board the plane because of a hunch that he was being tricked into repatriating himself. Subsequently, Cuban Embassy authorities told him that his passport would be canceled immediately. They also removed him from the medical brigade and labeled him a deserter,” the cable states.

The Wikileaks cable also reveals that Cuba had dispatched a new manager to Guyana in December 2006, aimed at cracking down on Cuban medical personnel who have intentions to request parole or flee Guyana.The revelation, which is contained in a March 30, 2007 cable from the US embassy here to the State Department, appears to confirm previous news media reports that the Guyana government has taken a policy not to grant citizenship to Cuban doctors who refuse to return to Havana even if they marry Guyanese. The embassy reported to the State Department that the renewal of the doctor's visa is done done six months prior to the conclusion of their medical mission so that the termination of their legal status will coincide with their repatriation to Cuba.

The cable notes that Cuban medical personnel who apply for parole are ostracized. Any Cuban medical professional who maintains communication with parole applicants is at risk of losing his/her legal status in Guyana and job with the medical brigade.

The embassy said three of the parole applicants told the Consular Officer that upon arrival in Guyana members of the Cuban Medical Brigade are forced to surrender their passports and they are returned just before they are about to board the plane to return to Cuba at the end of their two-year stint. Those who went to the embassy with their passports said they fled the Cheddi Jagan International Airport and went into hiding after they were chased.

“The applicants that came to the Embassy with their passports risked arrest by fleeing from the airport rather than returning to Cuba. They reported that "official-looking" people chased them as they ran to a taxi and drove away from the airport. They went into hiding until they felt safe enough to come to the U.S. Embassy to file an application for parole,” states the cable.

The embassy told the State Department that the Cuban doctor who was approved for parole was hesitant to travel because he feared for the safety of his female colleagues whose applications had been still pending. Three of the pending applicants had been in hiding and had reported that they could not have moved freely for fear that Guyanese police or Cuban embassy personnel might have apprehended them and repatriated them to Cuba.

“All of the parole applicants expect their families in Cuba to be targeted for reprisals because of their failure to return to Cuba after the completion of their mission,” the cable added.

The embassy said that Cuban applicants for parole told them that the only reason that the US embassy in Guyana does not receive many more parole applications is that they are terrified of being seen entering the U.S. Embassy. Consular Officers, according to the cable, sense that Cuban medical personnel are willing to take the risk of requesting parole; however once they do, they are faced with months of delay and uncertainty. “Since many applicants are requesting parole after they have completed the medical mission, they are no longer legally employed and unable to subsist on their meager savings while awaiting a decision from the Department of Homeland Security that can take months to process.

Against the backdrop of meager funds on which to live, the cable states Cuban medical personnel who have applied for parole rely on former colleagues for assistance. “Presently, they rely on the assistance that some former colleagues are willing to give them at much risk to their own status.”

“Local charities can offer very little assistance to political refugees. Moreover, every time the applicants have to leave their hiding place to ask for assistance, they risk detention and deportation because of their lack of status,” the cable adds.

Cuban medical personnel, the cable states, receive very low wages compared to their Guyanese counterparts, and their contracts require them to relinquish fifty percent of any overtime pay to the Central Unit for Medical Cooperation (UCCM) in Havana. The Cuban doctor's monthly salary is equivalent to US$500 from which US$100 is deducted on a monthly basis and contractually remitted back to the UCCM. Overtime is accumulated at the rate of US$1.25 per hour, and doctors on the overnight shift make US$2.50 per night. In comparison, Guyanese doctors typically make US$1,500 per month.

Source: Demerarawaves


  • Go to Home Page
  • Saturday, July 16, 2011

    Cuban Wretch "Escapes" Castro's Paradise


    On Thursday, July 14, 2011, a young Cuban who tried to stow away inside the landing gear of a Spanish airliner died during the nine-hour flight from Havana to Madrid. It was, ironically, Lenin who invented the term “voting with their feet” during the Russian Civil War to describe people moving into areas controlled by the Communists. Collectivists have never found occasion to use that term again.


    The flight of Cubans out of their horrific prison camp nation to anywhere else is a 60-year-old story. Fidel Castro inherited a nation that was among the most prosperous in the Western Hemisphere. Although there was much to dislike about Fulgencio Batista, the Cuban leader whom Castro ousted, there was also much to admire about Cuba before Castro.

    Indeed, there was a great deal for collectivists to admire about Batista. Sumner Welles, Undersecretary of State under Franklin Roosevelt, actually described Batista as a communist. Batista, the first Cuban leader to bring members of the Cuban Communist Party into his Cabinet, described himself as a “progressive socialist.” When Castro attacked Batista in 1953, the Cuban Communist Party actually accused Castro of “Putchism,” another one of the surreal words invented by Marxists which onlinedictionary.com defines as "a method of revolution or overthrow involving secret planning."

    Batista had won during a competitive election in 1940, although he later effectively usurped power. Nevertheless, after his first term as President, Batista left office peacefully. Unlike Castro, who came from an affluent upper-class family, Batista grew up in poverty. He worked in the sugar cane fields, on railroads, and in the hard labor that the poor must do to survive.

    Fulgencio Batista was part black, part Chinese, part American Indian, and part European. Unlike Castro, Batista genuinely was a “man of the people,” and his rise to power — from a sergeant in the Cuban army to leader of his nation — reflected that connection with ordinary people. When he was elected in 1940 with about 60 percent of the vote, he was the first non-white Cuban to win that office (the Barack Obama of his nation).

    Cuba before Castro is uniformly depicted by the establishment media as horrific. The reality is dramatically different. While Batista and others ruled Cuba, the nation flourished. (This is in spite of the socialist policies of Batista, not because of those policies.) How well off was pre-Castro Cuba?

    The Cuban peso had the same value as the U.S. dollar. There were 101 privately owned newspapers. Cuba had one radio per five Cubans and one television set per 28 Cubans. One out of every 40 Cubans owned a car, and one out of every 38 owned a telephone. These were among the best rates of ownership in the world. The infrastructure of Cuba — highways, ports, etc. — was considered by the U.S. Commerce Department to be the best in Latin America.

    How well was labor compensated? The average Cuban industrial worker earned $6 a day in 1958. Although that figure sounds low to us in our hyper-inflated world, that wage level can be understood only in comparison with nations’ average daily industrial compensation at the time: Sweden ($8.10), Switzerland ($8.00), New Zealand ($6.72), Denmark ($6.46), and Norway ($6.10.) Cuba also had the seventh-highest level of compensation for agricultural workers in the world, behind only Canada, America, New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, and Norway. Unemployment in Cuba was the lowest in Latin America.  Even the leader of the Cuban Communist Party until 1962, Anibal Escalante, said, “Cuba is one of the countries [in Latin America] in which the standard of living of the masses was particularly high.”

    The per capita income was the third-highest in Latin America, after Argentina and Venezuela. Ginsburg’s 1959 Atlas of the World Economy placed Cuba at 22nd out of the 122 nations surveyed. Income surpassed that of Spain and Portugal and was comparable to that of Italy.

    The Cuban public educational system received a higher percentage of the government’s budget than any other Latin American nation, with Costa Rica, a famously peaceful and orderly nation, second. Cuba also had 900 private schools and three private universities. Rural education received special attention and was supplemented by a mobile library system. According to the UN report of 1953, the literacy rate in Cuba was 82 percent, higher than in any other Latin American nation except Argentina and Costa Rica.

    How healthy were Cubans before Castro? They ate quite well. Per capita consumption of meat was 65 pounds per year, exceeded only by England, Australia, and Denmark. Caloric intake was the third-highest in Latin America, after Argentina and Uruguay. The nation had the third-lowest mortality rate in the world — lower, in fact, than America or Canada. The infant mortality rate was 3.76 per thousand, while next in line in Latin America was Argentina at 6.11 and Venezuela at 6.56. In fact, the infant mortality rate in Cuba was lower than in France, Italy, Belgium, or Austria. Only Argentina had more doctors per citizen than Cuba. Life expectancy was significantly higher than in Latin America in general.

    Cuba was doing well, but it was doing well in spite of the “progressive” policies of Batista, not because of Batista. What this nation needed was a return to free markets, the end of incessant government intervention on the side of labor, and public expenditures (which were often inefficient) to improve education and health. What Cuba did not need was a collectivist totalitarian such as Castro.

    In the Never-Never land invented by Marxists which divides mankind into “progressives” and “reactionaries,” where was Castro? In his youth, Castro owned the complete works of Benito Mussolini. When he was tried in Cuban courts, his oral argument was virtually modeled on Hitler’s “History will absolve me” speech. When Francisco Franco died, after Castro had been in power over 15 years, Castro ordered a day of respect for the Spanish dictator.

    Fidel Castro believes in power. The Cuban people have suffered grievously during the last 50 years. From 1959 to 1994, more than one million Cubans have left their island home for anywhere else. The horrors of Castro’s Gulag are as awful as anything in the ghastly history of modern totalitarianism. This nation that was once among the most affluent in the Western Hemisphere or, indeed, the world, now languishes in poverty and experiences persistent shortages of even the most basic items such as milk, soap, and clothing. Rationing is the norm.

    The incidental byproducts of Castro’s Cuba are found in baseball players and other athletes who abandon their communist prison as soon as they can, in the grinding poverty of those who cannot leave, and in those desperate enough to hide in the landing gear of an airliner traveling across the Atlantic Ocean from Havana to Madrid.

    by Bruce Walker

    Source: New American

  • Go to Home Page
  • Friday, June 24, 2011

    Cuba: Another Historiography Is Possible

    The Presidential Palace, built between 1913-1920. From 1965, the Museum of the Revolution. 

    Last Friday, I was talking with a young Honduran historian who was referring to Cuba’s Republican stage (1902-1959). She simplified that period by comparing it to how she sees Panama today: a paradise for gambling and sex but with a government that is failing to provide its citizens a dignified life.

    No matter how much revolutionary historiography has attempted to satanize Republican Cuba (attaching it with prefixes like “neo” or “pseudo to the noun “Republic”), it takes an effort to think this way by anyone who values logic and knows something about the history of Cuba.

    At least it takes some effort on my part, because for me the Cuban republic was not merely an American backyard for gambling and prostitution. There were also institutions here that for their seriousness and quality earned an esteemed place in the memory of our senior citizens.

    These were such that I’ve yet to meet an elderly elementary school teacher who doesn’t speak of their career without concluding with the sentence: “Us, yes, we are true teachers!” in an obvious critique of educators created by the revolutionary government.

    That republic of “players and prostitutes” also gave humanity numbers of people of international stature, such as the world champion of chess (Jose Raul Capablanca) and of boxing (“Kid Chocolate”). And I have to say that if Cuba still cannot point to a Nobel Prize winner from that time, it was simply because the sponsors and organizers of that award considered it undue to grant such a distinguished medal to a Latin American.

    It’s worth clarifying that despite the fact that the Swedish academy never granted Dr. Carlos J. Finlay the award, it did indeed nominate him for it on at least six occasions. This was an award that he clearly deserved because of his discovery of the Aedes aegypti mosquito as being the transmitting agent of yellow fever, thus saving hundreds of thousands of lives, which in an ironic twist of destiny also facilitated the completion of the Panama Canal.

    Another republic quite removed from the casinos and brothels was the one that grouped itself around Cuban intellectuality. Here at least three true erudite circles existed: the liberal, the Catholic and the socialist one, each led by a caliber of intellectuals at the continental level – people such as Jorge Mañach, Jose Lezama Lima and Juan Marinello, each also with their own identity and way of thinking about Cuba.

    From their respective political positions, and throughout the entire period of the republic, these cultivated circles that knew how to maintain intense, respectful and enriching dialogues on the issues that affected the nation, a matter that has been excessively downplayed in today’s Cuban academic and cultural panorama.

    That republic, which my Honduran friend automatically compared to the worst part of Panama, she also defined as “of little importance” also had one of the most important architecture schools on the continent. This was where architects like Nicolas Quintana (who died recently in Miami), Havana resident Mario Coyula and many others designed and built in barely a half a decade (1953-1958) two of the most emblematic neighborhoods in Havana and in Cuba: Vedado and Miramar.

    It goes without saying that this Cuba, so “ill-favored” and full of thugs (according to national historiography), had the first Latin American Olympic champion: fencer Ramon Fonts (1904).

    It’s also worth remembering the important role that Cuba would play in the technological development of the region. The first Latin American airborne journey was carried out by a Cuban, Agustin Parla. The 1913 flight lasted almost three hours as that pilot traveled between Cayo Hueso (U.S.A.) and the town of the Mariel, west of Havana.

    Even rights such as divorce — so trying and difficult to understand for sexist Ibero-Americans at the beginning of the 20th century — was accepted in our country as early as 1918.

    In terms of other women’s rights, the first feminist movement in Ibero-America appeared at the end of the 1930’s in Cuba, thirty-six years ahead of the movement in Spain, for example.

    Other important facts that my friend should know is that in 1937 Cuba decreed, for the first time in Ibero-America, laws for the eight-hour work day, the minimum wage and university autonomy.

    In 1940 a constitution was adopted which was the first one in Ibero-America that approved the right of women to vote, equal rights for different sexes and races, and women’s right to work.

    In 1951 the Riviera Hotel became the first in the world to have central air conditioning.

    In terms of our agrarian culture, my friend should also know that in 1954 Cuba succeeded in producing one head of cattle for each resident, with the Cuban population back then numbering around six million people.

    It would also be worthwhile to recognize that in 1956 the UN recognized Cuba as the number two country in Latin America in terms of its literacy index, with its illiterate population consisting of only 23.6 percent – well above Spain’s illiterate population of 60 percent.

    In 1957 Cuba was recognized by the UN as the leading Ibero-America country in terms of its number of doctors per capita (1 for every 957 residents).

    In 1958 Cuba ranked as the second country of the world in the percentage of households with color television and it was the third in the world to establish a color TV station.

    In 1958 Cuba was the Ibero-American country with the most automobiles (160,000, or one for each 38 residents).

    I also feel it my duty to tell my friend that in 1959, Havana led the world by being the city with the most movie theaters (358), even surpassing cities like New York and Paris.

    In conclusion, I would like to let my friend know that I don’t have anything personal against our fine Panamanian sisters and brothers, nor do I believe that she does. Still, I would like to know if she still thinks the same after this brief review of the data on the Cuban Republic.

    Alfredo Fernandez Rodriguez

    Source: Havana Times 

    Related: Clouds in my Cuban coffee 


  • Go to Home Page
  • Wednesday, June 22, 2011

    Hitler in Havana (1966)


    I was looking through old Miami Herald articles of the 60's and stumbled upon this ad from December 10, 1966. I laughed when I saw it because it highlighted how little anti-communist propaganda against the Cuban government has changed. At least locally.

    Thanks to YouTube, this television program titled "Hitler in Havana" can be viewed in its entirety. The title and first few minutes summarizes the video nicely: "in the midst of Havana today another Hitler rages!" This and many other points in the video I've heard repeated in Miami often. According to the ad, the video was produced by the Information Council of the Americas, founded by Edward S. Butler. The video is also available on DVD.

    Hitler in Havana


    [Portion from the ad]

    You've read bold headlines! Now see secret scenes smuggled direct from Castro's Cuba. See explosions rivalling [sic] the Riechstag fire! Castro's G-2 Gestapo in action! Concentration camps in the center of Cuba! Red stormtroops rioting throughout the Americas. Brutal executions at the firing squad wall. See pathos, poverty, sabotage, riots, all filmed from life, as it was actually happening, hidden in the heart of Castro's Cuba.

    Produced by INCA
    (c) 1966, Information Council of the Americas

    Entire program will be repeated with Spanish translation by Alberto Gandero
    Sunday, Dec. 11
    10:30 - 11:30 A.M.

    By: Mambi Watch


  • Go to Home Page
  • Sunday, June 12, 2011

    Cuba: Tobacco dollars over public health






    In a section of the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth", Al Gore talks on the topic of smoking and its harmful effects on human life, but this piece of the film seems to be ignored by Fidel Castro and the Cuban communists, although they are apparently anti-global-warming activists.

    Much of the civilized world has begun to pass laws to ban smoking in places that affect other people, as recommended by the World Health Organization; however, as if it were not enough to be one of the only countries still governed by a socialist dictatorship, Cuba also prefers to be one of the few nations to avoid anti-tobacco regulations in order to not harm the earnings of its state tobacco industry.

    According to WHO, about 6 million people will die this year because of smoking, not including passive smoking, but in the socialist paradise of the Castro brothers, the "problem" to choose between health and dollars is defined in the style of Wall Street investment bankers, what makes more profit?, where tobacco capitalism wins easily.

    While Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama, Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay and other Latin American countries continue to move to offer its citizens smoke-free spaces, Cuba continues to hold the annual "Habano's Festival", tobacco is still among the top three Cuban export products, and the pictures of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara with cigars in their mouths are part of Latin American communist culture.

    A few years ago, the government of Cuba sought to promote anti-tobacco regulations, but they were nullified with the excuse of being intolerable for the people, which sounds highly implausible because we are talking about one of the most repressive dictatorships on the planet.

    And in this we have another of the contradictions of Cuban socialism. Fidel prefers to write about the growth of deserts in Africa and toxic emissions in the northern hemisphere, but where he can do something real for life, in Cuba, where the Castro family has dominated for the past 52 years, he chooses to discuss the problems in foreign countries.

    Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri

    Source: From the Beginning


  • Go to Home Page
  • Thursday, June 2, 2011

    Clouds in my Cuban coffee


    The writer returns to the country of her birth, only to have her illusions met by hard reality.

    Our family was lucky. Or at least that’s what my parents told me, over and over again. “We got out of Cuba just in time.” First my mother, with my two siblings and me in 1960. Then my father, shortly before the revolutionaries appropriated the family business. My grandmother waited the longest, emigrating the following summer. She left her husband behind, forever as it turned out. He stayed in Havana to take care of a younger brother who had been imprisoned by Castro’s regime for “collaborating with the CIA.”

    After I married and had children of my own, I began dreaming of returning to Cuba. My situation was complicated, though. First, because I am now a U.S. citizen. Second, because both sides of my family had been part of the hated bourgeoisie before the Cuban revolution and had openly opposed Fidel Castro.

    I called my uncle in Washington, D.C., for advice. He’d been the mayor of Havana and ambassador to the United States under former president Ramón Grau. He discouraged me from going, warning that it would not be safe for any member of our family to return. My father agreed. He knew Fidel well — he had crossed paths with him every day in the hallways of their private Jesuit high school. “He was a bully then,” he said, his face darkening, “and he is a paranoid bully now. You might get in, but you might not get out.” Still, one afternoon, he drew a map of Havana with an engineer’s precision and carefully marked a half-dozen places of interest in red pencil: the family business, our home in Havana, my grandparents’ houses.

    My maternal grandmother lived with us in New Jersey after she emigrated. One summer morning, she patted a spot beside her and told me a secret. Just before she fled Cuba, she whispered conspiratorially, she had hired a master carpenter to hide a few precious belongings under the staircase of her home. A box of photographs. A bundle of letters. Family heirlooms, nestled in velvet and gold-brocade drawstring pouches. “Si regresas a La Habana,” my grandmother concluded, squeezing my hands too tightly, “If you make it back to Havana . . . promise me, Ali, that you will go to my house and get my things.”

    Twice, in my 30s and again in my 40s, I wrote letters and submitted applications for entry as a visiting journalist. I didn’t get very far, and I set aside my dream — until my eldest brother died unexpectedly, at age 51. He was cremated, and we scattered his ashes in the Atlantic Ocean hoping the sea would carry him to Cuba, his homeland. As the dark clot of cremains dissipated in the lapping waves, the familiar longing rose in me. Suddenly, nothing seemed more important than returning to Cuba.

    I quit my publishing job of 27 years. I found a new job in education that qualified me to conduct research in Cuba.

    I spent long hours online and on the phone investigating potential itineraries. Finally, on the off chance that I’d satisfy both countries’ requirements for legal travel, I paid a well-connected Cuban travel agent to process a thick stack of forms and documents.

    It was madness, but it worked. At the 11th hour, I received a phone call from the agent, who told me she was holding in her hands the Cuban government’s entry permit. She was as surprised as I was. “The Cuban officials must not have looked closely at your application. You’re very lucky.”

    Three weeks later, on Aug. 1, 2009, I stood in line at Miami International Airport with a lively group of Cuban families waiting to board a chartered flight to Havana. The minute our plane lifted off the runway, the passengers broke out in applause. Flushed with excitement, my seatmate said, “Life is very, very hard in Cuba, but we miss it terribly all the same. There is no more beautiful place on Earth.”

    At José Martí airport in Havana, I breezed through the H1N1 screening line, customs line and luggage tax line. As I approached the fourth and final line, I eyed the exit. “Wait!” the official I’d handed my declaration card to commanded. “What is this?” A hairy index finger stabbed the line where I’d written “U.S. citizen.”

    “I have my passport right here,” I stammered, confused by his tone. “I can show it to —”

    “No!” he barked. Then he theatrically shredded the declaration card and called over another official to cover his post. When he led me away to a private area of the airport, I panicked. But he simply whipped out a fresh form and helped me fill it out “correctly.”

    “Look, your U.S. citizenship does not mean anything here,” he explained. Eres cubana, entiendes? “You are Cuban, got it? You might have a house and some official papers in America, but you will always be Cuban. That is what you must write here.”

    I expected smooth sailing from then on. I was wrong. As I stepped outside the airport into suffocating heat, I found myself, like Alice in Wonderland, mystified by the strange, new world I’d tumbled into. Only this was no wonderland.

    The experiences of the next seven days were deeply disorienting. When I told the cab driver my destination was the Hotel Habana Libre, he said bitterly, “I am not welcome in your hotel, because I am dark-skinned. The government thinks tourists are more comfortable around light-skinned people. Even when my relatives from America come for a visit and stay here, I am not allowed to go up to their room.”

    I was genuinely surprised. Given that Cuba’s population is over 50 percent black and the government prides itself on equality and the common good, I thought race relations would be better. I asked the driver if this hotel was an exception. He snorted and bounced the cab over a curb and into the hotel’s circular driveway.

    Still, nothing could dampen my spirits. I was here! And I was about to enter the famed “Havana Hilton,” as the hotel was originally christened. My father’s first cousin launched his career as an architect here, designing one of the grand ballrooms. My young parents had strolled through the magnificent lobby, undoubtedly admiring the three-storey atrium. I was born in April 1958, just one month after the grand opening. Perhaps I had walked through these very doors myself as a toddler.

    But as I approached the main entrance, I tensed. Uniformed guards flanked the doorway. Plainclothes police with poorly hidden earpieces moved silently through the lobby. Glancing around as I waited in line to register, I spotted the cold eye of a surveillance camera tucked among plastic foliage.

    Never far from watchful eyes, I followed the pre-approved itinerary exactly. I attended canned lectures, toured designated schools and interviewed teachers and university professors for my “research project.” I learned little of any consequence in these government-sponsored venues. A few hours online would have been more fruitful.

    It was not easy to access the Internet, though, even in the hotel. Guests had to turn over their passports to the computer-room clerk before using the shared computers, and the Internet connection was extremely slow. Phone calls were monitored, too, in the glass-enclosed booths of the hotel telephone centre, where a helpful operator dialed all calls and, I’m told, listened in.

    Some days, though, the itinerary allowed for a few unscheduled and unsupervised hours to rest or shop. On these days, I quickly changed into a simple housedress and sandals and struck out alone. It was these solitary excursions — and the spontaneous encounters they occasioned — that made my visit worthwhile. I walked slowly, taking in the rich colours and scents of royal purple bougainvillea, blood-red hibiscus and the fiery blossoms of framboyan trees, and greeting the Cubans squatting in doorways and loitering in storefronts, striking up random conversations. A surprising number were friendly and willing to talk, to tell their stories.

    It’s true, these Cubans told me, that the government provides free health care and education. Every Cuban has a roof over his head and food on her table. But since the 1990s and the fall of the Soviet Union, the shortages in medicine, housing and food have eroded confidence in the regime. “It got so bad,” one woman told me in a hushed voice, “little children got horrible diseases. Some people became blind, and some people” — she formed a noose with a hand cupped around her neck — “you know. They just gave up.”

    A Cuban lawyer complained about the lack of access to world news. “How many channels can you watch in your hotel?” he asked me with boyish curiosity. He peppered me with questions about U.S. President Barack Obama, the American economy and our education system. The popularity of a half-dozen Cuban bloggers and Raúl Castro’s promise to make the Internet and mobile phones more accessible had led me to believe that information from the outside world was seeping into Cuba. But my casual acquaintances howled with laughter when I asked if they had mobile phones. “I can’t afford eggs for my children or a tin can of paint for my house,” one said. “Those things are only for the military and high officials.”

    One rainy day, an elderly woman invited me inside her kitchen for a cup of café cubano. Spotting a crucifix above the table, I asked her about religious practice in the country. “It is easier now,” she told me, “but if you are young it can prevent you from getting a good job.” She hesitated, then blurted: “My pastor was killed two weeks ago.”

    “Oh, no. What happened?” I asked. She shifted uncomfortably in her chair and twisted a corner of the floral tablecloth. “It was an attempted robbery,” she said finally, avoiding eye contact. I stopped asking questions.

    One experience was lighter, if no less sobering. I joined a busload of tourists on a day trip to the countryside. Our destination was a post-revolutionary Cuban community with an impressive array of social services, a well-equipped community centre and sparkling white-washed bungalows dotting the forested hillside. At the model home near the end of our tour, I hung back to thank the family who’d so kindly greeted us. “It must be difficult for you with all us tourists traipsing through your house every day,” I said in Spanish. The grandmother exchanged a furtive glance with her daughter and nodded. “How long have you lived here?” I asked. She answered vaguely, “A while.” When she learned I was born in Cuba, she invited me to join her and her daughter for coffee in a back room. “We don’t really live here,” her daughter offered as I sipped the sweet espresso. “It’s a great job, but our real house is five minutes away. We come here every day for the tourists. Anyway, we’re lucky to be able to live in this community. The government keeps it nice for the tourists. There’s a waiting list to get in.”

    Halfway through my visit, I abandoned the idea of retrieving my grandmother’s possessions. Not only because it would be impossible to gain admittance to her former home, which sat squarely in the capital’s Embassy Row, but also because my romantic daydreams had been impaled by the real and present desperation of the Cuban people. I had not travelled to Cuba expecting to see the paradise of my parents’ memories, of course, but I had hoped that things would be better for the average Cuban. Life still seemed impossibly hard here.

    As I sat at the gate in José Martí airport waiting for the charter plane that would carry me back to the United States, I couldn’t help wondering: How much has really changed in Cuba? The military and high-ranking government officials are Cuba’s new bourgeoisie, indifferent to the suffering of their fellow citizens. We tourists and researchers are kept in the dark, steered toward upscale resorts, hotels, restaurants and shops that few Cubans can enter, much less patronize. We visit Potemkin villages erected for our benefit, and our dollars line the pockets of the privileged.

    On the last day of my visit, an American university professor and socialist sympathizer said, “Every year I visit Cuba hoping that things will be better. This is my sixth visit.” He and I discussed how U.S. policy helped cripple Cuba’s economy and isolate its citizens. In the previous week, I had asked several officials and as many ordinary Cubans some variation of the question, “What should I tell Americans about Cuba and the Cuban people?” Some responded that I should tell Americans about the Cuban people’s ingenuity, resiliency and national pride despite the country’s troubles; others spoke of the Cuban people’s keen sense of humour and achievements in the arts and sciences. But everyone, absolutely everyone, repeated one particular message: Tell the American people to lift the blockade, not just for economic reasons, but for the sake of intercambio — the human exchange that inevitably leads to mutual transformation.

    By Alicia von Stamwitz 

    Alicia von Stamwitz was born Alicia Ramirez de Arellano. She lives in St. Louis.


    Source: UC Observer


    Cuba Before Castro


  • Go to Home Page
  • Friday, May 27, 2011

    Without One Vote Against



    When Castro says that Cuba is the most democratic country in the world, I am uncertain if he is being serious or it is black humor. I can understand that a lifelong guerrilla, fiercely opposed to the capitalist model, does not appreciate at all the system of representative democracy in the Western world.

    But from there to setting up a series of institutions, silent and obedient to the government, where the three branches of State are controlled by one person and to tell us that this is the only true democracy, confirms to me that all autocrats have that pathological mania to appear as democrats.

    A dictator should state clearly that he is going to rule until his death, because he considers himself a superior being. Or because he does what the hell he wants.


    Any resemblance is not purely coincidental

    I’m sick of the lies. Perhaps true democracy does not exist. In countries where universally accepted laws operate and human rights are respected, failures occur in bulk, but people shout what they want against their government and no one will look at you with a mean face.

    Also, there are independent courts and parliament is like a madhouse, where everyone disagrees with the package of measures released by the president. That’s what I mean by a democracy.

    In Cuba, when the Castros talk nobody can go against them. Publicly, no one has ever been seen raising their hand to tell the comandante that he is pondering a load of nonsense.

    On the island, everyone is wrong. The infallible are the Castros. If things in Cuba are crooked it’s not by their misrule. No, the ‘guilty’ are the negligent workers and certain talentless ministers.

    General Raul Castro wants there to be disagreement. But when they end their speeches and the president of the dull and monotonous Cuban parliament asks the members whether they agree with the words of the leader, everyone, absolutely everyone, raises their hand.

    I will believe in the Socialist democracy, as advocated by the regime in Havana, when you see a negative vote.

    By Iván García

    From: Translating Cuba


  • Go to Home Page
  • Tuesday, May 17, 2011

    Communist jalopy creeps to capitalism

    The "good" old times are over long time ago.

    The communist utopia that Fidel Castro hoped to bring to Cuba with the revolution he led more than 50 years ago has, from all indications, collapsed into a stifling stasis for everyday Cubans.

    Most live in the same abode from birth to death, and struggle to maintain either rickety cars imported from the Soviet Union more than two decades ago, or 1950s-era jalopies that, on these shores, would be wheeled out at classic car shows. Few new products or ideas enter Cuba, thanks in part to America's long-running economic embargo, and few Cubans ever see the world beyond their island thanks to Byzantine travel restrictions.

    Anyone who is waiting on the edge of their seat for the regime to fall should probably lean back and get comfortable - a popular uprising like those that brought down totalitarian governments from East Germany to Egypt doesn't appear to be in the offing. But there are some indications that Cuba's rulers are opening the door, a tiny bit, to some economic reforms.

    A Communist Party gathering in April approved new guidelines that would allow Cubans to buy and sell houses and cars on a limited basis, let private farmers use state land and, possibly, let cooperatives bypass the maze of state bureaucracy and send their products straight to consumers.

    While it's barely American-style, go-go capitalism, it's at least a start. Like a stubborn music buff who refuses to part with his eight-track tapes, Cuba is one of the few remaining communist regimes in the world, and the day when it also crumbles seems an inevitability. One can't help believing that we could help hasten its demise by lifting the economic embargo that has been in effect since the Kennedy administration.

    Exposure to other cultures and ways of life has proven to be the undoing of other iron-fisted regimes before, and that's why your garden-variety dictator is reluctant to see satellite dishes sprout up on the sides of those drab apartment buildings that seem to be the hallmark of totalitarian societies. As the late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once pointed out, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

    Source: Observer Reporter


  • Go to Home Page
  • Wednesday, May 4, 2011

    Voice of the Resistance

    Dr. Óscar Elías Biscet.

    Dr. Óscar Biscet, in Cuba’s prisons for twelve years, speaks.

    ‘I need to get to work,” says Dr. Óscar Elías Biscet. Are you familiar with him? He is perhaps the foremost Cuban democracy activist, a symbol of the general resistance to the Castro dictatorship. Has he been neglecting his work? Not exactly. For the past twelve years, essentially, he has been in prison, suffering the things that the regime’s prisoners have always suffered. George W. Bush gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007. The recipient could not accept it in person, of course. But he has now been released from prison. The day, so long hoped for, by so many of us, was March 11. I spoke to him three weeks after.

    Biscet was born in 1961 and has a wife, Elsa Morejón Hernández, and two children, Winnie and Yan. The children have been in the United States for several years; Elsa, like her husband, is in Cuba. Biscet obtained his degree in internal medicine in 1985. A few years later, he embarked on human-rights activism. In 1994, he was charged with “dangerousness,” a very common charge. It means that the individual in question will not submit meekly to dictatorial rule. In 1997, Biscet established the Lawton Foundation for Human Rights (“Lawton” being the name of the Havana neighborhood in which he lived). The organization, of course, is banned. In 1998, he spoke out strongly against abortion, particularly late-term abortion: In his work as a doctor, he saw ghastly things. The authorities responded harshly to his protest.

    After being detained repeatedly — 26 times — Biscet was arrested in 1999 and thrown in prison for three years. He was released on Oct. 31, 2002, and had 36 days outside of prison. During this time, he worked on his “Democratic Principles for Cuba” and a civic project called “Club for Friends of Human Rights.” He was again arrested on Dec. 6, 2002, and underwent his ordeal until last March 11.

    I found it somewhat amazing to hear his voice, after reading about him and writing about him for many years. His voice was low, grave, and resolute. We spoke by phone, Biscet in Havana, his questioner in New York. Serving as translator between us was Aramis Perez, of the Directorio Democrático Cubano in Miami.

    Biscet has felt “a kind of ambivalence” in the last few weeks. Those are his words: “a kind of ambivalence.” “I’m happy to be able to return home to my wife, but I’m unhappy to see an entire people still without freedom.” In his view, Cuba as a whole is “the big prison” while El Combinado del Este, where he and so many other dissidents have been confined, is “the little prison.” “We who live under this dictatorship look to the sea and know that the sea is our prison bars.” Biscet also says, “This great, beautiful island of Cuba has been converted by the Castro brothers into their own personal estate.”

    Why, in his estimation, did the government choose to release him? “Because of the economic crisis, coupled with the social and moral crisis. The government offers false expectations of democratic change. They do this so that free countries will give them economic support. My release is part of the effort to create false expectations.” The government’s overriding goal is “to be financed. They want more money, even as they impoverish the Cuban people, and, with money, they will remain in power.”

    In the weeks before Biscet’s release, a movement was building around the world to get him the Nobel peace prize. He was nominated by the prime minister of Hungary, U.S. congressmen, members of the European Parliament, and others. Did this movement have an effect on the Cuban government and its decision making? Biscet is less likely to get the prize outside of prison than he was inside. He can’t say for sure whether the Nobel prize played a part in the government’s calculations. But he can say this: “It was a political error for the regime to imprison the Group of 75,” an error that cost the regime in the court of world opinion. The 75 are the democracy activists arrested in the crackdown of March 2003, known as the “Black Spring.” These prisoners have now been released.

    Almost all of them were exiled to Spain. This is what the regime wanted to do with Biscet, too, but he strongly resisted this fate. His supporters around the world backed him in this resistance. Instead of exiling him, the government has released him on a kind of parole. Biscet is serving out his prison term beyond the gates of prison itself. His continued freedom depends on his “good conduct.” Why was he so set against exile? “Because I love the people of Cuba and want them to be free. I want basic human rights to be respected, so that the Cuban people can develop themselves and their talents fully. They need freedom in order to develop themselves fully.”

    Men and women of Biscet’s makeup always resist exile, no matter how terrible are the conditions at home. Remember that Solzhenitsyn did not leave the Soviet Union voluntarily; he was expelled, a fate he considered a tragedy.

    Somewhat gingerly, I ask what it was like inside prison. For years, we heard reports of the torture that Biscet was enduring. He answers me very, very briefly (and I don’t press him): “My experience was very traumatic. I was forced to live among criminals,” meaning common criminals, thugs, not prisoners of conscience, like Biscet himself. And he was indeed tortured — “primarily between 2002 and 2006.” He immediately adds, “I also gained a lot of wisdom, because I studied a great deal and drew closer to the Biblical God.” Biscet is a devoted Christian. The authorities allowed him a Bible, although he could not share it with anyone, or pray with anyone. If this happened, the other prisoner would be punished and transferred to another cell. Biscet also says, “I thought of Beethoven, who said, ‘There is no evil so great that no good can come of it.’”

    Biscet is a steadfast advocate of nonviolence: a nonviolent struggle for political change. We have always heard that his models are Thoreau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and the Dalai Lama. Is this so? Yes, says Biscet, but there are others, ones who may not be as “universal,” because they come from the Bible, and not all “accept Biblical teaching.” He cites Moses — “who led the first nonviolent revolution.” Then he mentions the three Hebrew boys, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. “When a king tried to force them to bow down before an idol, they refused. They knew that God would help them — and even if He did not, they would never bow down to an idol.” While in prison, Biscet “kept them close, because they are examples of freedom of expression and freedom of religion.” And they were, of course, delivered.

    For the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Biscet will not take any personal credit. “I felt honored, but I wasn’t the only person being recognized with the medal. The American people saw in me the suffering of the entire Cuban nation.” And the medal “helped change the way the world thought about Cuba.” One day, Biscet would like to meet Bush and “thank him for everything he has done for Cuba’s freedom.”

    Why was abortion so important to him, early in his dissidence, and why it is important now? “The fundamental duty of a physician is to defend life.” And “life lasts from conception until natural death.” Biscet maintains that science makes clear that a fetus is “a human being distinct from the mother.” He regards abortion as “a crime against humanity.” And he links the issue to human rights more broadly. What about the Cuban health-care system as a general proposition? One of the myths of the Cuban revolution is that it has provided health for all. This is not a myth that works on Biscet, who, as a Cuban doctor, knows too much.

    What about another myth, then — the myth that Communist rule has been a boon to blacks? Biscet himself is black, as are many other leaders of the opposition. His contempt for this myth is unconcealed. “Completely false,” he answers. “We know that the Cuban dictatorship is anti-American, anti-Semitic, and anti-black.” And if you would like to know what the dictatorship thinks of black Cubans, “you need only go to Cuban prisons.”

    It is natural to ask Biscet what he thinks of a contentious issue in the United States: the longstanding sanctions on the Cuban regime, known collectively as “the embargo.” He says, “The embargo has helped the Cuban people both politically and morally.” He wishes that all “free and civilized countries would boycott Cuba, the way they did racist South Africa.” The world made South Africa a pariah state. The American embargo should be lifted, says Biscet, “when the embargo against the Cuban people’s human rights,” imposed by the dictatorship, “is lifted.”

    As he sees it, “civilized countries” have given the dictatorship “life” and “oxygen” for the past 20 years — i.e., since the collapse of the Soviet Union. And when he says “civilized countries,” does he mean Western Europe, which has sent so much cash Havana’s way? “I mean civilized countries in Europe, Latin America, and North America” (which is to say, Canada and Mexico).

    Recently, Jimmy Carter was in Cuba, seeing the Castro brothers and others, including some democracy activists, Biscet among them. During his stay, Carter referred to Fidel Castro as an “old friend.” This is appalling to Biscet, as to other democrats. “One can have different ideas, and they should be respected. But to call a tyrant a friend is truly horrible.” Many in the world have tried to make a hero out of Castro. And “we should not encourage the creation of false heroes.”

    Then we have the question of Biscet’s future: What will he do? He says that his immediate task is to “recover psychologically and physically” from his twelve years in darkness and hell. “I hope to be in the best possible condition,” to do the work he finds it unavoidable to do. Does he expect to be rearrested? “Anything is possible,” but he will work without fear. He believes that the island’s democrats are basically united, although “we do live under a totalitarian dictatorship that uses all of its resources to attempt to destroy us, which makes it difficult to progress as quickly as we would like.” That is probably the understatement of the hour — the hour of our time together.

    The Cuban people are “enslaved,” Biscet says, “but, here in Cuba, the slaves will revolt,” as they have done elsewhere. He mentions China, Iran, and Libya. And he describes a great challenge of the opposition: to shape a transition to democracy without a Tiananmen Square. Without a massacre by the rulers, who will not give up power sweetly.

    What does he want from America? He wants people to recognize just how bad the Cuban dictatorship is. And he wants solidarity. “The American people can help the Cuban people by drawing close to us in our suffering. Those of you who live in freedom have the ability to do this.” Above all, he says, do not provide the regime with the “oxygen” it needs to survive. He sees the Obama administration making concessions to the regime. And it is incomprehensible to him why “civilized and democratic countries” should lend a hand to such people — should give oxygen to the persecutors of so many, persecutors who are ripe for a great push.

    After we hung up with Biscet, I talked for a while with Aramis Perez, who had translated. How did he think Biscet had sounded? “Serene and collected. He spoke out of such conviction that he did not need to emphasize his words” — they all had authority. Every now and then, you feel that you have encountered a great man. Someone who makes up for some measure of human iniquity and indifference. Perez and I felt this about Biscet. So will many others, around the world, if they get to know him.

    Jay Nordlinger 

    Source: National Review Online


  • Go to Home Page
  • Thursday, April 28, 2011

    Cuba: Bloggers Reflect on Reforms at Communist Party Congress


    The sixth congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC), which was held in Havana from April 16 - 19, may have marked a major turning point for the Cuban economic system, and for Cuban society at large.

    As detailed by the BBC, party members approved measures to institute term limits for top party and government leaders, legalize home ownership and sales, and restructure state salaries so that they will be determined in part by the amount and quality of labor performed by workers.

    While many US and European news organizations viewed the changes as a great stride towards a market economy, with headlines like “Havana frees up markets—with a caveat” (The Miami Herald) and “Raúl Castro apuesta por reformar la economía y el Partido Comunista en el VI Congreso” [es] [“Raúl Castro is committed to reforming the economy and the Communist Party at the VI Congress”] (El Pais), the rhetoric of the congress itself demonstrated a commitment to strengthening and modernizing, but not marketizing, Cuban socialism.

    Bloggers in Cuba, and those who follow Cuba from other parts of the world, offered a diverse range of reactions.

    Deisy Francis Mexidor, author of Kimbombo que resbala [es], asked various Cubans for their opinions on the proposed changes. Many were enthusiastic about the ideas proposed, but concerned about how they would be implemented. A journalism student interviewed by Mexidor commented that,
    "[La] cuestión es cómo se logrará mantener el socialismo como proyecto sin caer en la economía de mercado.
    The question is how we’ll be able to maintain the socialist project without becoming a market economy.

    Another interviewee, the manager of a state-owned business, remarked,
    "[D]ebemos ser capaces de lograr una mayor productividad, de bajar los gastos y hacer las cosas con mayor eficiencia, de lo contrario no se puede hablar de elevar salarios.
    We should be able to achieve greater productivity, to lower production costs, and to do things with greater efficiency—if we can’t do this, we cannot talk about raising salaries."

    Pedazos de la isla [es] interviewed various bloggers and journalists who are known for their criticism of the government, including Laritza Diversent, of Las leyes de Laritza [es]. Diversent noted that while some Cubans closely followed and opined on the Congress, many were ambivalent about the outcome because of the lack of progress in years past.
    "Desde mi punto de vista el Congreso fue totalmente intranscendente, porque una cosa es lo que hablen ahí, y otra cosa es la que se haga. […] No hay una restructuración del partido o una restructuración democrática.
    Pero nada de esto tiene ningún tipo de importancia entre los ciudadanos dentro de Cuba. No tiene ninguna importancia como yo creo que tiene afuera de Cuba. Por supuesto, es porque muy pocos cubanos le interesa la política, o no la entienden, precisamente por estos “va y bienes” de que hoy deciden algo, mañana deciden otra cosa, y entonces vuelven a cambiar. Por toda esta inseguridad nosotros no le hacemos ningún tipo de caso a ese Congreso.
    From my point of view, the Congress was totally insignificant, because what they say is one thing, but what they do is another. There is no restructuring of the Party, nor is there democratic restructuring.

    But none of this is important for the citizens of Cuba. It has no importance in comparison to the importance it has outside of Cuba. And this is precisely because very few Cubans are interested in politics, or they simply do not understand it. And they feel this way because of the “back and forth” of the government, while one day it says one thing, tomorrow it’ll say another, and so on. Because of this insecurity, we do not pay any attention to this Congress."

    In the most radical change brought by the Congress, Raúl Castro himself proposed that top-level positions be limited to two, five-year terms. He emphasized the need for current leaders to encourage and educate younger politicians who would ultimately form the next generation of government on the island, and lamented the party’s inability to do this in the past. Contrary to this rhetoric, the party has elected the now 80 year-old Jose Machado Ventura, former party secretary and an original member of the July 26th Brigade, to the vice presidential seat that was left empty when Raúl took leadership of the country in 2008.

    The irony of this choice has been criticized by Cubans on various sides of the political spectrum. Blogger Rogelio Díaz, author of Bubusopía [es] criticized the government’s inability to move forward, in spite of the consensus that this will be the only way for the original revolutionaries to build a sustainable legacy.
    "[Lo] más preocupante es que [el liderazgo] todavia está en manos de los mismos sujetos estancadores de todo lo bueno y dinámico y prometedor y renovador y revolucionario de etapas anteriores.
    The most worrisome part is that leadership is still in the hands of the same, now stagnating, originators of the great and dynamic and promising and innovative and revolutionary developments of past eras."

    Octavo Cerco’s Claudia Cadelo [es] expressed a similar sentiment, writing that the implementation of the economic and political reforms agreed upon by the Congress could only move forward with new leadership in place.
    "[Raúl] sabe, tiene que saberlo, que sus promesas sólo se cumplirán cuando él ya no esté en el Comité Central, cuando ya no sea el Primer Secretario de ningún partido, cuando verdaderamente una nueva ola de cargos públicos asuma los poderes.
    [Raúl] knows, he has to know, that his promises will be fulfilled only when he is no longer on the Central Committee, when he is no longer First Secretary of any party, when a truly new wave of public officials assume power."

    Ellery Roberts Biddle

    Source: Global Voices


  • Go to Home Page
  • Saturday, January 8, 2011

    Cables spotlight health system woes in Cuba

    Doctor's workplace in one of the Cuban hospitals.
    In one Cuban hospital, patients had to bring their own light bulbs. In another, the staff used "a primitive manual vacuum" on a woman who had miscarried. In others, Cuban patients pay bribes to obtain better treatment.

    Those and other observations by an unidentified nurse assigned to the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana were included in a dispatch sent by the mission in January 2008 and made public last month by WikiLeaks.

    Titled "Cuban health care: Aqui Nada es Facil" — nothing here is easy — the cable offers a withering assessment by the nurse, officially a Foreign Service Health Practitioner, or FSHP, who already had lived in Cuba for 21/2 years.

    The Cuban government still boasts of its vast public health system, though the system suffered deeply after Soviet subsidies ended in 1991. It also blames most of the system's problems on the U.S. embargo. Though U.S. medical sales to Cuba are legal, the process can be cumbersome and Havana can sometimes find better prices elsewhere.

    The U.S. cable is not an in-depth assessment of Cuba's health system. Rather, it's a string of anecdotes gathered by the FSHP from Cubans such as "manicurists, masseuses, hair stylists, chauffeurs, musicians, artists, yoga teachers, tailors, as well as HIV/AIDS and cancer patients, physicians, and foreign medical students."

    At one OB-GYN hospital, the dispatch reported, the staff "used a primitive manual vacuum to aspirate" the womb of a Cuban woman who had a miscarriage "without any anesthesia or pain medicine. She was offered no . . . follow up appointments."

    A 6-year old-boy with bone cancer could only be visited at a hospital by his parents for "limited hours," the cable added.

    Cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or radiation get "little in the way of symptom or side-effects care . . . that is critically important in being able to continue treatments, let alone provide comfort to an already emotionally distraught victim," the dispatch noted.

    "Cancer patients are not provided with, nor can they find locally, simple medications such as Aspirin, Tylenol, skin lotions, vitamins, etc.," it added.

    HIV-positive Cubans have only one facility, the Instituto Pedro Kouri in Havana, that can provide specialty care and medications, the cable noted. Because of transportation problems and costs, some patients from the provinces may be seen only once per year.

    Kouri institute patients can wait months for an appointment, "but can often move ahead in line by offering a gift," the dispatch added. "We are told five Cuban convertible pesos (approximately USD 5.40) can get one an x-ray."

    Although the practice was reportedly discontinued, some HIV-positive patients had the letters "SIDA" (AIDS) stamped on their national ID cards, making it hard for them to find good jobs or pursue university studies, according to the cable.

    The cable acknowledged that medical institutions reserved for Cuba's ruling elites and foreigners who pay in hard currencies "are hygienically qualified, and have a wide array of diagnostic equipment with a full complement of laboratories, well-stocked pharmacies, and private patient suites with cable television and bathrooms."

    Hospitals and clinics used by average Cubans don't come close, the dispatch added, providing details on the FSHP's visits to four Havana hospitals:

    At the Hermanos Ameijeiras Hospital, part of which is reserved for foreign patients and was featured in the Michael Moore documentary "Sicko," a "gift" of about $22 to the hospital administrator helps average Cubans obtain better treatment there. The exterior of the Ramon Gonzalez Coro OB-GYN hospital was "dilapidated and crumbling" and its Newborn Intensive Care Unit was "using a very old infant 'Bird' respirator/ventilator _ the model used in the U.S. in the 1970s."

    During a visit to the Calixto Garcia Hospital, which serves only Cubans, the U.S. nurse "was struck by the shabbiness of the facility . . . and the lack of everything (medical supplies, privacy, professional care staff). To the FSHP it was reminiscent of a scene from some of the poorest countries in the world."

    At the Salvador Allende Hospital, the emergency room appeared "very orderly, clean and organized." But the rest of the facility was "in shambles" and guards by the entrance "smelled of alcohol."

    "Patients had to bring their own light bulbs if they wanted light in their rooms. The switch plates and knobs had been stolen from most of the rooms so one had to connect bare wires to get electricity," the dispatch reported.



  • Go to Home Page
  • Friday, December 24, 2010

    Cuban Wikipedia most elaborate propaganda creation ever

    EcuRed or CastroRed?
    Last week, Cuba launched EcuRed, it’s own version of Wikipedia. It was an intriguing move for a country whose population has very minimal Internet access. But the Cuban regime produces a large amount of propaganda targeted at the outside world, and EcuRed fits neatly into that framework.

    “They do these extensive media operations,” said Mauricio Claver-Carone, the executive director of Cuba Democracy Public Advocacy, and a member of the board of directors of U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, “so that eventually the rest of the world, they hope, is seeing that, and they think it’s the truth because it’s coming from all kinds of different sources.”

    If building an entire online encyclopedia seems overly elaborate for propaganda, one need only look at Cuba’s newspapers, says Claver-Carone. He points out that all six major newspapers in Cuba are state run, but each claims to represent a different voice in the population, leading to the perception that multiple different viewpoints are represented in the media.

    “It’s their way of continuously rewriting history, essentially, for a foreign audience,” he said, because “domestically, the Cuban government is not going to convince anyone that all is good … they survive basically off foreign political support and foreign economic support.”

    Frank Calzon, executive director of the Center for Free Cuba, agrees. “This is not for the Cuban reader,” he said.

    Calzon credits this massive propaganda effort with the fact that “there are still some folks that give the Cuban government the benefit of the doubt.”

    The targeted audience, obviously, is not the United States, a country that, as The Daily Caller reported last week, gets a pretty bad rap on EcuRed. “There is a huge audience out there that consumes anti-Americanism,” said Claver-Carone, calling it “the blame America first model.” The regime’s propaganda “feed[s] that anti-American audience.”

    It also, according to Claver-Carone, serves as a “distraction, so that people don’t pay attention to the real issues on the island.”

    In spite of this massive effort, Calzon suggests that technology has ultimately made it more difficult for Fidel Castro’s regime to preserve this image to the outside world.
    “People say technology is neutral,” he said, “but I think in our days technology is more in favor of democracy. It’s very difficult for a regime to have control to the extent that they are used to when people can take a photograph from a telephone.”

    By Alexis Levinson

    From: The Daily Caller


  • Go to Home Page