Ileana's Misguided Representation

   The fact that Cuba in partnership with foreign oil companies will soon be drilling in its territorial waters is one that the United States cannot prevent.  The historical coincidence that it will be done in an area closest to the district of Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is somewhat ironical.  Many Florida politicians have fought hard against drilling for oil off the coast of their state and to a certain extent it makes sense.  Florida depends on its beaches as popular tourist destinations and are enjoyed also by the people living there.  Any chance of an oil spill that can ruin these beaches would be a terrible blow to the state and its ecosystem.  But Florida politicians do not represent Cuba.  They have determined policies for decades that deal with the relations between Cuba and the U.S. but as much as they have tried to subvert Cuba they have only accomplished restricting the rights of Americans and caused unnecessary pain to the people on the island. 
   Many voices have been reasonable as they have expressed the intelligent position of working with Cuba and the companies that will be drilling there.  Common sense would lead people to the conclusion that cooperation in planning for an emergency in the event of an oil spill would be the right course of action.  Alot is said to cause fear that an accident in Cuban waters could cause oil to harm the coastline of Florida.  This is true.  But instead of Rep. Ros-Lehtinen taking a position that would be proactive in helping to preserve the beaches of the Florida Keys, she instead finds herself allowing her extremist anti-Castro views preventing her from helping to protect her constituents.  She chooses irrationally to instead attempt to punish all those involved in doing business there.  She chooses to stand in the way of people trying to do there best to provide support for protecting the environment that happens to be her own district.  She has shown that the only people she chooses to represent are the group of people in South Florida whose agendas are nothing more than trying to cause harm to Cuba.  In doing this she alienates the people of the Keys who would only benefit from the U.S. cooperating with Cuba on this issue.  She chooses to instead smile and pose for pictures with people who have violent pasts and some are even terrorists or calling people to create spectacles in congress to try to further her cause of slandering Cuba.  A cause that is tiring the American people whose right are restricted by the policies she supports.  Americans are quite cynical and understand the hypocrisy of the policies towards Cuba and are ready for this chapter to be closed.  She is doing a terrible job of protecting the interests of Americans and in this case, the people of her own district.  Perhaps sooner than later she will lose her relevance as she has already her credibility and will retire from her job as misguided representative to go join her partners and reactivate one of the many violent groups working to hurt the Cuban people.  That is where this hateful person fits best.  There she can try to enrich herself with the American tax dollars allocated for "democracy programs" as part of a pseudo industry created by the extremists in Miami for themselves.

Mario Tries to Flex His Muscle

   Today the House Appropriations Committee passed an ammendment that is intended to erase the tiny progress that Persident Obama has made allowing more travel and money to be sent to Cuba.  The less relevant extremists in Miami is trying to flex their muscles which are strong only due to the steroids they have beeen pumped with thanks to years of money and support by Washington.  But others' muscles will prove stronger.  When Bush tightened restrictions during his presidency, he upset a lot of people who want to see their families in Cuba and also support them in their tough circumstances by sending remittances.  Mario hates his family back in Cuba, since ironically his family tree has Fidel in it.  The blood connection from way back isn't as strong for him as it is for the majority of Cubans living abroad.  They love their families and don't support his endeavors.  His big brother Lincoln had to appear on TV to threaten the Cuban community living in Miami who were outraged at Bush's policy and became quite outspoken at the time.  Since so many people who enjoy the benefit of political refugee status granted to almost any Cuban as a political tool, a status that is much less given to people from other countries, he threatened to have immigration double check their claims of politcal refugee.  Obviously there are almost no true political refugees coming from Cuba, the majority have come simply for economic reasons conveniently using the "refugee" excuse to stay. 
   Undoubtebly, if his ammendment were to become part of the law, the same outrage would occur, as would quite likely the threats from the extremists.  The idea of separating families is one of the most disgusting pleasures of the Diaz-Balart brothers.  These individuals are incapable of caring about those who they purport to represent.  These guys are at a weak point, and their fears are what they are fighting against.  The changes in Cuba have along with an increase in remittances have made it possible for some on the island to begin their own businesses.  Mario certainly fears the prospect of people's economic situations getting better.  If less and less people choose to leave the island for economic reasons then where will all of the "political refugees" be?  There might be less photos in the propagandic press centered in Miami of people trying to "escape" Cuba.  There will be less and less applicants for "political Asylum."  There will be less and less excuses for this absurd policy.  The extremists are running in circles confused and scared.  Now they are even faced with the dilema of trying to fend off Big Oil, as it is extremely excited about the prospects of doing business with Cuba. 
   Now the question is whose muscles are bigger.  Are the withering muscles of the extremists down in Miami?  Or are the muscles of the American people who have had enough of their own rights restricted by these extremists?  I think that though it is unfortunate that the ammendment passed, we will see it eventually, somewhere along the process of creating a budget, get brushed aside with ease as there are now much stronger musles that the Miami crowd must contend with.  There time is passing, and soon they will all have to find a place in the Bay of Pigs museum down there in Miami.

The Pretenders

   What is truly amazing about the ridiculous politics that the U.S. selectively employs when it takes its stand on the issue of Cuba is the outright dishonesty on the part of the government in Washington.  Never mind the fact that if another nation acted in the same manner as the U.S. does with Cuba towards itself, even in the slightest way, it would find all kinds of justfications to use military actions against the perpetrators.  Never mind that almost the entire world denounces the embargo of the island on a yearly basis.  Nevermind the fact that in its policy towards Cuba it finds itself violating Americans' right to travel.  Nevermind the fact that an angry mob with disproportional influence not only seems to direct Washington's policy from coffee shops in Miami where terrorists walk freely in the midst of an supposed "War on Terror."  Nevermind the fact that many of the millions of dollars have enriched some undesirable people in Miami and some other parts at the expense of taxpayers. 
   What is truly mindblowing is that Washington literally announces to the world that it seeks to give funds to so-called dissidents on the island and when those same so-called dissidents find themselves being targeted by the government of Cuba for working with the proclaimed enemy, it actually tries to fool the entire world that Cuba is not allowing dissent!  As Americans, let's imagine for a moment that some group of people causing problems here in the United States were found to be payed by Iran, North Korea, or even Cuba.  We would be whipped into a frenzy and public outrage would be fueled by our loyal "free" media.  There would be calls for trials or maybe just to hide them down in our military base in occupied Guantanamo.  There would be "nothing off the table" as they usually say in Washington as the Pentagon proposes all kinds of military interventions to wipe out those "trying to destroy America."  Why is Cuba expected to sit on their hands and not do anything about these people working for, if not with, the enemy?
   We know well that by creating these "dissidents" we are subjecting them to scrutiny at the least.  We openly acknowledge that Cuba's security has penetrated the groups to a large extent, so large that we suspect that we have been handing over funds right to their intelligence service.  what we also know well is that even though a large effort has been made to foment support for these groups, they remain virtually unknown in Cuba and aren't remotely close to achieving the goals of Washington, regime change. 
   The only thing that this crazy fantasy dissidence is capable of is being highlighted in our media and used as examples of repression on the part of the Cuban government.  This is their sole purpose.  They are creations to justify the wickedly immoral policies towards Cuba.  How long does Washington imagine that such an obvious hypocricy be believed?  More and more Americans have realized what the extremists in Miami haven't, that the policy must change.  Many Americans are either indifferent to the socialist nature of Cuba or just flat out against the waste of their tax dollars in pursuit of such goals.  Even some within the hardline "exile" community have called for a change in policy.  More and more politicians from both parties have stated that the embargo should be changed or done away with. 
   But still we find ourselves with the group of "pretenders" who openly hand out money, advertise opportunities for money to try to subvert Cuba, disregarding its soveriegnty, and pretending that all this never happened, that the "dissidents" are just honest people trying to make their country better!  Still they pretend that they have no idea about the connections they have created with some folks on the island who are just looking for a paycheck from Washington as they smile for the cameras and play their parts for the Miami press that just eats it up and then tries to say that they are "reporting."   They can pretend all they would like but most people don't buy it anymore.  They look like kids telling lies that only the kids themselves believe.  It is a terribly embarassing situation that the self-proclaimed leaders of the free world aren't free enough to speak the truth. They just pretend to.

Part 5: Response to Freedom House Report on Cuba

   Most people are already familiar with the fact that Cuba has decided to take a path which creates many changes in the predominantly state controlled economy.  In reporting on this aspect of Cubans' opinions, Freedom House describes opinions as being split.  People have a wide range of differences in opinion from cynicism to trust in the government.  In attempting to portray Cuba in a bad light, much is covered about those cynics who have worries about subsidies disappearing (which would suggest they are popular) and the fear that prices rise outpacing wages.  Only one respondent was mentioned as fully supporting the reforms as she believes that the government's guidelines must be correct.  The rest of the examples are people complain that business owners will have to pay taxes and unfounded claims that people will simply be thrown out of their jobs with no assistance (something that the government has explained it will not do).  The number of examples given by the report support the idea of opinions being split, but are presented in a way that suggests that the split is heavily towards being not favorable.  This type of presentaion of opinion may be a reason why the U.S. government payes Freedom House for this kind of reporting. 
   One of the economic issues widely of concern is the elimination of the dual currency.  This is an issue that the government has as one of it's goals.  One problem with this kind of change may be the fact that much of what is subsidized is sold in national currency and not in CUC.  What good would it be for a change in this without a corresponding change in the earnings of people which is another goal of the government's changes?  Much care will be taken, the government has stated, to avoid a shock to the society that leaves many people hopelessly unable to survive.  The government has stated that there will be a slow and careful change so that some of the fears expressed are avoided. 
   Complaints that marabu has grown wildly in the countryside as agriculture has been "abondoned" may actually end up as a positive thing and even possibly a job opportunity since it is used to make a charcol for export to Europe.  Imagine if exports of this among other things were allowed to be exported to the large market of the U.S. just north of the island!  Seems like certain opportunities are hindered due to the economic embargo imposed by Washington. 
   Political changes are desired by some while others would like to keep things as they are.  With certain things like the announcement of term limits for the position that Raul Castro currently holds, changes in the political structure are underway.  The respondent who said that  "Nothing is ever their fault," referring to the government is incorrect, although it is his opinion, since Raul Castro has criticized the governments lack of fostering the development of future leaders as Cuba has relied on many people who have been loyal for years and decades only to neglect to a certain degree new faces.  The government seems to be acknowledging mistakes.  Probably an upsetting finding for the extremists in Miami and the politicians who rail against socialism in Washington is the existing belief in socialism among those interviewed for the report.  I guess this would just serve as a justification for the policy makers in Washington continuing the attempted subversion with the goal of regime change against the government of Cuba and hypocritically against the people in Cuba who they pretend to want to spread "democracy" to!

Part 4: Reponse to Freedom House Report

   In the section of the report that adresses restrictions on society, there are contradictions in the report.  The report suggests that when talking about the government people's voices were lowered or they asked to go to a more private area.  First it is probable that since they were conducting interviews with a group funded by the U.S. government they may have been worried about the fact that they were treading close to what is illegal, working with the announced enemy of their country.  In spite of respondents saying that nothing can be said against the government there, Freedom House found a situation where a man was telling jokes about the Castro's in the middle of the sidewalk in Havana.  Perhaps he wasn't aware of the "restrictions."  While trying to convince the readers that Cuba's government is unfair, they point out that penalties are given to those people who don't follow economic restrictions.  Here in the U.S. much is said about the rule of law, so why is a penalty against breaking laws to be seen as a problem?  And why would Freedom House feel it necessary to say "regime critics" when describing those who are penalized?  We all know that in almost all prisons in the world evewryone is innocent(!) so why would they take for granted that the woman's story about being fined for not reporting someone who was renting a room in a timely manner?  Anyone who has been to Cuba has experienced the type of crime like a taxi driver not running the meter and pocketing the money for himself.  Are we to give the lady the benefit of the doubt that she wasn't doing something similar?  Perhaps she wasn't, but if she wasn't reporting things the way that she was supposed to then she was still violating something.  The report, although ignoring the possibility of black market activity in the case of the woman renting rooms, goes on to talk about the black market.  It brings up the fact that these casa particulares (houses for rent) rely many times on food purchases from unlicensed sellers.  The wilingness to engage in the black market whether or not out of necessity, should also call into the claims of the woman claiming to have simply not reported the rented rooms in a timely manner.
   The old complaints about Cuba's hotels being only for foreigners is an issue resolved a few years ago when the government lifted those restrictions.  Now the complaint that remains is that in practice very few Cubans can afford to go to such places.  While this is unfortunate, I'd like to know where there exists a society where all of the people earn enough to go on vacations.  There is no country like that to my knowledge and this complaint only serves as an attempt to pretend that Cuba is unique in this way.  How much emphasis is put on countries with similar situations by Washington?  Does Washington spend millions on reports to point this out?  Certainly not if the country is willing to go along with the economic desires bof Washington.  Washington even doesn't worry much about the form of government in countries who are economically or geopolitically advantageous to its own interests.  Pure hypocricy.  But then again, hypocricy is not all that uncommon when it comes to its policies towards Cuba.

Which People Rule In "Democracy"?

   Democracy is an idea almost universally respected.  The noble idea that the will of the people is something worth defending.  But what was seemingly achieved by so many people around the world seems do have been usurped by those who were entrusted to protect the people's gains.  Despite the varying forms of democracy, all too common is corporate power's ability to be heard over the desires of the people.  Corporations fund campaigns of politicians who find themselves serving those rich interests.  The simple act of an election can be said to be democratic, but many times falls short of being truly democracy.  How can it be that "democratic" leaders feel obliged to ignore the will of the people?  How can a people determine their own destiny if they are ignored by their leaders?  How can choosing the lesser of two evils be considered democracy?  How do we find ourselves arguing on behalf of someone who has broken their camaign promises simply because of party affiliation?  How can the "democratic" leaders who ignore the will of their own people consider themselves to be in a position to try to push what they call democracy on others?  Are they so arrogant to believe that all people can be so blatantly lied to?  As these "democratic" leaders have liberated corporations so much that they are considered to have the same rights of people, they have also enslaved themselves to such a system.  They are addicted to the money they depend on for their own survival politically.  They are aware that to act against those powerful interests would mean an all out war against them by those in control of the manipulative media.  They are aware that if they play the game well that the choice for the lesser of two evils will repeat itself.  They know, although they can't and wouldn't admit it, that the people will be afraid to not choose the lesser of two evils, even if it is against their own interests.
   When these "democratic" leaders start speaking of the need for democracy in other places, they really mean a space for their corporate sponsors to begin to entrench themselves in new places.  They can easily count on the idea of democracy being supported since it is a noble one.  They can easily ignore the will of the people to the point that they are willing to use violence to supress them.  In Greece and Spain we are witnessing this right now.  The governments ignore the will of the people, beat them down in the streets, yet still find a way to keep a straight face when they claim to be democratic.  Capitalist democracy seems to be just that.  Democracy for the capitalists.  The average worker is not a capitalist, he is simply working for them while living in a "democracy" that is run by capitalists.  Workers can strike, but governments can order them back to work when it starts to affect the health of the capitalist system.  Workers are forced to accept cuts in their benefits in order to help a business become more profitable.  What other choice do they have?  They certainly aren't presented a choice at the ballot box.  They certainly don't want to be left without a job.  They are not in a position to determine their destiny.  They simply need to be happy to live in a "democracy."  Maybe one day they will decide that another way is possible.  Maybe one day they will find a way to show what a democracy really should be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   12 hours later:  I'd like to include a link to an editorial by Joe Cardona who I don't usually agree with. He describes the effects of Miami's "political cartel" of powerbrokers who fund to a great degree the politicians for their own corporate interests.  He states  "This “cartel” has its own interests to protect — often the business of those of the corner offices of high-rises on Brickell Avenue or downtown Miami or other corporate fiefdoms — so the general welfare and public interest goes wanting."  A corporate fiefdom!  Not a bad description of what people describe as "democracy."  Obviously frustration with the situation even causes those within the establishment to be concerned.  He sees the money in politics problem, which is obvious to most, but how can the politicians be expected to do something about it when they have moved so far away from the noble idea of democracy???

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/10/2261124/apathy-keeps-miami-dades-forgotten.html#ixzz1PRBvcA00

Part 3: Response to Freedom House Cuba Report

   In the subsection of this report called "Daily Needs"  The report begins by pointing out that Cubans are preoccupied by their economic situation.  Cubans in the survey described their situations as "tight."  The fact that the Cuban economy has intentionally been obstructed by the policies of the United States is totally ignored as emphasis is given to salaries from jobs are usually supplemented by black market earnings.  Just as in the United States, many people have had to find jobs unrelated to their degrees.  This could be due to the fact that the U.S. would not serve as a market which would allow certain sectors to flourish leaving for example, an engineer who rents rooms in two houses for a living.  If there is limited ability to apply his engineering skills he must obviously look for something else to do.  But unlike the situation in the U.S., jobs are not outsourced for cheaper labor, they are simply not yet in demand.  With a growth in the economy, it would be logical to conclude that there are many educated and prepared people to fill the necessary positions.  Since tourism at this point is one of the more lucrative sectors of the economy it makes sense that now people are earning livings within this sector.  The problem of the black market stems from more than one reason and it is a difficult cycle to break.  Low level workers steal from their workplaces only to create scarcity and then cause the price of goods to be higher on the black market.  Some people certainly justify their actions as a way to make more money without realizing the negative effects that their actions have on the rest of their society.  Althought the wages are relatively low, the personal economic situations are made even "tighter" due to the black market.  By legalizing some of the goods and services that formerly were part of the black market, the society will be in a better position to prevent the values of goods and services from spiraling upwards in relation to salaries.  Scarcity will lessen as people are more personally tied to the goods that they aren't expected to steal. 
   One man commented that it is easy for foreigners to defend the revolution when one doesn't have to endure life within it.  To an extent that's true.  What is also true is that many foreigners are defending priciples that they share with the revolution.  By living outside of Cuba, one is able to see positive aspects of the acheivements in comparison to what they have in their own countries.  A Cuban has a tight situation, yet never has the fear of losing their home or medical insurance. 
   The report cites a musician who complains that some imported goods must be paid for in CUC while he receives a salary in national pesos.  These can easily be exchanged, but the inconvenience of a dual currecy system is not the actual problem he faces.  The problem is that whether he has national pesos or CUC he still doesn't have enough to make his puchase of instruments.  A currency exchange may be inconvenient but the value of the purchase remains the same.  If he had enough money in national pesos then the only problem was one of having to go to a currency exchange place (Cadeca). 
   Some respondents said that they had concerns about the ability to have a family if they have a tough time supporting themselves.  I would venture to guess, although not scientifically(!) that this is a concern for people in any country.  Having children is more costly than not, but many of the expenses that people face such as doctor bills and such are not at all of concern in the free universal medical system in Cuba.  Certainly it is responsible to think of how able one is to support a family, but there are babies being born in Cuba and they are being fed.
   Complaints about the transportation system are common among  the respondents are high and suggestions that this impedes the ability to take advantage of the healthcare system.  Though this is true in certain situations, neighbors with cars are usually willing to help out in an emergency.  There are medical clinics all over the island availible to anyone and most times are within walking didtance.  Besides that, I have personally witnessed doctors going to the peoples's houses to give medical attention to patients, all of which are free.  That is probably why healthcare (along with free education and low crime rates) are frequently mentioned as a main source of happiness.  The report felt it necessary to include concerns about recent spikes in crime but apparently it didn't detract from the sentiment of happiness for the low crime rates.  Nor did the suggested uselessness of the educational degrees the were mentioned earlier detract from the happiness of having free education.  Almost half responded that their families were their greatest source of happiness and which Freedom House has decided that by being happier with family than free medical, education, and low crime rates there must be a shift in people's attitudes (suggestively towards worse) since the last survey.  Quite an assumption! As if people being happier with their families than social services is a symptom of a problem in Cuban society!

Part 2: Response to Freedom House Cuba Report

   I'll begin part 2 by adressing the claims made in the Executive Summary section of the Freedom House report.
   The report was created by compiling the results of 120 interviews on the island of Cuba which has a population over 11 million.  By sending 5 researchers to the island in its attempt to make generalized assumptions about the feelings and opinions of the Cuban people.  Just the idea that 120 people could accurately reflect the will of an entire nation is a bit of a stretch.  But even among those 120, some of the responses were enough to demonstrate that the line of propaganda that spews from Miami is not accurate.  Much of the context of the report is based on the reforms outlined by the Cuban government in recent months.  The reforms expect to update the systems in Cuba so that it is more able to perform independently and productively in the world as it is today. 
   The Cuban government announced the elimination of redundant and unnecessary workers on the government's payroll of around 1 million jobs.  This would cut the public workforce by about 20%.   I can't find any reason why the Republicans in Miami would have an ideological dispute with Cuba having a smaller government since they preach the same thing over here.  The Miami media has done its best to evoke sympathy for the people left without jobs, a point quite silly coming from people who support the policy of causing hardship for the people in Cuba.  The Cuban government has stated that these jobs will not be eliminated at a fast pace so that the "private" sector will be able to absorb these workers.  It has made it quite clear that it does not intend to leave people lost in limbo to starve or lose their homes or anything else for that matter during this process.  One of the aims is to create a culture of work which to a certain extent has been lost due to the existence of redundancies at state controlled workplaces.
   The Freedom House study would try to suggest that "despite hopes" people don't expect personal benefits from the reforms.  Given the fact that Cubans, just like much of the world is suffering from the downturn in the global economy,  the high hopes of the Cuban people are no different than the rest of the world.  The question arises in my mind if they included in their 120 people any who have started their own businesses and are actually already seeing a difference in their personal situations.  Many people have taken advantage of the new situation and began to increase their incomes drastically and have been able to do so without the risks of losing their access to housing or healthcare, things that certainly people risk in our own country in their entrpreneurial pursuits.  In their attempts to portray a dire situation on the island they point out the fact that many surveyed describe their situation as "tight".  In all fairness they are not comparing Cuba to the U.S., but it would be a good if they would have some sort of admittance that this is a sentiment not unique in Cuba.  Presenting facts that private businesses are subject to hefty taxes and fines for violations suggests that inspectors may be doing their jobs as are inspectors in our own country.  Here too there are fines for violations and business are also expected to pay taxes which according to the business community are also to high.  The one time argument that Cubans didn't have access to the same places and things that foreigners do is blown out of the water as the study admits that these restrictions were eliminated already.  The complaint that prices are too high for people's incomes is in many cases true, but as people find work in the growing private sector their incomes will undoubtedly grow.  More people will have the ability to spend money in these places just as have the taxi drivers and others who have been earning money and going to these places in the past years.  Is there an outcry in our media about the fact that many people don't earn enough money to afford a family vacation at Disney World or any of the hotels that more well off people con stay in? Not really, so why if everyone on the island has equal rights to pay for types of things but not all can afford it be a concern for the people that write this report? 
   Several respondants spoke of their efforts to leave the country with exit permits.  Did they speak of the countless denials for visas by the American Interests Section in Havana?  Without a visa what good is an exit permit?  Just days ago the mother of the hunger striker who died last year arrived in the United States.  How many people did she skip in line for the single reason of being able to make a show out of her for the Miami audience?  I bring this up only because the report mentions the prisoner release last year in which most but not all were moved to Spain only to find themselves complaining about life there too! 
   The rport is honest enough to include one person's opinion that the government will implement them correctly.  This can easily be construed as people having confidence in the competence of the Cuban government.  Quickly to battle this idea of confidence though, the report then cites a woman who fears a loss of the ration books that all Cubans rely on and rising prices they will be thrown into a life in which she will no longer survive.  I'll once again point out the fact that the government is aware of this situation and has reaffirmed that along with the gradual phasing out of the ration book there will necessarily be an increase of the purchasing power of the currency so that the change will not cause these worries she expressed to become a reality.  Then they rely on a former prostitute to provide us with someone who believes that as long as a Castro is in power, changes are not possible.  This is obviously ignoring the reality that though a Castro is still in the leadership these reforms are already taking place. 
   At the time of this report being released, the blog Generation Y by Yoani Sanchez is not blocked and hasn't been so for at least a year.  So why is a woman who got the chance to see the blog on the internet included in the report wondering why the blog is blocked?  It must be an attempt to consistantly perpetuate the idea that only what the government allows is assessible by the people.  If the report is created to give a better understanding of what is happening on the island then it shouldn't include thes types of inaccuracies.  "Internet and email along with cell phone use remains low"  states the report.  Of course internet remains at low levels since the infrastructure is only now beginning to take shape as a cable was just a few months ago connected to the island.  Cell phone use is flourishing on the island and it is obvious to anyone who has been there.  Text messages are prefered to calls since they are much cheaper than the call minutes on the phone cards that charge the phones for usage. 
   The report seems complimentary to the seemingly progressive social values of the Cuban people.  Although it does characterize Cubans as being isolated from each other which makes no sense since people know their neighbors very well and come to rely on each other in many instances.  The study attemps to suggest that Cubans are different than other Latin Americans in this respect which actually seems to suggest that despite being "isolated", they have managed to form progressive ideas.  It also ignores the fact that many of the Latin American countries have elected governments, that we accuse all the time of being Cuba-like,  rejecting the conservative politics that they have endured for decades if not longer.
To be continued (with pleasure!).....

Response to Freedom House's Report on Cuba (June 9, 2011)Part 1

Due to the 40 pages or so of the report issued by Freedom House along with my own time constraints, I will write a reponse in a few parts.  I will meticulously point out the problems that this report contains point by point as I feel it is necessary do so that people are not left with an incorrect impression as to the happenings in Cuba. 
   Freedom House has declined to accept it's share of the proposed $20 million for "democracy" programs and it is a good thing.  Based on what they have to show for last years' allocations, it should be quite obvious to the American people that these funds could be used for something more productive right here at home.

The actual report can be found at http://freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/102.pdf for anyone interested at reading it.

The Props For the Show in Miami

   Just a few short days ago, the mother of the hunger striker who died last year while serving a prison sentence arrived in Miami with her son's ashes.  She shouted "Zapata vive" while holding her son's ashes in a wooden box to the crowd's delight.  There was something ironic though about her statement which accused the Castro brothers of  "brutally beating her son to death."  Was he not a hunger striker?  Did he not imagine that he might die?  Did he refuse to eat the food given to him by the "Castro brothers"?  Maybe she got carried away in the moment while being surrounded by members of the Cuban Democratic Directorate.  From Miami, she promises to "relentlessly fight for the Cuban people's right to freedom and democracy which my son so much dreamed of.”  She will fight, I imagine, just as the rest of the people in Miami "fight", with a detachment from the true hopes and desires of the people she decided to leave, just as the others in Miami.  She now represents nothing more than another voice in the already over the hill part of the "exile" community as its political power within the U.S. is on the decline.  These "fighters" have "fought" predominantly with the money of the American people and have managed to do nothing but discredit themselves in the Cuban people's eyes.  Their support for the policies which were intended to make Cubans' lives as difficult as possible has forfeited their claim of trying to help.  There is nobody on the island who appreciates these efforts and many of the more recent immigrants from Cuba don't support these "exile" leaders' policies either.  She has thrown herself onto the side of the most disgusting characters in this unfortunate unfinished story of US-Cuba relations/tensions.  This is a side that is being cornered due to the fact that their terrorist tactics, expensive government hand-outs are no longer as popular within the Washington political establishment.  Couple that with the fact that many Americans find it offensive that they too are victims of this policy and the oil industry among others are making alot of noise as they are itching to do business with Cuba.  She stated that she hopes to one day bring his ashes to rest in Cuba, which she took so much trouble to bring to Miami only to be used as a prop for the extremists in Miami.  Really?  Rest? Thanks mom.

Jose Azel, Professor of Miami Mythology

   Today the Miami Herald blessed us with the view of another of the celebrated theorists from the anti-Cuba crowd, Jose Azel.  His expertise have gotten him in the heirarchy of "Cuba Studies" and is a professor at the University of Miami.  Why?  Well his type of expertise are the kind that is always in demand at the institutions in Miami.
   He begins his piece with references to the uprisings in Africa and the Middle East, which have caught the world powers off guard as they struggle with the typical hypocrisy and inconsistencies as they try to deal with the situations.  Obvious favoritisms in that part of the world get in the way of being able to form a consistent policy on the part of Washington and Europe.  Our media chooses to highlight certain acts of violence carried out by regimes long considered hostile to our interests, while obscuring equal or greater violence being carried out by "friendly" regimes. 
   Since nothing of the sort has occurred in Cuba, Miami's right wing has been left day dreaming about countless "what ifs".  After their high hopes of a similar rebellion in Cuba, they are resigning themselves to the fact that it will not occur.  So back to their traditional theories they go as to what the future will hold.
   In what Mr. Azer calls a "milestone", the famous in Miami Dr. Biscet, declared that the "dissidents" in Cuba are prepared to negotiate a transition in Cuba.  This "milestone" most certainly will turn out to be yet another footnote in the annals of anti-Castro history in the pseudo-reality Miami's right wing lives in.
   Describing the "opposition movement" in Cuba as "coming to age" is an example of how out of touch some people are.  Many people have spoken to Cubans and have reported that most Cubans aren't in favor of regime change, just the ability to help improve their country's economy in order for all Cubans to live more comfortably.  He claims that the Communist Party "has lost its ideological footing."  The recent decisions affirmed by their recent congress reflects an evolutrion within the country to better adjust itself to the realities of the world.  There is no more communist bloc to organize trade relations separate from the capitalist world, so it is quite obvious to everyone on the island (and it has been for some years) that certain changes in its economy and laws are necessary.  As opposed to the suggestion by Mr. Azel, the party is putting itself on more solid ground as it adjusts things more in line with what the citizens of Cuba would like.  At the same time, the government is staying true to its ideology of trying to ensure that nobody is left with nothing.  By making sure that changes do not occur in a hurried manner, it is being careful not to repeat the disasters that occurred in some post-Soviet societies during the 1990's.
   The word "embryonic" chosen by Mr. Azel to describe the "opposition" is quite comical at this point since we are to have supposed that there has been this opposition for 52 years.  How long can an embryo exist??!!  So much of what is considered as the opposition by the folks in Miami are nothing more than their own creations.  The U.S. government working hand in hand with the extremists in Miami have worked long and hard at creating and supporting "dissidents" to no avail.  They remain virtual unknowns on the island and serve primarily as propaganda tools for our own consuption through our media.  Saying that there are challenges to the methods of government would be true, but the author fails to either realize or mention that these methods are being discussed and debated openly and at times implemented within the existing system.  He believes that the answers to Cuba's future can be found in pre-revolutionary Cuba, Talk about being stuck in the past!  What should be understood about Cuba before 1959 is that by having such a corrupt and foreign dominated government gave rise to the revolution itself.  This is something that the experts in Miami seem to forget.  Suggesting a return to such a situation is suggesting that you fail to understand why the revolution even happened.  He points out that previously the politics were "personality driven", but by elevating people like Biscet to prominence is nothing different.  He is banking on the idea that things will be more diverse if the regime were to disappear.  I suspect that part of that diversity would include a large voice at the table for the people in Miami as defacto representatives for Washington's interests as is the case in some of the African and Middle East countries which are experiencing the backlash of not enjoying true independence as Cuba does today.
   If Mr. Azel is planning to "chart" the future of Cuba, he needs not do anything but pay attention to what goes on there.  Otherwise he will waste alot of paper with the charts he creates, as he continues with the ignorant theories that have long guided the people in Miami.
  Please click on the link to the opinion piece if you are interested in understanding how out of touch professor Azel is.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/04/2250037/charting-cubas-post-communist.html#ixzz1OKoLEhG5

Fidel's "coup de grace"?

   "Coup de grace" is a term used figuratively to describe the last in a series of events which brings about the end of something.  Is that what Cuba's invitation to U.S. oil companies amounts to?
   The embargo that the U.S. has maintained against Cuba for a half century has become recognized around the world as a policy that is misguided and wrong.  For years the international community has voted overwhelmingly to condemn the U.S. policy in the world's forum, the United Nations.  The U.S. has remained publicly defiant in the face of reason.  It has decided that backing down from this position would seem to suggest weakness, and weakness is the last thing a nation wants to project.  At the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, an opportunity was squandered and instead of reproachment, the United States decided that by further tightening the embargo that surely tiny Cuba would crumble without its large partner.  Although Cuba went through what was called the "special period" and shortages caused lots of pain and suffering, but the tiny nation edured.  Now, after two more decades have passed, only a tiny few yet powerful people, claim that the embargo is necessary and has a chance to work.  It has gone from a policy intended to squash the revolution in its early years to one of punishment and spite, on the part of those people whose personal privileges were adversely affected by the end of the previous regime.
   Wikileaks exposed the fact that the U.S. government has no illusions, and understands well that much of the opposition inside of Cuba is basically representing different interests within the exile community and are never going to be capable of real support within Cuba and therefore will never be able accomplish Washington's goal of bringing down the Cuban regime.  Time is not waiting for Washington and neither is Cuba.
   Cuba's energy needs have long been a problem for its economy.  Venezuela's position of working with countries in need of development has helped, but hasn't completely fixed the problem.  Then came the discovery of oil in Cuban territorial waters.  Since this is not the type of project that Cuba could take on itself, it made offers to foreign companies to become partners in the endeavor.  This is the point where Fidel Castro extended the offer to American oil companies. Coup de grace?
   There aren't many people who defend oil companies as caring entities whose thirst for oil isn't larger than their desire for profits.  They are so powerful in Washington, that we have been unable to muster up the political will to invest meaningfully in alternative sources of energy.  It is profound the understanding of our political system that this move made by the Cuban government  shows on their part.  They seem much more inclined to recognize how things work in Washington than Washington is towards Havana.
   In reality, the business community in the United States is ready and willing to do business with Cuba.  Florida politics have been the major obstacle in eliminating the embargo.  Politicians in Washington have yet found a way around the overly powerful Florida politicians.  Big Oil is no ordinary interest group.  It happens to have one of the most powerful and pervasive lobbies in Washington.  Couple that with the fears that the American people have of a catastrophic oil spill, especially ofter what happened last year in the Gulf of Mexico with the Deep Water Horizon and there may be an opening for the politicians to change course and save face.  There is tremendous clamor in the media about the coming exploration and drilling off the coast of Cuba.  We hear on an almost daily basis reports from the oil industry and its supporters that it is time to recognize the failure of the embargo to produce the intended results and it is in our interest to be there drilling as a partner with Cuba. There are arguments that try to minimize their obvious greed as they tout how they are the best ones to be there to help avoid an environmental catastrophe.  Whatever their argument may be, it is sure that they are pressuring more than one politician or official in the United States right now, explaining the benefits of eliminating this policy because it adversely affects American competitiveness.  It is unlikely that anything will change before the next presidential election, but equally likely is that whatever is promised on the campain trail by any candidate won't matter because we all are aware that promises can be broken after elections.  This window of opportunity for the U.S. to change course with a good reason is probably one that can't be passed up on.  And that may have been Fidel's "coup de grace".  

A Father's Tears

   The first time I remember seeing my father cry was when he found the name of a friend on the Vietnam Memorial.  A friend who gave his life fighting in a country on the other side of the world for reasons that are still not understandable.  Today on Memorial Day, I wonder how many other fathers, sons, mothers, sisters, daughters, are having to shed tears for unfortunate reasons.  By opposing the wars that we find ourselves in and the politics that lead us into them, I am not trying to offend those who believe differently, or those who have lost their lives.  I honestly believe that as a nation, we should struggle to avoid falling for the dirty tricks that politicians play on us to envoke fear so that we support reckless wars and continue putting our soldiers lives in danger.  We all support our troops, but that doesn't translate into supporting wars that cannot be justified.  Cooperation and respect between nations and peoples are the only ways that this world can find peace.  I will remain hopeful in spite of my deep skepticisms that good people and rationality will prevail one day.

Ros-Lehtenin "floats" a bill that will float away

   Today the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ileana Ros-Lehtenin, floated a bill in the committee that aims to deter the planned oil drilling off the coast of Cuba.  It has seven co-sponsors, five of which are from Florida and one from New Jersey.  If it were to become law, it prevents anyone investing at least 1 million dollars in Cuba's offshore drilling from being able to obtain a U.S. visa and it makes it illegal for Americans from helping in any way the oil exploration there.  She said that "It is in our national security interests to deter others from participating in these reckless schemes."  To this I must imagine that to the extremists in Miami, Cuba attempting to show that under their system it is possible to be more productive and offers a friendly environment for foreign investors is their idea of a threat.  That would leave these hard-headed extremists who like to argue that Cuba's system is backwards and can't be productive, with having to live with the fact that their arguments have become even more irrational than they have been, and even farther from reality.  She went on to say that "We cannot allow the Castro regime to become the oil tycoons of the Caribbean. I will continue to work with my Congressional colleagues to prevent oil drilling by the Cuban regime, which poses a national security and environmental threat to the United States.”  Quite simply this is more of the useless propaganda.  First of all, she certainly isn't opposed to there being tycoons in this world.  Secondly, the suggestion that the Castro's would be the beneficiaries of this is ridiculous.  They have shown none of the characteristics of the tycoons who are on quite good terms with the U.S.  They don't have fancy palaces like our friends in the Middle East, nor do they have suits embroidered with their names like our former friend who was thrown out of power in Egypt recently.  The truth of the matter is that this group of people are personally disgruntled by the fact that the Cuban Revolution threw Batista out of power, and along with him, their entire ruling class that exploited the people of Cuba as they enjoyed the life of luxury (like co-sponsor Mario Diaz Balart's family).  They don't mind trying to make the people of Cuba suffer since that was what they were accustomed to doing when they were in charge of the island.  What threat to our national security is she referring to?  The threat of an oil spill?  How many of those co-sponsors are opposed to drilling for oil?  Pure rhetorical garbage is what she offered as an explanation for this bill.  Is it any wonder that the delegates from Florida and the one from New Jersey, which are two of the states with the largest populations of extremists(and some terrorists!) are supporting this bill?  And to think that there are some people who say that Florida's politicians and politics don't get in the way of a rational, respectable relationship between the two countries. 
   The reason I believe that this bill, as I said in the title, will float away is that the oil lobby carries alot more weight in the "Halls of our Democracy" than the dwindiling, splintered, and fading group of loud mouth extremists from South Florida.  Along with that, the American people are ready and willing to move forward, not backwards, on the issue of Cuba. The high interest in travel and cultural exchanges that are going on right now is proof of this. 
   Reckless schemes are the ones being dreamed up in Miami as they are still some circles hell bent on violent provocations against the Cuban people.  That is probably one of the reasons that Washington bureaucrats, although sympathetic to the idea of ending the Cuban Revolution, are looking for different "representatives" to instigate situations on the island.   No longer are the Posada Carriles types the darlings in the American government's efforts to subvert the Cuban state.  They are busy attempting to create new international star "dissidents" in a futile effort to garner international support for pressuring Cuba.  If these efforts mattered to the rest of the world, these types of bills wouldn't need to be "floated" in the first place.  Instead Rep. Ros-Lehtenin feels the need to further restrict the rights of Americans and blackmale international investors by witholding U.S. visas.  She is on the losing side of a long and unfortunate battle that the Batista crowd has insisted on waging for way too long.  Her frustration is obvious.

Alan Gross a Victim?

   Are we to believe that Alan Gross is a victim?  Are we to ignore that he was breaking Cuban law?  Are we to think that our tax dollars being used to contract him through USAID weren't used with the intent of subverting a sovereign government?  Are we to think that nations don't have the right to punish subversion?  Are we going to say that the U.S. doesn't incarcerate people without charging them or allowing them due process?  Are we going to pretend that our Constitution can be ignored when we think it should be in certain circumstances?  Are we going to pretend that we aren't hipocritical in our foreign policies?  Are we going to say that Cuba is thumbing its nose at us because they prosecuted Mr. Gross?  Are we going to suppose that Americans who travel to Cuba should be able to visit Mr. Gross in the prison that he resides?  Are we going to ignore that the five Cubans being held in U.S. prisons for spying on the terrorist networks in Miami have been able to receive family visits?  Are we going to say that there are no terrorists walking free in Miami?  Are we going to imagine that Mario Diaz Balart grew up in "just another Cuban American household?"  Are we going to conveniently forget that his father was a Batista loyalist?  Are we going to hear if Bradley Manning thinks his "accomodations" are better than dispicable?  Are we going to let these extremists in Miami continue influencing our Cuba policy?  Are we presuming to know better than anyone else?  Are we really open to different opinions?  Are we really that righteous?  Are we fooling anyone?  Are we?

 

Please read the "opinion" of the "righteous" Pittsburg Tribune at the attached link.

Read more: Going to Cuba?: The wrong itinerary - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_738914.html#ixzz1NVnAhswf

Mr. Olivella Jr.'s UnReasonable Doubts

   A lawyer's job is defense.  A lawyer's success is raising reasonable doubt.  Miguel A. Olivella attempted to do just that regarding an article by Carl Leubsdorf that stated more or less that Florida politics are getting in the way of a rational policy with Cuba.  His attempt falls flat as the case he is arguing is one that is impossible to make.
   I can't defend the position taken by Mr. Leubsdorf completely either.  His contention that by changing our policy towards Cuba would bring about a change on the island in the favor of what many here in the U.S. consider a more correct form of democracy, is based on the typical arrogant feeling of superiority of how our country is governed.  I believe firmly that it is not our place to decide how another country should make its decisions.  The level of frustration that so many Americans have for our government officials should in itself cause people to not try and force others into a similar situation.  His point that Florida politics and the disproportionate influence that the anti-Cuba crowd has is quite valid.  It is also quite obvious for all to see.
   Back to Mr. Olivella.  In the sentence following his opinion that Mr. Leubsdorf suffers from "naivete", he states that he will now offer what he calls his own "humble opinion", without realizing that he already has.  He argues that Florida Governor Rick Scott, being a pro-business politician, is going against the majority of the business community who favors a relaxing of the embargo.  This point that they believe that there is worthy business to be done on the island flies in the face of the rhetoric by the anti-Cuba crowd saying that businesses can't benefit in Cuba under the current system.  Obviously this is not something that investors in the island believe and our business community believes either.  He chooses to pretend that Gov. Scott is somehow guided by a moral compass which helps him come to his position supporting the embargo.  I won't accuse Mr. Olivella of playing politics by his flattery of Gov. Scott on the basis of his name being on a list of possible replacements on the 1st District Court of Appeals, a decision to be made by Rick Scott.  It could quite simply be a coincedence that his response to Mr. Leubsdorf happens to come at this time.  Certainly he couldn't know that Mr. Leubsdorf would write his piece.  As for the moral compass of the governor, I wonder if it was working when he was a businessman running a health corporation that paid record fines for alleged Medicare fraud.  That idea of profiting off of health care is definitely at odds with Cuba's belief that health care is a right and profit motive has no place there. 
   He then, in the spirit of bipartisanship, offers Rep. Wasserman Schultz as an example of a Florida Democrat who has the same more compass for this issue as the governor.  He claims that she probably sacrifices support from her own supporters because of her position in favor of the harsh embargo.  I find this hard to believe since in our great democracy we are often stuck choosing the lesser of two evils and rarely is there a third option.  Something about these two examples he gives lends credibility to Mr. Leubsdorf's argument.  They are both Florida politicians!  He says that Pesident Obama's campaign position of easing certain aspects of the embargo would have made it impossible to win Florida as he did in 2008 if Mr. Leubsdorf's argument were true.  He ignores the reality that after the two terms by Bush, things in this country were so bad in so many people's lives that it is likely that anyone would have defeated the candidate from Bush's Republican party.  He accuses people who don't support the failed embargo of wearing rose colored glasses.  I would argue that the people who don't realize the complete failure of the embargo after a half of a century are the ones who have trouble seeing reality. 
   He goes on with the same old tired song sang by the right wing Cubans headquartered in Miami, that political dissent is punished and people are executed and tortured for disagreeing on the island.  He pretends that much of the dissent isn't sponsored and paid for by the self'proclaimed enemies of Cuba in Washington and Miami.  Certainly working with an foreign government in its attempts to overthrow one's own government is a serious crime in any country.  Why should it be different in Cuba?  Ignored also are the calls by the government for even more criticism and opinions by the people on the island as they evolve their system into one that is more suited for the realities of today's world.  The fact that companies doing business in Cuba must go through the state doesn't present a moral obstacle for the U.S. in its dealings with the rest of the world, so again, why should it be different in Cuba?  One who is guided by a moral compass surely wouldn't intentionally cause unnecessary suffering of a population in its attempt to weaken support for the regime.  Certainly those guided by a moral compass wouldn't give refuge to a man who is responsible for blowing up a civilian airplane and hotels as the U.S. does with Luis Posada Carriles who has Miami politicians speaking of his heroics.  He says that the Castro's have become rich, probably because a magazine once said so, although they admitted to having used an imaginary formula to come up with a supposed net worth.  Calling the U.S. a trading "partner" as Mr. Olivella does is not a fitting desription of the relationship if the majority of trade is not permitted because of the embargo.
   Our national interest is too noble, he claims, to "reward the regime in Cuba for acts that we accuse it of.  He forgets that here in the U.S. we have sanctioned torture, and created a worldwide "paredon"(which refers to the executions of Batista's criminals in the first years of the Revolution") as we feel it is OK to execute enemies, including American citizens anywhere they may be without a trial.
   So he has raised unreasonable doubts.  It is quite clear to all that the only obstacle to a logical policy with Cuba is the Florida factor and cannot be the result of some imaginary "moral compass."

Radio Marti New and Improved!

   Fox News Latino has given us all a good reason to continue throwing our tax dollars at Radio Marti.  At least that's what the folks at that abberation of a news agency thinks it has done.  In reality the group of "conservatives" over there have excused another waste of tax dollars as they defend the hopelessly lost government project aimed at subverting reality in the hopes of causing damage to the sovereign country of Cuba.  The "conservatives" rarely balk at such waste, as they can't resist the attempts to dominate other nations.  If it comes to the well being of our own country though, according to them, well we shouldn't be doing anything.  The market gods will figure that out.  Unfortunately, the same can be said for much of the other party. 
   The honest people at Fox begin by telling us that this useless entity, Radio Marti, is "keeping pace with the times" having made a slick transition towards social media and other marvelous platforms.  The new director has worked hard and is proud of the new tactics of propaganda being employed by this heroic organization whose results over the past thirty years have cost the American people around $500,000,000. 
  By using Twitter and Facebook, theese guys claim to have been able to aid the flow of their message to the island.  This is a great acheivement since what we have been paying for was easily blocked by the Cuban government and was nothing more than something to fan the flames of the extremists in Miami.  It is actually interesting that in their excitement, they have admitted to having been a total waste in the meantime.  But wait, that's not it.  They seem to have exposed one of their own fantasies in this stunning admission.  They contend that they are connecting with oh so many people through the use of the internet.  What fantasy have they exposed? The one where they almost constantly accuse the Cuban government of denying people access to the internet.  Well, I suppose that they won't worry about this minor detail from the story they have weaved.  Remember guys, if you tell a lie, it gets bigger and bigger until you can't keep track of your own story.  This game of contradicting themselves by the anti-Cuba crowd seems to be happening more often these days, as they feel the pressures of the real world pushing them into what will be almost total irrelevance .  They are losing ground and credibility day by day as their excuses are becoming extinct.  They seem to be the ones who are unable to adapt to things as they fight to bring back a past that is already long gone.
   The newly renovated waste site, excuse me, web site touts between 600 to 4000 hits a day.  That's one hell of a range!  I wonder how many hits are in Miami and elsewhere and how many are on the island.  At this point I'll just have to wonder, since that little bit of useful information wasn't brought up in the article.  They admit that, just as in the case of the radio an television stations, it is very possible and likely that the Cuban government blocks the internet sites to.  Sounds like we will continue to throw money into this new and improved bottomless pit for no reason other than to appease the powerful extremists in Miami.  The budget for this garbage was decreased by four million dollars this year to just under thirty million dollars.  This should make the conservative budget warriors a little more comfortable as they search for beneficial programs for the American people to cut.  But despite this decrease in funding, the director assures the folks at Fox that the programming hasn't suffered, it actually has improved!  (As if Fox News is concerned with the quality of broadcasting!)  Enjoy the new website Miami. Tweet to your heart's content, but remember that these recent revolutions elsewhere in the world were not products of the wack jobs in an exile's paradise.  They were homegrown and genuine, and the people in Cuba are moving on without you.

Israel and Palestine: What will be

   As a citizen of this world we live in, the issues of injustices anywhere I find of much interest and urgency.  Today I will express some of my concerns in relation to the issue of the situation facing the Palestinian people and the state of Israel.  I must disclose that my one of my grandfathers was Jewish.  His parents came to the United States almost a hundred years ago in search of a better life.  They left behind most of their family who just a few short years later became victims of the Nazis.  I understand the profound effect that their historical crime have had on the Jewish people as the subject was so horrible that my grandfather almost couldn't speak of it.  I myself am not Jewish, nor am I of any other faith.  This fact should not disqualify me from critisizing the policies of Israel nor should I be considered an anti-semite or "self-hating Jew." 
   It's a bit embarrasing that with the marvel of the internet, we are able to read opinions from around the world, and in spite of the fact that there seems to be a wide variety of opinions in Israel on the subject, we here in the U.S. are basically stuck with one prevalent opinion in our press with an almost disdainful reaction to any opposing view. 
   We openly speak of the importance of the problem, but our official stance is no more than a blessing for Israel's state to continue acting with virtual impunity in it's belligerent actions as it continually denies a peaceful reality for the Palestinian people.  Despite occasional rhetoric about how there needs to be a meaningful peace and a two state solution, the U.S. continues to support the state of Israel in it's "creation of facts" on the ground which makes such a goal more and more unlikely.  The dream of a Palestine free from occupation is one that will probably not come true.  The reality is that, thanks to a hard-headed policy on the part of some of the actors in this real life drama, that we have quite possibly passed the point where a two-state solution can be accomplished.  The fact that within Israel itself, the population of the Palestinian community is outpacing that of the Jewish one.  The likely outcome will someday be that there will be one country for all of the people, Jewish and Palestinian.  The question will then become will the state be one of an aparteid nature?  If so, then the problems will surely continue as the oppresed part of the population will struggle for equality.  Or will the hard-headed members of that society, from both sides, be marginalized enough that the people in the future state can live together in harmony as brothers and sisters, just as so many have already proven possible.  I am eternally hopeful that the good people will prevail in their search for peace as it is something that people all over deserve.  It is just a shame that so much pain and so much suffering must go on for so long.  As a world community, it is our duty to be on the side of peace and denounce the wicked politics that only prolong the misery that so many people must endure in the thing called life, that is no more precious for one person than another.

Happy Birthday

I'd like to take a break from my criticisms for a moment.  I'd like to wish a happy birthday to a special man who has worked hard his whole life and did whatever he had to to support the ones he loves.  89 years ago was his birth, and although he always suffers from the pains of reaching that age, he should feel good knowing that there are quite a few people who were born in Cuba who have made it past 100.  He may be lonely at times but everyone feels that way once in a while.  Thanks for all of the stories from your past. Most of all thanks for bringing me to that beautiful island where I fell in love with not only the beauty of it, but also the woman of my dreams.  Happy Birthday J.S.C.

The Priest of the Miami Herald

  The star of the Miami Herald's Cuba section, Mr. Juan O. Tamayo, is working hard as usual.  I wonder sometimes how hard it is for some people who are "experts" to keep going without worrying about their inconsistencies as they slant reality in a direction somewhat off to the realm of storytelling.  The Herald works hard to keep it's readers in this false reality.
   Today he decided to play church people against church people.  Typical nonsense.  That's how the game is played in the Miami wonderland.  Of course he refers to comments made to El Nuevo Herald by what he calls "Cuba's most outspoken priest."  A priest who is outspoken, why?  Because he speaks the words that somewhat fit the storyline of the two Heralds.  On top of that he chooses to speak to the news outlets most hostile to the Revolution.  What about the storyline that people who speak out face "consequences?"  Let's not focus on a silly detail like that though, that's not the point he tries to make in this article.  The reason the Herald needs to find a "rebel" priest is that one of the bigger stories coming out of the island over the past year or so is that the Catholic Church appears to be taking a more cooperative role on the island.  Ever since the Pope visited Cuba years ago, reactionary Miami has scrambled to figure out a response to this.  Since hating the Pope, along with Nelson Mandela, was making them look ridiculous, they decided that a different approach would be necessary.  A major part of the propaganda the Miami crowd had used in it's long and fruitless campaign against Cuba had been the "suppression" of religion.  Had the Church not been actively working with the self-proclaimed enemies of the Revolution at the beginning, things may have been different.  The "rebel" priest speaking to the Herald stated how Cardinal Ortega has "more access to the people who hold power" and how "it reflects an advantage for both the Cubans and Catholics." 

“The church now does have a larger space, but to express ideas that do not affect the power,” Mr. Tamayo highlights.  I know that there are many people who support the idea of religious states, but what right would a church have in affecting power?  I would say that if the Church is affecting people and people are in power, then there is a chance that one's religious beliefs could affect the decisions of that individual.  But what Mr. Tamayo is basically suggesting is that the fair thing to be done is to allow the Church to make desicions along with the state.  The priest goes on to say that while on a visit to Krakow, he was told by a Polish Cardinal that the Church is on the side of the people as is God.  So guess who isn't!  The suggestion is that the government isn't.  But isn't this the government that   is "allowing the Church more space" and it would be reasonable to think that the people are not being prevented from having God on their side if they so choose?  By the way, did he travel to another country?  I'm just wondering what that says about the ability for people who aren't exactly aligned with the regime to travel.  Another silly detail that goes against what we are supposed to believe about Cuba.  Mr Tamayo is proud to tout the credibility of the priest who he says has long been a harsh critic writing letters to Fidel and Raul "blasting the government" in his comments to the media.  My goodness Mr. Tamayo, why isn't he rotting away in a dingy cell somewhere in the island?  Isn't that what happens to people like this?  No, actually he is ending a three month trip to multiple countries including the U.S.  Amazing isn't it?  Well maybe he'll be dragged away once he gets home.  Wouldn't that make for an interesting follow up article!  

   The priest went on to express his skepticism about everything from the release of prisoners to the new reforms being undertaken in Cuba.  He also gets the impression that the church is gaining a presence in the media.  How astute of him.  He feels that Cubans are "losing their fear of retribution for speaking out", and nowhere does he mention that Raul Castro has repeatedly called on the people to do just that.  The priest does mention that he welcomes more Americans being able to travel to Cuba on humanitarian visits, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and imagine that he isn't opposed to people visiting their relatives as often as they would like either.  That's a position that is almost unacceptable by the never give up group of fascists in Miami.  I guess that isn't a good sign for the Diaz-Balarts and Ros-Lehtinen types who would rather keep families separated for another fifty years.  

   All things said, we can see how the effort to twist our perspective a bit is being made on an almost constant basis by people like Mr. Tamayo.  But it's to bad for them that they find themselves stuck in the island of Miami politics and can't conquer the minds of everyone just as they haven't been able to conquer Cuba's Revolution.