Mar 27, 2010

U.S. Senate Closer to Financing Cuba's Tyranny - UPDATED

Utterly disregarding the impact on U.S. tourism and the Castro tyranny's continued assault on the most basic human rights of Cubans, the U.S. Senate is inching closer to passing what is known as S. 428 or The Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act. This law would prohibit President Obama from preventing the travel of (non Cuban) U.S. citizens and residents to Cuba, unless he were to veto it.
"Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act - Prohibits the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba by U.S. citizens or legal residents or any of the transactions ordinarily incident to such travel..."
Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota claims a mayority of 60 U.S. Senators support its passage, and the following 39 are public about it (34 Democrats, 4 Republicans, 1 Independent):
John Barrasso [R-WY], Max Baucus [D-MT],Michael Bennet [D-CO] (withdrawn), Jeff Bingaman [D-NM], Barbara Boxer [D-CA], Roland Burris [D-IL], Robert Byrd [D-WV], Maria Cantwell [D-WA], Benjamin Cardin [D-MD], Thomas Carper [D-DE], Susan Collins [R-ME], Kent Conrad [D-ND], Michael Crapo [R-ID], Christopher Dodd [D-CT], Byron Dorgan [D-ND], Richard Durbin [D-IL], Michael Enzi [R-WY], Russell Feingold [D-WI], Dianne Feinstein [D-CA] , Al Franken [D-MN], Kay Hagan [D-NC], Thomas Harkin [D-IA], Tim Johnson [D-SD], John Kerry [D-MA], Amy Klobuchar [D-MN], Mary Landrieu [D-LA], Patrick Leahy [D-VT], Carl Levin [D-MI], Blanche Lincoln [D-AR], Richard Lugar [R-IN], Claire McCaskill [D-MO], Patty Murray [D-WA], Mark Pryor [D-AR], John Reed [D-RI], Bernard Sanders [I-VT], Jon Tester [D-MT], Mark Udall [D-CO], Tom Udall [D-NM], Jim Webb [D-VA], Ron Wyden [D-OR]
The travel legislation is now being considered in various sub-committees, including the one that oversees human rights. Sen. Barbara Boxer [D-CA], known for her support of ´progressive´ causes, is the Chair of the Human Rights Subcommittee and is therefore likely to support it. She is also 1 of 11 on the Foreign Relations Subcommittee.

Like Senator Boxer, Senators Kerry, Lugar and Barrasso are supporters of the bill and the 4 are on both the Foreign Relations and Human Rights subcommittees. Supporters such as Sen. Russell and Sen. Dodd are also on the Foreign Relations Subcommittee. Thus, at least a 6-5 majority in the Foreign Relations subcommittee supports it.

U.S. tourists should be putting their money where it will bring good, not evil, to themselves and their neighbors.

Wouldn't it be ethical (unlike this bill) and also far better for the U.S. economy, if U.S. tourists spent their money in Florida, Puerto Rico or Hawaii? Wouldn't $2 billion of tourist expenditures in a U.S. tourist destination be the real win win? Why then are the foregoing senators working so hard to increase tourism for Castro? Do they prefer that US Tourists spend their money in Cuba instead? Why? Why are they obsessed with diverting Caribbean bound tourists from Puerto Rico and Florida to Cuba?

I don't notice the senators from Hawaii and Florida, or the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico backing a bill that would potentially deprive them of income from at least 1 million tourists annually, in order to give it to a tyrant. Aren't the senators aware that tourism has been decreasing in all of these areas? Of course they are. Just this month, on March 4, President Obama signed a bill to promote tourism in the U.S.
"Obama said there is no better country to visit than the United States ...flanked by lawmakers from Nevada and other tourism states.

"The bill enjoyed bipartisan support and has been pushed since the country experienced a precipitous decline in overseas visitors after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. The travel industry estimates that more than 600,000 fewer overseas visitors are coming to the country, contributing to economic losses...

"The bill is expected to create 40,000 jobs nationwide in the first year."
Yet the foregoing list of Senators are joining hands to push a bill that diverts US tourists to Cuba's tyranny instead.

At least the Senators could have been thinking of helping Haiti develop a tourist industry. Haiti is receiving massive U.S. assistance and its people need jobs, right? How about investing to build Haiti's tourism infrastructure? Why aren't the senators spending the time allocated to Cuba Travel for Americans, to a bill that would create incentives for U.S. tourism investments in Haiti? Imagine the good that could bring. Wouldn't the American people prefer that over financing a tyranny? Where are the 'Promote Travel to Haiti' or 'Haiti Tourism' bills? I don't see them here. Wouldn't working on a bill like that for Haiti also help compensate for $700 million in disaster assistance, in addition to helping it become self sustaining?

Americans who don't agree with financing tyranny should write to their senator now, even if he/she is not on the foregoing list.


The Foreign Relations Committee of the House of Representatives may vote on the latter's version of this bill, H.R. 4645, this coming Wednesday, September 27. The House version is sponsored by Rep. Collin Peterson [D-MN]. If you don´t agree with financing and resuscitating the moribund Castro tyranny with U.S. tourist dollars or diverting Florida's, Hawaii's and Puerto Rico's tourism to Cuba, fax or email your Congressman without delay. The names of the 10 Republicans and 66 Democrats co sponsoring this initiative at the U.S. House of Representatives are as follows: :

Rodney Alexander [R-LA5],Tammy Baldwin [D-WI2], Howard Berman [D-CA28], Robert Berry [D-AR1], Judy Biggert [R-IL13], Sanford Bishop [D-GA2], Timothy Bishop [D-NY1], John, Boozman [R-AR3], Leonard Boswell [D-IA3], Frederick Boucher [D-VA9], Charles Boustany [R-LA7], Bobby Bright [D-AL2], Michael Capuano [D-MA8], André Carson [D-IN7]
Travis Childers [D-MS1], Jim Costa [D-CA20], Lincoln Davis [D-TN4], William Delahunt [D-MA10], Rosa DeLauro [D-CT3], Michael Doyle [D-PA14], Thomas Edwards [D-TX17], Keith Ellison [D-MN5], Brad Ellsworth [D-IN8], Jo Ann Emerson [R-MO8], Anna Eshoo [D-CA14],Sam Farr [D-CA17], Jeff Flake [R-AZ6], Al Green [D-TX9], Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7], Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [D-SD], Baron Hill [D-IN9], Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22], Tim Holden [D-PA17], Michael Honda [D-CA15], Jesse Jackson [D-IL2], Eddie Johnson [D-TX30], Henry Johnson [D-GA4], Timothy Johnson [R-IL15], Walter Jones [R-NC3], Steve Kagen [D-WI8], Ronald Kind [D-WI3], Rick Larsen [D-WA2],Barbara Lee [D-CA9], David Loebsack [D-IA2], Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14], Edward Markey [D-MA7]
Eric Massa [D-NY29], Jim Matheson [D-UT2], Doris Matsui [D-CA5], Betty McCollum [D-MN4], James McGovern [D-MA3], Walter Minnick [D-ID1], James Moran [D-VA8], Jerry Moran [R-KS1], James Oberstar [D-MN8], John Olver [D-MA1], Solomon Ortiz [D-TX27], Ronald Paul [R-TX14], Chellie Pingree [D-ME1], Jared Polis [D-CO2], Earl Pomeroy [D-ND], Laura Richardson [D-CA37], Mike Ross [D-AR4], Bobby Rush [D-IL1], Timothy Ryan [D-OH17], Janice Schakowsky [D-IL9], David Scott [D-GA13], José Serrano [D-NY16]
Victor Snyder [D-AR2], John Spratt [D-SC5], John Tanner [D-TN8], Gene Taylor[D-MS4], Edolphus Towns [D-NY10], Timothy Walz [D-MN1], Maxine Waters [D-CA35], Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]



Hawaii - Tourism went down to 6.5 million visitors, or 4.5 %, in 2009.

Puerto Rico Occupancy rates are down to a mere 66%, and in 2009 there were 1.8 million tourists, 200K less than in 2006.

Florida's tourist visits decreased by 3.4% to 18.1 million visitors in the last quarter of 2009.

From which of these are the (at least) 1 million tourists to Cuba going to be taken from?



Yesterday, March 27, one could hardly find this post if one entered 'Cuba' in Google's blog. Yet, if one entered ' Cuba travel' it was ranked number 1 in relevance most of the day.

On March 28 one cannot find it even among the first 5 pages after entering 'Cuba travel', but the others that were behind it are right there. It's unclear what relevance means to Google if it can vanish instantly. Any ideas?


I think I may have figured part of what 'relevancy' means to Google, with respect to Cuba.

Now the 4th most relevant post on Cuba and 12th most relevant on Cuba Travel is Top Resorts in Varadero, Cuba, by Cheap Mommy.

Google's number one ranked blog post for Cuba today is HAITI Signs MOU with Cuba and Brazil Regarding Public Health Programs. It supposedly quotes Haiti's president but one cannot distinguish what he declared from what the post's author added, for the quotes are not even closed, and the subject of the supposed quote is not even quoted! This is it:
He celebrated the fact that Haiti can also count on Brazil’s collaboration, and noted that despite a 50-year-old blockade, Cuba “has always been willing to help. So this time, it will use Brazil’s resources and expertise to continue that work.
The author then added that Haiti's president supposedly also declared having heard someone say “Cuban doctors were after God”.

Frivolousness and Cheap Communist Propaganda is what relevancy means to Google, with respect to Cuba.


The Win Win

Ladies in White Vs. Tyranny and Patrons

Remember this ´progressive´?

Ladies in White: "We´re Not Afraid of You"

Tyranny allows Cuban Dissident to Die of Hunger - What now?

Leaked photos of (26 or more) mental patients who presumably froze to death in Mazorra (Cuban hospital) January 9 - 13, 2010

Why Cuban Americans Are Traveling to Cuba and Further Thoughts

Mar 25, 2010

The Win-Win

The Republican Governor of Georgia wants to do business with the tyranny in Cuba. After all, the Cuban tyranny breeds slaves which they force to work for $11-20 per month, and Georgia could feed them chicken and eggs, just like in the old days. In addition, the Governor is interested in that really lucrative tourist industry. He can feed the tourists too, and maybe even employ some Cuban (no, not American, so it's OK) slaves. It would be a win-win for Georgia and the Cuban tyranny.

Gee, if only the tyranny could release the American Jew they have detained for helping Cuban Jews. That could surely help clinch the U.S. Senate's approval to lift the travel ban too. Forget Batista and Castro: that would really be a coup. At least that's what Sen. Byron Dorgan (Democrat-North Dakota) thinks.

If only they could free this American Jew who was distributing computers to the Cuban (oops, Jewish) slaves, the consciences of Americans could work with the Cuban slave owners, just like it used to be (for some) in the United States. Count North Dakota in; it's a win win for their Senator too.

Comparing Cuba with China , the Senator argued it would be no different than what the U.S. does with that threat. Threats are apparently the only other issue, as far as this Senator is concerned. He didn't mention slavery or the grave violation of objective and universal human rights by the partners he proposes for North Dakotans. That's not their, or his problem, or of the United States in which he believes.

History repeats itself? Progress?
A Replica of "Amistad", the 19th century slave ship,
sails into Havana Harbor on March 25, 2010,
waving the flags of Cuba and The United States.

Bell Tolls For Cuba


The Morality of Lifting Restrictions on Cuba: The China Question, The China Lesson

The Freedom to Travel to Cuba Press Conference

Ladies in White: "We´re Not Afraid of You"

UPDATED: Ladies in White Vs. Tyranny and Patrons

Tyranny allows Cuban Dissident to Die of Hunger - What now?

Why Cuban Americans Are Traveling to Cuba and Further Thoughts

Reuters has reported that Cuban-Americans are flying to Cuba by the plane loads. Citing the Cuban tyranny and a Miami travel agency respectively, it claims that 250 thousand U.S. based Cubans visited Cuba in 2009 and that said number is projected to grow to 300K this year. Diario de Cuba further reports that there were 170,000 Cuban Americans traveling to Cuba in 2008. Thus, Cuban American visitors increased by 47% in 2009.

Reading Reuters, however, one might think that Cuban Americans are perhaps ready to accept and finally live under tyranny; at least the 20% of 1.5 million Cuban Americans who is traveling to Cuba. One might think that justice and liberty are not really important to Cuban Americans; that despite all the noise they make, they are not firm with their values or lack dignity.

Surely that is not what Reuters intends to convey. They are only informing everyone of the travel facts, although its tone is perhaps one of glee, for it adds:
"With Cuban Americans emerging as Cuba's second-largest source of visitors after Canadians...(they) are an important source of dollars for the communist regime as it deals with the global economic downturn."
So, you see, Reuters seems to be suggesting that it's not just those 1 million Canadians (40% of Cuba's tourists) who are guilty of propping the tyranny up. It's the Cuban exiles themselves. Yes, the little scoundrels, the very ones who are supposedly against tyranny and against everyone else traveling.

Well, of course Cubans are financing the tyranny; indeed, they are its slaves. Isn't Reuters aware that the latter, and international partners such as Canada and Spain, employ Cubans for $11-20 per month? A tourist industry worker in Spain, Canada or Europe earns, at a minimum, US$ 2000 monthly, or 100 times what a Cuban is paid. In addition, Cubans are forced to work or go to prison. They are evidently enslaved by the tyranny and its partners, and slaves finance their masters. But some will counter that they are getting health care and education in return. Of course, this makes perfect sense. The tyranny needs the healthiest and most productive slaves possible, that is, except when they rebel. In such a case, they respect their right to suicide. Nor do they seem very interested in those they consider perennially unproductive, like the mental patients at Mazorra who presumably froze to death in early January, 2010.

Reuters, however, was not referring to those Cubans, but to the ones in Miami and the United States. How dare they go to Cuba. How dare they finance the tyranny, and yet criticize others for doing so. Don't these know they are not Cubans any more? Don't they know they are no more Cuban than Canadians or Spaniards? Cuban Americans, of course, are persons with dual US and Cuban citizenship. As Cubans they have always had the right of citizens to their place of birth. It doesn't matter what Reuters, the Castro tyranny or anyone else says or thinks.

Having hopefully clarified this point, one can then ask why are these Cuban Americans traveling to Cuba? Are they indifferent to financing tyranny or not?

Are some traveling there because they just want to see their birth place for the first time in perhaps 51 years (as I once did in 50 years)? If so, are they spending the most or the least possible?

Do some just wish to see their families or bring them goods? If so, are they staying with their families or at the tyranny's hotels?

Are they looking to bring democratic change to Cuba or not?

Or are some, or most, of those traveling to Cuba living in the U.S., but with Castro's blessings, as is the case in other parts of the world? Are they attempting to mix with the other exiles, and by traveling to Cuba, to discredit them?

How many fall into each category?

What about the other 1.2 million, or 80% of Cuban Americans? Are they planning to visit their enemy or not? For what reasons? Not that they need any.

These are some of the facts some news source might try to investigate.



Cuba's Tourism "Entrepreneurs"


Split between Cubans Deepens as They Debate Over Strategy and Attitudes

U.S. Citizen Denied Entry into the United States

The Morality of Lifting Restrictions on Cuba: The China Question, The China Lesson

The Freedom to Travel to Cuba Press Conference

Mar 23, 2010

What Cuba Means in Google

If you enter the search term 'Cuba' in Google News, the free world's leading search engine immediately suggests the following options:
"Cuba earthquake 2010, Cuba news,Cuba Haiti, Cuba embargo, Cuba earthquake, Cuban, Cuba Travel, Cuba economy, Cuban news, Cuban cigars."
Thus, for a new arrival from outer space Google provides zero clues about what's been happening in Cuba for 51 years, except for the embargo.

Perhaps Google takes pride in being 'politically neutral', which it interprets as meaning no up front mentioning of "dictatorship", "elections", "human rights", "political prisoners", "Ladies in White", "Mazorra", "Zapata", "dissidents", "exiles", "liberation", "hunger strikes", "executions", "acts of repudiation", "civil liberties", "political police" etc., but essential to mention Cuba travel and "Cuba embargo", immediately.

Oh, and to hide or omit "exiles" or "exilio" too, as and wherever possible.

Google would perhaps argue that few searches for Cuba mention said terms but omit mentioning that a neophyte often doesn't know what to search for.

Google claims it has left China in protest of alleged Communist demands that it exercise self-censorship. Yet, notwithstanding assertions to the contrary, I think perhaps the Castros would love to talk business with Google.


Iran for Google News - "news, punch, february 11, nuclear, israel, sanctions, protests, war, threat, feb 11

Iraq for Google News - "news, dinar, war, election, dinar revalue, dinar revaluation, dinar news, oil, economy, elections 2010"

UPDATE March 24, 2010 --
Well. Today Google removed "Cuba earthquake 2010" from its drop down --Let's Define Cuba For Searchers List-- but left "Cuba earthquake" (check for yourselves). Said deletion made space for a new defining term (only 10 allowed it seems). No, they didn't pick 'dictatorship', 'elections', 'political prisoners', 'dissidents', 'hunger strikes', etc. Instead they went with "Cuban Missile Crisis". (I remember watching it on TV from exile in New York.) Ah. How could they have forgotten. Castro wanted to shoot a nuclear warhead at the United States. Yes, Castro. The one so many in the U.S. and worldwide now defend. Good choice.

However, Cuban cigars continue to say more to Google about Cuba than tyrannies, executions and dead hunger strikers.

But there is hope. Maybe tomorrow.

UPDATE --March 28, 2010

Today Google web search defines Cuba as: cuban missile crisis, cubase, cubana lust, cuba gooding jr., cuba libre, cuba cigars, cuban sandwich, cuban revolution, cuban recipes, cuban food. All the ones in bold are different than the 10 terms it used to characterize Cuba when I first published this post 5 days ago on March 23.

Google web search thus grossly distorts by hiding the fact of tyranny in Cuba for 51 years.

´Cuba libre´is the best they could do, perhaps because it equally refers to a rum and coke.

How does Google come up with its blog search terms for Cuba? Only people´s searches? Therefore it can be controlled, from the outside, by an automated or human propaganda machine?

Mar 21, 2010

Ladies in White: "We´re Not Afraid of You"

Protesting for a seventh consecutive day and now accompanied by dead hunger striker's Orlando Zapata Tamayo´s mother, Cuba's Ladies in White approached the socialist regime's 'national assembly'* and demanded the release of political prisoners. What follows is a translated excerpt of an audio taken from Radio Martì of the confrontation that took place on Sunday.

A woman shouts (probably Zapata Tamayo’s mother):
"A strong repression with offenses from the paramilitaries, State Security with terrible offenses...with terrible offenses...I scream at you...You’ve assassinated my Orlando Zapata Tamayo took his water assassinated my (Orlando) with premeditation.

"All you who listen, we will continue…here we go head on against repression…we are not afraid of you."
Many women shout:
"Zapata vive! Zapata vive! Zapata vive!"
A little later, another woman adds:
"...they surrounded us...military police with their blue uniforms...among them vulgar women, I sincerely hate to say so...Cuban women just like me...who conduct themselves in such form, no composure, so violent, saying many lies, because they have even offended Mrs. Reina Luisa (Zapata Tamayo's's mother), telling her, "I´m glad your son has died", and me saying: "Lord, forgive her, for she does not know what she is saying, for that boy was assassinated."(They) are as always directed by officers from State Security."
*The National Assembly of Popular Power, according to Castro's 1976 spurious constitution is home to the people’s ultimate representatives, all hand picked by the tyrant.


Complete Spanish audio of this confrontation -- from Radio Martí

UPDATED: Ladies in White Vs. Tyranny and Patrons

Mar 20, 2010

UPDATED: Ladies in White Vs. Tyranny and Patrons

For a fifth straight day the wives of some 50 of Cuba´s political prisoners have been intercepted, supposedly by a mob, arrested and removed by force. Yet thus far only the European Parliament, the United States and Cubans have protested the assault. Does this mean that the rest of the world believes that what is being done to these ladies is right?

Given the lack of an independent judicial system in Cuba under Castro (unlike between 1940 and 1952), and after viewing the video below, does any one seriously doubt that there are political prisoners in Cuba?

Are those governments which are thus far silent trying to tell us it is right to prevent peaceful protests by force? If not, how then do they believe these ladies should make their grievances heard? Or do Africa, the Caribbean, Canada and Latin America not believe the ladies in white should be heard? Do they believe, like Cuba´s tyranny, that they should just shut up and stay home?

Could those who want the U.S. to lift its embargo and allow its citizens to travel to Cuba kindly point out the tourists or academics who were helping these ladies. Could they also explain how Castro´s tyranny could have survived without tourism, its main source of income?

The regime claims that 2 1/2 million tourists visited Cuba in 2009. Canadians, unabashed, accounted for almost 1 million, or 40%; followed by Spain (129K), Italy (117K), Germany(92K) and France(83K). The rest of the world contributed 897K tourists.

Jointly they provided the tyranny $2.1 billion CUC($2.2 billion dollars) in gross income. We don't know how much its foreign partners earned. However, given average salaries of US$11-15 per month for Cuban workers, net income for each partner is almost certainly without precedents, that is, since the slave era.

The tyranny's foreign ministry adds: "Investors from more than 40 countries have placed their capital in Cuba. Outstanding among them are: Spain, Canada, Italy, France and the United Kingdom."

When will these governments and tourists stop supporting Cuba's tyranny? What will it take?

¨This street is Fidel´s,¨ ´the mob´ screams at them



Leaked photos of (26 or more) mental patients who, presumably, froze to death in Mazorra (Cuban hospital) January 9 - 13, 2010

Who are the supporters?


Tyranny allows Cuban Dissident to Die of Hunger - What now?

UPDATE. Cuban Dissidents' Homes Under Siege After Issuing Ultimatum

Pro-Castro Mob Attacks Cuban Dissident But Castro Claims Saving Him

Van Jones, Free Speech and Cuban Exiles


Antúñez Arrested and Released, Vows to Continue

Cuban Police Beat Up 3 Women Attempting to Visit Dissident Antúnez (Video)

Mar 14, 2010

Cubaencuentro Sanitizes Pablo Milanes' Comments on Castro

A day after Pablo Milanes declared that Castro must be condemned if Cuban dissident and hunger striker Guillermo Fariñas were to die, has reported it as if it was "the fact", that is, Fariñas' death, that would have to be condemned, thus portraying it as if Milanes was not condemning either Castro.

However, a simple analysis makes it fairly obvious that Milanés was intending a condemnation of Castro, if Fariñas dies, for he follows by saying: "Ideas are discussed, not imprisoned."

Nevertheless, towards the end of the interview, perhaps realizing what he has said, he apparently attempts to patch things up and even defends the Castros.

Here is an excerpt of the interview (my translation of original in Spanish):
5-What strike does Castro deserve if Fariñas were to die?

MILANES- Must be condemned from a human point of view. You don't do those things. Ideas are discussed, not imprisoned.

6- What have the revolutionaries done with the revolution?

MILANES- --Stayed fixed in time. And history must advance with ideas and new men. They have become reactionary to their own ideas. That's why I've said another revolution is needed, because we have little stains. The enormous sun born in 1959 has become full of stains proportional to its aging.

7- In which century will Cuba have its next elections?

MILANES- I'm not a soothsayer, I don't have a prophet's soul, but I would want it to be as soon as possible. More than elections, I would want change, for I don't believe in elections either. That's a "democratic game" (his quotes); that's also a farce.

+1 To which island would you take a deserted man?

MILANES- If I tell you, you'd laugh. To Cuba. To a Cuba with the Castros, but with adjustments.
Yet, Cubaencuentro's headline is:
"Pablo Milanés says that if Fariñas dies, the fact must be condemned."
It then reports it as:
"Cuban troubadour Pablo Milanés affirmed in an interview with Spanish newspaper El Mundo on Saturday, that one must condemn Guillermo Fariñas' death, from the human point of view, in case it happens."

Communist Cuban Musician Says Castro Should be Condemned If ...Sort of

Pablo Milanés Interview with El Mundo (transcript in Spanish)

Mar 13, 2010

Communist Cuban Musician Says Castro Should be Condemned If ...Sort of

Renowned Communist Cuban singer Pablo Milanés has said that if Cuban dissident and hunger striker Gillermo Fariñas were to die, Castro should be "condemned from a human point of view...for those are things you don´t do." Now really.

Milanés didn´t explain which Castro he meant, or if the condemnation should be in a Cuban courtroom or just symbolic. Furthermore, he didn´t mention why Castro shouldn´t also be condemned for Orlando Zapata Tamayo´s death. Zapata Tamayo is the political prisoner who died on February 23 in a Cuban prison after a hunger strike lasting over 80 days. His death has caused the regime to be chastised by the United States, the European Parliament and even by allies and investors such as Costa Rica, Canada, France and Spain.

In the early 1970´s Milanés rose to fame on the tyranny´s coattails by sweetening and popularizing its image among youth with romantic masterpieces like "Yolanda", just like Hollywood today. So, unsurprisingly, the singer didn´t mention any of the other murders and crimes the Castro tyranny has been accused of during the past 51 years.

Nor should one wonder why Milanes also failed to criticize Castro´s unconstitutional dictatorship. He clarified that he didn´t believe in elections either! So one could even conclude that Milanés was actually doing his buddy tyrant a huge favor while on a regime financed tour.

Perhaps his declaration could even be interpreted as a plea for absolution, that is, in case the Castros don´t allow Fariñas to die, and if they are ever brought to justice in a legitimate Cuban courtroom.

Mar 11, 2010

UPDATED: Bioethics À la Carte for the Castro Regime?

A 3 year old child is about to cross a busy avenue and will be certainly killed. One is in a position to pull him away. Should one reason with the child or immediately pull him out? Another case: an adult is about to jump off a 100 story building. One is in a position to successfully prevent him by using force. Should one try to reason with him even though this means he could jump, or immediately arrest him to save his life?

An ideological opponent is on a combined hunger and thirst strike, and will certainly go into shock or die unless he’s immediately arrested and forcefully hydrated and nourished intravenously. Should one wait for him to go into shock or die, or force him to be hospitalized, hydrated and nourished?

Cuban dissident hunger (and thirst) striker Guillermo Fariñas hasn't been hydrated in 8 days or eaten in 15, and has lost 28 pounds. He went into shock last week and was hydrated only then. He refuses to eat, drink or be hospitalized until he goes into shock. According to the Castro tyranny's doctors who visited him yesterday, Fariñas is suffering from "heart arrhythmia and severe dehydration" but since he refuses hospitalization they will continue to wait until he goes into shock (or dies).

Is this what they would also have done in the case of the three year old crossing the avenue and the suicide jumper, or do they just practice bio-ethics À la Carte when it comes to political opponents? What exactly are the bio-ethical principles the tyranny claims to be defending with political opponent Guillermo Fariñas?


As expected, Guillermo Fariñas became unconscious at 2:00 P.M. today and was finally hospitalized.

The story was reported by AFP.

See Dissidents Guillermo Fariñas (right) and Ismael Iglesias M.D. (left)
Photo from AFP

UPDATE ...March 12, 2010

While Fariñas reportedly continues hospitalized and will hopefully terminate his suicidal strike on tyranny and self, the Cuban tyranny is besides itself attempting to defend its positions, although still not in a constitutionally legitimate Cuban courtroom.

After 17 years of ruling Cuba by decree (1959-1976), having established a totalitarian state, and with a significant portion of the population in exile, Fidel Castro held a 'referendum' to replace Cuba´s legitimate constitution (the one Batista violated with a coup in 1952) with one where he's on top and there is no effective separation of powers. This makes it virtually impossible to bring him to justice for any crime.

That´s why there are no constitutionally legitimate courts in Cuba. The counterfeit legal system in place is there to protect tyranny, not justice.

That's why among Cuba´s political prisoners are the nations' foremost patriots.


Castro Regime and Dissident Agree on 'Right' to Suicide

Political Opponent, Potential Suicidée or Common Criminal?

Another Suicidal Hunger Striker in Cuba

Raul Castro Claims Innocence

Tyranny allows Cuban Dissident to Die of Hunger - What now?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bioethics À la Carte for the Castro Regime?

Updated here.

Mar 9, 2010

Castro Regime and Dissident Agree on 'Right' to Suicide

Through an article published in its media monopoly, the Castro regime has argued that it is ethically obligated to respect political opponent Guillermo Fariñas' right to die through a hunger strike. While alluding to existing bio-ethical principles for its position, Granma failed to cite any specific arguments or make any valid ones of its own. Instead the article begins by boasting about the tyranny's vaccine program and its mission to Haiti, leaving one to wonder how either of these initiatives justify allowing Fariñas to kill himself.

As if calculating that the latter approach might not convince many, Granma then prefaces the regime´s supposedly bio-ethically driven position with a litany of accusations. But what do they expect this to accomplish? Does the regime mean that Fariñas should be allowed to commit suicide because he is guilty of this and that? So therefore it means that letting him die is, effectively, a death sentence for the crimes they contend he has committed?

He is accused of treason, a grave crime in any country. But why then, one immediately wonders, was Fariñas walking the streets just 2 weeks ago? Why was he effectively sentenced to death only upon initiating a politically motivated hunger strike?

According to Granma's article, Fariñas is a 'salaried US government employee' (cooperates with European enemies too), a 'vendepatria' (traitor), a maladjusted personality, a violent criminal offender (has struck others but never killed anyone), and is guilty of lies and blackmails which have been broadcast by 'subversive' networks (within Cuba, where only Castro's media monopoly is allowed) such as the anti-Cuban station Radio Marti (run by 'apátridas' which is how they now politely refer to the millions who have gone into exile since 1959, also called 'worms' by them). Those are the crimes for which he is to be allowed to die. Oh, and the bioethical principles too.

Evidently unaccustomed to having its astonishing cynicism ever questioned, the regime then argues that force feeding the hunger striker would be ethical only after he goes into shock! That's apparently their guiding 'bio-ethical principle'. But according to which authority? The tyrant?

But then the article adds that Fariñas´ organism is rapidly deteriorating. After all he has worn out after several other hunger strikes demanding one thing or another from tyranny (e.g. Internet access), and was last in shock just last week. The Granma article then boasts that if it were not for the tyranny’s medical team's skill and compassion, he'd be dead, for they helped Fariñas even though he is a mercenary working for the enemy. They just feel he must be on the edge of death, or at least in shock, before exercising said compassion and skill. Ethics obliges them, that´s what we are told.

They don't mention he fought for them in Angola, but do warn readers that he abandoned his socialist principles, and everyone knows that in Cuba, as the tyranny's billboards warn (do they still?), it's "socialism or death"! Too bad you drifted away, comrade Fariñas. Didn't you know what happens here to people like you?

Since history must always absolve Castro (or else, and now his brother too), Granma places the blame for comrade Fariñas' death squarely on Cuban exiles, foreign governments, the foreign press. and on Fariñas' criminal record. Blame can never be Castro's, in any degree. Their system does not allow either Castro to ever be formally accused. No, the accuser invariably and immediately becomes the accused. Which Cuban would ever risk formally accusing either Castro of anything in their courts, let alone pretend that either could ever be judged or condemned for anything whatsoever?

But Fariñas' hunger strike, blackmail in a sense it is, and he has learned the art and crime well from his former master. After all, before Fariñas was even born, Castro had already traded Cubans for tractors (1961). Give him money or a tractor, or it´s life in prison for your Cuban father or son. Upon receiving both in healthy quantities he immediately released his Cuban hostages, but that he contends, is his glorious ‘revolution’ not blackmail.

What about Cubans critical of the Castros not being allowed to enter or leave their homeland? Support the Castros or you cannot leave or return freely. If still on the island, support them or be stigmatized, threatened, beaten up, stoned, banished, imprisoned or killed. That too is revolution, not blackmail.

Leave and you will lose your home unless you return within 1 year. But that's not blackmail either. Castro is always innocent, always justified, always absolved by history, directly, with no intermediaries.

Supposedly also a Christian, Fariñas has nevertheless argued that the homeland, not God, is above all, just like the atheistic regime. Therefore one can no longer consider him a Christian; he has become an idolater, and from the Christian view he will die as one, unless he repents.

Apparently he is caught between what he feels is his commitment to commit suicide unless the tyrant acts justly by releasing political prisoners, and his honor or patriotism. He must realize that honor, patriotism, or conscience can never require one to act irrationally; and that to expect a 50 year tyranny to suddenly act justly because otherwise he will kill himself is unrealistic, if not irrational.

Furthermore he wants to protest against a tyrant while addressing him as Mr. President. This too is irrational.

What would happen to Cuba, or to any nation, if all of its patriots were to act like this? Has Fariñas ever considered the question? Does he believe suicides should be historical role models for Cuban children? If so, that is irrational too, for it could eventually lead to the nation's self destruction.

Having lived 48 years under Castro, Fariñas has regrettably internalized some of his traits. Indeed, he shares more with the tyrant then he might care to admit, for he has absolutized his political beliefs.

Tragically, a sadistic tyranny and a masochistic opponent have joined in purpose to insure the latter's death by suicide. Of course, this latest emanation from a culture of death is not just a Cuban phenomenon but one that infests the globe. Hopefully, it will be categorically condemned by Cubans everywhere and by all people and governments of good will, very soon.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Mar 6, 2010

Political Opponent, Potential Suicidée or Common Criminal?

Is Castro’s regime treating Cuban dissident and hunger striker Guillermo Fariñas as a potential suicide victim or as a political opponent? Hospitalized on March 3 after collapsing unconscious, Mr. Fariñas was immediately released to his home but not placed on a suicide watch.

Mr. Fariñas is ready to die, at least that is what he assures everyone:.
"I am ready in this hunger strike to go to the ultimate consequences, including my death."
His previous fasts have lasted even 6 months. However, in the past the regime has hospitalized him and, unlike hunger striker Orlando Zapata, he has survived. Not this time it seems. At least that is what Fariñas, a former fighter for Cuba's Angolan forces, has informed Raul Castro in his letter to him, dated March 5.
"Three companions of mine, very close to you, have sent me messages updating me that you have given the pertinent orders, such that I be let to die." (Excerpt of Fariñas´ March 5 letter to Raul Castro)
Regardless what he calls it, Fariñas is obviously attempting suicide to attract attention to political prisoners whose lives are also in danger. Otherwise he would drink water and eat. He is morally wrong to use suicide even for this high purpose, and should desist as other political allies and opponents, and even Tamayo’s mother (and this writer) have requested. However, given that he has continued to insist on killing himself, he should have immediately been given medical assistance to prevent his death, and placed on a suicide watch. This has not happened. Why? What does it mean? Are they going to let him die?

Does it mean that this is how the Castro regime has decided to treat likely suicide victims in Cuba, or only those that are political opponents? Does it mean that they just can't respond rationally to his criticisms and want him dead? Or does it mean that they will treat him as a ‘common criminal’ , which is how the regime’s media monopoly described now dead dissident, and hunger striker,Orlando Zapata Tamayo? If none of these, then why doesn't the regime immediately hospitalize Fariñas to prevent the suicide?

He was hydrated on Wednesday when he was hospitalized, but otherwise has not eaten for 10 days (or been hydrated in 3!). He must be either immediately hospitalized and placed on suicide watch (preferably with independent family approved observers), or the political prisoners he's doing this for must be immediately released. Otherwise, Guillermo Fariñas will almost certainly kill himself.


¿Opositor Político, Posible Suicida o Criminal Común? (Longer version of this post but in Spanish - 3/6/2010 9:23 P.M.)

Fariñas Debe Desistir de Huelga de Hambre

Raul Castro Claims Innocence

Another Suicidal Hunger Striker in Cuba

Tyranny allows Cuban Dissident to Die of Hunger - What now?

Labels: , , , , , , ,