"More Than 3 Billion People in the World Are Being Condemned to a Premature Death ..." (Castro)

April 1, 2007

On Apr 1, 9:50 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:1175439144.492383.15190@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 1, 7:59 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> >news:1175433839.166005.66930@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> > On Apr 1, 6:55 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > >news:1175380645.191773.148590@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> > > On Mar 31, 1:21 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > >news:1175354888.157810.309770@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > On Mar 31, 6:23 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > >news:1175337361.819861.284100@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > On Mar 31, 1:14 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > > >news:1175293622.843867.74080@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > > On Mar 30, 2:24 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > > > >news:1175289426.000628.243720@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > > > (snip)

>

> > > > > > > > Does he get paid for this kind of work?

>

> > > > > > > (snip)

>

> > > > > > > The only one that call this "work" is Dan Christensen.

> > > > > > > You are just a racist stalker I guess.

>

> > > > > > > > P.S. [1] Long time ago I said the best propaganda for Ch

April 1, 2007

On Apr 1, 11:56 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

to bother with]

> >> "The US embargo against Cuba continued. The Cuban government has

> >> traditionally argued that it is justified in depriving dissidents of

> >> fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly in order to

> >> maintain the unity of the country against hostile forces abroad. Although

> >> AI's mandate does not permit it to take a position on the US embargo

> >> against

> >> Cuba or any other type of sanction, AI recognizes that the embargo has

> >> increased hardship within Cuba and has contributed, for example, to poor

> >> prison conditions. However, AI maintains that all states, irrespective of

> >> any external threat, are obliged to fulfil the duties laid out in the

> >> Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the duty to respect

> >> fundamental

> >> freedoms."http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webamrcountries/CUBA?OpenDocument

>

> > Ummmmm.... Did you notice that this was from six years ago.

>

> Yep.

> in the mean time the US has become the largest food supplier of Cuba, no?

Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

"Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

be lifted, as it is highly detrimental to Cubans' enjoyment of a range

of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to food,

health and sanitation - particularly affecting the weakest and most

vulnerable members of the population. According to UNICEF, the

availability of medicines and basic medical materials has decreased in

Cuba as a consequence of the US embargo against the island." (AI

website)

What other lies are they telling, Mr. Lobbyist?

And as for food imports, the LA Times (AP) reported last week that the

Cuba imported $340 million from the US in 2006. That amounts to only

about 8 cents worth of food (at world market prices) per person per

day -- an amount, the article said, that has been decreasing each year

since the Bush regime set out to intensify these cruel sanctions of

yours in 2004. This paltry sum, even if given freely, could not even

begin to make up for decades of genodical trade sanctions that

continue to this day to harm the most vulnerable members of Cuban

society. AI was not fooled by your self-serving rationalizations, Mr.

Lobbyist. Neither were HRW and the UN General Assembly. (See previous

postings here)

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 1, 2007

On Apr 1, 11:59 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

to bother with]

> >> >>From "Democracy in Cuba" at my website:

>

> >> > How is the Cuban electoral system different from that in the former

> >> > U.S.S.R?

>

> >> (snip)

> >> Not much at all comrade Dan as the totalitarian system equally ensures

> >> that

> >> NO candidate that opposes the regime can even get on the ballot.

>

> > [snip]

>

> > Repeatedly debunked here. (

>

> (snip)

>

> Never "debunked" and confirmed by the UN (the quote and links you snipped in

> despair)

>

> What the UN said about "elections" in Cuba:

> "the electoral process is so tightly controlled that the final phase, the

> voting itself, could be dispensed with without the final result being

> substantially affected"

> See:http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord1998/vol4/cubachr.htm

>

This very report is debunked line by line at my website. (See

"Democracy in Cuba" there.)

> What Dan Christensen, Canadian Stalinist and serial liar snipped in despair:

>

> Cuba has a Stalinist system (even other communists admit that) and you as a

> Canadian Stalinist support that wholeheartedly.

[snip]

Already debunked here.

The Cuban electoral system is way in advance of anything in the former

USSR -- in large parts of the country, they didn't even have a secret

ballot! And it puts the corrupt, money-based system in the US to

shame, too. I recently read that it will take $1 billion to get into

the White House next year! What kind of "democracy" is that -- one

DOLLAR, one vote??? Get real, Mr. Lobbyist!

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 1, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175450716.829364.319650@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 1, 11:56 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> [snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

> to bother with]

Tranlsated: Candian Stalinist Dan Christensen snips what he can't refute:

OUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)

that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting

of your beloved embargo."

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3f1fe3a55c12d7d7?dmode=source&hl=en

HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban

government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said

during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:

Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

''I did not say lift the embargo without conditions,'' he said.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12157593.htm

You can enter after a free registration.

Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/16823

YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

Another example of the same lie: putting words in people's mouth.

Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report

quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same

report

that:

"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly

denounced the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear

its support for the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel

sanctions"

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ215.html

Link to the "report": (the one you didn't give until I shamed you in to it)

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the

trade sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from

these sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED):

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty

International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of

conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional

release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners

previously named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is

detained or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their

rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly."

and added to those snippets your own words to create this sentence on

your lying website:

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba

in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and

unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

2. isn't supported by the tenure and the conclusions of the report

You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro

regime and abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a

BLATANT LIE.

What the report actually recommends about the "embargo" is:

"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen

the embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim

towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

Clearly no immediate and unconditional end is demanded as Dan claims.

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy

that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns".

See:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian

Stalinist propagandist of SCC.

>> >> "The US embargo against Cuba continued. The Cuban government has

>> >> traditionally argued that it is justified in depriving dissidents of

>> >> fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly in order

>> >> to

>> >> maintain the unity of the country against hostile forces abroad.

>> >> Although

>> >> AI's mandate does not permit it to take a position on the US embargo

>> >> against

>> >> Cuba or any other type of sanction, AI recognizes that the embargo has

>> >> increased hardship within Cuba and has contributed, for example, to

>> >> poor

>> >> prison conditions. However, AI maintains that all states, irrespective

>> >> of

>> >> any external threat, are obliged to fulfil the duties laid out in the

>> >> Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the duty to respect

>> >> fundamental

>> >> freedoms."http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webamrcountries/CUBA?OpenDocument

>>

>> > Ummmmm.... Did you notice that this was from six years ago.

>>

>> Yep.

>> in the mean time the US has become the largest food supplier of Cuba, no?

>

> Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

>

> "Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

> be

(snip)

Link please.

Why not post it?

Is it the fact that the page is loaded with condemnation of the Cuban

regime's human rights abuses or the fact that the Un report dates back to

1995?

> And as for food imports, the LA Times (AP) reported last week that the

> Cuba imported $340 million from the US in 2006.

(snip)

Post a link comrade Dan.

This is how you quote someone:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well

worth fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.

In this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

........

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less

worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the

Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=tirG3.176162%245r2.278940%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At

this time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to

send death squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these

so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally

justified under the circumstances."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=txMG3.176443%245r2.284921%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

Unquote.

In fact: the head of the Cuban food import agency said: 560 million, no?

Estados Unidos es el principal proveedor de Cuba en ese rubro y su sexto

socio comercial, a pesar del bloqueo econ

April 1, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175451626.520786.112730@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 1, 11:59 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> [snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

> to bother with]

>

>> >> >>From "Democracy in Cuba" at my website:

>>

>> >> > How is the Cuban electoral system different from that in the former

>> >> > U.S.S.R?

>>

>> >> (snip)

>> >> Not much at all comrade Dan as the totalitarian system equally ensures

>> >> that

>> >> NO candidate that opposes the regime can even get on the ballot.

>>

>> > [snip]

>>

>> > Repeatedly debunked here. (

>>

>> (snip)

>>

>> Never "debunked" and confirmed by the UN (the quote and links you snipped

>> in

>> despair)

>>

>> What the UN said about "elections" in Cuba:

>> "the electoral process is so tightly controlled that the final phase, the

>> voting itself, could be dispensed with without the final result being

>> substantially affected"

>> See: http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord1998/vol4/cubachr.htm

>>

>

> This very report is debunked

(snip)

Your "yapping" is far from "debunking" anything Mr. Serial liar

>> What Dan Christensen, Canadian Stalinist and serial liar snipped in

>> despair:

>>

>> Cuba has a Stalinist system (even other communists admit that) and you as

>> a

>> Canadian Stalinist support that wholeheartedly.

>

> [snip]

>

> Already debunked here.

Never debunked Candian Stalinist

> The Cuban electoral system is way in advance of anything in the former

(snip)

It is as effective in repressing dissent, no?

Get real.

What Dan Christensen, Canadian Stalinist and serial liar snipped in despair:

Cuba has a Stalinist system (even other communists admit that) and you as a

Canadian Stalinist support that wholeheartedly.

http://www.cubaverdad.net/stalinist_system.htm

More facts and video at:

http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm

Dan's words:

> "The [soviet electoral] process begins a few months before the voting,

> with mass meetings to nominate candidates. Typically these meetings are

> stage-managed

(snip)

Like the "selection meetings" for "candidates" in Cuba "stage managed" by

the CDR.

http://www.cubaverdad.net/cdr.htm

The UN is correct in it's assesment.

Again the standard reply to your "lobbyist" lie Mr. Cyber-liar: (posted each

time Comrade Dan's lie of "lobbyist" is in the message)

Quote me comrade Dan. You claimed you can and you never did.

We both know you can't.

Try something like this:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well

worth fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.

In this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

........

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less

worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the

Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=tirG3.176162%245r2.278940%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At

this time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to

send death squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these

so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally

justified under the circumstances."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=txMG3.176443%245r2.284921%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

Unquote.

You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty

International,

Genocide Watch, ..........

Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.

As I said comrade Dan.

Every time you post that lie about me I post the truth about you.

Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on

vacation in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that

time prove).

This was your false claim:

"Taking a little break from arm-twisting in Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/b6375f9783e47aee?q=g:thl174670614d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8

Your inability to substantiate any of it is the best proof of your lies.

Nothing more than another example of your lies and misquotes like the

ones below:

YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)

that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting

of your beloved embargo."

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3f1fe3a55c12d7d7?dmode=source&hl=en

HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban

government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said

during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:

Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

''I did not say lift the embargo without conditions,'' he said.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12157593.htm

You can enter after a free registration.

Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/16823

YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

Another example of the same lie: putting words in people's mouth.

Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report

quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same

report

that:

"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly

denounced the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear

its support for the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel

sanctions"

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ215.html

Link to the "report": (the one you didn't give until I shamed you in to it)

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the

trade sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from

these sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED):

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty

International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of

conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional

release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners

previously named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is

detained or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their

rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly."

and added to those snippets your own words to create this sentence on

your lying website:

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba

in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and

unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

2. isn't supported by the tenure and the conclusions of the report

You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro

regime and abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a

BLATANT LIE.

What the report actually recommends about the "embargo" is:

"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen

the embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim

towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

Clearly no immediate and unconditional end is demanded as Dan claims.

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy

that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns".

See:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian

Stalinist propagandist of SCC.

PL

April 1, 2007

"ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Teddy@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1175444655.132182.323250@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

On Apr 1, 9:50 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:1175439144.492383.15190@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 1, 7:59 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> >news:1175433839.166005.66930@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> > On Apr 1, 6:55 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > >news:1175380645.191773.148590@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> > > On Mar 31, 1:21 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > >news:1175354888.157810.309770@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > On Mar 31, 6:23 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > >news:1175337361.819861.284100@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > On Mar 31, 1:14 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > > >news:1175293622.843867.74080@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > > On Mar 30, 2:24 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> > > > > > > "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> > > > > > >news:1175289426.000628.243720@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> > > > > > > (snip)

>

> > > > > > > > Does he get paid for this kind of work?

>

> > > > > > > (snip)

>

> > > > > > > The only one that call this "work" is Dan Christensen.

> > > > > > > You are just a racist stalker I guess.

>

> > > > > > > > P.S. [1] Long time ago I said the best propaganda for Ch

April 1, 2007

http://bestcyrano.org/IMG/FACE_WAR/albumfow/slides/hamasReveredYasin.htm

April 1, 2007

"torresdD" <torresD30@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:z2VPh.18660$tD2.12187@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

> http://bestcyrano.org/IMG/FACE_WAR/albumfow/slides/hamasReveredYasin.htm

Doris "Che spotting" Torres:

For those who don't know: Doris is a "Che T-shirt" spotter that reports on

her finds to the Cuban communist newspaper Granma

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/di3/52vuelta-i.html

April 2, 2007

On Apr 1, 4:43 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

to bother with]

> > Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

>

> > "Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

> > be

>

> (snip)

>

What Mr. Lobbyist snipped for obvious reasons:

Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

"Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

be lifted, as it is highly detrimental to Cubans' enjoyment of a

range

of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to food,

health and sanitation - particularly affecting the weakest and most

vulnerable members of the population. According to UNICEF, the

availability of medicines and basic medical materials has decreased

in

Cuba as a consequence of the US embargo against the island." (AI

website)

Forget your tired old lies and evasions. Just answer the question, Mr.

Lobbyist.

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 3, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175540065.868569.279110@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

>> > Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

>>

>> > "Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

>> > be

>>

>> (snip)

>>

>

> What Mr. Lobbyist snipped for obvious reasons:

>

> Do you think AI was lying in January of this year when they wrote:

>

> "Amnesty International has called for the US embargo against Cuba to

> be lifted, as it is highly detrimental to Cubans' enjoyment of a

> range

> of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to food,

> health and sanitation - particularly affecting the weakest and most

> vulnerable members of the population

Your problem Danny, continues to be how you deliberately MISREPRESENT what

Amnesty International and other agencies have said.

April 3, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175540065.868569.279110@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 1, 4:43 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> [snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

> to bother with]

Tranlsated: Candian Stalinist Dan Christensen snips what he can't refute:

OUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)

that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting

of your beloved embargo."

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3f1fe3a55c12d7d7?dmode=source&hl=en

HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban

government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said

during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:

Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

''I did not say lift the embargo without conditions,'' he said.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12157593.htm

You can enter after a free registration.

Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/16823

YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

Another example of the same lie: putting words in people's mouth.

Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report

quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same

report

that:

"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly

denounced the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear

its support for the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel

sanctions"

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ215.html

Link to the "report": (the one you didn't give until I shamed you in to it)

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the

trade sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from

these sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED):

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty

International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of

conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional

release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners

previously named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is

detained or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their

rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly."

and added to those snippets your own words to create this sentence on

your lying website:

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba

in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and

unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

2. isn't supported by the tenure and the conclusions of the report

You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro

regime and abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a

BLATANT LIE.

What the report actually recommends about the "embargo" is:

"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen

the embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim

towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

Clearly no immediate and unconditional end is demanded as Dan claims.

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy

that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns".

See:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

On Cuban imports from the US Dan claimed 360 million,

In fact: the head of the Cuban food import agency said: 560 million, no?

Estados Unidos es el principal proveedor de Cuba en ese rubro y su sexto

socio comercial, a pesar del bloqueo econ

April 6, 2007

On Mar 30, 3:58 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:1175279234.495684.222650@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> (snip)

>

> > Only an idiot cannot see a difference between 3.000.000.000 starving to

> > death and 3.000.000 having limited food supply.

>

> Only an idiot can deny that before Castro there was no hunger in Cuba as

> Castro himself has admitted that.

>

Forget about your "anarchist archives," and your nostalgia for the

"good old days" under Batista.

>From Britannica Online, about as mainstream a source as you can get:

"The income from sugar was augmented by vigorous tourism based on

hotels, casinos, and brothels; Havana became especially attractive

during the years of U.S. Prohibition (1919-33). Yet the prosperity of

the 1920s, '40s, and '50s enriched only a few Cubans. For the

majority, poverty (especially in the countryside) and lack of public

services were appalling."

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=127845&tocid=54423

>From the US-dominated OAS in 1983:

"Foreign observers agree on the progress made in lowering the

incidence of malnutrition in Cuba. [Citing studies dated in the early

1980's...] It has been stated that "given the equity imposed by wage

policy and the rationing of food, there is no reason to doubt the

affirmation of the government that malnutrition in Cuba has fallen

from a pre-revolutionary level of 40% to a current level of less than

5%."

http://www.cidh.oas.org/countryrep/Cuba83eng/chap.12.htm

So much for your "good old days, eh, Mr. Lobbyist?

"The generalized food crisis [of the early-to-mid 1990's] in Cuba is

over. Statistical data, journalist accounts, and extensive field

visits confirm that the period of a systemic farming crisis,

widespread food shortages and extensive nutritional deficiencies has

passed. Farmers are producing more food, the state is importing more

food, and the diet of the population has improved....

"Food imports dropped by one third from 1989 to 1994, the same period

in which caloric intake dropped by 38%. Instead of being forced to pay

this 30% penalty imposed by [uS] sanctions, if Cuba had been able to

import 30% more food, the food deficit would have been erased....

"Under the circumstances facing Cuba--the U.S. embargo, loss of

trading partners, little international aid, and economic collapse--the

agricultural recovery is nothing short of extraordinary."

"Going against the grain," Oxfam America, 2001

http://www.oxfamamerica.org/art1164.html

"Cubans [today] have as much food as they did before the Soviet

Union collapsed.... [T]heir caloric intake has returned to normal -

they've gotten that meal back."

Bill McKibben, Harpers Magazien, 2004 (See the thread, "The Cuba

Diet" at

SCC.)

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 6, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175830712.701544.214390@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 30, 3:58 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>

>> news:1175279234.495684.222650@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

>> (snip)

>>

>> > Only an idiot cannot see a difference between 3.000.000.000 starving to

>> > death and 3.000.000 having limited food supply.

>>

>> Only an idiot can deny that before Castro there was no hunger in Cuba as

>> Castro himself has admitted that.

>>

>

> Forget about your "anarchist archives,"

Nope.

the quote comes from the book af a man that was persecuted by McCarthy and

that was a friend of Che (who invited him to Cuba).

That is why you had to snip the text I guess.

"Cuba, the "Pearl of the Antilles," though by no means a paradise, was not,

as many believe, an economically backward country. Castro himself admitted

that while there was poverty, there was no economic crisis and no hunger in

Cuba before the Revolution. (See Maurice Halperin: The Rise and Fall of

Fidel Castro, University of California, 1972, pgs. 24, 25, 37)

Note on the author Maurice Halperin:

http://www.cubaverdad.net/references/halperin.htm

The fact that the well known US anarchist Sam Dolgoff also quotes him in his

work just shows the respect the source has in "non-loony" left circles.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/dolgoff/cubanrevolution/chapter7.html

> and your nostalgia for the "good old days" under Batista.

Nope.

I support the aim of the Anti- Bastista revolution: the restoration of the

1940 constitution.

Even Che and Castro said the revoilution wasn't communist.

In fact: the communists supported Batista until late 1958.

Where were the communists during the Cuban revolution? If we believe Fidel

Castro not on the side of the revolution:

In the course of the guerrilla struggle in the Sierra Maestra mountains, he

(Castro) delivered another speech which, once again, stresses his distance

from the Communists:

"What right does Senor Batista have to speak of Communism? After all, in the

elections of 1940 he was the candidate of the Communist Party ... his

portrait hung next to Blas Roca's and Lazaro Pena's; and half a dozen

ministers and confidants of his are leading members of the CP."

H.M. Enzenburger, Raids and Reconstructions, London, 1976, p.200.

See: http://www.marxisme.dk/arkiv/binns/80-cucas.htm

A version of the facts confirmed in this (Marxist) source:

In November 1940, the communists supported Batista's candidates in the

elections to the Constituent Assembly. In return for their support, Batista

allowed the communists to organize and control the government sponsored

union, Cuban Confederation of Labor (CTC Confederacion de Trabajadores de

Cuba) The first Secretary General of the CTC was Lazaro Pena--who,

ironically, enough, held the same post in the Castro regime. In exchange for

these favors the communists guaranteed Batista labor peace.

(also see the video: Cuba Memoria Sindical) In line with the Communist

Party's "Popular Front Against Fascism" policy, the alliance of the

Communist Party with the Batista was officially consumated when the Party

joined the Batista government. The Communist Party leaders Carlos Rafael

Rodriguez and Juan Marinello (who now hold high posts in the Castro

government) became Ministers Without Portfolio in Batista's Cabinet. To

illustrate the intimate connections between the communists and Batista, we

quote from a letter of Batista to Blas Roca, Secretary of the Communist

Party:

June 13,1944

Dear Blas,

With respect to your letter which our mutual friend, Dr. Carlos Rafael

Rodriguez, Minister Without Portfolio, passed to me, I am happy to again

express my firm unshakeable confidence in the loyal cooperation the People's

Socialist Party [the then official name of the Communist Party of Cuba] its

leaders and members have given and continue to give myself and my

government. . .

Believe me, as always, Your very affectionate and cordial friend,

Fulgencio Batista

In the electoral campaign the Communist candidates won ten seats in the

Cuban parliament and more than a hundred posts in the Municipal councils.

In line with their pro-Batista policy the communists joined Batista in

condemning Fidel Castro's attack on the Moncada Barracks (July 1953 -- the

anniversary of the attack is a national holiday in Castro Cuba)

.. . . the life of the People's Socialist Party (communist). . . has been to

combat . . . and unmask the putschists and adventurous activities of the

bourgeois opposition as being against the interests of the people. . .

(reported in Daily Worker, U.S organ of the Communist Party, August 10,

1953)

Throughout the Batista period the communists pursued two parallel policies:

overtly they criticized Batista and covertly they cooperated with him.

See: (with internal links added)

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/dolgoff/cubanrevolution/chapter6.html

Time line: (from a website on dissident communists in Cuba)

May 1940 The official communists support Batista in the

Presidential elections.

July 1942 Batista declares war on the Axis powers and appeals to

political parties in Cuba to form a Government of National Unity. The

official communists join Batista's cabinet.

See:

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/cuba/tennent/PhD/appendC.html

Some facts:

The PSP (Partido Socialista Popular - Cuban Communist party at

the time) supported Batista until July 20th 1958 (when the Pacto de Caracas,

the agreement between July 26 movement and Partido Socialista Popular was

signed)

See: Jorge Garcia Montes and Antonio Alonso Avila. Historia del

Partido

Comunista de Cuba. Ediciones Universal, Miami 1970 e.g. pp. 440, 453,

492,

501, 504, 536.

The notorious BRAC (Buro de Repression de Actividades Comunistas)

(see "Repuesta" pp. 57-64) was not effective against overt and covert

communists but apparently used communist contacts to provide high level X-4

information (e.g. "Repuesta" p. 132) on disaffected officials of the Cuban

army and non-Castro resistance that was almost without exception co-opted.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_Batista

The veteran Cuba-watcher Ruby Phillips of the New York Times

speculated, from sources unnamed, that one of the reasons why BRAC made few

arrests of Communists in early 1958 was that the Communists had struck a

deal with Batista: If they refrained from supporting Castro, Batista would

stop harassing them.

When CIA headquarters official Lyman B. Kirkpatrick, Jr., visited

Batista in 1957 on a mission to strengthen BRAC, the Cuban president, to

Kirkpatrick's shock, brought in a photographer to snap pictures that showed

up in the next day's Havana newspapers. "Thus I found myself being

used to bolster a shaky and increasingly unpopular regime," Kirkpatrick

lamented. As he learned the next year, BRAC was almost entirely targeting

M-26-7 and using violence in interrogations, "despite our constant

protests."(31)

See: Contesting Castro, by Thomas G. Paterson

Missing from the insurrection against the dictator were the

Communists and their followers (the lower working classes and unions).

Samuel Farber writes that "The old Communist Party had little that could

attract the new generations of young rebels, while the older liberal

anti-Batista elements would not even consider cooperation [with the

Communists]...this Communist weakness had some significant consequences, not

the least being that it contributed to the inability of the working class to

take a leadership role in the revolutions against Batista... they probably

figured that Batista, like most other dictators in Latin America, would

eventually be succeeded by some more liberal regime. If such a compromise

solution was going to be found, the Party wanted to ensure that it would be

in the strongest possible bargaining position."

The Communists docility and dangerous co-existence with Batista

included several painful episodes in the struggle against the tyrant, such

as the Party's boycott of anti-Batista demonstrations and their siding with

Batista's police against a group of organized demonstrators as early

as November 19, 1955. In reaction to the Hubert Matthews interview of

Castro, the Communist Party publicly rejected Castro by stating their

"radical

disagreement with the tactics and plans of Fidel Castro." Finally

there was the infamous event known as "The Humboldt Seven" crime, which was

to poison relations between Castro and the Communists well into the 1960's

and culminated with executions and arrests of several Party members in the

early 1960's.

On March 13, 1957, the militant student group known as Directorio

Revolucionario attacked the presidential palace and nearly killed Batista

(who was saved by a dud hand grenade and incredible luck). The immediate

reprisals by the Havana police and other armed factions was ferocious,

and Lieutenant Colonel Esteban Ventura Novo achieved fame by the bloody

terror in which he engulfed the capital in the manhunt for student leaders.

Among the many detained during the days of terror were several Communist

students, one of which betrayed the location of the rebel safe house. The

apartment was located at number seven Humboldt Street, hence the name of the

episode.

Surrounded by Havana policemen, four rebel students surrendered, and

Ventura immediately killed them. The traitor, a Communist student named

Marcos Rodriguez, for reasons unknown to this day, was subsequently

protected by powerful Party leaders Joaquin Ordoqui and Edith Garcia

Buchaca. The Rodriguez trial in 1964 led to his execution and the subsequent

arrests of Ordoqui and Buchaca. I will discuss the event in more detail

later in this article.

Communist students and leaders had been against the attack on the

presidential palace all along, and remained staunchly against Castro's

insurgency throughout its first year. Juan Marinello, as guerrillas fought

in the mountains and students died on the streets of Havana, wrote to

Herbert Matthews in 1957 that "there's no need for a popular insurrection,"

and that 26 of July Movement "is following mistaken tactics... for that

reason we do not approve of its tactics." Their reasoning was clear: Moscow

did not yet approve of Castro and they were playing for evolution (like the

1930's and 1940's) rather than a violent course.

An even more serious confrontation between the Communist Party and

Castro was soon to take place. On April 9, 1957, and using his new rebel

radio station, Castro called for a general strike against Batista in an

effort to

bring down the dictator. For various reasons, the strike failed, and

at least 100 Cubans were killed that day and several hundred arrested. Soon

Castro charged that the Communists had "sabotaged the strike to promote the

downfall of the [26 of July] Movement." Later, Castro was to say in an

interview to Look magazine that "the Cuban Communists...have never opposed

Batista, for whom they have seemed to feel a closer friendship."

See: http://members.tripod.com/~Campello/castro.html

The Communists would soon be caught between Batista and the

anti-Batista forces. Meanwhile, the dictator closed down all opposition

newspapers (Hoy, however, was allowed to remain open), terrorized editors

and students, broke relations with the Soviet Union, and outlawed the

Communist Party (but not its daily newspaper). The Communists entered a

period of dangerous coexistence with the dictator; Fidel Castro entered a

period of war and Cuba was with him.

See: http://members.tripod.com/~Campello/castro.html

From: Is Cuba socialist? a debate on a Socialist website in the UK

There are four main arguments that Cuba is some kind of socialism: all of

them are without foundation. The first argument is that Cuba is socialist

because the revolution was led by people who now call themselves Communists.

Yet you only have to look at the July 26th movement before 1959 to see that

is wrong. Their programme was for the restoration of the 1940 Constitution,

in other words for a bourgeois-democratic republic. They said in their

manifesto that nationalisation was a "cumbersome instrument" and that Cuba

would be "a loyal ally" of their Northern neighbour. Castro himself said in

an interview in 1970 that, "In 1959 there was no class consciousness, only

class instinct, which is not the same thing", and referred to the revolution

in the early months of 1959 as neither capitalist nor socialist but "olive

green". The Castroites labelled the Communist Party "totalitarian". They

were certainly no mass party. There were 81 fighters on the Granma; only 300

at the battle of Santa Clara; and around 1500 overall. In terms of

composition, the July 26th movement was a mixture of middle class leaders

like Castro, some workers and youth, but mostly class elements. In no sense,

by its programme, size or composition was it a mass socialist party.

Some commentators have said that the socialist element was provided by the

involvement of the Communist Party, which by the fifties was called the

Popular Socialist Party, the PSP. Although they had been in the previous

period the largest and most influential Communist Party in Latin America,

they were also the most cravenly opportunist, and the most Stalinist,

following every twist and turn in Russian foreign policy and adapting to

their Cuban milieu. They were sectarian in opposing the general strike in

1933 which brought down the dictator Machado. Later their popular front

strategy led them to gain two ministers under Batista after forming an

alliance with him after 1938. They spoke of having a "positive attitude

towards the progressive endeavours" of Batista in his first period in power.

Even into the fifties, though the CP had been repressed by their former

ally, they referred to the July 26th movement as "putschists and sterile".

Although they came to some understanding with Castro from 1957 and sent

cadres to fight with the guerrillas, they were still formally calling for a

bourgeois government to replace Batista into the middle of 1958, only months

before Castro took power. This was hardly the programme or actions of a

revolutionary socialist party that sought to lead the working class to

power.

Finally, look at the manner of the seizure of power. After a two year

guerrilla campaign, in the major battle of the war at Santa Clara in the

last days of 1958, only 6 guerrillas and 300 soldiers died. Batista himself

fled. There was not even a battle for the capital, Havana. There were no

Soviets, few factory committees or occupations. The last general strike in

April 1958 was a failure, and there were no organs of dual power. The

workers were largely passive. The general strike in the first week of

January 1959 was a public holiday. Batista's rule had already collapsed. No

one in 1959, not even Castro or Guevara, said the revolution was socialist,

and the revolution was not led by conscious socialists, whatever Fidel's

later protestations. The 26th July movement stood for mild reforms, which

could not be achieved because of Batista's dictatorship and the domination

of American imperialism, hence the necessity of guerrilla war. The new

government in 1959 was a petty bourgeois government, but one which ruled a

country with a peculiar class structure and American hegemony. It was not

socialist. To argue it was socialist in hindsight is to reach the absurd

conclusion that a socialist revolution can be made without the active agency

of the working class or without a conscious Marxist party.

See: http://archive.workersliberty.org/wlmags/wl54/cuba.htm

From the International Socialist Review:

Cuba had been run by dictator Fulgencio Batista since 1934. His regime was

corrupt and brutal. Although fully supported by the U.S., Batista was hated

by everyone except for his immediate collaborators and hangers-on. In the

late 1950s, this regime had no true left opposition. Gangsters ran the

unions. The Communist Party (CP)-known at the time as the Popular Socialist

Party (PSP)-was, like other Communist Parties of the 1930s, a useful

instrument of Stalin's foreign policy. However, the PSP had decomposed far

more than the average CP. It was linked to the Batista regime to such an

extent that Castro could say,

What right does Se

April 6, 2007

On Apr 6, 10:08 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

> "Dan Christensen" <dch...@netcom.ca> wrote in message

>

> news:1175830712.701544.214390@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

>

> > On Mar 30, 3:58 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

> >> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> >>news:1175279234.495684.222650@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> >> (snip)

>

> >> > Only an idiot cannot see a difference between 3.000.000.000 starving to

> >> > death and 3.000.000 having limited food supply.

>

> >> Only an idiot can deny that before Castro there was no hunger in Cuba as

> >> Castro himself has admitted that.

>

> > Forget about your "anarchist archives,"

>

> Nope.

> the quote comes from the book af a man that was persecuted by McCarthy and

> that was a friend of Che (who invited him to Cuba).

[snip]

More mainstream sources like Britannica and Oxfam America, as well as

the US-dominated OAS have decisively refuted this nostalgia of yours

for the "good old days" under your beloved, US-backed Batista regime.

Your questionable and obscure sources here notwithstanding, today, the

overwhelming consensus of expert opinion is that the average Cuban is

much better off today in terms of health and social conditions. (See

my previous posting here. Also see "Achievements of the Revolution" at

my website.)

Despite the best efforts all you embargo-Nazis, Cuba continues to lead

the region in both health care and education. As measured by the

infant mortality rate, the single most reliable indicator of over all

public health, Cubans surpassed their tormentors to the North years

ago. Cuba could very well be a world leader in these areas were it not

for genocidal US trade sanctions, about which even the UN Human Rights

Commission has been forced to concede, "It is also impossible to

ignore the disastrous and lasting economic and social effects of the

embargo imposed on the Cuban population over 40 years ago." (SCC

archives) Makes you proud, don't it, Mr. Lobbyist?

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 7, 2007

Note how Candian Stalinist Dan Christensen snipped ALL references to the

close ties between Batista and the communists in Cuba;

For the whole story see:

http://www.cubaverdad.net/revolution.htm

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1175872746.607915.256970@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 6, 10:08 am, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>> "Dan Christensen" <dch...@netcom.ca> wrote in message

>>

>> news:1175830712.701544.214390@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

>>

>> > On Mar 30, 3:58 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>> >> "ljsprojects" <T.Schmidt.Te...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>

>> >>news:1175279234.495684.222650@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

>> >> (snip)

>>

>> >> > Only an idiot cannot see a difference between 3.000.000.000 starving

>> >> > to

>> >> > death and 3.000.000 having limited food supply.

>>

>> >> Only an idiot can deny that before Castro there was no hunger in Cuba

>> >> as

>> >> Castro himself has admitted that.

>>

>> > Forget about your "anarchist archives,"

>>

>> Nope.

>> the quote comes from the book af a man that was persecuted by McCarthy

>> and

>> that was a friend of Che (who invited him to Cuba).

>

> [snip]

>

> More mainstream sources

(snip)

The guy was in Cuba comrade Dan.

Castrp and other top communist officials have said the same thing: NO

HUNGER.

What comrade Dan snipped.

A COMPARATIVE LOOK AT SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

IN PRE-CASTRO AND PRESENT DAY CUBA

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/cuba/wwwh0013.htm

"Armando Hart, a member of Castro's innermost ruling group, made the

extremely significant observation that:

.. . . it is certain that capitalism had attained high levels of

organization, efficiency and production that declined after the

Revolution. . . (Juventud Rebelde, November 2, 1969; quoted by Rene Dumont,

Is Cuba Socialist?)

Paul A. Baran, an ardent pro-Castroite in the equally ardent Monthly Review

pamphlet, Reflections on the Cuban Revolution (1961) substantiates what

every economist, as well as amateurs like Castro, has been saying:

....the Cuban Revolution was born with a silver spoon in its mouth. .

..the world renowned French agronomist, Rene Dumont, has estimated that if

properly cultivated as intensively as South China, Cuba could feed fifty

million people. . . the Cuban Revolution is spared the painful, but

ineluctable compulsion that has beset preceding socialist revolutions: the

necessity to force tightening of people's belts in order to lay the

foundations for a better tomorrow. . .(p. 23)

Theodore Draper quotes Anial Escalante, (before he was purged by Castro) one

of the leading communists, who admitted that:

....in reality, Cuba was not one of the countries with the lowest standard of

living of the masses in America, but on the contrary, one of the highest

standards of living, and it was here where the first great . . . democratic

social revolution of the continent burst forth. . . If the historical

development had been dictated by the false axiom [revolutions come first in

poorest countries] the revolution should have been first produced in Haiti,

Colombia or even Chile, countries of greater poverty for the masses than the

Cuba of 1958. . . (quoted in Draper's Castro's Revolution: Myths and

Realities; New York, 1962,

p. 22)

see:

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/dolgoff/cubanrevolution/chapter7.html

Castro himself admitted that there was no hunger in Cuba:

Cuba, the "Pearl of the Antilles," though by no means a paradise, was not,

as many believe, an economically backward country. Castro himself admitted

that while there was poverty, there was no economic crisis

and no hunger in Cuba before the Revolution. (See Maurice Halperin: The Rise

and Fall of Fidel Castro, University of California, 1972, pgs. 24, 25, 37)

From this other Socialist website the developed status of Cuba before Castro

(and the immediate effects of his take-over) are clear:

"Firstly Cuba was already relatively developed before 1959, probably third

in Latin America. Secondly, Cuba compares well but not is not markedly

better than examples of capitalist countries on a similar level, like Taiwan

and Costa Rica. Thirdly, since the withdrawal of the Russian subsidy there

has been a terrible decline in living standards.

Cuba's annual growth figure of 4% over the first thirty years, even if it is

credible, which I doubt, does not reveal the whole picture. Cuba fell from

third place in Latin America to fifteenth for GDP per capita between 1952

and 1981, and the growth figures that were achieved did not arise from

increases in productivity. The economy shrank from the mid-1980's and

plummeted 35% between 1989-93, back to 1970's levels. GDP per head is now

lower than Jamaica. From 1963 Cuba became a sugar monoculture within the

Soviet empire. But the real crisis in Cuban agriculture is shown by the fact

that half the food for Havana (three million people) is currently produced

by the army, which owns just 4% of the land."

See: http://archive.workersliberty.org/wlmags/wl54/cuba.htm

Today: 773,000 people need WFP food aid (see: http://www.wfp.org)

"For many Cubans, the problems with the system include inadequate public

transportation, crumbling housing, food shortages and soaring prices."

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/cuba/sfl-acubanotebook04feb04,...tory?coll=sfla-news-cuba

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/28594

Like Mugabe Castro has destroyed the Cuban food production.

Just one example: rice, the staple food of Cubans

The story of rice in Cuba:

Castro's destruction of nutrition.

Rice is the staple of Cuban food. Cubans where no bread eaters. they ate

rice.

"After WW2 imported rice was difficult to obtain and costly, so Cuban

farmers had an incentive to grow rice. In 1949 Cuba produced 10 percent

of domestic consumption. In 1960, the year after Castro came to power, the

Cuban rice harvest was 400,000 metric toms, making Cuba for the

first time self-sufficient in rice. During the decade of the fifties, Cuban

producers had successfully adopted the latest methods of rice farming

employed in Louisiana and Texas. From the point of technological expertise,

rice production outstripped that of any other branch of Cuban agriculture;

and in terms of money value, rice became one of Cuba's major crops.

By 1962, with Cuban agriculture socialized, the rice yield was reduced by

50%. The same year, as has already been noted, the rationing of foodstuffs

was introduced, with the rice ration set at 6 pounds per person per month.

.... That lowered per capita consumption by two thirds... More over, for

low-income Cubans, for whom rice formed amore substantial part of their

diet, the reduction was even greater."

M. Halperin, Return to Havana, Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, 1994,

p.49-50.

A well functioning free market ensured that from a shortage in 1949 break

even was achieved by 1960. Castro ruined the industry by 1962. In

two years 50% of the annual need in rice were no longer met.

In 1966 the rice ration was again reduced by half to 3 ponds per person per

month. that is down from 18 to 3 ponds since the start of the

dictatorship.

The reason was: the deal that Castro himself had made with China on the

supply of rice fell through when Castro didn't deliver the promised

support in their "polemic" with the SU.

(for details on the rice Crisis and the Cuba - China quarrel see: M.

Halperin, Taming of Fidel Castro, Berkeley: University of California Press,

1981, p. 195-207.)

"Thus in 1965, Cuban rice production had dwindled to 50,000 tons..."

M. Halperin, Return to Havana, Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, 1994,

p.50..

Why did Castro need to reduce rice productions even further: to grow more

sugar to reach his (foolish) goal of 10 million tons of sugar in 1970.

He never made it, but destroyed the production of a staple food while at it.

Gross incompetence. Criminal negligence.

At the end of 1989 the rice ration was 5 pounds. Down from an average

consumption of 18 pounds before the revolution.

Last I saw that is still the same outside Havana with a 20% larger ration of

6 pounds in Havana.

> Despite the best efforts all you embargo-Nazis,

(snip)

Dan Christensen: you are the only one with "Nazi" attitudes.

You support a regime that:

- does not allow freedom of speech - like the Nazi regime

http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm

- imprisons opponents (even having it's own concentration camps in the past:

the UMAP) - like the Nazi regime

http://www.cubaverdad.net/dissidents.htm

http://www.cubaverdad.net/independent_journalists_in_cuba.htm

more about the UMAP:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/msearch?query=UMAP&submit=Search&charset=UTF-8

- violates human rights - like the Nazi regime

http://www.cubaverdad.net/universal_declaration_of_human_rights.htm

- persecuted gays until very recently - like the Nazi regime

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/msearch?query=%22gay%22+OR+%22homo%22&submit=Search&charset=UTF-8

- burns books - like the Nazi regime

- uses harsh repression against its people and has a sophisticated system of

social control - like the Nazi regime

http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm

....

and of course there are your own words that show you attitude:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth

fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In this

case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less

worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the

Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=tirG3.176162%245r2.278940%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this

time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death

squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and Colombia. Again, the

actions of the Cuban government in detaining these so-called dissidents seem

quite mild in comparison and are morally justified under the circumstances."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=txMG3.176443%245r2.284921%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

Again the standard reply to your "lobbyist" lie Mr. Cyber-liar: (posted

every time Candian Stalinist Dan Christensen post his lie about me)

Quote me comrade Dan. You claimed you can and you never did.

We both know you can't.

Try something like this:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well

worth fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.

In this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

........

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less

worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the

Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=tirG3.176162%245r2.278940%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At

this time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to

send death squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these

so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally

justified under the circumstances."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=txMG3.176443%245r2.284921%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

Unquote.

You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty

International,

Genocide Watch, ..........

Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.

As I said comrade Dan.

Every time you post that lie about me I post the truth about you.

Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on

vacation in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that

time prove).

This was your false claim:

"Taking a little break from arm-twisting in Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/b6375f9783e47aee?q=g:thl174670614d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8

Your inability to substantiate any of it is the best proof of your lies.

Nothing more than another example of your lies and misquotes like the

ones below:

YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)

that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting

of your beloved embargo."

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3f1fe3a55c12d7d7?dmode=source&hl=en

HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban

government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said

during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:

Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

''I did not say lift the embargo without conditions,'' he said.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12157593.htm

You can enter after a free registration.

Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/16823

YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

Another example of the same lie: putting words in people's mouth.

Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report

quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same

report

that:

"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly

denounced the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear

its support for the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel

sanctions"

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ215.html

Link to the "report": (the one you didn't give until I shamed you in to it)

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the

trade sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from

these sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED):

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty

International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of

conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional

release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners

previously named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is

detained or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their

rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly."

and added to those snippets your own words to create this sentence on

your lying website:

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba

in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and

unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

2. isn't supported by the tenure and the conclusions of the report

You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro

regime and abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a

BLATANT LIE.

What the report actually recommends about the "embargo" is:

"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen

the embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim

towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

Clearly no immediate and unconditional end is demanded as Dan claims.

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy

that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the

forefront of its concerns".

See:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian

Stalinist propagandist of SCC.

PL

April 9, 2007

On Apr 6, 11:32 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

to bother with]

> >> > Forget about your "anarchist archives,"

>

> >> Nope.

> >> the quote comes from the book af a man that was persecuted by McCarthy

> >> and

> >> that was a friend of Che (who invited him to Cuba).

>

> > [snip]

>

> > More mainstream sources

>

> (snip)

>

> The guy was in Cuba comrade Dan.

> Castrp and other top communist officials have said the same thing: NO

> HUNGER.

>

[snip]

Once again, it seems you are reduced to mindlessly repeating your

failed arguments here, desperately hoping that no one has noticed. If

you have nothing no and relevant to add, do not expect a reply from me

on this matter.

Again, we are left with the fact that, your obscure and questionable

sources notwithstanding, today, the overwhelming consensus of expert

opinion is that the average Cuban is much better off today in terms of

health and social conditions than under your beloved, US-backed

Batista regime (not Soviet-backed as you would actually have us

believe!).

And that despite the best efforts all you embargo-Nazis, Cuba

continues to lead the region in both health care and education. As

measured by the infant mortality rate, the single most reliable

indicator of over all public health, Cubans surpassed their tormentors

to the North years ago. Cuba could very well be a world leader in

these areas were it not for genocidal US trade sanctions, about which

even the UN Human Rights Commission has been forced to concede, "It is

also impossible to ignore the disastrous and lasting economic and

social effects of the embargo imposed on the Cuban population over 40

years ago." (SCC archives) Makes you proud, don't it, Mr. Lobbyist?

Dan

Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at

http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

April 9, 2007

"Dan Christensen" <dchris@netcom.ca> wrote in message

news:1176090219.624752.264120@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 6, 11:32 pm, "PL" <pl.nos...@pandora.be> wrote:

>

> [snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame

> to bother with]

By which comrade Dan means that he snips what he can't refute

Note how Candian Stalinist Dan Christensen snipped ALL references to the

close ties between Batista and the communists in Cuba;

For the whole story see:

http://www.cubaverdad.net/revolution.htm

> >> > Forget about your "anarchist archives,"

>>

>> >> Nope.

>> >> the quote comes from the book af a man that was persecuted by McCarthy

>> >> and

>> >> that was a friend of Che (who invited him to Cuba).

>>

>> > [snip]

>>

>> > More mainstream sources

>>

>> (snip)

>>

>> The guy was in Cuba comrade Dan.

>> Castrp and other top communist officials have said the same thing: NO

>> HUNGER.

>>

> [snip]

>

> Once again, it seems you are reduced to mindlessly repeating your

> failed arguments

(snip)

Nope.

you are reduced to snipping everything, as usual.