One of many links I found to be of interest:

How about a quick summary, just who outside the US, does not trade and have more or less normal relations with Cuba?

That's no reason to trivialize what they DO do now, however.

For example, people in Cuba will have an extremely hard time feeding their families without the state-provided vouchers which result in rations to everyone.

That's great, except that it also provides a method of control. So, you may find that your vouchers didn't come in this month, or the authorities are saying that one of your family members is listed as having moved to another province, or whatever. Instead of two pounds of rice for the month, you get 1 pound.

Mechanisms such as this were used in the former Soviet Union, too. So, it's not as if it should surprise anyone.

In the case of Dr. Emma Lara, an eminent Cuban doctor in charge of the AIDS programme in Havana, she testified that members of the Secret Police demanded that she falsely certify a dissident as HIV positive, so that he could be quarantined during a visit by the Pope to Cuba.

When she refused to do so, she lost her position and ended up taking in sewing to make ends meet. Her son, who had an office job, lost his position, too. Another doctor made the certification, and the dissident was taken out of circulation for the time required.

quote:

---

While of course I know that Cueball and his colleagues will make excuses for Cuba no matter what, [/QB]

---

Let's all do our best to try not to bait each other in this thread (me included - I know I gave Fidel a little dig in the last thread).

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

1) The first when I had a long drawn out discussion with Red Albertan about the KGB Spetznaz operation to overthrow the Afghan government in 1979. He accepted the original Soviet line, I did not.

2) The second when I had a longer debate with a since banned Babbler about the prevelance of officially sanctioned police violence against gay people throughout Latin American. My point being to establish that there was nothing particularly unusual about police attitudes to gay people in Cuba, in the Latin American frame, which is as you know is often described as a culture of machismo.

That is over a period of 4 years.

You support the Cuban regime. You tried, in this thread, to downplay the repression which occurs there.

Also, note that I was referring, not just to Cueball, but to "Cueball and his friends", those being people naming themselves "Fidel" "Better Red" and so on.

Check it out for yourselves!

For example, here's one such:

quote:

---

Castro's character? He has tons of character. Is he a nice guy. Dunno. Is he an effective politiican who has done good things for his country. Yes.

I can't think of a Canadian politician who has come close to the kind of staying power, intelligence and ability as Castro. He makes people like Paul Martin look like they are in kindergarden.

---

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=000318&p=

If you need more examples which have nothing to do with gay rights or machismo, as you claim, just let me know, there's plenty to choose from.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: jeff house ]

This is a free country, and so people are free to belong to whichever group they wish, and to follow the political line of whichever party they wish.

But Cueball himself (today!) pointed out the Trotskyist connections of some group.

Here, Cueball claims to be uninterested in Cuba, and to have posted in only four threads. That turns out to be untrue.

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:
You can rest assured it is all tied into infant mortality somehow.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Oh no, there is no reason to put anyone up against a wall.

This is a free country, and so people are free to belong to whichever group they wish, and to follow the political line of whichever party they wish.

But Cueball himself (today!) pointed out the Trotskyist connections of some group.

Here, Cueball claims to be uninterested in Cuba, and to have posted in only four threads. That turns out to be untrue.

There is nothing wrong with following the line of the Communist Party. Just don't pretend your some sort of unattached observer patiently seeking out the facts.

---

quote:

---

Castro's character? He has tons of character. Is he a nice guy. Dunno. Is he an effective politiican who has done good things for his country. Yes.

I can't think of a Canadian politician who has come close to the kind of staying power, intelligence and ability as Castro. He makes people like Paul Martin look like they are in kindergarden.

---

Saying that Gheghis Khan was an able and intelligent leader who did good things for his country is not necessarily an endoresment of the sacking Transoxania, and wanton murder of its people.

These people have character, and poltical will and determination. They are a cut above the rest, either through force of personality or through benefit of circumstance. The very survival of Cuba's regieme, against invasion and blockade, continuing long after his primary sponsor the USSR pulled up stakes and went home indicates this.

Even you have said postive things about Napoleon here, even though he was a ruthless tyrant. There is a difference when analyzing someone in terms of their historical legacy and the absolute "perfect" morality that you set as the standard for your vain and infectual hectoring, which appears only to serve the purpose of establishing your own moral superiority, for yourself.

In fact that sense of moral superiority has been the basis of most of the most outrageous crimes in history, (for instance Soviet Bolshevism) not Fidelesque pragamatism, which is though often less flashy and moral sounding, actual useful. I would say the same of Attaturk.

The reality is that the foundation upon which almost any statue that has been raised to the commemorate the "great people" of history usually has more than one or two corpses under it. George Washington: Slave owner.

But of course at the heart of your moralism is total self absorbtion, so that while you seem to have no trouble exerpting a quote which you can use to declaim against me, you can't seem to locate my previous explanation regarding this quote, or even make stab at trying to faithfully represent my ideas.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

And, I made this comment, as I have said before, directly when you bring it up, much more in the sense of his historical legacy, much in the manner one talks about Napoleon, or Churchill.

---

Oh, I thought you had said that you only wrote about Cuba on the gay issue, and that you had only contributed to four threads on it.

Here's another example of Cueball apologising for Cuba.

Some babblers had said that lots of people risk their necks to leave Cuba, just as they did to leave East Germany.

Here's Cueball:

quote:

---

They shot them in order to prevent an exodus of the well trained university graduates who would use their high grade soviet educations, paid for by the state, for their personal engrandizement in the much weathlier economies of Western Europe and North America. That was the origin of the policy.

The policy was well advertized. Everyone knew that jumping the wall was punishable by summary execution. It was a shoot to kill policy.

---

That was in a thread titled "Castro Take Two".

And here he is on a thread about the "obsession" requiring elections in Cuba.

quote:

---

Sure but just theoretically speaking would having one party having a monopoly on political power be a contravention of democratic norms if that parties membership were generally open, and the processess within the party deomcratic. It seems to me that such could be a form of democratic system.

For instance, in theory at least, it does not seem to me that the Soviet model as inherently undemocratic, if party membership is open, and not selected. There is nothing undemocratic about having local organization vote for the membership of the higher party authorities in the manner of a series of electoral colleges, each electing in turn the higher authority, if you see what I mean.

---

So, could we have an admission that Cuball wasn't being truthful when he said he only posted on four Cuba threads?

quote:

---

They shot them in order to prevent an exodus of the well trained university graduates who would use their high grade soviet educations, paid for by the state, for their personal engrandizement in the much weathlier economies of Western Europe and North America. That was the origin of the policy.
The policy was well advertized. Everyone knew that jumping the wall was punishable by summary execution. It was a shoot to kill policy.

---

That is more or less how Kruscheov characterizes the policy. I was little less tender to Soviet sensitivities that he. Do you have a problem with me faithfully representing the position? Where did I say I supported it?

You see you are so convinced of your own self-absorbed fantasies about my Bolshevism, that you read my rather direct, and factualy expression both of the intent and the justification of the policy as if not explicitly condeming it means approval. I was stating the facts.

If I were to paraphrase Hitlers ideas would that amount to an endoresement?

quote:

---

For instance, in theory at least, it does not seem to me that the Soviet model as inherently undemocratic, if party membership is open, and not selected. There is nothing undemocratic about having local organization vote for the membership of the higher party authorities in the manner of a series of electoral colleges, each electing in turn the higher authority, if you see what I mean.

---

I don't really see that suggesting that a layered democracy (A system of acending electoral colleges, the lower one voting for the membership of the one immediatly above it) from below, might be a feasible system of democratic expression "if party membership is open, and not selected. "

Your problem is simply that you can not read. Start with looking up the word "theory," as in "theoretically speaking."

I was not asserting that the Soviet System was a democratic system. I was saying that it might have been a feasible democratic system, had the process of candidate selection and party membership not been dictated from the top down.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

"If the cure for AIDS in Africa was a glass of clean water, millions would still die." -- Fidel Castro, from a UN speech for receving an award for improving Cuban health

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

I was not asserting that the Soviet System was a democratic system. I was saying that it might have been a feasible democratic system, had the process of candidate selection and party membership not been dictated from the top down.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

"Fidel" doesn't even mention the Soviet gulag, even though that has been permitted since 1956.

And "Cueball" is jes' describin' the policy of shooting those who leave the East Bloc, he's not advocating. (Or criticizing).

If you were to say that the US used various means of torture in Abu Ghraib, without using the phrase "I denounce this" at the begining of every paragraph and every sentence, would that indicate approval?

Another thing that goes without saying is that you seriously delusional, as is clearly evident to anyone who actually reads my response to Fidel, which you charachterize as being "joined by" as we are in league, when my post is expressly and obviously reproving Fidel for "reducing everything to a partisan mud slinging match, of who is worse."

By the way, those quotes you used from me, have no links, I would like to be able to review the context of my statements.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
"Fidel" doesn't even mention the Soviet gulag, even though that has been permitted since 1956.

---

Ya well, even the Soviets were susceptible to change. Now it's the U.S.A. that incarcerates more of its citizens than any other. They even own the largest gulag population in Cuba at Gitmo Bay!.

quote:

---

And "Cueball" is jes' describin' the policy of shooting those who leave the East Bloc, he's not advocating. (Or criticizing).

---

How many were shot, Jeff ?. How many of them were war criminals trying to escape to freedom?. And how would you like to stay in a country that had been bombed to bits by the allies(not Ford or the other factory owners though) and Russians ?. Imagine the devastation across Russia just after WWI and the 25 nation invasion to put down the revolution, with White Russians on the rampage and killing willynilly. Imagine the millions of homeless and freezing and starving to death after all that bullshit.

quote:

---

Whenever you press these guys, you get this sort of response, which wouldn't convince a teenage donkey.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Haha.
You support the Cuban regime. You tried, in this thread, to downplay the repression which occurs there.

Also, note that I was referring, not just to Cueball, but to "Cueball and his friends", those being people naming themselves "Fidel" "Better Red" and so on.

You know. The Communist Party group.

---

I just saw this. This is enough of this crap, Jeff House doesn't warrant even a suspension for this for thsi overt and cowardly red-baiting and making up of fantasy cabals of Red babblers?

Jusy Rebick wants this kind of ad hominem McCarthyte shit on her site? Really????

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

I'm tempted to say that some of you folks sure like to debate the same things over and over and over again.

But this thread is actually the first Cuba thread where the focus of debate is mainly on having the thread itself. That's a new one. Skookum congrats!

As to any issues of actual substance regarding Cuba, since I have been on the Rabble--about six months, I guess--I have either read or participated in debates regarding Cuba's:

--economy, and to what degree it has become more socialist over time, in relation to the primarily state capitalist nature of it and similar type economies (Russia, China, etc.)

--political reforms and structure, and repressive or democratic they are in comparison to other Latin American countries and the US itself, and what improvements are being made over time

--the improvement in living standards and working conditions in comparison to other Latin American countries and the US

--the need to open up its electoral system so it's at least more democratic than the one in the US

--the need to remove the US trade embargo and what changes that will affect if it happens

--how its economy and political structure will be affected by the rising wave of electoral victories and economic and social restructuring by center-left coalition governments throughout South America

--the status of Fidel Castro's health and what his eventual retirement or death will mean

--the on-going threats made by US politicos to invade the country and the effect this has had over the years, and the apparent public warming up among some quarters of the US ruling elite to normalize relations (e.g.: Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, Bill Moyers, etc.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vansterdam Kid:
Jeff is being an ass, but it's kind of true isn't it? At least in a small-c communist way.

---

It doesn't matter if it is true or not. That is not the problem with McCathyism. It is the hunting down and defaming of people based on alledged suspicions, such as, "defending" red causes, as proof of a persons affiliations.

In fact, the principled position on "the question" was not to answer the question.

There is no reason that Jeff should be continued to allow his suspicions to be the basis of innuendo used to smearing people, and thus derail discussion into constant bickering about who and who is not a communist.

And in anycase you think there is any similarity between my views and those of Fidel's so that they could possibly be constured as a "group," communist or otherwise on babble?

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

How many were shot, Jeff?

---

Or does it just go without saying that shooting people in this manner and for this purpose was an egregious abuse of human rights?

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:
Sorry about the thread drift but I couldn't let this pass.

192 people were killed trying to cross into West Berlin, and 200 others were injured by shooting trying to escape. None were war criminals.
Basic Facts on Berlin Wall

---

Amazing how many have died and risked their lives trying to escape places like Cuba and communist East Germany.

How many have died in rickety rafts trying to escape the evil American empire anyway? Where is the wall the Americans have trying to keep people in?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steppenwolf Allende:

--how its economy and political structure will be affected by the rising wave of electoral victories and economic and social restructuring by center-left coalition governments throughout South America

---

The addition of trade partners has already had a positive effect on Cuba's economy. Health care for oil with Venezuela is a big success for socialism. There are poor Venezuelan's seeing doctors for the first time in their lives. The fascist cabal wants to privatize health care there and here as well. Widget capitalism is unsustainable. Social services, health care and amenities to serve a possible several billion people around the world could be the success of a future services-based global economy. Cold war capitalism, as practiced in the western nations with the advantage of never been set back with world wars waged in our backyards, is unsustainable over the economic long run.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
That's a silly arguement. And means nothing. Mexico is in no way a communist state, but Mexicans risk life every day to escape Mexico.

---

People escape countries other than communist ones. So what?

How many Americans are trying to swim to Cuba?

I mean, who could pass up such a workers paradise?

By the way, Mexico is not fighting to keep it's citizens in like communist countries must.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: C.Morgan ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:
If communism is so bloody good, why do communists have to work so hard to keep their citizens in?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

Peruse around this site, capitalism/fascism for dummies, for even a half an hour and get back to us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:

People escape countries other than communist ones. So what?

---

Meaning that it proves nothing one way or the other.

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:

I had a glance at it but it didnt tell me why communists can never convince their citizens to stay without force.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Meaning that it proves nothing one way or the other.

People escape poor countries in order to go to rich ones.

---

My point is that the communist countries are the poor ones that seem to insist on forcing their people to stay.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

You didn't read all the big words. You should come to some rought conclusion that no matter what system tries to exist outside KAPITALISM (or iow's fascism with the mask on), cold wars and dirty fucking CIA tricks tend cause those societies to turn inward.

---

Its been nothing but dirty CIA tricks that have caused these people to risk their lives in trying to escape these worker's paradises?

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:

These must be very gullible people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

This is a thread for serious people who know a bit about recent history. So do us a favour and move to a right-to-work state. And hand in your health card at the border before you move to your worker's paradise in West Virginia or Alabama. Put some grease on that pipeline heading south for a song and slide off.

---

Oh squirm and dodge Fidel.

You can live in your ivory-tower North American world and romanticize about how beautiful communism is.

The reality is that the people who actually have to live in it despise it and risk their lives to escape it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
And the reason you refuse to move to a right-to-work state in the U.S. is because you don't believe in paying a thousand dollars a month to parasitic health insurance capitalists. And you don't believe in low wage capitalism in one-industry ghost town USA.

You believe in socialized medicine right there in Wild Rose County, America's gas tank. So what are you talking about socialism for?. We can't convince YOU to leave!.

---

Quit dodging Fidel.

Why were there 500 million chronically hungry people around the democratic capitalist third world 25 years ago ?. Because now there's 800 million of them. Millions of real human beings end up leaving those capitalist countries feet first every year!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Do some reading kid.

Why were there 500 million chronically hungry people around the democratic capitalist third world 25 years ago ?. Because now there's 800 million of them. Millions of real human beings end up leaving those capitalist countries feet first every year!

So tell us, captain capitalism, why can't 350 million people in democratic capitalist India go to bed on a full stomach tonight while their own country exports food and cash crops to "the market" ?.

---

I am not talking of such things. Have you ever answered a direct question or is dodging all you do?

quote:

---

People escape poor countries in order to go to rich ones.

---

While true, there are other reasons.

People escape oppressive countries in order to go to democratic countries. That is certainly the case for Cuba and the former East Germany.

People escape countries racked by civil conflict or occupied by foreign powers in order to go to countries that are not. That is certainly the case for Iraq and Haiti.

Edited to correct typo.

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: John K ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
You refuse to do any reading whatsoever, AND you refuse to answer my question. I know the answer to yours, but I don't believe you know the answer to mine. Most of the people here in this thread already know or have a good idea as to how to answer your question, but that would be time-consuming - redundant in fact. We've covered several possible and lengthy answers to your question many times in other discussions.

And so, I'm going to suggest, once again, that you go do some reading and arrive at several possible answers to your own very thoughtful but unoriginal question. And I'm trying to be polite about it.

---

No Fidel, you are simply dodging.

I will give you credit for not going back into infant mortality rates again though. That is rare for you.

Why must communist countries hold their citizens in by force?

These people clearly know communism much better than you pretend to. They live it.

quote:

---

...At the end of 1962, Washington abruptly ended flights and legal departures from Cuba to the United States; together with the effects of its economic war on Cuba waged since the Revolution, these measures proved a strong incentive to illegal emigration.

The same year, President Kennedy signed Public Act 87-510, the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, which was designed to create the impression that all the Cuban migrants were victims of persecution because of their 'political opinions contrary to the regime'. Cuban emigration to America became an issue of 'national security'. The legislation mentioned included special financial arrangements to support Cuban immigrants. Washington allocated over a billion dollars to the Cuban Refugees Program.

In February 1963, the US authorities stepped up their offensive aimed at inciting illegal departures from Cuba, by imposing further restrictions on legal immigration. Those arriving directly from Cuba - including highjackers of boats and planes and other criminals - were treated as 'refugees' and were granted immediate entry, while Cubans arriving from third countries were treated as foreigners subject to the normal US immigration rules.

The framing and manipulation of migration arrangements for such despicable motives and by such petty means led to a build-up to critical levels of the pressure to emigrate, relieved periodically by illegal exoduses under conditions of considerable risk to the travelers and marked by recurrent migratory cycles.

Many Cubans whose visa applications to visit relatives or emigrate permanently had been turned down flat by the US authorities, were welcomed with open arms, amid much publicity and politicking, when they arrived on American soil by illegal means.

The aim is to deceive world opinion into believing that Cubans are 'fleeing' their country for political reasons and from a socio-economic system that has failed...

...Out of the 35.2 million Latins or Hispanics recorded in the Year 2000 US census, those of Mexican origin numbered 20.9 million, Puerto Rican 3.4 million, Central American nearly 2 million, South American 1.4 million and those from the Dominican Republic 0.8 million.

Scant mention is made of the rest of Latin American migration and even less of the poverty, starvation, desperation, corruption and hopelessness that prompt it or the conditions of exploitation and abuse which accompany it. It is only the Cuban immigrants who receive Washington's 'political attention' and are portrayed in the captive media as 'exiles' or 'refugees' in search of a future of 'freedoms'.

This despite the fact that of the 35 million-plus permanent US residents of Latin American or Hispanic origins, less than 1.3 million are of Cuban origin - just 3.5% of that population.

Hypocritically ignored is the fact that Cubans emigrate, like the vast majority of emigrants from underdeveloped countries, to reunite families or for economic reasons - circumstances aggravated by the prolongation and intensification of the US blockade imposed on their nation...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
I'm sure that's too in-depth for him, laine. It's hard to keep up with how little these trolls understand about past and current events in general.

---

Troll?

I have been here nearly as long as you Fidel.

Keep dodging.

Those who understand communism flee it and history has proven it.

You have no answer Fidel.

The bottom line is that the system is so rotten that communists must force people through violence in order to keep them in it.

People flee many countries. So what. Only communists feel that they must kill their own citizens to keep them there.

You have never had to live it though Fidel.

And I doubt very much you'll be perusing any travel brochures for Haiti, the freest trading nation in the Caribbean. Or how about El Salvador, a free market democracy just a few days drive from Texas.

It's all about choices, isn't it, Morgo. And don't bother answering laine's post and informative article on Cuba - you might learn something out there in Wild Rose County. They should change that on your liscence plates to read, "America's Gas Tank" Ottawa will end up having to bail yez out after the oil dries up at some point as they did several times before. The profits will be long gone and so will the oil and gas and any credibility the conservatives might have had out there.

quote:

---

How I wish I could get you in a room full of Ukranians and let you spout your crap to them about how good communism is.

---

And I wish we get a room full of Haitian's and Guatemalan's and Philippino's and Venezuelan's and Salvadoran's and Afghani's and Iraqi's and East Indians and Puerto Rican's and Nicaraguans and Mexican's and let you rattle on about how good third world capitalism by Uncle Sam's rules is. Now bugger off

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

I am still waiting for you to tell me why so many of those who have lived under the rotten and failed scheme of communism risk their lives to leave it.

Why must communist countries use violence to keep their citizens there Fidel?

You keep dodging.

Your freedom from socialized medicine and socialist repression in general

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
You've become too comfortable with socialism in Canada, Morgan. I think you'd feel better if you could only immerse yourself in total free market economic Darwinism. I recommend Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas, Texas, West Virginia or any of the rest of those neardowell red have-not states.

Your freedom from socialized medicine and socialist repression in general

And don't forget to handover your health card at the border. b'bye!

---

Quit evading you sad little man.

We are not talking about Canadian or American socialism.

We are talking about communism (which you poorly try to defend).

Answer the question rather than sidetracking.

It is rather pathetic. You have been asked what a 1/2 dozen times or more and still refuse to answer.

Fidel
Why not just give the guy a clear answer of just a few sentences or so and then he might go away.

Let me explain it to you without propaganda.

Communism asks people to share. Some people can make a lot of money and some people can't.

The people that can't make a lot of money are happy to be in Cuba. The people that can make a lot of money, don't want to be there, because they want more than the average person.

If Cuba opened up the borders, the best and brightest would leave(the greedy ones at least), because they could do better than 'slightly above average'. The poor would stay - and thus Cuba would lose its best people - the doctors, engineers, artists, etc.

You do not see Cubas risking their lives to get to Mexico or Haiti or El Salvador or Guatemala? No, it is always the US - a rich country.

Now, the other thing that you need to realize is that socialism provides free education. The danger is that these people will take their free education and leave the country. It happens in Canada to a lesser extent.

You see, free market countries, generally have a huge void in education, because that education costs too much for most citizens to afford. Therefore, they have to leech from nations such as Cuba and Canada that provide decent education to its citizens.

The good news is that there is a solution.

Cuba is probably closer to the communist model.

quote:

---

How I wish I could get you in a room full of Ukranians and let you spout your crap to them about how good communism is.

---

Would that be 70-year old Catholic(i.e Westernized) Ukrainians?
Because I have relatives in Ukraine,and I know support of communism is still strong there.
And yes, that marvellous democratic free market system!
Ukraine's economy was wrecked by neo-liberal reforms . Remarkably, lazyness of Pres.Krawchuk delayed these brilliant changes till mid 90's, which probably saved the economy from a total collapse. Right now, with miserable economy and high corruption there are tens of thousands leaving Ukraine annually. Mortality (infant and otherwise) since the Soviet health care system crumbled.

Population of Ukraine has decreased by 3.5 million since 1989(from 51 million to 47.5 million)Thats as much population loss as from the 1930's famine.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Palamedes:
If Cuba opened up the borders, the best and brightest would leave(the greedy ones at least), because they could do better than 'slightly above average'. The poor would stay - and thus Cuba would lose its best people - the doctors, engineers, artists, etc.

---

In fact, Cuba has allowed disgruntled Cubans to leave in the past. The first time was after the revolution when Santos Trafficante and members of the U.S.-backed mafia regime in Havana were given one-way tickets to Miami. The FBI didn't bother investigating the high profile mobsters and mafia capo's because they were focused on communists in America then. The McCarthy witch hunts ruined the lives of a lot of artists and professional people in the U.S. because the rich were paranoid of being knocked off their own pedestals at the time. Fidel tipped off the FBI about an infamous mobster meeting that was to take place in the Appalachians. They fumbled it, and some say it was done on purpose because the FBI denied existence of the Cosa Nostra back then, even though their own head honcho running the agency was seen cavorting with known mobsters at the time.

The second time was in 1980 during the Mariel boatlift. Some 125,000 Cubans made lots of noise about wanting to leave, and so they the did. And the U.S. welcomed them with open arms too for political reasons more than humanitarian. They blamed Fidel for shoving hundreds of criminals onto american soil for the FBI to deal with. The 1980's movie, Scarface, with Al Pacino was fictional but not so far off base wrt the talent that was let go to Florida by the Cubans. Hundreds of them committed murder and began trafficking drugs after arriving in Miami.

Some commentators have suggested that a rogue agency within the CIA are the biggest dope dealers and traffickers in the world. It's said that the CIA and former Cubans have longed to use Cuba as a conduit for drug smuggling from South America via Haiti and Cuba. The CIA tried to smear democratically-elected president JB Arisitide with being involved with drug smuggling in Port au Prince. Nevertheless, the democratically-elected Aristide was removed from power by a CIA-orchestrated coup in Haiti, just 60 miles from Cuban shores and in this decade too.

quote:

---

You do not see Cubas risking their lives to get to Mexico or Haiti or El Salvador or Guatemala? No, it is always the US - a rich country.

---

And the U.S. has always encouraged Cubans to come to the U.S. over and above what are the poorest and most desperate refugees who float rafts from Haiti to the U.S. and Cuba all the time. The U.S. government even accepted hijacked Cuban planes landing on their soil whether the Cuban hijackers had threatened to or did kill people or simply broken international laws by hijacking a plane. That's a long story too.

quote:

---

Now, the other thing that you need to realize is that socialism provides free education. The danger is that these people will take their free education and leave the country. It happens in Canada to a lesser extent.

---

The truth is, it is a know phenomena that people are curious and tend to want to leave any island in search of adventure. It's human nature among Haitians(a lot moreso than average) Dominicans and Caribbean island dwellers in general. In fact, statistics show that more Cubans fled the island under Batista's reign than at any time during Castro's rule, except for perhaps the boat lift in 1980.

And of course, professional Cubans come and go from Cuba all the time. No country in this hemisphere sends more physicians and aid workers around the world to trouble spots and third world countries than Cuba. Cuban athletes participate in PanAm and Olympic games, and they win a respectable number of medals for their home country while participating. Most Cubans love their country and support the revolution today. Canadians are free to travel to Cuba and ask them.

Palamedes, that was a fair to good post and comments in general btw. And Better Red posted some interesting comments as well. Anyone else care to comment?

[ 02 March 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by oreobw:

Fidel
Why not just give the guy a clear answer of just a few sentences or so and then he might go away.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:

Quit evading you sad little man.

---

I'm not sure how harassment, taunting and ridicule - by someone who pops up here once or twice per year - qualifies as debate.

I babbled last yesterday around 3:30 p.m. Soon afterwards, I left work, did my usual trek to Mississauga to pick up the munchkin (which, on a combination of three different transit systems, takes approximately forever). Then I came home and finished an essay that was due at midnight for a course I'm taking. I peeked in very briefly before working on the essay, but I didn't have time to actually read anything in detail.

So now I've read everything, and I can't believe what's gone down in the last 12 hours.

Jeff House, your behaviour in this thread is absolutely atrocious. I've received several complaints over it, and I agree with the people complaining (including people who weren't involved in the argument).

Fidel and C.Morgan, your behaviour in this thread has also been absolutely atrocious. I don't even know where to start. First of all, C.Morgan has every right to join the debate in this thread about Cuba, which is why Fidel's behaviour has been terrible. For those of you all upset about C.Morgan, take a look at who started it. It was Fidel. However, that does not mean that C.Morgan gets to join in with personal attacks like "you sad little man" etc. Both of you need to smarten up. Last warning for both of you, and next time it's a suspension.

So now, about Jeff House, who has seemingly chased Cueball away with his red-baiting, despite being told at least a few times to knock it off. Jeff, you are not above the rules on this forum, despite the fact that you are using your real name and you've been here longer than any of the moderators here. Cueball's voice is just as valuable on babble as yours is, and so are those of the rest of the people you snarkily refer to as "communists". Cueball has repeatedly told us that he is not a communist, and your constant labelling of him as such is out of bounds and trolling.