Given the adulation for Nosferatu displayed by world leaders and the international press, as well as the cozy relationship established with the Castro dynasty by Pope Francis, this may not be too farfetched.
Pope Francis Proposes Canonization for Him
San Gandongo = play on words: a “Zangandongo” is any big lazy guy who leeches off others and expects everyone to do his work for him.
De La Madre Que Lo Pario = “Of the mother who gave birth to him.” Play on words: rather than signifying a geographical location, this identifies him as coming from a bad mother. This phrase is used to curse people who are unpleasant and/or do bad things, usually in this way: “I defecate on the mother who gave birth to him.”
Fidel’s tomb is a puzzle of sorts, a symbol that invites decoding.
As is the case with all symbols, the tomb can have an infinite number of meanings.
No doubt about it, the tastefulness of the object is highly questionable, but as the Latin saying has it, de gustibus non disputandum (rough translation: it’s pointless to argue about taste).
Fidel was a master of bad taste throughout his life, however, a “chusma” to the core. The same is true of all of the Castro clan.
Urban Dictionary defines “chusma” as follows:
“Originates from Cuban Spanish. Refers to a “lowlife”, a cheazy (cheap & sleazy) person, someone with little or no class who often dresses the part, as well – using big, gaudy, overly showy clothing & accessories.”
Fidel’s showy clothing and accessories were his military uniform and medals. Raul has always copied his big brother’s sartorial gaudiness.
So, anyway, take a look at the monstrosity that was designed for Fidel’s ashes. Stare at it for a while. See what it suggests to you.
I don’t know about you, but the very first interpretation that popped out as most obvious to me was that of an instrument of repression, something that symbolizes how he crushed the Cuban people.
Maybe that is why they planted a hedge along the botttom of the boulder, to hide the image of the Cuban people that could be visualized underneath.
I also immediately thought of the giant rolling boulder in “Raiders of the Lost Ark”:
I also thought of the monolith in the film “2001, A Space Odyssey”… especially of the first scene, where hairy hominids gather around it.
What happens next, after the hominids touch it, is that they start to kill each other.
Yes, that seems like a proper interpretation, for that is exactly what happened in Cuba when Fidel showed up.
Of course, the blankness of Fidel’s mortuary boulder invites creativity too: it’s too much like a blank canvas, asking for paint.
So, maybe El Sexto or some other daring graffiti artist can sneak in while the guards are sleeping and put a proper face on it.
Maybe something like this:
Oh, but the acolytes and sycophants will keep streaming to this obscene monument, no matter what.
And you can be sure that this Wonder of the World will be added to every people-to-people tour, and maybe even replace Che’s mausoleum as a required stop.
The idolaters who were there yesterday seem unfazed by the moral ugliness of Fidel. In fact, they were all attracted to it. So why shouldn’t they also be attracted to the ugliness of his killer boulder?
On the plus side: maybe Fidel will start a trend among despots. Robert Mugabe (center, below) looks as if he’s thinking of copying the design for his own tomb.
Yes, it was a Cretin Fest of colossal proportions, a veritable Circus of Miscreants.
Even one of the bloodiest of all living tyrants showed up: Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
Of course, no one on the Left objected to Mugabe’s presence, since he was there to honor Nosferatu, a despot far worse than himself who is venerated as a saint by all leftists.
A few non-despots and partially non-cretinous buffoons showed up too, but, for the most part, it was the largest assemblage of miscreants in recent world history (or at least since the funeral of Hugo Chavez).
All of them were there to worship the ashes of a mass murderer, even though no one could be certain that his ashes were really there, in Santiago de Cuba.
Let’s hope and pray that this was indeed the last act in Nosferatu’s tropical Théâtre du Grand-Guignol, and that he doesn’t end up returning as one of the undead, or as the “Man Who Killed Death” once featured at the Grand-Guignol (poster below).
Imagine Nosferatu’s head barking orders or delivering 6-hour speeches at the Plaza of the Revolution…..Aaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
While the freedom-loving peoples of the world, especially the Cuban exile community in the United States, celebrate the death of dictator Fidel Castro, the Cuban government has recruited a who’s who of leftist elites to mourn at his funeral, including delegations from Iran, South Africa, and North Korea.
Fidel Castro — whose rule from 1959 to 2008 was defined by human rights atrocities against political dissidents, Christians, LGBT Cubans, and other “undesirables” — made many friends in the international left along the way, particularly in his own Latin America and in Africa.
The BBC’s list of attendees from Latin America is unsurprising. Nicolás Maduro, dictator of the Cuban colony Venezuela, will be in attendance, as well as socialists Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua. Enrique Peña Nieto, the president of Mexico, is also expected to attend.
The Spanish newswire service EFE adds a number of leftist former Latin American heads of state to this list: Argentina’s Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, both currently targets of federal corruption probes, and Uruguay’s José Mujica, who, in attempting to compliment Fidel Castro over the weekend, compared him to the fictional character Don Quijote de la Mancha, an old man who suffered from hallucinations.
Representing Africa will be at least two heads of state: South African President Jacob Zuma and 92-year-old genocidal despot Robert Mugabe.
“God is just ignoring Zimbabweans’ prayers,” one Zimbabwean Twitter user remarked upon learning that Mugabe had outlived Castro.
(Probably not in the public spot of yesterday’s obscene ritual, but rather in some hidden spot where they cannot be easily desecrated).
The Castrophilia on display over the past week was hard to take, but one dimension of the adulation that was especially galling was the way in which Fidel’s hatred of religion was ignored.
Here is a brief overview of this aspect of Fidel’s legacy.
From The National Catholic Register
Fidel Castro’s War on Religion
COMMENTARY: Among the worst of Castro’s crimes and legacies, consider what he did to religious faith in this once-great Catholic nation.
by Paul Kengor
Fidel Castro, from 1959 to 2006 the world’s longest-running Marxist dictator, is dead at the age of 90. He was no friend of the Cuban people, or of Cuban Catholics. He was a brutal leader who was responsible for the deaths of thousands, and who silenced the prayers and voices of many more.
Sadly, one would never know this from President Barack Obama’s statement on the death of Castro.
“We know that this moment fills Cubans — in Cuba and in the United States — with powerful emotions, recalling the countless ways in which Fidel Castro altered the course of individual lives, families and of the Cuban nation,” said Obama. “History will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him.”
It is not clear if Obama meant this as a negative or positive. Reading the statement in full, it could easily be interpreted as positive. The official statement makes no mention of a single negative regarding Castro.
Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban emigrants, best described the president’s statement as “pathetic.” If you think that’s harsh, then you know nothing about Cuba under Fidel Castro. And among the worst of Castro’s crimes and legacies was what he did to religious faith in this once-great Catholic nation.
Being a devoted communist, Fidel Castro was possessed with a hatred of religion. In Cuba, like everywhere else, communists launched their standard war on faith. From country to country, no ideology has so consistently and viciously attacked Christianity like communism — starting with the Bolsheviks in 1917 and resounding throughout the century ahead. As Mikhail Gorbachev put it, communists launched a systematic “war on religion.”
Cuba was no exception. From the moment that Castro took hold in January 1959, churches were in trouble. The regime quickly launched a propaganda campaign against the faithful, describing Catholics as “social scum.” By the late 1960s, Christmas was banned on the island. Churches were shut down. Priests and their parishioners were silenced, arrested or placed under tight surveillance, with every word of every service or homily monitored by government church-watchers infiltrating the pews. Any criticism, especially of the Marxist regime, was very dangerous. One could not be a member of the Communist Party in Cuba (the only party legally permitted, including for any government jobs) without professing a belief in atheism.
In the Netherlands, for instance, the Nazi occupiers retaliated to all condemnations by Catholic bishops by rounding up and executing Catholic lay people at random.
In Poland, the Catholic Church was dismantled, and it is estimated that over 1,800 priests died in concentration camps.
Pope Pius XII’s silence led to him being called “Hitler’s Pope.”
Now we have Pope Francis, who is no one’s captive, and who could speak freely about repression in Cuba without fear of brutal reprisals, even within Cuba, for the Castro regime now depends on the Catholic Church for many social services.
Yet Francis, who is not just silent, but overtly speaks and acts as if he has a fondness for the Castro regime, has yet to earn the title “Castro’s Pope.”
This double standard is examined by Father Dwight Longenecker.
Remember when the secular Catholic hating media started crowing about Pius XII being “Hitler’s Pope”?
Funny how they thought it was wonderful when Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI, B16 and Francis all paid a visit to Cuba and knocked on Castro’s door.
History is now showing that Pope Pius XII put up stout resistance to the Nazis as he was able.
Pope John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis have taken a more diplomatic approach to Castro’s regime–visiting the murderous tyrant and hoping by diplomacy to do some good.
Pope Francis went so far as to express “sorrow” at the death of Castro.
Pius XII handled Hitler with diplomacy as well, but think of the brouhaha if Pius XII would have written to the Hitler family at the dictator’s death expressing “sorrow” at his loss.
To be consistent, shouldn’t the secular media be finger pointing and name calling Francis as “Castro’s Pope”?
But no, in True (deau) style most of them are giving the Cuban Mao a hero’s send off and presumably think Pope Francis is a marvelous fellow.
Don’t get me wrong. I think Pope Francis struck the right tone in being personal and pastoral, but it wouldn’t go amiss in the days to come if our Catholic leaders and media people were a bit more clear about Castro’s horrible legacy.
Furthermore, in addition to the personal condolences to the family of the deceased it would be great to hear an official statement from either the Vatican or the Cuban bishops along these lines:
“While we greet the death of any person with sadness, and offer sincere condolences to the family of Fidel Castro. We pray for the repose of his soul, hoping that in his final hours he may have turned to Christ Jesus in repentance and faith.
We also offer our prayers and condolences to the families of those he and his regime imprisoned, tortured and murdered. We pray that with his departure the shadow over Cuba might be lifted and true freedom and prosperity will be established for all Cubans.”
Will we hear that, or will we be presented with some wishy washy Liberation theology mumbo jumbo?
And, in case you wish to compare Father Longenecker’s wishful rendition of a proper papal message (above in light purple font) to the one actually sent by Papa Che to King Raul upon the death of Fidel, here is the full text:
On receiving the sad news of the death of your dear brother, His Excellency Mister Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, former president of the State Council and of the Government of the Republic of Cuba, I express my sentiments of sorrow to Your Excellency and other family members of the deceased dignitary, as well as to the people of this beloved nation. At the same time, I offer prayers to the Lord for his rest and I entrust the whole Cuban people to the maternal intercession of our Lady of the Charity of El Cobre, patroness of that country.
The National Catholic Register is the oldest national Catholic newspaper in the United States.
Its influence is immense.
Victor Gaetan, who has followed the plight of the Catholic Church in Cuba for years, provides the world with a very enlightening essay in the most recent issue of the Register.
The subject is the tangled history of Fidel’s relations with that Church and of the Church’s response to all of his abuse.
Highly, highly recommended reading, and a much-needed counter-balance to all of the laudatory ordure that has polluted the atmosphere in the past week.
The Death of a Dictator: Fidel Castro (1926-2016)
NEWS ANALYSIS: Cuba’s strongman brutally persecuted the Church.
by Victor Gaetan
At least three popes prayed for his soul, but Commandante Fidel Castro, the Jesuit-educated dictator who tyrannized Cuba for almost 50 years, resisted their merciful intercessions.
His death at age 90 on Nov. 25 was announced defiantly on Cuban TV by his brother, President Raul Castro, 85.
Nine days of public mourning features mass rallies in Havana and Santiago de Cuba, but no Mass of Christian burial for this baptized Catholic, whose revolution of 1959 targeted the Catholic Church as an enemy.
In fact, churches on the island have been visited by Communist Party bureaucrats and asked to cancel Mass, Eucharistic adoration and any musical programs. (The response has been rightly uncooperative.)
Fidel’s relationship to the Catholic Church was known for its ambiguity. He saw the Church in utterly opportunistic ways, desperate to co-opt its moral authority in the 1990s, after demolishing it for more than 30 years.
To the end, he gave signs of fascination with God, religion and Christianity’s powerful attraction, but his ego seemed unable to confess sin or seek reconciliation.
Cubans directly affected by Fidel Castro’s guerilla insurgency against President Fulgencio Batista’s military dictatorship in 1959 emphasize that Castro took power deceptively, claiming he would advance freedom against oppression. Yet he deployed violence and intimidation within two years of overthrowing Batista — revealing his true identity.
In 1950s Cuba, Juan Clark was involved with Catholic Student Youth and Catholic Action, an international movement encouraging priests and laypeople to work for social justice. He and his colleagues thought Castro, like them, wanted a more democratic, uncorrupt government.
As Castro’s tactics became increasingly totalitarian — Catholic bishops issued a pastoral letter in August 1960 condemning the “growing advance of communism,” describing its ideology as irreconcilable with the Catholic creed. Clark escaped to the United States in 1960, joining a group of men intent on resistance.
He returned to the island in 1961 as a paratrooper with the ill-fated, U.S.-backed Bay of Pigs invasion — and ended up in a Cuban jail for 20 months, until the U.S. government paid Castro $53-million ransom for more than 1,000 men.
“Fidel Castro was a diabolical genius,” Clark told the Register in a 2011 interview.
“He was a unique case, probably, in the history of the world,” Clark said. “He came to power with a lot of charisma and positive publicity generated in Cuba and the United States,” especially by The New York Times.
“He came to power with one banner. In the beginning, he even had support from the Church hierarchy,” Clark remembered.
“Less than two years later, Castro switched to another banner, an unpopular one — communism,” the former professor continued. “Although, having spent my life researching this, I believe the Soviet Union was involved with Castro even when he was in the Sierra Maestra Mountains” in the late 1950s.
The relationship between Castro and the Church continued to disintegrate through 1961: In May, the vast network of Catholic schools was confiscated and seminaries closed, including the Catholic schools Fidel had attended.
In September, he forced almost 20% of the island’s remaining priests and religious (including a bishop), onto a boat and expelled them.
Among the priests Fidel evicted was a high-school teacher and mentor, Jesuit Father Amando Llorente, who disguised himself as a shepherd to reach the revolutionary while he was still in the Sierra Maestras and challenge the younger man’s behavior.
Other priests were sent to labor camps in 1965, including Cardinal Jaime Ortega, who served as Havana’s archbishop from 1981 to 2016.
Dead at last, dead at last. Fidel Castro has shuffled off this mortal coil, at the age of ninety. Unfortunately, his death comes a bit too late—about sixty years too late. Millions of his people had been awaiting this moment for well over half a century. And as we Cubans rejoice, we weep. Our losses over the past six decades have been far too great, and so our glee is far from unbridled.
Slavery is what Fidel’s revolution was about. Brooking no dissent, he enslaved a nation in the name of eternal class warfare, creating a new elite dedicated to suppressing their neighbors’ rights. He pitted Cubans against one another, replacing all civil discourse with invective and intimidation.
Fidel boasted that he was loved by the Cuban people and spoke for us, that he was our very embodiment. But these were some of the boldest of his many big lies. The Cuban people he spoke for were but a monstrous abstraction, a figment that he projected onto the world stage. Flesh-and-blood Cubans had to be forced to attend his interminable speeches, or, as now, his funeral.
Dissenters were demonized. If you objected to his self-anointing as Maximum Leader or disdained his dystopian vision, two painful choices were open to you. Just two.
You could oppose him. But if you dared, even by murmuring in the dark, you faced imprisonment, torture, or death. Hundreds of thousands of Cubans were brave enough to suffer these consequences, but the world beyond the island’s shores ignored them, even denied their existence.
The other option was to beg for the privilege of banishment. Nearly two million Cubans chose that route, but millions more never got the chance. No one knows how many have died trying to escape by sea without his magnanimous permission.
Fidel portrayed those who fled his dystopia as selfish troglodytes. These nonconformists were vilified not just by Fidel but by all those around the world who believed his lies, including many eminent intellectuals, artists, and journalists in free, affluent nations. Lately, the tyrant even seemed to gain approval from His Holiness, Pope Francis, who paid him a very cordial visit.
For the millions of Cubans who remained in Fidel’s kingdom, the losses were even more profound. As they waved tiny Cuban flags at mass rallies and waited in line for necessities with their ration books in hand, as they listened to Fidel’s promises of a very distant glorious future, these Cubans watched others leave by the hundreds of thousands. When nearly two million refugees flee from a small island nation, everyone who remains is touched by loss. The exodus is all the more galling when those who have fled prosper in exile and those who remain become ever more destitute.
Why does the First World display so little indignation over Fidel’s labor camps and prisons, his torture chambers, and the summary executions with which he purchased his shamefully inadequate healthcare and indoctrination programs? Why do so many well-heeled tourists flock to the ruin Cuba has become? Why are so few of them offended by Cuba’s endemic racism, or the apartheid laws that deny ordinary Cubans access to the finest beaches and hotels in their own homeland? And why is it that poor folk from neighboring countries such as Haiti or Mexico have never, ever fled to Cuba?
Fidel justified his repressive policies by insisting that the Cuban people were incapable of achieving social justice by any other means. Likewise, many of Fidel’s First-World admirers view Cubans as postmodern equivalents of Rousseau’s noble savage—as primitives who are uncorrupted by civilization and incapable of comprehending Enlightenment notions of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—or perhaps as swarthier versions of Mussolini’s unruly Italians, that is, hot-blooded Latin rustics in need of a strong leader who can make their trains run on time.
Trying to convince such folk that their condescension toward “persons of colour” in the Third World verges on racism is usually futile. These progressive neocolonialist elites think of themselves as quite different from Ruyard Kipling and kindred bigots of yesteryear. Nonetheless, in order to admire Fidel Castro in our day, one has to overlook his human rights abuses or argue that in benighted places such as Cuba “social justice” can be achieved only through repression. One must assume that those victimized by Castro cannot be “victims,” because they lack the feelings, desires, and reasoning capabilities possessed by those who live in the First World.
How else but by such bigoted logic could Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, propose that a tyrant who impoverished his country and imprisoned, tortured, and executed thousands of his countrymen had displayed a “tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people”—who in turn “had a deep and lasting affection” for him? Trudeau’s bigotry is subtle but as reprehensible as that of any white supremacist. One must assume that he regards Cubans as inferior to Canadians, for he cannot have been elected Prime Minister of Canada without acknowledging that private property, free speech, elections, labor unions, and a free market economy—all of which are denied to Cubans—are the birthright of every Canadian. If all human beings are equal, then all are entitled to the same rights. This principle, apparently, is lost on Trudeau.
Something very frightening has been made evident in the past few days: the fact that there are many people like Trudeau in this world, who not only are comfortable with the crimes of a cruel despot, but who actually find those crimes praiseworthy.
Fidel’s most amazing triumph was to convince a great number of people around the world that he was a good man, despite all the suffering he inflicted on the people he ruled. Who can measure the suffering he caused? Ask those Cubans whose ranks he has just joined, those thousands he murdered. Ask the thousands who died at sea, trying to escape from him. Ask the dead, yes, if you somehow know how to do so. Ask those hundreds of thousands of Cubans who were crammed into his prisons, and those who were tortured in ways too horrific to imagine, and those who still languish in those dungeons of his. Ask any Cuban who has been forced to attend his interminable speeches, or any Cuban child who has had to spend every summer as a slave in an agricultural labor camp in order to pay for his or her “free” education. Ask any Cuban who has been subjected to an “act of repudiation” by his or her neighbors, or who has in any way run afoul of those other Cubans who run their local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution.
And while you’re at it, ask any Cuban who obeyed Fidel’s baneful commands how they felt about harassing, threatening, and abusing fellow Cubans who disagreed with the Maximum Leader. After all, Fidel did not rule without help. Some ordinary Cubans made his dictatorship possible, indulging their own vainglory. Fidel urged his own people to hate one another, strangling political discourse and poisoning whatever common future they hoped for.
Fittingly, his arrogant deceitfulness extended past his death. In Havana, tens of thousands of Cubans were forced to trudge to the Plaza of the Revolution, to bow before his ashes. Attendance was mandatory—as it was whenever Fidel needed to be surrounded by a throng of slaves—but the ritual was grotesquely hollow. After they had waited in line for hours, all that those Cubans got to see was a small framed photo of the ex–Maximum Leader and a kitschy display of some of his medals, guarded by four young soldiers. The ashes were not there. They were at the Ministry of the Armed Forces headquarters, accessible only to the top brass of the Castro military junta. For a final time, Fidel had hoodwinked his slaves, and the aging oligarchs gathered around his relics probably laughed.
So, good riddance. Let the despot slither into oblivion, along with all his loathsome achievements. History will never absolve him, or those acolytes in charge of his ashes.
Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg hates Donald Trump. That’s no secret.
Bloomberg News is now reporting that the Trumpinator seriously looked into buying hotels in Cuba a mere six months ago, while he was running for president.
This information is attributed to a Spanish hotel tycoon, Miguel Fluxa, executive chairman of Iberostar, who made these allegations to Spain’s ABC, a newspaper that is highly critical of the Castro regime and of Castro supporters.
Iberostar owns many apartheid hotels and resorts in the Castro Kingdom.
And… by sheer coincidence… (yeah, sure)…. Iberostar announced yesterday that it will be opening twelve more apartheid hotels in Castrogonia.
If the story about Trump is true, it’s very disturbing.
If it’s not true, it will be but one more false accusation made against the Trumpinator by his detractors.
Trump Considered Buying Hotels in Cuba, Iberostar Chief Says
President-elect Donald Trump was looking at buying hotels in Cuba as recently as six months ago, according to a top Spanish hotel executive who learned of it from industry contacts. That would be at odds with Trump’s stated Cuba policy and could have violated U.S. law against promoting tourism there.
The hotelier, Miguel Fluxa, executive chairman of Grupo Iberostar, made the comments to reporters at an event in Mallorca on Thursday to celebrate the closely held company’s 60th anniversary. The firm, which has more than 100 hotels, manages Havana’s five-star Parque Central, the city’s top-ranked hotel on TripAdvisor Inc. for several years.
Fluxa learned of Trump’s efforts from industry contacts in Cuba, not from the president-elect himself, an Iberostar spokesman said. Trump hasn’t offered to buy any of Iberostar’s 11 hotels in Cuba, said the spokesman, who asked not to be named, citing company policy. Fluxa’s comments were first reported by Spain’s ABC newspaper.
Michael Cohen, executive vice president at the Trump Organization, and Breanna Butler, an outside spokeswoman for the company at Hiltzik Strategies in New York, didn’t immediately respond to calls and e-mails seeking comment on Fluxa’s assertion.
Trump’s interest in buying Cuban hotels would be hard to square with his plan to reverse President Barack Obama’s moves there. Obama has eased sanctions since 2014, allowing U.S. cruise ships to dock at ports on the island and letting U.S. airlines fly to Havana. Trump says he would reverse Obama’s opening unless Cuba allows more political and religious freedoms.
“If Cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and the U.S. as a whole, I will terminate the deal,” Trump said in a Twitter post Monday.
Trump on Saturday tore into the newly deceased ruler of the island, a socialist thorn in America’s side since the 1959 revolt that brought him to power.
“Fidel Castro’s legacy is one of firing squads, theft, unimaginable suffering, poverty and the denial of fundamental human rights,” Trump said in a statement.
Until mid-October, promoting tourism in Cuba violated U.S. sanctions. Before that, “U.S. persons could not lawfully go to Cuba for hotel prospecting relating to tourism” without a license from the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, said Richard Matheny, chairman of the national-security and foreign-trade regulation practice group at Goodwin Procter in Washington.
Executives from the Trump Organization have traveled to Cuba to look for golf course developments, Bloomberg Businessweek reported in July. When Trump was asked by CNN in March if he’d be interested in opening a hotel in Cuba, he said: “I would, I would — at the right time, when we’re allowed to do it. Right now, we’re not.”
In September, Newsweek reported that a company controlled by Trump spent $68,000 on a 1998 business trip to Cuba.
Trump said this week he would be leaving his business “in total” and is drawing up legal documents to confirm the separation, which he plans to outline at a Dec. 15 news conference with his children. He hasn’t said whether he plans to sell or give his business to his children or only hand over management of the Trump Organization to them while he’s president.
Breitbart Senior Editor Milo Yiannopoulos Urges #NotMyPresident Liberals to Move to Cuba
Speaking about the recent celebrities that claimed they would emigrate to Canada if Donald Trump were to become president and the leftist praise that Cuban dictator Fidel Castro received upon his death, MILO said, “We know Hollywood loves communists, but they wouldn’t even go to Venezuela. I did publish a plan this week to help them out. My simple proposal, the MILO Plan, is to relocate Hollywood celebrities, journalists, and anyone else too scared to live in Trump’s America… to Cuba. They can culturally appropriate the food, and maybe even the poverty and misery of living under a brutal dictator.”
MILO continued. “Actors love attention, and Cuba will need some camera-hungry attention seekers to give their attention to now that Fidel has become one one of the only good communists. His brother Raul just doesn’t have the same charisma you know? All of the poverty, none of the machismo. What do you think? Should we send Lena Dunham, Cher, and Jon Stewart down to Cuba? They’d probably all convert to Islam in the hopes of sneaking into Gitmo. The meals are better, I hear. No Kellogg’s for one thing.”
The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation invites you to join us in commemorating the thousands of victims who suffered and died at the hands of the Castro regime in Cuba. A candlelight vigil will take place on December 4th, 2016 at 4:30 PMat the Victims of Communism Memorial on the corner of New Jersey and Massachusetts Avenues in Washington, DC.
We ask that you join us in standing with the Cuban people, remembering their past suffering, and hoping that this event marks the beginning of a truly democratic future for the island.
Imagine any newspaper boasting of the fact that Adolf Hitler paid a visit to its offices and all of its senior editors, editorial board members and employees were “star struck” by the Fûhrer.
Imagine a senior editor remarking that Adolf looked like “the Most Interesting Man in the World.”
Imagine the paper’s executive editor boasting of having enjoyed a “surreal” five-hour dinner with the Fûhrer at his Kehlsteinhaus (Eagle’s Nest) atop the Obersalzberg near Berchtesgaden.
Imagine such boasting taking place as a postmortem tribute of sorts to the Fûhrer’s charms.
Imagine the author of this boasting — David W. Dunlap –being patted on the back and congratulated for revealing to the world that the newspaper in question has been on the Fûhrer’s side all along, and that it has been totally incapable of being impartial.
Imagine everyone at this newspaper and the vast majority of its readers saying “Wow….we are all sooooo cool!”
Well, stop imagining and read the article below from the New York Times, which details what happened there when Fidel Castro paid a visit in 1995.
Absolutely vile. But also absolutely honest, at least.
Incredible, but true: the New York Times is very proud of its partisan reporting and of its love for one of the most despicable dictators in modern history.
Oh, but they’re not bigots or racists, or anything like that. No.
They just happen to think that Cubans are inferior beings who need to be abused and kept in check by a monster who looks like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
Excerpted from El Niuyortain:
President-elect Donald J. Trump is following in Fidel Castro’s footsteps.
Mr. Castro came to New York in October 1995 for the celebration of the United Nations’ 50th anniversary. On the final day of his five-day trip, he spent more than two hours at The Times, which was then at 229 West 43rd Street.
Times executives and employees are well accustomed to V.I.P. visits, but they are usually given days — if not weeks — of advance notice. Jay McKillop, the company’s security director, had 14½ hours to prepare for Mr. Castro….
….Unlike most V.I.P.s, he was not content to end his Times visit in the polished confines of the executive floor but asked to be shown the workers’ quarters. That meant the newsroom — a dark, claustrophobic, overcrowded, ill-ventilated, cheesily decorated and poorly maintained space.
“It looks as though you could use a union,” Mr. Castro said, through an interpreter, when he saw the space.
Deborah Sontag, a Times reporter who accompanied Mr. Castro with Ms. Alvarez, said the moment of his arrival in the newsroom “did feel surreal, but also very real and charged.”
“He seemed very attuned to his surroundings and interested,” she wrote in an email this week.
“There was a palpable awareness that this almost mythic figure had stepped out of history and into our gritty, rodent-infested newsroom,” Ms. Sontag wrote. “I was surprised by how star-struck our senior leaders were, editors and editorial board members. I had never seen anything like it, and have never seen anything comparable since.”
Tim Race, an editor, noticed the same thing. “I recall being put off by how many of my colleagues (or should I say Comrades) seemed to be falling over one another to have a chance to shake hands with the wily old despot,” he wrote in an email. “That said, I did think Fidel looked extremely dapper in his business suit. Sort of like the World’s Most Interesting Man. With a longer beard.”…
…Joseph Lelyveld, who was then the executive editor, was asked this week whether he thought the day’s events had been surreal. No, he replied.
The organization he directs was founded by the late Oswaldo Payá and fellow dissidents Ramón Antunez, Dagoberto Capote Mesa, Fernando Arvelo and Santiago Cardenas.
Cardet has been subjected to a savage beating, and is now imprisoned in Holguín.
His injuries –especially to his head and back — were severe enough to require immediate medical attention.
Castro state security agents charge that “while he was visiting the United States last week he met with people with whom he should not have met.” (“se reunió con quien no debía durante su viaje a Estados Unidos la semana pasada).
He has been accused of showing irreverence (“desacato”) and disrespect (“falta de respeto”) for “el Comandante” Fidel in some statements he made while he was abroad.
He has been threatened with a 15-year prison sentence.
Fellow dissidents fear he will be subjected to a sham trial, as is common for dissidents.
His wife was detained for several hours last week, on Wednesday 23 November, and was warned that Cardet would be arrested as soon as he returned from the U.S.
Cardet returned nonetheless, and is paying a heavy price for daring to speak freely while away from the Castro Kingdom.
Under Trump, shameful capitulation to Cuba hopefully will end
by Mark Davis
As the Christmas season of 2014 unfolded, President Barack Obama began the delivery of a priceless gift to the communist dictatorship of Cuba. It started subtly enough as Obama and Fidel Castro made reference to a “new course” in relations between our nations.
The “old course,” namely a half-century of moral clarity requiring reforms in Cuba before normalized relations, had grown tiresome to a president seeking transformations wherever they might be found. So why not a transformation away from regarding Cuba as a totalitarian pariah, into a new era of regarding the country as a cooperative friend and ally?
The complete lack of a basis for this capitulation did not slow the agenda of the next six months. The White House touted a “human rights dialogue” as Cuba was removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism— not because they had improved their behavior, but because Obama wanted to get past the “failed, Cold War-era” policies that impeded the path to legacy enhancement.
But, funny thing about the Cold War: Cuba was still fighting it. We are the ones who stopped. And with our acquiescence, embassies were re-opened and cruise ships fueled up to bring curious tourists through the time tunnel into a nation held in suspended animation by the monstrous Castro regime.
Donald Trump made clear on the campaign trail that an American surrender to Castro’s interests was not his style. Castro’s death gave him a chance to contrast even more starkly the difference between how Cuba has been handled under Obama and what changes may await come Jan. 20.
The Trump statement called Castro what he was, a “brutal dictator who oppressed his own people for nearly six decades.” It closed with a wish to help guide Cuba “away from the horrors endured for too long, and toward a future in which the wonderful Cuban people finally live in the freedom they so richly deserve.”
Compare that to the moral vacuum of the Obama statement, which made no mention of the freedoms crushed beneath Castro’s boot, noting that Castro “altered the course of individual lives, families and the Cuban nation.” Indeed so, in the way that cancer “alters the course” of our health. But no such scoldings were heard from the president’s statement, which said “history” will judge his “enormous impact.”
Anyone with eyes to see knows Castro’s impact. It was ruinous to countless lives dashed against the rocks of his tyranny, from the imprisonment and execution of political opponents to the suffocation of the basic rights of millions. But references to those truths by the White House would have cast an uncomfortable light on our inexplicable warming of relations, and prevented a paragraph of self-congratulation:
“During my presidency, we have worked hard to put the past behind us, pursuing a future in which the relationship between our two countries is defined not by our differences but by the many things that we share as neighbors and friends — bonds of family, culture, commerce, and common humanity.”
Run that “humanity” line by the innumerable victims of Castro’s murderous reign. The wholly unwarranted thawing of relations between the United States and Cuba was driven by the current president’s personal and political interests. Let us hope that his successor will immediately halt, if not roll back these harmful messages, making clear that America will extend pleasantries to Cuba when its detestable regime corrects its ways.
When America is willfully blind to global evils, tyrants and terrorists are empowered. If President Trump is about to call a halt to this nonsense, the Cuban people will be moving closer to the dream of a free country, which can only happen when its leaders see there will be no further unearned rewards.
Mark Davis is a North Texas radio host and a special contributor to the Dallas Morning News.
So, much like the challenges now being made to the Trumpinator’s election in the U.S. and the Brexit vote in the U.K., opponents of the popular vote in Colombia sought to nullify the referendum vote by turning to their country’s congress for approval instead.
And it looks like their ploy has paid off.
The peace deal rejected by the majority of the Colombian people has just been approved by their legislators.