Message for PBS

From a Marine once stationed in Guantanamo Naval Base, Cuba:

We deployed in the vicinity of the fenceline. We met the refugees as they approached, and with weapns in hand, denied them entry to the base. They had managed to traverse a kilometer deep minefield covered by towers with machine guns to get to this point. They had left everything they had ever known in order to get out of there. And we stopped them. We had orders. We had our orders, so we followed them. After enough shouting and threatening, the refugees eventualy gave up and headed back. Back into Cuba. While I was sweating my balls off under the hot sun, these refugees made a mistake. They had gotten through the minefield the first time, but they had not followed in their own footsteps going back. While I was thinking to myself how I wish these people would hurry up and go back so that I could head back to someplace with air-conditioning, one of them stepped on a landmine.

That explosion touched my world.

Then, I witnessed the worst thing I ever saw in my life.

As the dust cloud wafted away from those refugees, nobody ran. Nobody screamed. Nobody said anything.

They just laid down to die in the middle of a minefield that was the sun’s anvil.

Think of how badly you would not want to die like that. Think about that real hard. Think about slowly dying of exposure in a minefield. Think about what would make you risk such an outcome. Think about it real hard, and then remember that as bad as that was, it was better than going back.

Despair was once described to me by a college english professor as “the death throes of hope.” That day in the minefield was despair incarnate, and it was the worst thing I have ever seen with mine own eyes.

Make a fucking documentary of that.

Amen, Marine. Amen.

73 thoughts on “Message for PBS”

  1. This is so sad, so so so so sad. We do everything in the world to save the lives of Mexican immigrants coming in through the hot dangerous deserts of California – water stations, border patrol humanitarian efforts, free McDonald’s food, no protests to Mexican-government printed how-to guides on how to be an illegal alien. But to Cubans fleeing bonafide totalitarianism and wanting either freedom or death, we send them back through the mine field! Mexican illegal alien advocates often scream about ‘double standards’ regarding Cubans – and for the first time I agree with them. But the double standard is slanted to their advantage. This whole policy of sending people fleeing communism back through minefields is COMPLETELY INHUMANE. This has got to be stopped!

  2. OUTRAGE AT GUANTANAMO

    Cuban refugees risking it all by fleeing communism to Guantanamo (think about that for a minute!) are ordered by US troops to go back to communism through a field of landmines. One of the troops who must carry out these orders tells the terrible story …

  3. I may post a correspondence I had with an ex-friend of mine over the Elian mess. When you read his letters you may capture a little of the general feeling in the country about Cuban refugees/exiles, and Cuban-Americans in general, I have encountered.

  4. As I wipe away the tears… I ask you, Val… What are you trying to do? Turn us ALL into Sad Posters!?

  5. The Two Faces of Guant?namo

    This is a sad story about Marines having to turn away Cuban refugees at Guant?namo (hat tip: Publius). The part about the mine field makes it unbearable. What strikes me, beyond the details of this story, is how Guant?namo serves,…

  6. Sweet jeezus.

    I knew a few things about Cuba, growing up here in Indiana:

    castro is a dictator.

    Dictators are bad.

    People are dying trying to get the hell out of Cuba.

    Simple, yeah, but I think even without political leanings one way or the other it told me a lot. I knew people were dying trying to get out of Germany not only when I was a child, but since my GRANDMOTHER had been a child. I couldn’t see the difference then, and I don’t see it now.

    I learned more about Cuba as I grew up, and have learned much more, from first-hand accounts, after meeting my girlfriend and her family.

    This, though, is one of the worst I’ve heard.

    Embargoes? Sure. I’m all for keeping as much money out of castro’s already fat pockets as possible — and we all know that’s where it goes.

    But for fuck’s sake, if someone makes it out of there, DON’T SEND THEM BACK.

    (sorry for being so rambly. This stuff really leaves me confused.)

  7. Somber reading for a Saturday night

    I came across this post, written by a former sentry on the fenceline separating the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo bay from Cuba, earlier this evening. Gut-shuddering from beginning to end. I’ve always considered U.S. policy toward Cuba a tad short-sig…

  8. Marine in Cuba

    Although I read his site nearly daily, I haven’t linked to nearly often enough to the wonderful things he finds. While the following isn’t wonderful, it is eye opening. We deployed in the vicinity of the fenceline. We met the…

  9. I wonder if there is any possible way to get information like this across to Chevy Chase, Linda Ronstadt and any other delusional moonbats who tell everyone who will listen that Cuba under Castro is paradise.

  10. Ggorge, fight with what? Those guys down there can’t even get enough food and essentials, let alone guns and ammunition. The only ones who can fight are here already and the Americans does not let them. Fidel may get mad or something. So diplomacy keeps on and on and on…and….

  11. WHo said anything about guns and amo? Martin Luther King didn’t have guns. Ghandi didn’t have guns. Mother Theresa didn’t have guns. Why do you feel that you need to have guns to resolve this? You want to kill more Cubans or help them?

  12. cohetedude

    WHo said anything about guns and amo? Martin Luther King didn’t have guns. Ghandi didn’t have guns. Mother Theresa didn’t have guns. Why do you feel that you need to have guns to resolve this? You want to kill more Cubans or help them?

  13. This is devastating. I agree with A.M.Mora y Leon, something must be done. I know it’s not popular, but this is another good reason why the US should liberalize immigration. If my home town, LA, can manage the millions of immigrants we have, (contrary to popular opionion, we are, even with all the problems) surely, any desperate person fleeing fidel should be given refuge. Reading this, I’m thinking violent overthrow of fidel sounds good.

  14. Kathleen, a violent overthrow may sound good, but that’s a very bad idea. History proves that when you overthrow a goverment by force, the people side with the government for protection. And when a new government comes in by force, it tends to be just as bad as the one it tried to replace. Just look at Cuban history if you don’t believe me. Compare fidel’s revolution to the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. Which had violence, and which provided positive results?

  15. that’s cool. But then what do we do about the power grab? I guess we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it.

  16. cohetedude

    Who are the ones that are in this country that can fight, and why wont the Americans let them? And why is it only them that can fight?

  17. — Martin Luther King didn’t have guns.(went against we Anglo-Saxon w/AS morals, G was the same) Ghandi didn’t have guns. Mother Theresa didn’t have guns. Why do you feel that you need to have guns to resolve this? You want to kill more Cubans or help them?

    If they went against Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, others, make your case.

  18. One little correction – Cubans who arrive in the U.S. are not immigrants – they are refugees. It’s a different legal status and comes with different rights and obligations.

    When one compares the Cubans to Martin Luther King or Ghandi, one is really comparing fidel to the segregationist governments in the American South and to the British. I find such comparisions absurd – no matter how oppressive those governments may have been at a time, they were democratic institutions that eventually bent to the will of the people, unlike fidel.

  19. SandyP, do you honestly think that King and Gandhi would have received the same reaction in a totalitarian state as they received in the US and UK respectively? I have told a liberal friend, who is a great admirer of Gandhi, that Gandhi wouldn’t have lasted a week under the Soviets or Nazis. He lasted decades under British Imperial rule preaching satyagraha precisely because his adversaries were not barbarians — unlike the Soviets, Nazis, or fidel.

    While King and Gandhi were both imprisoned, their message was not squelched as it would have been in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, or Communist Cuba. In Cuba, particularly, the Comittees for the Defense of the Revolution (Comites para la defensa de la Revoluci?n), would have ratted Gandhi or King out and they would have served twenty or thirty years without a peep from the American press. Have you heard about Dr. Biscet on ABC, NBC, or CBS?

  20. The reference to Mother Theresa I don?t even understand so I won?t comment on that, but it is such an incongruent comparison to mention Gandhi & Martin Luther King as conduct examples that could topple a regimen like Castro?s
    I do see how pacifists (especially those not fully familiar with the Cuban tragedy) may feel that a march on let?s say the ?Plaza de la Revolucion? would have the same effect as a march on Washington by Martin Luther King, but how does that get organized within a totalitarian regimen ?
    I just need ONE of the pacifists to think through the management of such enterprise.
    Communication
    Distribution
    Planning
    Gathering
    Discussion
    Etc etc etc?
    How does anyone in Cuba can disseminate a call for unity? There is NO paper or printing presses that they can use. There is no freedom of press where they can take an advert to promote their cause.
    The pacifists look at the rest of the world from the very safe boundaries of the freedoms guaranteed under a democracy. Most of the time it is sheer naivet? and an amazing lack of knowledge of history in general
    There have been people (mostly Americans I have met through newsgroups etc) who pose these very logical question that COULD bring about a change in Cuba IF the Cuban people had a modicum of the freedoms afforded by the UK, the USA etc.
    But they DO NOT. Granma is never have a front page depicting of an anti-Castro spokesperson. There were PLENTY of frontpages of Martin Luther King and his struggle.

    Now let?s ALL be cognizant of FACTS vs. mythical romantic history, Gandhi didn?t accomplish anything! India was given its independence AFTER WW2 which acquiesced to do so because the ?Empire? was devastated. They just could not financially support an occupation government in India.
    Martin Luther King made the America people AWARE of the racial injustices that permeated the USA. But it was the GOVERNMENT of the USA who effected the changes that put an end to some of the most abominable practices of the time.

    Let?s get closer in history as to changes REALLY happen. In the USSR was Mikhail Gorbachev who came into power and realized a major change was in order to get the USSR out of its imminent collapse ( I am not talking about Communism collapsing , I am talking about TOTAL devastation to the COUNTRY). Perestroika was born.
    This is a good sample of how and why it was done http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc2/lectures/gorrev.html .
    Now do we believe Castro will have this epiphany after 46 years of totalitarism? Let?s be real.
    Just listening to those motherfuckers who downed the ?Brothers to the rescue? plane tells you there is NO reasoning with fanatical cultists. Cuba will be free when Castro gets a bullet in his head. We can always look at this course of action as the worse possible way of showing our humanity.?Sinking to THEIR level? someone told me.
    Yes, and? When a policeman is fired upon does he pull out a law book and try to reason with the criminal?
    That in the most simplistic way is what WE Cubans face. We are up against a MONSTER. You don?t reason with it, you destroy it. Is this humanity at its purest? I agree it is not , but we have been given no alternative.
    As I read on wall in La Habana ?Para que Cuba sea libre Castro debe morir?. There is REALLY no going around this simple logic.

  21. Killcastro,
    You say the pacifist this and the pacifist that. So let us know, how would you settle this matter.

    There was a statment made earlier, ” Those guys down there can’t even get enough food and essentials, let alone guns and ammunition. The only ones who can fight are here already and the Americans does not let them.” How realistic is that?

    What I was trying to get at is that violence is not always the answer. Look at those other figures who stood up to their governments, society views, and so forth and thought outside the box.

    One man in history thought outside the box against hitler. His name was Oscar Schindler. Look at what he achieved. There seems to be a mentalty out there that the only way to deal with castro is by violent overthrow. That is not the only way. That is what I meant by my quote.

    So say castro gets a bullet in his head. Then what. We all live happly ever after? Don’t think so. Then your gonna have everyone and their mama go for the power grab. Then you have to deal with those who feel they are owed a piece of the pie. Then you have those who are going to want their land back, but have to realize that you have 2generations of families living on that land. What kind of democracy would we establish in a “free cuba,” when we don’t even respect others on this blog site that have opposing views? What exactly would we do? Say, if you don’t see that I’m right and your wrong, you get tossed off the island?

    Maybe MLK, Ghandi, Mandela, Schindler, and other’s would not have survived one day in Cuba under Castro, but I’m sure their ideas would have. Look at Paya, Dr. Biscet. and the rest of the opposition. I don’t recall ever hearing them about using violence as a means of getting rid of fide.

  22. One man in history thought outside the box against hitler. His name was Oscar Schindler. Look at what he achieved.

    Shindler’s efforts should always be praised but Shindler’s efforts had nothing to do with fighting Nazisim or deposing hitler or even changing german society. Were there not a war going on at the time, the story may have had a slightly different, more tragic ending.

    I’m not saying that this means we need to wage war on Castro; if other countries could depose their tyrannies without waging war, I’m in favor of that. But we should not delude ourselves into believing that this way (which tends to be far slower and leads to the deaths of many millions of innocents in the meantime) is necessarily better. Just as a “black or white” view of the world is “simplistic” so too is a similar such view of war and its necessity or the results of war.

  23. ggorge needs to learn a bit more about one of his/her heroes, MLK. He was not a complete pacifist. To wit, I quote: “If your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if your enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.”

  24. Oh, and just in case it’s not clear: given his preference for nonviolence in the civil rights movement, he apparently credited the United States with a conscience. That is more than your average left-wing nutjob does today.

  25. The sad thing is that they did not have to cross the minefields or set across 90 miles of open sea if the American State Department had pursued what was rightfully theirs which Mr. Clinton in one of his many abuses of power through bypass by executive order gave away.

    I wonder how many Cubans here know about this???

    READ ON AND CRY…

    Nov. 6, 2000.? From Stephan Archer-
    Earlier this year, NewsMax.com reported several U.S. islands had been ceded to Russia without congressional approval or public debate. Now, in a NewsMax.com exclusive, it has been discovered that another nation ? Cuba ? has benefited as well from the unprecedented generosity of the United States.
    Numerous islands and islets surrounding Cuba remain sovereign territory of the U.S. However, the U.S. State Department has given them away, without public debate or official treaty, charges retired U.S. Navy Lt. Cmdr. Carl Olson of State Department Watch.

    Included in the island groups are Cayo Coco, Cayo Romano, Cayo Guajaba, Cayo Sabinal, Cayo Largo, the Archipielago de Sabana and the Archipielago de los Jardines de la Reina.

    It is not known how many people, if any, live on the islands, but Olson points out the monetary loss of this territory could be in the billions of dollars. He points out that by turning over these islands to Cuba, the U.S. loses a vast potential of mineral wealth as well as tens of thousands of square miles of fishing rights. Exclusive economic zones surrounding each one of the islands that would have been for the United States’ taking have been forfeited to Cuba without any bilateral agreement or fanfare.

    On top of all this, the State Department established a maritime boundary between Cuba and the United States because the two countries are less than 200 miles from each other’s shore.

    According to international law, all sovereign countries have fishing and mineral rights up to 200 miles off their coasts. Only when two countries are in closer proximity than the needed 400-mile buffer zone does a maritime boundary need to be agreed upon. The Cuba-U.S. State Department maritime boundary cuts in the middle of the Florida Strait between the state of Florida and Cuba. A problem with this is that in the process, it arbitrarily puts all the American-owned islands onto the Cuban side.

    The 1977 maritime boundary agreement between the U.S. and Cuba was never presented to Congress as a formal treaty.

    Outraged by the State Department’s abuse of authority, Olson said: “We find that the State Department’s ongoing concessions to the communist regime in Havana an unconstitutional abuse of the American public. Disposals of American territory and sovereignty must be done only with the advice and consent of Congress.” Also jumping into the debate over the Caribbean islands is the U.S. Census Bureau. Charged with counting the population in all U.S. states and territories, the Census Bureau sent a query letter to the State Department on June 29 of this year asking if the islands in the Caribbean Sea are still eligible for census enumeration.

    “We are told that Spain ceded these islands to the United States in 1898, and that the United States did not subsequently cede them to Cuba,” wrote Associate Census Director John H. Thompson to William B. Wood, director of the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues at the State Department.
    “Our source asserts that Cuba consists of only two islands ? the main island of Cuba and the Island of Pines (or Isla de la Juventud) ? and therefore, any adjacent islands should still belong to the United States.” The letter goes on to press the issue further, requesting that if the U.S. once had jurisdiction over the islands but does no longer, to please “identify [by] what treaty or other legal action the island was relinquished to another nation.”

    NewsMax.com contacted Donald Hirschfeld, who had retired from the Census Bureau and was now working on this issue for the bureau again under contract. He said the last time he spoke with the Office of the Geographer at the State Department was Oct. 11. Still, nothing has happened.
    Historically, the Census Bureau’s assertions regarding American sovereignty of the islands are accurate.

    On Dec. 10, 1898, a peace treaty was signed in Paris between the U.S. and Spain after the Spanish-American War. Article I of the treaty ceded only the island of Cuba to the U.S. Article II ceded Puerto Rico and the other Spanish Islands in the West Indies to the U.S. These islands included those around Cuba. U.S. military occupation of Cuba ended on May 20, 1902, and a new nation was born. However, this nation included only the big island of Cuba. On March 13, 1925, the U.S. also ceded the Isle of Pines to Cuba, but no other island to this day was ever given to Cuba by treaty.

    Olson told NewsMax.com he wondered why the State Department hasn’t energetically pursued America’s basic interests regarding the islands. He suggests the State Department has some other agenda with Cuba and the country’s communist dictator, Fidel Castro.

    “Think about this. Castro’s been there how long? A half-century? So how come no real effort has been done to get rid of him?” Olson asked. “He’s 90 miles away. It would be so simple. Apparently, the State Department likes to have him there.” Olson said another issue surrounding the islands around Cuba is airspace. According to Olson, the U.S. measures Cuban airspace from the island of Cuba. Castro’s regime, however, measures it from the islands. Concluding the whole debate over the islands, though, Olson asks how Cuba acquired sovereignty over the territory from the United States.
    “That’s the question,” Olson said. “Did Cuba invade the islands, and we have yet to draw up a peace treaty following this invasion? “You know, the State Department loves to let these things just float around. You can never trust them.

  26. Ggorge, three things for you to think about.

    First , I was adding to your previous question which was “Hey mark, if everyone leaves, who will stay to fight? just a thought.”

    You were not real specific.

    Martin Luther king, Ghandi, achieved their goals in countries that had a set of laws and guarantees for freedom, even if some there at the time were not aware of them or ignored them. A framework still existed and with time they prevailed with passive resistance. Cuba is at the mercy of a thug, a killer, a liar… and is one of most represive police stares in the world.

    All Cubans, those that are morally and physically able to, if need be, will eventually in their life fight those who will opress freedom in many ways. With words, with thoughts and with blood. The ones stuck there do not have 2nd amendment rights like the ones here, everything was confiscated.

    Those who did not allow for their means to resist to be taken, where eventually found out, chivateados, were given the death penalty and killed. Not by russians, or e. germans, or chinese, or n. koreans but by other cubans, who chose to follow the devil himself.

    Freedom is never cheap.

    How come that when fidel, che, raul and others use violence, kill, murder, destroy and rape a country it is always OK and has to be accepted, but when those people who were shot at, put up against the wall and killed, jailed, beaten, and had their country destroyed and are just trying to free it, maybe by having to fight by using violence, its not OK?

    World War II was full of violence, but it took that to beat nazism, ask if reasoning or making treaties with Hitler worked. sadly many people died, millions, to ensure that many more millions could be saved.

    Nobody said Cuba will be easy, and I pray that it will, but even if castro dies tomorrow, there are too many of his people that are reaping benefits from keeping the other 10-11 millions in a state of servitude reminiscent of plantation slavery.

    These guys are Cuban too, bad Cubans, ones that are using and keeping the rest living in misery so they can profit and retain their status quo, will they give it up peaceably?

    Maybe yes, maybe not. Time will tell. In the meantime, we have to face realities, hope for a peaceful solution and be prepared if it does not happen.

    A responsible optimist

  27. cohetedude,
    My first quote was very specific.

    2nd.Not all Cubans who are morally and physically able to will fight their oppressor with guns as if this was the wild west. That kind of logic reminds me of John Brown. Give a black man a gun and he will fight for his freedom, well what happened in Harper’s Ferry?

    However you are right. People can fight with words and thoughts, but it seems like you prefer fighting with blood more than anything.

    I never said that when it comes to fidel and others who use violence as a way to get what they what, that it’s okay and had to be accepted. It however is NOT OKAY for us to use violence because all you would be doing is hurting the people who you claim you are trying to help. Unless you can go after fidel, raul and all the other commies who destroyed Cuba, without risking innocent life, they by all means, be my guest. Other wise, don’t you think Cubans have suffered enough? World war 2 was full of violence, but this is not world war 2. Maybe in Europe millions of people died like you said, but Cuba only has about 11 million people give or take. How many more need to die or be killed for your views to be achieved?

  28. mcq
    MLK may not have been a complete pacifist, but his philosophy still endures in many disedents, as well as Ghandi’s. Tell me when you saw MLK marching down the street with a gun in his hand or a anything of the sort? That’s what I was getting at. Violence will never work to create democracy in Cuba. It hasn’t in the past, and it will not in the future. By the way if you can show me when MLK used violence to get his point across, please let me know as I would love to contact the MLK foundation and give let them know that he was a hippocrate.

  29. Ggorge, It all comes down to simple math.
    How many will it cost to save how many? Unfortunately, since the world was created, it has been so. Chamberlain found out, so did Petain, and also Wilson, it is our turn now, as we speak.

    I did not say that you said that it was OK for fidel to use violence, I just said and meant that when he has, the criticism and and condemnation is weak and the offense is soon forgotten. That the critics would rather bash an American administration over BS than castro over wholesale murder and other malfeance.

    Remember that all that it takes for evil to triumph, is for men of good will to do nothing. castro has gambled all his life in the art of “how far can I go before men of good will will react” he has become a master as your staments and philosophy demonstrates. Give him another chance, wait a bit, and the gravesites become more numerous, without an end in sight.

    I find your comments to be reactive at most and I fear that no serious thought whatsoever is being given by you to the other commentaries given here, so deeply entrenched are you in your beliefs that an exercise in common sense is not even considered.

    signed,
    A man of impeccable common sense and practicality

  30. cohetedude, you must be God, cause it’s sounds like you have all the answers.
    Then again you might be a madman cause it’s sounds as if your idea of freeing Cuba from the communists is by killing anyone who gets in your way. 2 bad for you. If you were in the Kennedy administration durring the oct missle crisis, we all be dead.

    By the way, an eye for an eye never solves anyting. Just leaves us all blind.

  31. “It however is NOT OKAY for us to use violence because all you would be doing is hurting the people who you claim you are trying to help.”

    Violence is bad! Arms are for hugging!

    Good grief. This isn’t a fricking Robert Fulghum nursery story. These are adult matters, and sometimes violence is the answer. If you can’t understand what this means then please go back to playing with your All-Organic Hemp blocks and let the adults take care of things.

  32. Andrea,
    if turning Cuba into the next Iraq is your idea of violence for a good cause, then your as stupid as your post. Adults are not animals. We can think of other ways than using wepons to get our way. But if you feel that violence is the answer, then I hope that it’s your family that gets taken out first. Then we’ll see what song you’d sing.

  33. You can act in many ways. There is so much more that we Cubans and Americans could be doing right now, instead of just bitching all the time. Why not get Cubans who live in Spain lobby against their government and try to curtail the Spanish support of Cuba. This could have been easier when the socialist were not in power in Spain. Why not lobby the British, get a group to go to Canada and speak with their leaders or Mexico. Why is it always, Fidel used violence, so we have to use violence becasue if we don’t, then nothing is ever going to change? That mentallty takes us back to the stone ages.

    Make other leaders know what is really going on in Cuba. That’s a start. I’m sure the Polish, and the Czechs would be the first ones to understand, as they’ve been there. Latin America might not get it right away, because they see fidel as the only one who will stand up to the U.S. It’s like watcing a fight. Your don’t want to get in it, you may not want to stop it, but you can’t help to watch.

    So if these posters feel that violence is the only way, they’re just kidding themselves

  34. ggorge,

    Cubans in exile, as well as others, have lobbied every single governement as you say for years. They have lobbied the UN, their Human Rights Commission, etc… They have lobbied congress, and every other institution you can name. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Reporters without Borders, you name it. Y que? Pues nico.

    I dont think anyone is advocating violence here, but sometimes the only way to stop violence is usually violemnce. It’s a pretty simple notion really, if someone were trying to kill one of your loved ones, you would certainly try to stop it by whatever means possible.

    I sit here day after day after day trying to expose the castro regime for what it is. That in itslef is taking action. What do you do? You come here and criticize those of us that actually do what we can and you offer up nothing in return. You point the finger but dont give us anything new. Read your comments in this thread and see for yourself.

    And one more thing, please have a bit more respect for commenters here. I dont appreciate you calling anyone “stupid” regardless of what remarks may have been made towards you.

  35. nope, don’t think so. If you allow other to vent on other post, then you have to allow both sides of the coin, otherwise your just as bad as you know who, simply becasue you only allow for one point of view. Just like you know who. Thats life.

  36. ggorge,

    let me explain how this works. Thi is my blog, I make the rules. If you dont like it, you are free to read someoone elses blog. Nobody called you stupid here.

    Por favor, no me des guaperia con los “nope dont think so” cause Ill ban you from this site so fast your head will spin.

  37. Val,

    ggorge is obviously a dedicated pacifist who will entertain no course of action that could possibly involve any form of violence. Please remember when dealing with pacifists that Pacifism is the opposite of Realism. Discussion is useless. Let natural selection take its course.

    G.

  38. ggeorge said:

    “But if you feel that violence is the answer, then I hope that it’s your family that gets taken out first.”

    Nasty.

  39. guido,
    “Discussion is useless. Let natural selection take its course.”

    What exactly is natural selection, dying of old age? Or war and distruction? That God none of you who advocate violence are capable of runing a country. What a waste.

  40. Ggeorge, these pacifist tendencies you have, I believe border in the masochistic.

    The next time you see a thug raping a woman, porque no le das tu mismo culito to see if that pacifies him while he is sodomizing you.

    You see, mi socio, thats what fidel is doing, he is raping cuba over and over and all you pacifists out there le siguen dando las nalgas in the hope he will stop.

    We are telling you that the bitch enjoys it, he ain’t gonna stop, till someone stops him dead cold, get that in your still unbashed head.

  41. What is natural selection? ggorge wants to know? heh heh. Keep reading the posts ggorge, maybe you’ll figure it out.

  42. ggeorge says: “nasty, but that’s violence grace.

    I meant that it is nasty of YOU to hope for someone’s family to be killed just because you do not agree with them.

    I am glad that you provide agruments for ‘the other side’, it keeps us honest and sharp. But you took the discussion way way down.

    Why is that?

  43. Andrea,

    In this blog site, many here have advocated the use of force and violence to get their message across. When others here have a different point of view, they get “attacked” in about the same manner of those who have opposite views of fidel in Cuba. Called names, ganged up upon, intimated, and so forth. And yet you say that I’ve brought this discussion way, way down? No I haven’t. All I said was the truth.

    How can you say that “sometimes violence is the only answer,” and then when someone comes at you with a violent response, you say it’s nasty? Violence is not a walk in the park. It’s not watching the clouds go by and listening to little birds sing. Violence is death and distruction. Which is what people like cohetedude advocate. People who just talk out of their ass, without thinking things thru. If you say that sometimes violence is the only way, then what your really saying is that it’s okay to kill inocent people for your views, just like it was okay for batista to kill for his views, and castro, che, and grau san martin, the list you know goes on and on. How would you tell the victims of fidel’s enemies that violence was the only answer? Look at where over 45 years of violence has gotten Cubans. Absolutly nowhere. And for that matter, look at what over 30 years of where violence has gotten Colombia, or the Middle East.

    But I am glad that I recieved people’s attention here. People here say I’m a pacifist and they’re ticked of by that. Then I say something violent, which is what they advocate, and now I’m a monster. There is absolutely no pleasing this group, because they never think things thru. They just act on raw nerves.

    I stand by what I said. I am not a hypocrate. If you or anyone here feels that violence is the only way out of this mess, let it be your families that get affected by that violence first. Rather yours than mine. I’ll keep looking for another way out. That’s not being nasty, that’s keeping it real.

    Cohetedude,
    If I ever saw an old lady getting raped, I would’nt turn my back to her and walk away and allow her to get raped, the way you would … pro embargo as per lmh’s and your’s comments on other discussions. I would chase him down and get others to help out, as most people would. I think you know what I mean.

    Then again, maybe you don’t.

    Andrea, read cohetedue quotes, if you want an example of someone talking out of their ass, and acting on raw nerves.

  44. World – AP Latin America

    Cuban Activist Decries ‘Culture of Fear’

    Tue Mar 8, 3:25 PM ET World – AP Latin America

    By VANESSA ARRINGTON, Associated Press Writer

    HAVANA – Cuba’s “culture of fear” is the biggest hurdle people living under the communist government must overcome to prompt peaceful political change and a free market on the island, Cuba’s best-known dissident told The Associated Press in an interview.

    Oswaldo Paya said he hopes to push Cubans into action with the National Dialogue, his latest effort to bring democracy to Cuba.

    “It’s like therapy, so people will understand the origin of their fear, the origin of their status,” Paya said of the project. “It’s therapy where Cubans discover their dignity … and discover that life can be different.”

    Unlike other regimes that have used force to control citizens, Cuba relies on people’s fear of punishment ? ranging from ostracism to imprisonment ? to maintain order, Paya said.

    “This regime dominates through people’s fear,” he told the AP late Monday, sitting in his living room filled with photographs of Cuban political prisoners and portraits of Jesus Christ. “It’s a culture of fear. It’s like a system of anticipated paralysis, in which people are not capable of expressing themselves or having conflicting attitudes.”

    Those who dare to speak out against the government can lose their jobs, be given the cold shoulder in their neighborhoods, or wind up in prison, Paya said. Their children can face exclusion and discrimination at school or at work, he added.

    Many adult volunteers who participated in Paya’s Varela Project ? a democracy drive that brought international acclaim to the activist ? are now behind bars.

    Paya says about 50 of the 75 dissidents arrested and sentenced to long prison terms in a spring 2003 government crackdown were Varela Project leaders. Fourteen of the 75 have been released for health reasons, but just two of those were Varela participants, he said.

    Under the Varela Project, volunteers submitted 25,000 signatures to Cuba’s parliament seeking a referendum asking voters if they favor civil liberties such as freedom of speech and the right to business ownership. Authorities long ago shelved the project, ruling it unconstitutional.

    The Cuban government considers Paya and other opponents to be “counterrevolutionaries,” and says there is room within the system for dissenting voices, as long as they don’t directly attack the island’s socialist revolution or its leaders.

    Paya said his latest pursuit, the National Dialogue, is even more threatening to the Cuban government. It goes to the heart of the regime, he said, by prompting people to voice their concerns and complaints and actively create a blueprint for change in Cuba’s centralized political and economic systems.

    “When Cubans are capable of saying that, beyond our fear, we want change, that hits the nucleus of power,” he said. “If the people don’t have fear, the regime no longer exists.”

    Under the project, thousands of Cubans on the island and abroad have formed small groups to discuss reform. The project includes outspoken opponents of President Fidel Castro (news – web sites) as well as supporters of the current system who favor some changes.

    A committee of 110 people was formed to organize participants, and a document is expected midyear.

    The Cuban government has not publicly commented on the National Dialogue, which was launched last summer. However, Paya said state security agents have threatened some of those hosting group sessions.

    Paya said he is accustomed to death threats and surveillance on his house. And he says some parents have told their children to keep away from his children.

    He said he wakes up every day facing the possibility he could be imprisoned. But because the nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize and winner of the European Union (news – web sites)’s top human rights award is internationally known, many observers doubt that would happen.

    Paya and members of his Christian Liberation Movement also have adversaries among some activists on the island and exile groups in the United States. He says he will not attend an opposition congress in May being organized by dissidents.

    “We don’t trust them, given a long history of sabotaging our projects and defaming our colleagues,” he said.

    Many dissidents, including those imprisoned in 2003, have been accused of working with U.S. diplomats to undermine the socialist system ? charges Washington and the activists denied. Paya also insists his group is not being influenced by anyone.

    “No one can pressure us, no one pays us,” Paya said. “We only respond to the interests of Cubans.”

    -By the way, keep up the GOOD JOB PBS! Ain’t nothing wrong with you.

  45. And Now For Something Completely Different

    Okay, first and foremost, Val Prieto (Babalu Blog) is one of my favorites and is high on the list of

  46. By the way Ggorge, I see you’re reading and paying attention. You may eventually learn something that unconstipates your grey matter.

  47. VAL,
    I’ve been reading some other post on your blog site and have noticed when people with other points of views different try to get their points across, they get called names and made to look stupid. Why is that?

  48. cubalibre,

    Um, because they are stupid?

    And what points of views would these be, oscar? the free healthcare and how great it is? The 100% literacy? the Che was a great man?

    Find one. We’ll discuss it.

  49. ggorge ?

    One of your statements clearly indicates your naivet? with respect at the world that surrounds you :

    **If you allow other to vent on other post, then you have to allow both sides of the coin**

    THIS friend, is the typical petulant cry of those with an over blown sense of self or a ridiculously na?ve view of the real world.
    In the microcosm that is THIS Blog, Val is MASTER. In a couple of days you went from advocating Gandhi like politics to DEMANDING, from the MASTER what the MASTER should do. Now think how ridiculous that demand was , more so because you did NOT reason with Val (as you suggest Cubans do with Castro) but you DEMANDED that YOUR point of view be accepted.

    LIFE doesn?t work that way, and YOU know it. You probably have a liberal, hippy based culture lingering around you like a pink cloud of guilt. It makes you feel inadequate to recourse to violence (and violence is violence ? it just how much violence we feel we can get away with ? whether insulting someone OR shooting someone in the head) But instinctively you DO. Human nature (or should I say the non divine part of humanity) IS violent. That is how we survive. We can admire the few people who have overcome the animal side of who we are, but we MUST admit it is such an infinitesimal minority is just an aberration of conduct and not the norm.

    You have an all loving Jesus who said to turn the other cheek, but in a passionate moment destroyed the temple and condemned all the merchants to eternal damnation for desecrating the house of his father.

    There in a VERY poignant nutshell you have MAN reacting to the NON divine nature of MAN.

    Now, I point out Jesus, because (to me) HE is a soul who was TRULY peaceful. The whole Gandhi, Martin Luther King thing, is to me neither here nor there.
    Gandhi was a well known womanizer and so was Luther King, psychologically a sign of VERY aggressive natures but alas?. THAT is the best you can do, so be it.
    The point here is that you have an argument based on some misguided ideal of how to go about achieving change, or achieving anything for that matter.
    It does NOT work, because it goes against our basic human instincts. Like communism and socialism do NOT work because it goes against the most basic principals we have programmed in our DNA. *I* MUST SURVIVE WHILE I RATHER YOU DINT?. Some of us have that bit of biological baggage under better control than others but we ALL have it. In some it is called ?passive aggressiveness ?(of which you seem to suffering). That is typically shown on apprehensive individuals or (and I am speaking in medical terms now). Now in my neighborhood in La Habana we called ?apprehensive? , scared.
    And THAT is clearly YOUR demeanor, that of a passive aggressive, apprehensive individual who is not fully at ease with his more animal instincts. I suggest that before making a call for ?peaceful? change against the likes of a monster like Castro, you look into your OWN nature and explain to yourself *WHY* you?re blowing a gasket on the VERY simple issue of Val being in full control of that which belongs to HIM.

  50. – cubalibre –
    Are they called STUPID or are their arguments STUPID because they do not represent the TRUTH at ALL, but a very biased, narrow, quasi-romantic view of Castro?s Cuba?

    As Val points out, if ANYONE keeps pointing out that Castro?s saving grace is kicking the ?Mafia? out of Cuba, Free healthcare and education, well that is just PROPAGANDA (and BAD propaganda at that) , and you know NOTHING about Cuba. The funny part is, that if he carries out his recent promise to subsidize pressure cookers in Cuba, THAT would be perhaps his GREATEST achievement. How god damn sad is THAT?

    Imagine ANY leader of ANY country in the world speaking 4.5 hours about the merits of Pressure Cookers! Charles Manson and his ?Helter Skelter? or Applewhite and the UFOs lunacy make as much sense.

    BUT this idiocy actually becomes a topic of contention for the PRO-Castro contingent.

    Case in point; 75 Cubans are incarcerated without reason, their human rights violated. After a year, 5 get released and we Cubans need to hear about how magnanimous Castro is? Now isn?t THAT just a colossal piece of stupidity?
    Like ?Well Hitler killed 20 million Jews but ? he didn?t kill ALL the Jews, how bad could he be??

    Cubans have dealt with 46 years of ?experts? from ALL extremes, the right and the left and the ever dangerous misguided CENTER.
    At some point we MUST just throw our hands up and declare ?yeap he/she is an asshole all right?

  51. Methinks ggeorge completely missed my point. Of course MLK did not use violence, because his particular political efforts did not demand it. But as the quote I provided clearly shows, he felt that there were indeed quite justifiable circumstances for doing so—WWII Germany being his chosen example.

    So, is Cuba Gandhi, or Bonhoeffer? Unlike you, I don’t have the hubris to claim to know for sure.

  52. KillCastro—in fact, Jesus was not a complete pacifist either. One need only read Luke 22:35-38 to understand that.(“If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”) What is more, his own example was NOT one of peace, but rather of passivity. After all, one could hardly imagine a more violent death—but for His reasons He chose not to fight back.

    To be fair, Jesus made it clear in Luke 22:49-51 that the aforementioned sword was to be used for defensive purposes, not for the advancement of faith. (If only Mohammed had felt this way.) But defense is not necessarily SELF defense: as Norman Geisler puts it, “Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally.” The question is, then, just whom are we called to protect, even using violence?

  53. killcastro,

    so Val is the master, no one is debating that. But kill castro, in the REAL WORLD, Cuba being part of that real world, fidel is the master. In a few days, I have been trying to say over and over and over that violence is not the answer. That’s all. Why you can’t get that is beyond me. But I just don’t care anymore.

    Tell me please in what comment I made have I demanded anything from Val? I am not here demanding that my views be accepted, because I know they never will, esp from people like cohetedude, but I do EXPECT my views to be RESPECTED, even if you don’t agree with them.

    You don’t need to tell me about life. Just the very fact that you can assume that I’m a hippy liberal shows me how nieve you or anyone can be. Do you know where I live?
    Where I work?
    What my name is?
    Where I come from?
    How old I am?
    I don’t think so, but you can assume that I’m a such and such? Wow. You, know in your last comment, you made a lot of remarks which I can either rebuke, or just let go. I choose not to waste my time. I take out the garbage not bring it in.
    What a waste.

  54. Tell ya what. If everyone here gives out their personal info. I’ll do the same. I think killcastro should go first, since he’s one of the many who assumes so much about others.

  55. Val, I want to thank you for pulling my remark to Ggorge, I had regreted writing it after I pressed the post button.

    I was very graphic and violent in detail but very truthful, I related something that would have altered Ggorges liberal pantsywaisted sensibilities.

    After all it was all about how to deal with reality and how other people when faced with a decision, handle it without all of the left wing self proclaimed intelligentzia club BS.

    He touched a raw nerve, when he accused me of doing nothing when innocents are being brutalized. I spent years trying to make a difference. Sometimes due to politics and other considerations it was very disheartening to see our efforts dismantled and wasted. But the times that you were somewhere at the right time and able to save lives while giving payback, made it all more worthwhile. Making decisions that may seem brutal to those that cannot not even begin to know how it all transpired.

    Doctors and patients have to make similar decisions when dealing with cancer. You take poisons which are called chemotheraphy, these kill the cancer cells, but they also kill some healthy cells. Both type of cells belong to you, you know the treatment will cause pain, suffering.

    You realize that with YOUR bad cells some of YOUR good cells are sacrificed and die too. It takes time and in some cases the treatment needs to become aggresive, depending on how well entrenched the cancer is, how fast it is spreading and what other organs it is threatening.

    I have had many friends who have won this battle and have comed back with a greater appreciation of life, loved ones, and feel renewed purpose in the eyes of God.

    But it would not have been possible without sacrificing some of the good, while killing the bad for the salvation of all.

    This battle has always existed in nature, all the way from the molecular and cellular to complex organisms, and extending to tribes to nations.

    The source of Cuba’s cancer originated from communist dogma, the virulence of this cancer resides within castro, and castro is metastizing like wildfire through Latin America. His greatest wish, to become the caudillo of caudillos, the core of the tumor.

    To rid ourselves of it will require aggressive and brutal measures, ice cream, hugs and kisses will not rid us of it.

    Val, thanks again.

  56. ggorge you BORE me with your predictability . I don?t know ANYTHING about you but I nailed you on the passive aggressive behavior (the ?garbage? comment left you wide open.
    So what would you expect from me if face to face you called me garbage, would you be terribly upset if I punched your lights out? NOT that I would do something like that ?cause it is illegal BUT? don?t you think you DESERVE at least a smack? Would you defend yourself if I attacked or would you try to REASON with me as to your right to insult me? See how stupid you sound. ?

    Listen , it is clear to the lot of us , there?s not much circulating up on your northern regions that can contribute in any valuable sense to our discussion so I WILLINGLY go out with your garbage. Who knows, stupid people have a tendency to throw away rather valuable things while sticking to small shiny trinkets

    I rather address the Jesus question… And NOT in a religious context but more on the historical context (which I feel teaches us a lot more about HUMANITY).
    Here you have a man where his human side and his divine side where quite often at odds with each other. And THAT was the only way he could?ve impacted history the way he did, Granted as a scholar you read the new testament and often wonder about the discrepancies in that which he taught and that which he did. Cursing a tree for not having fruit when he wanted it most was not all the act of a peaceful man.. His declaration of ?father why hath though abandoned me? really did not point to a man at peace but a man in torment
    Jesus was a man of contradictions and to paraphrase ?of course he contradicted himself he contained multitudes? The point is that peaceful means have seldom achieved anything on this earth of ours. Now AGAIN I ask a definition for violence. When Rosa Parks refused to sit on the back of the bus, that was in her day and time an act of violence hostility & disrespect to the law of the land. BUT.. She WAS RIGHT, she was JUST and the LAW had to change and it did not with meekness, rhetoric and dialog but with one woman saying FUCK YOU!

    Someone said that if a man is not willing to fight for peace he doesn?t deserve peace?
    Putin paraphrased the sentiments expressed above when he said (after 9/11) THE ONLY RESPONSIBILITY A PRESIDENT HAS IS TO PROTECT *HIS* PEOPLE.

    You don?t protect your people with ?strong notes of disapproval to the UN? You do by blowing motherfuckers like Saddam Hussein and his kind to kingdom come.

    And THAT is the world. That HAS been the world ? ALWAYS-

    Castro has taught those of us who were raised under his tutelage that VIOLENCE, bombings, terrorism WORKS. Castro, the FIRST terrorist in Latin America! If anyone lacks this bit of trivia. More Cubans died at the hand of terrorist Castrists bombs that in the hands of Batista?s goons) In fact the Batista?s massacres were nothing but retaliation for Castro?s bloody reign of terror.
    Just the FACT that Castro survives El Moncada, is sent to a minimum security prison and is out in a couple of years just points out at the ridiculous statement that Batista was a blood thirsty animal. But when your police force is being ambushed on 23 y 12 in El Vedado, Bombs are being placed in CINECITO ( a movie theater for kids) and you daily hear Radio Rebelde inciting cubans to VIOLENCE , there?s a point when your instinct is ?you know I am gonna hit back?. Was Batista?s retaliation brutal? O YES , BLOODY as hell , but so were the Castro attacks. Castro would come into a small village in La Sierra and if he didn?t get the help he needed the town would burn to the ground.
    Of course you never read THAT in the pages of Granma, did ya?

    Basically, speaking of overthrowing a tyrant a man who came to power by the sword and remain in power by the sword by meekly yielding to his every whim is just cowardice (or self interest , like that of Zapatero?s actions)
    Go reason with Charles Manson, or with Rev Moon, was Chamberlain able to reason with Hitler? And THERE IN LIES the absurdity of this ?Let?s give peace a chance? hippy shit.
    We did, it got us 9/11. Let?s kick his asses to kingdom come and then will ask forgiveness when the time comes
    .

  57. keep up the good posts cohetedude, and killcastro. We may just learn something…..blah blah blah…

    What? did I detect some emotions from cohetedude?? na I must be mistaken.

  58. killcastro,
    I have learned one thing from you. I never knew that someone with a name like “killcastro” could be a theologian. When your done with your surmons, I’d suggest you’d lay off of Jesus for a while. I must not be boring you so much, if you keep reading my post. All you and cohetedude can do is ask “if I smacked you this, if I raped you there,” what would I do. Well fact is there is a difference between smacking, raping, and physically being killed. I wouldn’t expect you to understand, as the only language you and your alpha66 buddies speak is that of violence and more violence.
    You can rape me, smack me, kill me and throw my body in the trash for all I care, cause at the end of the day, I’ll still be more of a MAN than you or anyone here who ever advocated violence.

  59. ggorge,

    You dont need to give your name and adddress and all that, but, at least use a legitimate email address. I would hve responded privately to some of your disparaging remarks had I been able to, instead of psoting them publicly.

    Thats the difference between you and I. Transparency. I bitch and moan and all that but at least I dont hide behind the anomnimity of the internet.

    What kind of an example does all this bitching and whinng between us set to those who arent Cuban that may be reading this?

    I pulled one of you remarks to cohetedude just the same was as I pulled his remark towards you. Had you given a legitimate email address, you would have known my reasons why.

  60. Andrea,
    Don’t worry about what Ggorge told you about awful, violent people like myself and killcastro. If all hell were to break out, would you rather us be by your side or Ggorge’s? He’ll probably bore you to death with his pacifist theories before the bad guys get to you.

    I am beginning to think that he might be a trial attorney, thinks he can argue or debate himself into and out of anything. So what if history and fact is ignored as long as he can weasel himself in and out?

    And Ggorge, what you detected was good manners, consideration and gratitude for Val’s hospitality, not emotion. Its also called having class and being polite, but then, you seem to be quite adept at misinterpreting and misrepresenting the obvious. Obviously!

    By the way Ggorge, I have some gopher turtle holes in my property you might want to crawl into and get cozy with the other rattlesnakes.

Comments are closed.