Latest U.S.-Cuba Pissing Match: Where Are The Adults?

It's a pretty grim scene along Havana's famed malecon seaside drive this week-- an electrified pissing match between two deeply hypocritical governments.

Washington has no formal in embassy in Cuba but its practical equivalent -- the U.S. Interests Section-- sits in a well-known building right on the coastal road. This week U.S. diplomats put up a merrily-lit Xmas exhibition on the property with twinkling lights, a Santa, a Snowman etc.

That alone probably would have ticked off Fidel's government. For some time Christmas wasn't "recognized" in Cuba and it was only a few years ago that Cubans could start buying very expensive artificial Xmas trees in the hard-currency stores. But what really got Castro's goat this time was the big number '75' that the Americans planted in the middle of the holiday display -- the number of Cubans hastily rounded-up and tossed into jail last year for thought crimes.

Now, on its own, this ain't a bad idea to hector Cuba over its transgressions.  The rub, of course, is the obvious selectivity of the U.S. protest gesture. If the U.S. government boldly spoke out against repression in every country where it has a diplomatic mission this world would be a better place. So I'm not opposed to what the gringos did, per se. I just wish they did it everywhere (in China or Pakistan they would have to use a lot more than two digits).

Now, the Cuban government has responded tit for tat. Giant posters of the abuse pictures of Abu Ghraib have now been installed and illuminated right outside the doors of the U.S. mission in Havana. The Cubans have further embellished them with bright red swastikas--something that tells us volumes about the margins for subtlety in Cuban political thought (as it is).

I find both governments to be deeply, deeply hypocritical. The actions of both governments insult our collective intelligence. The U.S. display was certainly intended to provoke (which it has) and does NOT reflect real Bush administration policy (which is to tolerate equal or worse repression by our "friends").

The Cubans should take little succor from the outrages of Abu Ghraib. The misbehavior of American troops in Iraq -- or Guantanamo-- in no way explains, excuses, nor justifies the total lack of political freedom or the absence of rule of law in Cuba.

Those lights along the malecon -- from both sides-- illuminate only the folly of those who have placed them. Where are the adults?

P.S. Without taking a side in this silly stand-off, I will note that the tradition of using the area around the U.S. Interests Section as a site for "symbolic" graphic political statements was inititiated by the Cubans. Sometime during the 1980's, the Cuban government erected a huge, neon-trimmed billboard right in front of the building that read: "Mr. Imperialists: We Have Absolutely No Fear of You!" It was there for years and years and might still be there. If my memory serves me right, it was put up in the immediate wake of the 1980 Mariel crisis when 100,000 Cubans (including the prison population) were allowed to come to the U.S.

P.P.S. Apparently that old sign is still up. Here's a picture of it taken recently by a British tourist.

Comments

[John Moore (Useful Fools)]

I do not believe it is possible for a world power to carry on a non-hypocritical foreign policy and survive.

I believe that all of us would like freedom for everyone - whether we are left or right.

But there are unfortunately practical issues. Sometimes they are used as an excuse. But all too often, they are real.

We attack Iraq and not Korea. Hypocritical? Many have said so. But the human cost of attacking the North would have been enormous, and almost all who died would not have been Americans.

We have to deal with China differently than Cuba. It is indeed a big trading partner (that in itself among other things an attempt to soften China, along with whatever monetary motives may drive policy). China can do horrible damage to us with a push of a button. China, on the other hand, never asked Michael Kruschev to nuke us, as Castro did (letter on the net). China is our best hope in the North Korean situation, and they will get all they can out of it.

Rumsfeld said "When you go to war, you take the army you have."

Unfortunately, the same is true of the diplomatic side of things - you take the allies you have. I think we could do a better job of taming some of these folks, but its hard to tell. Could we get the Saudis to behave? How about the rights of women throughout huge swaths of the world including India? When does human rights change to cultural imperialism?

The world, of course, is just as hypocritical, for example putting the one of worst human rights abusers as head of UN Human Rights organizations, and other such travesties. The Oil for Food program, the biggest financial scandal in the history of the world (unless you are the New York Times reporting on it) was a masterful job by Saddam to subvert the UN and prevent UN approval for a US attack. In many countries in the world, corruption is not even considered bad.

Ideologies and just plain humanity promise a better world. I think it may happen - in some areas it is happening - look at economic progress in India and China - but it is a struggle.

We know how to engineer transistors or bridges. Nobody, neocon or communist or whatever, inspite his or her claims, knows how to engineer societies, and the strongest attempts have had the greatest proportional internal death tolls (China, USSR, Cambodia, Nazi Germany).

I have been asking where the adults are too. I have concluded that there are more in the US than in any other important country. In Europe, they are regressing. The shame culture countries have fundamental problems - especially the Arabs.

Naturally, I think the adults are mostly on the conservative side.

But I think you just might have been able to guess that.

The left in the US has shown extreme hypocritical behavior lately. I could list a whole lot of incidents, but that would just set off a big back and forth. Only one example... I am glad you are one who recognizes the evil of Cuba's government. Too many on the left do not.

[jim hitchcock]

Your remarks about China do raise an interesting point, John; if we opened up trade with Cuba, would we have more influence over Castro's policies? Probably not much, I'd guess...It's always been clear that his longetivity is due to total repression, rather than keeping the peasants happy. And the reality is that the attempt would have a very negative effect on the realpolitik mindset of the anti-Castro voters in Florida, something Republicans will avoid at all costs. So...we wait for the old bastard to die, and then we attempt to deal.

P.S. Like to know where Carter fits in your last sentence.

[Ahmed]

There are indeed a large and substacial group of prisoners being held in Cuba under military detention, and whose treatment has garnered the wrath of human rights groups internationally. They are not declared prisoners of war, as Amnesty and others have pleaded, thus they have been denied the protection of the forth Geneva Convention. Their has been reported cases of abuse, torture as well as unjustified inprisoment, as many people there were simply swepted up by the military. These are not captives of Castro, but rather the US government and they are being held at Guatanamo Bay. Hypocracy it seems knows no limits

[Marc Cooper]

I see. So there are no or few prisoners in Cuban jails, correct? And it's a lie, is it, that who ever is in Cuban prisons have not been granted the right of being seen by Amnesty International? And it is also a lie that Cubans who are arrested have no right to independent defense lawyers and independent judicial review? A further lie, I suppose, that there is no concept of habeus corpus in Cuba? There is no ability to sue the state for wrongful imprisonment is also a fabrication. Amnesty International says it was last allowed in Cuba in 1988; they must be making that up as well.

I guess the only thing we know for sure is that Cuban prisoners in Boniato prison and who have NO mechanisms to exercise appeals or invoke any oversight and are at the hands of a Kafkaesque one-party dictatorship get up every morning and say: "Whew! Im lucky to be here because I could be in Guantanmo as prisoner to the Imperialists."

What I find dumbfounding is not that you condemn the conditions as Guantamo-- which merit denunciation-- of course, but you can't find that ounce of humanity and justice to denounce similar conditions created by Castro.

You are willing to quote Amnesty Intl quite selectively it seems. Too bad. That's exactly the same selective attitude the US interests section is demonstrating in Havana.

[Marc Cooper]

Here is a description by Amnesty Intl of some of the abusive conditions that the 75 dissidents arrested last year are facing... oh no, nothing like Guantanamo... sounds more like Club Med:

"With regard to their location of detention, Amnesty International has denounced the practice of deliberately incarcerating the 75 individuals in prisons located at extreme distances from their homes and families. This makes access to families and legal assistance particularly difficult, and can be construed as an additional penalty imposed upon the prisoners and their families. This practice contravenes the United Nations Body of Principles for the Protection of all Persons under any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, Principle 20, which provides that:
"If a detained or imprisoned person so requests, he shall if possible be kept in a place of detention or imprisonment reasonably near his usual place of residence".(7)

For example, Normando Hernández González, who lives in Vertientes in the province of Camagüey, is serving his sentence in Pinar del Río province, nearly 700 kilometers away, while Eduardo Díaz Fleitas from Pinar del Río is being held in Kilo 8 prison in Camagüey.

In addition, the exchange of correspondence and telephone communications between many prisoners and their families has reportedly been restricted, and family visits limited, according to families as a form of harassment by prison officials. Restrictions on contact with family members, if intended as harassment or a form of additional punishment, would contradict the principles of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners as laid out in paragraph 37:
"Prisoners shall be allowed under necessary supervision to communicate with their family and reputable friends at regular intervals, both by correspondence and by receiving visits".(8)

In addition, in cases such as that of nine prisoners of conscience held in Kilo 8 prison in Camagüey province, prison authorities have reportedly made efforts to deter prisoners from carrying out activities such as studying the Bible, for example by threatening to suspend family visits. This would also contradict the principles of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, paragraphs 41.3 and 42:
"Access to a qualified representative of any religion shall not be refused to any prisoner. On the other hand, if any prisoner should object to a visit of any religious representative, his attitude shall be fully respected ...So far as practicable, every prisoner shall be allowed to satisfy the needs of his religious life by attending the services provided in the institution and having in his possession the books of religious observance and instruction of his denomination".(9)

With regard to treatment in detention of the 75 individuals detained in March 2003, Amnesty International has received scattered allegations of ill-treatment by prison guards or by other prisoners, reportedly with the complicity of prison guards. Such instances would contravene article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that:

"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".(10)

In one such case, reports indicate that prisoner of conscience Víctor Rolando Arroyo Carmona was taken from his cell by three prison guards on 31 December 2003 and dragged to the floor while reportedly being struck in the face and body. Guards also allegedly trapped his leg in a door to immobilise him during the beating.

Some prisoners have reportedly been held in solitary confinement for extended periods. Amnesty International believes that if solitary confinement is used, strict limits should be imposed on the practice, including regular and adequate medical supervision by a doctor of the prisoner's choice and the right to appeal prison authorities' decisions. Amnesty International believes that solitary confinement can have serious physical and psychological effects and in certain circumstances can constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

For example, the Sigler Amaya brothers, Ariel and Guido, have reportedly been held in solitary confinement with inadequate light and water, in breach of international standards.

The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, paragraph 33 that states that "chains or irons shall not be used as restraints". Amnesty International has received information indicating that at least one of the prisoners, Próspero Gainza Agüero, was chained during his transfer to the prison infirmary, in contravention of these rules."

Well, you see, this is all good news. The level of abuse by the Cubans is not as intense as in Abu Ghraib or Gitmo. That must be what they mean by "Socialism With A Human Face."

[r.k.]

i traveled to cuba this last july, and will be again in april. i had wanted to go there for quite a while, and i head a pleasent time. i liked what i seen in the areas of social services, health and education. i also had had the privalage of visiting an aids hospital and got to learn about the advances in aids medicines. i visited with religious groups about religion and spiritualty in cuba. i got to learn to dance, and i drank alot of mojitos. all very pleasent experiences. i was very impressed with how deep into society the social services ran.
i also seen plenty of things that i didn't like at all. i got to visit with people who hated fidel and their government. they were very vocal about it, and were not afraid at all to tell me there opinion. usually in discussing this, random people passing by would join in and a pro fidel/anti fidel debate would start. very fun stuff. i hate the restrictions they have in the area of journalism..i hated seeing the way that some with reletives in miami have alot and live very well, while those with no reletives, although having access to health and education, were living alot more difficult a life.
i visited urban gardens, which were just gardens made out of unused land in the cities. i visited the farms in the country. those old farm boys are big time supporters of the revolution..they are treated very well, presumably because they produce the food for the country. i could go on and on. all in all, i had a great time while i was there. i learned that there are alot of good things in cuba, and alot of bad. i learned there there really are alot of people who really do love fidel, and there are alot who do not. i learned that cubans are willing to negotiate their socialism and try new formulas of economy (except in health and education, they want no privization in those areas, and was told on many occasions that if a future government tries to sell those off, there will be another revolution)

the most important thing i learned is that both the cuban government and the u.s. government act like children with eachother,and that both our countries could learn alot and offer alot from/to eachother..
r.k.

[r.k.]

i posted the above reply. i decided to add that i have had a few beers, so my spelling and grammar was off. also, i am not a journalist or professional in any field, and so posting a reply made me nervous, as i am just a 22 yr old guy doing nothing worthwhile in life at the moment. r.k.

[Marc Cooper]

RK.. thanks for posting and telling us of your experience. Dont be nervous and please keep posting. Your comments on Cuba are well taken and I have no doubt you saw what you saw... there are millions of people who feel benefitted by the Cuban government and millions who do not. There are complex reasons why on both sides of the fence-- but what you report is accurate.

I would point out one thing. My experience in Cuba is that people are much much more open in expressing even their most negative opinions than they were 15 or 20 years ago. That, however, isnt saying much. Expressing opinions is one thing-- having the right to act on them, let alone possessing the civic tools are quite another.

The big shift came in the summer of 1994... prior to that if you said you wanted to leave Cuba or --worse-- if you got caught preparing for that, you were considered a major criminal. But that summer saw the so-called "rafting crisis" when the government actually encouraged a mass exodus by raft! (That was an equally reprehensible position when you think of the incredible danger involved). From that point forward it was OK in Cuba for people to say they hated things and wanted to leave. A good escape valve for the government... at very little social or political cost. As you point out, there is press freedom. Nor is there any legal way to build any organization indepdent of the Communist Party and the state.
Among my many interests, Im a ham radio operator. So last time I was in Cuba I buzzed by the Amatuer Radio Association in Havana... I was saddened to see that even that was a state-sponsored organization.
Keep posting.

[steve]

Marc, you're saying that comparing Cuba to the most advanced capitalist power in the world is something that tells us next to anything? Cuba's violations sound pretty tepid compared to Haiti, or the Dominican Republic...Columbia, Mexico...
What's next, comparing the Cuban economic performance with the US? I guess there's something to be gained from that too...

[Ahmed]

Marc give me a break. As an American citizen who lives in a nation which defines itself as a beacon of liberty and purveyer of democracy throughout the world, you're damn right I'm concerned about about armed detention centers which wholly bypass international law, while justifying its methods in empty rhetoric about fighting terror. I was writing to agree with you charge of hypocracy for the empty and disingenous concern out government shows concerning the prisoner rights in Cuba. The irony of the plea they placed on the embassy, is that in the very same small island, on guatanamo bay the US is engaged in activities roundly coondmened by international law as well as human rights organisations. I assume we are in agreement on this

Marc, quit trying to suggest that the only way to crtique US power and blantant hypocracy is to prefix it with an equaling blistering attack against Cuba's human rights record. I find that kind of logic and moral equivalence asinine and intellectually insulting.

[Michael J. Totten]

Ahmed: "Marc, quit trying to suggest that the only way to crtique US power and blantant hypocracy is to prefix it with an equaling blistering attack against Cuba's human rights record. I find that kind of logic and moral equivalence asinine and intellectually insulting."

Wow. Conservatives get bent out of shape for moral equivalence, too. The difference between you and them is they know damn well the United States is vastly superior in the arena of human rights. You seem to be arguing that we could learn something from the Cuban model.

Maybe not. Perhaps I misunderstand your point. But sheesh, Ahmed, you sound as if you're offended by "moral equivalence" because Cuba's rights record is better, not worse, than the US. If that's not your point, then blasting Marc for "moral equivalence" is the wrong way to get it across.

Steve, meanwhile, is a broken record. Cuba isn't the worst country on earth. So what? If that's the standard only North Korea deserves any criticism. And I don't see Steve giving Kim Jong Il much of a smackdown in here.

[Ahmed]

Well thanks for the observation Mr Totten, but for your information, i was reacting more to the fact that when I brought up the issue of Guatanamo Bay, Coops went on some rant and accused me of being a rapid apologist of Castro.I found his logic and argument disingenous to say the least.

On the topic of Guatanamo, here's the opening paragraphs from Human Rights Watch USA's lengthy submission about

Two years after opening a detention camp at its naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the following is taken from a Human Right Watch's rather lenghty submission.

Since January 11, 2002, the U.S. government has sent over seven hundred people picked up from around the world to Guantanamo. Currently some 660 are in detention, including an undisclosed number of children. As the detention camp begins its third year, the public still does not know who the detainees are, what they have allegedly done, and whether and when they will be charged with crimes or released. There have been no hearings to determine the legal status of detainees and no judicial review—in short, no legal process at all.

[GMRoper]

I've already been figuratively labled a right wing knuckle dragging neanderthal by Ahmed. I've taken on steve numerous times (even though we always agree on the Red Sox). But folks, I've also travled a bit in this world and seen other countries, other ways of life, other political systems. I've studied European and Russian history, and my daughter claims that I lived most of that history.

But I will be damned if in this case I won't stand up for the USA. Sure, we have lot's of problems, we need to prosecute those who persecute prisoners, we need to clean up our own act considerably. But we are a damn sight ahead of the majority of the world and we do far better on human rights than any current member of the Human Rights Commission of the UN.

Now, I've said my piece and I'll shut up.

[John Moore (Useful Fools)]

The United States is at war. We have the right to capture those people, and in fact in most cases we had the right to execute them on the spot for a specific violation of the laws of war.

Wars are ugly. And some innocent people have bad things happen to them. I am sure some of those prisoners weren't too bad. But they are not POWs. They have little legal status. Most were captured fighting against us, and they were not in uniform of any sort (required even of insurgents by international law).

I would point out that the conditions at Guantanamo are not bad at all, as prisons go. They are better off there than Americans in American jails. They are far better treated than they would treat any captives.

They chose their path. I have little sympathy for most of them. Play with fire, and get burned. Some have been released and went right back to killing Americans.

Cuba, on the other hand, imprisons dissidents.

Can you tell the difference between illegal guerillas or terrorists and dissidents pushing for democracy? Have you read about the conditions in Cuban prisons?

I also have little interest in Amnesty International's judgements. When everyone in the world wants to get America, the NGO's - already anti-American in many cases - are not terribly accurate. Their raw data - fine. Their conclusions - screw 'em.

Ahmed, shall we due process do you give to killers who themselves would never give due process? I'd say not killing them on the spot is doing them a favor, except too many are confused enough to want to be killed in battle.

I suggest you look at history and look at other countries. So far, all I see is anti-Americanism.

[steve]

"Most were captured fighting against us, and they were not in uniform of any sort (required even of insurgents by international law)."

The ones released already? The ones who will invariably be released when it is finally acknowledged that they too had the bad luck of being chosen by a warlord to serve in Guantanamo or some other bad fate of being in thewrong place at the wrong time?
The confidence you speak reminds me of the confidence Clinton spoke of Wen HoLee's guilt or the military's faith in the idea that Mr. Yee had committed acts worthy of the death penalty...
On another level I find it hard to believe you truly think what you think. Are you saying that if your son or wife or close friend happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time that you would not object to the government putting them away in Guantanamo? Surely you can't believe that, for no sane person would or should? It's what leads me to believe that much of the rhetoric of the "war" on "terror" is about as real as the belief that Iraq is "WW2" all over.

[jim hitchcock]

John, understand, I am not taking issue with you, but most of the
Army of the Potomac under Washington were not in uniform. And they
were considered an illegal army by King George. I realize I'm putting too fine a point on it, but you're the one who suggested
we (or at least, Ahmed), look at history. And if their not POW's, just what are they. I really think that once we start denying due process, we set ourselves on that ole slippery slope. Next thing you know, we'll be jailing journalists for not revealing sources...

[r.k.]

it is sad that there is very little to do in that country that is not associated with the state..
i did however get to go out to a private farm, and then also a private cooperative farm. i had excellent fun there, at the farm co-op. it was a place that teenagers from the city can go if they want to learn about and become farmers. they study half the day, farm the other half. we had a great midnight song/drink/dance session in a swimming pool that we were filling up. very fun. i did find it distressing that the people in urban areas weren't afforded that freedom and luxury to operate outside of the state.

~i met a guy who left cuba in 94 on a raft. i met him in some little tiny tiny town in the country. he said he left on the raft, visited family in florida and new jersy, and went back to cuba, simply because it is his homeland. he said he couldn't comprehend how in the u.s. just a routine trip to the doctors office costs hundreds. the sad thing is that when he came back, he came sooner than the five yr period cubans who leave have to wait, and he was thrown in jail. when i asked him how jail in cuba was, he replied "it was ok. they didn't beat me, or torture me. but still, this is my country..why should they throw me in jail just because i traveled to another place."

a joke a cuban told me.....

~the pope comes to cuba for a visit, and before the festivities began, he asks fidel to accompany him on a drive on the malecon in the papal vehicle. fidel joins him. during the course of the journey, a gust of wind blows the popes little hat off into the ocean. fidel calmly gets up,jumps out of the vehicle, jumps off the wall of the malecon, and walks across the water and gets the pope his hat. the next day, the Granma reports.."Fidel is God. He walks on water and saves popes hat"
the vatican news service reports "the pope has performed his first miracle..he makes castro walk on water"
and the miami herold reports "Castro nearing death..he can't even swim anymore"

cheers
r.k.

[Marc Cooper]

Good joke RK> One day I will do a LONG posting with my "best of" Cuban jokes.

Ahmed... It's laughable to accuse me of saying that any criticism of the US must be prefaced with a denunciation of Cuba. Indeed... the absolute reverse seems to be ur problem. You seem to be physically incapable of mouthing or saying any words of criticism of Cuba without a prior denunciation of US abuses.

I make no symmetry between the two cases we are talking about. Symmetry is of little interest in any case. Either one is opposed to abuse or not. The victims of abuse seem to be able to agree on that much. I just find it mind-boggling that some people must engage such obvious moral relativism.
Email.. or web postings for that matter... are not the best form of argument because one cannot see or sense the nuances of face to face dialogue. So I dont really know if that shoe fits you... but it damn well seems like it...

So let's try again... do you find the judicial and penal system of Cuba worthy of a critique? Or do you think it improper to even the raise the question?

My position on Guantanamo is clear as is yours and we mostly agree. My position on Cuban justice is clear. You dont seem to have a position. At least not a stated one.

[Ahmed]

Marc,

The world is far more complex, contridictory and nunaced then to be understood by asking simply whether someone is for, or against something. To answer your query though, my position on the jailing of Cuban dissident, whether they be, journalists, writers, or enomists is clear--i absolutely an oppossed. But when i hear people railing away at Cuban injustices, when on the SAME ISLAND our country runs a mass detention center totally above international law and roundly condemned by human rights orgainsations, i get suspicious off that persons intend. Further, while jailing of ideas and thoughts is abonimibal, I believe that the US documented position of subsidising terrorist groups in Cuba as well as engaging in economically embargos aimed to starve Cuba economically, does wonders for civil liberties, in a country which has seen its revolution from day one threatened by big brother. I also wish journalists like you could devote some ink to the Cuban 5 who languish in American prisons. If we want to be honest too and devote oursleves to prison justice, we better damn well look at our own country which is building thousands of jails a year, housing more prisoners per capita then any advanced industrial state. None of this excuses the Cuban regime, to answer your inpending red herring, but I'm arguing for context and more fuller understanding of human rights. Lets not engage in dialogues where we assume that the United States has a monopoly on the values of enlightement, human rights anf freedom. I'm not suggesting you are but i see this idea in the writing of some on this board.

And Marc, I would like to mention, you started this debate by blowing a casket when i brought up Guatanamo and US hypocracy without comdemning Castro as a preface. So in theory we are in disgust with symettry, but in practice its you who employed it

adios

[Ahmed]

ps. GM i don't think that labelling people as "knucle dragging right wing neanderthrals" is earlier intelligent nor condusive to a debate about ideas, issues and values. I certainly haven't used terms like that to desbribe you, or anyone else, here. Where on Earth did you get the impression I did, even figuretively, as you put it

[steve]

"So let's try again... do you find the judicial and penal system of Cuba worthy of a critique? Or do you think it improper to even the raise the question?"

When faced with an argument that makes one uncomfortable, it's always good to reinterpret the arguments of one's critics in a way that distorts their criticisms. No one said either one of these propositions, of course. We did say, however, or I did say, however, that comparing Cuba to the most advanced capitalist country in the world that doesn't face 1/1,000th the kinds of threats that Cuba faces to it from the world's greatest superpower is not very helpful to serious comparative assessments. Comparing Cuba to Mexico or Domincan Republic/Haiti would be far more meaningful. Of course, then it would be impossible to make Cuba sound like the most evil form of governance in the world, outside of {fill in the blank most recent enemy of the week for the US}....

[Matt Welch]

Marc -- I've got no problem with the "75" display. I'd rather the U.S. demonstrate its hypocrisy *by* championing basic human rights, rather than by cuddling up with anti-democratic nasties. The more we do the former, the easier it will become to expose the counter-productive immorality of the latter.

[steve]

Another great left figure has died, though I hesitate to wonder how some will try to smear his good name.

http://columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg58307.html

[Marc Cooper]

Matt.. I agree. I thought I said that. If not, what Matt said.

Ahmed.. I blew no gasket. Comparisons have a certain validity and sometime can make a strong point. But I believe you should go back and review this thread. Here's the simple fact: I have written much on the blog (and in my real life) about the abuses carried out in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Ive called these practices torture-- I dont think it gets any more judgemental than that. But it's you-- not me-- my friend who seems incapable of making a clear, conscise statement of solidarity with the poor souls who are tossed into Cuban prisoners without prefacing it with some hair-shirt reading of an indictment of the U.S.
Look, I dont care if you denounce Castro or anybody else for that matter. But it makes you look ridiculous if you sputter and fume over Guantanamo (as you well should) but can't work up even a limp denunciation of the little personal didtatorship that Fidel is running -- with all of its offensive and nasty implications. Looks like this time around you edged closer and, my , my, you didnt turn to stone.
I am well aware of the aggressive hostility Cuba has faced from the U.S. It's a bankrupt and immoral American policy. None of it, however, justifies Castro's didtatorship nor his abridgement of the wholesale rights of the very people he claims to be defending.
On the contray.. U.S. policy and the Cuban dictatorship fit hand in glove... they desperately need each other to continue. They are so intertwined at this point they are inspeparable. That's why the electrified pissing match on the malecon this week is so grim-- the only losers in that match ar the Cuban people.

[GMRoper]

Ahmed, I said figuratively and that is precisely what I meant. I re-direct you to certain comments you made in my blog here: http://gmscorner.blogspot.com/2004/11/arafat-is-dead-arafat-ist-tot-arafat.html#110042844075001131. Your comments are hardly the equavalent of "debate about ideas, issues and values." In fact, I'd be willing to bet a dollar to a week old moldy slice of bread that your reaction to Marc's posting and my posting is more knee jerk than reasoned argument. At least that is my feeling.

Ahmed, feel free to attack Marc, me or anyone else you wish, that's fine; open and vociferous disagreement is one of our most basic freedoms. Just don't deny what you "FIGURATIVELY SAID" in previous posts.