Discussion:
Over 40 mansions form Castro's Residence
(demasiado antiguo para responder)
Rolf R
2007-11-21 01:27:22 UTC
Permalink
IMPORTANT INFORMATION IS NOW BEING OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC BY EXILED CUBAN
INTELLIGENCE MAYOR ROBERTO HERNÁNDEZ DEL LLANO.

Mega TV on direct TV, Channel 22, on Comcast.

SEE THE OVER 4O MANSIONS THAT FORM THE RESIDENCE OF DICTATOR FOR LIFE
FIDEL CASTRO.
MasterChief
2007-11-21 02:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Y que Dalia la vieja le pega los tarros al Kaga con el
chofer:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Post by Rolf R
IMPORTANT INFORMATION IS NOW BEING OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC BY EXILED CUBAN
INTELLIGENCE MAYOR ROBERTO HERNÁNDEZ DEL LLANO.
Mega TV on direct TV, Channel 22, on Comcast.
SEE THE OVER 4O MANSIONS THAT FORM THE RESIDENCE OF DICTATOR FOR LIFE
FIDEL CASTRO.
Rolf R
2007-11-22 14:06:43 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Rolf R
IMPORTANT INFORMATION IS NOW BEING OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC BY EXILED CUBAN
INTELLIGENCE MAYOR ROBERTO HERNÁNDEZ DEL LLANO.
How odd then that even Forbes Magazine must resort to the use of
rumours and speculation ("assumptions") to support their outrageous
claims about Fidel's supposed fortune. Try as they may for years now,
they obviously still have absolutey nothing on him! (See recent
posting at SCC.) I guess they will be watching your show with baited
breath! (Ha, ha, ha!)
Are you blind or stupid. You speak on propaganda sticks, but you are
incapable of watching real reels. Good washed head you are!
Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2007-11-22 21:33:37 UTC
Permalink
"Dan Christensen" <***@netcom.ca> wrote in message news:0c052d54-6d83-4cd0-a7d7-***@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
(snip)
How odd then that even Forbes Magazine must resort to the use of rumours
and speculation
Castro has a "residence" in lots of Cuban towns Dan.
Ask any Cuban.

Pl
Bufozzo
2007-11-23 14:55:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
(snip)
How odd then that even Forbes Magazine must resort to the use of rumours
and speculation
Castro has a "residence" in lots of Cuban towns Dan.
Ask any Cuban.
You will have to do better than this
some pictures maybe?
Just Havana, Cojimar,
Varadero,http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...http://llamado32.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.htmlhttp://llamado32.blogspot.com/2007/06/casas-de-visitas-en-varadero-ii...http://foro.univision.com/univision/board/message?board.id=cubanosenm...http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=EarthPeople&Numbe...http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...
A bunch of random pictures at various anti-Cuban forums? Sorry, still
not good enough. Even the self-styled "capitalists' tool" Forbes
Magazine, with all their journalistic resources, isn't buying into
your bullshit. Again, even they have been reduced to speculation and
rumour to support their outrageous claims (recent postings at SCC).
But at least they are honest enough to admit it. Perhaps you should
learn from their example.
Just perhaps.

Sr Bufozzo
PL
2007-11-25 09:06:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
(snip)
How odd then that even Forbes Magazine must resort to the use of rumours
and speculation
Castro has a "residence" in lots of Cuban towns Dan.
Ask any Cuban.
You will have to do better than this
some pictures maybe?
Just Havana, Cojimar,
Varadero,http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...http://llamado32.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.htmlhttp://llamado32.blogspot.com/2007/06/casas-de-visitas-en-varadero-ii...http://foro.univision.com/univision/board/message?board.id=cubanosenm...http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=EarthPeople&Numbe...http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas...
A bunch of random pictures at various anti-Cuban forums?
Nope.
Not anti-Cuban, Dan.
Forums where Cubans post data about Cuba.

Do you deny that Castro has houses all over Cuba?

PL
Rolf R
2007-11-25 21:20:28 UTC
Permalink
In article
Again, even Forbes Magazine, in its despair, is reduced to mere
speculation and rumour when it comes to Fidel's supposed personal
fortune.
You, idiot. The mere fact that he is a totalitarian dictator who can do
whatever, whenever with people and state properties would be enough for
even a man mentally handicap to understand he owns the whole island.
Rolf R
2007-11-26 14:24:47 UTC
Permalink
In article
<6e732527-b62c-417d-9065-***@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
Dan Christensen <***@netcom.ca> wrote:
It is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of logic, but you do not
use it.

Check this out at UTUBE






Rolf R
2007-11-26 14:30:49 UTC
Permalink
In article
By all credible accounts I have read, Fidel lives modestly. If you
have evidence to the contrary, please post it here.
Check this out, if you have a tiny bit of honesty.

http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-castro-
f3/
Bufozzo
2007-11-26 14:35:00 UTC
Permalink
Bastaaaaaaaaa ! ! ! ! !

No crosposteees mas a SCA , la reconcha de tu madre ! ! !

Me tienen lo huevos llenos estos operadores de mierda.
Al filtro con el imbécil este.
Post by Rolf R
In article
By all credible accounts I have read, Fidel lives modestly. If you
have evidence to the contrary, please post it here.
Check this out, if you have a tiny bit of honesty.
http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-castro-
f3/
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-26 15:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
In article
Again, even Forbes Magazine, in its despair, is reduced to mere
speculation and rumour when it comes to Fidel's supposed personal
fortune.
You, idiot. The mere fact that he is a totalitarian dictator who can
do whatever, whenever with people and state properties would be enough
for even a man mentally handicap to understand he owns the whole
island.
The facts disprove what you're saying. After the fall of the Soviet
Union, Cuba was faced with difficult economic challanges. The
government gave the expected, 'We'll all have to tighten out belts."
speech, but the Cuban people, through their democratic process
said, "No." and told the government to go back and figure out another
way. The Cuban government did what the people told them and cut the
size of the Cuban armed forces to one third of it's previous size and
preserved the quality of life. That's Cuban democracy in action.
By the way, nothing like that could ever happen in the U.S.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
Rolf R
2007-11-26 17:59:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
That's Cuban democracy in action.
That is what well "bullshit."
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-27 03:01:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
That's Cuban democracy in action.
That is what well "bullshit."
Now if you had a good Cuban education your grammer would be better too.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-27 03:04:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by Rolf R
In article
Again, even Forbes Magazine, in its despair, is reduced to mere
speculation and rumour when it comes to Fidel's supposed personal
fortune.
You, idiot. The mere fact that he is a totalitarian dictator who
can do whatever, whenever with people and state properties would be
enough for even a man mentally handicap to understand he owns the
whole island.
The facts disprove what you're saying. After the fall of the Soviet
Union, Cuba was faced with difficult economic challanges.
you mean the subsidies that maintained the ineffective system (25% of
GDP) and with which the regime paid it's "achievements" fell away.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The
government gave the expected, 'We'll all have to tighten out belts."
speech, but the Cuban people, through their democratic process
said, "No." and told the government to go back and figure out
another way.
actually: the regime imposed the "special period" on the people and
started scrambling for money to survive.
It even imposed an apartheid system on the people,
Caloric intake fell far even further below pre-Castro times
It was called the "Special Period" because it was a period where they
lost a lot of their trade income and supplies that are not made in
Cuba. It amplified the effect of the genocidal embargo placed on them
by the U.S.A. There was no apartheid in Cuba at this time nor has
there bee since the revolution began.
--
--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-27 13:24:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
It was called the "Special Period" because it was a period where they
lost a lot of their trade income and supplies that are not made in
Cuba.
actually they only lost the direct and hidden subsidies
The "special period" is actually the "normal period" in which Cuba
fell back on it's highly inefficient economy.
"Actually" this is a fantasy made up in the propaganda mills of the
CIA. The Cuban econmy is extremely efficient in order to keep all the
cuban people alive and in homes in the face of the genocidal embargo
placed on it by the most powerful nation on earth. (Well, maybe not the
most powerful anymore: The times they are a changin!)

Suggested reading:
<http://www.plenglish.com/>

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-11-26 23:19:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by Rolf R
In article
Again, even Forbes Magazine, in its despair, is reduced to mere
speculation and rumour when it comes to Fidel's supposed personal
fortune.
You, idiot. The mere fact that he is a totalitarian dictator who can do
whatever, whenever with people and state properties
"Fact," Rolfie? That is your opinion. In my opinion, Cuba is more
democratic than the US ever was.
(snip)
Cuba is no democracy.http://www.cubaverdad.net/democracy.htm
A democracy needs freedom of speech to start with.http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
Cuba has a repressive totalitarian system:http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm
By all credible accounts I have read, Fidel lives modestly.
You mean by the lying propaganda.
Insiders of the Castro clan have disproved that lie though,
Have a look at the videos made by the ex-girlfriend of his son comrade
Dan.
He lives lavishly in a mansion with swimming pool, helipad, .....
He send his bodyguards to buy cured ham in Spain and dogs in Germany.
His family has access to over 300 cars for the household.
Videotapes show Castro living luxurious life
By Oliver Poole
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH
LOS ANGELES - Fidel Castro's luxurious lifestyle has been revealed in
home videotapes smuggled out of Cuba by a former girlfriend of one of
his
sons.
The videos, which show the communist leader preparing for a sumptuous
banquet and lounging on leather sofas in his villa in Havana, give the
first
peek into the residence that most Cubans have never seen.
Ooooooooo... leather chairs!!! (snip)
the lie is exposed Dan.
castro get delicacies from all over the world while 7% of the Cuban
people need WFP food aid.
Post by PL
State media are banned from reporting on his family or homes in the
family compound because of Mr. Castro's fear of assassination.
Only his eldest son, Fidel Jr., has appeared at his side and has a
government job. It is not even known how many children the leader has,
though it is believed there are seven, including two with his
mistresses.
The tapes, segments of which were broadcast for the first time on the
California Spanish-language channel Univision on Monday night, were
taken
from the island by Dashiell Torralba, who had a two-year relationship
with
Mr. Castro's son, Antonio, an orthopedic surgeon.
The 27-year-old woman, who is now in hiding in an undisclosed Latin
American country, told the channel she stole the videos as revenge on
the
76-year-old dictator's wife, Dalia.
Miss Torralba said that Mrs. Castro broke up the two-year romance
because she is the niece of Diocles Torralba, a former transport
minister
imprisoned in 1998 on corruption charges.
The tapes last a total of 40 minutes and are believed to have been
mainly shot by Mr. Castro's adult children. The series, titled "The
Secret
Life of Fidel Castro," depicts his main residential compound, Punto
Cero, or
Point Zero, in western Havana.
Monday's episode showed Mr. Castro dressed casually before a banquet,
inspecting the elaborate dinnerware on the dinner table, his
grandchildren
playing with relatives and Antonio zooming along the patio on an
electric
scooter.
It pictures the spacious compound and carefully landscaped garden and
reveals that many of the family are wearing designer clothes.
[snip]
Apart from living in an official residence as any president or prime-
minister would, there is no indication of lavish personal spending --
except for the Spanish ham, the German dogs, the 300 cars, ... you mean?
Post by PL
Why Fidel Castro burns his underpants, by aide who defected
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 25 March 2006
When you've held uninterrupted power for almost half a century, a dash
of paranoia and self-indulgence is inevitable. Which is why,
presumably,
Fidel Castro has his underwear burnt after use, and sends aides across
the Atlantic to spend a small fortune on Spanish cured ham.
Such are the latest details on the world's longest surviving head of
state and government, as provided by one of his former personal
assistants, Delphin Fernandez. The picture that emerges is of a man
obsessed with his health, his security and with personal details of
foreign businessmen planning to invest in Cuba.
Mr Fernandez is perhaps a biased witness, who makes a living in Miami
from a TV show where he dishes the dirt on Fidel and his brother and
probable successor Raul.
[snip]
Only perhaps???? Get real!
the facts are confirmed by the ex girlfriend of Castro's son
Post by PL
Fidel Castro, Inc.: A Global Conglomerate
By Maria C. Werlau
Introduction
Since 1997, Forbes magazine has featured Fidel Castro in its annual
Billionaires' edition as one of the richest rulers in the world.
Initially, Forbes assigned to Castro a share of Cuba's reported GDP
(gross domestic product) for the previous year, which yielded a
fortune
of approximately $150 million.
[snip]
And as we saw last week, Forbes STILL has nothing but speculation
actually: they have corroborated proof from Castro insiders.
On video with facts on Castro's son's corruption:



http://www.youtube.com/user/BF26A4F468341A4F
http://www.youtube.com/user/BF26A4F468341A4F

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


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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well
worth fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.
In this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At
this time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to
send death squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally
justified under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on
vacation in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that
time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)
that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of
your beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the
Cuban government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,''
Smith said during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the
United States: Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and
Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report
quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same
report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly
denounced the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear
its support for the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel
sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the
trade sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from
these sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty
International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of
conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained
or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to
freedom of expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba
in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime
and abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT
LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen
the embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront
of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy
that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of its concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-11-28 21:57:14 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Again, apart from being set in an official residence of a head of
state, a similar video could be made in just about any middle-class
home in North America.
but ity was made in the opulent villa of the communist leader of a
country that claims to live "modestly" and "like the people" in a
country where 7% of the people get WFP assistance and where tghere is
a housing shortgae of 500,000 units.
Again, there is no indication of a lavish lifestyle.
except the fact that he sends people to buy cured ham in Spain and dogs in
Germany you mean?
What about the 300 cars?
How about the finr wines and full table in a mansion with swimming pool with
kids having all the toys they want in a country like Cuba?
The videos and testimonies expose your lies desperate dan.
You can't "snip and run", but it doesn't change the facts.

PL
PL
2007-11-25 22:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by PL
(snip)
How odd then that even Forbes Magazine must resort to the use of
rumours
and speculation
Castro has a "residence" in lots of Cuban towns Dan.
Ask any Cuban.
You will have to do better than this
some pictures maybe?
Just Havana, Cojimar,
Varadero,http://secretoscuba.cultureforum.net/casas-y-propiedades-de-fidel-cas......
A bunch of random pictures at various anti-Cuban forums?
Nope.
Not anti-Cuban, Dan.
Forums where Cubans post data about Cuba.
Do you deny that Castro has houses all over Cuba?
There is nothing to deny. Until we see proof from credible sources to
support your outrageous claims, why should we take them seriously?
After all, your lies here are legendary.
Nope.
you are.
I exposed you years ago and even had pages of your website removed.
Again, even Forbes Magazine,
answer the question Mr. Hypocrite liar.
Do you deny that Castro has houses all over Cuba?

PL
PL
2007-11-28 21:59:34 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
I see you are still passing off that report rejected by the
UNHRC as a
"UN assessment"
which it is: it is the assessment of th UN rapporteur and his
report
can be duly found on the UN website.
[snip]
It is NOT as you continue to say at your lying website, a "UN
assessment." Your own link exposes your lie. The report was
rejected,
Nope.
the report was duly presented to the UN bodies and NEVER rejected.
Your own link proves you are lying,
Nope.
It shows that it is a valid UN report to which for political reasons
no following was given.
[snip]
It is not a UN report if it was rejected by the UN body
(snip)

which it wasn't.
They just didn't apply sanctions.
Poor, pathetic lobbyist...
Some time ago, I wrote to GW president, Gregory Stanton, (snip)
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number
from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of
73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a
figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in
copying.
[snip]
Poor, pathetic little
(snip)

Moronic insults and snipping links doesn't change facts desperate Dan

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number
from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of
73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a
figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in
copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't
refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your
lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide
Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than
Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and
only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than
Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro
as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of
thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by
claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?

As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en
Mr. Lobbyist. And the fact
is you and your CIA colleagues have come up empty-handed again, are are
forced to rely on speculation and rumour on the matter of Fidel's
supposed personal fortune. You have been unable to prove that he has
even a single dollar in a foreign bank. He has even promised to resign
if you could do so.
(snip)
Post your proof of the "CIA colleagues" Mr. Serial Liar.
[snip]
Post your proof that you and your CIA colleagues
(snip)

No proof whatsoever I see.
thanks again for exposing yourself as a pathetic liar Dan Christensen.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-11-25 09:11:20 UTC
Permalink
Mister Christensen,
I love this part mention on your website about Democracy and Elections
"While the Communist Party of Cuba is the only legally sanctioned
party there, it plays no role in the electoral process. By law, it can
neither nominate nor, in any way, endorse any individual candidates"
That is so telling and tipical... Obviosly you don't understand what
Democracy means.
It means the majority rules.
Nope.
It means the regime rules as it denies freedom of speech and uses repressive
laws control the population.
"Candidates" are "selected" in public "votes" with agents of the Cuban
regime present to record and punish dissent.
No dissent is allowed. "Candidates" are imposed at the local level and for
the higher levels (national) subject to approval by the regime's "mass
organizations" that have a veto.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
In particular, it means you cannot buy an
election as you can in the US.
as it is "owned" by Castro and he won't sell it you mean?

Castro's system:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm

PL
Rolf R
2007-11-25 21:22:39 UTC
Permalink
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private. Not
even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say that stupid
statement. This is only created for external consumption of the useful
fools, like you. You are a parrot.
PL
2007-11-25 22:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private. Not
even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say that stupid
statement. This is only created for external consumption of the useful
fools, like you. You are a parrot.
Dan Christensen is a Canadian Stalinist hypocrite that loves in Canada,
bitches about the smallest imagined problem (once falsely claiming he was
censored in SCC) while supporting human rights abuses in Cuba.
He is a Stalinist that wants to live anywhere but in a place where he isn't
in control.
He rejects freedom of speech and has violated privacy laws on two
continents.

PL
µ
Rolf R
2007-11-26 04:14:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Dan Christensen is a Canadian Stalinist hypocrite
It figures. But on top of that he is a jerk -- as a whole -- a peabrain!
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-26 15:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
Post by PL
Dan Christensen is a Canadian Stalinist hypocrite
It figures. But on top of that he is a jerk -- as a whole -- a
peabrain!
When the facts aren't in your favour you hurl meaningless abuse, but it
doesn't change the facts.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-26 15:01:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private. Not
even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say that
stupid statement. This is only created for external consumption of the
useful fools, like you. You are a parrot.
The reality matches Dan's report. The meetings of mass organizations
take place at least weekly and more often prior to am election. They
invovled people even from the poorest neighbourhoods and everybody gets
a say. It's a great experession of democracy like nothing we have here
on the mainland.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-11-26 21:12:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private. Not
even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say that
stupid statement. This is only created for external consumption of the
useful fools, like you. You are a parrot.
The reality matches Dan's report.
Nope.
It disproves Dan's lies.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The meetings of mass organizations
take place at least weekly and more often prior to am election.
and the "mass organizations" and al meetings are controlled by the regime.

For more information see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm

PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-27 03:00:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private.
Not even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say
that stupid statement. This is only created for external consumption
of the useful fools, like you. You are a parrot.
The reality matches Dan's report.
Nope.
It disproves Dan's lies.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The meetings of mass organizations
take place at least weekly and more often prior to am election.
and the "mass organizations" and al meetings are controlled by the regime.
But it doesn't even make sense. There have been many dictatorships in
the world and they don't set up thousands and thousands of public
meetings all over their countries. If it were controlled by the
committee to defend the revolution they'd have a tremendously hard job
of it with so many people meeting and talking to each other. No one
can keep a lid on that sort of activity. Dictators don't attempt it.
Only in a democracy can you allow that sort of continual, grassroots
political activity.
Again, I point out that if Castro is a dictator, he seems very unclear
on the concept.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-11-27 13:19:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private.
Not even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say
that stupid statement. This is only created for external
consumption of the useful fools, like you. You are a parrot.
The reality matches Dan's report.
Nope.
It disproves Dan's lies.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The meetings of mass organizations
take place at least weekly and more often prior to am election.
and the "mass organizations" and al meetings are controlled by the regime.
But it doesn't even make sense. There have been many
dictatorships in
the world and they don't set up thousands and thousands of public
meetings all over their countries. If it were controlled by the
committee to defend the revolution they'd have a tremendously hard
job of it with so many people meeting and talking to each other.
(snip)
the meetings are part of the control system.
People are pressed in to showing up and can't express themselves
anyway.
So attendance is enforced to reinforce social control.
But it would be much siompler for a dictator simply not to do that.
The last thing a dictator wants is having his, (it's usually a him),
subjects meeting and talking to each other. When you have so many,
literally thousands of meetings at the community level all across the
country with no exceptions, it would be impossible to control. The
only answer is that this is a grassroots, partticipatory democracy.
--
--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-11-27 20:00:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by Rolf R
In article
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
I lived among Communists. I know well how the express in private.
Not even the raunchiest microcephallic jerk among them would say
that stupid statement. This is only created for external
consumption of the useful fools, like you. You are a parrot.
The reality matches Dan's report.
Nope.
It disproves Dan's lies.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The meetings of mass organizations
take place at least weekly and more often prior to am election.
and the "mass organizations" and al meetings are controlled by the regime.
But it doesn't even make sense. There have been many dictatorships in
the world and they don't set up thousands and thousands of public
meetings all over their countries. If it were controlled by the
committee to defend the revolution they'd have a tremendously hard
job of it with so many people meeting and talking to each other.
(snip)
the meetings are part of the control system.
People are pressed in to showing up and can't express themselves
anyway.
So attendance is enforced to reinforce social control.
But it would be much siompler for a dictator simply not to do that.
actually, it makes a lot of sense to do that to reinforce control.
In the camps of Pol Pot people were always dragged of to "meetings" to
ensure "cohesion".
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The last thing a dictator wants is having his, (it's usually a him),
subjects meeting and talking to each other.
but then the "subjects" are allowed to freely express themselves and his
"chivatos" (informers) have an opportunity to look for dissent
(non-attendance or talking back)
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
When you have so many,
literally thousands of meetings at the community level all across the
country with no exceptions, it would be impossible to control.
Thank the Stasi for the good training they gave to the Cubans CDR.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/cdr.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The
only answer is that this is a grassroots, partticipatory democracy.
Nope.
that is the answer that is completely excluded as Cuba has no freedom of
speech.
A pre-requisite for democracy.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/democracy.htm

PL
Chuck
2007-12-01 14:44:01 UTC
Permalink
Que payaso este pobre hombre!

Se ha convertido en un pelotudo global (el hazmerreir del mundo)

Chuck

==

En un encendido discurso ante miles de seguidores en Caracas, el presidente
Hugo Chávez amenazó ayer con suspender el envío de petróleo a Estados Unidos
si la oposición denuncia un fraude y sale a las calles tras el referéndum de
mañana, y dijo que quienes voten por el no estarán votando por su par
norteamericano, George W. Bush.

También advirtió que podría nacionalizar los bancos españoles en Venezuela
si el rey Juan Carlos no le pide disculpas por su ya famoso "¿Por qué no te
callas?".

....
Como una estrella de rock

Había llegado al lugar como una verdadera estrella de rock. Subido a un
camión y con los brazos en alto, cruzó la desbordada avenida Bolívar en
medio de los gritos de miles de personas que lo habían esperado por más de
ocho horas con sus pancartas y sus chavecitos (muñecos de Chávez) en alto.

Después empezó el show: Chávez bailó, tocó la batería y cantó una canción de
cuna con uno de sus nietos en brazos, antes de lanzar sus amenazas contra
los "enemigos de la revolución".

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/EdicionImpresa/exterior/nota.asp?nota_id=967228&pid=3589430&toi=5257
Fortinbras
2007-12-01 21:48:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chuck
Que payaso este pobre hombre!
Se ha convertido en un pelotudo global (el hazmerreir del mundo)
Chuck
Ese es solo un punto de vista tuyo. Pero es coherente que se preparen
los venezolanos para una reaccion desesperada de los cipayos DESPUES
DEL TRIUNFO CHAVEZ.

Saludos cordiales

Fortinbras

La alternativa es clara QUIEN NO VOTA POR CHAVEZ, ELIGE A BUSH!
Chuck
2007-12-01 22:31:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fortinbras
Post by Chuck
Que payaso este pobre hombre!
Se ha convertido en un pelotudo global (el hazmerreir del mundo)
Chuck
Chavez ya ni a los negros convence.

Desde que lo hizo callar el Rey los venezolanos no lo quieren escuchar mas.

Se vote lo que se vote tiene el tiempo contado.

saludos cordiales,

Chuck
Post by Fortinbras
Ese es solo un punto de vista tuyo. Pero es coherente que se preparen
los venezolanos para una reaccion desesperada de los cipayos DESPUES
DEL TRIUNFO CHAVEZ.
Saludos cordiales
Fortinbras
La alternativa es clara QUIEN NO VOTA POR CHAVEZ, ELIGE A BUSH!
PL
2007-12-01 18:10:12 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
But it doesn't even make sense. There have been many
dictatorships in
the world and they don't set up thousands and thousands of public
meetings all over their countries. If it were controlled by the
committee to defend the revolution they'd have a tremendously hard
job of it with so many people meeting and talking to each other.
(snip)
the meetings are part of the control system.
People are pressed in to showing up and can't express themselves
anyway.
So attendance is enforced to reinforce social control.
But it would be much siompler for a dictator simply not to do that.
actually, it makes a lot of sense to do that to reinforce control.
In the camps of Pol Pot
You mean the regime that the US allied itself with in its war against
Viet Nam? You must love them!
Nope.
Unlike you I hate dictatorships.
You will support anyone and anything that will advance the interests
of your political masters,
unlike you I have no "masters" Dn.
be it dictatorships, torture, murder or
genocide.
actually you are describing yourself here Mr. Hypocrite Propagandist and
unlike you I can prove it with quotes.
The Pol Pot regime was created by the communist block, was inspired by
communist ideology and used communist tactics.
They were US allies in the Vietnam War.
Get real Dan.
The abuses were committed way before the Vietnamese invaded them.
The abuses were inspired by their communist ideology.
That is what led to the disaster Mr. Hypocrite.
Post by PL
people were always dragged of to "meetings" to
ensure "cohesion".
Contrary to your propaganda, Cuba is not some concentration camp.
People are not "dragged" to meetings there.
they just are sanctioned like threatened with losing a house, job or
education you mean.
STILL waiting for your proof.
Posted and snipped by you as usual
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
The last thing a dictator wants is having his, (it's usually a him),
subjects meeting and talking to each other.
but then the "subjects" are allowed to freely express themselves and his
"chivatos" (informers) have an opportunity to look for dissent
(non-attendance or talking back)
Let us see even one documented case of anyone being punished for
"talking back" at a public meeting (credible sources only, please).
Poor desperate Dan already prepares himself to call ANY source that I
post as "not credible".
Get real Dan.
Even not attending can get in trouble.
You don't even have to talk back: not showing up is enough.
On February 1, officials held a public meeting in which they
criticized Yero for not voting for Communist candidates and for not
participating in the
local CDR; according to press reports, she received an eviction notice
the following day.http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/transition/issue07/cuba.htm
Not this one again. You must really enjoy getting your butt kicked!
Nope.
your but is kicked as it confirms exactly what I said
According to Amnesty International, she was being evicted because it
was believed to have abandoned her apartment. (snip)
That was the excuse used and people from her neighborhood had to support
her showing that the excuse was a lie.
But thanks for confirming that sanctions are applied even for merely not
attending.

The link Hypocrite Propagandist Dan Christensen never gave as he wanted
to hide the full facts.

On February 1, officials held a public meeting in which they criticized
Yero for not voting for Communist candidates and for not participating
in the local CDR; according to press reports, she received an eviction
notice the following day.

http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/transition/issue07/cuba.htm

On February 1, 1999, the police and housing officials called her
neighbors to a public meeting, where it appears, they declared that Mrs.
Sara Yero had not voted for Communist Party candidates and did not
belong to the local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution. The
next day, Margarita Sara Yero received a written eviction notice.

Human Rights Watch/Americas, op. cit., World Report 2000, p. 28.
http://www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/99eng/Chapter4.htm


In a few cases, the government used housing regulations to harass
independent reporters.
In January 1999, housing authorities in Santiago notified Margarita Sara
Yero, the director of the Turquino Correspondence of the Independent
Press Agency of Cuba (Agencia de Prensa Independiente de Cuba), that she
would be evicted from her home, where she had resided for thirty-five
years. The officials claimed that she had abandoned her home, but
several neighbors confirmed her residency.

On February 1, 1999, police and housing officials called her neighbors
to a public meeting, where they reportedly stated that Yero had not cast
votes for Communist Party candidates and did not belong to the local
Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (Comité para la Defensa de
la Revolución).

The next day, according to press reports, Yero received a written
eviction notice.
http://www.hrw.org/wr2k/americas-04.htm

Eviction

Eviction is another less common method of repression used by the
authorities to suppress dissidence.
Victims are ordered to leave their homes and reportedly sometimes
transferred to crowded shelters for the homeless. Amnesty International
is concerned that incidents in which eviction is threatened or carried
out allegedly for political motives or as a means of suppressing freedom
of expression, association and assembly undermine respect for the
principles articulated in article 12 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.

This article states that ''no one shall be subjected to arbitrary
interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to
attacks upon his honour and reputation,'' and other related rights.

For example, in August 1999, as well as being temporarily detained,
opposition activist Ramón Humberto Colás Castillo, was evicted from his
home in Las Tunas province, along with his wife, Berta Mexidor Vázquez,
and their two children.

Ramón Colás and Berta Mexidor, who were both founders of the first
independent library in Cuba, had lived in their home for 13 years before
being told they were illegal occupants. According to Berta Mexidor,the
authorities removed all their belongings into lorries in spite of their
protests and told them they were

been moved to another area, some 60 kilometres from their home. They
were later taken to a military camp where some 300 people were
reportedly housed.

According to reports, the family are currently staying with relatives.

In January 1999 Margarita Sara Yero, an independent journalist working
for Cuba Press in Santiago de Cuba province, was reportedly informed
that she had to vacate the home where she had lived for some 35 years.

The reason given by the authorities was reportedly that she ''had
abandoned her home and was the owner of another''. Margarita Yero's
lawyer then wrote to the Dirección Municipal de Vivienda, Municipal
Housing Office, with signatures from neighbours confirming that she had
never abandoned her home.

However, on 2 February 1999 she reportedly received a reply to the
letter stating that she would be evicted on 4 February 1999. Due to help
from various local organizations and a statement by an old friend who
confirmed that she had been living in that place since 1963, the
eviction was not carried out.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250042000?open&of=ENG-CUB

For more see www.cubaverdad.net
No comunismo, no trabajo http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/19917
Niegan teléfono a trabajador por no participar en actividades del CDR http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/14746
Both from CubaNet,
(snip)

A source that escape the regime's information blockade, indeed.
As usual when you can't refute the facts you try to slander the source.
You should know by now that that backfires.

No comunismo, no trabajo
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/19917

Niegan teléfono a trabajador por no participar en actividades del CDR
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/14746

Confirmed by other sources from Cuba:

ELECCIONES CUBANAS OBLIGADAS
2007-10-31.
Julio Beltrán Iglesias, Periodista Independiente, Agencia Jóvenes Sin
Censura

Al parecer en la falsa electoral que el Gobierno mantiene en Cuba,
obligan a los ciudadanos a participar pues en varios lugares de La
Habana los presidentes de los Comités de Defensa de la Revolución, CDR,
les han tocado las puertas a personas para exigirles que vayan a votar,
cosa esta que debe ser voluntaria.

Podemos mencionar, por ejemplo, el caso de Alejandro José Botello. El
presidente del CDR, Alexeis, del reparto Ponce, Municipio Arroyo
Naranjo, lo visitó varias veces exigiéndole que fuera a votar, que eso
no era voluntario, que era más bien obligado, o sino tendría problemas.

Alejandro José Botello le manifestó que él no cooperaba con la dictadura
y no creía en la falsa electoral que el Gobierno cubano se encaprichaba
en mantener por más de cuarenta años.

Esto le trajo como consecuencia la visita inesperada a su domicilio del
oficial de la Seguridad del Estado Leonardo, quien amenazara y ofendiera
al señor Botello, dejándole muy claro que su actitud le podía costar
unos cuantos años de la limitada libertad que disfrutan los cubanos,
informó el señor Botello.

http://www.miscelaneasdecuba.net/web/article.asp?artID=12438
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/34466

Imponen decenas de obligaciones a familias matanceras
Por Oscar Sánchez Madan

Bitácora Cubana, 3 de abril de 2006 - Matanzas

La organización oficialista, Comité de Defensa de la Revolución (CDR),
está entregando a cada familia matancera un documento en el que se
establecen decenas de obligaciones y proyecciones que afectan
sensiblemente a la ciudadanía.

En dicho documento titulado "Mensajes de compromiso de la familia
cederista", las autoridades gubernamentales le imponen a los ciudadanos
mayores de edad obligaciones tales como: entregar materias primas
generadas por las viviendas, pagar la cotización mensual de la
organización, participar en la limpieza y el embellecimiento del barrio,
participar en los trabajos voluntarios y en las actividades
político-ideológicas que se convoquen, donar sangre en las instituciones
del estado e inscribir a los jóvenes nacido en el 1990 en el Servicio
Militar Obligatorio.

Asimismo, se les prohíbe a las familias, entre otras cosas, participar
en juegos de azar, usar en las viviendas antenas satelitales, vender o
comprar viviendas, o, alquilar las propias al margen del control
estatal; usar incorrectamente los medios electrodomésticos vendidos por
el gobierno.

De momento esas imposiciones, las cuales forman parte de la legislación
oficial vigente, se chequearán, según el documento, públicamente en
asambleas de afiliados durante los meses de abril, julio y septiembre
del año en curso.

Los CDR son una organización creada por Fidel Castro en el año 1960 para
defender la llamada dictadura del proletariado mediante la vigilancia
revolucionaria, conocer qué hace y a que se dedica la gente es su
principal misión, así lo expresan sus estatutos.

http://www.bitacoracubana.com/desdecuba/portada2.php?id=1741
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/21682

Chivatería, Denuncia, Represión a lo cubano
Por Eduardo Cancio González


El pasado 28 de Septiembre cumplió 44 años una de las organizaciones de más
oscuro proceder en la triste historia de la revolución cubana: Los Comités
de Defensa de la Revolución. Cuando en igual fecha de 1961, Fidel Castro
llamaba a su fundación, no sabía el pueblo cubano, en su embriaguez de verde
olivo y barbas, que asistía al nacimiento de un diabólico mecanismo de
persecución y vigilancia que con el pasar de los años se convertiría en el
pilar fundamental del régimen.

A la temprana edad de 14 años, es invitado al convite. Negarse a participar,
es cuando menos, invalidar por siempre la maldita casilla de las
organizaciones de masas, que cual pesadilla, valora su escalafón de entrega
al sistema, para cualquier formulario o planilla que usted procure, en la
búsqueda de estudio o trabajo. Ser miembro garantiza además el beneficio de
la integración revolucionaria o la legitimidad de la máscara. La filosofía
de la organización es simple: conjugar el verbo vigilar en cada persona (más
eficientes las del plural) para despojarlo de su dignidad e intimidad. De
hecho, uno termina espiándose a sí mismo y reprochándose día a día, al
amparo de un miedo bien fundado, el no asistir a una reunión, no ir a un
trabajo voluntario o haber faltado a una guardia cederista.

Los CDR esconden, bajo una fachada humanista y supuestamente solidaria, de
donaciones de sangre, recogida de materia prima y campañas de vacunación, un
proceder al servicio de la policía política, que pone su futuro o su suerte
en manos de incontables verificaciones y chequeos para mantener actualizado
el archivo de los traidores. El presidente de la cuadra decide incluso si
usted esta apto o no para salir del país, amén de que se convierte en
guardián de sus miserias para poder arrebatárselas una vez se apropian de su
domicilio. No por gusto el mal llamado Alcalde de La Habana de hoy fue por
varios años Coordinador Nacional de la organización.

Habría que reconocer, en aras de la objetividad, lo efectivo del invento,
copiado muy bien de las prácticas hitlerianas. Miles de cubanos han pagado
cárcel, recibido humillaciones, actos de repudio y golpizas por parte de las
turbas enardecidas. Lo verdaderamente condenable es haberse aprovechado del
sentimiento solidario de nuestro pueblo para convertir en chivatos al
viejito jubilado, el ama de casa o el bodeguero de la esquina. No por gusto
cada 27 en la noche se espera un aniversario más de la gloriosa efeméride.
Curiosamente el festejo es una muestra palpable del desastre. Al son de dos
botellas de ron barato y una olla común, donde se cocina el pobre aporte de
cada uno y la contribución del gobierno (curiosamente se reparte un hueso
pelado de ternilla de res para cada CDR, que supone la matanza y la duda por
la falta de la fibra) se reúne la pobre gente a celebrar o quizás, dar
gracias al padre por permitir llevar una vasija del mejunje para el almuerzo
familiar de mañana. Y entre la pálida concurrencia al festín se escurre el
desagradable olor de la leña quemada en pleno centro de la calle, preludio
del discurso clausura del 28, donde se nos recordará a todos cuan estúpidos
fuimos 44 años atrás.

Mucho habrá que hacer por la Cuba de mañana. Entre lo primero, desbaratar
esta organización represiva, para devolverle al cubano la noble mirada del
vecino sin el doblez moral que representa el veneno de unos ojos y oídos que
le puede cercenar el mañana.



http://www.elveraz.com/articulo156.htm

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/14789

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

Thanks for again admitting defeat by resorting to your personal insults.
Quote me comrade Dan. You claimed you can and you never did.

We both know you can't.

Try something like this:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well
worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.
In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping
less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

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

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At
this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send
death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining
these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally
justified
under the circumstances."

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


Unquote.

You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty
International,
Genocide Watch, ..........

Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post
the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on
vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time
prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting
in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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

YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)
that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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


HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the
Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith
said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United
States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report
quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report
that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly
denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its
support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the
trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from
these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty
International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls
for
their immediate and unconditional release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners
previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is
detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to
freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on
Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro
regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT
LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen
the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy
that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront
of its
concerns".

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

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident
Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.

PL
PL
2007-12-05 19:29:10 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or to lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
On February 1, officials held a public meeting in which they
criticized Yero for not voting for Communist candidates and for not
participating in the
local CDR; according to press reports, she received an eviction notice
the following
day.http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/transition/issue07/cuba.htm
Not this one again. You must really enjoy getting your butt kicked!
Nope.
your but is kicked as it confirms exactly what I said
According to Amnesty International, she was being evicted because it
was believed to have abandoned her apartment. (snip)
That was the excuse used and people from her neighborhood had to support
her showing that the excuse was a lie.
But thanks for confirming that sanctions are applied even for merely not
attending.
[snip]
No sanctions were applied
the intent was clearky there, Dan.
Or was it just a "warning"?
[snip]
Whatever self-serving political spin
Nope.
Documented facts.
Snipping the facts won't work comrade Dan

What Dan snipped in despair:

On February 1, officials held a public meeting in which they
criticized
Yero for not voting for Communist candidates and for not
participating
in the local CDR; according to press reports, she received an
eviction
notice the following day.

http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/transition/issue07/cuba.htm

On February 1, 1999, the police and housing officials called her
neighbors to a public meeting, where it appears, they declared that
Mrs.
Sara Yero had not voted for Communist Party candidates and did not
belong to the local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution. The
next day, Margarita Sara Yero received a written eviction notice.

Human Rights Watch/Americas, op. cit., World Report 2000, p. 28.
http://www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/99eng/Chapter4.htm


In a few cases, the government used housing regulations to harass
independent reporters.
In January 1999, housing authorities in Santiago notified Margarita
Sara
Yero, the director of the Turquino Correspondence of the Independent
Press Agency of Cuba (Agencia de Prensa Independiente de Cuba), that
she
would be evicted from her home, where she had resided for thirty-five
years. The officials claimed that she had abandoned her home, but
several neighbors confirmed her residency.

On February 1, 1999, police and housing officials called her
neighbors
to a public meeting, where they reportedly stated that Yero had not
cast
votes for Communist Party candidates and did not belong to the local
Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (Comité para la Defensa
de
la Revolución).

The next day, according to press reports, Yero received a written
eviction notice.
http://www.hrw.org/wr2k/americas-04.htm

Eviction

Eviction is another less common method of repression used by the
authorities to suppress dissidence.
Victims are ordered to leave their homes and reportedly sometimes
transferred to crowded shelters for the homeless. Amnesty
International
is concerned that incidents in which eviction is threatened or
carried
out allegedly for political motives or as a means of suppressing
freedom
of expression, association and assembly undermine respect for the
principles articulated in article 12 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.

This article states that ''no one shall be subjected to arbitrary
interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to
attacks upon his honour and reputation,'' and other related rights.

For example, in August 1999, as well as being temporarily detained,
opposition activist Ramón Humberto Colás Castillo, was evicted from
his
home in Las Tunas province, along with his wife, Berta Mexidor
Vázquez,
and their two children.

Ramón Colás and Berta Mexidor, who were both founders of the first
independent library in Cuba, had lived in their home for 13 years
before
being told they were illegal occupants. According to Berta
Mexidor,the
authorities removed all their belongings into lorries in spite of
their
protests and told them they were

been moved to another area, some 60 kilometres from their home. They
were later taken to a military camp where some 300 people were
reportedly housed.

According to reports, the family are currently staying with relatives.

In January 1999 Margarita Sara Yero, an independent journalist
working
for Cuba Press in Santiago de Cuba province, was reportedly informed
that she had to vacate the home where she had lived for some 35 years.

The reason given by the authorities was reportedly that she ''had
abandoned her home and was the owner of another''. Margarita Yero's
lawyer then wrote to the Dirección Municipal de Vivienda, Municipal
Housing Office, with signatures from neighbours confirming that she
had
never abandoned her home.

However, on 2 February 1999 she reportedly received a reply to the
letter stating that she would be evicted on 4 February 1999. Due to
help
from various local organizations and a statement by an old friend who
confirmed that she had been living in that place since 1963, the
eviction was not carried out.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250042000?open&of=ENG-CUB

For more see www.cubaverdad.net

Anyone can see the abuse, Dan.
It's not just me, Mr. Lobbyist -- not even the capitalist, mainstream
media will touch their bullshit
accept facts Dan.
Cuban independent journalists are respected for their work and have
received lots of awards.
So "respected" that even the capitalist mainstream media will not
publish
(snip)

so respected that they receive international awards and get published in top
newspapers
Please list a Cuban journalist other than an independent one that received
an international award.
They have been given the opportunity to post their articles in top
newspapers like "Le Monde", "El Pais", ... and top magazines like
"NEwsweek".
Again, only the ocassional opinion
(snip)

pices on the situation in Cuba to break the information embargo imposed by
Castro.
Pieces that summarize and give a good view of what is going on.
Pieces that expose your lies.


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

Thanks for again admitting defeat by resorting to your personal
insults.
Quote me comrade Dan. You claimed you can and you never did.

We both know you can't.

Try something like this:

Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well
worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.
In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping
less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."

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

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At
this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send
death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining
these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally
justified
under the circumstances."

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


Unquote.

You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty
International,
Genocide Watch, ..........

Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post
the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on
vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time
prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting
in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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

YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)
that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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


HIS own words:

'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the
Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith
said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United
States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report
quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report
that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly
denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its
support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the
trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from
these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?

"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty
International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls
for
their immediate and unconditional release."

In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners
previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is
detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to
freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on
Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro
regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT
LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen
the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy
that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront
of its
concerns".

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

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident
Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.

PL
Rolf R
2007-12-06 14:31:01 UTC
Permalink
In article
Anyone can see how desperate you are, Mr. Lobbyist. In the only
example of anyone being evicted supposedly for speaking out at a
meeting, it turns out the eviction never took place! If this is really
the best you can do, you might as well concede the point.
One thing I can assure you, Mr. Christensen, you will not have a peace
agony when you die. You will see the victims of Communism being shot and
tortured one by one. You will feel their blood on your from head to toe.
You will die a slow death experiencing what you constantly denied, for
your mockery of a cruel reality. Then you will see each individual face
of innocent people who died jusst because they wanted to have freedom
youu enjoy and do not deserve. Let the dead victims be with you in your
mind until you die. That you deserve.
Bufozzo
2007-12-06 14:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Stop crossposting to Soc.Culture.Argentina ! ! !
Post by Rolf R
In article
Anyone can see how desperate you are, Mr. Lobbyist. In the only
example of anyone being evicted supposedly for speaking out at a
meeting, it turns out the eviction never took place! If this is really
the best you can do, you might as well concede the point.
One thing I can assure you, Mr. Christensen, you will not have a peace
agony when you die. You will see the victims of Communism being shot and
tortured one by one. You will feel their blood on your from head to toe.
You will die a slow death experiencing what you constantly denied, for
your mockery of a cruel reality. Then you will see each individual face
of innocent people who died jusst because they wanted to have freedom
youu enjoy and do not deserve. Let the dead victims be with you in your
mind until you die. That you deserve.
Rolf R
2007-12-06 18:48:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bufozzo
Stop crossposting to Soc.Culture.Argentina ! ! !
You see to forget that you do not pay for these groups. The US pays for
them, so go screw yourself!
Bufozzo
2007-12-07 05:16:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
Post by Bufozzo
Stop crossposting to Soc.Culture.Argentina ! ! !
You see to forget that you do not pay for these groups. The US pays for
them, so go screw yourself!
Ignorante, no sabe como funciona la red de servidores NNTP.
Dicha red no está "alojada" en ningún país, funciona descentralizada con
nodos en sincronización constante distribuidos por todo el mundo.

Hacete cojer por un burro.

Sr Bufozzo
PL
2007-12-08 18:36:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
In article
Anyone can see how desperate you are, Mr. Lobbyist. In the only
example of anyone being evicted supposedly for speaking out at a
meeting, it turns out the eviction never took place! If this is really
the best you can do, you might as well concede the point.
One thing I can assure you, Mr.Christensen, you will not have a peace
agony when you die. You will see the victims of Communism being shot and
tortured one by one.
Spare us your crocodile tears. When it comes to murder and torture,
the US regime is right up there. Check with Amnesty International if
you don't believe me. Allegations against Cuba, even taken at face
value, look like a Sunday school picnic compared to the crimes of the
US regime. The US embargo against Cuban people -- which I'll bet you
fully support -- are a collective punishment that actually amounts to
a form of genocide (Article 2c, UN Genocide Convention).
Nope it isn't comrade Dan.
Only you and other Castro apologists refer to the trade sanctions as such.
In fact the US is Cuba's largets food supplier.
Cuba's Castro on the other hand is indeed guilty of politicide and democide
killing more people than for example Pinochet (another dictator that never
should have come to power, but one that left of his own accord).
Genocide Watch has the Cuban regime listed as guilty of genocide.
You can't quote even ONE reputable international organization referring to
the trade sanctions as such and you are going to prove yourself a liar by
again failing to do so.
For the facts about genocide and Cuba see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/genocide.htm
or look it up in Google
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cuba+genocide&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

PL
PL
2007-12-11 20:16:22 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by PL
Spare us your crocodile tears. When it comes to murder and torture,
the US regime is right up there. Check with Amnesty International if
you don't believe me. Allegations against Cuba, even taken at face
value, look like a Sunday school picnic compared to the crimes of the
US regime. The US embargo against Cuban people -- which I'll bet you
fully support -- are a collective punishment that actually amounts to
a form of genocide (Article 2c, UN Genocide Convention).
Nope it isn't comrade Dan.
Only you and other Castro apologists refer to the trade sanctions as such.
These crimes of yours against the Cuban people have been thoroughly
documented by the likes of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch,
and even the Catholic Church.
No "crimes", Dan.
No "genocide" and you are going to expose your own lies by failing to quote
"Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch,
and even the Catholic Church. " referring to the trade sanctions as
"genocide".
None of them ever has you are just misquoting them and misrepresenting what
they said.
Again Mr. Serial Liar is exposed as such
Post by PL
In fact the US is Cuba's largets food supplier.
According to official US stats, US food exports to Cuba last year
amounted to no more than about
(snip)

and a lot more according to Cuban sources, no?
Post by PL
Cuba's Castro on the other hand is indeed guilty of politicide and democide
killing more people than for example Pinochet (another dictator that never
should have come to power, but one that left of his own accord).
Genocide Watch has the Cuban regime listed as guilty of genocide.
[snip]
Did you forget about GW's recent climb-down
(snip)

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?




As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en





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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-12-15 10:36:04 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
by which Dan christesn means he snips what he can't refute

Like:
That he exposed his own lie and that the trade sanctions are no "genocide" .
He did expose his own lies by failing to quote "Amnesty International, Human
Rights Watch,
and even the Catholic Church. " referring to the trade sanctions as
"genocide".
Again Mr. Serial Liar is exposed as such.
That is why he shows his menial spite with his changes of header.
On genocide in Cuba see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/genocide.htm
Post by PL
Post by PL
In fact the US is Cuba's largets food supplier.
According to official US stats, US food exports to Cuba last year
amounted to no more than about 8 cents per Cuban per day. In no way
would such a paltry sum get you off the hook for what amounts genocide.
And this amount has been decreasing every year since 2004, when the
Bush regime first about to kill off even this limited trade with
unprecedented financial restriction, and by harassing foreign banks who
facilitate this perfectly legal trade. Never has its genocidal intent
been more clear.
(snip)
and a lot more according to Cuban sources, no?
Not really.
(snip)

wasnt" Granma talking about thousands of tons and the head of alimport of
35% more?
Get real dan, the Cubans expose your lies
Post by PL
Post by PL
Cuba's Castro on the other hand is indeed guilty of politicide and democide
killing more people than for example Pinochet (another dictator that never
should have come to power, but one that left of his own accord).
Genocide Watch has the Cuban regime listed as guilty of genocide.
[snip]
Did you forget about GW's recent climb-down
(snip)
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.
[snip]
Poor, pathetic little "Miss" Lobbyist...
(snip)

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?




As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en





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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."

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

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".

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

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC


PL
PL
2007-12-15 19:06:03 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
by which Dan christesn means he snips what he can't refute

Like:
That he exposed his own lie and that the trade sanctions are no "genocide" .
He did expose his own lies by failing to quote "Amnesty International, Human
Rights Watch,
and even the Catholic Church. " referring to the trade sanctions as
"genocide".
Again Mr. Serial Liar is exposed as such.
That is why he shows his menial spite with his changes of header.
On genocide in Cuba see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/genocide.htm
Post by PL
Post by PL
According to official US stats, US food
exports to Cuba last year
Post by PL
Post by PL
amounted to no more than about 8 cents per Cuban per day. In no way
would such a paltry sum get you off the hook for what amounts genocide.
And this amount has been decreasing every year since 2004, when the
Bush regime first about to kill off even this limited trade with
unprecedented financial restriction, and by harassing foreign banks who
facilitate this perfectly legal trade. Never has its genocidal intent
been more clear.
(snip)
and a lot more according to Cuban sources, no?
Not really.
(snip)
wasnt" Granma talking about thousands of tons and the head of alimport of
35% more?
[snip]
As you know, the Cuban figure is widely believed to include shipping
and other fees
Not a difference of 35% Dan.

Again your desperate lies are exposed by the communist propaganda rag
Granma: (which just shows what a desperate liar you are)

According to Alimport, in 2006, the total in imports and related costs paid
to U.S. companies exceeded $570.8 million. These transactions, taking place
under restricted conditions, represented a significant increase in financing
costs for the island, estimated at some $21.8 million.
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2007/mayo/juev31/agreements-100-million-purchases.html

From the same article:

And it is in the interest of guaranteeing food for Cuba's 11 million people
that ALIMPORT must import some $1.6 billion dollars in food, for an increase
of $600 million over the last four years, with a tendency to double.

Currently, Cuba imports some 7.8 million tons of foodstuffs. Of that, 95% is
allocated for the family basket of goods guaranteed to every Cuban household
(a rationed distribution of products such as rice, legumes, sugar, coffee,
milk, meats, etc.) by the state at heavily subsidized prices, much lower
than their cost.
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2007/mayo/juev31/agreements-100-million-purchases.html

1.6 billion is equal to 7.8 million tons.
US imports: 570 million so let's say 1/3 of imports.
that means 2.6 million tons of food.
That translated to 230 kg of food per Cuban per year that comes from the US.
Supplying people with nearly 20 kg of food a month is a weird way to go
about a "genocide" no?
Again Cuban data twice exposes your desperate lies.

But comment to us on the over one million tons of food imported according to
Granma and your calculation that that meant that any and all Cuban gets 65kg
of food per month from the rationing.
Post by PL
Post by PL
Did you forget about GW's recent climb-down
(snip)
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a
figure
of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.
[snip]
Poor, pathetic little "Miss" Lobbyist... Just the thought of confirming
another source makes here poop her little pink panties! She would much
rather play it safe with her silly little girlish games here, than risk
getting her fat butt kicked again. Once bitten, twice shy, eh, "Miss"
Lobbyist??? (Hee, hee!)
(snip)
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.
You are simply repeating yourself here, "
(snip)

as usual the truth is repetitive Dan.
I know your lies are more "flexible".
The truth is fixed by the facts and the usenet record which I give below.
Again you go down as a serial liar Mr. Hypocrite Propagandist

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?




As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en





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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."

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

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".

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

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC


PL
krp
2007-12-18 13:31:17 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
krp
2007-12-19 14:03:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
The "8 cents" is a lie anyway. Note how this hypocrite hides behind the
extremely small rations
Cubans get. The rest of the food is bought in hard currency with the
remittances of what he calls "gusanos".
Well Comrade Dan does seem to live in his own alternate reality. Did you
know how much the chicken is selling to Cuba for? Like 3 cents a pound. Even
8 cents a day is lot of meat. Granted it isn't the best chicken and would
never sell in the U.S. but it is decent food for starving people. But then
IF Danny ever got out of the BAR in that resort hotel is stayed in on his
ONE trip to Cuba he might know how the people must live.
krp
2007-12-19 23:32:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
Post by krp
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
The "8 cents" is a lie anyway. Note how this hypocrite hides behind the
extremely small rations
Cubans get. The rest of the food is bought in hard currency with the
remittances of what he calls "gusanos".
Well Comrade Dan does seem to live in his own alternate reality
I vote for his lie that Cubans get 65kg of food per month from the
rationing as the most ludicrous lie of 2007 in SCC.
"Actually, it means the 781 kg / 12 = 65.1 kg per person per month from the
rationing system."
http://groups.google.fr/group/alt.journalism/msg/736e89408546405f
It just shows what a shameless liar he is
Danny lives in an alternate universe, on a special planet. I wonder what
colr the skies are there?
Post by krp
Did you know how much the chicken is selling to Cuba for? Like 3 cents a
pound. Even
8 cents a day is lot of meat. Granted it isn't the best chicken and would
never sell in the U.S.
actually the US has an incredible appetite for chicken breats (white meat).
It has therefore an large amount of decent quality chicken wings,
legs, ... available for export at uncredibly low prices.
That is what ends up in Cuba.

Almost all of it is dark meat. Legs and thighs. I've EATEN it unlike
BLOWHARD Christensen.
krp
2007-12-20 13:26:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
Yes Danny we know YOU were handed ALL that information in the HOTEL BAR
when you were in Cuba ONCE years ago! Fidel confers with YOU on a daily
basis for advice! SURE HE DOES!
krp
2007-12-21 14:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
Post by krp
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
Yes Danny we know YOU were handed ALL that information in the HOTEL BAR
when you were in Cuba ONCE years ago! Fidel confers with YOU on a daily
basis for advice! SURE HE DOES!
So, you have no evidence to support your outrageous claims. Thought so.
What claims would those be Danny? That the extent of your ACTUAL
knowledge of Cuba stems from ONE trip to Cuba that you ADMIT was spent
almost exclusively in the hotel BAR? Come on Danny buy lay out your
CREDENTIALS as an EXPERT on Cuba for us.
krp
2007-12-22 14:31:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
Post by krp
Post by krp
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
Yes Danny we know YOU were handed ALL that information in the HOTEL BAR
when you were in Cuba ONCE years ago! Fidel confers with YOU on a daily
basis for advice! SURE HE DOES!
So, you have no evidence to support your outrageous claims. Thought so.
What claims would those be Danny?
Pay attention, Kennykins! We were talking about your outrageus claims
that 8 cents worth of imported food per person per day is really a
significant amount of food. But I see you would rather change the
subject. Can't blame you, really. (What a loser!)
First of all EVEN IF your IDIOTIC claims of 8 cents a day were true, and
they are not, just more of your INSANE invented bullshit, Danny boy,
it's bullshit compounded several times. First of all you don't count all the
FREE food, like the TONS of free RICE donated by WFP to Cuba. But beyond
that you INVENT this 8 cents a day bullshit.

I'm not even going to TRY to answer your outrageous BULLSHIT Comrade. Or the
FACT that you always resort to trying to use your own little psychotic self
as the source for your delusions. It is easy to see how SHITTY math
education IS in the People's Republic of Canada:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2007/04/10/idaho_seeks_share_of_us_food_sales_to_cuba/

"Last year, Cuba imported $340 million of U.S. farm products such as
chicken, wheat, corn, rice and soybeans, making the Caribbean nation's
ideological foe the biggest foreign supplier of food on Cuban plates."

Let's see COMRADE - there are what, about 12 million people in Cuba. And 12
million divided into $340 million by YOUR Canadian Marxist math is 8 cents?
Is THAT your argument Danny boy? That's some NEW MATH there Danny. Given
the prices it's more than 8 cents a day Danny. Want to revise your claims?
And the $340 million figure is LOW Danny and doesn't count the U.S.
contributions to WFP that also go to Cuba.
krp
2007-12-22 21:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
Post by krp
Post by krp
Post by krp
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
Yes Danny we know YOU were handed ALL that information in the HOTEL BAR
when you were in Cuba ONCE years ago! Fidel confers with YOU on a daily
basis for advice! SURE HE DOES!
So, you have no evidence to support your outrageous claims. Thought so.
What claims would those be Danny?
Pay attention, Kennykins! We were talking about your outrageus claims
that 8 cents worth of imported food per person per day is really a
significant amount of food. But I see you would rather change the
subject. Can't blame you, really. (What a loser!)
First of all EVEN IF your IDIOTIC claims of 8 cents a day were true, and
they are not,
Just do the math, Kennykins. (See below)
Your SPECIAL math Danny boy???????????
Post by krp
Post by krp
just more of your INSANE invented bullshit, Danny boy,
it's bullshit compounded several times. First of all you don't count all the
FREE food, like the TONS of free RICE donated by WFP to Cuba.
WFP aid has amounted to only a few cents per Cuban per YEAR (on average).
Another Danny Christiensen BULLSHIT favt invention (see HIS website
where he can quote hiumself as THE authority AGAIN!)
Post by krp
Post by krp
But beyond that you INVENT this 8 cents a day bullshit.
No "invention," Kennykins. That's just the amount of imported US food
consumed by the average Cuban per day. Again, do the math.
Sure and it doesn't agree with the numbers YOU made up. NO Danny, I am
not going to see it on YOUR website where you quote yourself. That's
BULLSHIT. I gave you the source of over $340 MILLION a year in food from the
US. Do the math yourself. And that isn't the complete story of food supplied
to Cuba by the U.S. That's just part of it.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/US-food-sales-to-Cuba-remain-strong/2007/02/15/1171405328533.html

That is a slight dip from $US350 million ($A449.84 million) in 2005 and
$US392 million ($A503.82 million) in 2004, the council said, with total
sales to Cuba exceeding $US1.5 billion

This does NOT include live animals such as beef cattle, dairy cattle,
pork, lambs, or turkeys sold to Cuba each year. OH DANNY - YOU do the math!
Post by krp
I'm not even going to TRY to answer your outrageous BULLSHIT Comrade. Or the
FACT that you always resort to trying to use your own little psychotic self
as the source for your delusions. It is easy to see how SHITTY math
http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2007/04/10/ida...
"Last year, Cuba imported $340 million of U.S. farm products such as
chicken, wheat, corn, rice and soybeans, making the Caribbean nation's
ideological foe the biggest foreign supplier of food on Cuban plates."
Let's see COMRADE - there are what, about 12 million people in Cuba. And 12
million divided into $340 million by YOUR Canadian Marxist math is 8 cents?
Let me see...

$340,000,000 / 11,300,000 / 365 = $0.08

In "Canadian Marxist math" anyway. What is it in US Imperialist math?

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

krp
2007-12-22 14:33:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
Post by krp
Post by krp
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
Yes Danny we know YOU were handed ALL that information in the HOTEL BAR
when you were in Cuba ONCE years ago! Fidel confers with YOU on a daily
basis for advice! SURE HE DOES!
So, you have no evidence to support your outrageous claims. Thought so.
What claims would those be Danny? That the extent of your ACTUAL
knowledge of Cuba stems from ONE trip to Cuba that you ADMIT was spent
almost exclusively in the hotel BAR? Come on Danny buy lay out your
CREDENTIALS as an EXPERT on Cuba for us.- Hide quoted text -
From a previously quoted SOURCE:

"Last year, Cuba imported $340 million of U.S. farm products such as
chicken, wheat, corn, rice and soybeans, making the Caribbean nation's
ideological foe the biggest foreign supplier of food on Cuban plates."

Do the math Danny. Divide $340 million by 365 days. See what YOU
Canadian Stalinist answer is.
PL
2007-12-20 20:10:09 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by krp
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
The "8 cents" is a lie anyway.
A "lie" put out by your political masters in Washington.
Nope.
A lie put out by Dan Christensen.
A lie exposed by the Cuban regime's newspapers and leaders.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-12-20 20:14:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by krp
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
(SNIP AND LIE)
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can. With US food exports, according to official US
sources, amounting to no more than about 8 cents worth of food per
person day and declining yearly, this paltry amount of food is no more
than political window-dressing.
In your NOT at all humble opinion. That's 8 cents per person of highly
discounted cost. Rice is almost free and chicken is pennies a pound.
In TONS it is a great deal of food Danny boy, SNIP and LIE away!
Ummmm... it's that P-word again, Kennykins. You know, the one you hate
so much -- let's see your P-R-O-O-F!
There is no hint in the news media that this food was sold at anything
but world market prices. And 8 cents a day sure doesn't get you very
much these days.
But then according to Granma and the Cuban official in charge of
international food imports the figures were a lot higher no Mr. Serial Liar

Again your desperate lies are exposed by the communist propaganda rag
Granma: (which just shows what a desperate liar you are)

According to Alimport, in 2006, the total in imports and related costs paid
to U.S. companies exceeded $570.8 million. These transactions, taking place
under restricted conditions, represented a significant increase in financing
costs for the island, estimated at some $21.8 million.
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2007/mayo/juev31/agreements-100-million-purchases.html

From the same article:

And it is in the interest of guaranteeing food for Cuba's 11 million people
that ALIMPORT must import some $1.6 billion dollars in food, for an increase
of $600 million over the last four years, with a tendency to double.

Currently, Cuba imports some 7.8 million tons of foodstuffs. Of that, 95% is
allocated for the family basket of goods guaranteed to every Cuban household
(a rationed distribution of products such as rice, legumes, sugar, coffee,
milk, meats, etc.) by the state at heavily subsidized prices, much lower
than their cost.
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2007/mayo/juev31/agreements-100-million-purchases.html

1.6 billion is equal to 7.8 million tons.
US imports: 570 million so let's say 1/3 of imports.
that means 2.6 million tons of food.
That translated to 230 kg of food per Cuban per year that comes from the US.
Supplying people with nearly 20 kg of food a month is a weird way to go
about a "genocide" no?
Again Cuban data twice exposes your desperate lies.

PL
Adrey S
2007-12-18 23:47:08 UTC
Permalink
CONEXI=D3N VENEZOLANA Y
El narcosantuario de la Farc han encontrado gran apoyo =A0
La guerrilla colombiana de las FARC ha encontrado su santuario en la
Venezuela de Hugo Ch=E1vez. Cuatro desertores y varias fuentes de los
servicios de inteligencia y diplom=E1ticos detallan a EL PA=CDS la
extensa y sistem=E1tica cooperaci=F3n que determinadas autoridades
venezolanas brindan a las FARC en sus operaciones de narcotr=E1fico.
Guerrilleros de las FARC- AP
Fotograf=EDa: Munici=F3n confiscada a la guerrilla de las FARC
Seg=FAn los desertores, las autoridades venezolanas dan protecci=F3n al
menos a
cuatro campamentos de la guerrilla colombiana Fuentes de inteligencia
afirman que tienen informaci=F3n "s=F3lida" de que Ingrid Betancourt
est=E1 en Venezuela
Marcelo, desertor de las FARC: "La Guardia Nacional y el Ej=E9rcito
ofrecen sus servicios a cambio de dinero" Algunos desertan de la
guerrilla colombiana porque se sienten traicionados por sus jefes,
hundidos ante la percepci=F3n de que el capitalismo salvaje del
narcotr=E1fico ha suplantado el altruismo socialista que les impuls=F3 a
tomar las armas. Otros se van porque sienten necesidad de volver a la
vida familiar. Y otros porque, de repente, se convencen de que, si no
huyen, morir=E1n, como es el caso de Rafael, que desert=F3 en septiembre
tras a=F1o y medio operando en una de las bases de las Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) dentro de territorio venezolano.
La l=F3gica de Rafael es, a primera vista, perversa. Por un lado porque,
como guerrillero desertor, que ha regresado a Colombia, sabe que
vivir=E1 el resto de sus d=EDas bajo la amenaza permanente de que sus ex
compa=F1eros lo asesinen; por otro, porque la l=F3gica dice que para las
FARC la vecina Venezuela es un refugio seguro. Las FARC comparten la
ideolog=EDa bolivariana del presidente Hugo Ch=E1vez, y el Ej=E9rcito
colombiano no se arriesgar=EDa a violar la ley internacional y cruzar la
frontera.
"Todo eso es verdad", explic=F3 Rafael. "El Ej=E9rcito colombiano no
cruza la frontera, y la guerrilla tiene un pacto de no agresi=F3n con
los militares venezolanos. El Gobierno venezolano deja a las FARC operar
libremente porque comparten el mismo pensamiento bolivariano, y
tambi=E9n porque las FARC pagan sobornos a su gente". Entonces, =BFde
qu=E9 ha huido?
"De una peligrosidad mucho mayor a la que me enfrento ahora: de los
combates casi diarios dentro de Venezuela con los elenos [la guerrilla
del ELN]".
Pero =BFno comparte el Ej=E9rcito de Liberaci=F3n Nacional los
principios marxistas que llevaron a ambas organizaciones a la guerra
hace 40 a=F1os? "Puede ser", responde Rafael, "pero esto no tiene nada
que ver con pol=EDtica. La lucha con el ELN es por las rutas del
tr=E1fico de coca=EDna. Hay much=EDsimo dinero en juego en esa zona
fronteriza donde la droga entra desde Colombia. Porque la l=EDnea m=E1s
segura para llevar droga a Europa es por Venezuela". EL PA=CDS ha
hablado con Rafael, que milit=F3 como guerrillero diez a=F1os, de los
que tres estuvo en la c=E1rcel, y con otros tres desertores de las FARC
que se han entregado al Gobierno colombiano, acogidos por un programa de
reinserci=F3n a la vida civil; tambi=E9n ha tenido acceso directo en
Colombia y a diplom=E1ticos y fuentes de alto nivel de los servicios de
inteligencia y seguridad de varios pa=EDses, individuos cuya peligrosa
misi=F3n (por esto y en algunos casos por motivos pol=EDticos,
insistieron en el anonimato antes de hablar con EL PA=CDS) consiste en
combatir el terrorismo y el narcotr=E1fico internacional. Ambos
objetivos confluyen en las FARC, m=E1s potente que cualquier cartel en
el mercado global de la coca=EDna y calificada por la UE y EE UU como
"organizaci=F3n terrorista". Lo que aseguran un diplom=E1tico europeo y
diversas fuentes oficiales a las que ha tenido acceso EL PA=CDS es que
existe complicidad y compenetraci=F3n de elementos importantes del
Estado que preside Hugo Ch=E1vez en las actividades mafiosas y militares
de la organizaci=F3n guerrillera m=E1s antigua del mundo. La
conclusi=F3n a la que un diplom=E1tico europeo y todas las fuentes
oficiales consultadas han llegado es que la complicidad es activa y
constante a niveles operativos, en las zonas donde se despliega la
actividad militar y narcotraficante; y m=E1s pasiva cuanto m=E1s alta la
esfera del Gobierno venezolano, hasta llegar al presidente Ch=E1vez, al
que ninguna fuente consultada -ni siquiera en el anonimato m=E1s
extremo- acusa de complicidad directa con el gigantesco negocio del
narcotr=E1fico colombiano. Lo que a esos mismos medios les cuesta creer
es que no est=E9 enterado del grado de colusi=F3n que hay entre sus
fuerzas armadas y los altos mandos de las FARC. Tambi=E9n dudan de que
no est=E9 enterado del grado de involucraci=F3n de las FARC en el
tr=E1fico de coca=EDna.
EL PA=CDS, pese a sus numerosos intentos, no logr=F3 obtener -hasta el
cierre la noche del jueves de esta edici=F3n- una reacci=F3n de las
autoridades venezolanas a las declaraciones recogidas en este reportaje.
Se sab=EDa ya que, durante varios a=F1os, las FARC hab=EDan utilizado el
lado venezolano de la frontera colombiana como refugio. Pocos dudan de
que, si no fuera por la coca=EDna -la gasolina que alimenta la guerra
colombiana-, las FARC se habr=EDan extinguido como las dem=E1s
guerrillas latinoamericanas nacidas durante la guerra fr=EDa. Lo nuevo
que revelan los testimonios recogidos por este diario es lo extensa y
sistem=E1tica que es la cooperaci=F3n en Venezuela con la narcoguerrilla
en cuanto al transporte de la droga por aire, tierra y mar; al
suministro de armas, y la protecci=F3n sobre el terreno que reciben de
sectores de las fuerzas armadas; y a la inmunidad legal de facto que les
conceden elementos del Estado.
Se trata de un negocio ilegal gigantesco. Transita por Venezuela el 30%
de las 600 toneladas de coca=EDna que se mueven anualmente por el mundo.
Pr=E1cticamente la totalidad de la droga colombiana que sale por
Venezuela tiene como destino Europa, con Espa=F1a y Portugal como
principales puntos de entrada, y con un valor de mercado en las calles
europeas por encima de los 10.000 millones de euros al a=F1o. La
infraestructura venezolana destinada al flujo de la coca=EDna ha crecido
de manera exponencial, seg=FAn las fuentes de inteligencia entrevistadas
por EL PA=CDS, durante los =FAltimos cinco a=F1os de la presidencia de
Hugo Ch=E1vez, cuya decisi=F3n de expulsar a la agencia antidroga
norteamericana (DEA) de su pa=EDs en 2005 fue celebrada tanto por las
FARC como por sus socios en los carteles de droga convencionales. Como
ha dicho Luis Hernando G=F3mez Bustamante, poderoso capo colombiano de
la droga en manos de la polic=EDa de su pa=EDs desde febrero, "Venezuela
es el templo del narcotr=E1fico". Un diplom=E1tico europeo con muchos
a=F1os de experiencia en Am=E9rica Latina expres=F3 algo parecido de
otra manera. "El pa=EDs bolivariano, socialista, antiimperialista
ejemplar que pretende crear Ch=E1vez est=E1 en v=EDas de convertirse en
un Estado narco, del mismo modo que las FARC se han convertido en
guerrilleros narcos. Ch=E1vez quiz=E1 no lo entienda, pero este
fen=F3meno corroer=E1 a su pa=EDs como un c=E1ncer". En cuanto al
aspecto militar, o "terrorista", de las FARC, lo que los desertores
entrevistados sostienen es que las autoridades venezolanas no s=F3lo dan
protecci=F3n armada al menos a cuatro campamentos guerrilleros fijos en
su pa=EDs, sino que tambi=E9n hacen la vista gorda a programas de
ense=F1anza que operan dentro de los campamentos para la fabricaci=F3n
de bombas. Rafael -alto, fibroso y de aspecto serio, correspondiendo a
la imagen cl=E1sica del guerrillero latinoamericano- cuenta c=F3mo =E9l
mismo fue adiestrado en Venezuela para participar en una serie de
atentados en Bogot=E1, la capital colombiana. La colaboraci=F3n se
extiende supuestamente a la venta de armamento por las Fuerzas Armadas a
las FARC; a proveer a miembros de la guerrilla con c=E9dulas de
identidad venezolanas, usando nombres falsos, y a los l=EDderes de las
FARC con pasaportes para que puedan viajar a Cuba y Europa; y a dejar
que las FARC proporcionen entrenamiento militar a las Fuerzas
Bolivarianas de Liberaci=F3n. Las FBL, conocidas tambi=E9n como los
boliches, son una guerrilla creada por el Gobierno de Ch=E1vez con el
supuesto prop=F3sito de defender la patria en caso de invasi=F3n
norteamericana.
La expresi=F3n internacional m=E1s visible del terrorismo de las FARC ha
sido la pr=E1ctica de secuestrar a individuos con fines econ=F3micos o
pol=EDticos, como es el caso de la ex candidata a la presidencia
colombiana Ingrid Betancourt. Algunas de las fuentes de inteligencia con
las que se entrevist=F3 EL PA=CDS afirman que tienen informaci=F3n
s=F3lida de que las FARC la retienen en territorio venezolano. Rafael,
que dijo que estaba a punto de ser nombrado para un puesto de mando
importante justo antes de desertar, sostuvo que a principios de a=F1o, y
quiz=E1 despu=E9s, Betancourt se encontraba en un pueblo fronterizo
venezolano llamado Elorza, en el Estado de Apure, bajo la custodia de
Germ=E1n Brice=F1o Su=E1rez, alias Grannobles, miembro del estado mayor
de las FARC y jefe del Frente 10, en el que operaba Rafael. La l=F3gica
es que Elorza, donde Grannobles tiene una finca grande y lujosa
protegida, seg=FAn fuentes de inteligencia,por la Guardia Nacional y
conocida por los guerrilleros de las FARC como Rancho Grande, est=E1
alejado del conflicto militar, lo que reduce las posibilidades de que
muriese en un enfrentamiento, lo cual generar=EDa un problema de imagen
grave para las FARC, ya que Betancourt es tambi=E9n ciudadana francesa,
y el presidente Nicolas Sarkozy se ha esforzado para lograr su
liberaci=F3n.
Rafael, elocuente pero no fanfarr=F3n, reconoci=F3 que =E9l mismo no
hab=EDa visto a Betancourt, sino que compa=F1eros guerrilleros se lo
hab=EDan dicho, y no todas las fuentes consultadas por EL PA=CDS
concurr=EDan con la tesis de que ella estaba en Venezuela. En lo que
s=ED hubo unanimidad fue en que Grannobles, cuya extradici=F3n busca
Estados Unidos por narcotr=E1fico y por el asesinato de tres
norteamericanos en 1999 en suelo venezolano, maneja la log=EDstica
narcoguerrillera en Venezuela. Tambi=E9n es enlace para operaciones
conjuntas con capos de los carteles, uno de los cuales Rafael dijo haber
llevado a una reuni=F3n en Rancho Grande.
El contacto de Ch=E1vez con las FARC, afirmaron las fuentes de
inteligencia, se lleva a cabo a trav=E9s de uno de los siete l=EDderes
m=E1ximos de las FARC, Iv=E1n M=E1rquez, que tambi=E9n tiene una finca
en Venezuela y que se comunica con el presidente a trav=E9s de contactos
con los altos mandos de los servicios de inteligencia venezolanos. Como
explic=F3 un desertor de las FARC que hab=EDa ocupado un cargo
propagand=EDstico importante en la organizaci=F3n, "Las FARC comparten
tres principios bolivarianos con Ch=E1vez: la unidad latinoamericana, la
lucha antiimperialista y la soberan=EDa nacional. Las coincidencias
ideol=F3gicas llevan a la convergencia en el plano t=E1ctico". Las
ventajas t=E1cticas que emanan de la solidaridad bolivariana logran,
seg=FAn las fuentes, su m=E1ximo rendimiento en lo relacionado con la
industria multinacional del narcotr=E1fico. Existen diferentes m=E9todos
para enviar la coca=EDna de Colombia a Europa, aunque lo que siempre
tienen en com=FAn es la colaboraci=F3n por omisi=F3n, o comisi=F3n, de
las autoridades venezolanas. La ruta m=E1s directa es la a=E9rea.
Consiste, seg=FAn fuentes de inteligencia, en enviar avionetas desde
pistas en lugares remotos de Colombia a aer=F3dromos venezolanos. Ah=ED
hay dos opciones. O parten las mismas avionetas rumbo a Hait=ED o
Rep=FAblica Dominicana (una fuente dice que los vuelos no autorizados
"sospechosos" se han incrementado de 3 a 15 por semana desde 2006), o la
droga se traspasa a aviones que vuelan directamente a pa=EDses de
=C1frica occidental, como Guinea-Bissau o Ghana, de donde siguen por
v=EDa mar=EDtima a Portugal o Galicia, punto de entrada espa=F1ol del
=E1rea europea de Schengen.
Uno de los guerrilleros desertores entrevistado por EL PA=CDS,
llam=E9mosle Marcelo, narr=F3 el procedimiento para enviar droga en
cantidades peque=F1as a trav=E9s de individuos (mulas) que la
transportan en sus maletas en aviones comerciales. Marcelo desert=F3 en
agosto tras haber estado un a=F1o en un campamento venezolano de las
FARC en La Uvita, Estado de Apure. =C1gil en sus movimientos, menudo y
de mente ordenada, s=F3lo milit=F3 en la guerrilla de las FARC 15 meses,
pero sus jefes le procuraron r=E1pidamente una c=E9dula de identidad
venezolana, con lo cual cruzaba la frontera y transitaba por Venezuela
sin problemas.
"Una vez", recuerda, "fui al aeropuerto de Bogot=E1 a recoger a un
portorrique=F1o y llevarlo a Venezuela. =C9l cruz=F3 la frontera conmigo
despu=E9s de convenir un precio con los guardias venezolanos. Lo llev=E9
en carro particular a Caracas y de ah=ED viaj=F3 a Espa=F1a en avi=F3n
con la droga en la maleta. Lleg=F3 sin problemas. Me lo confirm=F3
Pizarro, un mando nuestro con 120 hombres bajo su cargo, que habl=F3 con
su contacto en Espa=F1a, que se llamaba Dani". Marcelo particip=F3 en
"ocho o nueve" misiones de este tipo a lo largo de 12 meses. "Operar en
Venezuela es lo m=E1s f=E1cil que hay", sostiene. "La guerrilla de las
FARC est=E1 de lleno all=E1, y la Guardia Nacional, el Ej=E9rcito y
otros venezolanos con cargos oficiales les ofrecen sus servicios, a
cambio de dinero. Nunca hay enfrentamientos entre las FARC y la Guardia
o el Ej=E9rcito". Rafael asegura que particip=F3 en varios operativos
cuyo fin era enviar la droga por v=EDa mar=EDtima desde puertos
caribe=F1os. Su rango en las FARC era m=E1s alto que el de Marcelo y
tuvo m=E1s acceso a informaci=F3n confidencial. "Se recibe la
mercanc=EDa en la frontera, transportada en camiones", explica Rafael.
"Cuando llega el veh=EDculo, la Guardia Nacional venezolana ya lo sabe
de antemano, ya est=E1n sobornados para que cruce a Venezuela sin
problemas. A veces nos dan una escolta. Entonces, yo y otros
compa=F1eros nos subimos o al mismo cami=F3n con el ch=F3fer, o en un
carro particular que les acompa=F1a. Hacemos el viaje, de unas 16 horas,
hasta Puerto Cabello, sobre el mar al oeste de Caracas. Ah=ED entra el
cami=F3n en una gran bodega controlada por venezolanos y gente de las
FARC que se encarga de la seguridad. Efectivos de la Armada venezolana
se encargan de los controles de aduanas y de la salida de los barcos.
Ten=EDan conocimiento de lo que estaba pasando y lo facilitaban todo".
Fuentes de inteligencia que analizan las rutas de salida de Puerto
Cabello dijeron que de ah=ED parten embarcaciones peque=F1as hacia
Hait=ED o la Rep=FAblica Dominicana, desde donde se hace el transbordo a
barcos grandes que llevan la droga a Europa, o directamente cruzan el
oc=E9ano a =C1frica o Europa en, por ejemplo, pesqueros. Un caso notable
fue el del pesquero venezolano Zeus X, que fue interceptado por la
Agencia Tributaria espa=F1ola en septiembre, a 1.050 millas de Las
Palmas, con seis venezolanos a bordo y un cargamento de 3.200 kilos de
coca=EDna con precio de venta en Europa estimado en 190 millones de
euros.
Rafael dijo que no s=F3lo acompa=F1aba a los camiones que viajaban entre
la frontera y el mar, sino que una vez permaneci=F3 un mes en Puerto
Cabello, donde se qued=F3 en un hotel, haciendo trabajos de "seguridad".
"Hubo p=E9rdidas de mercanc=EDa y robos. Dimos plomo. Murieron muchos,
por robo o por traici=F3n". Rafael asegura que no tuvo problemas con la
polic=EDa venezolana, y menos cuando hac=EDa sus viajes de vuelta,
cargado de dinero llegado generalmente de Espa=F1a, dijo, a cambio de la
droga. "Llevaba maletas grandes llenas de billetes de 500 euros, y se
las entregaba a un mando de las FARC del Frente 10 en el lado venezolano
de la frontera con Colombia".
El mismo procedimiento lo llev=F3 a cabo utilizando el puerto de
Maracaibo, que seg=FAn las fuentes consultadas por EL PA=CDS es "una
especie de para=EDso" para los narcotraficantes, entre los cuales se
encuentra uno de los capos m=E1s buscados actualmente por las polic=EDas
internacionales, Wilber Varela, conocido tambi=E9n como Jab=F3n. "Se
instalan en magn=EDficas casas, compran fincas grandes y negocios en
quiebra, y se convierten en personajes valiosos para las econom=EDas
locales venezolanas", dijo una fuente policial. "Venezuela es para estos
criminales un seguro de vida". Por eso, cuando la polic=EDa colombiana
preguntan a sus hom=F3logos venezolanos por el paradero de los capos
mafiosos, la respuesta siempre es la misma: "No tenemos nada". Esta
convergencia t=E1ctica entre las Fuerzas Armadas venezolanas y las FARC
se extiende al terreno militar, al extremo de que hoy, seg=FAn una
fuente de inteligencia especialmente bien informada con la que habl=F3
EL PA=CDS, la Guardia Nacional tiene retenes colocados alrededor de los
campamentos guerrilleros. =BFPara qu=E9? "Para darles protecci=F3n, lo
cual indica que hay conocimiento a muy alto nivel militar venezolano de
la estrecha colaboraci=F3n que tienen sus soldados con las FARC". No
siempre han estado tan claras las cosas. Otro desertor de las FARC, de
seud=F3nimo Humberto, record=F3 c=F3mo, en enero de 2004, casi hubo un
grave choque entre el Ej=E9rcito venezolano y la guerrilla colombiana en
una regi=F3n fronteriza llamada La Guajira. Seg=FAn Humberto, que
oper=F3 pol=EDticamente en la clandestinidad para las FARC en una
importante ciudad colombiana durante cinco a=F1os antes de ingresar en
la guerrilla como combatiente en 2005, el incidente ocurri=F3 al margen
de una reuni=F3n pol=EDtica de revolucionarios de varios pa=EDses
latinoamericanos en un campamento de las FARC en Venezuela. All=ED
estaban destacados unos 150 guerrilleros liderados por el embajador de
las FARC en Venezuela, Iv=E1n M=E1rquez. "De repente o=EDmos un
bombardeo a=E9reo cerca del campamento y despu=E9s nos enteramos de que
se acercaba una columna del Ej=E9rcito venezolano", se=F1ala. "La tropa
lleg=F3 al borde del campamento, pero cuando parec=EDa que iba a haber
un choque, los comandantes de ambos bandos empezaron a hablar y acabaron
bebiendo vodka juntos, celebrando el hecho de que los dos estaban al
mando de ej=E9rcitos bolivarianos".
Humberto, un ex universitario que hab=EDa brillado en su juventud por su
fervor revolucionario, desert=F3 en octubre de este a=F1o en gran parte
porque hab=EDa visto c=F3mo ese tipo de escena festiva, lubricada por el
alcohol, hab=EDa llegado a definir el estilo de vida de algunos altos
mandos de las FARC. "Nosotros los guerrilleros de a pie, los milicianos,
sufr=EDamos permanentemente por falta de abastecimiento. Camin=E1bamos
todo el d=EDa y pas=E1bamos hambre. El problema dejaba de ser militar y
se convert=EDa en uno de supervivencia b=E1sica. Pero en lo que no me
dejaba de fijar era en que mientras nosotros sufr=EDamos, los mandos no
s=F3lo com=EDan bien, sino que tambi=E9n beb=EDan whisky y se acostaban
con mujeres hermosas. Fue una enorme decepci=F3n". Rafael no pareci=F3
padecer esos mismos escr=FApulos. La ausencia de valoraci=F3n moral
cuando describi=F3 sus actividades narcotraficantes lo indicaba. Lo
mismo le parec=EDa cumplir con trabajos directamente ligados a su
original vocaci=F3n guerrillera como viajar a Caracas a recoger
armamentos que las FARC compraban de las Fuerzas Armadas venezolanas.
=C9sta es una de las dimensiones t=E1cticas m=E1s sistematizadas de la
cooperaci=F3n entre Venezuela y las FARC. Entre otros casos similares,
Rafael relat=F3 c=F3mo viaj=F3 en coche particular, un Toyota Corolla,
con un capit=E1n de la Guardia Nacional llamado Pedro Mendoza, a una
base militar grande en las afueras de Caracas llamada Fuerte Tiuna.
Entr=F3 en la base con el capit=E1n, que le entreg=F3 ocho fusiles.
Volvieron a la frontera con los fusiles en el maletero del coche.
Seg=FAn Rafael, elementos de la Guardia Nacional tambi=E9n suministraron
a las FARC granadas, lanzagranadas y material explosivo de base
petrol=EDfera C-4 usado para fabricar bombas. Una fuente de inteligencia
confirm=F3 que estos peque=F1os movimientos de armas ocurr=EDan a gran
escala. "Lo que ocurre es que la droga va de Colombia a Venezuela, y las
armas vienen de Venezuela a Colombia. No son cargamentos grandes, sino
que hay un flujo peque=F1o pero constante: 5.000 cartuchos, seis
fusiles... Es muy dif=EDcil de detectar porque hay muchas peque=F1as
redecitas, muy bien coordinadas por especialistas de las FARC".
Rafael operaba directamente con estos especialistas, tanto en el
tr=E1fico de armas como en el de coca=EDna, hasta que tom=F3 la
decisi=F3n de cambiar de vida. La convicci=F3n de que su suerte se iba a
acabar lleg=F3 en agosto de este a=F1o. "En junio y julio hab=EDa
recibido cursos en la fabricaci=F3n de explosivos, junto con efectivos
de las milicias de Ch=E1vez, de los boliches del FBL. Aprendimos, ah=ED
en un campamento dentro de Venezuela, c=F3mo armar diferentes tipos de
minas quiebrapatas y cazabobos, y a armar bombas con C-4 recibido de la
Guardia Nacional. Tambi=E9n nos ense=F1aron a detonar bombas de manera
controlada usando tel=E9fonos celulares". Le estaban preparando, dijo,
para una misi=F3n en Bogot=E1. "Nos dieron fotos de los objetivos.
=CDbamos a operar junto a dos grupos de las FARC destacados en la
capital. =CDbamos a poner bombas. Cuando se acercaba la fecha empec=E9 a
reflexionar que ya no pod=EDa seguir as=ED. Primero, por el peligro de
los choques con los elenos, y ahora, la posibilidad real de que me
detuvieran -y ya pas=E9 varios a=F1os en la c=E1rcel por mi actividad en
las FARC- o me mataran las fuerzas de seguridad en Bogot=E1. A finales
de agosto me escap=E9, y en septiembre me entregu=E9". Un diplom=E1tico
europeo que conoce bien la situaci=F3n general del narcotr=E1fico y la
guerrilla en Colombia, y que ha o=EDdo el testimonio de Rafael, hizo una
comparaci=F3n entre las actividades de las FARC en Venezuela y una
hipot=E9tica actividad similar de ETA en un pa=EDs vecino de Espa=F1a.
"Imaginemos que ETA tuviera una escuela de fabricaci=F3n de bombas en
Portugal dentro de campamentos protegidos por la polic=EDa portuguesa, y
que planeara detonar esas bombas en Madrid. Imaginemos que las
autoridades portuguesas dotaran de armamentos a ETA, a cambio de dinero
obtenido a trav=E9s del tr=E1fico de drogas, en el que las autoridades
portuguesas tambi=E9n colusionaran. Ser=EDa un esc=E1ndalo de enormes
proporciones. Pues eso, en gran escala, es lo que est=E1 permitiendo que
ocurra hoy el Gobierno de Venezuela". "La verdad", explica un alto mando
policial, "es que si Venezuela hiciera un m=EDnimo esfuerzo para
colaborar con la comunidad internacional, la diferencia ser=EDa enorme.
Podr=EDamos f=E1cilmente recuperar dos toneladas m=E1s de coca=EDna por
mes s=F3lo con una peque=F1a vuelta de tuerca por su parte. No lo hacen
porque hay mucha corrupci=F3n, pero tambi=E9n, y =E9ste es el motivo
m=E1s de fondo, por su actitud antiimperialista. 'Si esto les jode a los
imperialistas', piensan, '=BFc=F3mo les vamos a ayudar?'. La clave es la
voluntad pol=EDtica. Y no la hay".
Una l=F3gica similar se extiende, seg=FAn la fuente de inteligencia de
m=E1s alto rango entrevistada por EL PA=CDS, al tema de los secuestrados
de las FARC. "Si Ch=E1vez quisiera, podr=EDa forzar la liberaci=F3n de
Betancourt ma=F1ana mismo, independientemente de si est=E1 en Venezuela
o Colombia. Les dice a las FARC: 'La entregan o se acaba el juego ac=E1
en Venezuela'. La dependencia que se han creado las FARC en Venezuela es
de una dimensi=F3n tan enorme que no se podr=EDan arriesgar a decirle
que no".
Vota
Resultado 231 votos
Adrey S
2007-12-18 23:49:26 UTC
Permalink
CONEXI=D3N VENEZOLANA Y
El narcosantuario de la Farc han encontrado gran apoyo =A0
La guerrilla colombiana de las FARC ha encontrado su santuario en la
Venezuela de Hugo Ch=E1vez. Cuatro desertores y varias fuentes de los
servicios de inteligencia y diplom=E1ticos detallan a EL PA=CDS la
extensa y sistem=E1tica cooperaci=F3n que determinadas autoridades
venezolanas brindan a las FARC en sus operaciones de narcotr=E1fico.
Guerrilleros de las FARC- AP
Fotograf=EDa: Munici=F3n confiscada a la guerrilla de las FARC
Seg=FAn los desertores, las autoridades venezolanas dan protecci=F3n al
menos a
cuatro campamentos de la guerrilla colombiana Fuentes de inteligencia
afirman que tienen informaci=F3n "s=F3lida" de que Ingrid Betancourt
est=E1 en Venezuela
Marcelo, desertor de las FARC: "La Guardia Nacional y el Ej=E9rcito
ofrecen sus servicios a cambio de dinero" Algunos desertan de la
guerrilla colombiana porque se sienten traicionados por sus jefes,
hundidos ante la percepci=F3n de que el capitalismo salvaje del
narcotr=E1fico ha suplantado el altruismo socialista que les impuls=F3 a
tomar las armas. Otros se van porque sienten necesidad de volver a la
vida familiar. Y otros porque, de repente, se convencen de que, si no
huyen, morir=E1n, como es el caso de Rafael, que desert=F3 en septiembre
tras a=F1o y medio operando en una de las bases de las Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) dentro de territorio venezolano.
La l=F3gica de Rafael es, a primera vista, perversa. Por un lado porque,
como guerrillero desertor, que ha regresado a Colombia, sabe que
vivir=E1 el resto de sus d=EDas bajo la amenaza permanente de que sus ex
compa=F1eros lo asesinen; por otro, porque la l=F3gica dice que para las
FARC la vecina Venezuela es un refugio seguro. Las FARC comparten la
ideolog=EDa bolivariana del presidente Hugo Ch=E1vez, y el Ej=E9rcito
colombiano no se arriesgar=EDa a violar la ley internacional y cruzar la
frontera.
"Todo eso es verdad", explic=F3 Rafael. "El Ej=E9rcito colombiano no
cruza la frontera, y la guerrilla tiene un pacto de no agresi=F3n con
los militares venezolanos. El Gobierno venezolano deja a las FARC operar
libremente porque comparten el mismo pensamiento bolivariano, y
tambi=E9n porque las FARC pagan sobornos a su gente". Entonces, =BFde
qu=E9 ha huido?
"De una peligrosidad mucho mayor a la que me enfrento ahora: de los
combates casi diarios dentro de Venezuela con los elenos [la guerrilla
del ELN]".
Pero =BFno comparte el Ej=E9rcito de Liberaci=F3n Nacional los
principios marxistas que llevaron a ambas organizaciones a la guerra
hace 40 a=F1os? "Puede ser", responde Rafael, "pero esto no tiene nada
que ver con pol=EDtica. La lucha con el ELN es por las rutas del
tr=E1fico de coca=EDna. Hay much=EDsimo dinero en juego en esa zona
fronteriza donde la droga entra desde Colombia. Porque la l=EDnea m=E1s
segura para llevar droga a Europa es por Venezuela". EL PA=CDS ha
hablado con Rafael, que milit=F3 como guerrillero diez a=F1os, de los
que tres estuvo en la c=E1rcel, y con otros tres desertores de las FARC
que se han entregado al Gobierno colombiano, acogidos por un programa de
reinserci=F3n a la vida civil; tambi=E9n ha tenido acceso directo en
Colombia y a diplom=E1ticos y fuentes de alto nivel de los servicios de
inteligencia y seguridad de varios pa=EDses, individuos cuya peligrosa
misi=F3n (por esto y en algunos casos por motivos pol=EDticos,
insistieron en el anonimato antes de hablar con EL PA=CDS) consiste en
combatir el terrorismo y el narcotr=E1fico internacional. Ambos
objetivos confluyen en las FARC, m=E1s potente que cualquier cartel en
el mercado global de la coca=EDna y calificada por la UE y EE UU como
"organizaci=F3n terrorista". Lo que aseguran un diplom=E1tico europeo y
diversas fuentes oficiales a las que ha tenido acceso EL PA=CDS es que
existe complicidad y compenetraci=F3n de elementos importantes del
Estado que preside Hugo Ch=E1vez en las actividades mafiosas y militares
de la organizaci=F3n guerrillera m=E1s antigua del mundo. La
conclusi=F3n a la que un diplom=E1tico europeo y todas las fuentes
oficiales consultadas han llegado es que la complicidad es activa y
constante a niveles operativos, en las zonas donde se despliega la
actividad militar y narcotraficante; y m=E1s pasiva cuanto m=E1s alta la
esfera del Gobierno venezolano, hasta llegar al presidente Ch=E1vez, al
que ninguna fuente consultada -ni siquiera en el anonimato m=E1s
extremo- acusa de complicidad directa con el gigantesco negocio del
narcotr=E1fico colombiano. Lo que a esos mismos medios les cuesta creer
es que no est=E9 enterado del grado de colusi=F3n que hay entre sus
fuerzas armadas y los altos mandos de las FARC. Tambi=E9n dudan de que
no est=E9 enterado del grado de involucraci=F3n de las FARC en el
tr=E1fico de coca=EDna.
EL PA=CDS, pese a sus numerosos intentos, no logr=F3 obtener -hasta el
cierre la noche del jueves de esta edici=F3n- una reacci=F3n de las
autoridades venezolanas a las declaraciones recogidas en este reportaje.
Se sab=EDa ya que, durante varios a=F1os, las FARC hab=EDan utilizado el
lado venezolano de la frontera colombiana como refugio. Pocos dudan de
que, si no fuera por la coca=EDna -la gasolina que alimenta la guerra
colombiana-, las FARC se habr=EDan extinguido como las dem=E1s
guerrillas latinoamericanas nacidas durante la guerra fr=EDa. Lo nuevo
que revelan los testimonios recogidos por este diario es lo extensa y
sistem=E1tica que es la cooperaci=F3n en Venezuela con la narcoguerrilla
en cuanto al transporte de la droga por aire, tierra y mar; al
suministro de armas, y la protecci=F3n sobre el terreno que reciben de
sectores de las fuerzas armadas; y a la inmunidad legal de facto que les
conceden elementos del Estado.
Se trata de un negocio ilegal gigantesco. Transita por Venezuela el 30%
de las 600 toneladas de coca=EDna que se mueven anualmente por el mundo.
Pr=E1cticamente la totalidad de la droga colombiana que sale por
Venezuela tiene como destino Europa, con Espa=F1a y Portugal como
principales puntos de entrada, y con un valor de mercado en las calles
europeas por encima de los 10.000 millones de euros al a=F1o. La
infraestructura venezolana destinada al flujo de la coca=EDna ha crecido
de manera exponencial, seg=FAn las fuentes de inteligencia entrevistadas
por EL PA=CDS, durante los =FAltimos cinco a=F1os de la presidencia de
Hugo Ch=E1vez, cuya decisi=F3n de expulsar a la agencia antidroga
norteamericana (DEA) de su pa=EDs en 2005 fue celebrada tanto por las
FARC como por sus socios en los carteles de droga convencionales. Como
ha dicho Luis Hernando G=F3mez Bustamante, poderoso capo colombiano de
la droga en manos de la polic=EDa de su pa=EDs desde febrero, "Venezuela
es el templo del narcotr=E1fico". Un diplom=E1tico europeo con muchos
a=F1os de experiencia en Am=E9rica Latina expres=F3 algo parecido de
otra manera. "El pa=EDs bolivariano, socialista, antiimperialista
ejemplar que pretende crear Ch=E1vez est=E1 en v=EDas de convertirse en
un Estado narco, del mismo modo que las FARC se han convertido en
guerrilleros narcos. Ch=E1vez quiz=E1 no lo entienda, pero este
fen=F3meno corroer=E1 a su pa=EDs como un c=E1ncer". En cuanto al
aspecto militar, o "terrorista", de las FARC, lo que los desertores
entrevistados sostienen es que las autoridades venezolanas no s=F3lo dan
protecci=F3n armada al menos a cuatro campamentos guerrilleros fijos en
su pa=EDs, sino que tambi=E9n hacen la vista gorda a programas de
ense=F1anza que operan dentro de los campamentos para la fabricaci=F3n
de bombas. Rafael -alto, fibroso y de aspecto serio, correspondiendo a
la imagen cl=E1sica del guerrillero latinoamericano- cuenta c=F3mo =E9l
mismo fue adiestrado en Venezuela para participar en una serie de
atentados en Bogot=E1, la capital colombiana. La colaboraci=F3n se
extiende supuestamente a la venta de armamento por las Fuerzas Armadas a
las FARC; a proveer a miembros de la guerrilla con c=E9dulas de
identidad venezolanas, usando nombres falsos, y a los l=EDderes de las
FARC con pasaportes para que puedan viajar a Cuba y Europa; y a dejar
que las FARC proporcionen entrenamiento militar a las Fuerzas
Bolivarianas de Liberaci=F3n. Las FBL, conocidas tambi=E9n como los
boliches, son una guerrilla creada por el Gobierno de Ch=E1vez con el
supuesto prop=F3sito de defender la patria en caso de invasi=F3n
norteamericana.
La expresi=F3n internacional m=E1s visible del terrorismo de las FARC ha
sido la pr=E1ctica de secuestrar a individuos con fines econ=F3micos o
pol=EDticos, como es el caso de la ex candidata a la presidencia
colombiana Ingrid Betancourt. Algunas de las fuentes de inteligencia con
las que se entrevist=F3 EL PA=CDS afirman que tienen informaci=F3n
s=F3lida de que las FARC la retienen en territorio venezolano. Rafael,
que dijo que estaba a punto de ser nombrado para un puesto de mando
importante justo antes de desertar, sostuvo que a principios de a=F1o, y
quiz=E1 despu=E9s, Betancourt se encontraba en un pueblo fronterizo
venezolano llamado Elorza, en el Estado de Apure, bajo la custodia de
Germ=E1n Brice=F1o Su=E1rez, alias Grannobles, miembro del estado mayor
de las FARC y jefe del Frente 10, en el que operaba Rafael. La l=F3gica
es que Elorza, donde Grannobles tiene una finca grande y lujosa
protegida, seg=FAn fuentes de inteligencia,por la Guardia Nacional y
conocida por los guerrilleros de las FARC como Rancho Grande, est=E1
alejado del conflicto militar, lo que reduce las posibilidades de que
muriese en un enfrentamiento, lo cual generar=EDa un problema de imagen
grave para las FARC, ya que Betancourt es tambi=E9n ciudadana francesa,
y el presidente Nicolas Sarkozy se ha esforzado para lograr su
liberaci=F3n.
Rafael, elocuente pero no fanfarr=F3n, reconoci=F3 que =E9l mismo no
hab=EDa visto a Betancourt, sino que compa=F1eros guerrilleros se lo
hab=EDan dicho, y no todas las fuentes consultadas por EL PA=CDS
concurr=EDan con la tesis de que ella estaba en Venezuela. En lo que
s=ED hubo unanimidad fue en que Grannobles, cuya extradici=F3n busca
Estados Unidos por narcotr=E1fico y por el asesinato de tres
norteamericanos en 1999 en suelo venezolano, maneja la log=EDstica
narcoguerrillera en Venezuela. Tambi=E9n es enlace para operaciones
conjuntas con capos de los carteles, uno de los cuales Rafael dijo haber
llevado a una reuni=F3n en Rancho Grande.
El contacto de Ch=E1vez con las FARC, afirmaron las fuentes de
inteligencia, se lleva a cabo a trav=E9s de uno de los siete l=EDderes
m=E1ximos de las FARC, Iv=E1n M=E1rquez, que tambi=E9n tiene una finca
en Venezuela y que se comunica con el presidente a trav=E9s de contactos
con los altos mandos de los servicios de inteligencia venezolanos. Como
explic=F3 un desertor de las FARC que hab=EDa ocupado un cargo
propagand=EDstico importante en la organizaci=F3n, "Las FARC comparten
tres principios bolivarianos con Ch=E1vez: la unidad latinoamericana, la
lucha antiimperialista y la soberan=EDa nacional. Las coincidencias
ideol=F3gicas llevan a la convergencia en el plano t=E1ctico". Las
ventajas t=E1cticas que emanan de la solidaridad bolivariana logran,
seg=FAn las fuentes, su m=E1ximo rendimiento en lo relacionado con la
industria multinacional del narcotr=E1fico. Existen diferentes m=E9todos
para enviar la coca=EDna de Colombia a Europa, aunque lo que siempre
tienen en com=FAn es la colaboraci=F3n por omisi=F3n, o comisi=F3n, de
las autoridades venezolanas. La ruta m=E1s directa es la a=E9rea.
Consiste, seg=FAn fuentes de inteligencia, en enviar avionetas desde
pistas en lugares remotos de Colombia a aer=F3dromos venezolanos. Ah=ED
hay dos opciones. O parten las mismas avionetas rumbo a Hait=ED o
Rep=FAblica Dominicana (una fuente dice que los vuelos no autorizados
"sospechosos" se han incrementado de 3 a 15 por semana desde 2006), o la
droga se traspasa a aviones que vuelan directamente a pa=EDses de
=C1frica occidental, como Guinea-Bissau o Ghana, de donde siguen por
v=EDa mar=EDtima a Portugal o Galicia, punto de entrada espa=F1ol del
=E1rea europea de Schengen.
Uno de los guerrilleros desertores entrevistado por EL PA=CDS,
llam=E9mosle Marcelo, narr=F3 el procedimiento para enviar droga en
cantidades peque=F1as a trav=E9s de individuos (mulas) que la
transportan en sus maletas en aviones comerciales. Marcelo desert=F3 en
agosto tras haber estado un a=F1o en un campamento venezolano de las
FARC en La Uvita, Estado de Apure. =C1gil en sus movimientos, menudo y
de mente ordenada, s=F3lo milit=F3 en la guerrilla de las FARC 15 meses,
pero sus jefes le procuraron r=E1pidamente una c=E9dula de identidad
venezolana, con lo cual cruzaba la frontera y transitaba por Venezuela
sin problemas.
"Una vez", recuerda, "fui al aeropuerto de Bogot=E1 a recoger a un
portorrique=F1o y llevarlo a Venezuela. =C9l cruz=F3 la frontera conmigo
despu=E9s de convenir un precio con los guardias venezolanos. Lo llev=E9
en carro particular a Caracas y de ah=ED viaj=F3 a Espa=F1a en avi=F3n
con la droga en la maleta. Lleg=F3 sin problemas. Me lo confirm=F3
Pizarro, un mando nuestro con 120 hombres bajo su cargo, que habl=F3 con
su contacto en Espa=F1a, que se llamaba Dani". Marcelo particip=F3 en
"ocho o nueve" misiones de este tipo a lo largo de 12 meses. "Operar en
Venezuela es lo m=E1s f=E1cil que hay", sostiene. "La guerrilla de las
FARC est=E1 de lleno all=E1, y la Guardia Nacional, el Ej=E9rcito y
otros venezolanos con cargos oficiales les ofrecen sus servicios, a
cambio de dinero. Nunca hay enfrentamientos entre las FARC y la Guardia
o el Ej=E9rcito". Rafael asegura que particip=F3 en varios operativos
cuyo fin era enviar la droga por v=EDa mar=EDtima desde puertos
caribe=F1os. Su rango en las FARC era m=E1s alto que el de Marcelo y
tuvo m=E1s acceso a informaci=F3n confidencial. "Se recibe la
mercanc=EDa en la frontera, transportada en camiones", explica Rafael.
"Cuando llega el veh=EDculo, la Guardia Nacional venezolana ya lo sabe
de antemano, ya est=E1n sobornados para que cruce a Venezuela sin
problemas. A veces nos dan una escolta. Entonces, yo y otros
compa=F1eros nos subimos o al mismo cami=F3n con el ch=F3fer, o en un
carro particular que les acompa=F1a. Hacemos el viaje, de unas 16 horas,
hasta Puerto Cabello, sobre el mar al oeste de Caracas. Ah=ED entra el
cami=F3n en una gran bodega controlada por venezolanos y gente de las
FARC que se encarga de la seguridad. Efectivos de la Armada venezolana
se encargan de los controles de aduanas y de la salida de los barcos.
Ten=EDan conocimiento de lo que estaba pasando y lo facilitaban todo".
Fuentes de inteligencia que analizan las rutas de salida de Puerto
Cabello dijeron que de ah=ED parten embarcaciones peque=F1as hacia
Hait=ED o la Rep=FAblica Dominicana, desde donde se hace el transbordo a
barcos grandes que llevan la droga a Europa, o directamente cruzan el
oc=E9ano a =C1frica o Europa en, por ejemplo, pesqueros. Un caso notable
fue el del pesquero venezolano Zeus X, que fue interceptado por la
Agencia Tributaria espa=F1ola en septiembre, a 1.050 millas de Las
Palmas, con seis venezolanos a bordo y un cargamento de 3.200 kilos de
coca=EDna con precio de venta en Europa estimado en 190 millones de
euros.
Rafael dijo que no s=F3lo acompa=F1aba a los camiones que viajaban entre
la frontera y el mar, sino que una vez permaneci=F3 un mes en Puerto
Cabello, donde se qued=F3 en un hotel, haciendo trabajos de "seguridad".
"Hubo p=E9rdidas de mercanc=EDa y robos. Dimos plomo. Murieron muchos,
por robo o por traici=F3n". Rafael asegura que no tuvo problemas con la
polic=EDa venezolana, y menos cuando hac=EDa sus viajes de vuelta,
cargado de dinero llegado generalmente de Espa=F1a, dijo, a cambio de la
droga. "Llevaba maletas grandes llenas de billetes de 500 euros, y se
las entregaba a un mando de las FARC del Frente 10 en el lado venezolano
de la frontera con Colombia".
El mismo procedimiento lo llev=F3 a cabo utilizando el puerto de
Maracaibo, que seg=FAn las fuentes consultadas por EL PA=CDS es "una
especie de para=EDso" para los narcotraficantes, entre los cuales se
encuentra uno de los capos m=E1s buscados actualmente por las polic=EDas
internacionales, Wilber Varela, conocido tambi=E9n como Jab=F3n. "Se
instalan en magn=EDficas casas, compran fincas grandes y negocios en
quiebra, y se convierten en personajes valiosos para las econom=EDas
locales venezolanas", dijo una fuente policial. "Venezuela es para estos
criminales un seguro de vida". Por eso, cuando la polic=EDa colombiana
preguntan a sus hom=F3logos venezolanos por el paradero de los capos
mafiosos, la respuesta siempre es la misma: "No tenemos nada". Esta
convergencia t=E1ctica entre las Fuerzas Armadas venezolanas y las FARC
se extiende al terreno militar, al extremo de que hoy, seg=FAn una
fuente de inteligencia especialmente bien informada con la que habl=F3
EL PA=CDS, la Guardia Nacional tiene retenes colocados alrededor de los
campamentos guerrilleros. =BFPara qu=E9? "Para darles protecci=F3n, lo
cual indica que hay conocimiento a muy alto nivel militar venezolano de
la estrecha colaboraci=F3n que tienen sus soldados con las FARC". No
siempre han estado tan claras las cosas. Otro desertor de las FARC, de
seud=F3nimo Humberto, record=F3 c=F3mo, en enero de 2004, casi hubo un
grave choque entre el Ej=E9rcito venezolano y la guerrilla colombiana en
una regi=F3n fronteriza llamada La Guajira. Seg=FAn Humberto, que
oper=F3 pol=EDticamente en la clandestinidad para las FARC en una
importante ciudad colombiana durante cinco a=F1os antes de ingresar en
la guerrilla como combatiente en 2005, el incidente ocurri=F3 al margen
de una reuni=F3n pol=EDtica de revolucionarios de varios pa=EDses
latinoamericanos en un campamento de las FARC en Venezuela. All=ED
estaban destacados unos 150 guerrilleros liderados por el embajador de
las FARC en Venezuela, Iv=E1n M=E1rquez. "De repente o=EDmos un
bombardeo a=E9reo cerca del campamento y despu=E9s nos enteramos de que
se acercaba una columna del Ej=E9rcito venezolano", se=F1ala. "La tropa
lleg=F3 al borde del campamento, pero cuando parec=EDa que iba a haber
un choque, los comandantes de ambos bandos empezaron a hablar y acabaron
bebiendo vodka juntos, celebrando el hecho de que los dos estaban al
mando de ej=E9rcitos bolivarianos".
Humberto, un ex universitario que hab=EDa brillado en su juventud por su
fervor revolucionario, desert=F3 en octubre de este a=F1o en gran parte
porque hab=EDa visto c=F3mo ese tipo de escena festiva, lubricada por el
alcohol, hab=EDa llegado a definir el estilo de vida de algunos altos
mandos de las FARC. "Nosotros los guerrilleros de a pie, los milicianos,
sufr=EDamos permanentemente por falta de abastecimiento. Camin=E1bamos
todo el d=EDa y pas=E1bamos hambre. El problema dejaba de ser militar y
se convert=EDa en uno de supervivencia b=E1sica. Pero en lo que no me
dejaba de fijar era en que mientras nosotros sufr=EDamos, los mandos no
s=F3lo com=EDan bien, sino que tambi=E9n beb=EDan whisky y se acostaban
con mujeres hermosas. Fue una enorme decepci=F3n". Rafael no pareci=F3
padecer esos mismos escr=FApulos. La ausencia de valoraci=F3n moral
cuando describi=F3 sus actividades narcotraficantes lo indicaba. Lo
mismo le parec=EDa cumplir con trabajos directamente ligados a su
original vocaci=F3n guerrillera como viajar a Caracas a recoger
armamentos que las FARC compraban de las Fuerzas Armadas venezolanas.
=C9sta es una de las dimensiones t=E1cticas m=E1s sistematizadas de la
cooperaci=F3n entre Venezuela y las FARC. Entre otros casos similares,
Rafael relat=F3 c=F3mo viaj=F3 en coche particular, un Toyota Corolla,
con un capit=E1n de la Guardia Nacional llamado Pedro Mendoza, a una
base militar grande en las afueras de Caracas llamada Fuerte Tiuna.
Entr=F3 en la base con el capit=E1n, que le entreg=F3 ocho fusiles.
Volvieron a la frontera con los fusiles en el maletero del coche.
Seg=FAn Rafael, elementos de la Guardia Nacional tambi=E9n suministraron
a las FARC granadas, lanzagranadas y material explosivo de base
petrol=EDfera C-4 usado para fabricar bombas. Una fuente de inteligencia
confirm=F3 que estos peque=F1os movimientos de armas ocurr=EDan a gran
escala. "Lo que ocurre es que la droga va de Colombia a Venezuela, y las
armas vienen de Venezuela a Colombia. No son cargamentos grandes, sino
que hay un flujo peque=F1o pero constante: 5.000 cartuchos, seis
fusiles... Es muy dif=EDcil de detectar porque hay muchas peque=F1as
redecitas, muy bien coordinadas por especialistas de las FARC".
Rafael operaba directamente con estos especialistas, tanto en el
tr=E1fico de armas como en el de coca=EDna, hasta que tom=F3 la
decisi=F3n de cambiar de vida. La convicci=F3n de que su suerte se iba a
acabar lleg=F3 en agosto de este a=F1o. "En junio y julio hab=EDa
recibido cursos en la fabricaci=F3n de explosivos, junto con efectivos
de las milicias de Ch=E1vez, de los boliches del FBL. Aprendimos, ah=ED
en un campamento dentro de Venezuela, c=F3mo armar diferentes tipos de
minas quiebrapatas y cazabobos, y a armar bombas con C-4 recibido de la
Guardia Nacional. Tambi=E9n nos ense=F1aron a detonar bombas de manera
controlada usando tel=E9fonos celulares". Le estaban preparando, dijo,
para una misi=F3n en Bogot=E1. "Nos dieron fotos de los objetivos.
=CDbamos a operar junto a dos grupos de las FARC destacados en la
capital. =CDbamos a poner bombas. Cuando se acercaba la fecha empec=E9 a
reflexionar que ya no pod=EDa seguir as=ED. Primero, por el peligro de
los choques con los elenos, y ahora, la posibilidad real de que me
detuvieran -y ya pas=E9 varios a=F1os en la c=E1rcel por mi actividad en
las FARC- o me mataran las fuerzas de seguridad en Bogot=E1. A finales
de agosto me escap=E9, y en septiembre me entregu=E9". Un diplom=E1tico
europeo que conoce bien la situaci=F3n general del narcotr=E1fico y la
guerrilla en Colombia, y que ha o=EDdo el testimonio de Rafael, hizo una
comparaci=F3n entre las actividades de las FARC en Venezuela y una
hipot=E9tica actividad similar de ETA en un pa=EDs vecino de Espa=F1a.
"Imaginemos que ETA tuviera una escuela de fabricaci=F3n de bombas en
Portugal dentro de campamentos protegidos por la polic=EDa portuguesa, y
que planeara detonar esas bombas en Madrid. Imaginemos que las
autoridades portuguesas dotaran de armamentos a ETA, a cambio de dinero
obtenido a trav=E9s del tr=E1fico de drogas, en el que las autoridades
portuguesas tambi=E9n colusionaran. Ser=EDa un esc=E1ndalo de enormes
proporciones. Pues eso, en gran escala, es lo que est=E1 permitiendo que
ocurra hoy el Gobierno de Venezuela". "La verdad", explica un alto mando
policial, "es que si Venezuela hiciera un m=EDnimo esfuerzo para
colaborar con la comunidad internacional, la diferencia ser=EDa enorme.
Podr=EDamos f=E1cilmente recuperar dos toneladas m=E1s de coca=EDna por
mes s=F3lo con una peque=F1a vuelta de tuerca por su parte. No lo hacen
porque hay mucha corrupci=F3n, pero tambi=E9n, y =E9ste es el motivo
m=E1s de fondo, por su actitud antiimperialista. 'Si esto les jode a los
imperialistas', piensan, '=BFc=F3mo les vamos a ayudar?'. La clave es la
voluntad pol=EDtica. Y no la hay".
Una l=F3gica similar se extiende, seg=FAn la fuente de inteligencia de
m=E1s alto rango entrevistada por EL PA=CDS, al tema de los secuestrados
de las FARC. "Si Ch=E1vez quisiera, podr=EDa forzar la liberaci=F3n de
Betancourt ma=F1ana mismo, independientemente de si est=E1 en Venezuela
o Colombia. Les dice a las FARC: 'La entregan o se acaba el juego ac=E1
en Venezuela'. La dependencia que se han creado las FARC en Venezuela es
de una dimensi=F3n tan enorme que no se podr=EDan arriesgar a decirle
que no".
Vota
Resultado 231 votos
PL
2007-12-20 20:30:45 UTC
Permalink
Once the same crap is more than enough, Dan.
Stop flooding newsgroups
PL
2007-12-20 20:44:15 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
By which Mr. serial Liar means he snips what he can't refute or doesn't
dare to address
A nation that consistenly supplies a third of the imported food to
another nation can
hardly be accused of acting in a "genocidal" way.
It certainly can.
Firstly: thanks for confirming the fact that the US supplies about
a third of the food of the Cuban people.
[snip]
In reality, it amounts to almost nothing in terms of nutrition.(snip)
according to Cuban sources: one third of the rationed food in Cuba on
which the people depend.
So the rationing gives "nothing" according to you.?
You may be right there.
The meager rations don't feed Cubans.
You yourself have admitted that at best 25% of the needs of Cubans comes
from the rationing.
based on your figures the Cuban people about 24 cents worth of food a
day via the rationing Dan.
Bullshit. AP's Anita Snow recently report that the monthly ration
(only about a 1/4 to 1/3 of the Cuban diet) amounts to the US
equivalent of about $50 worth of groceries per person.(snip)
No link as usual.

Your lie then.
Granma says that 95% of that $50 is imported and 1/3 comes from the US.
So at US retail prices that means that Cubans get about 15.8 dollars
from the US.
But then: this is at full US retail prices for similar (higher quality)
products while you quoted international wholsale prices (bulk).
Note that this also refers to the larger rations of Havana.
You can't compare apples with oranges Dan.
Prices in the comparison have to be constnat.
The proportions given by Granma and Alimport give the true comparison basis.
Your can't hide behind the fact that the regime gives very few food to
the people and use that as an "argument" against the US.
[snip]
Again, despite the best efforts of all you embargo-Nazis,
You are the only one with "Nazi" attitude Dan Christensen

You support a regime that:
- is on the list of genocide Watch:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/genocide.htm
- does not allow freedom of speech - like the Nazi regime
http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
- imprisons opponents (even having it's own concentration camps in the past:
the UMAP) - like the Nazi regime
http://www.cubaverdad.net/dissidents.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/independent_journalists_in_cuba.htm
more about the UMAP:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/msearch?query=UMAP&submit=Search&charset=UTF-8
- tortures opponents:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/torture_in_cuba.htm
- violates human rights - like the Nazi regime
http://www.cubaverdad.net/universal_declaration_of_human_rights.htm
- persecuted gays until very recently - like the Nazi regime
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/msearch?query=%22gay%22+OR+%22homo%22&submit=Search&charset=UTF-8
- burns books - like the Nazi regime
- uses harsh repression against its people and has a sophisticated system of
social control - like the Nazi regime
http://www.cubaverdad.net/totalitarian_system.htm
...
and of course there are your own words that show you attitude:
Quote:
"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In this
case, the ends do indeed justify the means.
.....
These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=tirG3.176162%245r2.278940%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and Colombia. Again, the
actions of the Cuban government in detaining these so-called dissidents seem
quite mild in comparison and are morally justified under the circumstances."
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=txMG3.176443%245r2.284921%40tor-nn1.netcom.ca

Unquote
no one is
starving in Cuba.
but 7% of the population needs WFP food aid, no?
see: www.wfp.org
Again, no one, not even Amnesty International is buying into your self-
serving lies and rationalizations, "Miss" Lobbyist.
Thanks for again allowing me to expose you as the pathetic liar you
Pathetic.
on your part indeed
Posted on Wed, Jul. 13, 2005
HURRICANE DENNIS
Castro rebuffs aid despite rising death toll, damage
Cuba's damages and deaths from Hurricane Dennis keep rising -- and so
does
its government's resolve not to accept any help from Washington.
BY FRANCES ROBLES
Hurricane Dennis caused about $1.4 billion in damage and killed 16
people in
Cuba, but the government there will refuse any aid from Washington or
Europe, Fidel Castro has announced.
Castro's decision to rebuff aid came as reports of Dennis' mayhem in
the
Caribbean kept climbing. Four days after the Category 4 storm pummeled
the
islands, a total of 41 people are now confirmed dead -- 16 in Cuba and
25 in
Haiti.
But Castro says he turned down a U.S. offer of $50,000, and would
spurn even
$1 billion -- if it came from Uncle Sam. ''Cuba will not accept
humanitarian
aid from the United States, which imposes a criminal blockade, or from
any
of the European governments that took aid away under the pretext of
human
rights violations,'' the Communist Party daily Granma reported in a
story
paraphrasing Castro's comments.
The Cuban leader made the announcement on a late-night TV news show
that
started Monday and dragged on for seven hours. The story made
reference to a
2003 move by the EU -- now suspended -- to cut off aid after Cuba's
crackdown on dissidents.
EXILES' ROLE
Exile groups meanwhile jumped into the fray, some collecting funds
for
dissident groups on the island, others pushing to lift strict Bush
administration limits on visits to Cuba -- underscoring once again
the
politicized and deeply divided nature of Cuban politics, even in times
of
tragedy.
''Castro is rejecting aid for his people,'' said Sylvia Iriondo, of
Mothers
Against Repression. ``That shows the last thing on his mind is the
welfare
of the Cuban people.''
On Monday, Mothers Against Repression used its license to send
financial
support to Cuba to remit $3,000 to the Assembly to Promote Civil
Society in
Cuba, she said.
Members of the Cuban Commission for Family Rights traveled to
Washington
Monday to lobby for changes in U.S. rules that limit travel and
remittances.
''They've suggested donating through certain groups,'' said Alvaro
Fernández, the group's representative. 'I say, `Go for it,' but these
groups
are talking about giving it to dissidents. So, OK, we're going to help
only
dissidents? There are a lot of people in Cuba who are not part of the
dissident movement.''
The United Nations announced it sent $50,000 worth of aid. U.S. State
Department spokesman Tom Casey said Washington will continue working
with
the nongovernmental groups to send money to Cuba, despite Castro's
stance.
Ironically, a similar snub from Havana after Hurricane Michelle in
2001 led
to a boom in U.S. exports to Cuba.
Since that storm, Havana has purchased several hundred million
dollars'
worth of foodstuffs in groundbreaking deals with U.S. exporters. CANF
has
asked the companies that profit from those sales to donate rice to
Cuba this
time -- for free.
DEFENSE OF AID
The foundation defended handing out its Cuba Relief Fund donations
through
dissidents, saying it was the only way to guarantee aid gets to Cubans
and
not Castro.
''Look, this money is not coming with a condition to only give it to
people
who are vocal against the government,'' said CANF director Camila
Ruiz.
``It's that these are trusted individuals would would give it to
people who
most need it.''
Saudy Peña contributed to this report.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12120030.htm
[snip]
Sorry, nothing in this years old report shows that AI is buying into
your bullshit, (snip)
it does expose your lies though
STILL haven't found your balls,
(snip)
Childish insults don't change facts comrade dan.
[snip]
Your cowardice won't change the facts,
(snip)
The facts are clear Dan: you lied and your lie was exposed.
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.
[snip]
Still haven't found those long-lost balls of yours,
(snip)

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of 73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?




As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en





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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.

" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."

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

" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."

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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".

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

Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC


PL
PL
2007-12-08 18:29:22 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or to lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Sadly for you, none of their so-called "news reports" have been
published in the mainstream media
(snip)
Daily reports end up in specialized publications on Cuba,Dan.
You mean "specialized publications" like the US government-funded
propaganda organ
Nope.
publications set up by Cubans abroad and pro-human rights organizitions.
Post by PL
When larger issues arise and are discussed as internationally
important news items.
"News reports" by these so-called "independent journalists of yours
are almost never cited.
actually they are very often sited in news reports and by international
human rights organizations like HRW.
Post by PL
NO other Cuban journalist
Reports in Granma are always being cited in the mainstream media.
Get real.
Maybe on Fidel, but in Europe nobady but the loony left quote Granma.
Post by PL
Recognized by international organizations, human rights groups,
Guatemalan trade Unions, the European parliament, the French
parliament, the Chilean parliament and lots of other as
independent,Dan.
[snip]
If true, it seems these organizations are not a very good judges of
excellence in journalism -
Yes they are Dan and they aren't dogmatically handicapped as you are.
But thanks for confirming the widespread support and recognition for the
independent journalists in Cuba.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-12-11 20:21:02 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or to lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Post by PL
Sadly for you, none of their so-called "news reports" have been
published in the mainstream media
(snip)
Daily reports end up in specialized publications on Cuba,Dan.
You mean "specialized publications" like the US government-funded
propaganda organ
Nope.
publications set up by Cubans abroad and pro-human rights organizitions.
You mean your mafia pals in Miami? Get real!
Nope.
Cubans in exile verywhere from Sweden to Spain

http://www.cubanuestra.nu/
http://www.miscelaneasdecuba.net/web/folder.asp?folderID=89
http://www.cubaencuentro.com/es/encuentro-en-la-red/cuba
Post by PL
Post by PL
When larger issues arise and are discussed as internationally
important news items.
"News reports" by these so-called "independent journalists of yours
are almost never cited.
actually they are very often sited in news reports and by international
human rights organizations like HRW.
STILL waiting for your proof. And it has been several months (years?)
now.
Posted over and over again and merely snipped comrade Dan.
Post by PL
Post by PL
NO other Cuban journalist
Reports in Granma are always being cited in the mainstream media.
Get real.
Maybe on Fidel, but in Europe nobady but the loony left quote Granma.
[snip]
I think you are jealous because so-called "news reports" from your
pals in Cuba are almost NEVER cited
(snip)

get real dan.
Granma never made it to Newsweek.
The independents did.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
Petry
2007-12-06 16:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democrático

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del referéndum del último domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una década, el comandante Hugo Chávez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el trípode de
la movilización política y social, la hegemonía personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la égida de un Estado dominante. Chávez fracturó así la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
región: entonces y ahora, actuó como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en sí mismo al
pueblo y a la Nación. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dialéctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazaría, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresión autónoma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo falló en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la dinámica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesión de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el maná que
brota del petróleo, el control sobre los medios de comunicación:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar más
división y encono.
No fue así, Chávez perdió. ¿Error de cálculo? ¿Respeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? ¿Seguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto único y
auténtico representante del pueblo, no podía ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegemónico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir más lejos, ésta es la lección que, en el
mismo día del referéndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin impartió desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin superó la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremacía de un Estado
que también capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opinión ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, ¿puede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros países
una hegemonía que reniegue del pluralismo político y de la
autonomía de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobarómetro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los años, en 18
países latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos está
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que soñaba Chávez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es más alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacción con el rendimiento de este régimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garantías en torno
a la participación política y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la población (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato teñido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidación de hegemonías (lo que Chávez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar también libertades civiles y
políticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar más
espacios de libertad. Semejante virazón no gira en el vacío. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situación económica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la economía de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). Aún más, mientras la percepción de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es más fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimación acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
países es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aquí podría inferirse que muy poco está adquirido de antemano
en América latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades están ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribución, de origen étnico, de
incorporación de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullición y de apatía (en Venezuela, dato no desdeñable que
podría jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participación electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace más difícil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Perón y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Chávez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de dirección.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones cívicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansión del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de más en más sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposición de regímenes políticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutación que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con razón, que Venezuela soportó un vacío en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vacíos hoy se colman rápido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todavía el medio de comunicación de los sectores
más postergados, el teléfono celular sí lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opinión son más vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasión es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por sí o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad –la social y la
tecnológica– un referéndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteció en
Misiones el último año se repitió en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Chávez estará haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migración de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en América latina la democracia está sacudida por golpes
de opinión de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
después se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representación
política oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesión de
golpes de opinión, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democrático, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos años de desalojar a Chávez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atención que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucción inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deberíamos observar con atención en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemonías duraban porque las mayorías electorales las querían;
ahora, parecería que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
están oxidando. La hegemonía tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicción entre los gobernantes que sueñan con esta
clase de dominación y los segmentos de la sociedad que no están
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lección no es sencillo.
La Nación 12-6-07
Opiniones:
===========
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una dirección de
inobjetable comprensión.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democracía contra el 63% de nuestro país. En tal sentido
no he visto a político alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vernáculo, creeremos que ese 37%
extraña la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que también está
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
sucederá en nuestro país, que el pueblo sabrá votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los números del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un país que los necesita íntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien ganó en lo que está bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no está bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecerá.
Reportar Abuso
===============
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que él seguirá con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , él los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevará al PUEBLO al paraíso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , más de 70 años de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:24:47 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:27:04 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:24:53 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:24:27 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:24:33 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:21:34 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
Petry
2007-12-06 17:27:11 UTC
Permalink
Un golpe democr=E1tico

Por Natalio R. Botana
Para LA NACION
Jueves 6 de diciembre de 2007

Los resultados del refer=E9ndum del =FAltimo domingo en Venezuela han
tenido una contundencia que muy pocos (incluido el que esto escribe)
imaginaron. Desde hace una d=E9cada, el comandante Hugo Ch=E1vez ha
puesto en marcha un ambicioso proyecto construido sobre el tr=EDpode de
la movilizaci=F3n pol=EDtica y social, la hegemon=EDa personalista
condensada en el reeleccionismo indefinido y un socialismo instituido
bajo la =E9gida de un Estado dominante. Ch=E1vez fractur=F3 as=ED la
sociedad venezolana e intenta proyectar su sombra sobre nuestra
regi=F3n: entonces y ahora, actu=F3 como un disparador que, al mismo
tiempo, incluye y excluye, porque reclama encarnar en s=ED mismo al
pueblo y a la Naci=F3n. Merced a esta simbiosis, el adversario pasa a
ser un enemigo de la patria.
La dial=E9ctica amigo-enemigo tiene en este montaje del liderazgo un
papel decisivo que rechazar=EDa, a primera vista, la convivencia
pluralista y la expresi=F3n aut=F3noma del pueblo elector. Sin embargo,
algo fall=F3 en este engranaje. Hasta el 2 de diciembre, la din=E1mica
del "chavismo" se engarzaba con una sucesi=F3n de victorias. El manejo
del Estado, la entrada en el mundo de los marginados por medio de unas
"misiones bolivarianas" embebidas de justicia social, el man=E1 que
brota del petr=F3leo, el control sobre los medios de comunicaci=F3n:
todo ello anunciaba otra victoria, aun al precio de generar m=E1s
divisi=F3n y encono.
No fue as=ED, Ch=E1vez perdi=F3. =BFError de c=E1lculo? =BFRespeto, a
pesar de la prepotencia, hacia la transparencia de la democracia
electoral? =BFSeguridad de que su movimiento, en tanto =FAnico y
aut=E9ntico representante del pueblo, no pod=EDa ser derrotado? En todo
caso, el problema se agiganta porque, cuando se busca instaurar un
modelo hegem=F3nico de democracia, el conductor que lo materializa no
puede perder. Sin ir m=E1s lejos, =E9sta es la lecci=F3n que, en el
mismo d=EDa del refer=E9ndum venezolano, Vladimir Putin imparti=F3 desde
Rusia. Acusado de fraude y manipulaciones de todo tipo, el partido de
Putin super=F3 la barrera del 60% de los sufragios.
Por otra parte, si en Rusia la sociedad parece proclive a aceptar esta
mezcla de autoritarismo y capitalismo, con la supremac=EDa de un Estado
que tambi=E9n capta la renta petrolera, en Venezuela el espejo de la
opini=F3n ha dado muestras recientes de que el socialismo chavista no
las tiene todas consigo. Otra pregunta es, pues, pertinente, =BFpuede,
en las actuales condiciones sociales, establecerse en nuestros pa=EDses
una hegemon=EDa que reniegue del pluralismo pol=EDtico y de la
autonom=EDa de la sociedad civil?
Veamos algunos indicadores. En el informe de Latinobar=F3metro 2007 (una
encuesta de 20.212 entrevistas realizada, todos los a=F1os, en 18
pa=EDses latinoamericanos) la imagen que arrojan los venezolanos est=E1
muy lejos de la unanimidad con que so=F1aba Ch=E1vez. En Venezuela, el
apoyo a la democracia es m=E1s alto que en la Argentina (67% contra 63%)
al igual que la satisfacci=F3n con el rendimiento de este r=E9gimen (59%
contra 33%). Si a ello se agrega el dato de que las garant=EDas en torno
a la participaci=F3n pol=EDtica y electoral son vistas como positivas
por el 72% de la poblaci=F3n (cuando en la Argentina lo hace el 59%),
tenemos un retrato te=F1ido por actitudes que pueden apuntar hacia la
consolidaci=F3n de hegemon=EDas (lo que Ch=E1vez pretende) o bien virar
hacia una democracia capaz de garantizar tambi=E9n libertades civiles y
pol=EDticas.
Esto es lo que estuvo en juego el domingo en Venezuela: ganar m=E1s
espacios de libertad. Semejante viraz=F3n no gira en el vac=EDo. Se
asienta en juicios positivos acerca de la situaci=F3n econ=F3mica (52%)
que, sin embargo, valoran las privatizaciones (47% contra 19% en la
Argentina), la econom=EDa de mercado (49% contra 39%) y la empresa
privada (61% contra 46%). A=FAn m=E1s, mientras la percepci=F3n de los
conflictos posibles entre ricos y pobres, o entre empresarios y
trabajadores, es m=E1s fuerte en la Argentina que en Venezuela, la
estimaci=F3n acerca del impacto de los delitos violentos en ambos
pa=EDses es dolorosamente alta (75% en Venezuela, 79% en Argentina).
De aqu=ED podr=EDa inferirse que muy poco est=E1 adquirido de antemano
en Am=E9rica latina. No hay liderazgos perennes, si tenemos en cuenta
que nuestras sociedades est=E1n ahora en pleno movimiento. Las atraviesa
toda clase de conflictos: de distribuci=F3n, de origen =E9tnico, de
incorporaci=F3n de masas urbanas. Son sociedades que combinan momentos
de ebullici=F3n y de apat=EDa (en Venezuela, dato no desde=F1able que
podr=EDa jugar a favor del oficialismo, la participaci=F3n electoral fue
de apenas el 44,11%) en las cuales cada vez se hace m=E1s dif=EDcil
armar esquemas inspirados en experiencias del pasado, como la cruza
entre Per=F3n y Fidel Castro de que se vanagloria Ch=E1vez. En realidad,
estamos avanzando sobre un terreno inestable en donde las sociedades y
sus electorados sorprenden y producen bruscos cambios de direcci=F3n.
Debido a la conciencia que se difunde acerca de la injusticia de las
desigualdades, a tradiciones c=EDvicas que no han sido abolidas y al
desarrollo de nuevas capas sociales nacidas de la expansi=F3n del
sistema educativo, nuestras sociedades son de m=E1s en m=E1s sociedades
horizontales. Resisten la imposici=F3n de reg=EDmenes pol=EDticos
verticales, entre otros motivos, porque sobre esa horizontalidad se ha
sobreimpuesto la horizontalidad que deriva de la mutaci=F3n que estamos
experimentando en la escala de las comunicaciones.
Se ha dicho, acaso con raz=F3n, que Venezuela soport=F3 un vac=EDo en el
campo opositor. No obstante, estos vac=EDos hoy se colman r=E1pido. Las
agrupaciones estudiantiles movilizaron el voto con Internet y celulares.
Si Internet no es todav=EDa el medio de comunicaci=F3n de los sectores
m=E1s postergados, el tel=E9fono celular s=ED lo es. Por consiguiente,
los desplazamientos de opini=F3n son m=E1s vertiginosos, en especial
cuando la ocasi=F3n es propicia y el lance consiste en votar por s=ED o
por no.
En la encrucijada de esta doble horizontalidad =96la social y la
tecnol=F3gica=96 un refer=E9ndum puede ser fatal. Lo que aconteci=F3 en
Misiones el =FAltimo a=F1o se repiti=F3 en Venezuela el domingo pasado.
Hoy Ch=E1vez estar=E1 haciendo el correspondiente balance. Un balance
complicado, al que no es ajena la migraci=F3n de generales amigos hacia
las filas opositoras y la tenacidad de este militar para dar siempre
batalla.
Sabemos que en Am=E9rica latina la democracia est=E1 sacudida por golpes
de opini=F3n de diverso calado. A ciertos gobiernos se los elige y
despu=E9s se los desaloja, como si los registros de la representaci=F3n
pol=EDtica oscilasen entre la normalidad electoral y los sobresaltos
extraelectorales de las movilizaciones populares. En esta sucesi=F3n de
golpes de opini=F3n, lo que hubo en Venezuela fue un golpe
democr=E1tico, muy diferente, para bien de la democracia, del perverso
intento de hace pocos a=F1os de desalojar a Ch=E1vez del poder por medio
de las armas.
Es un llamado de atenci=F3n que no significa el ocaso de la experiencia
chavista ni tampoco la reconstrucci=F3n inmediata de una democracia
plural para todos los venezolanos. Pero es un punto de partida que
deber=EDamos observar con atenci=F3n en la Argentina. Antes, las
hegemon=EDas duraban porque las mayor=EDas electorales las quer=EDan;
ahora, parecer=EDa que las piezas de aquella fragua del poder popular se
est=E1n oxidando. La hegemon=EDa tiene entonces patas cortas. Pese a
ello, la contradicci=F3n entre los gobernantes que sue=F1an con esta
clase de dominaci=F3n y los segmentos de la sociedad que no est=E1n
dispuestos a plegarse a tales designios es fuente de polarizaciones y
retrocesos. Aprender esta lecci=F3n no es sencillo.
La Naci=F3n 12-6-07
Opiniones:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
5
tehuelchen
06.12.07
11:12
Muy buena su nota, sobre todo el final, que tiene una direcci=F3n de
inobjetable comprensi=F3n.
Otro dato y no es menor, cuando apunta a que el 69 % de los venezolanos
quieren la democrac=EDa contra el 63% de nuestro pa=EDs. En tal sentido
no he visto a pol=EDtico alguno preocupado por ello. Si hacemos una
lectura gruesa del porcentaje vern=E1culo, creeremos que ese 37%
extra=F1a la seguridad que nos daban los gobierno de facto, algo
parecido al silencio de los cementerios, o que tambi=E9n est=E1
integrado por los que golpeaban las puertas de los cuarteles y se suman
a los que estan hoy adentro, aunque no escuchen golpes en sus puertas.
De todas formas es preocupante, porque la democracia, sin ser perfecta
es el mejor de los gobiernos, (recuerdo lo que dijo, pero no recuerdo a
quien, en esta cita).
El golpe recibido por Chavez, como Ud., lo cita, Sr. Botana, es
importante por lo saludable a los que se quieren eternizar en el poder
usando el aparato de gobierno.
Pero... siempre hay un pero, tengo la suma y secreta esperanza que no
suceder=E1 en nuestro pa=EDs, que el pueblo sabr=E1 votar cada vez mejor
y que si este no es el gobierno que votamos, sepamos en democracia
aceptar los n=FAmeros del soberano. Que los opositores aprendan de sus
errores (a eso se le lama experiencia, o no?) y que se mejoren para
ayudar a un pa=EDs que los necesita =EDntegros, no recortados por sus
espamos circunstanciales. Necesitamos estadistas que indiquen el camino,
que colaboren con quien gan=F3 en lo que est=E1 bien y que critiquen con
bases a lo que no est=E1 bien. En definitiva que sumen, que el pueblo se
los agradecer=E1.
Reportar Abuso
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
4
Guga
06.12.07
10:31
Pero de que que estamos hablando si el sr.Chavez ha declarado ya que la
victoria del NO fue una "victoria de M.." y que =E9l seguir=E1 con el
proyecto porque si no lo entienden , =E9l los se los va hacer
entender!!!
Si piensa igual que el anciano Fidel y toda la izquierda Stalinista del
mundo...que ellos son la vanguardia que llevar=E1 al PUEBLO al para=EDso
Socialista del siglo XXI..
Por favor , m=E1s de 70 a=F1os de fracasos y millones de muertos en esos
experimentos del Socialismo Real y alguien puede creer que aceptan la
Democracia???
Los pueblos se merecen los dirigentes que eligen,apoyan o soportan
.nada mas y nada menos...

Reportar Abuso
PL
2007-11-25 22:26:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Mister Christensen,
I love this part mention on your website about Democracy and Elections
"While the Communist Party of Cuba is the only legally sanctioned
party there, it plays no role in the electoral process. By law, it can
neither nominate nor, in any way, endorse any individual candidates"
That is so telling and tipical... Obviosly you don't understand what
Democracy means.
It means the majority rules.
Nope.
It means the regime rules as it denies freedom of speech and uses repressive
laws control the population.
Cuba is more democratic than the US ever was.
(snip)

Cuba isn't "democratic" as it has no freedom of speech.
Post by PL
"Candidates" are "selected" in public "votes" with agents of the Cuban
regime present to record and punish dissent.
Typically, the only people present are those living in the
neigbourhood.
(snip)

They "represent" those that are imposed on the people as there is no freedom
of expression and as snitches are present in all meetings
Post by PL
No dissent is allowed.
You mean no traitors are likely to be nominated by their neighbors.
what you call "traitors" are those that disagree with the system.
Thanks for confirming I was right.
there is no freedom of expression in Cuba.
No democracy.
Post by PL
"Candidates" are imposed at the local level and for
the higher levels (national) subject to approval by the regime's "mass
organizations" that have a veto.
You would much prefer that United Fruit, AT&T or the CIA to have the
veto
Nope.
I want Cubans to be able to express themselves freely voting in anonymous
elections (all can stand and all can vote freely) for candidates that can
put themselves forward freely
Post by PL
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
But this is just your lying website,
(snip)

as anyone can see: facts.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
PL
2007-12-01 16:40:14 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the right to
reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of the above,"
thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and another vote. Only
those supported by the majority can be elected. US voters can only
dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be "selected
in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a system
where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put themselves
forward without being vetted by any regime.
Post by PL
Post by PL
I want Cubans to be able to express themselves freely voting in anonymous
elections (all can stand and all can vote freely) for candidates that can
put themselves forward freely
[snip]
Bullshit. Under Section 206 of your beloved Helms-Burton Act, it won't
matter what kind elections they hold, not even US-style money-based
elections would do, if the outcome was not to the liking of extremists
in Miami and Washington. Under HB, the genocide is to continue until
such time as socialism is outlawed and a capitalist regime is installed
in Havana. The Cuban people are to have no choice in the matter, even
though their socialist system, despite all your best efforts, continues
to provide the best health care and education systems in the region.
False.
A blatant lie.
Nope.
A fact.
First: there is no "genocide" and you are going to prove that by failing to
post even ONE quote from a reputable organization referring to the trade
sanctions as susch.
Secondly: socialims isn't outlawed at all. Stalinist communism is what needs
to be moved away from. A Swedish social democracy for example fits the bill.
Thirdly: the main issue is respect of rights.
Post by PL
That law demands free and fair democratic elections.
It demands a capitalist regime
Nope.
It asks for free and fair election and a substantial move towards the
recognition of rights.
Any system beyond the dictatorial one will fit that bill.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-01 21:03:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the
right to reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of
the above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be elected.
US voters can only dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a
system where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put
themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
Freedom of speech is the rule in Cuba, except for those trying to
defeat the revolution, then it's not so much the "speech" that's
objected to, but the treason against the revolution. Free and fair
elections require that there is no foreign investement nor influence in
the process and that only public money be used in the campaign and used
in such a way as to support each candidate equally. That way they can
be elected on their merit and not on how much their money gets their
message out in front of propagandised voters. Cuba does this and it
makes their elections among the fairest and freeest in the world.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-03 09:14:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the
right to reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of
the above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be elected.
US voters can only dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a
system where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put
themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
Freedom of speech is the rule in Cuba,
Nope.
There is no freedom of speech in Cuba.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
except for those trying to
defeat the revolution,
Thanks for exposing your own lies.

PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-03 20:23:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too
[lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the
right to reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none
of the above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be
elected. US voters can only dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in
a system where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely
put themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
Freedom of speech is the rule in Cuba,
Nope.
There is no freedom of speech in Cuba.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
except for those trying to
defeat the revolution,
Thanks for exposing your own lies.
You've re-edited my words to make them something that I've never said.
Then you pretend to refute them, but it's a straw man. This is typical
of your tactics and it is contemptible.


--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-03 20:38:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too
[lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the
right to reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none
of the above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be
elected. US voters can only dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in
a system where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely
put themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
Freedom of speech is the rule in Cuba,
Nope.
There is no freedom of speech in Cuba.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
except for those trying to
defeat the revolution,
Thanks for exposing your own lies.
You've re-edited my words to make them something that I've never said.
actually: you said that people in Cuba were free to say anything "except for
those trying to defeat the revolution".
Your words showing that your claim of "freedom of speech" in Cuba is a lie.

Freedom of speech mean that everyone including those that oppose the
government are entitled to speak.
You clearly have stated they aren't.
You thereby exposed your won lie.

PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-04 03:06:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too
[lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to
impose candidates on anyone as voters in national elections
have the right to reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting
for "none of the above," thereby calling for a new slate of
candidates and another vote. Only those supported by the
majority can be elected. US voters can only dream of such
freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be
selected. Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom
of speech in a system where a secret ballot selects candidates
that can freely put themselves forward without being vetted by any
regime.
Freedom of speech is the rule in Cuba,
Nope.
There is no freedom of speech in Cuba.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
except for those trying to
defeat the revolution,
Thanks for exposing your own lies.
You've re-edited my words to make them something that I've
never
said.
actually: you said that people in Cuba were free to say anything
"except for those trying to defeat the revolution".
Your words showing that your claim of "freedom of speech" in Cuba is a lie.
Yes, That's what I said, not what you quoted above, and it's perfectly
true now that you've quoted it correctly. Freedom of speech doesn't
mean that you can commit treason nor espionage.
Post by PL
Freedom of speech mean that everyone including those that oppose the
government are entitled to speak.
If that's all they are doing then they are allowed to speak, but people
will think them idiots.
Post by PL
You clearly have stated they aren't.
No I didn't
Post by PL
You thereby exposed your won lie.
My what?
--
--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-04 18:25:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
actually: you said that people in Cuba were free to say anything
"except for those trying to defeat the revolution".
Your words showing that your claim of "freedom of speech" in Cuba is a lie.
Yes, That's what I said, not what you quoted above,
actually, that is what I quoted
No you edited the quotation earlier to mean something else.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
and it's perfectly
true now that you've quoted it correctly.
it is indeed perfectly true that there is no freedom of speech.
I said that they were free to say anything. That's freedom of speech.
They are not free to organize a counter revolution and overthrow the
legitimate government. I don't know of a country anywhere that allows
this. But that is not a restriction of freedom of speech.
By your own admission those that oppose the Castro regime have no
freedom of speech.
Not what I said. They can even recall Fidel, or could when he was in
power, with a proceedure that is easier than impeaching a president in
the U.S.A. , which many would like to do.(;-))
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Freedom of speech doesn't
mean that you can commit treason nor espionage.
In Cuba you can't even say you want Castro out.
that isn't treason. It is merely wanting another government.
In all democracies people have a right to say so.
Including Cuba, but very few would want to say that.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Freedom of speech mean that everyone including those that oppose
the government are entitled to speak.
If that's all they are doing then they are allowed to speak,
Nope, they are not.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/repressive_laws.htm
These are CIA propaganda sites. Your can't cite yourselves as
you "proof." Whether you say it here or whether you say it on a web
site, it's still not true.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
You clearly have stated they aren't.
No I didn't
Post by PL
You thereby exposed your won lie.
My what?
Your lie that there is freedom of speech in Cuba.
there is only "freedom of speech" for those that support the regime by
your own admission.
I made no such statement.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-04 20:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
actually: you said that people in Cuba were free to say anything
"except for those trying to defeat the revolution".
Your words showing that your claim of "freedom of speech" in Cuba is a lie.
Yes, That's what I said, not what you quoted above,
actually, that is what I quoted
No you edited the quotation earlier to mean something else.
False.
That quote was exactly in there.
That is why you snipped that part I guess.

"except for those trying to defeat the revolution,"

was the part in question.
that was always there as anyone can see above.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
it is indeed perfectly true that there is no freedom of speech.
I said that they were free to say anything.
and that is a lie.
Being free to say anything means also being free of sanctions.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
That's freedom of speech.
They are not free to organize a counter revolution
(snip)

translated: the can not express their dislike and criticism of the regime
nor their desire for another.
In short: no freedom of speech.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
By your own admission those that oppose the Castro regime have no
freedom of speech.
Not what I said.
What results from your words.
In your "universe" freedom of speech means being sanctioned if you speak out
against the regime.
That is no "freedom of speech".
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
They can even recall Fidel,
the can't criticize Fidel without risking jail.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/repressive_laws.htm
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Freedom of speech doesn't
mean that you can commit treason nor espionage.
In Cuba you can't even say you want Castro out.
that isn't treason. It is merely wanting another government.
In all democracies people have a right to say so.
Including Cuba, but very few would want to say that.
Nope.
lots would want to, few would dare so.
Why:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/repressive_laws.htm
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
Freedom of speech mean that everyone including those that oppose
the government are entitled to speak.
If that's all they are doing then they are allowed to speak,
Nope, they are not.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/freedom_of_speech.htm
http://www.cubaverdad.net/repressive_laws.htm
These are CIA propaganda sites.
Nothing to do with the CIA as anyone that visits the pages and follows the
links will see.
LOts of links to international human rights organizations.
the site already has over 100 links to their reports.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/links_to_human_rights_reports.htm
it even has RSS feeds from the Cuban official press.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/rss_propaganda.htm
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
You clearly have stated they aren't.
No I didn't
Post by PL
You thereby exposed your won lie.
My what?
Your lie that there is freedom of speech in Cuba.
there is only "freedom of speech" for those that support the regime by
your own admission.
I made no such statement.
beyond saying that freedom of speech is limited to those that support the
regime you mean.

PL
PL
2007-12-03 09:20:18 UTC
Permalink
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the right to
reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of the above,"
thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and another vote. Only
those supported by the majority can be elected. US voters can only
dream of such freedom of expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be "selected
in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a system
where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put themselves
forward without being vetted by any regime.
This already happens.
Nope.
No candidate can stand for national elections without being vetted and
approved by communist front organizations.
At the local level the CDr controls who can be "candidate"
See amongst other the text of the Cuban electoral law at:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
Post by PL
Post by PL
Post by PL
I want Cubans to be able to express themselves freely voting in anonymous
elections (all can stand and all can vote freely) for candidates
that
can
put themselves forward freely
[snip]
Bullshit. Under Section 206 of your beloved Helms-Burton Act, it won't
matter what kind elections they hold, not even US-style money-based
elections would do, if the outcome was not to the liking of extremists
in Miami and Washington. Under HB, the genocide is to continue until
such time as socialism is outlawed and a capitalist regime is installed
in Havana. The Cuban people are to have no choice in the matter, even
though their socialist system, despite all your best efforts, continues
to provide the best health care and education systems in the region.
False.
A blatant lie.
Nope.
A fact.
First: there is no "genocide" and you are going to prove that by failing to
post even ONE quote from a reputable organization referring to the trade
sanctions as susch.
The facts in this case have been thoroughly documented by the likes of
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and even the Catholic
Church.
None of them have EVER referred to the trade sanctions as "genocide" Mr.
serial Liar.
You are going to prove me right by posting NO QUOTE WHATSOEVER.
Castro on the other hand is firmly on Genocide Watch's list:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/genocide.htm
Post by PL
Secondly: socialims isn't outlawed at all.
Unless a system a based not on the collective ownership of the means
of production, but on private ownership
(snip)

state ownership of some goods is NOT excluded Dan.
Post by PL
Stalinist communism is what needs
to be moved away from.
Cuba is way more democratic than the USSR ever was. Or the USA for
that matter.
Nope.
It is a totalitarian state with a state capitalist system
http://www.cubaverdad.net/democracy.htm
Post by PL
A Swedish social democracy for example fits the bill.
Sweden is capitalist country. It's economy is based primarily on
private property.
(snip)

it is a social democracy with lots of socialist elements in it's society
Post by PL
Thirdly: the main issue is respect of rights.
The main issue is to force a foreign political system on the Cuban
people,
Nope.
The law states they are to elect freely.


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures. In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online) that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-03 20:27:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the right to
reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of the
above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be
elected. US voters can only dream of such freedom of
expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a system
where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put
themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
This already happens.
Nope.
No candidate can stand for national elections without being vetted and
approved by communist front organizations.
Like any country, they have to be nominated according to procedure, but
that is in the hands of the assembled constituents, not the wealthy or
the corporate elite, but the everyday citizens of Cuba who freely
assemble at the meetings, as Dan has pointed out very clearly, and I
have done before.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-03 20:35:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to impose
candidates on anyone as voters in national elections have the right to
reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of the
above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be
elected. US voters can only dream of such freedom of
expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be selected.
Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom of speech in a system
where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put
themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
This already happens.
Nope.
No candidate can stand for national elections without being vetted and
approved by communist front organizations.
Like any country, they have to be nominated according to procedure,
and that procedure should allow anyone to stand even those that disagree
with a regime.
As soon as a regime has a direct veto free and fair elections end

PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-04 03:07:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too
[lame
to bother with]
Post by PL
Post by PL
Unlike the US system, in Cuba it is no one's interest to
impose candidates on anyone as voters in national elections
have the right to
reject ALL candidates on the ballot, voting for "none of the
above," thereby calling for a new slate of candidates and
another vote. Only those supported by the majority can be
elected. US voters can only dream of such freedom of
expression!
(snip)
which won't change anything as the new "candidates" will be
"selected in the same way.
[snip]
It will keep changing the candidates until an electable slate of
candidates is put forward.
Nope.
The system esnures that merely a new set of clones will be
selected. Free and fair elections are only possible with freedom
of speech in a system
where a secret ballot selects candidates that can freely put
themselves forward without being vetted by any regime.
This already happens.
Nope.
No candidate can stand for national elections without being vetted
and approved by communist front organizations.
Like any country, they have to be nominated according to procedure,
and that procedure should allow anyone to stand even those that
disagree with a regime.
Which they can do.
Post by PL
As soon as a regime has a direct veto free and fair elections end
Like in the U.S.A.?

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-04 18:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
and that procedure should allow anyone to stand even those that
disagree with a regime.
Which they can do.
Nope, they can't.
The CDR and the so-called "representative" organizations control who
gets on to the ballot list as a "candidate".
"representative organizations are "the people" that's what democracy
is all about.
read the Cuban electoral law.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
This is a CIA propaganda site. You won't get anything like the truth
out of that.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-04 20:50:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
and that procedure should allow anyone to stand even those that
disagree with a regime.
Which they can do.
Nope, they can't.
The CDR and the so-called "representative" organizations control who
gets on to the ballot list as a "candidate".
"representative organizations are "the people" that's what democracy
is all about.
Nope.
these are the "constitutionally allowed" organizations controlled by the
regime.
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
read the Cuban electoral law.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/elections_in_cuba.htm
This is a CIA propaganda site.
Your lie.
But the issue is: what isn't correct in the quote of the Cuban electoral
law?

Cuban "electoral law"

Cuba: Ley Electoral de 1992

Artículo 30.- Las Comisiones electorales de Circunscripción tienen las

funciones siguientes:


1.. establecer en su territorio, las áreas de nominación de candidatos a

delegados a la Asamblea Municipal del Poder Popular, conforme a las reglas

dictadas por la Comisión Nacional Electoral y someterlas a la aprobación de

la respectiva Comisión Electoral Municipal;

2.. organizar, dirigir y presidir las asambleas de nominación de

candidatos a Delegados a las Asambleas Municipales del Poder Popular;

3.. elaborar la lista de los candidatos de su circunscripción electoral a

Delegados a la Asamblea Municipal del Poder Popular y verificar que éstos

reúnen los requisitos establecidos;

4.. circular y exponer en murales, en lugares públicos, las fotografías y

biografías de los candidatos;

5.. participar en la elaboración de la lista de electores por cada Colegio

Electoral con la cooperación de la Comisión Electoral Municipal y de las

organizaciones de masas;

6.. hacer pública la lista de electores de cada Colegio;

7.. resolver las exclusiones e inclusiones de cualquier persona en el

registro de electores, según proceda, luego de consultar con la Comisión

Electoral Municipal; y subsanar los errores que se adviertan en las

anotaciones;

8.. someter a la aprobación de la Comisión Electoral Municipal la

ubicación de los Colegios Electorales en la circunscripción;

9.. garantizar que los Colegios Electorales estén oportunamente ubicados y

acondicionados, y divulgar su localización;

10.. designar a los miembros de las Mesas de los Colegios Electorales de

su circunscripción, cuidando que éstos sean electores de la misma;

11.. expedir las credenciales correspondientes a los Presidentes y demás

miembros de las Mesas designados en los Colegios Electorales de su

circunscripción;

12.. garantizar la ejecución de los escrutinios en los Colegios

Electorales, de acuerdo con lo dispuesto en esta Ley;

13.. realizar el cómputo final de la votación cuando exista más de un

Colegio Electoral en la circunscripción;

14.. hacer público el resultado de la votación;

15.. informar a la Comisión Electoral Municipal cuanto se solicite sobre

el proceso electoral;

16.. rendir informe final del desenvolvimiento del proceso electoral

celebrado en su circunscripción a la Comisión Electoral Municipal

correspondiente dentro de los tres ( 3 ) días siguientes a su terminación;

17.. cualquier otra que les sean atribuidas por la Comisión Electoral

Municipal o la Asamblea Municipal del Poder Popular correspondiente de

acuerdo con las disposiciones de esta Ley y de la Comisión Electoral

Nacional.

Artículo 68.- Las Comisiones de Candidaturas se integran por representantes

de la Central de Trabajadores de Cuba, de los Comités de Defensa de la

Revolución, de la Federación de Mujeres Cubanas, de la Asociación Nacional

de Agricultores Pequeños, de la Federación Estudiantil Universitaria y de la

Federación de Estudiantes de la Enseñanza Media, designados por las

direcciones nacionales, provinciales y municipales respectivas, a solicitud

de las Comisiones Electorales Nacional, Provinciales y Municipales.

En el caso que una de las organizaciones de masas carezca de representación

en algún municipio se designará un representante por la dirección provincial

correspondiente.



Artículo 69.- Las Comisiones de Candidaturas son presididas por un

representante de la Central de Trabajadores de Cuba.

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

That is the issue.

PL
f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
2007-12-05 02:08:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by f***@fredwilliamsFFFf.ca
Post by PL
and that procedure should allow anyone to stand even those that
disagree with a regime.
Which they can do.
Nope, they can't.
The CDR and the so-called "representative" organizations control who
gets on to the ballot list as a "candidate".
"representative organizations are "the people" that's what democracy
is all about.
Nope.
these are the "constitutionally allowed" organizations controlled by
the regime.
The regime is the people.

--
Regards, Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
PL
2007-12-05 19:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Las pruebas de que lentiroso es Dan Christensen
[snipping portions of PL's posting already debunked, or too lame to
bother with]
Post by PL
Some time ago, I wrote to GW president, Gregory Stanton
(snip)
That lie has been exposed over and over again.
Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.
Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number
from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of
73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a
figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in
copying.
[snip]
Poor, pathetic Little "Miss" Lobbyist... Just the thought of
confirming another source makes her(snip)
Childish insults don't change documented facts Mr. Serial Liar

Dan Christensen's exposed lie about Genocide Watch.

Dan falsely claimed the organization had copied (mindlessly) a number
from a
book by Rummel. Another case of false claims of "private
information".
Upon verification it became clear that Rummel quoted a figure of
73,000
deaths attributable to the Castro regime. Genocide Watch showed a
figure of
75,000 which comrade Dan promptly attributed to "sloppiness" in
copying.

Dan Christensen fails to understand that his private lies can't
refute the
public record.
He tried this one on a couple of times and always failed.

Do you deny Dan Christensen that you got the numbers wrong in your
lie and
that the "exclusive" source you falsely claimed was used by Genocide
Watch
(another "private" message) actually gave a LOWER figure than
Genocide
Watch?

I have clearly shown that your claim that Mr. Rummel is the one and
only
source Genocide Watch uses is false by proving that Mr. Rummel (whose
credibility you attack without proof) gives a different figure than
Genocide
Watch (73,000 versus 75,0000). Genocide Watch correctly lists Castro
as a
genocidal dictator because of his responsibility for the death of
thousands
of people.

When confronted with your lie you turned insult in to injury by
claiming the
"made an error in copying", didn't you?

As always: the links that expose Dan Christensen's lies:

Dan's lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/ff0ab4c53757e8a0?dmode=source&hl=en

My exposure of his lie:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/a44230458e76b3c7?dmode=source&hl=en

Dan's pathetic claim Genocide Watch made a mistake:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/8eeb4ad61f1463d4?dmode=source&hl=en


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



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

We both know you can't.



Try something like this:



Quote:

"In my opinion the advances made by the Revolution are morally well
worth
fighting for and justify the use of these extraordinary measures.
In
this case, the ends do indeed justify the means.

.......

These measures, however, would NOT be morally justified in propping
less
worthy regimes in the region -- the USA and its vassal states in the
Caribbean and Latin America come immediately to mind."



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



"It is wrong to think that a particular end justifies EVERY means. At
this
time, for example, it would be wrong of the Cuban government to send
death
squads after their opponents as happens in Mexico and

Colombia. Again, the actions of the Cuban government in detaining
these
so-called dissidents seem quite mild in comparison and are morally
justified
under the circumstances."



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



Unquote.



You lie about me as you lied about Wayne Smith, Amnesty
International,
Genocide Watch, ..........



Still waiting for the "Geneva" proof comrade Dan.

That "episode" clearly exposes your lies.



As I said comrade Dan: every time you post that lie about me I post
the
truth about you.



Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on
vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP address of my posts in SCC at that time
prove).

This was your false claim: "Taking a little break from arm-twisting
in
Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"

Link:

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



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



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



YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith

"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)
that he
does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting of your
beloved embargo."

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



HIS own words:



'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the
Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith
said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United
States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.

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

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

You can enter after a free registration.



Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:

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



YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.

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



Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report
quoted
below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same report
that:



"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly
denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its
support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"

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



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

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



They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the
trade
sanctions in that report, are they?

Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from
these
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED)?



"in 1.

"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty
International
considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of conscience(2) and calls
for
their immediate and unconditional release."



In 8.1

" to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners
previously
named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.



" to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is
detained or
imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their rights to
freedom of
expression, association and assembly."



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



" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced the US embargo on
Cuba in
humanitarian terms, and made clear its support for the immediate and
unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"



that sentence:

1. isn't in the report

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



You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro
regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT
LIE.



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



"Amnesty International calls on the United States government

- to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen
the
embargo.

- to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.

- to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of
its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."



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

The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy
that
places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the forefront
of its
concerns".



See:

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



Lies and more lies from comrade Dan Christensen, the resident
Canadian
Stalinist propagandist of SCC.



PL
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:38 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:43 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:43:00 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:34 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:52 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:43:14 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 16:50:19 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber: Está el socialismo
Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el Catedrático, el de
Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el Verdadero, el
Comunista y el Democrático.
Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...
EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista Objetivos y tareas del
socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la Ideología del marxismo
– leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del "socialismo democrático"
arrancan del neokantismo, con su preconización del socialismo ético.
Según esta ideología, el socialismo no constituye el producto de un
desarrollo histórico – natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral,
accesible por igual a los representantes de todas las capas de la
sociedad. Por consiguiente, el problema de la transformación
socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo, un problema moral, un problema
de reeducación y formación de los hombres en el espíritu del
socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases, la revolución socialista,
la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo surge tan sólo
"democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una suma de medidas
sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo, llevadas a cabo
en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos burgueses. El
socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad armónica de
todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos los
capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 
Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI
~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 16:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber: Está el socialismo
Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el Catedrático, el de
Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el Verdadero, el
Comunista y el Democrático.
Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...
EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista Objetivos y tareas del
socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la Ideología del marxismo
– leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del "socialismo democrático"
arrancan del neokantismo, con su preconización del socialismo ético.
Según esta ideología, el socialismo no constituye el producto de un
desarrollo histórico – natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral,
accesible por igual a los representantes de todas las capas de la
sociedad. Por consiguiente, el problema de la transformación
socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo, un problema moral, un problema
de reeducación y formación de los hombres en el espíritu del
socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases, la revolución socialista,
la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo surge tan sólo
"democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una suma de medidas
sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo, llevadas a cabo
en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos burgueses. El
socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad armónica de
todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos los
capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 
Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI
~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 16:50:11 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber: Está el socialismo
Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el Catedrático, el de
Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el Verdadero, el
Comunista y el Democrático.
Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...
EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista Objetivos y tareas del
socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la Ideología del marxismo
– leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del "socialismo democrático"
arrancan del neokantismo, con su preconización del socialismo ético.
Según esta ideología, el socialismo no constituye el producto de un
desarrollo histórico – natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral,
accesible por igual a los representantes de todas las capas de la
sociedad. Por consiguiente, el problema de la transformación
socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo, un problema moral, un problema
de reeducación y formación de los hombres en el espíritu del
socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases, la revolución socialista,
la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo surge tan sólo
"democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una suma de medidas
sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo, llevadas a cabo
en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos burgueses. El
socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad armónica de
todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos los
capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 
Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI
~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 16:50:33 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber: Está el socialismo
Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el Catedrático, el de
Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el Verdadero, el
Comunista y el Democrático.
Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...
EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista Objetivos y tareas del
socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la Ideología del marxismo
– leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del "socialismo democrático"
arrancan del neokantismo, con su preconización del socialismo ético.
Según esta ideología, el socialismo no constituye el producto de un
desarrollo histórico – natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral,
accesible por igual a los representantes de todas las capas de la
sociedad. Por consiguiente, el problema de la transformación
socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo, un problema moral, un problema
de reeducación y formación de los hombres en el espíritu del
socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases, la revolución socialista,
la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo surge tan sólo
"democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una suma de medidas
sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo, llevadas a cabo
en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos burgueses. El
socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad armónica de
todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos los
capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 
Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI
~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 16:50:28 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber: Está el socialismo
Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el Catedrático, el de
Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el Verdadero, el
Comunista y el Democrático.
Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...
EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista Objetivos y tareas del
socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la Ideología del marxismo
– leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del "socialismo democrático"
arrancan del neokantismo, con su preconización del socialismo ético.
Según esta ideología, el socialismo no constituye el producto de un
desarrollo histórico – natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral,
accesible por igual a los representantes de todas las capas de la
sociedad. Por consiguiente, el problema de la transformación
socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo, un problema moral, un problema
de reeducación y formación de los hombres en el espíritu del
socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases, la revolución socialista,
la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo surge tan sólo
"democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una suma de medidas
sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo, llevadas a cabo
en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos burgueses. El
socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad armónica de
todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos los
capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 
Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI
~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
Petry
2007-11-26 15:42:29 UTC
Permalink
Hay muchas clases de socialismo, a saber:
Está el socialismo Científico, el Corporativo, el Cristiano, el
Catedrático, el de Estado, el Ético, el Guildista, el Libertario, el
Verdadero, el Comunista y el Democrático.

Yo prefiero el democrático que es el que practican Chile, Argentina,
Uruguay, Brasil y los paises Europeos, paises que sí saben
pensar....no asi el loco venezolano que práctica un socialismo
comunista, dictatorial...

EL SOCIALISMO DEMOCRÁTICO ES:
Ideología oficial del reformismo moderno, proclamada en el Congreso de
Francfort (1951) de la Internacional Socialista
Objetivos y tareas del socialismo democrático" es contrapuesta a la
Ideología del marxismo – leninismo, Las raíces teóricas del
"socialismo democrático" arrancan del neokantismo, con su
preconización del socialismo ético. Según esta ideología, el
socialismo no constituye el producto de un desarrollo histórico –
natural, sujeto a ley; es un ideal moral, accesible por igual a los
representantes de todas las capas de la sociedad. Por consiguiente, el
problema de la transformación socialista de la sociedad es, ante todo,
un problema moral, un problema de reeducación y formación de los
hombres en el espíritu del socialismo. Se rechaza la lucha de clases,
la revolución socialista, la dictadura del proletariado. El socialismo
surge tan sólo "democráticamente", es decir, como resultado de una
suma de medidas sociales y, en particular, de tipo cultural y educativo,
llevadas a cabo en el marco de la sociedad burguesa por gobiernos
burgueses. El socialismo existe como "democracia", o sea, como unidad
armónica de todas las capas y de todos los grupos sociales, incluidos
los capitalistas. Por su sentido objetivo, el "socialismo democrático"
tiende a perpetuar los soportes básicos de la sociedad burguesa.  
 

Entiendo que es ideal porque no se va a los extremos, no divide ni aisla
a los pueblos y es más acorde con el Siglo XXI

~*~Petry~*~
M***@hotmail.com
2007-12-02 20:22:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rolf R
INTELLIGENCE MAYOR ROBERTO HERNÁNDEZ DEL LLANO.
Mega TV on direct TV, Channel 22, on Comcast.
SEE THE OVER 4O MANSIONS THAT FORM THE RESIDENCE OF DICTATOR FOR LIFE
FIDEL CASTRO.
Sumamente interesante todos los programas de Maria Elvira. Es
increible la pudredumbre dentro de la cupula del castro-fascismo.

Este ex-agente de la seguridad que acaba de llegar al exilio
demuestra
la corrupcion que existe bajo ese nefasto regimen.


Aqui les envio el enlace. Les recomiendo vean y aprendan para que no
caigan en esa Gran Estafa que se llama el comunismo.



Loading...