Archive for the ‘Cuba’ Category

The Prison Called Cuba

by Alan Caruba on Monday, April 20th, 2015

This is article 70 of 70 in the topic Communism

By Alan Caruba

We are told we need to feel sympathy for the Cuban people who have suffered from a U.S. embargo and lack of diplomatic recognition. That ignores a long history of oppression in Cuba no matter who was in charge.

Prior to Fidel Castro, Cubans were in the grip of Flugencio Batista who overthrew the existing government in September 1933 and then dominated Cuban politics for the next 25 years until Castro’s revolutionary movement took control of the capitol in January 1959.

Fifty-six years ago in 1959, I was about to graduate from the University of Miami and among my friends were young Cubans sent there to get a degree. I have often wondered which among them returned to Cuba and which, like those who could afford it, were joined by their family who fled Cuba.

The U.S. had been involved with Cuba from the end of the Spanish-American War in 1898 when Spain ceded Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam for $20 million. We stayed in Cuba until it was granted independence in 1902 as the Republic of Cuba. Its first president faced an armed revolt in 1906 so we returned to briefly occupy Cuba to restore some stability, but they never really got the hand of being a democratic self-governing nation.

How much better it would have been for the Cubans if the U.S. had decided to make the island a territory like Puerto Rico. Then we could have let the island prosper without having to end up with becoming a Communist nation closely allied, first with the Soviet Union and after its collapse in 1991, with others like China and Venezuela.

The lesson we might be expected to draw from this is that Communism does not work. It is an utterly failed economic and social system that can only stay in power by jailing or executing anyone who resists. That is exactly what the brothers, Fidel and Raul Castro, have done since seizing power. One consistency of the past five decades has been the anti-America policies they have pursued.

The reason given by Obama was that U.S. policies toward Cuba “have not worked” and that it is time for a change. There is some truth in this and it should be noted that Canada has long had good relations with Cuba as have European and, of course, Latin and South American nations.

Even so, what are we to conclude from the report that Russia plans to join military drills with Cuba and North Korea that may also include Vietnam and Brazil? Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has left it sanctioned and isolated, so the military drills send a message that it still has nations friendly to it, but what nations!

Cuba was caught not long ago when it attempted to ship weapons to North Korea, so we are talking about two dedicated Communist nations. Over the years, it has more than demonstrated its anti-American hostility.

Generally, there is little to be gained by exchanging embassies or relieving Cuba. Lifting our embargo and other sanctions leaves the U.S. with even less leverage, if any.

Click to continue reading “The Prison Called Cuba”
Go straight to Post

The Death of the Left

by Daniel Greenfield on Saturday, April 18th, 2015

This is article 201 of 201 in the topic Liberalism

The left is winning, but for the left winning is indistinguishable from dying.

The West didn’t defeat Communism; it held it at bay long enough for it to defeat itself. The Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China crushed Communism more decisively than Goldwater could have ever dreamed of.

The embargo didn’t turn Cuba into a hellhole whose main tourism industry is inviting progressive Canadian pedophiles to rape its children. Castro did that with help from the dead guy on the red t-shirts.

 “One of the greatest benefits of the revolution is that even our prostitutes are college graduates,” Castro told Oliver Stone. In real life, his prostitutes are lucky if they graduated from elementary school.

American admirers eager to get to Havana claim to be worried that Starbucks will ruin their Socialist paradise. What really worries them is that American businesses might give Cuban teens an economic alternative to sexually servicing decrepit leftists from Berkeley for $10 a night in the revolutionary version of Thailand where everyone is free, especially the political prisoners and raped children.

There’s no embargo to blame in Venezuela. Hugo Chavez destroyed his own Bolivarian revolution by implementing it. The Venezuelan economic collapse really took off while Obama was in the White House leafing through the tract Chavez had gifted him blaming America for all of Latin America’s troubles.

Now Chavez, the tract’s author and the Venezuelan economy are all dead.

Chavez’s successor has desperately tried to blame America for his crisis, but Uncle Sam had nothing to do with the lack of toilet paper in the stores, the milk rationing and the soldiers stationed outside electronics retailers. It’s just what happens when the left wins.

When the man in the White House wanted a Latin American revolution to succeed, it still failed.

The left is at its best when it’s trying to take power. It unleashes its egocentric creative impulses, it writes poems, plays and songs as its heroes die in doomed battles or pump their fists at protests. And then they win, get rich and fat, the people grow poor and the country becomes a miserable dictatorship. Try putting a 300 pound Che on a t-shirt. Or get inspired by Obama lazily playing golf.

A successful leftist revolution quickly becomes indistinguishable from an ordinary oligarchy. Millions may die, but decades later all that’s left is a vast pointless bureaucracy that runs on family connections, an ideology no one understands anymore and an impoverished population ripe for outside exploitation.

And then before you know it, Moscow is full of fast food joints, China uses slave labor to make iPhones and aging hippies can buy children in Cuba for the price of a Happy Meal.

The left rams through its ideology by force and when the ideology is gone, all that’s left is the force.

Now that the left has gotten its way in America, crushing its enemies, inflicting everything from socialized medicine to mandatory gay marriages on the masses, the excitement is gone.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Anti-Marxist Counter-Revolution in Brazil

by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton on Wednesday, March 18th, 2015

This is article 1262 of 1262 in the topic International

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

With the Middle East in turmoil and Russia’s Vladimir Putin threatening nuclear war, most of our media have missed a big story south of the border. President Barack Obama’s fellow Marxist, Dilma Rousseff, is coming under tremendous pressure to resign her presidency in Brazil. As many as three million Brazilians took to the streets on Sunday to demand the impeachment of Rousseff, a former Marxist terrorist, and the end of the rule of the Brazilian Workers’ Party.

Such a development would be a major blow to the anti-American left in Latin America, which has been operating since 1990 under the rubric of the São Paulo Forum, a pro-communist movement started by Rousseff’s predecessor, Luiz Inácio Lula de Silva, and Fidel Castro.

In a growing scandal, the treasurer of the ruling Workers’ Party has been charged with corruption and money laundering linked to the state-run oil company, Petrobras, a firm which has benefited from U.S. taxpayer loans provided through the Export-Import Bank under Obama.

While Obama has attempted to stifle oil development and production in the United States, his administration officially launched an “energy partnership” with Brazil in August of 2011. “We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers,” Obama told a group of Brazilian business leaders.

Some stories appearing in the Western press did note that as many as one million Brazilians turned out on Sunday to protest massive corruption linked to the Rousseff administration. One photo from the march showed a Brazilian waving a sign that said, “We won’t be another Venezuela,” a reference to another Marxist basket case of economic failure and corruption.

But sources contacted by Accuracy in Media say the turnout was far larger, with as many as three million Brazilians in the streets.

Alessandro Cota, a Brazilian who is currently a philosophy and political science researcher at the Inter-American Institute for Philosophy, Government, and Social Thought, told AIM, “This March 15 is certainly a new beginning for Brazil and probably the end of the dreams of all those who wanted to turn the largest country of Latin America into a socialist republic. After 12 years under the rule of the Brazilian Workers’ Party—8 years under President Lula (2003-2011), and 4 years under President Rousseff (who was re-elected last October for another four-year turn)—the Brazilian people, tired of waiting for opposition politicians to take action against the government, took the lead and decided to make history by themselves.”

Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, President of the Inter-American Institute for Philosophy, Government, and Social Thought, said, “Never and nowhere has a government been so completely rejected by its own population. But it is more than that. It is not only the rejection of a government, or a President. It is the rejection of the whole system of power that has been created by the Workers’ Party, which includes intellectuals and opinion-makers in the big media. People are no longer afraid of going against the Workers’ Party.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Obama-Pope Axis of Marxism

by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton on Tuesday, December 23rd, 2014

This is article 64 of 70 in the topic Communism

By: Cliff Kincaid

The Washington Post is a die-hard Democratic Party newspaper that occasionally recognizes Obama’s drift into Marxism. The December 19th editorial on Cuba is a case in point. Not only does the Post understand the nature of Obama’s betrayal of a free Cuba, it is beginning to wake up to the failures of bipartisan policies that have built communist Chinese economic power in the name of capitalism and reform.

The paper says that Obama “should have learned and applied some of the hard lessons of normalization with China and Vietnam—most notably that engagement doesn’t automatically promote freedom. When the United States debated extending ‘most-favored-nation’ trading status to China, we shared in what was then the conventional wisdom: Economic engagement would inevitably lead, over time, to political reform inside that Communist dictatorship.”

The paper goes on to admit it was duped. But Obama should know better, shouldn’t he?

The Post notes that the Chinese regime has been strengthened, not weakened, by policies of “engagement.” The Chinese communists “were determined to reap the fruits of foreign investment and trade—for themselves and their families, first, but also for their country—without ceding power. So far, confounding expectations, they have succeeded,” the paper commented.

In the case of Cuba, the Post said, Obama could have proposed normalization only after certain freedoms were given to the Cuban people. Instead, Obama “spurned” the “brave freedom fighters” on the island in the form of ordinary citizens risking their lives to protest against the Castro regime and to demand basic rights. Obama simply ignored their struggle.

So what are we to conclude? The Post is the paper which sent a reporter by the name of Dana Milbank to our news conferences over the years to ridicule our warnings of Obama’s Marxism. It looks like the editorial board, at least, is coming around to the realization that Obama is deliberately pursuing a Marxist policy in the case of Cuba. This is a breakthrough.

In a separate editorial, the paper called Obama’s change in Cuba policy a “bailout” of the regime. It said, “Mr. Obama may claim that he has dismantled a 50-year-old failed policy; what he has really done is give a 50-year-old failed regime a new lease on life.”

The editorial fails to take note of the role of Pope Francis in the betrayal. However, a separate article in the paper indirectly took note of the development, highlighting that while Pope John Paul II was “extremely public in his fight against communism,” Francis seems dedicated to being known as a “master builder of bridges” between the communist and free worlds. This is to the advantage of the communists.

The article notes that Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)—who is Catholic—was critical of the pope, saying he should “take up the cause of freedom” rather than facilitate Obama’s deal with the Castro brothers. But we have heard enough from the pope, in terms of his attacks on capitalism, to know where he stands.

Rubio told ABC News, “The pope is a spiritual leader and he always, naturally, is going to want to bring people closer together. And I respect that as a spiritual leader.

Click to continue reading “The Obama-Pope Axis of Marxism”
Go straight to Post

Leading Communist: Ferguson Will Lead to “Global Revolution” – “Its Occupy, but a Hundred Times Better”

by Trevor on Tuesday, December 9th, 2014

This is article 194 of 194 in the topic Marches/Protests/Riots

The pro Iran/North Korea/Cuba Workers World Party is heavily involved in many of the anti-police demonstrations currently occurring in the United States.

Listen to Workers World Party leader Larry Holmes talk of  “world revolution” – linking “ant-racist struggles” to the anti-Walmart campaign and other current issues.

Larry Holmes, center, North Korea July 2013.

Larry Holmes, center, North Korea July 2013.

The left really thinks they are on a roll now. They believe they are on the verge of big revolutionary change.  Just like the ’60s all over again…just this time they have a friend in the White House.

Holmes even wants to shut down Christmas. “We will sink fear into the bourgeoisie”

Go straight to Post

The YAF’s National “No More Che Day” Targets Columbia University

by Humberto Fontova on Tuesday, October 14th, 2014

This is article 61 of 70 in the topic Communism

“From the first moment I heard about Che, Ernesto Guevara,” gushes Columbia University’s SDS (Student’s for a Democratic Society) leader in 1968 Mark Rudd, “he was my man, or, rather, I was his. Brilliant, young, idealistic, a daring commander of rebels, willing to risk his life to free the people of the world, I wanted to be like him. I was a member of the cult of Che. Who wouldn’t fall for this rifle-toting poet…?”

Columbia University College Republicans, for one. The Young America’s Foundation (YAF,) for another. Indeed such is these organizations’ penchant for blowing raspberries and horse-laughs at the staggering imbecilities swallowed (and spouted ) by gasping groupies like Mark Rudd that they’re a staging a “No More Che Day” at Mark Rudd’s own Columbia University on Oct. 9th.

Worse still, (for such as Rudd and fellow Che groupies) this event features a speaker who –you might say– “wrote the book,” on exposing the real Che Guevara and the staggering stupidity (or other mental malfunctions) that motivate those who idolize this amazing sadist, coward and epic idiot.

For starters, most of Che’s “rifle-toting” was done in the face of utterly unarmed enemies. “When you saw the beaming look on Che’s face as the victims were tied to the stake and blasted apart by the firing squad,” said a former Cuban political prisoner Roberto Martin-Perez, to your humble servant here, “you saw there was something seriously, seriously wrong with Che Guevara.”

Even as a youth, Ernesto Guevara’s writings revealed a serious mental illness. “My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any vencido that falls in my hands!” This passage is from Ernesto Guevara’s famous Motorcycle Diaries, though Robert Redford somehow overlooked it while directing his heart-warming movie.

The Spanish word vencido, by the way, translates into “defeated” or “surrendered.”And indeed, “the “acrid odor of gunpowder and blood” very, very rarely reached Guevara’s nostrils from anything properly describable as combat. It mostly came from the close-range murders of defenseless men (and boys.) Carlos Machado was 15 years old in 1963 when the bullets from the firing squad shattered his body. His twin brother and father collapsed beside Carlos from the same volley. All had resisted Castro and Che’s theft of their humble family farm, all refused blindfolds and all died sneering at their Communist murderers, as did thousands of their valiant countrymen. “Viva Cuba Libre! Viva Cristo Rey! Abajo Comunismo!” “The defiant yells would make the walls of La Cabana prison tremble,” wrote eyewitness to the slaughter, Armando Valladares.

The one genuine accomplishment in Che Guevara’s life was the mass-murder of defenseless men and boys. Under his own gun dozens died. Under his orders thousands crumpled. At everything else Che Guevara failed abysmally, even comically.

During his Bolivian “guerrilla” campaign, Che split his forces whereupon they got hopelessly lost and bumbled around, half-starved, half-clothed and half-shod, without any contact with each other for 6 months before being wiped out. They didn’t even have WWII vintage walkie-talkies to communicate and seemed incapable of applying a compass reading to a map. They spent much of the time walking in circles and were usually within a mile of each other.

Click to continue reading “The YAF’s National “No More Che Day” Targets Columbia University”
Go straight to Post

Barbara Walters Charmed by the Hemisphere’s Top Torturer of Women

by Humberto Fontova on Tuesday, May 20th, 2014

This is article 548 of 577 in the topic Media

“She was an early ballbuster, and I mean that in the nicest possible way. She rattled a lot of cages before women were even allowed into the zoo.” (Katie Couric hailing Barbara Walters this week in Vanity Fair.)

Some women living in the U.S. today (and with long experience in literal cages) strongly differ with Couric. They know—and from first-hand experience–that far from “busting” any gentleman parts, the figurative description for Ms Walters’ services to a powerful man matches a famous performance by another woman much in the news this week, also courtesy of Vanity Fair. (Her fist name starts with an M and last name with an L.)

Barbara Walters “interviewed” Fidel Castro in 1977 and again in 2002. But the famous ABC Wicked Witch who interrogated Nixon, Reagan and Bush –when confronted by Fidel Castro– morphed in Ann Margaret in front Conrad Birdie. No hint of the famous ABC News dominatrix in Washington was evident in the smiley and goo-goo-eyed groupie in Havana.

Instead this famous “feminist” shamelessly stroked among the most brutal and insatiable male egos in modern history—and within walking distance of where hundreds of his female victims languished in filthy, rat-infested and sweltering torture chambers.

When feminist icon Barbara Walters sat quivering alongside Fidel Castro in 1977 cooing: “Fidel Castro has brought very high literacy and great health-care to his country. His personal magnetism is powerful!” dozens of Cuban (genuine) feminists suffered in nearby torture chambers. From exile today many of them recall the horrors:

“They started by beating us with twisted coils of wire recalls former political prisoner Ezperanza Pena from exile today. “I remember Teresita on the ground with all her lower ribs broken. Gladys had both her arms broken. Doris had her face cut up so badly from the beatings that when she tried to drink, water would pour out of her lacerated cheeks.”

“On Mother’s Day they allowed family visits,” recalls, Manuela Calvo from exile today.” But as our mothers and sons and daughters were watching, we were beaten with rubber hoses and high-pressure hoses were turned on us, knocking all of us the ground floor and rolling us around as the guards laughed and our loved-ones screamed helplessly.”

“When female guards couldn’t handle us male guards were called in for more brutal beatings. I saw teen-aged girls beaten savagely their bones broken their mouths bleeding,” recalled prisoner Polita Grau.

Fidel Castro’s regime jailed and tortured 35,150 Cuban women for political crimes, a totalitarian horror utterly unknown—not only in Cuba—but in the Western Hemisphere until the regime so “magnetic” to Barbara Walters. Some of these Cuban ladies suffered twice as long in Castro’s Gulag as Alexander Solzhenitsyn suffered in Stalin’s.

Their prison conditions were described by former political prisoner Maritza Lugo. “The punishment cells measure 3 feet wide by 6 feet long. The toilet consists of an 8 inch hole in the ground through which cockroaches and rats enter, especially in cool temperatures the rat come inside to seek the warmth of our bodies and we were often bitten.

Click to continue reading “Barbara Walters Charmed by the Hemisphere’s Top Torturer of Women”
Go straight to Post

Why do Obama and Clinton (but no Republicans) Eulogize Gabriel Garcia-Marquez?

by Humberto Fontova on Wednesday, May 7th, 2014

This is article 1175 of 1262 in the topic International

The eulogies to Nobel-winning author Gabriel Garcia-Marquez upon his recent death make two points official:

1.) No amount of moral and intellectual wretchedness will earn an artist even the mildest rebuke from most of his professional peers and their related institutions—so long as the wretch hires himself out to communists.

2.) The masochism (to sidestep more “McCarthyite” terms) of Democratic U.S. Presidents is boundless.

Not that the media eulogies sidestep Garcia-Marquez’ politics. Most are quite upfront about it. Let’s take the one run by The New York Times as emblematic:

Like many Latin American intellectuals and artists, Mr. García Márquez felt impelled to speak out on the political issues of his day. He viewed the world from a left-wing perspective, bitterly opposing Gen. Augusto Pinochet, the right-wing Chilean dictator, and unswervingly supporting Fidel Castro in Cuba. Mr. Castro became such a close friend that Mr. García Márquez showed him drafts of his unpublished books.

Notice the word “dictator” above. But with whom does the New York Times associate it? Pinochet, of course. Does Fidel Castro also qualify as dictator? The New York Times does not tell us.

“Mr. García Márquez’s ties to Mr. Castro troubled some intellectuals and human rights advocates,” continues the NYTimes. “Susan Sontag wrote in the 1980s, “To me it’s scandalous that a writer of such enormous talent be a spokesperson for a government which has put more people in jail (proportionately to its population) than any other government in the world…He attributed the criticism to what he called Americans’ “almost pornographic obsession with Castro.” But he became sensitive enough about the issue to intercede on behalf of jailed Cuban dissidents.”

In fact, fully contrary to the New York Times’ whitewash, Garcia Marquez’ “intercession” is what got some of those dissidents jailed and tortured by his friend Castro in the first place. Let’s not mince words. Let’s call out Garcia-Marquez categorically: on top of his decades of pro-bono propaganda services for Castroism, Garcia-Marquez was also a volunteer snitch for Castro’s KGB-mentored secret police.

Here I’ll turn over the floor to someone intimately familiar with the issue Armando Valladares who himself suffered 22 torture-filled years in Castro’s prisons and was later appointed by Ronald Reagan as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Commission:

“Many years ago Garcia Marquez became an informer for Castro’s secret police,” starts a recent expose’ by Mr Valladares. “At the time, back in Havana, Cuban dissident and human-rights activist, Ricardo Bofill, with help of the then-reporter for Reuters, Collin McSevengy, managed to enter the Havana hotel where García Márquez was having a few drinks. In a quiet corner, with absolute discretion, Bofill gave García Márquez a series of documents relating to several Cuban artists.

A few weeks later Castro’s police arrested Ricardo Bofill–and displayed on the table right next to Castro’s secret-policeman –were the very documents which Bofill had given Garcia Marquez.”

Bofill, a peaceful human-rights activist inspired by Gandhi and Martin Luther King, went on to suffer 12 years in Castro’s prisons—thanks to Gabriel Garcia-Marquez. On October 13, 1968 the Spanish newspapers ABC and Diario 16, published Bofill’s disclosures and headlined that: “García Márquez’ revelations led to the imprisonment of numerous Cuban writers and artists.” Seems all this was all conveniently “forgotten” by most media outlets last week.

But enough from me.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

What Really Happed at the Bay of Pigs

by Humberto Fontova on Thursday, April 24th, 2014

This is article 130 of 147 in the topic History

(You always hear and read of a “fiasco,” a “defeat” a “disaster” at the Bay of Pigs, 53 years ago this week. But you rarely hear about the cause. Here it is.)

“They fought like tigers,” writes the CIA officer who helped train the Cubans who splashed ashore at the Bay of Pigs 53 years ago this week. “But their fight was doomed before the first man hit the beach.”

That CIA man, Grayston Lynch, knew something about fighting – and about long odds. He carried scars from Omaha Beach, The Battle of the Bulge and Korea’s Heartbreak Ridge. But in those battles Lynch and his band of brothers counted on the support of their Commander in Chief. At the Bay of Pigs, Grayston Lynch (an American) and his band of brothers (Cubans) learned — first in speechless shock and finally in burning rage — that their most powerful enemies were not Castro’s Soviet-armed soldiers massing in nearby Santa Clara, but the Ivy League’s best and brightest dithering in Washington.

Lynch trained, in his own words, “brave boys who had never before fired a shot in anger” — college students, farmers, doctors, common laborers, whites, blacks, mulattoes. They were known as La Brigada 2506, an almost precise cross-section of Cuban society of the time. The Brigada included men from every social strata and race in Cuba—from sugar cane planters to sugar cane cutters, from aristocrats to their chauffeurs. But mostly, the folks in between, as befit a nation with a larger middle class than most of Europe.

Short on battle experience, yes, but they fairly burst with what Bonaparte and George Patton valued most in a soldier: morale. No navel-gazing about “why they hate us” or the merits of “regime change” for them. They’d seen Castroism point-blank.

Their goals were crystal-clear: firing-squads silenced, families reunited, tens of thousands freed from prisons, torture chambers and concentration camps. We see it on the History Channel after our GI’s took places like Manila and Munich. In 1961 newsreels could have captured such scenes without crossing oceans. When those Cuban freedom-fighters hit the beach at the Bay of Pigs 50 years ago this week, one of every 18 Cubans suffered in Castro Gulag. Mass graves dotted the Cuban countryside, piled with hundreds who’d crumpled in front of Castro and Che Guevara’s firing squads. Most of the invaders had loved-ones among the above. Modern history records few soldiers with the burning morale of the Bay of Pigs freedom-fighters.

From the lethal fury of the attack and the horrendous casualties their troops and militia were taking, the Castro brothers and Che Guevara assumed they faced at least “20,000 invading mercenaries,” as they called them. Yet it was a band of mostly civilian volunteers their Soviet armed and led-troops outnumbered 20-to-1.

Where are the planes?” kept crackling over U.S. Navy radios two days later. “Where is our ammo? Send planes or we can’t last!” Commander Jose San Roman kept pleading to the very fleet that escorted his men to the beachhead (and sat much closer to them than the Sixth Fleet sits to the Libyan coast today). Crazed by hunger and thirst, his men had been shooting and reloading without sleep for three days. Many were hallucinating.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The New York Times—still Shilling for Communists

by Humberto Fontova on Tuesday, April 1st, 2014

This is article 1166 of 1262 in the topic International

“Everyone knows that the Cubans control (Venezuela’s) military intelligence and police intelligence. They control the coordination of the armed forces.” Such convictions are held by critics in both countries (Venezuela and Cuba) although they offer little hard evidence to back their suspicions.” (Victoria Burnett and William Neuman, The New York Times, March, 2014.)

“Fidel Castro has strong ideas of liberty, democracy, social justice, the need to restore the Constitution….but it amounts to a new deal for Cuba, radical, democratic and therefore anti-Communist.” (Herbert Matthews, New York Times, February 1957.)

“This is not a Communist Revolution in any sense of the term. Fidel Castro is not only not a Communist, he is decidedly anti-Communist.” (Herbert Matthews, New York Times, July 1959.)

So according to the New York Times the only Cubans in Venezuela today function as Marcus Welbys and Florence Nightingales. And the only communists in Cuba in 1959 were kept far from positions of influence by those stalwart defenders of liberty the Castro Brothers and Che Guevara.

Same as in 1959, many well-informed people much closer to the issue differ with the New York Times:

“Venezuela today is a country that is practically occupied by the henchmen of two international criminals, Cuba’s Castro brothers. They (the Cubans) have introduced in Venezuela a true army of occupation. The Cubans run the maritime ports, airports, communications, the most essential issues in Venezuela. We are in the hands of a foreign country. This is the darkest period in our history.” (Luis Miquilena who served as Hugo Chavez’ Minister of Justice for three years. March 2014.)

One day in May 1959, only five months after the triumph of Castro’s “anti-communist” revolution, Castro’s own Air Force Chief, Major Pedro Diaz-Lanz told his friend Eddie Ferrer, “I’ve got to tell the Americans and the world what’s going on here and start the fight against these communists. Everybody seems asleep!”

A week later Diaz-Lanz resigned his post and declared publicly that Castro’s civilian government was a hollow sham, nothing but a front (maintained with the then invaluable assistance of the New York Times) for Soviet-trained communists who were running the show behind the scenes, especially in the crucial functions of the military and police. Diaz-Lanz then bundled his wife and kids onto a small boat and escaped to Miami just ahead of a firing squad.

After weeks of frantically knocking on doors and hoarse from phone calls, Diaz-Lanz finally appeared at a public hearing before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. The date was July 14, 1959.

Mr. SOURWINE (Chief Counsel). Is Castro friendly to the United States?

Major DIAZ. No.

Mr. SOURWINE. But Fidel Castro has said on many occasions [as dutifully transcribed and transmitted by the New York Times] that he is friendly to the United States. You are saying that this is not true?

Major DIAZ. He is lying.

Mr. SOURWINE. You know there are many who say that Fidel Castro is not himself a Communist.

Major DIAZ. I am completely sure that Fidel is a Communist.

Mr. SOURWINE. You are completely sure that Fidel Castro is what?

Major DIAZ. “That Fidel Castro is a communist. Also, I’m prepared because the communists have a well-known system of trying to destroy the reputations of anyone who disagrees with them.”

The New York Times was quick out of the gate.

Click to continue reading “The New York Times—still Shilling for Communists”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin