Dr. Néstor García Iturbe 8
REVIEW: Vicki Huddleston’s Cuba memoir
Comments by By Dr. Néstor García Iturbe Translated and edited for CubaNews The first commentary on this book refers to what is printed on the cover as it is announced as “a diplomat´s chronicle of America´s long struggle with Castrós Cuba”, which does not reflect the reality of what is presented in the book. Part 1 of the book recounts Vicki Huddleston’s stay at the State Department’s Office of Cuban Affairs from 1989 to 1993. In referring to this stage, the author failed to take into account 30 years of aggression by the United States against Cuba, including the beginning and strengthening of the economic blockade, the invasion by the Bay of Pigs, the Missile Crisis and the thousands of terrorist activities and sabotage that Cuba suffered during those thirty years. That’s actually an important part of “Americás long struggle with Castro´s Cuba.” The correct thing would have been for the cover to show that the chronicle to which reference is made only from 1989 onwards, since in the way it is written it seems to have been written to cover the whole period since the beginning of the Cuban Revolution. In the first chapter she gives us a sample of the alliance between the U.S. government with the worst of the Cuban exiles, mainly with the Cuban American National Foundation and the Brothers to the Rescue [BTTR]. It presents the latter as an almost philanthropic organization dedicated to rescuing rafters, when it repeatedly violated Cuban airspace to launch propaganda and explosive devices. The author herself reports that, as a State Department official, in some of these violations of Cuban airspace, she travelled as a passenger on one of the BTTR planes. This is an example of something that an U.S. government official is not supposed to do. In her book, Mrs. Huddleston tries to describe, according to her, the police regime in Cuba, especially organized by the State Security, which she says does not miss any movement of foreign diplomats. Assuming that the author was totally convinced of what she said, we could describe what she sees as naïve during Illinois Governor George Ryan’s visit to Cuba. She states that during his stay she prepared a meeting attended by various ambassadors, and several of the so-called “dissidents”. And that in order to be able to speak freely, at the end of the meal she offered in her home, she waited for the servants to leave the room where they were gathered to begin the testimonies and opinions of each of them. If Cuban security has such a broad and efficient control, how many microphones would there be in the premises selected by Mrs. Huddleston to hold the secret meeting? The interference in Cuba’s internal affairs is also recognized by the former ambassador, when in a meeting with Colin Powell, she told him how she carried out actions with dissident groups, private libraries and independent journalists, adding that if they had more resources they would do much more. What would be the attitude of the U.S. government if Cuba or another nation were to begin to foment opposition for the purpose of overthrowing the established regime? Is that the right attitude of a diplomat representing his country to another? The book, at least, gathers the maneuvers and activities carried out by the United States against Cuba in order to destroy the Cuban Revolution. A true compendium of illegalities, dirty maneuvers, violations of diplomatic law, conspiracies and interference by the United States in Cuba’s internal affairs. A better title for the book would have been “Our Crook in Havana”. June 6, 2018
Comentarios del Dr. Néstor García Iturbe El primer comentario sobre este libro se refiere a lo que tiene impreso en la cubierta pues se anuncia como “a diplomat´s chronicle of America´s long struggle with Castrós Cuba”, lo cual no refleja la realidad de lo que se expone en el libro. La parte 1 del mencionado libro relata la estancia de Vicki Huddleston en la oficina de Asuntos Cubanos del Departamento de Estado a partir de 1989 hasta 1993. Al referirse a esa etapa el autor ha dejado de tomar en consideración 30 años de agresiones de Estados Unidos hacia Cuba, lo que incluye el inicio y fortalecimiento del bloqueo económico, la invasión por Bahía de Cochinos, la Crisis de los Misiles y miles de actividades terroristas y sabotajes que durante esos treinta años Cuba sufrió. Esa es en realidad una parte importante de “Americás long struggle with Castro´s Cuba.” Lo correcto hubiera sido que en la cubierta apareciera que la crónica a la que se hace referencia e solamente a partir de 1989, pues en la forma en que está redactado parece que fuera durante todo el período desde el inicio de la Revolución Cubana. En el primer capítulo nos da una muestra de la alianza del gobierno estadounidense con lo peor del exilio cubano, principalmente con la Fundación Nacional Cubano Americana y con los Hermanos al Rescate mostrando estos últimos como una organización casi filantrópica dedicada rescatar balseros, cuando la misma en repetidas oportunidades violó el espacio aéreo cubano para lanzar propaganda y artefactos explosivos. La propia autora relata que siendo funcionaria del Departamento de Estado, en algunas de esas violaciones del espacio aéreo cubano viajó como pasajera en uno de los aviones. Una muestra de algo que supuestamente no debe hacer un funcionario oficial del gobierno estadounidense. En su libro la señora Huddleston trata de describir, según ella, el régimen policiaco en que se vive en Cuba especialmente organizado por la Seguridad del Estado, que según ella no le pierde movimiento alguno a los diplomáticos. Partiendo de que la autora estuviera totalmente convencida de lo que dice, pudiéramos calificar de ingenuo lo que describe durante la visita a Cuba del Gobernador George Ryan. Plantea que durante la estancia del mismo preparó una reunión a la que asistieron distintos embajadores, varios de los llamados “disidentes” y que para poder hablar libremente, al terminar la comida que ofreció en su casa, esperó a que los sirviente abandonaran la habitación donde estaban reunidos para comenzar los testimonios y opiniones de cada uno. ¿Si la seguridad cubana tiene un control tan amplio y eficiente, cuantos micrófonos habría en el local seleccionado por la señora HUDDLESTON para efectuar la reunión secreta? La injerencia en los asuntos internos de Cuba también es reconocida por la ex embajadora, cuando en una reunión con Collin Powell, le relataba como realizaba acciones con grupos disidentes, bibliotecas privadas y periodistas independientes, agregando que si tuvieran mas recursos harían mucho mas actividades. ¿Cuál sería la actitud del gobierno de Estados Unidos si Cuba u otra nación comenzara a fomentar la oposición con el propósito de derrocar el régimen establecido? ¿Es esa la actitud correcta de un diplomático que representa a su país ante otro? El libro, al menos, recoge las maniobras y actividades realizadas por Estados Unidos contra Cuba con el fin de destruir la Revolución Cubana. Un verdadero compendio de ilegalidades, maniobras sucias, violaciones a lo establecido en el Derecho Diplomático, conspiraciones e injerencia por parte de Estados Unidos en los asuntos internos de Cuba. El mejor titulo para el libro “Our crook in Havana. 6 de junio 2018
Our Woman in Havana by Vicki Huddleston
by Walter Lippmann.
Our Woman in Havana por Vicki Huddleston
We Keep Being Put on New Lists
We Keep Being Put on New Lists
By: Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
The Trump administration, at the head of the United States government, has just included Cuba on three new lists.
That is part of the policy change, which Trump announced when he met in the city of Miami, with a group of “rank Batistianos, annexationists and terrorists” as our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bruno Rodríguez, described them in his recent speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations.
One of the lists, from the State Department, refers to different Cuban entities with which the US citizens will not be able to carry out financial transactions. This list is headed by the MINISTRY OF THE ARMED FORCES, THE MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR, THE POLICE AND OTHERS ORGANS OF STATE SECURITY. They also include a series of hotels and other entities that supposedly belong to the security forces of the Cuban government.
This measure has been shaped by the main interest of trying to affect the trips of US citizens to Cuba. But what it establishes is unconstitutional, within the so-called freedoms that American citizens have proclaimed, as well as being irrational.
For example, if a US citizen commits a traffic infraction, he has to pay a fine to the police, in doing so he is violating a regulation of the US government and could be incriminated for this.
It is irrational and ridiculous to include in the ban two brands of soft drinks made in Cuba. The so-called “individual freedoms” of the American are torn up again when the government regulates them up to the brand of soda pop that can be drunk.
To continue issuing regulations, the Trump administration will establish the type of toilet paper that Americans should use in Cuba. It is possible that even THAT will have to be regulated for people from the US. That is the so-called “democracy”, and a sample of the “freedom” that prevails in capitalist society.
The other lists, also regulating what the US citizen can do or not do, have the same goal, try to affect the relations between the Cuban people and the American people, the contacts that are established between visitor and visited, in order, to the greatest extent possible, to avoid these contacts.
In general, people from the US who have traveled to Cuba are kind, respectful and interested in knowing the truth of what is happening on the Island. That is the danger that the enemies of our country are considering.
Those who return from Cuba, speak with honesty of our people, of the advances of the revolution and of the situation in which we live, which is always much better than the image disclosed by the enemies and the Miami mafia.
What kind of regime is Trump creating?
It is not only trying to reverse the progress in relations with Cuba that was achieved during the Obama administration. The violations of the US Constitution and to the liberties proclaimed in that same document, are directed at creating a repressive, discriminatory, terror regime, comparable to the existing one at the time of peak of the McCarthyism.
Perhaps that is the true meaning of his motto “Make America great again”.
Hurricane Irma’s Effects on Cuba
Hurricane Irma’s Effects on Cuba
By Néstor García Iturbe
Translated and Edited by Walter Lippmann.
DEAR READERS:
Some compañeros from other countries have written to me worried about Hurricane Irma and its consequences. That is why I make this brief chronicle. It would be unnecessary for those who live in Cuba and surely they would have much to contribute from their personal experiences.
AFTER PREPARATION TO RECEIVE IRMA AND ITS ARRIVAL IN CUBA, THEY CAN UNDERSTAND THAT ALL LIFE HAS BEEN ALTERED.
This hurricane crossed several provinces of the country along the north coast, destroying a good part of our tourist facilities and beaches, in addition to seriously affecting many cities.
The size of the hurricane was such that when it passed through a place it affected an area of more than three hundred kilometers. The closest to the eye of the hurricane with winds of about 250 kilometers per hour, in addition to the rains, those that were far from the center of the hurricane were also affected by winds of 80 kilometers in some cases and 150 in others (approximately).
Virtually the entire country ran out of electricity, with heavy flooding, disrupted roads, telephones. The news could be heard on the radio, the one with a portable radio, because although the television was on the air, no one could receive the signal because of the lack of electricity.
Although Civil Defense properly and timely warned about the dangers and the need to be safe, people were placed at safe locations to shelter, accidents occurred that cost the lives of ten Cubans.
Losses were also suffered in agriculture, industries, housing, schools, hospitals and others.
For those who have visited Cuba and have been in Havana, I can tell you that the water the sea advanced about 800 to 900 meters from the coast, above the seawall, in some places reached the height of 1.5 meters (as in the neighborhood where alive). You can understand that it destroys mobile homes, electrical equipment, shops, streets. trees, cars, electric and telephone lines, flooding of tunnels, garages and everything that is usually the basement of a building, where people often live.
After the hurricane, work began on the restoration of normality, and although much of the services (water, electricity, gas, telephone, television, radio) have yet to be restored, they have been reestablished in almost all of the country. On Monday the school year should be restarted at all levels, people who had problems with their home will continue in shelters, but work is underway on many of these, as well as factories and power plants. Most of the streets are passable and almost all the trees that were demolished were eliminated.
We still have some work to do, we have solved a good part but there are always issues that we must resolve to bring the country and its citizens back to the situation in which they were before Irene.
We are grateful for the solidarity shown by many people who are friends of Cuba, the help that is coming to us from some countries and above all we are grateful to have so many friends, like you, who care about us.
Many hurricanes would have to pass so that the Revolution would not go ahead. A hurricane affects us, but it does not stop us.S
Thank you all,
Néstor
Obama’s Pre-Visit Actions
- English
- Español
CUBA-USA: OBAMA’S PRE-VISIT ACTIONS
By Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
February 20, 2016
A CubaNews translation
Edited by Walter Lippmann
Many “skilled in the art” say that in the days remaining before the Nobel Peace Prize President visits Cuba, the US government will probably make some gestures towards our country to “sweeten” the environment so that when he arrives there is a favorable climate for his welcome.
I don’t figure the welcoming will be in the style of the film Bienvenido Mr Marshall [Welcome Mr. Marshall]: everyone with American flags, lots of people standing in the sidewalks all the way from the airport to the place where he will be staying, bands playing the Marines anthem as the entourage goes by. Good is enough, but not too much.
Apparently the US government has also thought of the gestures to “sweeten the welcoming”.
On February 18, the USAID (US Agency for International Development) –whose actions have nothing to do with international development, but with political subversion and interference in the internal affairs of other countries– extended to February 29, the deadline for submissions by organizations interested in Cuba of projects for providing “humanitarian assistance to political prisoners and their families as well as individuals and groups that have been politically marginalized.” The initial deadline was February 15.
For each of these, projects these organizations can request from $500,000 to $2,000,000 dollars. As can be seen, the sum is not negligible, especially if the project submitted gets $2 million.
USAID warned that the organization whose project is approved should not send US citizens to Cuba for project implementation, because these would be detected more easily.
So, if USAID makes that warning, and fears that those who come are detected, it is because the nature of the project is totally illegal and contrary to the established laws in Cuba. This type of project instead of “sweetening” the environment, adds the sour taste of interference in the internal affairs of our country. And this will happen only a few days before Obama arrives in Havana.
Some persons interested in this type of activity, but who have no interest in residing in Cuban jails, have asked questions to USAID about this project of the US government.
The clarifications provided by the USAID, are the following:
–This program operates under the jurisdiction and authority of US law. (It has no acceptance on the part of the Cuban government.)
– The program is secret and exceptions to this are individually considered. However, at the moment USAID is not requesting any exception for this program in accordance with DATA ACT or Memorandum OMB M-15-12-related to US government expenditures.
– Humanitarian aid to political prisoners and politically marginalized individuals and their families is the priority of this program. We cannot offer a methodology on how such aid should reach its beneficiaries.
From this it is clear that the actions of the US government to interfere in our internal affairs are maintained.
That from the money given by US American taxpayers so their government can work, funds are taken to “pay their agents in Cuba”.
That according to US government criteria, in Cuba there are “political prisoners” and politically marginalized people” who should be helped in their fight against the Cuban Revolution.
Surely when Obama comes to Cuba he will hold a meeting with the “politically marginalized” to assure them that their salaries are safe and they should continue to perform the activities that are indicated. In any case, if they go to prison, they will become “political prisoners” and will continue to receive their salary which, from that moment on considering they are in jail, will have a ten percent increase.
CUBA.- EU.- ACCIONES DE OBAMA PREVIAS A LA VISITA.
Por Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
20 de febrero 2016.
Muchos “entendidos en la materia” plantean, que en los días que nos quedan para que El Premio Nobel de la Paz llegue a Cuba, seguramente el gobierno estadounidense hará algunos gestos hacia nuestra patria que “endulcen” el ambiente y que cuando se realice el recibimiento exista un clima favorable para dicha actividad.
No me imagino que el recibimiento sea al estilo de la película “Bienvenido Mr. Marshall” todo el mundo con banderitas estadounidenses, haciendo una larga fila de personas desde el aeropuerto hasta el lugar donde va a residir y con bandas de música tocando el himno de la Infantería de Marina en la medida que pasa la caravana. Bueno es lo bueno, pero no lo demasiado.
Al parecer el gobierno estadounidense también ha pensado en los gestos que debe hacer para “endulzar el recibimiento”.
El día 18 de febrero la USAID (Agencia de Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional), cuyas acciones nada tienen que ver con el desarrollo internacional, sino con la subversión política y la injerencia en los asuntos internos de otros países, ha extendido hasta el 29 de febrero el plazo para presentar proyectos de organizaciones interesadas en suministrar en Cuba “asistencia humanitaria a prisioneros políticos y sus familias, además de a personas y grupos que políticamente han sido marginados”. El plazo inicial vencía el 15 de febrero.
Para cada uno de estos proyectos estas organizaciones pueden solicitar entre 500,000 hasta 2 millones de dólares. Cómo puede notarse, la suma no es despreciable, sobre todo si el proyecto presentado alcanza los 2 millones de dólares.
La USAID advierte, que la organización cuyo proyecto sea aprobado, no debe enviar a Cuba ciudadanos estadounidenses para la ejecución del proyecto, porque estos serían detectados más fácilmente.
Muy bien, si la USAID realiza esa advertencia y teme que los que vengan sean detectados, entonces es porque la naturaleza del proyecto es totalmente ilegal y contraria a las leyes establecidas en Cuba, por lo que este tipo de proyecto en vez de “endulzar” el ambiente, le agrega el agrio sabor de la injerencia en los asuntos internos de nuestro país. Todo eso unos días antes de que Obama llegue a la Habana.
Algunos interesados en este tipo de actividad, pero que no tienen interés alguno en residir en la cárceles cubanas han realizado preguntas a la USAID en relación con este proyecto del gobierno estadounidense.
Las aclaraciones ofrecidas por la USAID, son las siguiente:
-Este programa opera bajo la jurisdicción y autoridad de las leyes de Estados Unidos. ( No tiene aceptación alguna por parte del gobierno de Cuba.)
– El Programa es secreto y las excepciones a esto se consideraran individualmente. De todas formas en estos momentos la USAID no está solicitando excepción alguna para este programa de acuerdo con el DATA ACT o el memorándum OMB M-15-12 relacionado con los gastos del gobierno de Estados Unidos.-La ayuda humanitaria a prisioneros políticos y personas individuales políticamente marginadas y sus familias, es la prioridad de este programa. No podemos ofrecer metodología alguna sobre la forma en que dicha ayuda debe llegar a los interesados.
De todo eso se desprende, que las acciones del gobierno de Estados Unidos para interferir en nuestros asuntos internos se mantienen.
Que del dinero que entregan los contribuyentes estadounidenses para que su gobierno funcione se toman fondos destinados a “pagar a sus agentes en Cuba”.
Que según el criterio del gobierno de Estados Unidos, existen en Cuba “prisioneros políticos” y personas políticamente marginadas” a las cuales deben ayudar en su lucha contra la Revolución Cubana.
Seguramente, Obama, cuando venga a Cuba, sostendrá una reunión con los “políticamente marginados” para asegurarles que sus salarios están seguros y que deben continuar realizando las actividades que se les orientan. En todo caso, si van a prisión, se convierten en “prisioneros políticos” y seguirán recibiendo su salario, a partir de ese momento, con un diez por ciento de aumento, por estar en la cárcel.
What you didn’t read about the Iowa caucuses
- English
- Español
What you didn’t read about the Iowa caucuses
By Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
February 2, 2016
A CubaNews translation.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.
The primary elections in Iowa of the so-called Republican and Democratic parties, held on February 1st, have been widely covered in the US media as well as in other countries, including Cuba.
Most of the coverage of this event tries to highlight something that is a big lie: the so-called “democratic process” by which Americans of both political parties choose the presidential candidate. Then by what they call “free elections” a new president is elected. When this is done, the electoral farce is over.
Among the “features” that some attribute to the Iowa primaries is that the winner of each of the parties almost certainly becomes its presidential candidate. Let’s see how this is done.
As far as the Democratic Party is concerned, the assertion could be taken as valid. During the 1996 primaries (Clinton), 2000 (Gore), 2004 (Kerry), 2008 (Hillary, by the preferential votes from the party leadership, which then switched to Obama), and 2012 (Obama), were all winners in Iowa and became presidential candidates.
As regards the Republican Party we cannot take it as an acceptable indicator because of the results which are: 1996 (Dole), 2000 (Bush), 2004 (Bush), 2008 (Huckabee, McCain was fourth) 2012 (Santorum, Romney came in second). In recent years the winner in Iowa has not exactly been the presidential candidate for the Republicans.
As US news agencies have published (and others have repeated ) victory in the Democratic field narrowly went to Hillary with 50.2 percent of the votes, while Sanders scored 49.8.
On the Republican side, the results are described as surprising (this is also repeated by others). Ted Cruz won 28 percent of the vote, Donald Trump 24, Marco Rubio 23 and further behind, but still in the race, Ben Carson with 9.3 percent followed by Rand Paul and Bush. According to what has happened in recent years, on the Republican side nothing is certain for anyone.
Consider other factors that are generally concealed. Each of the so-called “parties” in Iowa has approximately 600,000 people registered as party members. Do not forget this figure. That amounts to about 1, 200,000 people, and in 2010, according to the Census Bureau of the United States, the voting age population in Iowa was 2, 318,000.
Everyone knows that in any election in the United States abstention becomes apparent as a form of protest by those who are certain they will not live better under one president or another; so then why bother to vote? Regularly, abstention nationwide is about 50 percent of the population, as reflected in Iowa between total population and registered party members.
It must be added that, on the day of the primaries, February 1st, Iowa and other neighboring states were experiencing one of the most violent snowstorms of the season which by its nature was called “Snowzilla”. This was another good reason to stay home and not go to vote.
Let us now see how out of the 600,000 registered voters in each of the political parties how many really bothered and overcame all difficulties to go to vote.
In the Republican Party:
Cruz 28% 43,550 votes
Trump 24% 38,358 votes
Rubio 23% 36,065 votes
Carson 9% 14,464 votes
Bush 3% 5,000 votes
These figures, plus other votes that were cast, total 155,535, which represent 25.9 percent of registered Republicans. ONLY ABOUT A QUARTER OF THEM VOTED.
Perhaps this will give you a clear idea of how what these gentlemen call “representative democracy” really works. This is actually an outdated and rigged system to ensure the power of the ruling class.
Let us see how this went among the Democrats:
Clinton 50,2 % 666 votes 22 delegates to the Convention
Sanders 49,8 % 661 votes 21 delegates to the Convention
Of the nearly 600,000 people registered as Democrats, 1,327 showed up to cast their votes (Martinoticias.com, February 1, 2016) 0.22 percent, a real abstentionist scandal. However, they distributed among themselves the 43 delegates to the Convention as if everything had happened normally. “Free elections” and “representative democracy” keep marching on.
If you’ve read a review like this on the elections in the United States, in any media, please send it to me to improve my knowledge.
I hope now you understand better the circumstances that led Hillary and Ted Cruz to be declared winners in Iowa. This story is repeated in every primary.
LO QUE USTED NO HA LEIDO SOBRE LAS PRIMARIAS EN IOWA
Por Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
2 de febrero del 2016
Las elecciones primarias en Iowa, de los llamados partidos republicano y demócrata , celebradas el día 1 de febrero, han sido ampliamente cubiertas por la prensa estadounidense y por la de otros países, incluyendo la de Cuba.
El enfoque mayoritario sobre este evento trata de resaltar algo que es una gran mentira, el llamado “proceso democrático” mediante el cual los estadounidenses, de ambos partidos políticos, seleccionan al candidato a la presidencia, para después mediante lo que ellos denominan “elecciones libres” elegir al nuevo presidente. Cuando esto se haga, la farsa electoral ha terminado.
Entre las “propiedades” que algunos le atribuyen a las primarias de Iowa es que el ganador de las mismas, en cada uno de los “partidos” es casi seguro el aspirante a la presidencia por el mismo. Veamos cómo se comporta esto.
En cuanto al “partido” demócrata, esto pudiera tomarse como bueno. Durante las primarias de 1996 (Clinton),2000 (Gore),2004(Kerry),2008 (Hillary por los votos preferenciales de la cúpula partidaria, que después se cambiaron para Obama),2012(Obama) fueron ganadores en Iowa y aspirantes a la presidencia.
En cuanto al “partido” republicano, no podemos considerarlo un indicador aceptable debido a los resultados obtenidos, que son 1996 (Dole),2000 (Bush),2004 (Bush),2008(Huckabee, Mc Cain quedó en cuarto lugar) 2012 (Santorum, Romney quedó en segundo lugar). En los últimos años no ha sido precisamente el ganador en Iowa el aspirante a la presidencia por los republicanos.
Según lo que han publicado las agencias noticiosas estadounidenses ( y repetido por otras)
la victoria en el campo de los demócratas quedó en manos de Hillary por estrecho margen, 50,2 por ciento de los votos, ya que Sanders obtuvo el 49,8 .
En el campo republicano los resultados se dan como sorprendentes (esto también lo repiten). Ted Cruz obtuvo el 28 por ciento de los votos, Donald Trump el 24, Marco Rubio el 23 y más rezagados, pero en la contienda Ben Carson con el 9,3 por ciento seguido por Rand Paul y Bush. De acuerdo con lo sucedido en los últimos años, en el campo republicano, no hay nada seguro para nadie.
Analicemos otros factores que se tratan de esconder. Cada uno de los llamados “partidos” cuenta en Iowa con aproximadamente 600,000 personas registradas como miembros del partido. No olviden esta cifra. Eso totaliza aproximadamente 1 millón 200,000 personas y en el año 2010, según el Buro del Censo de Estados Unidos, la población en edad de votar era de 2 millones 318,000 personas.
Todos ustedes saben que en cualquier tipo de elección en Estados Unidos, se pone de manifiesto la abstención, forma de protesta de aquellos que están seguros no van a vivir mejor con un presidente u otro, entonces para que molestarse en votar. Regularmente la abstención a nivel nacional, está cerca del 50 por ciento de la población, tal y como se refleja en Iowa entre la población total y los registrados en los partidos.
A todo esto debe agregarse que el día de las primarias 1 de febrero, el estado y otros estados colindantes estaban sufriendo de una de las mas violentas tormentas de nieve de la temporada que por sus características fue denominada “Snowzilla”. Otro aliciente para quedarse en casa y no ir a votar.
Veamos ahora de los 600,000 registrados en cada uno de los “partidos” políticos cuantos se molestaron y pasaron todas las dificultades para poder votar.
En el “partido” republicano:
Cruz 28% 43,550 votos
Trump 24% 38,358 votos
Rubio 23% 36,065 votos
Carson 9% 14,464 votos
Bush 3% 5,000 votos
Estas cifras, mas otros votos que se realizaron, totalizan 155,535, lo cual representa el 25,9 por ciento de los inscritos como republicanos. SOLAMENTE UNA CUARTA PARTE DE ELLOS VOTARON.
Quizás a ustedes esto le de una idea clara de cómo funciona lo que estos señores denominan “democracia representativa” que en realidad es un sistema caduco y amañado para garantizar el poder a la clase dominante.
Veamos ahora como se comportó el asunto entre los demócratas.
Clinton 50,2 % 666 votos 22 delegados a la convención
Sanders 49,8 % 661 votos 21 delegados a la convención
De las cerca de 600,000 personas registradas como demócratas, se presentaron a dar su voto 1,327, (Martinoticias.com. febrero 01, 2016 ) el 0.22 por ciento, un verdadero escándalo abstencionista. No obstante, se repartieron los 43 delegados a la convención como si todo hubiera sucedido normalmente. Las “elecciones libres” y la “democracia representativa” sigue adelante.
Si usted ha leído un análisis como este, sobre las elecciones en Estados Unidos, en algún órgano de prensa, por favor mándemelo, para aprender.
Espero que ahora le quede más claro las circunstancias que motivaron Hillary y Ted Cruz fueran declarados vencedores en Iowa. Esta película se repite en cada primaria.
Cuba: Consume Cuban Products
- English
- Español
CUBA: CONSUME CUBAN PRODUCTS.
By Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
January 5, 2015
A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.
The phrase that has been used as the title of this article is intended for many people in our country for whom everything that is produced –or comes from– abroad has a high value and a special meaning.
Examples of this are seen when they use the words “clowns” instead of the Spanish payasos, “performance” instead of the Spanish actuación, trying to give a different meaning to something that can be perfectly expressed in Spanish. They think that with the foreign word the object may seem different and higher ranking.
Something similar happens when we invite a foreign scholar to offer a lecture on a Cuban subject, while in our country we do not give a national expert the chance to give the lecture.
As for books and newspaper articles something similar happens.
Recently an article was published –I received it on January 3rd of this year– which said the Bush family had financed the rise to power of Adolf Hitler. The article gave as reference the book George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (in the article the word Unauthorized was incorrectly translated as Indeseable [undesired]). It also said the authors are Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, and incorrectly labeled them as US Americans. This is a very interesting and real situation.
We must point out that in the book Estados Unidos, de raíz [The United States, from the Roots] published in Cuba by the Centro de Estudios Martianos in 2007 –that is, 11 years ago– a section is devoted to the links between US companies and individuals, including the Bush family, with the regime of Adolf Hitler. The section begins on page 218 and ends on page 222.
The book mentions and explains in detail the cooperation between the Ford Motor Company with the Nazi regime and how this US company, in coordination with Hitler’s representatives, used the slave labor of Jews and other war prisoners in their industry. In 1939, the company gave Hitler a million marks for his fiftieth birthday, which was reciprocated with a medal the Nazi regime gave to Henry Ford.
The General Motors was also involved in this type of activity. Nearly 300 US American companies were involved; some with subsidiaries such as German Steel Trust, one of whose owners was Clarence Dillon.
Among the law firms that provided assistance to the government of Hitler was the US American firm Sullivan and Cromwell, where one of its top executives was John Foster Dulles.
International Business Machines’ (IBM) services were highly regarded by the German regime; so much so that Adolf Hitler himself gave its founder, Thomas J Watson, the Cross of Merit of the German Eagle with a Star. The services of IBM and the census the company carried out for the Third Reich were taken as the source for the arrest of Jews and the organization of the concentration camps.
Some banking companies joined this cooperation: the Chase National Bank of Paris, a subsidiary of the Chase Manhattan Bank, owned by the Rockefeller family. The Union Banking Company also established strong relationships with the fascist regime. Two of its top executives were Prescott Bush and his father-in-law George Herbert Walker. They joined their capitals to that of German Fritz Thyssen, a close friend of Adolf Hitler.
The rest of the story and more details about it can be found in the aforementioned book, published in Cuba, eleven years ago, written by a Cuban author from the Juanelo neighborhood in Luyanó. His name is Néstor García Iturbe.
Big Capital respects no borders and has no scruples when it comes to making money.
CUBA.- CONSUMA PRODUCTOS CUBANOS.
Por .Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
5 de enero 2015
La frase que se ha utilizado como título de este artículo, responde a una situación existente en nuestro país, donde todo aquello que se produzca o venga del extranjero, tiene para muchas personas un alto valor y un significado especial.
Eso sucede cuando a los payasos les decimos “clown”, a las actuaciones “performance”, tratando de que eso varíe el significado de algo que puede decirse perfectamente en español, pero que dicho de esa forma se trata de que parezca algo distinto y de mayor categoría.
Algo similar sucede cuando traemos un académico extranjero para que nos imparta una conferencia sobre un tema de Cuba, mientras que en nuestro país no le damos oportunidad de dar la conferencia a un experto criollo.
En cuanto a los libros y los artículos periodísticos sucede algo similar.
Recientemente se publicó un artículo, que recibí el día 3 de enero de este año, donde se planteaba que la familia Bush había financiado la ascensión al poder de Adolfo Hitler y se daba como referencia el libro George Bush The Unauthorized Biography (George Bush Biografía no autorizada, donde incorrectamente se tradujo la palabra Unauthorized como Indeseable ). Se plantea que los autores son los estadounidenses ( que se calificaron también incorrectamente como norteamericanos ) Webster G. Tarpley y Anton Chaitkin. Una situación muy interesante y verdadera.
No se puede dejar de señalar, que en el libro Estados Unidos, de raíz, publicado en Cuba por el Centro de Estudios Martianos en el año 2007, hace 11 años, se dedica un epígrafe a la vinculación de personas y empresas estadounidenses con el régimen de Adolfo Hitler, lo cual incluye a la familia Bush. Este epígrafe comienza en la página 218 y termina en la 222.
Se menciona y explica en detalle, la cooperación con el régimen nazi de la Ford Motor Company y como dicha empresa, en coordinación con los representantes de Hitler, utilizaron en la industria el trabajo esclavo de los judíos y otros prisioneros de guerra. Esta empresa entregó en 1939 un millón de marcos a Hitler por su cincuenta cumpleaños, lo cual fue compensado con una medalla que dicho régimen entregó a Henry Ford..
También la General Motors estuvo involucrada en este tipo de actividad, cerca de 300 empresas estadounidenses lo estuvieron, algunas con filiales como la German Steel Trust, de la que uno de sus propietarios era Clarence Dillon.
Dentro de las firmas de abogados que prestaron ayuda al gobierno de Hitler estuvo la estadounidense Sullivan and Cromwell, donde uno de sus principales ejecutivos era John Foster Dulles.
La empresa International Business Machine (IBM), cuyos servicios al régimen alemán fueron altamente reconocidos, cuando el propio Adolfo Hitler entrego a su fundador Thomas J Watson, La Cruz del Mérito del Aguila Alemana con Estrella.. Los servicios de la IBM y el censo realizado por esta empresa, se tomaron como base por el Tercer Reich para apresar a los judíos y organizar los campos de concentración.
Algunas firmas bancaria se sumaron a esta colaboración, como el Chase National Bank de Paris, filial del Chase Manhattan Bank, propiedad de la familia Rockefeller. También estableció fuertes relaciones con el régimen fascista, la Union Banking Company, donde uno de su principales ejecutivos era Prescot Bush y su suegro George Herbert Walker, los que unieron sus capitales con el alemán Fritz Thysen, amigo íntimo de Adolfo Hitler.
El resto de la historia y más detalles de la misma, pueden ustedes leerlo en el libro antes mencionado, publicado en Cuba, hace once años, escrito por un cubano, del Barrio de Juanelo, en Luyanó, cuyo nombre es Néstor García Iturbe.
Los grandes capitales no reconocen fronteras, ni tienen escrúpulos, cuando de ganar dinero se trata.
What is Meant by “Normalization”?
====================================== CUBA.- EU.- QUE SE ENTIENDE POR NORMALIZAR Por: Dr. Néstor García Iturbe En los últimos meses, sin duda alguna, una de las palabras que más se ha escuchado ha sido normalizar. Cuando utilizamos los diccionarios para buscar el verdadero significado de esta palabra, encontramos que la misma significa “Someter a norma. Poner en buen orden.” (Diccionario Manual Ilustrado VOX de la Lengua Española); “Regularizar o poner en buen orden lo que no estaba. Hacer que una cosa sea normal.” (Diccionario Océano Práctico de la Lengua Española). Normalizar puede tener un efecto beneficioso o perjudicial, según la norma a que se someta el hecho. Lo normal es que la madre sienta cariño por sus hijos. Que el maestro se preocupe por la instrucción y educación de sus alumnos. Que una mujer en estado pueda tener un parto feliz. Que un estudiante aplicado pueda terminar su carrera universitaria. También es normal que si usted prende un fosforo cerca de la gasolina, esta entre en combustión o explote. Si usted utiliza un auto y no se preocupa por asegurarse de que cuente con el aceite y el agua necesario, lo normal es que el motor se destruya. Si a un enfermo usted no le suministra la medicina y los cuidados necesarios, lo normal es que muera. Considero que estos ejemplos son suficientes para establecer que la normalización de una situación puede estar determinada por la relación existente entre dos países o personas. Lo normal es que un amigo ayude al otro. También puede considerarse normal que un enemigo trate de destruir al que considera su enemigo. En ambos casos se actúa de forma normal. Esto puede influir en el concepto de lo que uno u otro considera normal. Estoy plenamente convencido, que la acción realizada por la USAID el día 9 de septiembre, dos días antes de que comenzaran en la Habana las reuniones de las comisiones en pro de la normalización de relaciones, ellos consideran que están dentro de la mayor normalidad. El 9 de septiembre, la USAID anunció que está buscando administradores para sus programas contra Cuba. El salario que ofrecen está entre los 90, 823 a los 139,523 dólares anuales . Las personas que están tratando de contratar deben tener experiencia en promoción de la democracia, derechos humanos, desarrollo de la sociedad civil, desarrollo comunitario y formación de grupos juveniles. Como es lógico pensar, estos son los programas de subversión político ideológica que piensan desarrollar en los sectores mencionados, por eso requieren los llamados “administradores.” En el anuncio de la USAID se plantea que “ Successful candidates must obtain a “secret” security clearance within nine months of accepting the position. Information deemed “secret” is defined as that which would “cause serious damage to national security” if disclosed. Así que estos “administradores” deberán pasar el chequeo de seguridad y obtener el famoso “clearance” pues lo que realicen o conozcan, si es divulgado, puede causar serios daños a la seguridad nacional. ¿Pueden ustedes imaginarse que tenebrosas actividades desarrollará la USAID contra Cuba, que de divulgarse causaría serios daños a la Seguridad Nacional de Estados Unidos? Entre otras cosas, en el anuncio de la USAID se plantea que Cuba es un país “sin presencia física” lo cual significa que la USAID no cuenta con una oficina en el mismo por lo que la actividad se dirigirá desde Washington, lo que nos hace pensar que estos tenebrosos planes se ejecutarán por los “diplomáticos” estadounidenses asignados a la Embajada en la Habana y el envío periódico de personas con el manto de profesores universitarios, periodistas, académicos, miembros de organizaciones juveniles y otros. Para terminar la oferta de trabajo se plantea que las solicitudes a estos cargos deben presentarse antes del día 8 de octubre a las 9:00 am., aunque de acuerdo a los listados de la USAID estos puestos de trabajo se había informado comenzarían en septiembre del 2015. Todo de lo más normal. La USAID haciendo su trabajo para tratar de destruir al enemigo que se ha apoderado de Cuba. Mientras tanto, las conversaciones siguen adelante. CUBA.- EU.- What is Meant by “Normalization”?
By: Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
September 10, 2015
In recent months, without a doubt, one of the words most often heard has been “normalization”.
When we use dictionaries to find the true meaning of this word, we find that it means “Subject to rule. Put in good order ” (Manual VOX Illustrated Dictionary of the Spanish Language).; “Regulate or put in good order what was not. Make that one thing is normal. “(Ocean Practical Dictionary of the Spanish Language).
Normalization can have a beneficial or detrimental effect, depending on the standard to which the fact is submitted.
Typically, a mother feels affection for her children. The teacher worries about the instruction and education of their students.
It is said that a woman can have a happy birth. A diligent student can finish college.
It is also normal that if you light a match near gasoline bursts into flame or explodes. If you use a car and do not worry about making sure that has the necessary oil and water, it is normal that the engine is destroyed. If you are sick you do not receive the necessary medicine and care, it is normal to die.
I believe that these examples are sufficient to establish that the normalization of a situation can be determined by the relationship between two countries or people.
Typically, one friend helps another. It is also considered normal for an enemy to try to destroy whomever it considers its enemy. In both cases such acts are normal. This can influence the concept of what either considers to be normal.
I am convinced that the action taken by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) on September 9, two days before the start of meetings in Havana of the committees towards the normalization of relations, is what they feel are normal.
On September 9, USAID announced that it is seeking managers for its programs against Cuba. The salary offered is between $90,823 to $139,523 per year.
The people whom they are trying to hire must have experience in promoting democracy, human rights, civil society development, community development and the training of youth groups. As is logical, these are the political and ideological subversion programs that USAID plans to develop in these sectors, so they require so-called “administrators.”
In the announcement from the USAID, it states that “Successful candidates must obtain a “secret” security clearance Within nine months of accepting the position. Information deemed “secret” is defined as that which would “cause serious damage to national security” if it were disclosed.
So these “managers” must pass the security check and get the famous “clearance” for what conduct or be known, which if disclosed, could cause serious damage to national security. Can you imagine that USAID develop dark activities against Cuba, which if disclosed would cause serious damage to the national security of the United States?
Among other things, in the announcement from USAID it arises that Cuba is a country “without physical presence” which means that USAID does not have an office in the Cuba so that the activity will be directed from Washington, what makes us think that these sinister plans will be implemented by “diplomats” assigned to the US Embassy in Havana and sending periodic persons with the mantle of university professors, journalists, academics, members of youth organizations and others.
To finish the job it is suggested that requests these charges due on October 8th at 9:00 am., But according to listings of these jobs USAID had been reported to begin in September 2015.
All very normal. USAID is doing its job to try to destroy the enemy that has gripped Cuba.
Meanwhile, talks are continuing.
Google translation. Revised by Walter Lippmann.
======================================
10 de septiembre 2015
Neither Enemies Nor Rivals, Neighbors
- English
- Español
CUBA-USA
NEITHER ENEMIES, NOR RIVALS, NEIGHBORS
By: Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
August 14, 2015
A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.
Today, in his speech in the city of Havana, the Secretary of State of the United States Government, John Kerry, exlained the actions the Obama administration plans to implement in relation to Cuba, including the efforts it has done and will do with Congress to try to achieve the lifting of the blockade.
Mr. Kerry delivered some parts of his speech in Spanish, probably to prevent the translation changing what he wanted to convey. He wanted the message to directly reach all present. In Spanish language he clearly said:
“We are neither enemies nor rivals, we are neighbors.”
This was a very important phrase from Mr. Kerry, as well as was his description of the efforts of the Obama administration to achieve the lifting of the blockade.
I believe that within a little more than twenty days –certainly soon enough– President Obama will have the opportunity to take an action that will confirm his efforts for the elimination of the blockade, and also give proof to the idea that Cuba and the United States are neither enemy nor rivals, but neighbors.
On September 5, 2014, President Barack Obama extended the Trading with the Enemy Act for Cuba for another year. This action was part of the continuation of the blockade against our country.
The Trading with the Enemy Act was approved by Congress on October 6, 1917, and gives the President the power to restrict trade with countries considered “hostile” to the United States. Section 5(b) gives the chief executive the possibility of applying economic sanctions in wartime, or in any other period of national emergency, and prohibits trading with the enemy or its allies during military conflict.
Under this law, the oldest of its kind, the Regulations for the Control of Cuban Assets were adopted in 1963, after the blockade against Cuba was declared in 1962 by President John F. Kennedy. Cuba is the only country against which this legislation is in force after it was suspended for North Korea in 2008. Other countries like China and Vietnam were also subject to the application of this legislation in the past.
Although since 1959 the White House has never declared a national emergency with respect to our country, successive US presidents have extended and applied this law to Cuba. In addition to this legislation, the legal framework of the blockade is broad and complex. It includes other laws and administrative regulations such as the Foreign Assistance Act (1961), the Export Administration Law (1979), the Torricelli Law (1992), the Helms-Burton Law (1996) and the Export Administration Regulations(1979).
The action of extending the Trading with the Enemy Act for Cuba is repeated every year. It has become a routine procedure for the White House which, after 50 years, has not given up this outdated and failed policy toward Cuba. Meanwhile, internal debate for a change of policy in the US grows. Once again the US government will be internationally isolated when the overwhelming majority of states vote in favor of Cuba’s resolution calling for the elimination of the economic, commercial and financial blockade, which is presented each year to the United Nations General Assembly since 1992.” (1)
We heard the statements of the Secretary of State, Mr. Kerry, declaring that Cuba is not an enemy or a rival, but a neighbor. It would not be consistent with such statement to see that President Obama –who a year ago extended the Trading with the Enemy Act for Cuba –extends it again for another year, until September 2016.
Now Obama, who has the power to exclude Cuba from the Act, can give a sign of seriousness in his approach and prove he is pursuing a consistent policy aimed at improving relations with Cuba.
Go ahead Mr. Obama, go ahead Mr. Kerry. Show that when you say something, you do not change your minds.
This is asked by your neighbors, not your enemies.
(1) Cubaminrex/ Dirección General de EE.UU.
CUBA.- EU.- NI ENEMIGOS NI RIVALES, VECINOS
Por : Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
14 de agosto 2015
En el discurso que pronunció en la ciudad de la Habana, en el día de hoy ,el Secretario de Estado del gobierno de Estados Unidos, John Kerry, estableció las acciones que la administración Obama tiene planificado ejecutar en relación con Cuba, incluyendo los esfuerzos que realiza y realizará con el Congreso, para tratar de lograr el levantamiento del bloqueo.
Algunas partes del discurso el señor Kerry las pronunció en español, seguramente para evitar que la traducción pudiera modificar lo que deseaba trasladar y que el mensaje llegara directamente a todos los presentes. Claramente en idioma español dijo: “No somos ni enemigos ni rivales, somos vecinos.”
Muy importante esta frase del señor Kerry y su descripción de los esfuerzos de la administración Obama por lograr el levantamiento del bloqueo. Considero que dentro de un poco más de veinte días, bastante cercano por cierto, el presidente Obama tiene oportunidad de realizar una acción, que ratificará sus esfuerzos por la eliminación del bloqueo y además, que Cuba y Estados Unidos no somos ni enemigo sin rivales, sino vecinos.
El 5 de septiembre del año 2014, el presidente Barack Obama prorrogó para Cuba, por un año más, la Ley de Comercio con el Enemigo ,lo que es una acción que forma parte de la continuidad del bloqueo contra nuestro país. “La Ley de Comercio con el Enemigo fue aprobada por el Congreso Federal el 6 de octubre de 1917 y le otorga al Presidente la facultad para restringir el comercio con países “hostiles” a Estados Unidos.
La sección 5 (b) delega en el máximo jefe del Ejecutivo la posibilidad de aplicar sanciones económicas en tiempo de guerra o en cualquier otro período de emergencia nacional, y prohíbe el comercio con el enemigo o sus aliados durante conflictos bélicos.
En virtud de esta ley, la más antigua de su tipo, se adoptaron las Regulaciones para el Control de Activos Cubanos en 1963, luego de que fuera declarado el bloqueo contra Cuba en 1962 por el presidente John F. Kennedy.
Cuba es el único país para el cual está vigente esta legislación luego de que en 2008, fuera suspendida para Corea del Norte. Otros países como China y Vietnam también fueron objeto de la aplicación de esta legislación en el pasado. Aún cuando la Casa Blanca nunca ha declarado una emergencia nacional con respecto a nuestro país desde 1959, sucesivos presidentes estadounidenses han prorrogado esta ley para Cuba.
Además de esta legislación, el entramado legal del bloqueo es amplio y complejo ya que abarca otras leyes y regulaciones administrativas como la Ley para la Asistencia Exterior (1961), la Ley para la Administración de las Exportaciones (1979), la Ley Torricelli (1992), la Ley Helms-Burton (1996) y las Regulaciones para la Administración de las Exportaciones (1979).
La acción de prorrogar la Ley de Comercio con el Enemigo para Cuba se repite cada año por lo que se ha convertido en un procedimiento rutinario de la Casa Blanca, que luego de más de 50 años no ha renunciado a esta obsoleta y fracasada política hacia Cuba.
Mientras tanto, se acrecienta el debate interno en EE.UU. a favor del cambio de la política y una vez más el gobierno estadounidense quedará aislado ante la abrumadora mayoría de los Estados que votarán a favor de la resolución de Cuba reclamando la eliminación del bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero, que es presentada cada año en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas desde 1992.” (1)
Después de haber escuchado los pronunciamientos del Secretario de Estado, señor Kerry , donde declara que Cuba no es un enemigo ni un rival, que es un vecino, no sería consecuente con ese pronunciamiento que el presidente Obama, al cumplirse un año de haber prorrogado para Cuba la Ley de Comercio con el Enemigo, la prorrogue nuevamente por otro año, hasta septiembre del 2016.
Ahora Obama, que tiene la facultad de no incluir a Cuba en dicha Ley, puede dar una muestra de seriedad en sus planteamientos y de que está llevando a cabo una política consecuente encaminada a mejorar las relaciones con Cuba. Adelante señor Obama, adelante señor Kerry. Muestren, que cuando dicen algo, no cambian de opinión. Se lo piden sus vecinos, no sus enemigos.
(1) Cubaminrex/ Dirección General de EE.UU.
You must be logged in to post a comment.