Talk:Cuba/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Off-topic

Political Commentary on Cuba

Ed Vallejo participates actively in making corrections to Wikipedia information which he considers subjective, non democratic, and above all that violate the principals and bill of rights of the Constitution of the United States of America (USA), specifically regarding Freedom of Speech and of the Press.

Recently it has been brought to the attention of Mr. Vallejo, that certain articles written by members of Wikipedia do not in fact reflect the true social, economic and political reality of the State of Cuba.

Cuba is a dictatorship run by one of the richest men in the world Fidel Castro.

Fidel Castro leadered a so called "democratic revolution" in 1958 only to take power in 1959 and begin a Terrorist control of the Island of Cuba, not only by trying to recreate the history of the people of the Island, but attempting to erase their past with idealistic promises which have never come to fruition.

Mr. Castro has applied terror techniques on his people and the greatest censorship known to the modern world.

Only recently Mr. Castro became ill and transfered power to his brother Raul, and there was a total secrecy on the Island and about 40,000 troops guarding the Island.

From what we understand from the members of Action4Justice on the Island, many members of the international press were asked to leave the Island immediately.

Updates on the Cuban economy

The UNDP in its 2004 Human Development Report revised Cuba's GDP upwards to US$5,259 PPP per capita (figure for 2002). The UNDP's method notes explain why this was done, when cash income had not changed that much. The basic reason is that the free services that Cubans enjoy (health, education, housing, some basic foods, universal social security, some other benefits) have to be factored in to make a sensible comparison with other countries. The 2005 UNDP report does not contain an income update for Cuba. In 2006 Cuba experienced 11% economic growth (8% according to their friends in the CIA), in large part due to increased trade with China and Venezuela. While much of this was being put into public infrastructure (trains, buses, housing, the electricity network) Cuban wages (which are very low) rose by 50-80%, in early 2006. In 2006 health services contributed almost as much to the Cuban economy as tourism.

American cars in Cuba

The 2002 documentary film "Yank Tanks" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312048/ (Carros Clasicos de Cuba) delves into the inventive methods Cubans use to keep their pre-revolution American cars on the road, as well as the politics they must deal with to keep their back-alley garages open. Best Documentary winner at the 2002 Los Angeles Latino International Film Festival.

Democracy in Cuba

Is it true that Cuba was a functioning Democracy during the terms of presidents of Tomás Estrada Palma to Alfredo Zayas y Alfonso. Is it true that the Cuban people had Freedom of Speech and of the press and were people able to enjoy the freedoms that ended with the term of president Alfredo Zayas y Alfonso? Even though Cuba had currupt Presidents during this time(Money and Cheating Problems),were the cuban people able to talk about the currupt presidents in Cuba without fear of getting arrested? They had two parties in congress:The Liberal Party and The Conservative Party,although they had violence at the polls during Elections(Were the Liberals and Conservatives able to vote on issues fairly in Congress?)This is covering the period 1901-1925.

Internet in Cuba

Some notes on access: There is a widespread misconception, particularly in the US, that Cubans do not have access to the internet. Several points should be made (i) internet access in Cuba is expensive and slow; satellite connections are used, as the US will not accept a cable link, (ii) many workplaces and all colleges have internet connections, but the service is still slow, (iii) the Cuban government has been further investing in college and workplace computers and internet, and does not give any real support for private home connections; (iv) hotels and shops have hosted public internet access for several years, but the high cost (from US$4.50 an hour upwards) has been prohibitive for many Cubans, (iv) at least from 2005 public shops have been providing non-html/email internet access at a lower cost (US$1.50 an hour) and many young Cubans are using this email, every day. _______

The matter of control of the internet arose in the latest OAA (Organization of American States) conference "At Washington's insistence, the final Declaration of Santo Domingo, which will be issued when the conference ends today, notes that the Internet, without political censorship, can develop democracies. To underscore the point, Zoellick reminded the General Assembly that Cuba ``has the highest controls on the Internet." [1] El Jigue 6-7-06

These 'democracy' themes, should and does work well at the 'high' political level(when was the last time philosophy was discussed in prime time?) but be very aware of your surroundings when you deciede to defend with logic instead of weapons, your 'high' moral and 'civic' standards...I tell you, I missed the memo that gave into these ideologies and pretty much put logic under the command of the military and politicians.

There is no telling what a controlled society could do..

I hope everything works out peacefully. But you said a great point: When was the last time philosophy was discussed in prime time? It goes right down to the point of why people can't have interests in politics. They think that what the prime time tells them, is all that there is to philosophy and politics. Teemu Ruskeepää 18:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

XM Radio in cuba. If you look at the XM radio "footprint" it seems that people in Cuba can recieve XM satellite radio. Is there any evidence that they listen? Are they allowed to watch satellite television in Cuba?--C5mjohn 08:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Satellite television is not officially allowed, although a discrete number of people do home-build or buy satellite dishes and decoders, and have some of their relatives in Miami pay the DirecTV subscription (porn channels included) or downright hijack the signal. Its against the law, however, and I think to remember some cleansing done about this.

By the way, you don't have to resort to XM radio (which I don't know about), there's only 90 miles between Havana and the Florida Keys, so on a clear day you can see CBC and ABC, some Miami TV channels (although the video signal is usually very bad quality) and many north-american FM and AM radio stations are available most of the time (and many people do hear them). The only american channel that is not being watched in Cuba is actually the only channel that was ment to be seen on Cuba (ironically enough), namely TeleMartí, which is blocked out by Castro's government by means of active interference.

As for internet freedom, there's no point in discussing Castro's control over the internet, the control is there. However, we're talking about a country where a telephone line in your home is considered shameless luxury, what infrastructure for internet access do you think there is? We tend to give these things for granted, I have a 10 Mbit fiber optics connection at home and that's more bandwidth than what's available for the entire Havana. Back in Cuba, I had a 28 Kbps connection in the office, which costed a lot of money (I think 130 dollars per month), and one day, talking to a technician for the internet company that provided the connection (the company's name was Columbus, if I recall correctly) I was told that the entire company had a 2 Mbit internet backbone connection, that was divided between all its customers (mostly foreign companies, embassies, and state offices). -- EmirCalabuch 15:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Pseudo democracies under tighter control

Senator Lugar refers to pseudo democracies [2], which now, given recent past history of turning into real democracies, are under far tighter control. However, in this article Cuba is specifically excluded from this category. El Jigue 6-9-06

If politicians were the ones writing these articles, we would be reading codes, instead of deciphering them...what is real democracy? an 'narchy' country with a government made up of five individuals?

Gueyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! Oh come on try and be more specific that is a standard line from text of Apologia Catechism 101. El Jigue 6-9-06

Hold up just a minute...who gave the lecture on what constitute a democracy versus what is supposed to do and what really it is...a philosopher? a political science major in the US?...or marginal writer and thinker?...and when did this happen???

The only real democracies were the Greek city-states - and they disenfranchised the majority of the population. Anything that is called a democracy fails to live up to the ideal in one way or another. There is a whole range, the question is where does one draw the line. -- Beardo 14:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Family

The following attempts to make an impression based on flaws or misunderstood premises..."Children are required to take part in social activities outside of the home, such as working in the fields during holidays to prevent them from becoming blind intellectuals."

Children are encouraged to take part in social activities outside of the home (and according to their ages), as expected from a Socialist society, even if it means working in State crop fields. 'Blind intellectuals' is a perceived characterization, which speculates on what happens to people when they grow older. It seems, the social responsibilities placed on the Youth, expects a 'help' now mentality and does not bear fear as to what they'll later do in life.

That 'children' work the fields is based on Camp Schools(Escuela del Campo) and it involves attending classes and helping in crop fields for 45 days out of the year. This begins in the 7th grade and could last till college graduation...

btw campo means country or field, not camp. Escuela de Campo = country school. -- Beardo 17:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

For such a short section, it seems more focus on accusing and insulting, rather than to give valid information...clearly a slant commentary...

Deserves a look or two...

The Cuban Government doesnt force children, they have a voluntary organisation which is very similar to the "Pioneer" movement in Russia. Danil

Update

It seems as if somebody deleted some things that we were working on...not a problem, this doesnt mean they are giving up, it means they will continue to do whatever they deem necessary...

Also the Military section is a carbon copy from the US state department(which means alot of things)...it is not cited as so or even sourced...most information from the '90s'...

Also..."Cuba also adopted a "war of the people" strategy that highlights the defensive nature of its capabilities."...it rather highlights the intention of defending its land, the weapons got technical cababilities to use as offensive or defensive. as an example, in Bay Of Pigs, the Cuban army was able to front a defense against the attackers, and then it drove them out or captured them...

We talked about the Sports and Cuisine sections, some ideas were given, hopefully the new changes could be reviewd here soon...

Deletions

Once again, someone seem to be running out of words or simply defending the 'status quo', the best way they know how, which is trying to quite others...due to patience, we have time...

I took the liberty in requesting help...how they look at it is simple, im sure this is not the first time, is a tug of war, but it does not involve logic or thinking. it merely passes for a weak 'conscious will attack'...

we wait to hear words from admin, before debating the necessary changes to these articles...

Deletions

Its almost a race against time...you see, all this 'data' and information these 'Cuban Experts' are working with are becoming quickly obsolete...it has to do with the 'economic' doings of the Cuban government. that includes, the oil that Cuba receives from Venezuela, the deals signed with China on nickel and transportation, the increase tourism, the US food purchase on the last few years that also includes Cattle (for those Cubans who cant do without their beef)...you are looking at perhaps the start of 'normal' life for most Cubans thanks to some of these deals, since the Soviet Union...it cannot happen according to some folks, how would you demonize Cuba then?...

Let it be known, some of these folks have pretty much 'idolized' Fidel Castro...is no surprise they can't say a sentence on Cuba without mentioning his name (take a look at the sections)...but this is not done because they are concern about Cuba (they would live or move there and work 'the fields') they are actually BENT on milking the money there is to make coming straight from the US government (take a look at Miami's Cuban American National Foundation)...there is money to be made in the United States off the Cuban 'circumstance', make no mistake about it...

We hope these troubles does not hamper on our ability to work on these articles...we hope for this situation to be resolved at its due time...

Deletions

I hope that this matter is looked at whenever it warrants attention...instead of deleting what others have said, why not do the same? if at the very least, you could add whatever you would like to add to the conversation, do so, but there are people more than willing and able to debate these issues. it would be of educated people to go on with these discussions, where ever they might lead us...

I propose a dialogue...is what 'dissedents' inside of Cuba demand, but are not capable of archiving, not because the time is not given to them, but because they have to deal with 'reason'. there is no better tool or weapon than logic for these arguments.

Allow us to take our cases to a judge on his own merrit. Logic will not make us both right, there have been promises made about that...lets sit down and let our intention be known. let us come to terms, not by 'spray painting', but by clearly defined colors of nature.

let us come to terms...

This will be moved in a while to an appropriate category, right after your 3 other messages, respectively. Please express your will freely at the appropriate category of your choosing. Please do not add new discussions outside the discussion tree. You can also suggest new categories at "additions and general quality". Teemu Ruskeepää 07:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Teemu do you think you are qualified to set up an agenda for discussion? If so please explain why. El Jigue 6-22-06

I can't remember if I told you before Jigue, but I've got a page for your suggestions here - User:Zleitzen/Cuba history sandbox you're welcome to put what ever points you see fit and I'll try and see what can be worked on for the article - I've lost all track of many of your suggestions made before the block of the page. --Zleitzen 07:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't have to be qualified because you may challenge every change. Let't talk about it, if you have contradictions. I'm moving this now. Teemu Ruskeepää 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll help 'el jigue' refresh his mind and at the same time 'prove' teemu is more than qualified to do as he pleases...

If what Fidel Castro wanted to accomplish, was fame and wealth, he didn't had to get help from the other side of the world. The United States were more than willing to help him win(as they have done throughout history supporting dictators) 'All' the United States was asking, was simply to 'wet its beak'(or 35 percent corporate tax, whichever was more greedy) What better way to 'jumpstart' his appetite for destruction, than with the help of the 'Destructor' himself? Sure, the Soviet Union was going to allow him to do as he please, under his own accord though...Maybe what he wanted was to kill and rape women, well, all he had to do was to wait for the United States's acceptance of his government(which he did and received) So then, why, after the United States government recognized his government, did he not simply follow 'free market' policy? who could think a country can get 'rich'(or individual for that matter) without the support of 'richness' incarnated...ahh, but Fidel Castro decides to refine Soviet oil in Cuba's refineries, and well, time has stand still...if Fidel Castro wanted to be larger than life, he needed the United States help...if Fidel Castro needed a 'blind eye' to his massacres as a dictator, he needed not look further than the United States(90 miles < 2000+ miles)...he was going to get quotas!(which he got from the Soviet)...

I tell you as inhabitant of Russia that Soviet Union didn't want to do these things. - It was just antiSoviet and anticommunistical hysteria and I want to support Cuban politics.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.61.145 (talk • contribs)  :) Dlohcierekim 13:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

All very interesting, but Talk pages are not strictly a forum to argue different points of view about controversial issues. They are a forum to discuss how different points of view should be included in the article so that the end result is neutral. Partisan debates do not align with the mission of Wikipedia, and get in the way of the job of writing an encyclopedia. See WP:TPG. For an alternative forum, see the m:Wikibate proposal or look elsewhere on the internet where there are plenty of forums to discuss opinions.--Zleitzen 09:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

No, you must have confused me with 'el jigue'...in no way, shape or form do i want my way in here. those were not opinions, they were actually facts. did i say i wanted to add those facts to cuba's entry? no, i did not..."I'll help 'el jigue' refresh his mind and at the same time 'prove' teemu is more than qualified to do as he pleases..." I undestand where you heart is at, and I do not have a problem with it. are there things in cuba that should be common knowledge(the purpose of encyclopedia)?...instead of looking at the 'neutrality'(compromising the truth) when it comes to giving an 'impression', we should be looking at intentions. Then if it should be 'neutral' somehow, no arguments, it should be neutral...we both know the importance of having a 'fair'(not neutral) Wikipedia...make recommendations about the entries itself, and do not again tell others what they should do when you still dont have everything nailed down.

You take a look at Venezuela's Wiki page, and you could not help yourself stand back in admiration. You say "nah, this 'neutrality' is not possible, you must check China's page"...so you go and take a look at China's page(including China democracy movement) and you once again, stand back and admire the excellent work...you take a look at Cuba's page, and you ask yourself, "is this the work 'spearheaded' by 'neutrality' that 10 'archives' has produced?...what where in those 'archives'?...so you take a look at those archives, and you see again the work produced; and oh my, in search of 'neutrality' everything was given a 'blank check'...it seems a different approach most be taken this time around...i would love to give the chance to others to speak on this matter. by merely giving one person the opportunity to revise the work will not do much...am i looking for 'like minded' presence in here? not at all(although it would be hard to ignore) what we should look for instead is a 'student approach' and ask questions about these matters...it would be hard to accept even a 'neutral'(which should be the last approach, not the first one) article if other people are not 'payed' attention to. since even when they were heard(archives) the current article does not make reflection of it...i invite a 're-continuation' of those attempts. this time with the implied purpose of not only being heard, but prudence being accepted...i believe the environment is ripe for such an accord...

Additions and general quality

Making a comprehensive discussion tree

I think that rather than burying old discussions into an inaccessible archive, the list should be organized. This way the discussion could expand without the need of archives. Make a categorial order which deepens in an orderly fashion. I've thought of a basic root of all the present headings in the article and a two permanent "control" categories: 1. Off-topic and 2. Additions and general quality. Depending on the article, the discussion categories should include all the present titles in the article and if necessairy, categories for "photos" and "sources", which are not displayed in the article's tree of contents .

Decided things

This is a new feature to my discussion tree structure, which makes conclusions valid and repetition unnecessairy. It improves my design, whose purpose is to eliminate the need for discussion archives. This will be added, I hope, at the end of every paragraph, where there will be a copy of the present section of the article. Decided things will be highlighted and the others are not. New articles will always be highlighted (decided) at first. If a user wishes to re-open discussion, the part will be unbolded, and futher arguments ensue at the end of the old discussion.

The discussion tree should be maintained simultaneously with editions of the discussion as well as the article. When editing the article, the "decided things" should be edited to correspond with the article. When editing the discussion, the "decided things" should be edited (highlight - unbold ) to show what is under dispute and what has been concluded. The editors may do this themselves, or then observers can do it, voluntarely.

The Wikipedia structure should be modified to include the present discussion headings in the discussion page, so that when a user starts a new discussion, he could choose a present heading, which together form a universal category. Also the "decided things" at the end of every main discussion heading, should be programmed to appear automatically every time someone adds a new heading to the article, along with the new heading, of course.

My idea of a discussion tree is new to Wikipedia, and I'm considering beginning it as an experiment first on small article with a few headings. However I have also begun doing it at Talk:Fidel_Castro and some other pages. Teemu Ruskeepää 16:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposed paragraphs

Ultramarine and BruceHallman have agreed that the below paragraphs are acceptable, in keeping with the policy to keep controversial material away from the main page and onto subarticles. I have added the disclaimer (before the Castro revolution) to the health section, which I hope means that less historically motivated users do not misunderstand the context as appeared to be the case before.

Sports mention under Culture

Sports and outdoor recreational activities is a right for every citizen under the Cuban Constitution [1]. Cuba's national past time and most popular sport has been Baseball throughout its history [2]. It also enjoys world wide successes in other sports like Volleyball, Track and Field, Martial Arts and closely behind Baseball in relevance, Boxing [3]. Because professionalism is banned for most sports in Cuba, Summer Olympic sports have gained an added importance for most Cuban expectators. Government spending, especially after the Revolution, has helped Cuba become the most decorated country in the hemisphere, aside from United States, at the Summer Olympics for half a century. [4]

(1)Article 9, Subtext B - http://www.cubanet.org/ref/dis/const_92_e.htm (2)http://www.cubanball.com/history.html (3)http://www.olympic.org/uk/athletes/results/search_r_uk.asp (4)http://www.olympic.org/uk/games/past/table_uk.asp?OLGT=1&OLGY=2004

Fabio Grobart forgotten

One notices that Fabio Grobart agent of the third international has been essentially erased from Cuban history, even if Castro did talk about his massive contributions to the foundation of the Cuban communist party (Third international, Stalinist). Amazing how Castro hogs credit even from this own teachers [3]. El Jigue 5-30-06

Thats sick how he does that...by the way men death tolls are quite high

Unprotecting

I'm unprotecting this now ... wow, I didn't realize it had been a full month. Guess we tend to lose track of things sometimes. Anyway, please keep all of Wikipedia's policies in mind as you continue to edit this article. I hate to admit it, but the only reason I even remembered the protection on this article was because it was mentioned in an article today in the New York Times. D'ohh!! --Cyde↔Weys 03:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Have made a couple of changes immediately as per talk page consensus, (see above). There are also a number of factual errors on the page that need to be resolved - I have a list somewhere but it'll have to wait.--Zleitzen 03:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Have altered the tag on the truck as for accuracy. Moved a few sections around, removed a bit of clutter. The content changes I have made are to reduce the health and education sections to the agreed passages after endless reworking for consensus. Users should be extremely careful if they wish to edit those sections - should examine the corresponding pages, and do their research beforehand. Have re-added the military section. Also, there is still a lot of roving junk on the page which needs to be trimmed. --Zleitzen 04:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Categorize "human rights" under "government and politics".

Now they are separate, which suggests something bad. Teemu Ruskeepää 15:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

A Small Correction

Someone with access please note the following:

Under the section Demographics, it is stated that the abortion rate is of XX.X per 1000 pregnancies. This is incorrect. The rate is reported as "per 1000 women aged 15-44" in the primary source. In terms of abortion per known pregnancy, the Cuban rate is 58.6% (yes, 58.6 per 100 pregnancies) the Caribbean average is 35%, Latin American is 27% and the European average is 48%. So, the numbers are off by a factor of 10.

Intro

Hispaniola contains two countries

As a critic clearly noted the island of Hispaniola has a greater population than Cuba; however, Hispaniola contains two countries Haiti and Dominican Republic. Just change island to country. El Jigue 5-30-06

Agree EJ. This shows the problem of letting administrators edit protected articles like that. -- Beardo 02:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I do not agree with EJ. Hispaniola is not a country at all, and thus can not be called so! It is right to mantain the word island because of its geographic nature, respecting the proper terminology. Gabriel

Ay vey! Gabriel Please read my first remark. Haiti and Santo Domingo may share an island but they are divided by a massive mountain range Pico Duarte is about 10,000 feet high and two different languages. Even the Tainos considered Haiti which means mountains distinct from Quiskeya which is a name the Dominicanos like to call their part of the Island. El Jigue 6-7-06

I think the point is that Cuba is the most populous country in the Caribbean - this is the point of note which should be mentioned in the introduction. The fact that it is the second most populous island is of (dare I say) secondary importance. -- Beardo 23:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably my fault - I originally and mistakenly wrote that it was the most populated island in the Caribbean. Forgot about Hispaniola - being two entities. tut tut.--Zleitzen 23:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

History

Independent Cuba

Wars of independence

It would seem that the role of Estrada Palma working in the US to support the fighting in Cuba is over emphasized. In the 1895-1898 the roles of Maximo Gomez, the Maceo brother Jose and Antonio, and that of Calixto Garcia are neglected. By the Summer of 95, the Spanish held only the coastal cities, including the Havana. El Jigue 6-18-06

Rename subtitle

Isn't Cuba independent now? The historical nature of the gaining of the independence should be emphasized and make the title void of present day implications. Teemu Ruskeepää 15:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

From Batista to Castro

”Batista's” presidential palace

Once the time and date of construction of the presidential palace was in a section labeled Cuban Infrastructure. However, that section has been removed. Now the Presidential Palace has become “Batista's palace.” This is probably the last time I will suggest such a correction, for it seems more appropriate to let the whole article become a source of ridicule, with such laughable entries e.g. "El Jigue 6-20-06"

Cuba Following Revolution

Minor Point: before or after

The following text appears to be in error:

The result was the Bay of Pigs Invasion of April 1961—the rising did not take place and the invasion force was routed. This prompted Castro to clearly declare Cuba a socialist republic, and himself a Marxist-Leninist, which he did in May 1961.

According to this timeline Cuba "officialy" declared itself socialist one day before the bay of Pigs began. Considering that the DGI had dozens of informants in the operation, the invasion was no suprise, but there is a chronological abnormality here. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 01:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe that your source is incorrect, as an academic source I have (Keen, Benjamin & Haynes, Keith 'A History of Latin America' Boston/New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004 on page 439) states:

"One month after the Bay of Pigs [i.e. May 1961], Castro proclaimed allegiance to socialism and the Soviet Union, pledging to defend Cuba in the event of another U.S. attack, stepped up it's flow of arms to the island".

There is no chronological abnormality here, for if you look at the policies of the Cuban regime prior to the time, they were not ultra-socialist: the nationalisation of American oil refineries in May 1960 had only occurred as a pragmatic move due to their refusal to process Soviet oil and over half of Cuba's farmland was still in private hands, with relations with the United States not even being broken off until January 1961. Hauser 03:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I have several other references that also have the same chronology and they are very specific about the date of April 16, 1961:

1. The Cuban Revolution: Origins, Course, and Legacy, Marifeli Perez-Stable, pg 3
2. Cuba-us, Helms-burton Doctrine: International Reactions, Joaquin Roy, pg 10
3. Collective Political Violence: An Introduction to the Theories and Cases of Violent Conflicts, Earl Conteh-Morgan, pg 151
4. A Timeline From the Guardian UK
5. US department of state

I would disagree with interpretation of the regime prior to this date, but thats not the question here. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 22:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The statement "the rising did not take place " needs to be qualified with two caveats, (a) there was a rising in the middle provinces especially which was far more intense than Castro's own rising and that lasted until about 1967 see War Against the Bandits, and (b) well over 200,000 were arrested "before the invasion" El Jigue 6-16-06

On the timing, I was told the speach occurred during the Bay of Pigs attack. The confusion may be clarified here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/castro/timeline/index.html, which indicates that a speach made during the Bay of Pigs referred to the revolution as socialist, but at the following May Day celebration Castro described the country as socialist. -- Beardo 14:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

That would make sense, perhaps considering there were still some non-Socialists participating in the Government at that stage. Cheers, Hauser 06:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Culture

Cuban cuisine

Cuisine

As it is now, it states..."Traditional Cuban food usually lacks seasoning" But then in a 'traditional' offering, Criollo, it states..."Criollo uses many different seasonings, with some of the most common being onion and garlic" I think we could also work on the half top part, it dwells more into the political system, rather than 'cuisine'...the joke we could do without, specially since in Cuisine of the United States, it makes no mention how its citizen receive their foods, specially those who have no say in what they eat at homeless shelters...the same goes for Cuisine of China...

This section is expected to be redone, to actually explain different food preperation etc, that would go more along the lines of 'cuisine'...

One should keep in mind that for the general Cuba population food is rationed and that consumption of beef is in essence forbidden. El Jigue 6-18-06

Cuban Cuisine

...which includes dishes containing beef which is legally prohibited in Cuba, or discussion of Castro’s popularity (it is illegal to insult Castro) than to attempt to continually correct items inserted by contributors who do either not know Cuba or who seem bent on whitewashing the Cuban circumstance. El Jigue 6-20-06

I’m sure you do know Cuba a whole lot, you live there im sure...

Three usages for cows in Cuba...food, milk and work...although because circumstances unrelated to Cuba's self-determination (and not unlike other countries) beef 'has' been scarce in practical terms. but to say that some kind of food is 'legally prohibitive' is none sense...also, with all the hardship on regular Cubans, the average calorie intake is above the 2000 recommended in the United States.

Something to let your worries free...most Cubans in the United states, are white, which means most Cubans in Cuba who have family in the United States could easily afford beef everyday...if they really want to eat beef, beef they shall have...now, stop being concern with the mostly black Cubans who perhaps dont get to eat as much beef as they would like, you dont even care about blacks in the United States...

now that we know whats illegal, should we dwell on whats not? does part of that circumstance helps you unfold the mystery? You talk of Cuba as being the poorest, most oppressed nation in the world (at least you try and make a case for it) while Cuba is not even the poorest nation in the hemisphere, let alone the world...A Cuba, untouched by the capitalist 'helpful' hands for half a century, and yet, it seems, quite right to say Cuba is better off than half of the world, whether or not it gets enough serving of beef to become obese like most people are 90 miles north from Cuba.

If you find no satisfaction in any of this, then you might be a tad over worked and its time for you to drink a glass of wine, you have earned it...

Who are you? At least sign in El Jigue 6-21-2006

The common Cuban can buy beef only twice a year, see Decreto 225 which is enforced by severe punishments [4]. El Jigue 6-21-06

El Jigue - I'm in the process of going through some of your famous "careful suggestions" to change incorrect details on the page. Are you now satisfied with the caption for the truck?--Zleitzen 14:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Z: Thank you for your kind efforts. However, it seems that once a correction is made, someone inserts some other piece of disinformation, e.g. Batista did not build the Presidential Palace, nor was it “his.” Then there is this nonsense about beef in Cuban cuisine. In Cuba essentially all beef is reserved for tourists [5] and the “nomenclatura” of the mayambe. El Jigue 6-21-06

Sorry to contradict you, but Batista had nothing to do with the construction of the Presidential Palace, which was started on 1913, finished in 1919, and was intended to be Occidente Region's Government House. It was Menocal's wife, Mrs. Mariana Seva, to say it was perfect as the house of the Presidency, and Menocal and his family moved in on January 20, 1920, shortly before the official inauguration cerimony, which took place on January 31 of that same year.

If you have a hard time believing it, you can take a look at some beautiful vintage prints circa 1930 here: [6] and, if you don't object to resorting to the palace's own archive, some 1917 pictures of the palace almost completed here: [7]. Curiously enough, the first print is reversed, the building shown to the left of the presidential palace is actually to the right, and should be the "La Corona" cigar factory. To the left, there's actually the neo-gothic "Iglesia del Angel Custodio" church (yes, that's the old "Loma del Angel" area, named after the church, as in "Cecilia Valdés o la Loma del Angel" by Cirilo Villaverde).

So, the Presidential Palace is just a fine example of early Republican architecture, as is the Capitol (which it predates). In fact, Batista didn't even lived there! He resided at his finca Kukine. He used the Palace just as his day office, and for the occasional party. His nickname was "El Mayoral de Kukine", and for a reason, in fact he left his finca sparingly, specially after the Palace was attacked. To put it bluntly: if your "history" says otherwise, please provide some form of hard reference, as a presidential decree signed by Mario García Menocal on 1918 says you're wrong.

Sorry, I was under the wrong impression that you were saying Batista did build the Presidential Palace. My mistake... -- EmirCalabuch 09:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I would like to think of this Cuba page in Wikipedia as a presentation to a nation and culture that I modestly represent and that I think is beautiful and interesting, despite its current leader and political orientation. I left Cuba four years ago, and don't regret it, but I know my roots. Presenting a country under a bad light just to drive a political issue home does little service to anyone. I just don't see where describing the recipe for frijoles becomes a political issue. Somewhere else, I could probably agree with your reasons for hating Castro, but it seems your idea of the "Cuisine" section for Cuba should read: "following decreto 225, chicharrones are illegal and are being confiscated for the Comandante's reserve..." Uninformative, and false, as well. -- EmirCalabuch 02:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that El Jigue and yourself were in agreement concerning the palace, Emir - it wasn't Batista's by any means. Thanks for the additional history though. Please feel free to contribute to the range of articles.--Zleitzen 02:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, I was mistaken by El Jigue's wording: "...piece of disinformation, e.g. Batista did not build the Presidential Palace...", I tought he intended that saying Batista did not build the Palace was disinforming. For that, I excuse myself.--EmirCalabuch 09:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Have changed the presidential palace tag, El Jigue. To be honest, the loss of cattle / beef issue isn't really relevant to this section. The article is talking about traditional cuisine, regardless of present availability. If you check Cuisine of Ethiopia it makes no mention of the fact that much of the country was and is in the grip of extreme famine, and thus many of the dishes are beyond the means of most Ethopians. Though on the Cuban Cuisine page some sort of mention could be in order and a link to Ubre Blanca, Cuban cattle being a subject close to my heart as you know, Jigue. Oh, and can you at least sign in? (I'm ribbing you)--Zleitzen 17:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The following is in spanish, well, the source provided by 'el jigue' was in spanish...

" La carne de res se vende solo para turistas o en las carnicerías dolarizadas. "

Like i said before, with the dollars that you send your family in Cuba, they can easily afford beef...i too look forward in moving from this...

Society

Education

Education

Historically, Cuba has had some of the highest rates of education and literacy in Latin America, both before and after the revolution. All education is free to Cuban citizens including university education. Private educational institutions are not permitted. School attendance is compulsory from ages 6 to 16 and all students, regardless of age or gender, wear school uniforms with the color denoting grade level. Primary education lasts for six years, secondary education is divided into basic and pre-university education. Higher education is provided by universities, higher institutes, higher pedagogical institutes, and higher polytechnic institutes. The Cuban Ministry of Higher Education also operate a scheme of Distance Education which provides regular afternoon and evening courses in rural areas for agricultural workers.

See main article Education in Cuba

These two paragraphs can replace the present sections meaning that the page can be unlocked to registered users. --Zleitzen 13:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I Agree. Teemu Ruskeepää 16:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The following needs to be looked at..."In addition there are a several thousand North African teen and pre-teen refugees undergoing military training"...the source provided, were of ex-cuban officials making statements like these..."“These children followed military training and courses on the making of explosives,”...such a 'thing' would also merrit an entrance in Cuba's Human rights, but its not even left to the imagination in those pages...is it true? i dont think the journalists even cared about the accuracy of those statements. should we care about the accuracy? yes, we should care...also, to show the true intentions, the article leaves out the thousand of foreign students in cuba...is that true?...do we have prove?...where are the sources?...is there a doubt about those students in Cuba?..."The member of the FEU Secretariat, in charge of Foreign Relations for that organization, said that it will boost the exchanges between those future professionals, who number now more than 22,000 in all the Cuban universities, Escambray newspaper reports."(http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/idioma/ingles/2006/marz14estudiantes-extranjeros.htm)...but, that comes from Cuba itself(its sad, information that comes FROM Cuba holds little or no credebility)..."Cuba currently hosts 3432 medical students from 23 nations studying in Havana."(http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/7456/14-c) ...concerning this matter, when did CNN or FOX jumped on this news?...an attack on Cuba's intention of helping others...

Within 'Education in Cuba' the following is stated..."Although education is free to Cuban citizens, foreign students wishing to study in Cuba pay tuition fees of between 4,000 and 7,000 (U.S.)...but then, in the same paragraph..."As part of Bush’s plan to "hasten Cuba’s transition" to a "post-Castro, democratic existence" US citizens will no longer be allowed to enjoy "fully hosted" stays in Cuba—in other words, where the Cuban government funds their living and tuition costs." and also..."Cuban president Fidel Castro offered to award full scholarships to 500 needy US students"...If, UNITED STATES students, are able, somehow, not to pay tuition, who can ask a student from Bolivia to pay 5000 dollars?...now, of course, that there are foreign students in Cuba who pays tuition cost will not be something to be alarmed of. but that 20,000 students pay tuition?...impossible to believe...even more when "Cuban president Fidel Castro offered to award full scholarships to 500 needy US students"...

This brings up another point...sources...it's no secret that we accept UN's numbers almost 'blindly', for it has been rendeered a 'neutral' source of information(although is in NY)...thats not a problem...but just because is UN doesn't mean we believe their numbers, we believe their numbers because they are in the area. When it comes to sources like the United States Department, albeit preciesly when it comes to Cuba, their numbers are more 'fiction than arts'. they are not in Cuba, and so they 'largely' based their numbers on 'estimation'(estimates are rampage inside of the United States itself)...we could talk about the usage of the United States government as 'sources', when it comes to Cuba.

That, brings us to..."US State Department Report on Cuban Education"

this is the parapragh in its entirely..."Cuba has been among the most literate countries in Latin America since well before the Castro revolution, when it ranked fourth. Since then, Cuba has increased its literacy rate from 76 to 96 percent and is tied today for second place with Chile and Costa Rica[9]. Argentina is the most literate country in Latin America. This improvement is impressive, but not unique, among Latin American countries. Panama, Paraguay, Colombia, Brazil, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and Haiti -- which all ranked just behind Cuba in this indicator during the 1950's – have equaled or bettered Cuba's improvement when measured in percentage terms[10]."(http://www.state.gov/p/wha/ci/14776.htm)

Take a look at what they mean when..."have equaled or bettered Cuba's improvement when measured in percentage terms"

Cuba's literacy rate(1957) was 76 percent("Cuba has been among the most literate countries in Latin America since well before the Castro revolution"...this means that at the time of the Revolution, perhaps, those same countries had percentages WELL below 76 percent; Cuba was ranked 4th back then.)...CUBA A LEADER, RANKED 4th, WITH 76 percent...

Cuba's literacy rate 'today' - 96 percent...thats a 20 percent increase...now, let say that any other country for matter, had a 65 percent literate rate at around 1960...if today that same country is(and should be) around 90 percent, thats a 25 percent increase...with those numbers, you get this "Panama, Paraguay, Colombia, Brazil, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and Haiti -- which all ranked just behind Cuba in this indicator during the 1950's – have equaled or bettered Cuba's improvement when measured in percentage terms"...my friends, Cuba at 76 percent, had only about 24 percent to go; Cuba is now at 96 percent. If those countries back then, who where ranked 'just' behind Cuba, they needed a higher percentage to "have equaled or bettered Cuba's improvement when measured in percentage terms"...what does this mean? this is not the best way to say Cuba was better off...specially when it states that Cuba has a 96 percent literacy rate today(as it should be) instead of 76 percent...now, it is implied, that a Communist nation had the same success as a 'democratic' nation...but, out of those countries, which of them were 'really' democratic?...

Now to show the 'real' difference of Communist Cuba, we have to compare Cuba's numbers before the Revolution with Chile and Costa Rica...Cuba 76, Chile 81 and Costa Rica 79...now both Chile and Costa Rica had higer a higher percentage in 1957...In 2000, they were all tied at 96 percent, which means Cuba's percentage rate 'increase' was higher than both Chile and Costa Rica's.

Then, we have "which all ranked just behind Cuba in this indicator during the 1950's" key word, 'JUST'...check how 'closely' behind Cuba these countries were...

Paraguay 68 Colombia 62 Panama 72 Ecuador 56 Brazil 49 Dominican Republic 43 El Salvador 42 Guatemala 30 Haiti 11

This, comes, from the United States' State Department...(sad, there's no doubt about the State Department's credebility)...seems to me, a much more deeper research should be concentrated in these articles...and in their sources...

Source about cost international students pay in Cuba...http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2004/abril/vier9/16beca.html

"CUBAN universities have welcomed more than 13,945 foreign students from 113 countries, via a cooperation program that is systematically growing.

"This program, which is free of cost to the students, began in 1961 and increased during the 1970s in response to requests by African and Middle Eastern countries, mainly for middle-level education, according to an April 10 article in Granma daily."

Also, that was a 2004 article, we could easily agree on 22,000 students given on a previous source...

Source about "Foreign students must hold a Bachelors or an equivalent degree, have a visa and follow compulsory Spanish classes"

High school students do not have bachelor degrees...

"US applicants must be 18 to 25 years old and have a high school diploma. They must also come from a racial or ethnic minority and have no criminal record. Most of the current students have not yet earned a college degree." http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0504-03.htm

Public health

Health

(remove WHO stats) The Cuban government operates a national health system and assumes full fiscal and administrative responsibility for the health care of its citizens. Historically, Cuba has long ranked high in numbers of medical personnel and has made significant contributions to World Health since the 19th Century. According to World Health Organization statistics, life expectancy and infant mortality rates in Cuba have been comparable to Western industrialized countries since such information was first gathered in 1957 (before the Castro revolution). C

See main article Public health in Cuba'

This data is not from WHO but from the Cuban goverment and WHO accepts it without change....El Jigue 7-10-06

Government and politics

Human rights

Cuba’s Point of View

Wikipedia usually states the perspective of the main issue first, and then states the perspective of the critiques. This article contains the U.S. governments, Miami Cubans, and others, usually conservatives’ perspective first, and throughout most of the article. I humbly suggest the following addition of the Cuban government’s perspective first to serve as the introduction of the article:

Cuba’s human rights values stem from the Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, adopted at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. According to Cuban statements on human rights recognizes the “universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated character of all human rights.” At the same time, Cuba understands that no single model of “political, economic, social and cultural” exists. Cuba holds as fact that “human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, should be treated in a global form, in a fair and equal way, in an equal footing and giving the same importance to all” of the different rights. Cuba also understands the need for “respect for national and regional particularities, as well as for the diverse historical, cultural and religious heritages.” Cuba advocates all three generations of Human Rights.

Moreover, “Cuba promotes and defends the principles of objectivity, impartiality and non selectivity in the treatment of issues related to human rights, and the refusal to use them with political dominance purposes.” On the other hand, “Cuba rejects the growing trend of countries in the North,” which set themselves “up as judges and censors of all that happens in countries in the South.” These countries in the North “hide the countless human rights violations that take place in their own territories plus others derived from the unjust international order they are imposing in their own benefit.”

Cuba has contributed “Draft Resolutions” to several human right documents. Cuba supports and “contributes with its positions and initiatives, to the progressive development of the international system of promotion and protection of all human rights for all.” Many developing countries support and imitate Cuban human rights policies. Cuba, and Cuban citizens, has had their human rights violated by the United States for over one hundred years. The first sixty years as neo-colony, followed by a half century of “low intensity war” by which thousands of Cubans have died.

The United States government, Miami Cuban emigrants, and others, usually conservatives decry the Cuban government and its socialist Constitution because it violates the human rights of its citizens. Since 1851, the United States government has condemned the Cuban political system under Spanish rule. When the United States neo-colonized Cuba in 1898, criticism shifted from the government to the people of Cuba, especially the color people. United States government criticism changed again in 1959, and has continued to the present. [Cantón Navarro, José. (1996). Historia de Cuba. La Habana, Cuba: SI-MAR S. A. ISBN: 959-7054-12-4].

The difficulty in understanding Cuba’s human rights policies objectively comes from a prolific 47-year negative propaganda campaign funded by the United States, the human rights values of the observing nation or individual, and that Cuba’s different political-economic system is foreign to the capitalist social structures. Unless one places, Cuban human rights within a historical, cultural, socio-psychological, political-economical context [Pollis, A. and Schwab, P. eds. (2000). Human Rights: New Perspectives, New Realities. Boulder, CO. Publication: Lynne Rienner. ISBN: 1-55587-979-9] one cannot possibly understand the present day Cuban three generations of human rights’ policies. Cuba’s distinctive social, political, economical, and cultural structures and procedures in many cases do not have a corresponding structures or functions in a capitalist society. This poses a problem explaining Cuba to someone unfamiliar with socialism. In other words, many human right goals carried out in Cuba could not occur in a capitalist nation, and vice-versa, making analogies difficult. Finally, nations that support universal human rights do recognize that each nation is different and value judgments enter into the decision of which human rights take precedent over others.[ Pollis, A. and Schwab, P. eds. (2000). Human Rights: New Perspectives, New Realities. Boulder, CO. Publication: Lynne Rienner. ISBN: 1-55587-979-9].

Daniel

Oneofshibumi 04:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I would support a rewrite of the Human Rights section to reflect the points you make about this. BruceHallman 14:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest what follows below to replace the current “human rights of Cuba” section for the following reasons:

• 1) It recognizes that Cuba’s human rights is a controversy issue.
• 2) It marks the year when United States started a propaganda campaign against Cuba’s human rights.
• 3) It provides Cuba’s point of view about human rights.
• 4) It mentions that Cuba believes in “three generations of Human Rights”
• 5) It describes the composition of those who most frequently criticize Cuba’s human rights and what issues they raise.

SUGGESTED HUMAN RIGHTS OF CUBA SECTION

Controversy surrounds Cuba’s human rights record since 1959. Cuba’s human rights values stem from the Declaration and Program of Action, adopted at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. statements on human rights records, recognizes and supports the “universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated character of all human rights.” At the same time, Cuba understands that no single model of “political, economic, social and cultural” exists. Cuba holds as fact that “human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, should be treated in a global form, in a fair and equal way, in an equal footing and giving the same importance to all” of the different rights. Cuba also understands the need for “respect for national and regional particularities, as well as for the diverse historical, cultural and religious heritages.” Cuba advocates all generations of Human Rights.

Moreover, “Cuba promotes and defends the principles of objectivity, impartiality and non selectivity in the treatment of issues related to human rights, and the refusal to use them with political dominance purposes.” On the other hand, “Cuba rejects the growing trend of countries in the North,” which set themselves “up as judges and censors of all that happens in countries in the South.” These countries in the North “hide the countless human rights violations that take place in their own territories plus others derived from the unjust international order they are imposing in their own benefit.”

For many years, several groups have accused Cuba of human rights violations. These groups include the United States, the anti-Castro Cuban-Americans in Miami, and others, usually conservatives criticize Cuba’s 1st generation rights or negative rights issues. These issues include free speech, representation in government, and the political-economic system.

QUESTIONS:

1) How long should a suggestion stay on the “Talk Page” before a suggestion can be transferred to the “Main Document”?

2) What does one do with the older material in the human rights section? Transfer it to the main human rights of Cuba article?

Daniel Oneofshibumi 07:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I too support this article to be included. FrankShoot 25 July 2006

I also support Cuba's point of view to be primary and pro-US criticism to be included too, but not as main point of view --- Nedko^{self bias resist} 18:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Military

Military

Where an earth is the military section? I found a Wikipedia version at [8] Teemu Ruskeepää UPDATE: I found it at Military_of_Cuba, but I think I should be linked here. Teemu Ruskeepää 15:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right Teemu, good spot. Here's my proposed paragraph for the military section--Zleitzen 16:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Under Fidel Castro, Cuba became a highly militarized society. From 1975 until the late 1980s, massive Soviet military assistance enabled Cuba to upgrade its military capabilities. Since the loss of Soviet subsidies Cuba has dramatically scaled down the numbers of military personnel, from 235,000 in 1994 to about 60,000 in 2003. The government now maintains a state security apparatus under the Ministry of Interior, spending roughly 1.8% of GDP on military expenditures.

See Also Military of Cuba

Ok, that's good. Teemu Ruskeepää 16:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmmmmmmmm I see Teemu has forgotten the Militia. El Jigue 5-30-06

Apparently my documented comments on the composition of the forces in the attack on the palace has been consigned to the archives, thus the "truck" jpg still says Directorio when in reality the forces were mainly Autentico. El Jigue 5-30-06

El, Jigue - I've made a note of a number of your points here: User:Zleitzen/Cuba history sandbox to be looked at when the page is unlocked. I'll change the truck jpg when that happens.--Zleitzen 23:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The first sentence of the Military History paragraph makes no sense: Cuba is not a society, per se, but rather a country, and very rarely is a society militarized—perhaps a geographical area, but not a society. To make the sentence less ambiguous and more neutral, I suggest: "Under Fidel Castro, Cuba experienced a rapid expansion of its military." "Militarized society" evokes images of soldiers marching through the streets and supressing civilians with an iron fist. I don't think it is the intent of the sentence to characterize Cuba as a police state. If it is, then that's not a neutral statement. -- WGee 03:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair question WGee. Though here is a "Militarized society" source [9]. Also it should be noted that the Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR) was in an internal military wing - plus the Military Units to Aid Production (UMAPS), that were designed to reeducate counter revolutionaries, gays, etc. About two-thirds of the members of the party’s original Central Committee were military officers or veterans of the guerrilla struggle - and the FAR is probably still the most consistently powerful institution ahead of the Communist Party and so on. In this sense Cuba 1959-89(ish) was no different to most other Latin American countries which could also be described as "Militarized societies".--Zleitzen 04:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, a Military History section should not exist. All of these points about the build-up of Cuba's military have to be included in the main history section—in their historical context. You don't find many history textbooks that discuss military history out of the context of political change or war. -- WGee 23:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a military section in the pages of the United Kingdom, the United States, France etc and almost all other nation pages.--Zleitzen 23:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a distinct difference between a military history section and a section that discusses the current state of the military. And since those articles are not featured, they cannot be used as archetypes, anyway. -- WGee 02:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead and write the military section the way you see fit, WGee - if you know more about Cuba's military structure. It matters little to me whether it's in or not - but something has to appear on the page to link it to the page Military of Cuba. Featured articles such as Australia and People's Republic of China carry such a section so we're not pushing the boat out here. As for the history, it's almost impossible to describe Cuba's military without referring to the Soviet past - it was the Soviets that provided Cuba's current military apparatus.--Zleitzen 03:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, all this time I thought you writing a Military history section, so you can disregard my last two comments. I'm still very concerned, however, with the fact that your proposed paragraph does not cite sources; nor does the main article. WGee 20:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Review my comments above where I provide a source.--Zleitzen 03:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Although we can agree Cuba's armed forces and military command are very much 'integrated' into 'society', the overall 'work' description when it comes to the people, is no different than the United States's Corp of Engineering...with this I would like to implied that if 'militarized society' is giving a negative description it should be done from 'top to bottom'...

Also, as where 'militias' are given the description of 'trouble makers, disturbers of peace, causing trouble', it is highly unlikely for Cuba's militias to fall under this mantra. Armed conflicts in Cuba has been non-existent after Cuba's Revolution.

who the heck are you and where do you get your information You completely forget the "War Against the Bandits, which lasted longer and involved more casualities than the War Against Batista. El Jigue 6-22-06

I was actually refering to Cuba's militias, as in context within Cuba's military(military as in Fidel Castro's led forces)...but no harm here, i'm sure you have enough information to write a book(like others) about the 'insurgency'...Cuba's current 'sidearms' of the military is what I was reffering about, thus, "Armed conflicts in Cuba has been non-existent after Cuba's Revolution."...now, if would like to 'argue', i'll simply say that if the 'insurgency' occured right after Cuba's Revolution, than that conflict is part of the Revolution itself..."The insurgents were mainly country folk, including former Batista forces"

now, i don't have a problem if you want to be the sole source about Cuba's 'circumstance'(as you've been doing) and that includes the numerous CIA sponsored assasinations attempts...which has happaned so frequently all around the world, you could easily produce five books...

you can stop asking for my name whenever you're ready...notice my non-intention of knowing yours...

Furthermore, the fuction of each country's military must also be described when attempting to reach an aggrement on 'militarized society'. for example, if the overall 'theme' of the military is to protect the population, then is very clear Cuba falls under that, where I would like to enclave this, is at the striking difference between Cuba's military and the military of those 'developed countries.

As a former Cuban soldier under compulsory service at sixteen years of age and a proud current civilian employee of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, I take grave exception regarding the comments above "he overall 'work' description when it comes to the people, is no different than the United State’s Corp of Engineering..." and the especially the comment regarding the supposedly striking difference between Cuba's military and the military of those developed countries: The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is made up of mostly civilian, voluntary, and well compensated employees; Totaling approximately 34,600 Civilian and 650 military members (http://www.usace.army.mil/who/)and it even includes several thousand non-us citizens (http://www.usace.army.mil/employment/noncitz.htm) in contrast the Cuban military where the service is not voluntary, anyone that does dares refuse, will not only be incarcerated, but will automatically lose their membership in the all important political groups including the University Students' Federation and the Federation of Secondary School Students which is prerequisite for acceptance to any educational institution of higher learning.

This is incorrect. You cannot be denied membership to the FEEM if you refuse to pay military service, if only for the simple reason that FEEM covers secondary school (which starts at 12 years old) as well as high-school (which starts at 16 years old), and you go to secondary- or high-school BEFORE you pay military service (which, by law, can be paid only between 16 and 28 years of age). And, until the late 80s, if you managed to get to the university after high-school, you didn't paid military service at all (later, compulsory service was introduced for University students as well, usually AFTER they finished their studies).

Also, membership to the FEEM and FEU (and OPJM, for that matter) are a consequence of being a student, not a prerrequisite. If you're in school, you just belong to those organizations, automatically. Finally, if you refuse to pay military service, you're forcefully roosted in a special boot camp for the duration of the military service, not sent to jail (you do go to military jail for brief periods if you have an ill conduct while in service, or repeatedly flee from your duties). Conscription is common in other developed countries (such as Germany, or Italy until 2004) and this doesn't make them bloodthirsty regimes, although most of these countries do accept the so-called "conscientious objection" (in which case, military service is replaced with community service, not simply avoided). You're right saying Cuba does not accept objection of conscience.

Now, it doesn't do much to state that 'brick layers' in the Corps are civilians..."Opportunities within the Continental US are rare for a Non Citizen, but the Corps of Engineers has operating offices in and outside the Continental US"...this is for what is worth...

For the great and 'noble' wars that the US are involved, service is not voluntary either(Vietnam and draft go together hand in hand) so in turn, is not surprising that in order for US students to receive Federal Aid, they must register with the Selective Service, after regestiring, if they are drafted and deciede not to serve, well incarceration occurs as well...

Now, if you would to tell me, that all the Cubans who are in the active duty military are there not under their will, that would be wrong, since the requierment is only for one year...

Furthermore, I would be amused if you or anyone could explain how the Cuban military protected the Cuban population when:

I'm not sure how you should take this...from Raul Castro's(General of the Cuban Army) speech on June 15 2006..."Assurance of victory is based on the blood of the fallen and on the rivers of sweat of Cubans who have worked to bring about our main goal – preventing war, the leader said during a ceremony commemorating the Western Army’s creation."

1. They were sent to butcher thousands in Angola and Ethiopia (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB67/cubatrans2.doc)or when

Only notably intervention by Cuba's troops in another country...hard to say the same for 'developed countries...it also seems to me, that other countries joined the fun...from wiki(After a 14 year independence guerrilla war, and the overthrow of fascist Portugal's government by a military coup, Angola's nationalist parties began to negotiate for independence in January 1975. Independence was to be declared in November 1975. Almost immediately, a civil war broke out between MPLA, UNITA and FNLA, exacerbated by foreign intervention. South African troops struck an alliance of convenience with UNITA and invaded Angola in August 1975 to ensure that there would be no interference (by a newly independent Angolan state) in Namibia, which was then under South African occupation (Hodges, 2001, 11). The Soviet Union began to aid the MPLA and gave much economical support, while Cuban troops came to the support of the MPLA in October 1975, enabling them to control the capital, Luanda, and hold off the South African forces. The MPLA declared itself to be the de facto government of the country when independence was formally declared in November, with Agostinho Neto as the first President.

In 1976, the FNLA was defeated by a combination of MPLA and Cuban troops, leaving the Marxist MPLA and UNITA (backed by the United States and South Africa) to fight for power.

2. One of their most highly decorated generals was caught red handed laundering money for south America’s drug lords along with interior minister (http://www.fiu.edu/~fcf/fidelsreserves102097.html) At least he was given a trial unlike others military officials (http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/cuban-rebels/morgan-executed.htm) or maybe when

Iran-Contra comes to mind...and that was not a one man show...the funny thing about the General's story is, that often is cited as being totally false, that Castro made up all those drug charges against him in order to kill him because he was gaining too much power in the Cuban military...

3. They are sent as I was to play babysitter for escaped U.S. cop killers (http://www.odmp.org/officer.php?oid=11530) or wait it must be when 4. They sent to evict their own people (http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y06/jun06/08e9.htm)

In neither of those stories the word military was mentioned at all, and if you need firepower to evict families in a Communist country or protect criminals from 'unarmed' civilians, something is wrong here...Those rare evictions in Cuba, was due for the illegal sale of houses, houses that most people don't pay for, but think they have the right to sell...Also, emminent domain comes to mind...

I could go on for some time, but I think it would be pointless since your opinions are obviously based on political ideology and leanings and mine have been shaped by my past and recent experiences. R.Ruiz 06/15/2006.

I very much doubt that you could go on, the only two action written in stone on the Cuban side when it comes to military issues abroad, is the Angola 'Civil War' and Che's fighting in Bolivia(and the latter is well, not all that revelant, since Bolivians themselves were doing the fighting)...

Now of course, in no way did I felt under attack, so I didn't feet the urge to defend my personal views, basicly I just wanted to reinfore what I stated at the beginning...what you get here is, that by you defending the actions on the US side, you will also defend the actions of the Cuban side as well...

Reference to the 50'ties' private media

I'd like to remove the sentence at the end about what the revolution caused for the private media. It isn't about how the economy is at present. Teemu Ruskeepää 14:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Done Teemu Ruskeepää 16:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

And the whitewash of the Cuban government continues steadily El Jigue 6-23-2006

Jigue, I've left a fairly important message for you but it's now further up the page - about your corrections and suggestions. If you can find it take a look.--Zleitzen 16:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Zleitzen, why don't you say it here, if it's relevant about the heading. Also, why don't you say what part of the article your comment was about? The comment can be found directly where the heading exists. I just moved the headings in the same order as in the article. Why is it so hard to consider this? Teemu Ruskeepää 07:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Because I'm not wasting my time repeating myself - I wrote a message clearly to El Jigue and it was relocated by you. --Zleitzen 08:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that I'm wasting your time by proposing to organize the discussion? That's an insult towards other people's will. You wrote to El Jigue without considering the existing tree, and I relocated the entire conversation to off-topic, additions and general quality or to one of the headings of the article. There your answer to El Jigue will still be right after El Jigue's comment. You seem to be a neurotic, passive-aggressive resistant of other people opinions, by giving deliberately the impression to others, that I'm changing the places of answers in relation to questions, and that my organizing of the discussion isn't about what I have said it is. Well, are you suggesting that, Zleitzen? Teemu Ruskeepää 15:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm suggesting that you refrain from moving other users comments Teemu, as it is making it more difficult to communicate and will be impossible to use in time without archiving. This appears to be the consensus on the other page you are attempting this experiment. Please don't refer to other users as neurotic or passive aggressive.--Zleitzen 16:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Official

Suggested addition to Official Links: Link to Official Site of Cuban Embassy in Ottawa, Canada: http://embacu.cubaminrex.cu/canadaingl/

Since the Cuban Embassy in Ottawa, long considered by many as a major Castro propaganda outlet, is now taking second place to the Venezuelan counterpart, principally because Hugo Chavez has more money. Thus, since this Wikipedia "page" on Cuba is increasingly pro-Castro I suggest that the URL of this Venezuelan Embassy be listed here too xe xe El Jigue 6-27-06

Footnotes and referencing

Due to the problematic referencing issue, I have removed references that were no longer in the article - moved referencing from the hybrid style in the top of the editing page to within the appropriate body of the main article - with the exeption of the "socialist republic" citation which I couldn't move for some reason because it messed up the text of the template. In future, I recommend that users reference in the traditional footnote style.--Zleitzen 11:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Calling El Jigue

There is a real lack of information on earlier Cuban parties in wikipedia - and no page at all for the Partido Auténtico. Would you care to make an opening on the red link provided - just add anything you know at this stage. I would ask on your own page but you seem to have a roving IP address at the moment.--Zleitzen 11:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I've always felt that he should get an account and become a regular contributor. He certainly knows a lot on the subject. --TJive 11:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Have made an introductory paragraph.--Zleitzen 17:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Latest edits

Hey - Co-ordinate is co-ordinate. Unless I've missed something all these years. Is this a regional difference? If it is, I pull The Face of Fu Manchu - (old Jamaican term for a face of disapproval). I think it's probably correct to detail the CDRs though "ensure" would be more accurate than "enforce", I'm not sure how they enforce the status quo other than being general nosy bastards and social irritants.

The edit "which are often statistically implausible" about the elections I'm not sure about. Given that the figures for the many candidates have approximately an 15% range, and the unwieldy process effectively means a voter (who is compelled to vote by law in the Australian manner) can opt to just approve all candidates in a swift tick of one box, I don't believe these are so implausible. General studies put the figures down to apathy on the part of the voter - ie. tick the box, get out quick, get back to working on the car and leave me alone. This sense of apathy and fear of change amongst Cubans, most of whom have only know one system of government cannot be underestimated. It's comparable to the links between certain societies and monarchies. Anyway, this is all speculation - including the comment about the election results being implausible. Responses please.--Zleitzen 12:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The candidates - who aren't really relevant in the end - aren't the only concern. Every (ostensibly) important government referendum gets absurdly high approval tallies reported. It is foolish to believe this is instead all due to apathy, itself brought on by lack of faith in the process. Noting this is rather relevant so as not to mislead readers. --TJive 12:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's the citation "The government claims that the elections represent a show of popular support, but its critics have attributed the result instead to fear or apathy on the part of those who do not support the government. They suspect that the result may reflect electoral engineering (in constituencies known to have a high proportion of voters who are more inclined to express dissatisfaction by registering blank or spoiled votes, the candidates offered tend to be highly respected local figures not associated closely with the government.[10]. You're referring to the 2002 referendum on the constitution which had absurdly high figures, but you're still in the realm of original research.--Zleitzen 12:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Not really, just noting what has already been observed. If you have a better alternative wording that illustrates the same points, I'm all for seeing it. --TJive 13:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I also didn't consider that there is a regional difference in spelling, though I have no idea on that count, or for that word. I just see a tendency on Wikipedia for the removal of unnecessary hyphens, which I think is the case here. --TJive 13:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Spelling should be US on this page so you're right to pick me up on anything I get wrong such as the coordinated etc. What I've done is changed it to "invariably high". The reasons for this need to be elaborated on the politics of Cuba and elections in Cuba page. Because I don't believe it's an open and shut case - there are too many variables. As usual in life, and certainly with Cuba - there is more to it than meets the eye. --Zleitzen 13:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with the wording. --TJive 15:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

How is the clause "...are not verified by non-partisan, independent, or non-state organs and observers." relevant and neutral? For comparison, prior to 2004, USA elections were also not verified by non-partisan, independent, or non-state organs and observers. And, the 2004 OSCE observation identified a failure to credential the non-partisan status of domestic observers. In Cuba, the secret ballots are opened and counted in public view. In light of this, the 'verified by...observers' clause appears to be POV pushing.BruceHallman 15:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Likewise it is not the practice of the UK Government to invite international observers at UK elections, and voter fraud is common [11]. However, the full statement about Cuba is factual and not neccessarily POV pushing. Both "Non-partisan" and "independent" is essentially negated by the political climate of Cuba, the count is supervised by state officials to my knowledge. Comparing the Cuban and US political cultures is a bit like comparing a dog with one leg to a dog with two, it makes little difference because the dog still can't walk in a straight line. We could really do with a Swiss editor to come along and denounce the lot of us. The passage may read more accurately if it stated "are invariably high, though international observers are not invited to verify the process" which is unquestionably true and notable. --Zleitzen 16:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Zleitzen wrote: "...not neccessarily POV pushing...". The key word, neccessarily. Of course, not neccessarily. Yet, in context of the history of POV fighting about elections in Cuba, the clause has the real and clear appearance of POV pushing. The POV could be balanced by omitting the clause, or by adding a "...the secret ballots are opened and counted in public view" balance clause for NPOV. BruceHallman 17:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Paper almost ready

Z thank you your removal of reference to internal immigration and palestinos documentation of this makes a wonderful reference to demonstrate bias for my paper. And I thought I had to rely on Bruce to make goofs like that. Xe xe El Jigue 7-19-06

For what it is worth, I would like to point out that I do not describe El Jigue's actions with words like 'goofs'. And, I would also like to point out that personal attacks are harmful to the editing process. BruceHallman 15:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

El Jigue, what is "internal immigration" and what on earth was that sentence in the article trying to say? Detail and source what you mean about "palestinos" and it can go back in - it was removed because it plainly didn't make sense. No other reason. I await your paper with keen expectation. --Zleitzen 10:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

we are more than willing to put focus back into this...a question was asked as to what are the proper steps in actually editing parts that were agreed upon in this talk page...i think we should let 'El Jigue' delete articles and complaint how he was supposed to be a cuban senator...

more than willing to put some focus back into this page...

The senator was Rolando Masferrer, a former communist, and executioner for the loyalists during the Spain Civil war. He was a Batistiano, as well as belonging to the same cell as Arturo Guillermo Montenegro, who became William Wieland, of the State Department. If the Tigres de Masferrer had caught me in 1958 they would have killed me. They say Masferrer in the Spanish Civil War wandered the streets of Barcelona going about his purges, the last thing his victims heard (says the legend) was the sound step drag,step drag, louder and louder until he reached them.. As for me all I really wanted was to live the life of an agricultural scientists in the country. No I do not want to remove articles, I dislike censorship but now I am quite content to watch you guys make a mess of all of this. Go on the web and look up palestinos e.g. [12] and think why the Cuban goverment requires internal passports. BTW Hurry go to [13] and see what seems to be a Bayamo storm rising south west of Baracoa, heading towards the plains of the Cauto and then out to see. Mirando y dejando El Jigue xe xe 7-24-06

El Jigue, your source for the palestinos is... our page about three months ago, so no go there. By the way, I enjoyed the Castro grilling on the staircase in Argentina the other day. I thought he was going to drop there and then. --Zleitzen 01:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Have found a source for Palestinos. It's back in. I've made a few removals from Adam Carr's history rewrite that may suit you Jigue - but please address these issues clearly on the talk page. By the way, what's the story with the removal of Graham Greene?--Zleitzen 02:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Z: Grahame Greene was a supporter of Castro and critic of Batista's abuses. However, when Batista fell and Castro came to power Greene never critized Castro. This is odd behavior for an academic, thus one could guess, but of course not prove on that alone, that Green continued to work for British intelligence reporting on Cuba. There is some information on that in Sherry, Norman 2004 The Life of Graham Greene. Vol III 1955-1991. Viking, New York ISBN 06700311429 El Jigue 7-24-06

Please keep your comments on the article in question, not other editors (that goes for you too El Jigue). Personal attacks are not welcome, may be removed and could lead to a block. --Zleitzen 03:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

attack?...do make us laugh...hey listen, what did you thought about the US state department's 'wording' on Cuba and Latin American's literacy rate?...and how bout that there are no sources cited on Cuba's censorship on 'certain' books like Animal Farm?...how bout the Cuisine part that has nothing to do how a Communist country distributes its food?(defend this, please, really)...how bout Fidel Castro's belief in sports...he is not superman and he cant make 11 million cubans like sports...kids like to eat, and when they grow up they still like to eat; is Castro responsible for that? how about the numbers of executed cubans by the government? the source is based in the United States and it offers no documentation...do we really have to ask for documentation on Argentina and Brazil's missing people under US approve dictarships?..."Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy, a group of academics whose board of directors is almost entirely comprised of Cuban exiles"

The US's page contains sources given by the State Department...is it possible we could use sources and numbers from the Cuban Government?...

Hey listen, you want to delete that 'attack'...i'll deleted myself if we talk a bit about Democracy and Elections...im sure you believe in logic, or you will afterwards...

Why use sources from the United States government?...explain that...specially when it comes to Cuba you see how they LIE about the issues....

When can we start re-doing most of these articles...listen, i have all this week open...can we decide an hour where we could meet here and discuss almost real time all of these issues? it seems once this information is posted, those in charge of agreeing on changes disappear...

Have i attacked you yet?....lucky...

Whos position are you gonna defend when it comes to defending the current state of this page?

What is the life expectancy of the current state of this article?...you do not agree this whole article could be re-written in a few days? with sources cited?...what am i advocating?...respect for 11 million Cubans...think all of this is not possible?...my friend, lets be honest for a change...what is the life expectancy of this current article as it is?

Z Is this unidentified source trying to insult me, using data from some very faulty dossier, or is he trying to insult somebody else, it is not clear, for that post is not very coherent. What ever, this has little importance, and I am old and can take insults with very little effect. Yes that thing about Castro in Argentina seems to show a person not in full command of their faculties or their body for that matter. Perhaps the old fox is playing yet another game such as trying to flush out potential rivals/successors in Cuba, but it does not seem so. Well we all will get there sometime if we are lucky. By the way when I make a goof Bruce has my permission to call it a Brain fart xe xe El Jigue 7-24-06

The rationale is, that by keeping enough focus(more than enough rather) on Fidel Castro, it doesnt matter who else you try to bring down along with him(even those 11 million Cubans who should be the main focus of this page)...is what old timers have been doing ever since they left Cuba or were put in a position to stand against Communism...trying to insult him?...i think if the main objective of this is to insult, we would not be this focus...we will rather wait to see responses on the points mentioned above...

Regarding your points - and again this applies to El Jigue who is also equally disgruntled with this article for apparently different reasons - All discussion hinges on civility - which is non-negotiable (see guidelines). Good faith would need to be on display for the discussion of any proposed changes to take place. I recommend that both users remove their above personal comments about other editors before any discourse can take place.--Zleitzen 13:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

We are most interested in finding a reason why to use State Department's sources when it was shown they are liers when it comes to Cuba...we could start off on that if possible...

Amnesty and UN should be the only valid sources used when it comes to missing cubans and 'shaky' information reporting foul behavior on the part of the Cuban Government...we could defend this arguemnt at request...

Also, we also understand the support for the addition of the paragraphs written on Cuba's Human Rights Section...was properly sourced and showed good intentions in our opinion...

On the use of Amnesty and UN sources. That has been my consistent line from the start. It's the best way to present human rights in Latin America and particuarily Cuba. US sources and Cuban rebuttals are simply too prone to attacks from editors. If all users could accept the basis of amnesty reports at the exclusion of more partisan sources, then we'd be making progress. By the way, navigate round the different Cuba related pages. There is a lot of information that you may find on the many other pages concerning your points - and on those pages you'll find me there also. Also, when you finish editing each comment - please hit the squiggle button three squares from the right to enter your signature(IP address). So we know who is saying what.--Zleitzen 16:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

How to go about this then?...who has been defending the usage of US sources?...can they come here and explain their point?...because if not, then we should be able to do something about it rather sooner than later...you say 'partisan sources', well we might not be aware of those, it would be hard for me to accept their findings without reading them...we wont hesistate for a second accepting the findings of Amnesty or UN sources concerning Cuba...

We understand that as it is now, some information in this page are very valid...but in the same page, perhaps in the same paragraph, comes a 'throw in' that displaces the original messege...i might not be clear in this, but its pretty obvious what i want to say...

What can we do about US sources?

We do not find that button to press...SharpShoot July 25 2006

What I recommend you do is go to the help page and find out how to register, and learn a bit about wikipedia and the way the functions work. It'll make life easier for you here.--Zleitzen 17:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Specifically, this help page article might explain things: Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages -- BruceHallman 17:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

We appreciate this help, really...we believe we come to Wikipedia, enter a term and information 'pops' up...rather diffucult imagining something easier...now, we dont believe in names at the bottom of documents, but for harmony's sage, we have found an adecuate signature and such...as for contributing elsewhere in wikipedia?...i've yet to find another subject where talk pages would be any of my concern...please, how do we go about the usage of US sources in Cuba's page...thank you...SharpShoot July 25 2006

If I understand your question, the issue of 'acceptable' sources in an encyclopedia is a matter of WP:Policy, especially Wikipedia:Verifiability. Read those two pages and you will see. Most of the volunteer editors of this encyclopedia have agreed to follow these policies, of course, the devil is in the details! BruceHallman 21:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

If taken within that context(neutral point of view) than we would bring even more points to this conversation...not only that..."reliable sources" reenders most of the source cited in the Cuba page more than unusable(north african kids being trained in explosives)...who is the editor that approves the usage of the State Department as a neutral source when talking about Cuba?...not only that, we are still missing the point about sources of clear bent the information(take a second look at how South America's literacy rate is presented in the State Department web page)...how is it possible we still do not understand how they lied?

The main problem here is not understanding how Wikipedia works...we are not paying attention to the comments presented in this talk page...where is the Wikipedia Policy on editors reading the information presented to them in this talk page? SharpShoot 25 July 2006

To answer your question "who is the editor that approves the usage of the State Department as a neutral source". That could be anyone including you. You have full rights to question any part of the article, change it yourself and justify your changes here on the talk page. However, you'd need to register first which takes about 4 seconds.--Zleitzen 23:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

When the time comes to actually edit the page, we are sure to receive more than ample help...but editing without finding and accepting valid reasons wont do alot and editors will find it necessary to 'lock' the page once again, which in turn will delay the process...what we are interested in, is discussing the changes before implementing them...in doing so, we could avoid being denied access to the page...Now, we understand the person who originally apported to these sections might not be here, but El Jigue is, and im sure he will do for now...can we get somebody to acknowledge at the very least how the State Department bent the information?...that would surely motivate us a whole lot...

Also, what are the chances that without a discussion, 'users' wont be able to sabotage this process? SharpShoot July 25 2006

See Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages. The time to actually edit a page is always now. --Zleitzen 00:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The process of editing this particular page is rather sensitive(unlike perhaps other pages)...it involves having 'proof' and acceptance to the changes before hand...that way when the page gets 'locked'(because it will get locked due to vandalism) the information that 'should' remain visible is that which found acceptance in this talk page...this is not new...but fair enough, we wont get an acknowledgment at this time(we were really looking forward getting at least Zleitzen on record) in this case we'll retreat knowing we should encounter little or no opposition in the coming days...SharpShoot 25 July 2006

It's a constantly evolving work. There is plenty of material in the article that has been neither agreed nor approved by anyone. It's just there - some of it dates back a long time. Feel free to do what you want with it at any time. Change it if you don't like it and give a reason why. If the edit and reason is challenged then you can justify your changes here. If other editors disagree with your edit then a consensus can be reached based on discussion. Edit first, discuss later. There's nothing about having acceptance to the changes beforehand on the statute. Who really knows how the changes are going to look until we see them?--Zleitzen 04:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Biased statement

"... [The fall of the USSR provided] a crisis in confidence for those who believed that the Soviet Union was successfully “building socialism” and providing a model that other countries should follow. In Cuba, however, these events were not sufficient to persuade Cuban Communists that they should voluntarily give up power." -- taken from main article

Seems like a ridiculous statement; how can a dictator be expected to give up power?

Re-read that statement: events were not sufficient to persuade Cuban Communists that they should voluntarily give up power. See the resignation of János Kádár in Hungary and the subsequent breakdown of power of the Hungarian Communist Party as a starting point. Then take a look at what happened on November 28 1989, "the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia announces they will give up their monopoly on political power". And continue your studies of the era. You may find that the above statement is not so ridiculous.--Zleitzen 14:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Finally Andres Oppenheimer got off his duff [14] This column is worth reading, far more than Castro's endless distortions of health conditions in Cuba. El Jigue 7-2-06

Already read it El Jigue. For my Hilda Molina research! You've got to get up early to catch me out.--Zleitzen 16:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Z: It seems that Castro's lack of flexibility in the Hilda Molina matter is causing him to dramatically lose popularity in Argentina [15] El Jigue 7-28-06

I didn't think he was very popular in the Argentine to begin with, El Jigue. Mind you, I don't know of any foreigner that is popular down there. Though Castro was a big hit with Argentinian footballing supernova Diego Maradona [16]. In England, a choice between the two is a grim one and the bitterness still rankles[17]! I'm sure you'll attest that Fidel is in good company.--Zleitzen 02:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Raul Assumes Presidency - Changes need?

On July 31, Raul Castro assumed the position of President of Cuba and of the Communist Party of Cuba due to Fidel Castro's failing health after his trip from Argentina. I think proper note of this should be taken as events occur, as is being done on the Lebanon page.

I think it would be appropriate to change Fidel's status as head of state with a mention to it being temporary and the situation surrounding the event. Some may say its too early to change it, or that the temporary nature should make it unneccesary, I argue that the temporary nature of this situation does not change the fact that it is happening, just as the temporary nature of king Gyanendra as an absolute monarch or the mention of the various military juntas and transitional governments around the world.

Well, I think that the temporary assumption of presidential powers is not the same than assuming the position of president itself. It is misleading to state that Raul Castro is the current head of state of Cuba. Gugganij 13:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Raul is not President of Cuba

Just to reiterate something. Raul is not yet President of Cuba anymore than George H. Bush was president of the US after Reagan was shot, and John Prescott was British Prime Minister after Tony Blair underwent heart treatment. Raul has assumed the duties of President of the council of State during Fidel's incapacitation. --Zleitzen 13:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, that's a standard procedure in many political systems. Temporarily assuming the powers of the president doesn't equal assuming the office of the president. Gugganij 15:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Similar problems are occurring on the Raul Castro and Fidel Castro pages. These also need to be watched.--Zleitzen 16:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand your positions, and I agree. However I do think mention of the current situation should atleast be given some notable mention - Red Heathen

It is, check the page again.--Zleitzen 06:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

CNN are calling him Intermi President (Presidente interino). TV Genius 23:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

CNN can call him what they like, the Cuban constitution is clear enough!:)--Zleitzen 23:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

If Fidel Castro goes into acoma for months or weeks like Ariel Sharon then I think it should changed that it says that Fidel Castro is the head of state but Raul Castro is just temporay. If Fidel gets pronuced premently incappsited then I think Fidel Castro should be the former head of state.--Scott3 01:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

These are Cuban legal matters. We don't call the shots.--Zleitzen 01:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Asterisk

Perhaps an Asterisk or something next to the president portion in the infobox would be an acceptible middle ground, what do you think? Attic Owl 02:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There needs to be a note in the infobox saying that although Fidel Castro is still the President of Cuba, he is currently incapacitated and Raul Castro is interim president for the time being.--Folksong 10:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Site protected

Is there any reason why the article was protected. There was not any edit war going on. 85.124.177.162 15:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

There was a vast, lengthy, well publicised edit war due to the controversial nature of the subject matter (see top of page for one of many articles written about this page). The upshot of the poor publicity is that this page is semi- protected to new users.--Zleitzen 15:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Motto

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believed "Patria o Muerte" to be a slogan of the revolution - but "Patria y Libertad" to be the actual motto of Cuba dating back to independence and further back to Marti and the struggle. See this coin here [18]. Whatsmore it is mentioned in the preamble of the present constitution.--Zleitzen 11:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You're partly right. "Patria y libertad" was the official motto until 1960, and as you can see from the following source, it was already used by Cuba's first president, Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, as early as 1868 [19]. It is said that the complete motto was "Dios, patria y libertad", and the "Dios" part was dropped later, although as you see in the Cespedes decree linked, "Dios" does not appear, so, unless the document was altered, it could be assumed that the "Dios" part was unofficial, or that it was added after the signing of this specific document ("Dios, Patria, Libertad" is the official motto of Santo Domingo, maybe there could be some confusion here). An explanation is also given here: [20]. "Patria o muerte, venceremos" was the concluding phrase of one of Castro's speeches (given on March 5, 1960, after the explosion of the ship La Coubre), which he then reused as the ending remark of all his speeches. Later it became the motto of the revolution and the country [21] gives a small explanation of the origin of this motto. Castro signs officially under the motto "Patria o Muerte", or maybe even "Socialismo o Muerte".

The Spanish Wikipedia page states the official motto is instead "Patria o Muerte". Actually, the government's website does not indicate an official motto, under National Symbols it lists just the flag, coat of arms and anthem. So, I think it would be safe to say the official motto is the one used in the official documents signed by Castro.

Actually, the Spanish wikipedia says the motto is "Patria o Muerte ó Socialismo o Muerte"--Otsego 18:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The fact that Castro ends his speeches with that sentence doesn't make it an official motto. For example, the official motto of France is Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, but president Jacques Chirac likes to end his speeches with Long live the Republic, and long live France (I probably could have found a better example). Given that Cuba doesn't have a motto on its coat of arms, on its coins nor in its constitution, and that the official governement website doesn't list one, I think that Cuba simply doesn't have a motto - many countries don't. The fact that you haven't reached consensus reinforces that belief. Pruneau^talk 10:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

President Of Cuba

In Tish momet the president of Cuba is Mr. Raul Castro Ruz no Fidel Castro because Fidel have a verrty severe Problem.

The latest Cuban Government announcements of a committee to support "a recovering CAstro" may or may not indicate that the Cuban Communist Party has ousted Raul. Creeping shadows, of cloaked figures with daggers, or a dance of careful joy of communist bureaucrats I really do not know....xe xe El Jigue 6-12-06

Statements about US immigration policy inconsistent with referenced sources

I'm by far no expert on Cuba or US policies towards Cuban emigrees, but the statement that "U.S. law[20] grants U.S. residency to any Cuban who arrives on U.S. soil without a visa" is not even supported by the linked document describing the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1996 (CAA) -- which rather states that "CAA gives the Attorney General the discretion to grant permanent residence to Cuban natives or citizens seeking adjustment of status if they have been present in the United States for at least 1 year after admission or parole and are admissible as immigrants." I'm always hesitant to try to restructure something like this without discussion -- am I misunderstanding something here? cmac 01:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to go ahead and make the changes, Mcgrawcm.--Zleitzen 02:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Why are you deleting my messages?

The dictator is dead, long live the dictator, that's how I see the transfer of power from Fidel Castro to his brother. Shame on those who defend these dictators, you're not better than the religious fanatics that vote for Bush. At least the American idiot has only two years left to mess with people’s life.

(Please remember to delete my message comrades!)

I know people knowing Fidel and I consider you shoudn't tell so aggressive antiCastro position. He is a nice man and want Cuba to prosper, but United States want to exploit Cuba as you. You can see Russia after perestroika - it was American action through CIA.

I against so word as dictator. Can you tell so words to so to forceful Fidel's face? - I doubt. I wish good luck to all Cubans from Russia and I want to tell that any American influence isn't good for you.

Castro appears to have joined the undead

Today’s photos of Castro “recovering” [22] are much better than yesterday’s, however the lack of clinical paraphernalia and most odd shadows, can be taken to suggest that either the photographs have been altered, or that Castro has become a vampire so I naturally “believe” the latter. One would think that the use of a respirator would require shaving Castro’s beard. For a rousing discussion see [23] Xe xe El Jigue 8-14-06

Cuban Democracy

Is it true that Cuba was a functioning Democracy during the terms of presidents of Tomás Estrada Palma to Alfredo Zayas y Alfonso. Is it true that the Cuban people had Freedom of Speech and of the press and were people able to enjoy the freedoms that ended with the term of president Alfredo Zayas y Alfonso? Even though Cuba had currupt Presidents during this time(Money and Cheating Problems),were the cuban people able to talk about the currupt presidents in Cuba without fear of getting arrested? They had two parties in congress:The Liberal Party and The Conservative Party,although they had violence at the polls during Elections(Were the Liberals and Conservatives able to vote on issues fairly in Congress?)This is covering the period 1901-1925.

This was true even in the early Machado years El Jigue 8-18-06

Raul has assumed permanent power

Reading between the lines of the latest Raul Castro proclamation [24] makes it quite apparent that Fidel Castro's rule has ended. Raul Castro, seems to have assumed permanent power and is preparing to rid himself of rivals very possibly by military force. 8-18-06 El Jigue

Executions of rivals may follow

The recent release of a recording of Raul Castro ordering the shoot down of the Brother's to the Rescue planes suggests that internal opposition to Raul is building up. One reason for this is that improved relations with the US would strongly enhance the living conditions of the Cuban nomenclatura (Mayimbe), and that according to US law this cannot happen until Raul as well as Fidel is removed from power in Cuba. In reaction one would expect, considering past behaviours, that Raul will suppress these putative rivals with at least some executions. El Jigue 8-21-06

Or maybe it's just someone in Miami trying to stir up trouble. Does Raul even want to cling on to power ? -- Beardo 16:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

B: That is Raul's voice on the tape speaking from Holguin. BTW according to Spanish law if Raul leaves power he can be tried in Spain. El Jigue 8-21-06

BTW El Jigue 8-23-06 H.R. 927, Title II, Sec. 205: is the meat of the problem for Raul, so one can expect (and one already observers some hints of it) the start of a massive propaganda campaign to change it.

This US law is stirring up much trouble between the Cuban nomenclatura (Mayimbes) and Raul. To many in the Cuban government Raul is an unspoken of obstacle to living a good life. So perhaps a murderous round of purges may start or perhaps even have started

HR 927 SEC. 205. REQUIREMENTS AND FACTORS FOR DETERMINING A TRANSITION GOVERNMENT.

(a) REQUIREMENTS- For the purposes of this Act, a transition government in Cuba is a government that--

(1) has legalized all political activity;

(2) has released all political prisoners and allowed for investigations of Cuban prisons by appropriate international human rights organizations;

(3) has dissolved the present Department of State Security in the Cuban Ministry of the Interior, including the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution and the Rapid Response Brigades; and

(4) has made public commitments to organizing free and fair elections for a new government--

(A) to be held in a timely manner within a period not to exceed 18 months after the transition government assumes power;

(B) with the participation of multiple independent political parties that have full access to the media on an equal basis, including (in the case of radio, television, or other telecommunications media) in terms of allotments of time for such access and the times of day such allotments are given; and

(C) to be conducted under the supervision of internationally recognized observers, such as the Organization of American States, the United Nations, and other election monitors;

(5) has ceased any interference with Radio Marti or Television Marti broadcasts;

(6) makes public commitments to and is making demonstrable progress in-- (A) establishing an independent judiciary; (B) respecting internationally recognized human rights and basic freedoms as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Cuba is a signatory nation; (C) allowing the establishment of independent trade unions as set forth in conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labor Organization, and allowing the establishment of independent social, economic, and political associations;

(7) does not include Fidel Castro or Raul Castro; and

(8) has given adequate assurances that it will allow the speedy and efficient distribution of assistance to the Cuban people.

(b) ADDITIONAL FACTORS- In addition to the requirements in subsection (a), in determining whether a transition government in Cuba is in power, the President shall take into account the extent to which that government--

(1) is demonstrably in transition from a communist totalitarian dictatorship to representative democracy;

(2) has made public commitments to, and is making demonstrable progress in-- (A) effectively guaranteeing the rights of free speech and freedom of the press, including granting permits to privately owned media and telecommunications companies to operate in Cuba; (B) permitting the reinstatement of citizenship to Cuban-born persons returning to Cuba; (C) assuring the right to private property; and (D) taking appropriate steps to return to United States citizens (and entities which are 50 percent or more beneficially owned by United States citizens) property taken by the Cuban Government from such citizens and entities on or after January 1, 1959, or to provide equitable compensation to such citizens and entities for such property;

(3) has extradited or otherwise rendered to the United States all persons sought by the United States Department of Justice for crimes committed in the United States; and

(4) has permitted the deployment throughout Cuba of independent and unfettered international human rights monitors.

The danger of an angry dying Castro

By asking for prayers that the Catholic Church might be trying to molify Castro and persuade him not to go on a mad rampage of killing. After all his doctors had promised him 140 years of life and he must be very angry at the probable cancer eating at his guts. El Jigue 8-26-06

Rumors are just rumors, still further rumors suggest that Fidel is trying to kill Raul to preserve his "Legacy." El Jigue 8-27-06

Even pro-castro types are thinking spreading cancer: so now we get the official denials which do little more than confirm it. El Jigüe 8-28-06

Mad rampage? Rumors? Killing his brother? These 3 sections above are pure vandalism. If someone else thinks that it is justified, I think that it should be removed. Wikipedia is not place for such kind of language.--RockyMM 11:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Although I generally enjoy reading El Jigüe's bulletins, it is true that they don't really fit into the remit of wikipedia talk page policy. Perhaps if users could subscribe to future El Jigüe pronouncements on individual talk pages rather than article talk pages then it would satisfy. I for one would sign up!--Zleitzen 14:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmmmmmmm Z and M these remarks of yours will make a magnificent addition to the end of my paper on Wikipedia censorship. As to fratricide in high places among absolute rulers one has only to note as examples the fratricidal wars of the last Incas, Mongols of India, or the collapse of the Empire of Alexander the Great; not to speak of the deadly killings in the Hareems of the Sultans of Turkey. In Cuba the rise of the Castros was full of such internal bloodletting such as the betrayal of Frank Pais to the "trial" of Ochoa. xe xe El Jigue 8-29-06

One also may note that while this matter is of considerable importance to the press e.g. [25] there are some that try to keep up the pretense that Castro will recover and that there is no struggle for sucession []. El Jigue 8-29-06

AS to recovery of Fidel Castro, that does not seem to be in the offing [26] thus the cancer theory is still viable. As to rivals of Raul some think, but I do not, that Chavez may seek for some measure of control of Cuba [27]. However, in my view the younger ranks of the Mayimbe will provide most resistance to Raul's rule, and a popular rising in the eastern provinces cannot be ruled out. El Jigue 8-30-06.

Nobody here but us chickens

There is a report in the Miami Herald [28] which essentially states there is nothing new in Cuba. However, the reporter involved is often considered as leaning towards the present Cuban government and somewhat ill informed. Thus it seems that although it appears that there there are foxes in the henhouse, at least one fox is saying "Nobody here but us chickens." El Jigue 8-31-06

Dread Ramirito Valdez in Raul's cabinet

Much feared Ramirito Valdez is in Raul Castro's new cabinet [29]. I view this circumstance not only as prelude to increased repression but as an indication of a potentially explosive and meta-stable power structure in Cuba. Complicating the matter is a putative contact between Raul Castro and members of the US government. El Jigue 9-11-06

Strange - only a few weeks ago Valdes was being described as a potential challenger to Raul, [30] and so by EJ's earlier comment should have been executed not promoted ! -- Beardo 15:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Valdes is described by the Miami Herald as hard-line, but has been out of power for 20 years. Does anyone know what his current views are ? -- Beardo 20:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Castro seems better but unable to walk

Castro seems better but unable to walk [31]. However, his relationship with Chavez (from above source) can be taken to suggest anything from consolation of a dying Castro to internal conflict in Cuba:

"You should know that the dawn of a new era continues to shine, Chávez said, reading from his own letter to Castro. ``You are part of this dawn. All of us need you, so we can continue to push the sun. I bring you the embrace of a million human beings who, like me, admire you, and sing with you: On to victory, forever! We shall win!

On to victory, forever! Castro responded, repeating a Cuban revolutionary slogan. ``We shall win."

The question arises who is in charge of Cuba, Raul Castro, Ramiro Valdez or Chavez? El Jigüe 9-2-06

Chavez may be the paymaster, but I don't see that he directs anything. Valdes has just got given a fairly minor ministry. If he gets his old job back at MININT - then he really is on the rise again ! -- Beardo 15:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Beardo Thanks for info. Yet Valdez's trademark repression of dissidents seems more aggressive than usual as in recent arrest of Dr. Darsi Ferrer with the opening of the gas supply accompanying potential threat of a explosion to his five year old son. El Jigue 9-2-06

Is there any connection between Ferrer and Valdes ? Why do you think there is a link ? -- Beardo 21:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Dunno, you seem far closer to the matter than I. However, the actions of the Cuban government in the recent Darsi Ferrer arrest are more like an modus operandi of a very hard liner like Ramirito. BTW for fun see this [32] El Jigue 9-2-06

I am sure Valdes is not the only hard-liner (if he is still hard-line). It's not as if action against dissident stopped for 20 years whilst Valdes was out of power and have suddenly restarted. -- Beardo 05:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Beardo is it Valdes or Valdez? I have always used the latter but do you have a reason for the other spelling. I always thought of the s spelling as Portuguese in origen. El Jigue 3-9-06

Perhaps an article on Ramirito Valdez is appropriate

Perhaps an article on Ramirito Valdez is called for even thought I for one merely thought of him as a Segundo Frente follower of Raul. El Jigue 3-9-06

Archiving

This page seems desperately in need of some archiving of old discussions. -- Beardo 15:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)