A few questions…

The following quote is the opening paragraph of a news article in the Washington Post written by Howard Schneider.

“Mojitos at Varadero Beach . . . fishing in the waters Hemingway immortalized . . . dinner and a show at the Tropicana: A long list of currently forbidden pleasures will become legal for Americans under pending legislation that would lift central provisions of the United States’ half-century embargo of Cuba.”

Forbidden pleasures in Cuba?

Really, how can anyone expect to have a reasonable discussion with someone who views an island ruled by a murderous dictator who has enslaved its entire population as a tourist destination replete with forbidden pleasures?

And we are supposed to be the unreasonable ones?

They call us intransigents and hardliners for exposing the atrocities that take place on a daily basis in Cuba. They tell us that we are all an angry and unreasonable bunch that have been blinded by our hatred. But since when is hatred of injustice and murder, of repression and imprisonment, of harassment and beatings, of starvation and neglect, of slavery and usurpation of one’s humanity, an unreasonable and unjustified emotion?

When did ignoring the suffering and enslavement of fellow human beings in order to enjoy an all-inclusive vacation become the reasonable thing to do?

Why does fighting for the rights of Cubans to enjoy the most basic of human rights make one an intransigent? When did ignoring oppression become reasonable, and exposing oppression unreasonable?

When did expressing the desire for Cubans to live in a free and democratic society, free of repression and slavery, become a hard-line position? And when did trading with slave masters and providing them the tools to continue their vile practice of subjugating and humiliating an entire nation become the prudent and rational course of action to take?

They say that we are the unreasonable ones. That our strong and unyielding opposition to tyranny has tainted our judgment. We can no longer be objective and we are not willing to accept anything less than freedom and justice for Cuba. There was a time, however, when standing up for humanity and defending the oppressed was considered noble and the right thing to do. There was a time when slavery and oppression was unacceptable.

Today all those things that were once noble and right earn you the label of intransigent hardliner. What was once the mark of brave and forthright men who fought for freedom and justice throughout history, is now a disgraceful trait and therefore those who exhibit such characteristics should be marginalized and silenced.

You can go ahead and try to marginalize us, and you can even try to silence us. But you should know that if a bearded monster with the blood of tens of thousands of innocent humans on his hands has never been able to do it, I seriously doubt you will.



9 thoughts on “A few questions…

  1. So, what are the odds that Schneider, and the legion of others like him, would be comparably cavalier, flip and utterly amoral over something like American entertainers exercising their right to perform in a resort in South Africa under apartheid? It happened, but the response was rather different. The resort was Sun City, which was a private, non-government operation, but yes, it was in South Africa. The “correct” position was squarely and unequivocally against going there. However, Frank Sinatra did it, and he caught hell for it. So much so, that he wound up making an abject apology for it, and this was Sinatra, who was neither chopped liver nor a retiring little flower. But of course, Cuba is different. And Cubans even more so. Screw’em.

    • A local blogger — whom I will not give a link to, and, no, it’s not who you think — wrote this idiocy this morning:

      But just imagine what would happen if all of a sudden planeloads of American tourists started showing up at the beaches and the hotels and the restaurants, wandering the streets of Havana or the smaller towns or going out to Hemingway’s farm. Today the Cuban minders can keep an eye on the occasional American visitor with the special visa or the Cuban-America returning to visit Tia Conchita and treating each of them as a potential spy or mischief-maker. But they would be overwhelmed by hundreds of tourists flooding in with cameras and laptops and iPods and cash. There’s no way the Cubans could control all of them and prevent them from infecting the average Cuban with capitalism and Lady Gaga. The worst threat to the Cuban regime isn’t the stealthy James Bond-type spy sneaking in on a visa cooked up by the CIA; it’s Fred and Ethel from Bloomington, Indiana, with their Margaritaville shirts and Visa cards.

      This, folks, is the mindset (if you can call it that) prevalent among the amoral, unthinking, moron class of liberal/progressives today. They could care less about the suffering of the Cuban people. They spout this inane simplistic nonsense, with the evidence right in front of them that tourism does not budge the regime. If their argument were true, then Canadian, British, Spanish, and French tourists, et al, would have brought the regime down decades ago.

      Fucking morons every last one of them.

  2. Aha they always mention KGB agent Argo (Hemingway). It seems despite his work for their cause in Spain, in Cuba, and elsewhere he was allied to Manolo Castro and Rolando Masferrer, and thus the wrong kind of communist for Castro (who tries to kill all he suspects to be rivals).

    See the assassin characters in Hemingway’s play “The fifth column) boasting about his killings in Spain and in Cuba …

  3. Besides Castro apparently hated his portrayal as a Black in “The Shot.”

    Apparently Hemingway even acted as an informer read
    ‘The Denunciation’ in which narrates turning in a friend to the Spanish communists for execution.

    No wonder he killed himself, after all that “work” and Castro still took his house away ….

  4. Fishing? Tourists can now fish? Cubans are forbidden to fish.

    George, that was exactly what Jeff Flake proudly explained to me. His answer was that the tourist now are a drop in the bucket compared to if Americans would be allowed to go. He said it would destroy their infrastructure to have all of those thousands of new tourists come in and the regime would collapse. And he is a moral person making these proposals with the intention of bringing down Castro. What he doesn’t understand is that Castro will control who gets in no matter what the laws.

  5. Again, why was it not only OK but a moral imperative to isolate and embargo the hell out of apartheid-era South Africa, and yet the exact opposite is being furiously pushed for Cuba?

  6. And George, they’re not morons, exactly. That would at least be a tolerable excuse. I’m afraid it’s rather worse. But it’s SO fashionable, SO “correct,” so utterly and completely SAFE, that they figure they simply CANNOT lose. In all fairness, the temptation must be nearly irresistible, or it certainly appears to be.

    • Yes they are. If they were capable of even the slightest critical thinking they would not hold those positions or opinions. They are worse than parrots and mockingbirds in that they have the ability to think and not just repeat what they hear ad nauseam without consideration.

Comments are closed.