Yoani Sanchez center of attention in Brazil

( Check out the video yourselves. The questions during this Brazilian combo of our Face The Nation, Meet the Press and The View come in Portuguese but she answers in Spanish)

The money quotes:

“I don’t regard myself as a (Castro regime) opponent.”

“Yes, I did meet with a U.S. official. I met with Bisa Williams of the U.S. interest section to discuss the best manner to lift the U.S. embargo…If you want to accuse me of that–I proudly accept the charge.”

Towards the end, the host throws out some words seeking her definition:


Che Guevara–“He lost me when I read his quote about a “Revolutionary must become a cold killing machine.”

Fidel Castro–“The consequence of his ideas and actions were setback for Cuba. I, personally, would not rescue anything from them. His legacy might change in 20 or 30 years. But I prefer to refer to him simply as, “my past.”

Raul Castro— “He will pass into history as the reformer who could not activate the reforms we wanted.”

The woman strikes me as sincere, a product of her times, environment and education. A better product than most, in fact.

No question from her Brazilian hosts, however, on the wholesale Castroite massacres of thousands of her countrymen and the torture of tens of thousands of them in the Castroite Gulag, or why when “DICTATOR!!!” Batista ran Cuba ALL Cubans traveled UTTERLY freely at their every whim, Cubans enjoyed a nigher standard of living than most Europeans (to say nothing of BRAZILIANS!!!), Cubans enjoyed the most advanced telecommunications on earth at the lowest prices and utterly free of government control–and Cuba enjoyed net immigration?

Again, I doubt she’s up to snuff on these items. And I don’t blame her. After all, 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
per cent of Ivy League graduates, and professors–(we all know the exception!)
are also (but mostly willingly) ignorant of these items.

Regarding the (relative) understatement of the “embargo” during this Brazilian exposition? Well, “the U.S. embargo” is not a big deal in Brasil. They–meaning the vital players (the Brazilian government, Oderbrecht, etc.)–are already in Castro’s bag.

The big prize, as we all well know, awaits in Washington D.C…Wonder if “the embargo” will THEN come up???)

(Oye pero la verdad que a este Fontova le encanta joder?)



13 thoughts on “Yoani Sanchez center of attention in Brazil

  1. No doubt that’s why they allowed her to leave. If at every platform she supports the lifting of the embargo, she is serving the castro’s whether she knows it or not. And what’s this about Batista being a dictator? Yes, he was a dictator, but he’s been dead for decades. Shouldn’t she be thinking of Cuba’s new dictator?

  2. I don’t trust her. You are too kind Humberto. It is one thing for American leftists to show that they “care” more than I do as they display their ignorance in their attitudes about Castro.
    But for anyone living there, and as educated as Yaoni is, to spout this crap, I am convinced she is a shill for the regime and that’s why they let her out.
    Unless she famously says, “I defect” and tells what is going on with the Ladies in White, Etc. not to mention the church not giving the ladies shelter, she is worthless and working for Castro.

  3. YS is contaminated, misinformed, and compromised accordingly, but that’s her “normal” and doesn’t bother her. I expect all her associates in Cuba are the same way, as are most if not all Cubans raised and (de)formed under the Castro system. Far too much has been made of her by foreign elements, and she’s evidently bought into that. Her comment about meeting a US functionary about lifting the embargo is like George Clooney saying “I went to Congress to discuss how we can solve the world’s problems.” Maybe she didn’t mean it the way it sounds, but it comes across very poorly. As for Batista, he was effectively finished over half a century ago, and it’s long past time to get another whipping boy (especially with so MANY live and active ones available). Obviously, she missed (or chose to waste) an excellent opportunity to make the point that both Castro brothers are not only dictators but far worse ones than Batista ever was. Instead, she calls the Castro catastrophe a “setback,” which is an absolutely mindboggling understatement, to put it kindly. I can believe that she’s sincere and means well, though I do not exclude other possibilities, but her motives and intentions are far less important than the way she could be used by others with perverse motives and bad intentions. As I’ve said before, she strikes me as something like Gloria Estefan presuming to sing a major operatic role at La Scala, and I’m afraid the outcome could be rather worse than an embarrassing fiasco.

  4. So if she’s not a Castro opponent, what is she, a sociologist? A neutral observer? A mediator? What?

  5. Batista: “A minor, run-of-the-mill authoritarian dictator who ruled over a prosperous, thriving country and made possible a monstrous, totalitarian dictator who ruined and practically destroyed that country and caused untold harm throughout Latin America and beyond.” I’m afraid her actual answer was, shall we say, deficient.

  6. Raul Castro “a reformer”. By the way, wasn’t that blabbering degenerate, that will pass into cuban history as no more than domestic shit and a cancer, the one who introduced Fidel to communism and the first one that wants everyone executed? Reformer…

    The woman is an idiot, that’s what she is. I always contained myself a little regarding her because she’s a woman who seeming was an opponent (that part has confirmed to be erroneous) and one who seemed to be doing so “bravely” from Cuba but it has already been too much and too frequent, it is time to be blunt.

    Frankly, her foolishness gives me the impression that she’s on a natural high the type marijuana smokers can only dream of. Always intrigued by the mundane and insignificant, not able to see beyond her nose or analyze, everything being delivered with the tone of ambiguity and existentialism, etc. Enough…

  7. OMG Gallardo, you hit the nail on the head and said what I wanted to say, but could not find the words!:

    “Frankly, her foolishness gives me the impression that she’s on a natural high the type marijuana smokers can only dream of. Always intrigued by the mundane and insignificant, not able to see beyond her nose or analyze, everything being delivered with the tone of ambiguity and existentialism, etc. Enough…”

Comments are closed.