US Fines Miami Co. for Reimbursing Expenses for Medical Services in Cuba

By Café Fuerte

BUpa-displayHAVANA TIMES — The BUPA Florida group associated with a large international health insurance consortium, agreed to pay a fine of US $128,704 dollars for transactions that allegedly violated the rules of the US Treasury Department for providing coverage for people listed as drug traffickers [not-Cuba related] and reimbursing expenses to a customer who received medical treatment in Cuba.

The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) said in a statement that the company, based in Miami, chose to pay the penalty to end the dispute with US authorities, who found 39 alleged violations occurred between March 2008 and March 2011.

There are three separate cases involving a total of $ 190.672 dólares.Thirty seven violations are associated with two non-Cubans, identified as the Guatemalan citizen Mario Paredes Cordova,  and the Mexican, Daniel González Muñoz.

Cordova faces drug charges in the US courts, while Muñoz was listed by OFAC in 2005 for alleged ties to drug traffickers cartels to launder money.

The Cuban case

Violations associated with one unidentified traveler to Cuba who was treated on the island occurred between December 3, 2008 and February 18, 2009, and totaled US $14.726.

OFAC’s Cuban Assets Control regulation prevents passengers or any other person to receive reimbursements from US companies for services in Cuba, unless there is a specific license from OFAC for that matter. The measure is interpreted by many policy holders as a questionable interference with a medical situation that may arise on a trip to the island.

Based in Miami

Bupa is a Florida corporation that brings together Bupa Insurance Company (BIC), Bupa Worldwide Corporation (BWW) and US Medical Services Corporation (USAMED) all located in the Miami area and subsidiaries of BUPA, a global health emporium based in London .

Established in 1947, BUPA (British United Provident initials Association) serves over 22 million customers in 190 countries and reported annual profits of 9.1 billion pounds ($14.555 million).

Under the Obama administration the bulk of the fines issued by the Treasury Department concerning violations of the half-century old Cuba embargo have fallen on banks, export companies and travel agencies.

Meanwhile, the government of Raul Castro considers the recent actions of OFAC as an escalation of the financial blockade against Cuba, detailed in the island’s latest report to the United Nations General Assembly. Last week the General Assembly passed a non-binding resolution asking the US to drop its embargo on Cuba. It passed by a 188-2 margin.



94 thoughts on “US Fines Miami Co. for Reimbursing Expenses for Medical Services in Cuba

  • So you watched one part and know it all? Who cares if they misidentified the actual shooters? Check out other sources, like JFK and The Unspeakable describes. The fact is that Lee Harvey Oswald was a stupid patsy.

    And thanks for your laughs, Griffin.

  • Your vitriolic response (there’s a third grade word for you) belies your inability to refute my facts. In as much as I lived in Cuba, I would say my facts are at the very least empirical. Name-calling, by the way, impresses no one.

  • Passionately because that’s how you express yourself in your support of the US embargo. And that isn’t negative at all in itself. The great contridiction is you being Canadian and enjoying the benifits of being able to travel freely to Cuba to see for yourself and benefit from taxes paid by Canadian companies that profit from doing business in Cuba. If you were consistent you would be even more passionate in demanding the Canadian government impose a similar embargo and travel ban on Cuba and the heck with the “good guy” approach.

  • Read the fine print. I had the same observation regarding Heineken beer and Coca-Cola. I subsequently learned that in these cases, the beverage sold in Cuba is produced by a specially-constructed subsidiary, with negligible ties (less than 10%) to the name parent company. Doing so allows the parent to continue to do business as a US corporation.

  • “Don’t believe the hype.” But I should believe your blatant and obviously incorrect propagandistic bullshit?

    One final question for you, moses: are you incapable of reading English with more than a third grade level understanding, or are you pretending to misread the Helms Burton Act so you can spread your views as if they were based on empirical facts?

    Either way, stuff yourself back into the crack where you live and worm away.

  • The US used to have an embargo on China. The two countries sat down and negotiated a settlement to the dispute and the embargo was lifted.

    Also, China holds billions in US debt. There isn’t much the US can do to China that won’t turn around and hurt the US.

  • Why do you use the word “passionately” in relation to my opinions, but not to any others? In fact, why all this attention to my posts, when others who take the pro-embargo position pass uncommented by you? Just curious…

    I have already written about the relationship between Labatts, the Holguin Brewery, and Anheiser-Busch InterBev in previous comments at HT.

  • Maybe if you spread the word Labatts will get a nice fine from the US Treasury Dept. Sounds like a worthwhile campaign for someone so passionately in favor of the embargo on Cuba.

  • That rule does not seem to be enforced evenly. For example, Labatts operates a brewery in Holguin in partnership with the Cuban brewer, Bucanero.

    And yet, Labatts’ products are also for sale in the US. In fact, Labatts is majority owned Anheuser-Busch InBev.

  • Don’t underestimate your power to convince fellow Canadians. If you really believe that embargoing Cuba and taking away Canadians right to freely travel is the answer, and can argue it with sound reasoning, than get with it ASAP. I’m sure there will be a few others that will join you right off the bat.

    One more point. How will your fellow Canadians see the light like you did if they are prohibitted from going to Cuba?

  • Diplomatic pressure… hum bug. That sounds like the toothless UN resolution vote against the embargo. Either you are for Canada imposing en embargo and travel ban or you are a hypocrite telling US citizens they should maintain such an embargo while benefitting from the tax dollars of Canadian corporations and travel companies doing business in Cuba without US companies’ competition. I guess that’s the good guy strategy.

  • There you go again. You are either for embargoes or against them. When are you going to point black say: I demand the Canadian government impose a trade embargo on Cuba similar to the US embargo and a travel ban, forbidding any Canadian companies from doing business on the island. I further demand my government prohibit Canadian citizens from traveling to Cuba without special permission as is the case for US citizens. When you are ready I’d love to publish it with the corresponding arguments as an article for reader scrutiny.

  • I oppose Canadians travelling to Cuba and Canadian businesses investing with the Castro regime. I travelled to the island twice. The first time to a resort. The second time I stayed at a casa particular in Havana. I spent a week travelling about the city. What I saw and heard from Cuban people opened my eyes about the true nature of the Castro regime. Most Canadians have this false image that Cuba is just some kind of Latin social democracy like Sweden, but with warmer beaches.

    Since then I decided never to return to Cuba until the Castro’s are gone and the people have their freedom. I urge other Canadians to adopt that position too. Alas, they’re too busy drinking the mojitos to listen.

  • That I would support. Trust, but verify. Start negotiations, and extend rewards only after real and verified progress has been made. Start with the small, easier stuff and then move on to the tougher issues.

    But I am very much against granting all kinds of concessions to the Castro’s just to get hem to the table. That approach is doomed to failure.

  • Are you saying the only non-hypocritical position is to be totally for 100% everybody supporting a blockade on Cuba?

    Or are you saying the non-hypocritical position is to claim to be in favour of democracy and human rights in Cuba, while at the same time supporting free trade and travel to the island which pumps billions of dollars into the pockets of the Castro regime?

    I am opposed to Canadians travelling to holidays in Cuba and to Canadian businesses investing in Cuba. I have said that in the past. I have said today, that I have urged my government to be stronger in there diplomatic pressure on Cuba to respect human rights.

    I still don’t know what your positions on these same issues are. (That’s not changing the topic, that’s me pressing you on the same topic.)

  • And you support the right for Canadian citizens to freely visit Cuba and spend their money at hotels and stores owned by the Cuban military or joint venture companies. Likewise, you support Canadian businesses having the right to do business with whoever they wish, including the Castros. Yeh, keep telling everyone in Cuba and the US what to do from your comfortable Canadian armchair. It’s so nice to be the good guy and let someone else be the bad guy. It can even be economically beneficial!

  • I am trying to keep you on the subject and not letting you divert to other issues than the embargo since you have written tirelessly in support it.

    Now you come out for the US to keep its embargo on Cuba but for your Canada to take the good guy approach and continue to allow its citizens to visit Cuba and stay at military owned and joint venture hotels and allow Canadian businesses to reap profits in joint ventures with the Castros. Sorry but that’s about as hypocritical as you can get.
    In favor of embargoes if someone else imposes them, against embargoes if it would affect your own country’s citizens and business interests.

  • “So you don´t like the Castros as rulers for having betrayed the Cuban people. Haven’t we heard this a thousand times?”

    Not often enough, I say it again:

    The Castros betrayed the Cuban people. I support freedom, democracy and human rights in Cuba.

  • That was then, this is now. Living in the past is fruitlessly a waste of everyone’s time and valuable energy. What was Reagan’s famous slogan with Gorbachev?…. “Trust, but verify”. I loved that line…the perfect response to support due dilligence. The same can hold true of negotiations and new agreements with the Cuban government today. But my fear is that the US government will not be able to accept incremental agreements for change as a means of respectfully moving things forward.

  • I resent your characterization of me as hypocritical simply because I fail to fit your narrow definition of an “anti-Castro agitator” and the positions you insist they must hold.

    I had assumed you would agree that issues surrounding US-Cuban relations are complex and best not reduced to polarized positions and simple slogans. Was I wrong?

    In my opinion, the best approach is to have friendly but firmly principled nations like Canada talking to Cuba and pressing them to respect the human rights of the Cuban people. At the same time, the US will continue to impose their embargo for their own political reasons. Good cop – bad cop. It seems a realistic and honest approach to me. You think it’s hypocritical.

    So be it.

    I note that you have avoided my direct questions to you. For your convenience, I repeat them here:

    Do you support free & democratic elections in Cuba?

    Do you condemn the Cuban government for human rights abuses against the Cuban people?

    The old Party elite, once united by ideology & power, will have been replaced by a new military-corporate elite united by money & power….That will be a horrible fate for the Cuban people, don’t you agree?

    I look forward to your answers.

  • So you don´t like the Castros as rulers for having betrayed the Cuban people. Haven’t we heard this a thousand times? Let’s see what you can do to get your government to fine Canadian companies for operating in Cuba and keep Canadian citizens from traveling there. In your liberal democracy you have the opportunity to come out publicly and campaign for an issue you feel so strongly about. Maybe some other people will join you. Yes you risk being criticized and being called a nut, but when one feels so strongly about the virtues of embargoes that shouldn’t matter.

  • Yep hypocritical. Set the record straigtht and make a public call for Canada to impose an embargo and travel ban on Cuba. I would respect your position much more than you a Canadian telling the US government to maintain the 54 year old embargo. HT will gladly publish your public call for a Canadian embargo and travel ban on Cuba. Again, who knows maybe it will take off and Canada can be the third of 193 countries to support embargo as a economic weapon. You may also consider demanding your government impose embargos on Vietnam and China since the US lifting its sanctions didn’t produce the change you would have hoped.

  • The Castro’s curtailed the freedoms of the Cuban people first. The US sanctions came after.

    Fidel himself admitted he never had any intention of keeping his promise to hold free and democratic elections after Batista was overthrown. He explained in a speech to the Cuban public that he had planned to build a Marxist state in Cuba but that he had to do it stealthily because the Cuba people were not ready to know the truth.

    Once he grabbed power, once the “frog was in the pot”, the Castro’s slowly turned up the heat until it was too late for the frog to escape.

    If you still see the Castro’s as liberators, then there is the root of your delusion. They never had any intention of liberating the Cuban people from jail. Their goal was merely to change who controlled the jail guards.

  • I’m sorry that you see my more nuanced opinion on the embargo and human rights in Cuba as “hollow and hypocritical”.

    If the argument comes down to whether more “carrot” or more “stick” will push the Cuban government toward respecting human rights, the example of the last 54 years during which Cuba got both, shows neither approach has worked. The examples of Vietnam and China show that all carrot and no stick don’t work either. The example of South Africa is that all stick and no carrot does work, and pretty damn fast.

    As I stated, I have called for my government to press the Cuban government to respect human rights in Cuba and China. I have raised the issue of boycotting travel to Cuba with my friends and colleagues to the point that I have been ostracized by many as some kind of right-wing nutter. Many Canadians simple do not want to hear that anything is wrong with Cuba. Nor do they want their vacation plans upset, more likely. If you ask me, they are the ones who are hollow and hypocritical.

    I find those who say the US trades with Vietnam and China so it’s only fair they do so with Cuba ring hollow and hypocritical.

    I find those who championed the embargo against apartheid South Africa and yet who oppose sanctions on the equally repressive and repugnant regime in Havana ring hollow and hypocritical.

    I find those who claim to support democracy and human rights around the world, yet turn a blind eye toward Cuba and defend the Castro regime ring hollow and hypocritical.

  • You continue to evade the question. How can you support the US embargo on Cuba as the best way to bring about the change you so passionately want to see on the island and at the same time refuse to call for your government, the Canadian one, to impose a similiar embargo on Cuba and travel ban on Canadian citizens? It’s great to tell people in another country what to do but how about your own country. If you don’t come out clearly for Canada to join the US and impose a similar embargo on Cuba than your support for the US doing so rings hollow and hypocritical.

  • There is no cookie-cutter approach to US foreign policy. What works for China is not applicable to Cuba and vice versa. It is politically naïve to compare the two.

  • No it is not. ALL Spanish banks and German manufacturers and every other non-American company in the world (literally millions of them) may choose to do business with the Castros OR with the US government. Don’t believe the hype. China, Russia, Brazil, Venezuela and many other countries freely trade with Cuba with no hesitation due to the US embargo.

  • I might not be providing the answer you think I should, but that is not the same thing as evading the issue. I have addressed every issue you raised, and added several more of my own (some of which have been ignored).

    I do add my voice to those who support democracy and freedom around the world, which has included urging my government to take a tougher stand for human rights in many countries, not just with Cuba.

    My hunch is there are some other, very “difficult” reasons why the US will never lift the embargo so long as Raul & Fidel live. It’s personal. When the brothers finally do pass from the scene, then things may change very quickly. I hope things will change for the better.

    My concern is that by then the current system in Cuba will have completed the transition from a Marxist state to a Fascist state. The old Party elite, once united by ideology & power, will have been replaced by a new military-corporate elite united by money & power. The influx of American money will flow through the channels the elite has constructed in banking, tourism and all the other sectors of the Cuba economy they dominate. The Cuban people might have a few more dollars in their pockets, but they won’t be any freer. They will still be oppressed by an ruthless state security apparatus, but with even fewer social benefits than they have now. That will be a horrible fate for the Cuban people, don’t you agree?

    So how best to avoid that fate and instead arrive at a future Cuban system which respects human rights and freedoms? My bias is for a liberal democratic system in which the Cuban people can form political parties of their choosing and decide together what directions they want to take their country.

    Some people say, Lift the embargo now, and hope for the best! Others say, the system in Cuba is wonderful as it is, so lift the embargo and leave them alone.

    I remain unconvinced.

  • In effect, you are saying, “Trust them and let’s see what happens”. Is that about right? Well, Fidel fooled us once already. He said he would hold elections and would not stay in power long. How did that work out?

  • You are still evading the issue. Dozens or hundreds of times you have stated why another country, the USA should maintain its embargo on Cuba, because it’s government is undemocratic and that lifting the embargo would only help the Castros. But your country Canada actively does business in numerous repressive countries you would not call liberal democracies and I don’t see you calling on your government to embargo those countries and stop your companies from doing mining and other business there which, from your way of thinking, only helps the dictators or other repressive rulers, and of course your own lifestyle through the taxes the Canadian companies pay at home. Remember, although your voice is only one among millions of Canadians maybe your calling for Canada to impose embargos around the world could rally other supporters. Again, by multiplying your efforts,maybe Canada could be the third country of 193 to support the US embargo on Cuba!

    And to answer your question I personally don’t believe the US embargo on Cuba does much but fatten some bank accounts in Miami and Washington, give the Cuban government an excellent excuse to continue on as is, and hurt the economy for everyday Cubans.

    After 54 years of the unilateral embargo it’s pretty hard to predict what exactly would happen if the US changed course, dropped the embargo and sought normalized relations and trade with Cuba. There would be many new factors coming into play.

  • Moses, you continually refer to the Castros as tyrants. Given that, it’s no doubt impossible for you to envision the Castros relinquishing control, post embargo. I don’t see the Castros as tyrants…I see them as liberators who had to make very difficult choices for the Cuban people by curtailing certain freedoms in an effort to insure that the revolution survived in the face of US aggression and continued subversion. End the war first…and I promise you, if the Castros or their successors don’t then begin the process of reinstating basic freedoms for the Cuban population, I’ll be at the front of the line to call for their immediate over-throw.

  • I wouldn’t characterize my comments here as work in support of the embargo. I am discussing the issue here with other people who share an interest in Cuba.

    Sending email to my MP is actually more activist work than posting comments on this or any other blog.

    My commitment to democracy is unwavering, Circles. It’s a rather weak argument to take one paragraph out of context from the dozens I have written and use it to claim that my interest is in helping US corporations get their property back. The weight of my arguments show where my commitment is.

    You know well the Cuban government is rather touchy about criticism, which is why you must work carefully not to run afoul of the Castro regime’s watching eyes. Does that mean your support for freedom of the press is “wavering”? I wouldn’t say it is, but it’s a fair question. My guess is you want to do this blog for sincere reasons and have made the necessary compromises to make it possible. As a result, Havana Times is the most wide ranging and balanced blog on the topic of Cuba anywhere on the web. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

    Your questions to me, and I appreciate them, came in response to my point about the use of the examples of Vietnam & China as why the US should drop the embargo. I pointed out that lifting the embargoes of those 2 countries has not resulted in either of them developing into liberal democracies. Therefore, the people who argue for lifting the embargoes because doing so will somehow push Cuba toward political liberalization, have failed in their arguments. The comparable examples we have did not provide that result. There is no reason to believe it will work with Cuba either.

    So if I may ask you, Circles: Do you believe that lifting the US embargo on Cuba will lead to political liberalization and democracy in Cuba? Do you even believe that is desirable?

  • LOL! That’s wonderful… you post a link to an hysterical and throroughly discredited “documentary” on the JFK assassination.

    The film identifies three men as the assassins of Kennedy: a deceased drug trafficker Lucien Sarti and two living men. All three were later revealed to have strong alibis: Sarti was undergoing medical treatment in France at the time, another was in prison at the time, and the third had been in the French Navy at the time. And then there’s the crazy lady who claims she was Lee Harvey Oswald’s lover and that they were working for the CIA on a bioweapon to assassinate Castro. For sure, that sounds legit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_Who_Killed_Kennedy

    Anyway, thanks for laughs. You really are special, Jeff.

  • But you have repeated umpteen times that the embargo is justified because Cuba is undemocratic and lifting it would only help the Castros. Gee “I asked my politicians” to take a harder line seems quite feeble compared to your daily public forum support for another country, the US to embargo Cuba. From your last response one would sense you no longer think democracy is the issue, just payment for properties seized and the ex-owners not accepting the compensation offered. Looks like your position on democracy is wavering.

  • I told you, I asked my politicians to take a harder line on Cuba. The Canadian gov’t refuses to do so.

    As you well know, the reason the US gov’t imposed the embargo in the first place was because Castro seized the property of US citizens and corporations, without compensation. Then he seized the property of wealthy Cubans, and as they fled into exile in the US, they added their political support to the embargo. Several years later came Helms-Burton. The Canadian relationship with Cuba does not carry that same baggage.

  • Look up the career of Ana Montes. As I wrote above, Cuba does not pose a direct military threat to the US. But they do have extensive intelligence assets in the US which they use to collect information for re-sale to other countries with do pose a threat to the US (ie: Russia & China).

    The KKK was founded by the Democratic Party.

    I live in Canada.

  • You continue to beat around the bush. Where is your demand for Canada insituting an embargo, similar to the one the US has on Cuba, which you wholehartedely support, on the dozens of countries you would consider undemocratic.

    Likewise a travel ban that prohibits Canadians from trading freely to those undemocratic countries.

    And most of all where is your call for Canada to impose an embargo on Cuba, keeping its companies from doing business there and instituting a travel ban to keep Canadians from freely going there and pumping their money into the economy?

  • Raul does not represent the Cuban people. He represents the military oligarchy which rules Cuba.

    The Castro regime curtailed freedoms, and confiscated private property as a means to establishing their exclusive grip on power. The sanctions came as a response to those actions, not the trigger of them. Therefore, to remove the sanctions will not prompt the Castros to loosen their grip.

    Past behaviour is a good indicator of future behaviour. For fifty five years the Castro’s have ruled with an iron fist. Raul has recently stated there will be no political reforms to go along with his economic reforms. Your argument that he will suddenly have a change of heart flies in the face of his entire life’s work and his pledge to maintain the Party’s monopoly on power in Cuba in the future.

    You “believe” US negotiators will be pleasantly surprised, but you have never offered a single shred of evidence to support that belief, which persists in spite of all the facts to the contrary.

    Terry, what you have there is not a “belief”. It’s proper name is a delusion.

  • Wow, you know all the propaganda buzzwords.

    Do you seriously think Cuba represents a threat to this country? What will they do, send hookers over here with free cigars? Throw empty rum bottles at us?

  • As if we have a democracy? Did you read the news this morning? You now live in KKKochmerika.

  • Moses, Your statement that Cuba can trade with the rest of the world is incorrect. You need to read Helms Burton, to see how we pressure spanish banks, german manufacturers, etc. into not trading with Cuba. We fine their subsidiaries in the US if they do.

    Nice try, false prophet.

  • In case you missed it, the United Nations authorized the US & British military operation in Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and drive al Qaeda out of the country. The democratically elected government of Afghanistan then asked for Western help in fighting the Taliban and training the Afghan National Army. The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is a NATO-led security mission in Afghanistan that was established by the United Nations Security Council in December 2001 by Resolution 1386.

    At total of 48 nations have contributed soldiers and other personel to the mission.

    It seems to me the people who oppose that mission, such as yourself, are the ones in the minority. You wonder why so many people criticize the US? Perhaps it’s because they are all as ignorant of the facts as you are.

  • I am no history expert but I don’t recall a single instance in recorded history where tyrants like the Castros simply gave up power, especially after they became more powerful. Can you share a previous example where this has taken place. Please share WHY the Castros would relax their “brand of martial-law”. I am reminded of my favorite anti-slavery activist, Frederick Douglass, who said “Power concedes nothing without demand”.

  • The claim that the US refuses to talk to Cuba is false.The US & Cuban gov’t do engage in ongoing discussions and negotiations on a number of bilateral issues, including migration and drug trafficking.

    President Obama unilaterally eased travel & remittance restrictions with Cuba. In return for that gesture, the Cuban gov’t gave him nothing.

    So whatever your “firm beliefs”, the evidence is that while the US has made compromises and attempted to improve relations, the Cuba government has continued to reject any compromise on their side.

  • I certainly do support the sanctions my country applied to Russia following the invasion of Ukraine by the Russian military. I am critical of my government’s less than outspoken defence of human rights in China. I am deeply suspicious of the government of Saudi Arabia and believe Canada should put diplomatic pressure on the KSA to improve their human rights record. I would say the US should do so as well. The reason they don’t is two fold: 1. oil talks 2. the strategic relationship in a dangerous and complex region.

    As for Canada & Cuba: along with Mexico, Canada was the only country in the Americas to maintain uninterrupted diplomatic relations with Cuba since 1959. Pierre Trudeau made several trips to Cuba and established warm relations with Fidel Castro. At least 85 Canadian businesses have operations in Cuba, Sherritt & Labatts just being the most visible. Canadian government agencies and charities have funded a large number of aid programs in Cuba. For all of that outreach, I don’t see that the Castro regime has done anything to improve human rights nor allow free and fair democratic elections. It didn’t seem to matter much when the Cuban gov’t decided to toss two Canadian businessmen into jail on rather vague “corruption” charges.

    I emailed my MP and the Foreign Minster to ask them to speak out in support in these two persecuted Canadian businessmen and to protest the Cuban government actions. Regrettably, our politicians have been silent. Why? Nickel & beer speaks. Millions of Canadian tourists would whine if their cheap holidays were inconvenienced.

    I understand why you bring up the cases of Vietnam, China, Saudi Arabia & etc., to point out US hypocrisy on the subject of embargoes. Well sadly enough, there’s a whole world full of hypocrisy and self-interest out there, in Canada, Spain, and Cuba as well.

    Finally, I supported my government’s lead in establishing economic sanctions against South Africa. PM Brian Mulroney was outspoken on the topic, and as he explained to Thatcher & Reagan, “the purpose of the sanctions is not to bring South Africa to her knees, but to bring her to her senses: apartheid must end.” I was in the huge crowd at Toronto’s Nathan Phillips Square when Nelson Mandela came to speak and was proud to hear him thank Brian Mulroney and Canada for our support of the sanctions.

    So I would say, sometimes sanctions, or an embargo, are a good tool. They sometimes work, although history shows us, they only work when the targeted state actually wants to have better relations with the world. For the past 55 years, the Castro regime has not wanted better relations with the US. They have always found somebody else to subsidize their revolution, and the Cuban people have paid the price for the Castros’ hypocrisy.

  • Mr. Moses, This is the reply to your previous comment to me a few days ago. I could only read it now because of work commitments.

    Dear Mr. Moses, I would love to have the answers to this.

    1. What made you think that I am an immigrant? Is my English that poor?? (My English used to very good….hmmmm..).

    And unfortunately I am not patriotic. But yes, I will do anything to protect the people here in Great Britain from any harm. And I thought that you are Spanish or Mexican??? even though you live in Cuba.

    2. I can never say that you should respect President Al Assad. (But then it is a relative term.) . What I said is about self respect and respecting sovereignty of another country.

    3. Yes. Thousands of syrians are killed. And Thousands of American soldiers are killed in Afghanistan as well. Does it change any thing?? In Iraq Sadam Hussain is toppled. Does it change the number of killings in Iraq on a daily basis? In fact it increased. The problem is Americans (westerners as well) never understand these people. They are so different than how you guys are.

    4. Bringing down Al Assad will only increase the number of death. They need a dictator. Killing and getting killed is a way of living for some people. I know that because I can understand some of their fanatic language and ofcourse, when they speak between themselves I understand what they speak even though they dont know it. You may be right. I may not care about the people who beheads others (innocent people) in the name of religion or anything. They dont have any right to exist. I have yet to come across a believer who tolerate people of other religions. I admire Obama for not sending troops into Syria or Iraq. Now, they cant capture American soldiers. he..he.. I like that. Then US can always use drones…… You cant compare Cuba with Syria. Different people, entirely different attitudes.

    I dont think that people should believe that their country is better and they should be patriotic. In fact people should realize their shortcomings so that they could rectify their perception. Change will never come if People believe that they are better. I think people should understand that UK or US or Germany or France is better than most of the countries out there. Or in other words Democracy is always better than dictatorship. National boundaries are all man made or ‘Rogue made’ dear friend.

  • Moses, I got a doubt. The same sort of marxism/ communism exists in China as well. Any opposition to the ruling government is dealt with an iron fist there. Lot of innocent lives were lost in China as well. Still why US seems to be so interested in embargo with Cuba only???
    Is US afraid of China? Dont you think that the behavior is a bit opportunistic?

  • So you mean US is above all and should nt listen to International opinion? This is exactly what I said before. If you see a domestic disturbance, you report it to police. You are not supposed to interfere. But you believe that the system (here police) and you are one.

  • Moses, Read and listen something that is not favorable to US as well. You will understand why People around the world dont like US. UK and US went into war together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Still people are more keen to blame the US. Why? I am not a fan of Marxism. I am not a fan of religious fanaticism. I feel frustrated when I hear the news of Americans beheaded in Iraq. Still I cant agree with US.
    Yes. I used to be a fan of US.

  • Walter, As long as US is doing that, it is okay. They think that they are the world police. Americans are very intelligent. They do the same mistake again and again and expect a different result each and every time. No surprise that they got their asses kicked in all the wars. (ofcourse they can always make a rambo film..) The day is not far before the world unites against these morons as well as those religious fanatics they created.

  • Moses, in your mind, you believe that the Castros freed the Cuban people of foreign domination, only to be dominated by the Castros. You see the Castros as completely uncaring of the Cuban people. You see them, not as liberators, but as tyrants, and certainly not as the protectors of Cuban sovereignty. Under those circumstances, I can understand why you can’t even begin to comprehend that once Cuba is legitimized by the US government through the normalization of relations, the Castros, and/or their successors, will have no need to maintain absolute control of the people. Their brand of war-time marshal law will then no longer be necessary. The potential for a wide variety incremental changes will then be entirely possible, further supported by respectful negotiation with the US as both nations harmonize together. Pulling the plug on Helm-Burton to help jump-start the process doesn’t equate to the US throwing in the towel. It just means the rules of engagement will have changed to better support a potential that is more realistic and achievable in the short term, with the preferred end-game also remaining on the short list for the long term.

  • You misinterpreted what I wrote…as usual. Like it or not, at present, Raul represents the Cuban people. When the US ends their war on Cuba, Raul will then be able to relax many of the long-standing war-time measures adopted to maintain order and the survival of the revolution in the face of America’s obsessive attempts to subvert it. Why is it that you refuse to consider this? Until the embargo comes down, nobody can say with certainty that Raul won’t then answer in kind by reinstating many freedoms that had to be curtailed. As a compromise, the US could negotiate to secure the reinstatement of certain basic freedoms upfront before lifting the embargo. I believe US negotiators may be pleasantly surprised by the outcome, but again, until the US sits down at the bargaining table, ready, willing, and able to negotiate, nobody, including you, will ever know for sure.

  • Although we are discussing this in another thread I will add something here. Griffin, there are dozens of countries that don’t fit your criteria for a democracy deserving normal trade relations. Are you working to have your country, Canada, put an embargo on all those countries to keep Canadian businesses including the mining companies from doing business with them? Are you also working for Canada to impose a travel ban on its citizens from freely traveling to Cuba and the other undemocratic countries?

  • Hum, No on Vietnam and Maybe yes on China. Will you be working to seek an embargo on China like you passionately do in the case of Cuba? How about Saudi Arabia and Russia? Would you support embargoes similar to the Cuba embargo on them? Do you try to get Canada,your home country, to insitute an embargo on Cuba and these other countries for their repressive undemocratic systems? Maybe you could organize to make Canada the third of 193 countries in the UN that supports the embargo on Cuba.

  • JFK was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald, an open admirer of Fidel Castro.

    You’ve watched too many Oliver Stone movies. Put down the bong.

  • Really? You think all decisions in Cuba are best left to the dictator Raul Castro? Wow. At least you’re honest.

    Why not let the Cuban people make the decision about what kind of government they want? Are Cuban people not capable of such responsibilities? Do they really need an octogenarian oligarchy run everthing for them?

    You seem to have a very low opinion of Cubans.

  • I am trying to provide as straight forward an answer as possible. However, the issues surrounding trade embargoes are far from simple and so I resist giving simplistic yes/no answers to questions which attempt to reduce a complex issue to a simple answer.

    As I said in my answer: No, the U.S. should not embargo Vietnam for their lack of liberal democracy, and also because Vietnam has made sincere efforts at improving relations with the US. Nor does Vietnam pose any kind of threat towards the U.S. The govt of Vietnam has benefited by the increased cash flow, however they also allow more independent business than Cuba does.

    As for China, maybe yes, not because of the lack of liberal democracy, but because of their invasion and occupation of Tibet and their ongoing cyberattacks on the U.S. Many of the top generals and party officials have become very wealthy through Chinese state & private corporations. The PLA own many key industries.

    For Cuba, the U.S. has made attempts to improve relations. Obama relaxed travel & remittance restrictions. In response, the Cuban govt gave him nothing. The Castros have made no sincere attempts at improving US relations. They want the money, no strings attached.

    Straight enough?

  • I am very curious how you get from no embargo to a free Cuba. Step by step I mean. I would hope Circles would receive your post. I simply can not wrap my brain around how prosperity would make a dictator walk away from more power and more wealth. Is this sort of like the Laffer Curve the Reagan administration tried to sell us? A kind of trickle down theory where given enough prosperity a tyrant like Castro would peacefully step down. I welcome this analysis.

  • The difference is that, short of demanding democracy, many things can be negotiated with the current Cuban government in advance of lifting the embargo. But the US must be willing to sit down at the table and talk first. The US must assert a committed desire to seek a negotiated peace. Currently, the US maintains a ridgid position for lifting the embargo that the Cuban government cannot possibly entertain. The very fact that the US is symbolically holding a gun to Cuba’s head is reason enough to dismiss the inflexibility of Helms Burton entirely. I firmly believe that the Cuban government can and will agree to compromise if the US government will agree to negotiated compromise too. It’s totally irrational and irresponsible to believe that the stipulations required to over-turn Helms Burton can be obtained through negotiation…initially, the US will not get everything that they want. But a negotiated peace will then open the door to further negotiation down the road as relations improve and economic ties begin to gel. Dropping the embargo does not lessen American resolve to promote change in Cuba. In fact, it will enhance the ability as more and more opportunities to cooperate come to the fold. Stronger relations will help promote stronger potential for change. It’s inevitable.

  • Yes, isn’t that the book where he said he did not want to be President and wanted to bring open elections and democracy back to Cuba. How did that work out?

  • I lived in Cuba. I am married to a Cuban. I know more than it appears you assume that I know. Better still, I know enough to know that guys like you hate the US more than you really like Cuba. Cuba just becomes the excuse you need to criticize the US. No one who really cares about Cubans can feel good about the quality of Cuban hospitals and schools. If you cared about Cuba for more than a history lesson, you would feel badly about Cubans who have to buy their rice from Cuban bodegas. Have you ridden the P11 in Havana? That alone should provoke counter-revolution. By the way, I don’t watch Fox. At least the news. Love Fox Sports.

  • I don’t know…you’ll have to ask Raul, or his successor. It’s entirely up to them…or at least it should be.

  • Griffin, it looks like it is going to be hard to get a straight answer from you on whether you would support embargoes on Vietnam and China because they are light years away from the model of liberal democracy you believe in.
    Did normal trade relations with those countries “only provide more funds for the dictatorships”?

  • Yes I have, and yes I do. Fidel knew a good line when he saw it.

    In that same speech, Fidel pledged to restore democracy to Cuba. That was a promise he never intended to keep and one which he broke as soon as he had seized power.

  • You point to the UN as an example of “world democracy” …I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. The UN is a talking shop of states, where dictatorships and kleptocracies have as much say as liberal democracies. The UN is not a moral institution.

    US hypocrisy with regards to China is well known, and deserves to be condemned. I will add to that the condemnation of the government of my own country, Canada. With such a large market, cheap labour and cash-heavy banks, Western capitalist governments seem much less interested in human rights. Oh, they mention specific issues from time to time, politely at private meeting with Chinese officials. But it does not stop them from doing business with China.

    That record of hypocrisy goes directly against your argument that by lifting the embargo, the US could gain some leverage with which to push the Castro regime to political liberalization. Clearly, that process has not happened with respect to China or Vietnam, and it is not likely to happen in Cuba either.

    You are quite right, Cuba does not pose a military threat to the US. But they do have significant intelligence assets inside the US and at their listening post at Lourdes, where the Chinese & Russians have taken a renewed interest. Cuba sells intel collected from the US to interested third countries. Consider the case of Ana Montes).

    Fidel Castro deliberately provoked the US into imposing the embargo. He had the USSR at his back and figured he didn’t need or want US money. The embargo served his purpose of driving a deep wedge between the US and Cuba, of severing the economic, social and political ties between the two countries. Fidel wanted a divorce, not a separation. He got what he wanted. Now that the USSR is gone, Raul figured Cuba needs American money and he figures he has structured his military-corporate regime to benefit from the influx of US dollars. He’s right: GAESA is the largest corporation on the island. The military controls all the banks, resorts and all the import/export business.

    Therefore, I maintain that lifting the embargo will not bring freedom or democracy to Cuba. It will enrich the Castro regime and the ruling clique. It might improve the standard of living of the average Cuban, but he will still be subjected to the same brutal repression and denial of human rights by the single party state which has ruled Cuba for 55 years.

    I fail to see how anybody who claims to stand for the rights of the working class people of the world can endorse a policy which will enrich a military dictatorship and cement it’s grip on power for generations to come.

  • China, Vietnam and Cuba are all different cases, with their own historical peculiarities.

    In the case of Vietnam, the US negotiated an end to their embargo on that country when Vietnam agreed to return the last of the POW’s.

    The US lifted the embargo on China after Mao had died and Deng Xioping agreed to open the country up to foreign investment. Kissinger has made a huge pile of money as a consultant to US investors wanting to do business in China.

    Nobody believes Vietnam poses any kind threat to US interests in the region. In fact, current US policy is to engage diplomatically with Vietnam as an lever against China. So no, I would not support an embargo on Vietnam. Although not a liberal democracy, they have improved considerably since the 1970’s.

    The Chinese do continue to pose a military threat to the US. Chinese hackers in the PLA have been identified in thousands of cyber-attacks against US government, military, industrial and financial networks. Respect for human rights in China is still limited. Not as bad as under Mao, but still far from a liberal democracy.

    If the US government was serious about defending their national interest, they would be doing much more about China, possibly even via economic sanctions. However, as the Chinese own one third of all US government debt, the US has it’s hands tied in dealing with them.

    So I return the discussion to the argument that by lifting the US embargo on Cuba, the Castro regime would somehow be forced to become a liberal democracy. In the cases of China & Vietnam, it has not happened. There is no reason to think it would happen with Cuba.

    So is your goal the establishment of democracy & freedom in Cuba? Or is it merely to have the embargo lifted, damned the consequences? The Castro regime is structured to control the lion’s share of all business with the island. Therefore lifting the embargo will only provide more funds for the dictatorship, which will make democracy and freedom even less likely.

  • Griffin, would you support a new embargo on Vietnam and China for not being liberal democracies?

  • Defenders and promoters of democracy will always insist that the establishment of democracy takes precedence over all other forms of political governence…and in the case of Cuba, it takes precedence over inflicting economic sanctions that continue to hurt the Cuban people, rather than the Cuban government. American style democracy is not the be-all to end-all in the world. And it certainly doesn’t justify American interventionist policy aimed at Cuba either. Are the people in China and Vietnam now living much better without the US interventionist policies of the past? Absolutely. The world merely wants the same for Cuba.

    It’s ironic that, in this day and age, a little island in the Caribbean, with absolutely no military might of its own, can continue to strike paranoia, fear, and resentment into the hearts of the most powerful nation on earth. All-the-while, the US unabashedly and without apology, freely does billions of dollars in business with China annually ~ a country with a similar system of governence as that of Cuba. The US continues to make no apologies for this blatant contridiction and disgraceful display of hypocracy, either to Cuba, or to the rest of the world. It only serves to confirm that America’s motivation for singling out Cuba is completely driven by spite…and nothing else. It has nothing to do with democracy…how could it? The US government also confirms the value of democracy to the world every year when it continues to ignore the democratic process and opinion of the United Nations. Promoting democracy for Cuba is just a cover to continue inflicting spiteful cold-war revenge on a poor and defenseless nation that refuses to kowtow to American imperialism.

  • Do you have any idea of the various stages the Cuban revolution has undergone? Do you know what happened in 1971? Why? In 1987? Why? In 2011? Why? You know nothing about Cuba but the bs you hear on Fox.

  • Have you ever read History will absolve me? Do you know why he wrote it?

  • Cuban exiles, who these people supported, were involved in the actual shooting of JFK. Posada Carilles — who we all know bombed that Cubana flight — removed damaging evidence against Reagan and Bush from a safe-house in Nicaragua. These actions, and many more, allowed the CIA to take control of our government. That’s treason. But I appreciate you all showing your ignorance of basic historical facts.

  • So by lifting the embargo, Cuba would become a liberal democracy, just like Vietnam and China have?

  • We often hear two arguments for lifting the embargo:

    1. The US trades with China and Vietnam, so it’s not fair that the US won’t trade with Cuba.

    2. Lifting the embargo will help bring democracy to Cuba.

    These two arguments are mutually contradictory. If China and Vietnam are held up as examples of a sane & fair US trade policy, then why are Vietnam and China still run by single party dictatorships? Shouldn’t those countries be democracies by now?

  • Yes, but there lies the paradox…until the embargo is lifted, the war is over, and peace comes to the conflict, neither of us will ever really know what the Cuban government would then do in a non-contested and economic free-trade environment with the US. My feeling is that the sheer weight of American economic influence, freedom and democracy exchanged through normalized relations, will permeate through and inevitably drive political evolution in Cuba. Cuban-Americans will obviously take the lead role in promoting the possibilities. Once the wall comes down, it will be impossible for the Cuban government to contain the influence…if, of course, they will still want to contain it. My feeling is to the contrary…when the war is over and Cuba is then fully recognized by the US, many of their government’s war-time measures will be scrapped and/or significantly relaxed. But again, we’ll never know until the US scraps or further relaxes their policies first too. It’s really a chicken or the egg thing. But one thing is certain…if the US were to scrap the embargo today, that decision would not threaten the US in any way. That cold-war relic is not only no longer necessary, but a continuing counter-productive tragedy for both nations.

  • Did I just read your comment correctly? Criminality is genetic? Really?

  • I assume your comment is strictly emotional. Do you really consider being anti-Castro as act of treason against the US Constitution? Really?

  • You obviously don’t understand what took place. US legal tender or currency belongs to the American people. Under current law, a law common to nearly every country, it is the sovereign right of the government to determine who and where that currency may be used. This health insurers reimbursed an insured for health services received in Cuba. In other words, effectively paying the Castros with an unauthorized sum of US currency. Hence the fine. Had this insured not sought reimbursement or chose instead to pay in Euros or Yuan, there would be no crime and no reason to fine the insurance company. I DON’T WANT US DOLLARS USED BY THE CASTROS. Given that the US dollar is the world’s reserve currency, this is impossible to completely eliminate. But measures such as this taken to extent they are in accordance with Federal law are a reasonable means to discourage the use of US currency in Castro-related transactions. As I said earlier, sounds fair to me.

  • I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. I contend that if more free trade and tourism were enough to send the Castros into retirement, then why has it not happened? Keep in mind that Cuba can trade with the whole world except the US. Tourists from all over the world can travel freely to Cuba. I am not naïve nor minimizing the value of US trade and tourism to Cuba. Would US trade double trade volume to Cuba? Not likely. Cuba is would still be poor and unable to increase trade volumes dramatically with or without the embargo in place. Would unrestricted US tourism really make a difference? Again, not likely. It has been estimated that unrestricted US tourism would increase Cuba’s tourism revenues by 25%. Significant yes, but not enough to cause regime change. Terry, I emphatically contend that lifting the embargo only makes the Castros stronger, not weaker. Why else would they be so hell-bent on lifting the embargo? After all, if they believed that you were right, then lifting the embargo would be the catalysts of their undoing and we both know that no dictator wants that. You are admirably hopeful but completely wrong about the effect that lifting the embargo would have on the Castro regime.

  • Point taken, Moses. The main obstacle to us finding total agreement is our difference concerning ideological and political responsibilities. In these modern times, I’m a firm believer that no country’s government has the right to impose their political value system on another. The US is still on a crusade to bring democracy to Cuba. But the over-lying question and contradiction is… does the US really have the right to impose their will through the continuation of economic sanctions that only hurt the Cuban people, and not the Cuban government? I see the Cuban government surviving no matter how unbearable current conditions become for the people, due in part to the US embargo. As things become increasingly worse for Cubans, the government can always continue to use the US as the scapegoat and rally support for not conceding defeat to America, especially after already surviving over 5 decades of US hostilities. To capitulate to US demands would make all prior sacrifices meaningless.

    To me, it’s better to let the Cuban government fall completely on their face…unaided by US government interventionist policies. The Cuban government would have no where to hide when left unmolested by the US government. There would then be a ground-swell of public demonstrations in Cuba demanding changes, supported not by the US government, but by the Cuban-American community in Miami. The Cuban émigrés will be able to accomplish more meaningful change in Cuba in 5 years…than the US government has been able to accomplish in 5 decades.

  • Yes, yes, Chuck. The United Fruit Co committed some awful human rights abuses several decades ago.

    However, Rep. Lincoln Rafael Díaz-Balart was born in 1954 and Rep. Mario Rafael Díaz-Balart was born in 1961. I don’t see how they can be held criminally responsible for actions committed by other people before they were born, even if they are related to them. Or are you suggesting that anybody related to Attorney Rafael Diaz-Balart, and all his decedents, are guilty of murder?

    If so, you must indict his daughter, Mirta Francisca de la Caridad Díaz-Balart (aunt to Lincoln & Mario) and her first husband, Fidel Castro, and their son, Fidel Ángel “Fidelito” Castro Díaz-Balart.

  • A criminal trait is evident in the Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart genetic genealogy is evident. Suffice to remit ourselves to “La Guira in Banes, Cuba, a United Fruit sugarcane plantation community in Banes, Cuba.
    This Soweto-type community of thousands of English Speaking Caribbean and Haitian migrants and poor Cubans, were forced to live in thatched roof huts without electricity, running water, sewer, schools and healthcare facilities.
    The only jobs available was the back breaking cutting of sugarcane in the stifling heat in Cuba. Most workers were paid with “vales” or a company paper, which could be used only in company stores at black market prices.
    Hunger and malnutrition was evident in children with distended abdomen filled with parasite, rampant infant and maternal mortality, which can be corroborated by visiting cemeteries in Banes, Tacajo, Naranjo Dulce, Baguanos, Marti or any of the hundreds of Hell on Earth semi-slave communities generated by the United Fruit Co., Manati Sugar Co., Guantanamo Sugar Co etc., none of which was ever denounced to any Human Rights Organization.
    When Union leader Jesus Menendez stood up in defense of sugarcane workers, he was murdered by Captain Casillas Lumpuy under orders from the US Embassy in Havana. Attorney Rafael Diaz-Balart was no where to be found in defense of justice.

  • You and I will terminally disagree on this point. For the very reasons you support lifting the embargo, I heartily urge that it be maintained and even strengthened. Now is not the time to ease the pressure, however insignificant as it may be on the Castros. They are facing the very end of their physical reign. The economy is in shambles with no lifeline in sight. The outmigration and demographic markers are at record levels. The international criticism of the US embargo is a paper tiger. No sanctions, no boycotts, nada. You say it’s time to throw in the towel and I say the battle is nearly won.

  • I am no fan of Dick Cheney either. But to his credit and our benefit, the US only had to suffer his neocon politics for 8 years. Castro has imposed his egomaniacal will upon the Cuban people for 55 years. Have you checked the Castros record of interventions in Africa and Latin America? They have given at least as good as they have gotten. Once again, challenge me on my facts and try to leave the personal attacks for small-minded folks.

  • Can you please be specific about the crimes and acts of treason allegedly committed by Mario, Ileana, and Marco? Would Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who also supports the embargo on Cuba, also be included in your indictment?

    Having a difference political opinion is not normally considered a crime or an act of treason, in the US at least. In Cuba, it is.

  • Actually Jeff, Fidel Castro invited the comparison with Hitler when he lifted the phrase, “History will absolve me” from “Mein Kampff”.

  • Moses, I’m happy to hear that you recognize that Helms Burton is largely counter-productive. You’ve also expressed that it is not clear to what extent the embargo has caused suffering for the Cuban people and to what extent the regime itself has caused the suffering in an effort to stay in power. I think it’s very fair of you to state that Like me, you also recognize the dilemma.

    Given all of the controversy and negative world opinion concerning the contiuation of the embargo, it’s my hope that you can also agree that perhaps it’s time to find out once and for all, if by removing it, the present Cuban government can then be more progressive, and help to provide a much higher standard of living for the Cuban people. Will the Cuban government adopt democracy and a free press immediately? Likely not. But I don’t think we should let those current deficiencies dictate the pace for normalizing relations. I would like to see the Cuban government stand alone on their own two feet and either live or die by their own merrits without being able to divert blame for their shortcomings on the US. Any continuing criticism of the Cuban government would then stick like glue, and world opinion would shift accordingly by placing blame where it rightfully belongs. Unfortunately, the US embargo is distracting that effort at the moment, and clouding fair and unbiased perceptions. The US is bearing the brunt of the criticism, instead of allowing the Cuban government to either swim or sink.

  • Moses, You are clueless and it shows. First of all, using Hitler as a comparison for any live leader should only be done when you are speaking about Dick Cheney. To compare Fidel Castro to either is pure propaganda. More importantly, it is precisely all of the terrorist attacks that this country has launched, or condoned, which have killed innocent Cubans including children, are exactly why we need to end the embargo.

    In this case what you miss Moses is that the US is the terrorist sponsoring nation and should be under an embargo from the rest of the world.

  • You nailed that one. Those gusanos who floridians elect are criminals and should have been arrested for treason years ago. They couldn’t care less about the people of Cuba, or the people of the US.

  • Don’t blame Obama , blame the disgusting policy he inherited and the henchmen, Mario,Ileana, and Marco who drive it. They are sick people and anyone who is unwilling to make changes with Cuba is in the same box. Unbelievable how much time has been wasted and how much has been lost.

  • Rich, first of all, my “attack” is against the Castros, not Cuba. There is a huge difference. Criticizing Hitler is not the same as criticizing all WWII Germans and criticizing the Ku Klux Klan is not an attack on all white people. Second, Helms Burton is intended to put economic pressure on the regime. It is clear that this pressure is largely counter-productive. It is not clear, however, to what extent the embargo has caused suffering for the Cuban people and to what extent the regime itself has caused the suffering in its effort to stay in power. The bombing of Flt. #455, Bay of Pigs, etc. have nothing to do with the enforcement of US Federal law. By the way, any ‘untrue’ criticism of even the brutal Castro regime would be unfair. Please let me know which of my comments are untrue.

  • I guess, Moses, the UN 188-to-2 vote, the fate of Cubana Flight 455, the Bay of Pigs, the car-bombing of newsman Emilio Milian, etc., were also “fair,” at least in the vernacular of those who hide behind the skirts of a Cuban policy that the rest of the world, including America’s best friends, strongly oppose. Almost six decades of hurting innocent Cubans on the island in the guise of hurting or seeking revenge on Castro is obvious to the rest of the world, Moses. But I imagine you and the vast “anti-Castro” cottage industry will persist in preaching to the choir. So, after all these decades, why can’t you convince at least one other nation in the world {discounting Israel because it is very dependent on billions of dollars in U. S. aid as well as the U. S. veto in the UN}?. “Fair to Me.” Is there any attack on Cuba that you would deem unfair?

  • Anyone who thinks it is OK for the US government to fine and punish businesses from providing medical care to travelers or others in Cuba is not only supporting the “embargo,” but endorsing the US policy of making the Cuban people suffer in the vain and cruel hope that this lead to the overthrow of the Cuban government. Such people stand exposed by their inhumanity.

  • Sounds fair to me…..

Comments are closed.