fidel will attend the cuban parliament today

[click images]

.

I think this is going to be very important.

Saturday's appearance will be particularly interesting because the last time Fidel Castro attended parliament was a month before his health emergency. Since then lawmakers have convened with an empty chair set aside for Fidel.

The special session will deal with a topic followed closely by the elder Castro brother: the threat of global nuclear war.

A brief statement read on state television's Friday night newscast did not say if Castro would address the assembly, which will be broadcast nationwide. But it's hard to imagine that he won't since he requested the special session.

I hate to say it, but I feel things beginning to shift into place. I think Fidel does too.

.

UPDATE: BB2 points out in comments [*HE DID NOT! I MISREAD IT!] that so far today people are saying Fidel is urging Obama to attack Iran. I think that [*MY MISREADING] is [*WOULD HAVE BEEN] a misreading of the end of Fidel's most recent regular column:

"’You are backing a country that has hundreds of nuclear weapons [Isreal] but you are saying that you want to stop Iran, which could possibly have them some day…’"

The Iranians have stated that they will fire 100 rockets against every one of the U.S. and Israeli ships that are blockading Iran, as soon as they inspect any Iranian merchant ship.

In that way, when Obama gives the order to comply with the Security Council resolution, he will be decreeing the sinking of all the U.S. warships in that area.

Never before has such a dramatic decision fallen upon a president of the United States. He should have foreseen that.

On this occasion, for the first time in my life, I am addressing United States President Barack Obama:

You must know that it is in your hands to offer humanity the only real possibility of peace. Only on one occasion can you make use of your prerogatives by giving the order to fire.

It is possible that later, on the basis of this traumatic experience, solutions might be found that will not lead us once again to this apocalyptical situation. Everybody in your country, including your worst adversaries of the left or the right, will doubtless be grateful to you, and also the people of the United States, who are not in any way guilty of the situation created.

I ask you to deign to hear this appeal that I am conveying to you in the name of the Cuban people.

I understand that a rapid response cannot be expected, nor would you ever give one. Think it through well, consult your specialists, ask your most powerful allies and international adversaries for their opinion on the matter.

I am not interested in honors or glories. Do it!

The world really can be liberated from nuclear weapons and also conventional ones.

The worst of all the variants will be nuclear war, which is already virtually inevitable. PREVENT IT!

I am pretty sure Fidel meant for Obama to use his prerogative NOT to inspect Iranian ships, to NOT go so far as to force Iran to protect herself. I admit that is not so clear from this wording, but the rest of it, here, and in everything he's written over the years, doesn't make sense if he is urging Obama to provoke the Iranians.

I'm still looking.

.

UPDATE: From the end of a piece at the Miami Herald about his speech in the parliament today:

Castro noted that after months of warning of the risks of nuclear war over the enforcement of sanctions against Iran — he even gave a deadline in June — he's now less pessimistic.

"At first I thought that the imminent danger of war had no solution possible," he said. "I am sure, however, that it will not happen that way and that, on the contrary, the conditions for a solution (...) are being created at this time."

"One man alone will have to make the decision: The president of the United States," Castro said, because Iran will not bow to U.S. and Israeli demands to halt its nuclear program.

If Obama approves an attack on Iran, he added, he will trigger a war that will spread through the Middle East and Asia and cause "the instantaneous death of hundreds of millions people, among them an incalculable number of people in his own country."

The "established order of the planet ... will inevitably collapse, the reigning social order will disappear abruptly" and all currencies will be worthless, he added.

Castro noted that "as luck would have it,'' Obama's father was Muslim and his mother was Christian and added he hoped the U.S. president will become conscious of the threat to world peace.

In comparison, he called Richard Nixon a "cynic," branded Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman as "ignorant" and called Jimmy Carter "a decent person."

So I guess we settled that one anyway.

.

UPDATE: I really hate wading through MSM propaganda for any good bits, but this one was worth the work:

"Fidel attracts more people. There's nobody better than him," said Pedro Gonzalez, a 90-year-old retiree who watched the session of parliament on a nationwide broadcast. "Look how well he's recuperated. It's incredible. Fidel makes us feel better."

Me too, Pedro, me too.

I don't think there will be a reliable translation of his eleven-minute speech until after the weekend, but I'll keep looking.

.

OKAY. PRIME EXAMPLE WHY YOU NEVER TRUST THE AP.

While it was the first time the brothers have appeared together publicly since Fidel fell ill, neither made any effort to approach the other, and they never even seemed to make eye contact.

There is no rift between the Castro brothers. Jesus. Give it a rest.

And, man, being something of an expert on the topic of old men, I can't tell you how great it is to be poring through pages and pages of images of Fidel looking so well. There was almost no hope for his survival, and he damn well has DONE it. I hope he never dies.

.

UPDATE: * Sheesh. I have GOT to train myself not to start blogging before I've had at LEAST a few gulps of coffee. Bad enough I try to comment without enough in me, or while waiting for it to be ready. That's embarrassing enough! I'm leaving this all up here because it's still cogent stuff you need to know, even if I started in on it assuming the preposterous was what was coming of it all... which... in my own defense... is lately a fairly safe assumption....

.

viva fidel forever

[click image]

.

Fidel Castro appears on Cuban TV
By Isabel Sanchez (AFP) – 1 hour ago

HAVANA — Aging former Cuban leader Fidel Castro appeared on television for the first time in nearly a year on Monday, as the government began releasing 52 dissidents under a landmark deal brokered with the Catholic Church.

Castro, 83, appeared healthy and animated as he discussed his views on the Middle East and North Korea in a recorded interview with the anchor of the "Round Table" news and analysis show, which aired on state-run television at 6:30 pm (2230 GMT).

The Cuban revolutionary spoke of an "imminent" US and Israeli attack on Iran, and blamed the United States for secretly sinking a South Korean warship in March, then accusing North Korea of being behind the incident.

An international inquiry found that the North had torpedoed South Korea's Cheonan corvette, killing 46 sailors. But Pyongyang has angrily denied responsibility.

Castro has made only sporadic appearances — either on television or in public — since emergency intestinal surgery in July 2006 drove him to hand power to his younger brother Raul.

Political columns in Fidel Castro's name are published regularly in state media, but the columns have focused for the past year on international affairs and largely ignored domestic affairs.

The television interview was taped, as were two previous Castro performances on the program in June and September of 2007.

Recent events represent something of a return to form for Castro, who turns 84 next month.

He was photographed at a public function at a science center on Wednesday, believed to be his first public outing since December, when he left his residence to meet visiting Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Five photos were published over the weekend of Castro wearing a track suit — his customary attire since relinquishing the presidency — greeting well-wishers at Havana's National Center for Scientific Investigation.

The bout of Castro appearances comes at a delicate time politically for Cuba as it begins releasing dissidents under a landmark deal brokered with the Catholic Church last week.

If all 52 activists are freed as the government has promised, it would be the largest prisoner release of Raul Castro's tenure.

The last video of Castro was almost a year ago when he was filmed in an animated conversation with a group of law students from Venezuela's University of Carabobo.

Guerrilla revolutionary and communist idol, Castro held out against history when he turned tiny Cuba into a thorn in the paw of the mighty capitalist United States.

Famed for his rumpled olive fatigues, straggly beard and the cigars he reluctantly gave up for his health, he kept a tight clamp on dissent at home while defining himself abroad with his defiance of Washington.

Castro and a band of followers launched their revolt in earnest on December 2, 1956 when they landed in southeastern Cuba on the ship Granma.

Twenty-five months later, against great odds, they ousted president Fulgencio Batista and Castro was named prime minister.

After leading the Americas' only one-party communist country through nearly half of the 20th century and into the 21st, he still serves as first secretary of Cuba's Communist Party.

.

at least FIVE leaks [blowouts] now identified in the gulf

[click image]

.

YOU DO NOT WANT TO MISS THIS LINK.

There are three "leaks" so far publicly associated with Deepwater Horizon / Thunder Horse... plus TWO more... and it's altogether conceivable you missed the full impact of my crazed investigations yesterday, so go back and follow those links too... OR listen to the barnswoggle being put out on yer TVs.

Your call.

.

BP says approximately 210,000 gallons of oil are spilling into the Gulf per day. But John Amos, a geologist at the West Virginia-based nonprofit SkyTruth, says that at least 1.1 million gallons of oil is leaking out of the well every day. His calculation is based on early NASA images of the slick that showed it covering 2,200 square miles of the Gulf, and on the estimated thickness of oil needed for the slick to be visible from space. "If it really is just 210,000 and they can't handle that—you've got to be kidding me," says Amos, who has tracked the changing estimates of the spill on his blog. "One of the world's biggest oil companies plus the Coast Guard has been beaten by 210,000 gallons a day—do they really want us to think that?"

But even this figure may be on the low end. Under pressure, BP for the first time released video of the sea floor spill site this week. Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, analyzed the tape and told NPR this week that the oil flow is likely closer to 3 million gallons a day. If that's the case, the situation in the Gulf would equal more than two Exxon Valdez spills every week. The Exxon Valdez incident was, until now, the worst oil spill disaster in US history.

And the absolute worst-case-scenario? According to government data on daily production at another Gulf well, the BP spill could spew 6 million gallons per day if the wellhead that's currently restricting the flow breaks.

.

I still want to know WHAT externality would cause the oil to gush SO catastrophically if the companies stopped APPLYING the pressure to keep their reservoirs from being fouled...? I don't GET it. Yes, there would still be considerable problem with oil blurping up from the fistulae, as it were, caused by all the drill holes, but it seems to me this would be a much more relaxed and far slower release of crude into the Gulf. No? And wouldn't it be easier to get at these breaks and plug them with balloons until something more sturdy can be applied?

Did they EVER have a way to soundly plug these puppies once they were done with them?

I'M TRYING TO SAY THAT I THINK THIS MESS COULD BE MITIGATED IMMEDIATELY AND STOPPED ALTOGETHER IF THEY QUIT WITH THE BACK PRESSURE ON ALL THE RIGS.

Have I got the concept wrong?

I do KNOW that means giving up their precious oil there, but, well... uhm...?

.

I HAVE BEEN DREADING THIS THE MOST.

I have not wanted to say it because, actually, Cubans are not ultimately worth more or less than anyone else, but it's just so awful that we are almost certainly going to slime them so hard they can't get back up, after all these decades of trying to starve them. They SO do not deserve this. I haven't been able to make myself go over to Granma to see what they're saying yet... and I've been thinking about it for weeks.

Maybe I oughta just take a slug of brandy and do it now....

I'll get back to you on it.

.

Well, it seems I have girded myself for nothing. Fidel is griping about us being the ones who sunk the South Korean ship and majorly griping about Israel and our treatment of Iran... and the possible health risks of cell phones.

I probably should have married him.

.

endless blather

[click image]

.

'Race still an issue in Cuba'
By Patricia Grogg
1 February 2010

The elimination of racism remains unfinished business in Cuba today.

"We have to admit that the problem exists, determine its impact on the social model that we defend, and tackle it in depth," says Esteban Morales, an Afro-Cuban economist, political scientist and author of numerous articles and essays on the subject.
As a researcher at the University of Havana's Centre for the Study of the Hemisphere and the United States (CEHSEU), Morales could also be considered an expert on US affairs.

While he openly admits to the persistence of racism in Cuba, he takes issue with a statement recently issued by a group of 60 African-American artists and intellectuals accusing the Cuban government of Raúl Castro of persecuting and harassing black citizens based on the colour of their skin.

As far as Morales is concerned, accusations like these reflect a lack of awareness of the reality on the ground in Cuba, and "are trumped up as part of the same campaigns that US governments have always waged against the Cuban revolution".

"We talk about racism and say that we need to perfect guarantees of civil and democratic rights, but not only for blacks in Cuba—for society as whole. This is a struggle in which our allies include the country's highest political leadership," he says in this interview with IPS.

Question: Why has the Cuban revolution's social model not succeeded in eliminating the disadvantages faced by the black population?

Esteban Morales: Despite the radical nature of the process that got underway in 1959, the country's social policies failed to take skin colour into account. In terms of social policy, after the triumph of the revolution, all poor people were treated equally, without differentiating between whites and blacks. But this was something that needed to be done, because the colour of one's skin in Cuba is a significant variable in social differences.

White people came to Cuba by their own free will, as colonisers, with goals that they very often achieved. Black people were brought here by force and turned into slaves. These are very different starting points that cannot be forgotten or ignored, and that continue to have an impact today.

Despite the fact that everyone's living standards improved and black Cubans achieved a more favourable position over the last half century, the profound differences did not disappear entirely. During the special period [the economic crisis of the 1990s, following the collapse of the East European socialist bloc], we realised that those who were hit hardest by the crisis were in fact black Cubans, who had fewer possibilities of forging a livelihood.

Even in Cuba today, being poor and white is not the same as being poor and black.

And yet the Cuban government declared in 1962 that the problem of racism had been overcome.

That was a mistake, caused by idealism and wilfulness, and the pressures of political circumstances in those years. From that time on, there was a long period of silence on the subject, since talking about racial differences was seen as playing into the hands of the enemy. Anyone who insisted on bringing up the subject was considered racist and divisive.

The issue of racism re-emerged during the special period, and with the kind of virulence you would expect from a problem that was supposed to have been solved, but actually wasn't.

On more than one occasion you have said that in this country, people are educated "to be white". Do you think it would be fair to view this kind of contradiction as a form of "institutionalised" racism?

It is a certain kind of institutionalised racism, but not as a result of specific directives, or a conscious decision. It is more a result of flaws and errors in the educational process, in the teaching of history, in the racial representations in our books. It is a result of failing to address in the schools, in depth, the consequences of slavery, which are still felt today.

The problem is not with the institution of education, but rather with aspects and problems of social life, with dysfunctionalities and imperfections in our society. In Cuba there is still a lack of racial awareness. For whites, it isn't important because they have always been in power. But blacks need racial awareness in order to fight against racism and fight for their place in society.

Racial discrimination is a phenomenon that persists in people's minds, in the family, in personal relationships, sometimes in institutionalised groups, and this is something that cannot be easily resolved.

How would you propose to solve these shortcomings in the field of education?

The only way to remedy this is through strict vigilance to guarantee equal opportunities for all in employment, and especially in the new economy - in other words, in tourism and joint ventures with foreign capital - as well as in education, along with major cultural work.

Education should really not be biased towards any colour, but what is happening in practice is that our schoolchildren are being educated, for the most part, to think that it is better to be white and that it is a disadvantage to be black.

We have to deal with the problems of a Western bias in our education, and expand the teaching of history to include Africa, Asia and the Middle East, while addressing racial representation in our books. We have to take the discussion of racial discrimination into the schools, so that when kids go out into the streets and hear a racist remark, they will have a basis for challenging it.

What do you propose in social terms?

"We are all equal" was also a demagogic slogan of republicanism. Equality is the goal, the aspiration, while inequality and difference are what we stumble over every day.

We have to start by recognising the inequalities that exist in our society, despite all of the efforts that have been made to eliminate them, leading almost to the brink of egalitarianism. They are a legacy, but at the same time, they are a phenomenon that can be reproduced as a result of the dysfunctionalities of our social model, which needs to be perfected.

It is only by understanding these differences in depth and working on them that we can achieve genuine equality.

Do you think a specific policy for the black population is needed?

In Cuba there is a certain kind of affirmative action policy, although we don't call it that. After researching in depth the situation of families, the problems affecting children, the disabled, different social groups, we were led in practice to adopt affirmative action measures, because this is how we were able to reach the people who have historically been the least privileged and the most vulnerable.

There are phenomena that need to be remedied and this can only be done by addressing them separately, such as housing, employment, health. In all of these efforts, it is essential to take skin colour into account. The more research that is done, the more obvious it becomes that blacks are at the bottom, people of mixed-race backgrounds are generally in the middle, and whites are at the top.

Why isn't there more in-depth discussion, including coverage in the Cuban media, about this widely recognised issue?

There is growing debate at the intellectual and community levels, and in cultural centres, but it also needs to reach government bodies, and the country's political, social and grassroots organisations. This is what we are calling for, because more than 60 per cent of Cuba's population of 11.2 million people is not white [but instead either black or of mixed race] according to our studies.

Do you think it should form part of the political agenda as well?

Of course. The fact that President Raúl Castro referred to the issue in his December 20 address to parliament seems to imply that it could be on the agenda of the upcoming 6th Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba. And if it isn't, I think it should be.

In addition, there are two commissions studying different facets of the problem: one at the National Library and another at the Union of Cuban Artists and Writers (UNEAC). There should also be a commission to address this issue in parliament [National Assembly].

If the National Assembly specifically addresses the questions of religion, women or youth, then why not the issue of race? I believe it is of equal importance, but it has been dealt with less than any other.

Is there a danger that this discussion could be cut short out of fear that it could create internal divisions or be manipulated to be used against the revolution?

On the contrary, what is actually being used in the campaigns of our enemies is the fact that it has taken us so long to address the issue, and failing to discuss it is what could actually divide us.

What hurts us politically, from the point of view of our image abroad and inside the country, is the fact that our official discourse is out of sync with reality, because up until very recently we claimed that there were no racially related problems in Cuba.

I'm so tired of the issue of racism. Nobody seems to realize that ceasing to speak of it and simply maintaining a zero tolerance attitude about it—not stopping to glorify yourself as not racist by bitching about it—ceasing to denigrate others as racist when you think you can make a case for it, hallucinatory or not—simply ousting perpetrators on both sides, making them pay heavy social and political and financial prices for this bullshit would be a much bigger help. You keep talking about it, incessantly bringing it up in relation to whomever it is you don't like for their real or imagined perfidies, yer actually giving grounds for others to make it seem as though the matter were not settled, as though racism is in some wise okay, or usable as an excuse. At some point you just have to shut up and perform....
.

the right of everything to exist

[click image]

.

REFLECTIONS OF FIDEL
The right of humanity to exist
(Taken from CubaDebate)

CLIMATE change is already causing considerable damage and hundreds of millions of poor people are suffering the consequences.

The most advanced research centers assure that very little time is left for avoiding an irreversible catastrophe. James Hansen, of NASA’s Goddard Institute, says that a level of 350 parts carbon dioxide per million is still tolerable; today, however, the figure is in excess of 390 and it is increasing at a rate of 2 parts per million every year, exceeding the levels of 600,000 years ago. Each one of the last two decades has been the hottest ever recorded. The abovementioned gas increased 80 parts per million in the last 150 years.

The ice of the Arctic Sea, the vast, two-kilometer-thick layer that covers Greenland, the glaciers of South America which feed its principle sources of freshwater, the colossal volume that covers Antarctica, the layer that covers Kilimanjaro, the ice that covers the Himalayas and the enormous frozen mass of Siberia are visibly melting. Notable scientists fear qualitative jumps in these natural phenomena that give rise to changes.

Humanity placed great hope in the Copenhagen Summit, after the Kyoto Protocol signed in 1997, which entered into effect in 2005. The summit’s resounding failure gave way to shameful episodes that require due clarification.

The United States, with less than 5% of the world’s population, issues 25% of its carbon dioxide. The new president of the United States had promised to cooperate with international efforts to confront a problem that is affecting that country as much as the rest of the world. During meetings prior to the summit, it became evident that the leaders of that nation and of the richest nations maneuvered to make the weight of the sacrifice fall onto emerging and poor countries.

A large number of leaders and thousands of representatives of social movements and scientific institutions, determined to fight to preserve humanity from the greatest threat in its history went to Copenhagen, invited by the summit’s organizers. In order to focus on the political aspects of the summit, I will not go into details concerning the brutality of the Danish public forces, which attacked thousands of demonstrators and guests of the social movements and scientists who went to Denmark’s capital.

In Copenhagen, real chaos prevailed, and unbelievable things happened. Social movements and scientific institutions were not allowed to attend the debates. There were heads of state and government who were not even able to issue their opinions on vital problems. Obama and the leaders of the richest countries took over the conference with the complicity of the Danish government. The agencies of the United Nations were relegated.

Barack Obama, who arrived on the last day of the summit to remain there for only 12 hours, met with two groups of guests "hand-picked" by him and his collaborators. Together with one of them, he met with the rest of the highest delegations in the plenary hall. He spoke and immediately left via the back door. In that plenary session, except for the small group selected by him, the representatives of other countries were not allowed to speak. During that meeting, the presidents of Bolivia and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela were allowed to speak, because the president of the summit had no alternative than to concede that in the face of the strenuous demands of those present.

In an adjoining room, Obama met with the leaders of the richest countries, several of the most important emerging states, and two very poor ones. He presented a document, negotiated with two or three of the most important countries, ignored the United Nations General Assembly, gave press conferences, and marched away like Julius Caesar during one of his victorious campaigns in Asia Minor, which prompted him to exclaim, "I came, I saw, I conquered."

Even Gordon Brown, prime minister of the United Kingdom, had affirmed on October 19, "If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement in some future period can undo that choice. By then it will be irretrievably too late."

Brown concluded his speech with dramatic words: "We cannot afford to fail. If we act now; if we act together; if we act with vision and resolve, success at Copenhagen is still within our reach. But if we falter, the earth itself will be at risk… For the planet there is no plan B."

Now he arrogantly stated that the United Nations cannot be taken hostage by a small group of countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Tuvalu, while accusing China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other emerging states of giving in to the seduction of the United States and signing a document that dumps the Kyoto Protocol into the garbage bin and contains no binding commitment whatsoever on the part of the United States and its rich allies.

I feel obliged to remember that the United Nations was born just six decades ago, after the last World War. There were no more than 50 independent countries at the time. Today, it is made up of more than 190 independent states, after the odious colonial system ceased to exist because of the determined struggles of the peoples. Even the People’s Republic of China was denied UN membership for many years, and a puppet government held its representation in that institution and on its privileged Security Council.

The tenacious support of a growing number of Third World countries was indispensable to the international recognition of China, and an extremely important factor for the United States and its allies in NATO recognizing its (China’s) rights in the United Nations.

In the historic struggle against fascism, the Soviet Union made the largest contribution. More than 25 million of its sons and daughters died, and enormous destruction ravaged the country. Out of that struggle, it emerged as a superpower, capable of countering, in part, the absolute dominion of the imperial system of the United States and the former colonial powers in their unlimited plunder of the peoples of the Third World. When the USSR disintegrated, the United States extended its political and military power toward the East, toward the heart of Russia, and its influence over the rest of Europe grew. There is nothing strange about what happened in Copenhagen.

I would like to emphasize the unjust and offensive nature of the statements of the prime minister of the United Kingdom, and the yanqui attempt to impose, as a summit agreement, a document that was never discussed at any time with the participating countries.

At a December 21 press conference, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez stated a truth that is impossible to deny; I will use some of his exact paragraphs: "I would like to emphasize that in Copenhagen, there was no agreement whatsoever of the Conference of the Parties; no decision whatsoever was made with respect to binding or non-binding commitments or international law; there was simply no agreement in Copenhagen.

"The summit was a failure and a deception of world public opinion…. The lack of political will was laid bare….

"It was a step backward in the actions of the international community to prevent or mitigate the effects of climate change….

"The average world temperature could rise by five degrees…."

Immediately, our foreign minister added other interesting facts about possible consequences according to the latest scientific investigations.

"From the Kyoto Protocol to date, the emissions of the developed countries have risen by 12.8%... and 55% of that volume comes from the United States.

"One person in the United States consumes, on average, 25 barrels of oil annually; one European, 11; one Chinese citizen, less than two; and one Latin American or Caribbean, less than one.

"Thirty countries, including those of the European Union, consume 80% of the fuel produced."

The very real fact is that the developed countries which signed the Kyoto Protocol drastically increased their emissions. They now wish to replace the base of emissions adopted starting 1990 with that of 2005, with which the United States, the maximum issuer, would reduce its emissions of 25 years earlier by only 3%. It is a shameless mockery of world opinion.

The Cuban foreign minister, speaking on behalf of a group of ALBA countries, defended China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other important states with emerging economies, affirming the concept reached in Kyoto of "common, but differentiated responsibilities; meaning that the historic accumulators and the developed countries, those responsible for this catastrophe, have different responsibilities from those of the small island states, or those of the countries of the South, above all the least-developed countries….

"Responsibilities means financing; responsibilities means the transfer of technology under acceptable conditions, and then Obama makes a play on words, and instead of talking about common but differentiated responsibilities, talks about ‘common, but differentiated responses.’

"He leaves the plenary without deigning to listen to anybody, nor had he listened to anybody before his speech."

At a subsequent press conference, before leaving the Danish capitol, Obama affirmed, "We've made meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough in Copenhagen. For the first time in history the major economies have come together to accept their responsibility…"

In his clear and irrefutable statement, our foreign minister affirmed, "What is meant by ‘the major economies have come together to accept their responsibility?’ It means that they are shrugging off an important part of the burden signified by the financing for the mitigation and adaptation of countries — above all the entire South — to climate change, onto China, Brazil, India and South Africa; because it must be said that in Copenhagen, there was an assault on, a mugging of China, Brazil, India, and South Africa, and of all of the countries euphemistically referred to as developing."

These were the resounding and irrefutable words with which our foreign minister recounted what happened in Copenhagen.

I should add that, at 10 a.m. on December 19th, after our Vice President Esteban Lazo and the Cuban foreign minister had left, there was a belated attempt to resuscitate the corpse of Copenhagen as a summit agreement. At that point, virtually no heads of state or even ministers were left. Once again, the exposé of the remaining members of the Cuban, Venezuela, Bolivian, Nicaraguan and other countries’ delegations defeated the maneuver. That was how the inglorious summit ended.

Another fact that cannot be forgotten was that, during the most critical moments of that day, in the early morning, the Cuban foreign minister, together with the delegations that were waging their dignified battle, offered UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon their cooperation in the increasingly difficult battle that is being waged, and in the efforts that must be undertaken in the future to preserve the life of our species.

The environmental group WWF warned that climate change will become uncontrollable in the next 5 to 10 years if emissions are not drastically cut.

But it is not necessary to demonstrate the essence of what is being said here about what Obama did.

The U.S. president stated on Wednesday, December 23 that people were right to be disappointed by the outcome of the Summit on Climate Change. In an interview with the CBS television network, the president noted, "Rather than see a complete collapse in Copenhagen, in which nothing at all got done and would have been a huge backward step, at least we kind of held ground and there wasn't too much backsliding from where we were…"

Obama, according to the news dispatch, was the one most criticized by those countries which, virtually unanimously, believe that the outcome of the summit was disastrous.

The UN is now in a predicament. Asking other countries to adhere to the arrogant and antidemocratic agreement would be humiliating for many states.

Continuing the battle and demanding at all meetings, particularly those of Bonn and Mexico, the right of humanity to exist, with the moral authority and strength the truth affords us, is, in our opinion, the only way forward.

Fidel Castro Ruz
December 26, 2009
8:15 p.m.

.

admit it, you wish he was ours

[click image]

.
Reflections by comrade Fidel

THE TRUTH OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE SUMMIT

The youth is more interested than anyone else in the future.

Until very recently, the discussion revolved around the kind of society we would have. Today, the discussion centers on whether human society will survive.

These are not dramatic phrases. We must get used to the true facts. Hope is the last thing human beings can relinquish. With truthful arguments, men and women of all ages, especially young people, have waged an exemplary battle at the Summit and taught the world a great lesson.

It is important now that Cuba and the world come to know as much as possible of what happened in Copenhagen. The truth can be stronger than the influenced and often misinformed minds of those holding in their hands the destiny of the world.

If anything significant was achieved in the Danish capital, it was that the media coverage allowed the world public to watch the political chaos created there and the humiliating treatment accorded to Heads of States or Governments, ministers and thousands of representatives of social movements and institutions that in hope and expectation traveled to the Summit’s venue in Copenhagen. The brutal repression of peaceful protesters by the police was a reminder of the behavior of the Nazi assault troops that occupied neighboring Denmark on April 1940.

But no one could have thought that on December 18, 2009, the last day of the Summit, this would be suspended by the Danish government—a NATO ally associated with the carnage in Afghanistan—to offer the conference’s plenary hall to President Obama for a meeting where only he and a selected group of guests, 16 in all, would have the exclusive right to speak.

Obama’s deceitful, demagogic and ambiguous remarks failed to involve a binding commitment and ignored the Kyoto Framework Convention. He then left the room shortly after listening to a few other speakers. Among those invited to take the floor were the highest industrialized nations, several emerging economies and some of the poorest countries in the world. The leaders and representatives of over 170 countries were only allowed to listen.

At the end of the speeches of the 16 chosen, Evo Morales, with the authority of his indigenous Aymara origin and his recent reelection with 65% of the vote as well as the support of two-thirds of the Bolivian House and Senate, requested the floor. The Danish president had no choice but to yield to the insistence of the other delegations. When Evo had concluded his wise and deep observations, the Danish had to give the floor to Hugo Chavez. Both speeches will be registered by history as examples of short and timely remarks. Then, with their mission duly accomplished they both left for their respective countries. But when Obama disappeared, he had yet to fulfill his task in the host country.

From the evening of the 17th and the early morning hours of the 18th, the Prime Minister of Denmark and senior representatives of the United States had been meeting with the Chairman of the European Commission and the leaders of 27 nations to introduce to them—on behalf of Obama—a draft agreement in whose elaboration none of the other leaders of the rest of the world had taken part. It was an antidemocratic and practically clandestine initiative that disregarded the thousands of representatives of social movements, scientific and religious institutions and other participants in the Summit.

Through the night of the 18th and until 3:00 a.m. of the 19th, when many Heads of States had already departed, the representatives of the countries waited for the resumption of the sessions and the conclusion of the event. Throughout the 18th, Obama held meetings and press conferences, and the same did the European leaders. Then, they left.

Something unexpected happened then: at three in the morning of the 19th, the Prime Minister of Denmark convened a meeting to conclude the Summit. By then, the countries were represented by ministers, officials, ambassadors and technical staff.

However, an amazing battle was waged that morning by a group of representatives of Third World countries challenging the attempt by Obama and the wealthiest on the planet to introduce a document imposed by the United States as one agreed by consensus in the Summit.

The representative of Venezuela, Claudia Salerno, showed with impressive energy her right hand bleeding from strongly slamming on the table to claim her right to take the floor. Her tone of voice and the dignity of her arguments will never be forgotten.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cuba made a vigorous speech of approximately one thousand words from which I have chosen a few paragraphs to include in this Reflection:

“The document that you, Mister Chairman, repeatedly claimed that did not exist shows up now. […] we have seen drafts circulating surreptitiously and being discussed in secret meetings…”

“…I deeply resent the way you have led this conference.”

“…Cuba considers the text of this apocryphal draft extremely inadequate and inadmissible. The goal of 2 degrees centigrade is unacceptable and it would have incalculable catastrophic consequences…”

“The document that you are unfortunately introducing is not binding in any way with respect to the reduction of the greenhouse-gas emissions.”

“I am aware of the previous drafts, which also through questionable and clandestine procedures, were negotiated by small groups of people…”

“The document you are introducing now fails to include the already meager and lacking key phrases contained in that draft…”

“…as far as Cuba is concerned, it is incompatible with the universally recognized scientific view sustaining that it is urgent and inescapable to ensure the reduction of at least 45% of the emissions by the year 2020, and of no less than 80% or 90% by 2050.”

“Any argument on the continuation of the negotiations to reach agreement in the future to cut down emissions must inevitably include the concept of the validity of the Kyoto Protocol […] Your paper, Mister Chairman, is a death certificate of the Kyoto Protocol and my delegation cannot accept it.”

“The Cuban delegation would like to emphasize the preeminence of the principle of ‘common by differentiated responsibilities,’ as the core of the future process of negotiations. Your paper does not include a word on that.”

“This draft declaration fails to mention concrete financial commitments and the transfers of technologies to developing countries, which are part of the obligations contracted by the developed countries under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change […] Mister Chairman, by imposing their interests through your document, the developed nations are avoiding any concrete commitment.”

“…What you, Mister Chairman, define as ‘a group of representative leaders’ is to me a gross violation of the principle of sovereign equality consecrated in the United Nations Charter…”

“Mr. Chairman, I formally request that this statement be included in the final report of the works of this regrettable and shameful 15th session of the Conference of the Parties.”

The representatives of the countries had been given only one hour to present their views. This led to complicated, shameful and embarrassing situations.

Then, a lengthy debate ensued where the delegations from the developed countries put a heavy pressure on the rest to make the conference adopt the abovementioned document as the final result of their deliberations.

A small number of countries firmly insisted on the grave omissions and ambiguities of the document promoted by the United States, particularly the absence of a commitment by the developed countries on the reduction of carbon emissions and on the financing that would allow the South countries to adopt alleviating and adjustment measures.

After a long and extremely tense discussion, the position of the ALBA countries and Sudan, as President of the G-77, prevailed that the document was unacceptable to the conference thus it could not be adopted.

In view of the absence of consensus, the Conference could only “take note” of the existence of that document representing the position of a group of about 25 countries.

After that decision was made—at 10:30 in the morning Denmark’s time—Bruno, together with other ALBA representatives, had a friendly discussion with the UN Secretary to whom they expressed their willingness to continue struggling alongside the United Nations to prevent the terrible consequences of climate change. Their mission completed, our Foreign Minister and Cuban Vice President Esteban Lazo departed to come back home and attend the National Assembly session. A few members of the delegation and the ambassador stayed in Copenhagen to take part in the final procedures.

This afternoon they reported the following:

“…both, those who were involved in the elaboration of the document, and those like the President of the United States who anticipated its adoption by the conference…as they could not disregard the decision to simply ‘take note’ of the alleged ‘Copenhagen Agreement,’ they tried to introduce a procedure allowing the other COP countries that had not been a part of the shady deal to adhere to it, and make it public, the intention being to pretend such an agreement was legal, something that could precondition the results of the negotiations that should carry on.”

“Such belated attempt was again firmly opposed by Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia. These countries warned that a document which had not been adopted by the Convention could not be considered legal and that there was not a COP document; therefore, no regulations could be established for its alleged adoption…”

“This is how the meeting in Copenhagen is coming to an end, without the adoption of the document surreptitiously worked out in the past few days under the clear ideological guidance of the US Administration…”

Tomorrow our attention will be focused on the National Assembly.

Lazo, Bruno and the other members of the delegation will be arriving at midnight. On Monday, the Minister of Foreign Affairs will be able to explain in detail and with the necessary accuracy the truth of what happened at the Summit.

Fidel Castro Ruz
December 19, 2009
8:17p.m.
.

sing it, raúl

[click image]

.
It's one hundred percent Obama's doing.
.

GOOOOOOOOD!!!

[click image]

.
Do NOT trust this lying sack of shit! He tosses off coups d'état more easily than swatting flies.

Ask Honduras.
.

science fiction story

[click image]

REFLECTIONS OF FIDEL
A science fiction story
(Taken from CubaDebate)

HOW I regret having to criticize Obama, knowing that in that country there are other potential presidents worse than him. I understand that in the United States that office is currently a tremendous headache. Perhaps nothing could explain it better than the information in yesterday’s Granma that 237 members of the U.S. Congress; in other words, 44% of them, are millionaires. That does not mean that every one of them is obliged to be an incorrigible reactionary, but it is very difficult that they might think like any of the many millions of U.S. citizens who lack medical care, are unemployed or have to work hard to earn a living.

Obama, of course, is not a beggar, he possesses millions of dollars. As a professional he was outstanding; his domination of language, his eloquence and his intelligence are undisputed. Despite being an African American he was elected president for the first time in the history of his country in a racist society that is suffering from a profound international economic crisis, the responsibility for which falls upon itself.

It is not about being or not being anti-American, as the system and its colossal media try to describe its adversaries.
The U.S. people are not responsible for, but the victims of an unsustainable system and, what is worse, one that is now incompatible with the life of humanity.

The intelligent and rebel Obama who had to endure humiliation and racism during his childhood and youth understands that, but the Obama who is educated and committed to the system and the methods that led him to the presidency of the United States cannot resist the temptation to pressure, threaten and even deceive others.

He is obsessive in his work; possibly no other president of the United States would be capable of committing himself to a program as intensive as the one that he proposes to undertake in the next eight days.

According to his program, a wide-ranging tour will take him to Alaska, where he is to talk with troops deployed there; to Japan, Singapore, the People’s Republic of China and South Korea; he is to take part in the meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); he will have talks with the prime minister of Japan and His Majesty Emperor Akihito in the Land of the Rising Sun; the president of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang; of Russia, Dmitri Medvedev, and of the People’s Republic of China, Hu Jintao; he will give speeches and press conferences; he will carry his nuclear briefcase that we trust he will not need to use during his accelerated tour.

His security adviser has informed that he is to discuss with the president of Russia extending the START-1 Treaty, which expires on December 5, 2009. Certain reductions in the enormous nuclear arsenal will doubtless be agreed, without significance for the economy and world peace.

What is our illustrious friend thinking of taking on during his intensive voyage? The White House has solemnly announced it: climate change, economic recovery, nuclear disarmament, the war in Afghanistan, the risks of war in Iran and in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. There is enough material here to write a book of fiction.

But how is Obama going to resolve climate problems if the position of his representation in the preparatory meetings for the Copenhagen Summit on greenhouse gas emissions was the worst of all the industrialized and rich countries, both in Bangkok and in Barcelona, because the United States has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, nor is that country’s oligarchy disposed to genuinely cooperate.

How is he going to contribute to the solution of the grave economic problems affecting a large part of humanity, when the total debt of the United States – which includes federal government, state and local governments, companies and families – amounted at the end of 2008 to $57 trillion, equivalent to more than 400% of its GDP, and when that country’s budget deficit rose to close to 13% of its GDP in the fiscal year 2009, a figure that Obama is doubtless aware of.

What can he offer Hu Jintao when his policy has been openly protectionist in order to hit Chinese exports; when he is demanding at all costs that the Chinese government should revalue the yuan, which would affect growing Third World imports proceeding from China.

The Brazilian theologian Leonardo Boff – who is not a disciple of Karl Marx, but an honest Catholic, one of those who is not prepared to cooperate with imperialism in Latin America – recently affirmed: "…we are risking our destruction and the devastation of the diversity of life."

"…almost half of humanity is now living below the poverty level. The richest 20% consume 82.49% of all the Earth’s wealth and the 20% poorest have to sustain themselves with a miniscule 1.6%." He quotes the FAO warning that "…in the coming years there will be between 150 and 200 million climate refugees." And he adds that in his estimate: "humanity is now consuming 30% more than its reposition capacity… The Earth is showing unequivocal signs that it cannot take any more."

What he affirms is a fact, but Obama and the U.S. Congress have not as yet heard that.

What is he leaving us in the hemisphere? The shameful problem of Honduras and the annexation of Colombia, in which country the United States is to install seven military bases. They also established a military base in Cuba more than 100 years ago and still occupy it by force. On it they installed the horrific torture center known worldwide, which Obama has been unable to close as yet.

I sustain the belief that before Obama concludes his mandate there will be six to eight rightist governments in Latin America allied to the empire. Likewise in the near future, the most right-wing sector in the United States will try to limit his mandate to a period of four years. A Nixon, a Bush or somebody like Cheney will once again be new presidents. Then one would see with all clarity the significance of those absolutely unjustifiable military bases that are now threatening all the peoples of South America on the pretext of combating drug trafficking, a problem created by the tens of billions of dollars from the United States being injected into organized crime and drug production in Latin America.

Cuba has demonstrated that in order to combat drugs what is needed is justice and social development. In our country, the crime figure per every 100,000 inhabitants is one of the lowest in the world. No other [country] in the hemisphere can show such low indices of violence. It is known that in spite of the blockade, none other possesses such high educational levels.

The peoples of Latin America will know how to resist the onslaughts of the empire!

Obama’s tour would seem to be a science fiction story.

Fidel Castro Ruz
November 11, 2009
7:16 p.m.

listen to sean, fidel

[click image]

I think they got it wrong about Sean being buddies with POTUS, but, well, I think it's funny to emerge from the U2 concert to first find al Jazeera reporting that Obama's sending a message through the Spanish government and then that RIA Novosti was reporting that Sean Penn is on his way to meet with Fidel. I don't know for sure but I think Fidel would rather deal with truth tellers than lying heads of state.

looking good

[click image]

'Fit' Fidel appears on Cuba TV

Fidel Castro, Cuba's former president, has appeared on state television for the first time in a year, suggesting that his once-failing health has improved.

The footage, broadcast on Sunday, showed the 83-year-old Castro meeting students from Venezuela at an undisclosed location a day earlier.

His picture was also appeared in a newspaper the same day.

Castro has not been seen in public since July 2006, when he underwent intestinal surgery for a still-undisclosed ailment. His health is considered a state secret.

In February 2008, he stepped down as president, ceding power to his brother, Raul, and he last appeared on state television in June that year.

Planet's future

In Sunday's television broadcast he appeared in good health, telling the students that he was worried about the future of the planet, under threat from global warming.

"Even the Pentagon has become involved," Castro said.

"It has included the climate among things that threaten the security of the United States."

The students presented Castro with a T-shirt and sang: "We love you, Fidel. We love you."

Castro, wearing a blue track suit, told the students that Cuba stood by the Venezuelan government of President Hugo Chavez, a close friend and ally of Castro.

Meeting with Correa

The footage followed a front-page photograph of Castro meeting Rafael Correa, the Ecuadorean president, published in the official Juventud Rebelde newspaper.

A brief official note said Castro and Correa spoke for a number of hours on Friday about recent developments in their respective countries, Latin America and the world.

As Cubans gathered at kiosks on Sunday morning to pick up the paper, word spread that Fidel's photo had appeared.

"I'm waiting for the paper to see him because it's been a long time since a photo was published and I want to see how he is," said Arturo Martinez, one of those waiting for the paper to arrive a few blocks from Communist Party and government headquarters.

i think this is trumped up to screw with lifting the embargo

[click image]

The timing is too creepy, and it looks very low key and like something they were going to ignore until they found a reason not to ignore it anymore. Don't forget those exiled Cuban oligarchs are pretty powerful and can't be liking the warming of relations.

at last something positive about the new administration

[click image]

I couldn't bear to read the entire article in case there was anything in there to taint the generally positive feeling. So, please wait at least a couple hours before bursting my bubble. Okay?

another thing i hold against ban ki moon

[click image]

And, really, when you get right down to it, now that we know what really went on during his presidency, EVERYTHING is Clinton's fault....

even fidel is trying to save obummer from himself

[click image]

The old men are pulling for you, Cinderella. How 'bout you man up and start doing things right?

now, wait just a doggone minute here

[click image]

Fidel Castro: Obama 'misinterpreted' Raul's words
2 hours ago

HAVANA (AP) — Fidel Castro says that President Barack Obama "misinterpreted" his brother Raul's sentiments toward the United States.

Raul Castro prompted widespread speculation last week that the U.S. and Cuba could be headed toward a thaw in nearly a half-century of chilly relations, when he said Cuban leaders would be willing to discuss "everything" with the U.S., including human rights, freedom of the press and speech, and political prisoners.

Obama responded by saying Washington seeks a new beginning with Cuba but he also said that Cuba should release some political prisoners and reduce official taxes on remittances from the U.S. as a sign of goodwill.

Fidel Castro wrote in an essay on Tuesday that Obama "without a doubt misinterpreted Raul's declarations."

Heh. I was wondering how long it would take for him to weigh in. I don't think even death will stop him.

__________________________________________

Here it is in his own words....

Sometimes I have a heck of a time getting into Granma and I couldn't get to it when it first came out.

panic on the fascist news wires

[click image]

American exceptionalism's panties are bunched:

Analysis: Obama gores foreign policy ox
by STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 11 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama has gone abroad and gored an ox — the deeply held belief that the United States does not make mistakes in dealings with either friends or foes.

And in the process, he's taking a huge gamble both at home and abroad, for a payoff that could be a long time coming, if ever.

By way of explanation, senior adviser David Axelrod describes the president's tactics this way:

"You plant, you cultivate, you harvest. Over time, the seeds that were planted here are going to be very, very valuable."

While historic analogies are never perfect, Obama's stark efforts to change the U.S. image abroad are reminiscent of the stunning realignments sought by former Soviet leader Michael Gorbachev. During his short — by Soviet standards — tenure, he scrambled incessantly to shed the ideological entanglements that were leading the communist empire toward ruin.

But Obama is outpacing even Gorbachev. After just three months in power, the new American leader has, among many other things:

• Admitted to Europeans that America deserves at least part of the blame for the world's financial crisis because it did not regulate high-flying and greedy Wall Street gamblers.

• Told the Russians he wants to reset relations that fell to Cold War-style levels under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

• Asked NATO for more help in the fight in Afghanistan, and, not getting much, did not castigate alliance partners.

• Lifted some restrictions on Cuban Americans' travel to their communist homeland and eased rules on sending wages back to families there.

• Shook hands with, more than once, and accepted a book from Hugo Chavez, the virulently anti-American leader of oil-rich Venezuela.

• Said America's appetite for illegal drugs and its lax control of the flow of guns and cash to Mexico were partly to blame for the drug-lord-inspired violence that is rattling the southern U.S. neighbor.

• Said that "if our only interaction with many of these countries is drug interdiction, if our only interaction is military, then we may not be developing the connections that can, over time, increase our influence" — neglecting to mention U.S. health care, education and humanitarian relief efforts in Latin America.

At a news conference ending the three-day Summit of the Americas on Sunday, Obama was asked to explain what a reporter called this emerging "Obama Doctrine."

He said that first, he remains intent on telling the world that the United States is a powerful and wealthy nation that realizes it is just one country among many. Obama said he believes that other countries have "good ideas" and interests that cannot be ignored.

Second, while the United States best represents itself by living up to its universal values and ideas, Obama said it must also respect the variety of cultures and perspectives that guide both American foes and friends.

"I firmly believe that if we're willing to break free from the arguments and ideologies of an earlier era and continue to act, as we have at this summit, with a sense of mutual responsibility and mutual respect and mutual interest, then each of our nations can come out of this challenging period stronger and more prosperous, and we can advance opportunity, equality, and security across the Americas," the president said.

Critics, especially those deeply attached to the foreign policy course of the past 50-plus years, see a president whose lofty ideals expose the country to a dangerous probing of U.S. weakness, of an unseemly readiness to admit past mistakes, of a willingness to talk with unpleasant opponents.

"I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez," said Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican. "This is a person along the lines with Fidel Castro and the types of dictatorship that he has down there in Venezuela and the anti-Americanism that he has been spreading around the world is not somebody the president of the United States should be seen as having, you know, kind of friendly relations with."

At his news conference Obama said he didn't think he did much damage to U.S. security or interests by shaking the hand of Chavez, whose country has a defense budget about one-six hundredth the size of the United States, and depends upon it's oil reserves for solvency.

But beyond specific attacks on his new foreign policy are the deeper philosophical challenges emerging from the still powerful, if diminished, conservative political structure in the United States. Such opponents can play havoc with Obama's attempts to change domestic policy and will work to weaken his 60-plus percent approval among Americans.

Obama brushes that aside:

"One of the benefits of my campaign and how I've been trying to operate as president is I don't worry about the politics — I try to figure out what's right in terms of American interests, and on this one I think I'm right."

So thought Gorbachev. But being right is not always politically healthy.

___

Steven R. Hurst reports from the White House for the AP and has covered foreign affairs for 30 years.

I mean, was, like, that a threat?

But that's not all, nossirreebob, you gots yer picks, the Republicans are pitching hissies all over the place! We. Can. Not. Be. Found. Fallible. Are you nuts? Yes:

Obama says reaching out to enemies strengthens US
By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 19 mins ago

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad – Defending his brand of world politics, President Barack Obama said Sunday that he "strengthens our hand" by reaching out to enemies of the United States and making sure that the nation is a leader, not a lecturer, of democracy.

Obama's foreign doctrine emerged across his four-day trip to Latin America, his first extended venture to a region of the world where resentment of U.S. power still lingers. He got a smile, handshakes and even a gift from incendiary leftist leader Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and embraced overtures of new relations from isolated Cuban President Raul Castro.

"The whole notion was that if we showed courtesy or opened up dialogue with governments that had previously been hostile to us, that that somehow would be a sign of weakness," Obama said, recalling his race for the White House and challenging his critics today.

"The American people didn't buy it," Obama said. "And there's a good reason the American people didn't buy it — because it doesn't make sense."

Still, Obama made sure to inject some go-it-slow caution and clear expectations for U.S. foes as he capped his trip to twin-island nation of Trinidad and Tobago with a steamy outdoor news conference.

On Cuba, he said Castro should release political prisoners, embrace democratic freedoms and cut fees on the money that Cuban-Americans send back to their families. Obama has lifted some restrictions on Cuba, and Castro responded with a broad, conciliatory overture.

"The fact that you had Raul Castro say he's willing to have his government discuss with ours not just issues of lifting the embargo, but issues of human rights, political prisoners, that's a sign of progress," Obama said. "And so we're going to explore and see if we can make some further steps."

He did not, though, offer any sign of lifting the crushing U.S. trade embargo on Cuba, as many Latin American and U.S. leaders want. Obama acknowledged that the U.S. policy in Cuba for the last 50 years "hasn't worked" but said change will be gradual.

In Washington, both Democrats and Republicans said Sunday that they wanted to see actions, not just rhetoric, from Cuba.

"Release the prisoners and we'll talk to you. ... Put up or shut up," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

"I think we're taking the right steps, and I think the ball is now clearly in Cuba's court," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. "They need to respond and say what they're willing to do."

As for Venezuela, Obama's friendly encounters with Chavez at the summit drew intense publicity — partly, Obama said, because Chavez is good at getting in front of TV cameras. Chavez's anti-American rhetoric has, in the past, led Obama to call him a demagogue.

Obama returned to Washington early Sunday evening. But even before he got back, Obama was facing condemnation from some Republicans about how he dealt with Chavez. "I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez," said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.

The president brushed that aside, noting that Venezuela has a defense budget about one-six hundredth the size of the United States' and owns the oil company Citgo.

"It's unlikely that as a consequence of me shaking hands or having a polite conversation with Mr. Chavez that we are endangering the strategic interests of the United States," Obama said.

Venezuela and the United States expelled each other's ambassadors last September. But during the summit, Chavez approached Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and said he was restoring his nation's ambassador in Washington, voicing hopes for a new era in relations.

"We ratify our willingness to begin what has started: cementing new relations," Chavez said Sunday in remarks broadcast on state television. "We have the very strong willingness to work together."

Obama's dealings with Chavez spoke to his broader message: dismissing arguments of the past, and respecting other democratic governments even if he opposes their economic and foreign policy.

"If we are practicing what we preach, and if we occasionally confess to having strayed from our values and our ideals, that strengthens our hand," Obama said. "That allows us to speak with greater moral force and clarity around these issues."

He said of his doctrine for engagement: "We're not simply going to lecture you, but we're rather going to show through how we operate the benefits of these values and ideals."

The president said he found it interesting that many of the leaders talked about how Cuban doctors have dispersed throughout the region, and their countries depend on them.

"It's a reminder for us in the United States that if our only interaction with many of these countries is drug interdiction, if our only interaction is military, then we may not be developing the connections that can, over time, increase our influence," Obama said. He neglected to mention that the U.S. Agency for International Development provides many services in Latin America, including health care, education and humanitarian relief.

Central American leaders who met with Obama said they pressed him on immigration reform. They also said that Obama promised to consider providing better notice before the United States deports dangerous criminals back to their nations.

Even Nicaragua President Daniel Ortega, a critic of U.S. policy, said he found Obama receptive to dealing with the issues raised. Ortega said Obama "is the president of an empire" that has rules the president cannot change. Nevertheless, Ortega said, "I want to believe that he's inclined, that he's got the will."

Both Graham and McCaskill spoke on "Fox News Sunday." Ensign was interviewed on CNN's "State of the Union."

I am queazy about this whole thing. I'm with Hugo. I want everyone to be friends... and that is the setup for egregious disappointment....

Again, this better not be merely the more-flies-with-honey approach to picking everyone in the world's bones clean for fun and profit, or the atmosphere will become toxic with my screams.

this makes me queazy

[click image]

Everyone is well-pleased with the warming toward Cuba, especially Hugo Chavez, and it is marvelous to think our governments would be friendly... but... well... they've been prey so long I can't think that this would be anything more than trying honey to catch our flies... the change we've been waiting for... right? So I am tickled for Chavez who so obviously wants everyone to be friends and scared for him because he so obviously wants everyone to be friends.

fantastically good news

[click image]

The terrorist we have been harboring for so many years is finally going to have to face the music. Dare we hope he will be extradited to Cuba for trial when we're done with him? Venezuela has a stake in this too. Both Fidel and Hugo Chavez have been yelling about this for years.

Let us hope it's not a hoax, a way to find him innocent, generate a fresh excuse for harboring him.

fidel on the visiting u.s. delegation

[click image]