Bozzie, I think Grace must have had you in mind when she referred to the

" ignorant, armchair anti-communist blatherers who know so little of cuban history, have never met and talked to an actual cuban, and are unable to think critically about the self-serving yankee propaganda that infests our "mainstream" media."

who were going to respond to Tim's article of Fact about Cuba.

Besides, I don't 'hate' America. I disapprove of their politics of Imperial domination . Get-a-life Bozzie, Viva Cuba !!

maracas - glad to see you didn't resort to any infantile name calling rhetoric.

Abajo con el dictador cubano!

Tim may be right to argue that the USA is using criticism of Cuba’s human rights record to its political advantage. This is hardly new. It can be argued that there are ideological elements in the criticisms of Israel, North Korea, Saddam and then the USA in Iraq, the Taliban and then the USA in Afghanistan, Indonesia in East Timor, Vietnam, China, Mynmar, Sudan etc . Whatever the accusers’ motives, these regimes have cases to answer.

Surely the key question in these countries, and in Cuba, is whether human rights abuses are taking place, not the motives of the accusers. To deny or excuse human rights violations on ideological grounds is, to my mind, even worse than seeking to make political capital out of them on ideological grounds. Tim uses offical statements by the Cuban Government to defend its human rights record, and prejudicial language and rhetorical devices such as scare quotes to attack its opponents. I find neither persuasive.

According to the latest report by Amnesty International (not just the Amnesty’s USA operation, as Tim implies):

"2003 saw a severe deterioration in the human rights situation in Cuba. In mid-March the Cuban authorities carried out an unprecedented crack-down on the dissident movement. Seventy-five long-term activists were arrested, unfairly tried and sentenced to up to 28 years’ imprisonment; they were prisoners of conscience. In April, three men convicted of involvement in a hijacking were executed by firing squad, ending a three-year de facto moratorium.

"Criticism from the international community, including countries and individuals previously supportive of the Cuban government, intensified. The Cuban authorities sought to justify these measures as a necessary response to the threat to national security posed by the USA. The US embargo and related measures continued to have a negative effect on the enjoyment of the full range of human rights in Cuba."

http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/cub-summary-eng

Rhian,
The arrest and trials of the 70 or so dissidents in 2003 was a direct response to the American financing of Cuban dissidents to disrupt Cuban society as part of the USA's plan of 'transition' to a form of government acceptable to the US and dependent on the IMF and World Bank. Castro executed 3 people for their part in a hijacking. I do not personally approve of the death penalty and deplore it's use internationally .However,I understand that George W.Bush,whilst Governor of Texas signed more death warrants than any other President of the United states.
Tim argued that the USA was using the UN Human Rights Commission to push their own agenda......This is quite ironic since Bush is the only President in history to have the U.N. remove the US. from the human rights commission.........
Bush withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.--actually the World Court is changing into the International Criminal Court--because the US wants to be a part of the court, but not be open to h the US having charges brought against them, they have temporarily ceased negotiating with the countries involved in and taking part in the establishment of the ICC. So, in other words, the US wants to be able to establish the laws within the ICC, practice those laws within the ICC, but not have those laws applied to the USA.He refused to allow inspectors access to U.S. "prisoners of war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.--Guantanomo Bay.Castro's 'crimes' pale into insignificence by comparison to Bush's (whom you seem to absolve).
Why is this so ?

Maracas

I don’t “absolve” Bush of anything, I don’t agree with the death penalty in Texas, Cuba or anywhere else, and I don’t approve of what the USA has done at Guantanomo.

But the issue under discussion is Cuba’s human rights record, not the USA’s. On this, I prefer to accept the authority of Amnesty International and other independent monitors than that of the Cuban Government. If you don’t accept Amnesty’s analysis, check out Human Rights Watch:

“Despite the release in 2004 of fourteen of the seventy-five political dissidents, independent journalists, and human rights advocates prosecuted in April 2003, human rights conditions in Cuba have not improved. The Cuban government systematically denies its citizens basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, movement, and a fair trial. It restricts nearly all avenues of political dissent, and uses police warnings, surveillance, short term-detentions, house arrests, travel restrictions, criminal prosecutions, and politically-motivated dismissals from employment as methods of enforcing political conformity.

“Human rights monitoring is not recognized as a legitimate activity, but rather is stigmatized as a betrayal of Cuban sovereignty. No local human rights groups enjoy legal status. Instead, human rights defenders face systematic harassment, with the government placing heavy burdens on their ability to monitor human rights conditions. Nor are international human rights groups such as Human Rights Watch allowed to send fact-finding missions to Cuba.”

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/10/cuba10306.htm

Rhian posted
QUOTE
“The Cuban government systematically denies its citizens basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, movement, and a fair trial. It restricts nearly all avenues of political dissent, and uses police warnings, surveillance, short term-detentions, house arrests, travel restrictions, criminal prosecutions, and politically-motivated dismissals from employment as methods of enforcing political conformity.”
END QUOTE

If you open your eyes then the same applies to the Commonwealth of Australia (see also my website http://www.schorel-hlavka.com just that you didn’t know it. (Takes time to load down, due to the volume on the website!)

We do not even have a valid constitutional elected Government! Just that you didn’t know we are under a DICTATORSHIP ourselves!

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES are rife in the Commonwealth of Australia, and Cornelia Rau, Vivian Solon, and numerous others, are clear example of this.

Who then are we to dictate another nation where were ourselves cannot manage our own affairs?

Regardless what Saddam Hussein may or may not be guilty of, we had no right to invade another sovereign nation, in particularly not unconstitutionally, and murder so many Iraqi’s!

Lets deal with this kind of HUMAN RIGHTS abuses first. Bring John Howard and his cohorts before the Courts to face war crimes and crimes against humanity charges against them, and then we may get some standing to criticize others.

Whatever HUMAN RIGHTS violations Cuba may or may not have, let we not be blinded to ignore the USA’s HUMAN RIGHTS abuses in CUBA! After all we still have an Australian David Hicks denied his rights!