And no doubt the Cuban government will allow for this?

You’ll swallow anything.

So if Raúl violates the ICCPR, who do the Cuban people go to for redress?

And no, Cuba’s granting of full social and cultural rights does not mean we can accept a lesser standard on civil and political rights. But neither does the opposite hold true in regards to the US Government, who does all they can (completely alone in the world) to prevent the right to food, housing and health care from entering the debate.

By the way, the most onerous “exit visa” requirement (requiring a letter of invitation) is on the way out as well, according to El Pais.

I happen to trust the reporting of Tracey Eaton, from the Dallas Morning News. If you are calling her a dupe regarding her experience with the Cuban prison system, that is between you and her. Did you read her article??

So if free universal health care, affordable housing, access to food and education was all established in the US are we to believe that you would be willing to accept limits on what you can read, your right to peacefully assemble, access to the internet, access to media, the ability to publish what you wished to publish, the requirement to obtain an exit visa to leave the US, limits on where and if you could travel?

As for journalists visiting the prison, the level of your credulousness is frankly, robotic. The ICRC is an independent non-partisan organization designated to enforce conditions under the Geneva Conventions. They are the sort that knows the difference between a real inspection and a Potemkin Village inspection. Yet Cuba refuses to alow them to inspect their prisons.

As for citing the UN, Ms. Tibaijuka is with the Habitat Division, not with the UNHCHR. Here’s what the UNHCHR said in a recent report:

The prosecution cited the publication of articles or interviews in the media, communication with international non-governmental organizations and exiles in the
United States or in Europe, possession of audio or video cassettes originating from the
United States Interests Section in Havana, and communication with groups which were not officially recognized – trade unions, professional associations and independent Cuban academic groups.

Those arrested were tried in very short order: a few weeks, or even a few days, in trials
not open to the public. The accused were assisted by counsel who did not belong to an
independent bar association. They are currently being held in conditions affecting their physical and mental health which are all the more worrying as the Cuban authorities have provided the High Commissioner and the special rapporteurs who signed the urgent appeals with very brief information about them, or none.

In 2005 and 2006, more people were arrested and given disproportionate sentences for
expressing dissident political opinions.
The appeal to the Cuban authorities made by the Personal Representative of the
High Commissioner on 28 July 2005 has gone unanswered.

Nine urgent appeals were made in 2006, either separately or jointly, by special
procedures (Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, Special Rapporteur on the
independence of judges and lawyers and Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health).
The Personal Representative of the High Commissioner has drawn up 10 recommendations intended to put an end to the current situation through restoration of the
guaranteed fundamental rights of citizens in the country and international protection of those rights through Cuba’s accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as its two optional protocols and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Cuban Foreign Minister, refused to respond other than to say that it did not recognize the UNHCHR mandate with regard to Cuba.

BTW, one of those organizations you chided, Human Rights Watch, was one of the recipients of the 2008 UN Human Rights Award.

Nice cherry-picking on your part. You’re a master of elision.

Again, I just do not accept that some groups that do not even consider such basic things as health care, housing, food and education human rights needs to go around the world telling people why they are insufficiently liberal. The UN Human Rights watchdog was allowed in last year – and got a pretty steller report. Cuba let journalists inspect prisons in 2004. They make US prisons look like Guantanamo.

Here is what the Undersecretary General of the UN said about Cuba last year: She called Cuba an example for the world as the government’s set health, education and the people’s well-being as its priorities, and that Cuba’s social achievements are worthy to be shared with other developing nations. “Cuba is a nation that knows sustainable development. We want to find out how to share experiences and ideas with other developing nations,” she said.

My blog name is Leftside: A View to the South (AV2tS). I use the handles interchangibly, though I am leaning towards the latter lately.

Oh please. Don’t patronize me. There’s nothing imperialist about it. It’s called healthy skepticism and it’s a lot healthier than your wholesale swallowing of everything Fidel does. When he pukes do you hold his beard out of the way?

I notice that you didn’t dispute the issues regarding the ICRC, AI and HRW. Facts are troublesome things for you, aren’t they.

Just wondering why do you call yourself av2ts here and leftside at Boz’s blog?

This is the beauty of the Web. From 10,000 miles away you can tell me all about the country Ive actually been visiting for the l;ast eight days! Sorry to disappoint you but, um, well, I already knew 100% of what you were so kind to lecture me on. I have spent all of my time this past week with ardent Taiwanese as well with numerous other ethnic groups and even aboriginals. So, sorry, I fully understand the racial divide that marks all politics here on the island. We can even discuss the 228 incident and its historical repercussions, after u look it up.

Claiming that Cuban elections are really elections is akin to saying the earth is flat. Plse go away. Now.

BY the way, comrade, there are rebeliious acts everyday in Cuba. They range from people stealing state fasctories blind (a common practice) to open demonstrations like the one yesterday by women celebrating HUman Rights Day in Havana who were immediately packed into police vans and carted away. That doesnt count the million or so people willing to ride rafts thru shark infested waters to get off the freedom island you describe. No, thats no act of rebellion. Thats just crass consumerism, right wing gusanos coming to the US because they want to buy, um, food.

If you can find me one citation of one person alleging fraud in the counting of Cuban ballots maybe I’ll consider that a serious reply. Even dissidents don’t allege such things because they know how popular the Castro’s and the Revolution remain. Mother Jones’ other posterboy for a dissident – Pedro Luis Ferrer – admits his appreciation for the Revolution.

Doesn’t the fact that there has been not one instance of upheaval, of a rebellious act, since Fidel has passed on the leadership role tell you something? Even the dissidents admit they are a tiny minority and have a long way to go to “educate” their fellow citizens.

Were international observers there to observe the fairness of the election?

Somehow I doubt it as the Castros’ Cuba is the only nation in the Western hemisphere that will not allow the ICRC visit their prisons and has refused visas for AI and HRW delegations since 1989.

It’s kind of like trying to defend adultery by appealing to how few people you actually cheated with: At that point, who gives a shit?

Instead he finds it necessary to say that Fidel is not a Marxist-Leninist because the Cuban revolution did not copy Soviet Russia. He is partially right, as Cuba certainly charted its own path.

And again he dismisses Cuban participatory democracy, which is about a whole lot more than just one day every 4 years (like the US). In Cuba, workers have an official say at their workplace. In Cuba, the education and political conscience is one of the highest in the world. In Cuba, the Party has nothing to do with the elections (a quarter of those elected have no affiliation). In Cuba, real people from the community are nominated by their peers in local grass-roots assemblies. Most are orrdinary workers, who volunteer for their political post. In Cuba, there is no money in politics. Voters base their decisions on a simple resume and list of accomplishments. At the end, in the voting booth, every Cuban citizen over 16 (including criminals) has the right to vote to decide whether to approve or deny the representative. The fact that so many vote (more than 90%) and agree with the selection is testament to a system that has more going for it than we think. If not, there would be tons more lethargy, No votes or spoiled ballots. In fact, the approval of the system in overwhelming, which matches the notions of anyone who really talks to the people in Cuba – and not rely on the handful of (often paid) opposition.

The number of “Taiwanese” outnumber the “Chinese”, but the KMT also gets a good many votes from people who see the pro-Taiwanese, pro-independence forces as jeopardizing the de facto independence of Taiwan, and isolating Taiwan economically, with their endless rhetoric about the need for de jure independence, and against trade with China.

An apt analogy with Taiwan: imagine FDR dies a couple years early, Henry Wallace becomes Prez, one way or another there is a communist takeover of USA. A non-commie government in exile is formed in…Puerto Rico, or Hawaii. A bunch of anglos come over, declare martial law for forty years or so, style themselves as the USA in exile.

Wild Strawberry movement are DPP activists if I am not mistaken. That’s groovy. But keep in mind…DPP has only about 1/4 of the seats in their parliament.

Well, in Haiti and Nicaragua young people were tortured or thrown out of helicopters for opposing the government. In Cuba, the only people who are punished are those who get cash and marching orders from the CIA–the very people Cooper adulates.

So if free universal health care, affordable housing, access to food and education was all established in the US are we to believe that you would be willing to accept limits on what you can read, your right to peacefully assemble, access to the internet, access to media, the ability to publish what you wished to publish, the requirement to obtain an exit visa to leave the US, limits on where and if you could travel?

As for journalists visiting the prison, the level of your credulousness is frankly, robotic. The ICRC is an independent non-partisan organization designated to enforce conditions under the Geneva Conventions. They are the sort that knows the difference between a real inspection and a Potemkin Village inspection. Yet Cuba refuses to alow them to inspect their prisons.

As for citing the UN, Ms. Tibaijuka is with the Habitat Division, not with the UNHCHR. Here’s what the UNHCHR said in a recent report:

The prosecution cited the publication of articles or interviews in the media, communication with international non-governmental organizations and exiles in the
United States or in Europe, possession of audio or video cassettes originating from the
United States Interests Section in Havana, and communication with groups which were not officially recognized – trade unions, professional associations and independent Cuban academic groups.

Those arrested were tried in very short order: a few weeks, or even a few days, in trials
not open to the public. The accused were assisted by counsel who did not belong to an
independent bar association. They are currently being held in conditions affecting their physical and mental health which are all the more worrying as the Cuban authorities have provided the High Commissioner and the special rapporteurs who signed the urgent appeals with very brief information about them, or none.

In 2005 and 2006, more people were arrested and given disproportionate sentences for
expressing dissident political opinions.
The appeal to the Cuban authorities made by the Personal Representative of the
High Commissioner on 28 July 2005 has gone unanswered.

Nine urgent appeals were made in 2006, either separately or jointly, by special
procedures (Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, Special Rapporteur on the
independence of judges and lawyers and Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health).
The Personal Representative of the High Commissioner has drawn up 10 recommendations intended to put an end to the current situation through restoration of the
guaranteed fundamental rights of citizens in the country and international protection of those rights through Cuba’s accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as its two optional protocols and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Cuban Foreign Minister, refused to respond other than to say that it did not recognize the UNHCHR mandate with regard to Cuba.

BTW, one of those organizations you chided, Human Rights Watch, was one of the recipients of the 2008 UN Human Rights Award.

Nice cherry-picking on your part. You’re a master of elision.