Cuba seeks 20-year jail term for detained American

[Zorro]

Source: AP

Prosecutors are charging a jailed American contractor with "acts against the integrity and independence" of Cuba and requesting a 20-year jail term, state news media reported Friday, dimming hopes the 60-year-old Maryland native would be allowed to go home soon.

Alan Gross has been jailed without charge since December 2009 on suspicion of spying.

The U.S. government, and his family, say he was distributing communications equipment to the island's Jewish community. They have long called for him to be released, or at least brought to trial.

State-controlled website Cubadebate said that a trial date would be set shortly and that Gross' family, his lawyer, and American consular representatives will be allowed to attend.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110205/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_cuba_detained_american

[boppers]

1. "Unlawful satellite internet links" = 20 years in prison.

Castro's defenders in 5..4..3..2..1..

[TheWraith]

2. But but but, they're defying the evil American imperialist running dogs!

:eyes:

Really, good healthcare does NOT make up for living in a police state.

[boppers]

4. ..and they have freedom of the press!*

*as long as your press is registered.

[Ash_F]

7. I agree it is too harsh, but the same can happen in the US. Even life sentences are possible.

If you give material support to an organization the State Department has designated as unlawful or terrorist, it does not matter to them if your perception of the organization is that it is noble or if the support was actually benign. People have gone to jail for life for this in the US so this story in itself does not make Cuba anymore of a police state than here.

I agree that they should let him go on time served. He is said to have lost a lot weight and his family needs him. He may have meant well but when the Cubans look at him, they do not see a humanitarian, they see a Batista. It probably is not fair but maybe if the Batistas did not kill so many people and had the US not have supported them, things would be different. This guy is a victim of the past.

[Ghost Dog]

8. Well put, Ash_F.

And welcome to DU!

[Ash_F]

9. Thank you.

Several people have given me a warm welcome. This is a nice community.

[boppers]

11. What people in the US are serving life sentences for connecting somebody to the internet?

Moral relativism is, well lame.

[Ash_F]

46. That is not what he is being accused of.

He is being accused of giving aid to terrorist organizations. Even though he probably had humanitarian ideals in mind, judging from his background(which is why they should let him go), the Cuban prosecutors are framing it as providing communication infrastructure for groups that are going to use it to coordinate violent acts against Cuban citizens. There is probably a little bit of truth to that spin, if you look at the history of the island. Killings by opposition groups(mainly ex Batista's) have been well documented over the years.

And yes there are many people serving life sentences for that in the US, right now. For even more benign stuff like providing simple food and medicine to terrorist organizations. I am not arguing for either government. They are both not very good at defining what a terrorist organization is and wrongly presume that opposition parties are homogeneous in their acts and ideals. It does not matter to them if 99% of the group just want peaceful representation if 1% are using physical violence. They use the 1% to discredit the rest. It is not fair, but people are often unfair to win an argument.

However these cases have very little to do with how each country generally runs their government. You are the one who is using this to broadly condemn the Cuban's way of government, even though you only named Castro. Many people blame Castro for everything that happens there but the Cuban government is larger than one person and is generally popular among the citizens. That is like using Bush to define America, they are both retired.

That is why I brought it up.

[joshcryer]

54. The Cuban state is using Castro's blueprint to the tee.

When Castro finally dies I expect that blueprint to somewhat ease up.

[Ash_F]

90. OK, I am new to this board. But I am guessing responding to one-liners is pointless?

The Jewish groups already have internet btw. He was probably planing to give it to someone within the group without their sanction.

I think if someone cared enough about big issues like this, they should take the time study the history of the region past to present as well the current political system/climate. So that they may have a serious discussion about what is happening. I doubt Castro has had anything to do with this case. There is more to Cuban politics than that.

I am against political systems that are dominated by one party(even two), but I recognize why Cuba came to that. The communist party became so big because of the overwhelming popular disdain for Batista regime. Which was a true minority group that only held onto power through force of arms. If you think it was the other way around you need to do some reading.

Cuban was essentially owned economically, politically and militarily by a combination of American and Cuban elites, ever since the US won the territory from Spain in the Spanish-American war. As the FDR era came to maturity, Americans were experiencing upward economic and social mobility through the 40s and early 50s. The Cubans looked to this and sought to emulate(as did most of the world). They started to unionize and liberalize, and demand fair representation. This threatened the wealth and land that the Cuban/American elites had held for the 50 years after the war. So they responded with violence, killing striking laborers, students, community organizers and rival political leaders. All people who were not even communist yet. With weapons made in America. With American money to keep soldiers loyal to them. With such blatant inhumanity that even the priests united with the communists, who were vocally anti-religion, for a time. And so the revoltion kicked off. The Communist party came to power and the Cuban government took more the form of the Soviet-Marxist model than that of the American-FDR model(which was what it was originally trending toward). The Average American did not know what was going on in Cuba back then, the wealthy were making the decisions. The Average American does not know this history either. But average Cubans do and there is a lot bitterness, resentment and anger towards the US about it.

That anger is why Gross is getting the book thrown at him. It does not have anything to do with Castro or his "blueprint". Maybe if the US took the right side back then, things would be different. I am sure things would be better if they take the right steps. But it will not happen if the American public is going to sit on the sidelines while rich people with money involved in the situation make all of the decisions. That is way it has been for the past 100 years between the US and Cuba. Political parties and named-ideologies have come and gone but the rich/poor dynamic has always been there. I do not condone what is happening to Mr. Gross or the tight control of internet access, I can not denounce that enough. But I understand why things are this way. America has not done enough to differentiate itself from the Batistas and denounce its past actions. Its politicians certainly have not. Most citizens have not. Even half the posters on this Democratic board have not. Not because they are bad people or do not care about others plight, but because they do not know and are not involved. People need to get involved to fix things.


<->
There will always be rich and poor but what is important is that people have representation. This was/is just too much^^^

[joshcryer]

94. It's insulting you don't think I am aware of that side of the story.

But given that you have swallowed it whole without question, I would cite these two books:

http://libcom.org/library/cuba-anarchism-history-of-movement-fernandez

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bright/dolgoff/cubanrevolution/toc.html

Something happened to both Cuba and the United States back then (though somewhat earlier in the United States), something ironically quite similar on historical terms. The American labor movement in the United States, Industrial Workers of the World, was implicitly anarchist. The plutocrats over time squashed that movement, and the USA trended toward corporation controlled fascist plutocratic capitalism. Whole groups would be arrested for protesting, one after another. Two world wars helped to quell the IWW.

Likewise, in Cuba, the revolutionary anarchists were squashed by García Menocal, but something slightly different happened, there. The anarchists successfully had insurrection against the capitalists, and slowly were taken over by the communists (statists or Marxists). And yet again, war played a part in the dwindling nature of the libertarian socialists (The Spanish Civil War, which had Cuban anarchist involvement). But still, Batista gained control, and with the help of the anarchists Castro and his goons overthrew Batista. For the anarchists, however, it was too late. They were heavily repressed, far beyond the IWW in some respects (because the IWW fell into obscurity because of the world wars that lasted years), many were executed and forced to undergo torture beyond anything you can comprehend today (the Spaniard anarchists also employed psychologically torture, so I'm not saying this was a unique process). Trending Cuba toward state controlled totalitarian autocratic communism.

I'm sorry that my side of history disagrees with yours, but the Castro regime was never a progressive one, but both countries enjoyed a brief period of time where free expression reigned. And I expect both will again some day soon. Though I will not give the US one iota of credit for its coming revolution, but I am sure that the Castro-ians will demand credit for theirs.

Only real reason that the US hasn't turned into Chile or Batista's Cuba or Spain or whatever depotic country you can think if is our First Amendment. Free speech, free press, free assembly, which some American's take for granted, but others defend vigorously, forces change.

[Ash_F]

95. You seem pretty preoccupied with the concept of Anarchy.

What I think is more important than getting caught up on ideologies and philosophical arguments, is to have a pragmatic and solution-oriented view towards a country's needs. You seem to be thinking more about Anarchy than Cubans. I am not here to be an apologist for Castro or the communist party in Cuba. I just want to offer context for what is happening with this man's case, and why it is playing out like it is. And no, when something happens in Cuba and people make generic Anti-Castro one-liners that are really tangential to the story, it is a pretty good sign that they do not know much about Cuba. Maybe you knew more than I thought, but I bet you learned at least one new thing from what I wrote there. :)


It is true that communists alienated and other parties after the revolution from participation in the government. They alienated the church too. And some of the politicians that supported the revolution spoke out against to communist tilt of the new government. But the communists were seen as the people's saviors more than anyone else, so they enjoyed overwhelming support. To the point where they controlled the entire government and have nothing to balance them out and no accountability. That is the problem with one-party rule, as I have mentioned before. The problem is, there exists a fear in many countries in the post colonial era of going back to the "old ways" of when foreign superpowers controlled them through force of arms and pilfered their resources. There is an honest fear of those people worming their way back into power. The dominating political parties hold onto power by rallying people against that fear. Sadly they get away with it because there is some truth in it all, if overblown. Actions like the embargo, and especially clandestine actions, do not help. That is why they are trying to control the internet, among other things.

The biggest irony about Cuba-US relations is that if people want the communists to loose power faster, the best way to do that is to end the embargo and normalize relations. Opportunity breeds discourse. Cubans will not have a reason to cling to the communists as their saviors anymore and the communists will not be able to point to their rivals and paint them as uncle Toms. But that probably would not completely destroy the Communist party. They would still be the largest party for a long time and that would be unacceptable to the people who want to the whole pie.

If I would end on an optimistic note, time is making it easier. On the Cuban side, the people who were most traumatized by the Batista era are dieing out and retiring, and some of that fury is cooling. You can even see it in Castro himself. On the US side, the elite American and Cuban families who had money tied up on the island have shifted their focus on making money elsewhere, similar to what is happening in South Africa and Zimbabwe, so they are not putting pressure on American politicians like they used to. In a fair world they would be poor now so they could see what it is like, but no, most of them still run in high society and mingle with our politicians. And for the average American the specter of Communism is fading so the ideological bogeyman is weakening. Hopefully one day Americans will realize that Cuban communists mostly just want a decent life, like they do. Things will get better.

But they will get better faster if the US drops the embargo and Cuba releases Mr Gross.

[joshcryer]

55. And just so we're clear, that blueprint says "free communication" = "terrorism."

I know of no one serving life sentences in the United States for proposing providing free communication which is translated by the government as "terrorism."

We have yet to have that.

[social_critic]

16. I'm not going to Cuba, that's for sure

After seeing this, there's no way those goons are coming close to controlling my fate - I was going to visit Cuba, but forget it.

This is unreasonable, cruel, idiotic, and reflects the fears of a tyrannical regime in its dying throes. Evidently what's happening in Egypt is scaring the Cuban regime.

[dipsydoodle]

17. Evidently ?

Cuba has already had its own successful Revolution.

Fidel's recent Reflection/Essay is in support of the Egyptian people :

THE die is cast for Mubarak and not even the support of the United States can save his government. An intelligent people, with a glorious history which left its mark on human civilization, live in Egypt. "From the height of these pyramids 40 centuries contemplate you," Bonaparte exclaimed, it is said, in a moment of passion when the encyclopedists’ revolution took him to that extraordinary crossroad of civilizations.

At the end of World War II, Egypt was under the brilliant leadership of Abdel Nasser who, in conjunction with Jawaharlal Nehru – heir to Mahatma Gandhi – African leaders Kwame Nkrumah, Ahmed Sekou Toure and Sukarno, president of the recently liberated Indonesia, created the Non-Aligned Movement and promoted the struggle for the independence of former colonies. The nations of South East Asia, the Middle East and Africa, such as Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Western Sahara, the Congo, Angola, Mozambique and others, immersed in the battle against French, British, Belgian and Portuguese colonialism backed by the United States, were fighting for their independence with support from the USSR and China.

After the triumph of our Revolution, Cuba joined that movement which was on the march.

In 1956, Britain, France and Israel launched a surprise attack on Egypt, which had nationalized the Suez Canal. The bold act of solidarity on the part of the USSR, which even threatened to deploy its strategic missiles, paralyzed the aggressors.

The death of Abdel Nasser on September 28, 1970, was an irreparable blow for Egypt.

The United States continued to conspire against the Arab world, which holds the largest oil reserves on the planet.

It is not necessary to put forward many arguments, suffice it to read the news cables on what is inevitably occurring.

Let’s see the news:

January 28:

"(DPA) – More than 100,000 Egyptians took to the streets today to protest against the government of President Hosni Mubarak, despite a ban on demonstrations issued by authorities…"

"The demonstrators set fire to Mubarak’s National Democratic Party offices and police surveillance posts, while in central Cairo they threw stones at police who were attempting to disperse them with teargas and rubber bullets."

"American President Barack Obama met today with a committee of experts to assess the situation, while White House spokesman Robert Gibbs warned that the United States is to reevaluate the multimillion-dollar aid it gives to Egypt in line with the development of events.

"The United Nations also issued a strong message from Davos, where Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon was present this Friday."

"(Reuters) – President Mubarak orders curfew in Egypt and the deployment of army troops backed by armored vehicles in Cairo and other cities. Violent clashes reported between demonstrators and police.

"Egyptian forces, backed up by armored vehicles, were deployed on Friday in Cairo and other large cities in the country to end huge popular protests demanding the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak.

"At least 410 people were wounded during Friday's protests, some in a serious condition with bullet wounds, medical sources said, while state television announced a curfew in all cities."

"The events represent a dilemma for the United States, which has expressed its wish for democracy being extended throughout the region. However, Mubarak has been Washington’s close ally for a number of years and the recipient of much military aid."

"(DPA) – Thousands of Jordanians demonstrated throughout the country today after Friday prayers calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Samir Rifai and political and economic reforms."

In the midst of the political disaster striking the Arab world, leaders meeting in Switzerland considered the causes which gave rise to the phenomenon, which they even described as collective suicide.

"(EFE) – Various political leaders at the Davos Economic Forum are asking for a change in the growth model."

"The current economic growth model, based on consumerism and without taking environmental consequences into account, cannot be maintained for much longer because the survival of the planet goes along with it, various political leaders in Davos warned today."

"The current model is collective suicide. We need revolutionary thinking. Revolutionary action," Ban warned. "Natural resources are constantly more scarce," he added, during a debate on how to redefine sustainable growth in the framework of the World Economic Forum.

"Climate change is showing us that the old model is more than obsolete," insisted the UN leader.

"The Secretary General added that, in addition to basic resources for survival such as water and food, ‘another resource is running out, time to tackle climate change.’"

January 29:

"Washington (AP) – President Barack Obama tried the impossible: winning the hearts and minds of Egyptians furious with their autocratic ruler while assuring a vital ally that the United States has his backing.

"The four-minute speech Friday evening represented a careful balancing act for Obama. He had a lot to lose by choosing between protesters demanding that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak step down from a government violently clinging to its three-decade grip on the country.

"Obama didn't endorse regime change. Nor did he say that Mubarak's announcement was insufficient."

"Obama's address was the most forceful of the day, but it stuck largely to the script already set by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs."

"(NTX) – The Washington Post today asked the Obama government to use its political and economic influence in order to persuade President Mubarak to step down in Egypt."

"The United States should use all its influence, including the aid of $1 billion-plus which it provides for the Egyptian army every year, to ensure the final result (Mubarak’s resignation), stated the editorial."

"…In his message on Friday night Obama said that he would continue working with President Mubarak and lamented the fact that he has not mentioned possible elections."

"The daily described as ‘unrealistic’ the positions of Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, who informed a radio station that he would not call the Egyptian president a dictator and that he did not think that he should resign."

"(AFP) – American-Arab organizations have called on the government of President Barack Obama to stop supporting the Mubarak dictatorship in Egypt."

"(ANSA) – The U.S. once again stated that it was ‘concerned’ about the violence in Egypt and warned the Mubarak government that it cannot act as if nothing has happened. Fox News says that Obama is left with two bad options in relation to Egypt.

"…he warned the Cairo government that it cannot go back to ‘shuffling the cards’ and acting as if nothing had happened in the country.

"The White House and the Department of State are closely following the situation in Egypt, one of Washington’s principal allies in the world, and the annual recipient of $1.5 billion in civil and military aid."

"The U.S. media is giving extremely wide coverage to the disturbances in Egypt and noting that, in whichever way they are resolved, the situation could result in a headache for Washington."

"If Mubarak goes down, Fox stated, the United States and Israel, its other main ally in the Middle east, could have to face a government of the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo, and an anti-Western swing in the North African country."

"We have backed the wrong horse for 50 years," former CIA officer Michael Scheuer told Fox. "To think that the Egyptian people are going to forget that we backed dictators for 50 years, I think is a pipe dream."

"(AFP) – The international community has increased its calls on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to undertake political reforms and end the repression of demonstrations against his government, which continue this Saturday for the fifth day."

"For their part, in a joint statement on Saturday, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and David Cameron asked the president ‘to initiate a process of change’ in response to his people’s ‘legitimate demands’ and ‘at all costs to avoid the use of violence against civilians.’

"Iran has also called on the Egyptian authorities to respond to demands from the streets."

"On the other hand, King Abdala of Saudi Arabia considered the protests as ‘attacks on the security and stability’ of Egypt, perpetrated by ‘infiltrated individuals’ in the name of ‘freedom of expression.’

"The monarch made a telephone call to Mubarak to express his solidarity, according to the official SPA news agency."

January 31:

"(EFE) – Netanyahu fears that chaos in Egypt could give rise to Islamist access to power.

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today expressed his fear that the situation in Egypt could give rise to Islamist access to power, a concern which he said is shared by leaders with whom he has talked in the last few days."

"…the Prime Minister declined to make any reference to national news reports noting that Israel today authorized Egypt to deploy troops in the Sinai Peninsula for the first time in three decades, which is considered as a violation of the 1979 peace agreement between the two nations."

"For her part and in response to criticisms of the Western powers such as the U.S. or Germany, which have maintained close ties with totalitarian Arab regimes, the German Chancellor affirmed: ‘We have not abandoned Egypt.’"

"The peace process between Israelis and Palestinians has been paralyzed since last September, principally because of the Israeli refusal to halt the construction of Jewish settlements in Palestinian occupied territory."

"Jerusalem (EFE) – Israel is leaning toward keeping in power Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, whom the Israeli head of state, Shimon Peres, backed today on the understanding that ‘a religious fanatical oligarchy is no better than the lack of democracy.’"

"The statement by the President of the State of Israel coincides with national media reports of Israeli pressure on its Western partners to lower the tone of their criticisms of the Mubarak regime which the Egyptian people and the opposition are trying to overthrow.

"Unidentified official sources quoted by the Haaretz newspaper stated that the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent a communiqué on Saturday to its embassies in the U.S, Canada, China, Russia and various European countries to ask ambassadors to emphasize to their respective national authorities the importance for Israel of stability in Egypt."

"Israeli analysts are noting that Mubarak’s fall could endanger the Camp David Agreements which Egypt signed with Israel in 1978 and the subsequent signing of the bilateral Peace Treaty in 1979, above all if the consequence should be the rise to power of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, which enjoys broad social support."

"Israel sees Mubarak as the guarantor of peace on its southern border, in addition to being a key support in maintaining the blockade of the Gaza Strip and isolating the Hamas Palestinian Islamist movement."

"One of Israel’s greatest fears is that the Egyptian revolts, following in the wake of the Tunisian ones, could also reach Jordan, thus weakening the regime of King Abdala II, whose country and Egypt are the only Arab nations to recognize Israel."

"The recent appointment of General Omar Suleiman as Egyptian vice president and thus, a potential presidential successor, has been welcomed in Israel, which has maintained close cooperative relations with the general in the context of defense."

"But the direction being taken by the Egyptian protests does not allow the continuity of the regime being taken for granted, or that Israel can continue to have in Cairo its principal regional ally in the future."

As can be observed, the world is simultaneously and for the first time confronting three problems:

Climate crises, food crises, and political crises.

Other grave dangers can be added to these.

The constantly more destructive risks of war are very much present.

Will the political leaders have sufficient serenity and equanimity to face up to them?

The future of our species will depend on that.

Fidel Castro Ruz
February 1, 2011
7:15 p.m.

Translated by Granma International

Mods - There open permission for the Reflections of Fidel Castro to be republished unamended in their entirety.

[boppers]

21. Cuba could use a revolution.

A people can only be squashed by tyrants "for their own good" for so long before they throw off their shackles.

[joshcryer]

36. The Cuban military runs the country and is roughly 10% the population including reservists.

Contrast that to the United States where 1% of the population is military (including reservists).

If there were to be a popular uprising in Cuba (if only to have a more direct Democracy), there would be a lot of pressure from the military (which controls 60% of the GDP) to quell any such notions.

I'll never forgive Cuba for repressing the Cuban anarchists, and I'll never forgive American anarchists for drinking the fucking koolaid, and buying in to Castro's rhetoric (relatively balanced article that discusses it): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Cuba

And believe me, I read Castro's speech "History Will Absolve Me," and 15 years ago I thought it was goddamn amazing. But as I've aged I've seen through the rhetoric and seen just what a hierarchical socialist state is. Tyranny.

[sufrommich]

23. Yeah, Egypt had it's own revolution too,in 1956.

What does that have to do with the OP? Other than then typical move to deflect.

[social_critic]

62. Dipsy, Cuba's revolution is ancient history - today Castroite Dictatorship is the establishment

I know it's semantics. But today the Castroite dictatorship is the establishment. And the Cuban people are the revolutionaries who are going to kick the regime into the trash heap of history. :-)

[joshcryer]

70. I think they're waiting for Castro to die so they don't break his heart.

Be it either mass delusion or true affection, the Cuban people do have some feeling for Castro. But it's gotta break some time. Give them some internet. Things will look amazing.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boppers]

22. 20 years to life for setting up internet links in the US?

What similar US case would you use as a comparison?

[ronnie624]

32. Your viewpoint is clearly biased.

"The project Gross worked with was part of a $40 million-a-year USAID program to promote democracy and political change on the island."

In other words, he is an agent of political warfare by a foreign government. Imagine foreign agents attempting to secretly promote a political cause in the United States, on behalf of a government that is a declared enemy.

[boppers]

33. "foreign agents attempting to secretly promote a political cause in the United States"

Happens all the time. We call them "lobbyists" and "activists".

The moral high ground is lost when those agents are arrested on trumped-up charges, and their voice is silenced.

Yes, my viewpoint is biased towards freedom and democracy. I accept that.

[ronnie624]

35. Foreign lobbyist must be registered with the Department of Justice,

therefore they do not operate in secret.

Your illogical reply again illustrates your ideological bias.

[boppers]

42. Yeah, register with a government.

That's why it's wrong.

[LanternWaste]

83. And wikileaks...

We call them "lobbyists" and "activists". And wikileaks.

But no one's in jail over that... oh, wait.

[joshcryer]

37. Yeah, and the anarchists who got repressed by Castro's regime got funds from American's.

They were clearly CIA agents.

[boppers]

43. So?

What's wrong with that?

[ronnie624]

45. Why, nothing, of course.

The U.S. government has the most powerful military, therefore it has the 'right' to do as it pleases, including clandestine activities in other countries that would be illegal here.

Simple as that.

[joshcryer]

53. I was talking about the American anarchists, not the US government.

The American anarchists were anti-Castro long before the US government decided it was a good idea.

[joshcryer]

52. I actually agree with sending aid to comrades overseas.

The key being here that the US wasn't the first to be anti-Castroism, it was the anarchists (who are, no question, more liberal and socialist than any other group on the planet).

Is it OK for anarchists to send aid money to those who are suffering under totalitarian control?

Yes.

Is it OK for governments to do the same to those who they are ideologically aligned with?

To be consistent I must say, reluctantly, yes.

So when Che went and meddled in the affairs of other countries, and got himself killed doing it, good for him.

I reserve the right to do the same (and maybe get killed in the process).

[sufrommich]

26. So Cuba views the jews there as a terrorist organization?

Do you have a link to Cuba declaring them an unlawful terrorist organization before Gross was arrested? The difference is that in the US there has to be reasonable cause,what caused Cuba to consider this group of jews as a terrorist organization?Unlawful internet access?

[Ash_F]

47. That is a disgusting thing to say. See my second reply to Boppers for more on the situation.

Edit - In case it is not clear in my post, it is not known who he gave the equipment to at this time. The Jewish groups denied having contact with him so it is unclear who he was going to give it too. That is why they arguing that he was going to give it to terrorist groups. Unless there was an update I missed.

Double Edit - I think the likely situation is that he was going to give it to someone within the group without official party sanction, just to simply use the internet. But now they will not come forward to clear him because they would face a five year term themselves. So now he is twisting in the breeze in front of a justice system with a lot of anger towards the US and the Batistas. Again, a victim of the time.

And whether the US Department of Justice is/has been reasonable about this kind of thing is arguable. I would argue no. Maybe less unreasonable. But that is another discussion.

[NaturalHigh]

3. If there is a trial, it will only be for show.

I can't understand how anyone can defend the Castro dictatorship.

[boppers]

5. Well, the Castro regime did do good things for:

Literacy
Medicine
Hunger
Poverty
Housing
Education
(etc.)

So, I can understand some level of defense, as it hasn't been *all* bad. They took a nation living in violent, exploited, poverty, and elevated them to happy, somewhat well cared for, poverty.

Then again, Mussolini made the trains run on time.

[EFerrari]

6. Seriously, they should just let him die uncharged in custody like America does it.

[sufrommich]

24. One does not have to support either. nt

[EFerrari]

27. I have no problem with Cuba or any other country in this hemisphere

fighting back against destabilization by the State Department.

[sufrommich]

28. Giving people the hardware to connect to the internet is not

destabilizing a government,no matter how much perfume you try to spray on it.

[EFerrari]

29. After blocking net access for Cuba, it's not possible for State to claim

they are only trying to connect poor oppressed Cubans to the net.

[sufrommich]

30. The US is not blocking Cuba from accessing the internet. nt

[EFerrari]

31. Yes, it is. It has refused to allow access to a cable near Cuba.

Cuba is currently using satellite only. But that's okay, they are working with Venezuela to lay a cable that goes through Ven's network.

[joshcryer]

41. That is incorrect, "Cuban Democracy Act of 1992" explicitly *permits* internet.

But giving Cuba internet would be terrifyingly bad. Cuba doesn't want our free internet.

"We want to emphasize the fact that the Cuban government has the political will to expand access to the Internet safely, while protecting from harmful content such as incitement to terrorism, xenophobia, pornography and, of course, incitement to subversion of the status quo in Cuba and frankly counter revolutionaries."

"We need to access that enables us to protect ourselves, which we think is legitimate, due to the espionage to which we are subjected by the fact that a country blockaded and attacked for over 50 years by a major technological powers."

http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2009-02-06/internet-es-vital-para-el-desarrollo-de-cuba/

The reason Cuba is going with Venezuela is that the lines can be cut and locked at the source. The United States would set up cell towers and access points all over Cuba, it'd be freely accessible to anyone.

[msanthrope]

48. Very interesting. But Castro knows that the day Cubans are able to freely

communicate is the day they will be able to truly organize and overthrow.

[joshcryer]

50. Exactly. Right now I can go outside with a sign that says "Down with Republicans!"

In Cuba if you did the same but said "Abajo con el Partido Comunista¡" you are a dissident "counterrevolutionary."

It is all so fucking cute.

[reorg]

56. That is incorrect, the "Cuban Democracy Act of 1992" doesn't mention the internet

and the exception regarding telecommunications apparently didn't cover services of web providers and fiber-optic connections.

So, it took 17 years until Obama on April 13, 2009 "directed the Secretaries of State, Treasury, and Commerce to take the needed steps to: (...)

- Authorize U.S. telecommunications network providers to enter into agreements to establish fiber-optic cable and satellite telecommunications facilities linking the United States and Cuba.
- License U.S. telecommunications service providers to enter into roaming service agreements with Cuba’s telecommunications service providers."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Fact-Sheet-Reaching-out-to-the-Cuban-people/

[joshcryer]

57. It certainly did cover it. Cuba doesn't want it from the US.

Cite one link where Cuba has asked for internet from the US and was denied it. You will be unable to find it because it never happened.

[reorg]

60. How do you know?

"The government blames internet restraints on a US embargo, which blocks an underwater cable from the United States. Although the US recently dropped the cable ban, Havana has said it will build a cable from Venezuela."
18 November 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/18/cuba-blogs-blogosphere

[joshcryer]

63. You just proved it for me.

But it's propaganda that they could not get internet from the US.

[reorg]

65. empty blather n/t

[joshcryer]

68. Cuban Democracy Act of 1992

Telecommunications Services. -- Telecommunications services between the United States and Cuba shall be permitted.

Telecommunications Facilities. -- Telecommunications facilities are authorized in such quantity and of such quality as may be necessary to provide efficient and adequate telecommunications services between the United States and Cuba.

[reorg]

73. How immensely generous

"Telecommunications facilities are authorized in such quantity and of such quality as may be necessary to provide efficient and adequate telecommunications services between the United States and Cuba. (...)

Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the investment by any United States person in the domestic telecommunications network within Cuba. For purposes of this paragraph, an "investment" in the domestic telecommunications network within Cuba includes the contribution (including by donation) of funds or anything of value to or for, and the making of loans to or for, such network."

http://www.state.gov/www/regions/wha/cuba/democ_act_1992.html

[joshcryer]

75. Yes. which is why Gross is going to jail the rest of his life. He was in under the guise of USAID.

At least as far as we know, he was clearly distributing communications equipment (which Cuba itself forbids from being imported).

Cuba would have arrested him even if he was a private investor, though, which is why this point is meaningless. The US's position is that intercommunication and technology breaks communism (and it did for the most part in the USSR). Cuba is well aware of its potential to spur "counterrevolutionaries." Which is why they'd jail anyone, American or otherwise, from distributing the technology.

[reorg]

86. According to your logic, Chavez will soon be imprisoned in Cuba n/t

[joshcryer]

69. Just because the Castroian government claims it was restrained from having internet...

...doesn't make it true. Give me a hard link where the Cuban government specifically requested it and was denied. It has never happened. The US has been trying to get communications to the Cuban people for decades.

[flamingdem]

81. Google for info on how the US blocked a signed agreement to lay internet cable from FL to Cuba nt

[joshcryer]

82. Still looking but I found this:

http://www.talktalk.co.uk/technology/news/reuters/2011/02/06/video-shows-cuban-fears-of-internet-social-media.html

Quite alarming.

[reorg]

85. Really, really alarming

"Being a blogger is not bad. They have their bloggers and we have ours. We're going to fight to see which of the two turns out stronger," he said.

http://www.talktalk.co.uk/technology/news/reuters/2011/02/06/video-shows-cuban-fears-of-internet-social-media.html

[joshcryer]

58. I did not say it "mentioned the internet" I said it permitted it. Big difference.

The United States has had a long standing invitation to allow intercommunication between the world and Cuba.

[reorg]

59. you said it "explicitly" permits, but it doesn't

or are you suggesting Obama was pretending to ease sanctions that didn't exist?

"April 13, 2009
FACT SHEET: REACHING OUT TO THE CUBAN PEOPLE
Today, the Obama administration announced a series of changes in U.S. policy to reach out to the Cuban people"

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Fact-Sheet-Reaching-out-to-the-Cuban-people/

[joshcryer]

61. Obama is not "permitting" anything, he's authorizing.

[reorg]

64. yes, he authorizes changes n/t

[joshcryer]

67. Yes, additions, not permission.

[reorg]

72. Obama initiated some changes in US policy towards Cuba

but, at least according to this author in Foreign Policy, not enough to make better internet access feasible:

... In April 2009, Obama's announcement that he would relax regulations governing U.S. telecom activities in Cuba was met with tremendous expectation. In revising the regulations, Obama said he hoped to "help bridge the gap among divided Cuban families and promote the freer flow of information... to the Cuban people." Despite what appeared to be an opening, there was not so much as a peep of opposition from traditional anti-Castro groups -- which generally frown upon Washington softening toward Cuba. On the island, it was met with relief. In December of that year, Yoani Sánchez declared optimistically that the "period of silence is coming to an end. Now we must bring the power of the Internet and Twitter to all citizens."

Moreover, as a recent Cuba Study Group, Americas Society/Council of the Americas, and Brookings Institution report notes, greater Internet access to the Internet for average Cubans would help set the stage for technically and economically empowering Cuban citizens for the eventual transition away from its anachronistic, decrepit economy to a more globally integrated market system -- a huge step in a country with only a 16 percent Internet penetration rate, the lowest in the Western Hemisphere.

But something was lost between Obama's hopeful words and the marching orders given to regulators. The final regulations prohibited export licenses for anything that could be considered "domestic infrastructure," such as cell-phone towers, satellites, wireless routers, even cell phones. Worse, the sale of items such as SIM cards, PDAs, laptop and desktop computers, USB flash drives, Bluetooth equipment, and wireless Internet devices remain prohibited. For long-suffering Cubans it was as if the U.S. government had given them a certificate that could only be redeemed outside the island. Without these physical elements, Internet and mobile connectivity remain a pipe dream for many Cubans. For now, all that really remains changed is the possibility for telecom representatives (but not representatives of what can be deemed infrastructure companies) to travel to Cuba and the possibility for the licensing of roaming agreements.

Between "domestic infrastructure" and all the items banned for export, there's little room for any real U.S. business activity that could link the island to the Internet and provide citizens with the tools of communication. Instead, the provisions only allow for the donation of these items, rendering a critical foreign-policy objective to philanthropy. ...

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/07/15/havana_calling?page=0,1


According to Reuters, even the Venezuelan fiber optic cable project had to take into account US sanctions:

"A Chinese subsidiary of French company Alcatel-Lucent is supplying the cable. French vessel Ile de Batz will lay the line which contains less than 10 percent U.S. product, thereby meeting U.S. embargo specifications. However, under the embargo the ship will not be able to dock in the United States for six months after putting up in Cuba."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/18/us-cuba-internet-idUSTRE70H5ZZ20110118

[joshcryer]

74. You're still missing the point, the US would have happily given Cuba access if Cuba asked.

Cuba has not asked for reasons which are clear. It would create debate and stir the international community. The United States would say "the network must be free," Cuba would have to decline, since they do not in fact want a free network.

[reorg]

87. So why don't you stick to the point

You have falsely claimed that the Cuba embargo law of 1992 "explicitly *permits* internet".
You have yet to explain why the 2009 "changes in U. S. policy" authorized by Obama were necessary.
You have failed to respond to the point made in Foreign Policy that even then, the final regulations in effect ruled out practical results, that "it was as if the U.S. government had given them a certificate that could only be redeemed outside the island".

We'll see how "free" Cuban web access will be once the Venezuelan connection is ready. To date, they don't block foreign websites like certain other countries do that are not under US embargo.

[joshcryer]

88. US permits access if authorized. US had not authorized because Cuba didn't ask.

Obama decides to authorize after Cuba says they want to get it through Venezuela.

We'll see how many Cuban's have access to sites like the Anarchist FAQ.

[JVS]

93. Yeah!

[dipsydoodle]

10. Its the same penalty

in Cuba for killing a cow without authorisation. That was introduced way back to discourage cattle rustling.

It's been pointed out here on DU before that the penalties for rustling remain harsh in the US too.

The moral in this instance is to not import into Cuba anything which is a clearly prescribed banned product - for the avoidance of doubt the full list accompanies entry slip application forms.

[boppers]

12. "for the avoidance of doubt the full list accompanies entry slip application forms."

What?

That doesn't make any sense.

[dipsydoodle]

13. It would make sense if you'd been there

and if you haven't what are you harping on about ?

There are numerous products prohibited from entry to Cuba. The list is supplied with the Tourist Visa Card application. Some listed here but that is not exhaustive :
http://www.cubavacationstravel.com/cuba_custom_prohibited_items.php

btw I was there for most of October.

[boppers]

20. I'm going to go somewhere where internet access is regulated? Uh, no.

I value my freedom a little more than that.

[joshcryer]

38. Foreign tourists have plenty of free access to internet. The plebs can't use it though.

Free as in freedom, the internet isn't blocked from a hotel room.

[joshcryer]

39. "any item - including literature- attempting against the security and internal order of the country"

There you go right there. Thank fucking god for the First Amendment. Jesus. Does that not tell you something there? If I flew with fucking "What is Property?" it could be confiscated. The Anarchist FAQ in printed form, that'd get me in deep shit.

[boppers]

44. The sad part is "socialists" who hate property.

It's a messy thing.

[joshcryer]

51. The anarchists view state owned property as capitalist, though.

Only instead of "private investors" (typically plutocrats) owning the corporation that owns the property, it's the state that owns the corporation (the state) that owns the property.

FYI, the "real socialists" the anarchists in Cuba, the anti-Batistias, were all repressed when Castro gained power. He immediately ejected all the union people (many of whom were anarchists) and made it into his own little cartel.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bright/dolgoff/cubanrevolution/toc.html

[dipsydoodle]

14. I think you aware

that the last sentence has previously been discussed elsewhere here on DU :

"While Gross claims to have been working with the 1,500-strong Jewish community, the leaders of the island's two main Jewish groups have told The Associated Press they had nothing to do with him."

[sufrommich]

25. Man, hard to believe they wouldn't fess up after seeing Gross

carted off to jail.:eyes:

[flamingdem]

34. US Jewish groups with ties to Cuba are progressive, Gross is right wing

.. and he was lying about his contact with those groups.

[sufrommich]

49. "Gross is right wing" lol, link? nt

[ronnie624]

71. He works as an agent of an imperialist power

that actively seeks to undermine the sovereignty of Cuba and many other small countries. He couldn't possibly be considered 'progressive'.

I'd need to see a link to reliable information naming him anything other than right wing.

[joshcryer]

76. Um, the best progressives work to undermine totalitarian regimes.

Progressives do not explicitly follow the "law of the land."

[joshcryer]

77. I assume you were against Che working in Congo and Bolivia, btw?

[ronnie624]

79. I didn't have much of an opinion on such things as a small child.

Che is not my hero, just an interesting part of history, and his activities are completely irrelevant to the issue of the U.S. government's policies of militarism and dominance with regard to small countries like Cuba. It's very odd that you compare the adventures of a single person to the official policies of a 'superpower'. How does one go about addressing it except to simply point out the inherent nonsense?

Forcefully meddling in the affairs of sovereign countries violates the UN Charter.

[joshcryer]

84. I'm not particularly fond of Che (I think he had a death wish and did things haphazardly).

However, I do not think that Che was wrong to try to be involved in Congo or Bolivia, just as it is not wrong to try to be involved in Egypt and Tunisia. Also, Che was not representing "just himself." His rebel cause overthrew Batista and itself was a Marxist ideology from Argentina. He was just as representative of the state as anyone else.

[joshcryer]

92. Here's an example of *individuals* helping bloggers in Cuba:

http://translatingcuba.com/?page_id=2790

[dipsydoodle]

15. Actual wording was

"Acts against State Independence or Territorial Integrity." According to Article 91 of Cubaâ�Ös Penal Code.

http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=261424&Itemid=1

In other words spying. What's the penalty in the US for spying ? Its 14 years in the UK but can be made subject to multiple charges with consecutive sentences - George Blake for example got 42 years on three charges - he escaped 5 years later.

[joshcryer]

40. Treason is 5 years minimum up to death. Trials for treason are extremely rare, and convictions are..

...almost non-existent.

[flamingdem]

19. The solution is EASY. Release the Cuban Five

... the USA has done this kind of thing many times, why not with Cuba??????


Stupidity reigns in US-Cuba relations

[social_critic]

66. So it's done to get a prisoner exchange

This sure smelled to me like a prisoner exchange. Are you representing the Cuban regime? :-)

[flamingdem]

80. No. Just stating the obvious. By the way were you born in Cuba? nt

[happyslug]

91. I suspect that is the Plan of the Cuban Government

This case sounds to much like a case the Cuban Government has been looking for. An exchange of a technical violator of Cuban laws, for the Cuban Five, who are in Jail for the technical crime of being Cuban Spies in the US (The Cuban Five used legal means to gather information of Cuban dissidents in Florida planning violent acts in Cuba, a crime in both Cuba and the US, the "Spies" then turned over the evidence to the FBI, who then arrested the "Spies" as unregistered agents of a foreign Government, the people who were reported to be planning violent Activities were never charged).

I suspect the Cuban Government would have ignored this gentleman, except the Cuban Government want their agents out of US Prison, thus he was charged and convicted of a Technical Crime. Thus I will not be surprised if an exchange takes place, especially if pressure is put on the US GOvernment to do something about this man's fate.

[Zorro]

78. Video shows Cuban fears of Internet, social media

This article from a couple of days ago describes why the Cuban government would take such a hard line in this case.

<snip>

Cuba fears the United States is encouraging dissent through social media such as Facebook and Twitter with the goal of toppling the government, according to the video of what appears a meeting of Cuban officials posted on websites this week.

The 50-minute video apparently is a presentation given by an Internet expert to officials of Cuba's Interior Ministry last June.

A link to the video at http://vimeo.com/19402730 was posted on several blogs, including that of Cuban anti-government blogger Yoani Sanchez, and on the website of the Miami Herald. It is not known how the video was obtained.

The expert, whose identity is not disclosed, told the officials the United States is promoting use of Facebook and Twitter to foment dissent similar to ways it was used in insurrections in the Ukraine in 2004 and in Iran in 2010.

<snip>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110205/wr_nm/us_cuba_usa_cyberwar_1

[joshcryer]

89. Saw that.

There's a post in GDP about it which has devolved into a discussion about different stuff. I wish more people would watch this video. If Bush did something like this everyone would be freaking the fuck out.