Although the Cubans may well not allow the 'overthrow the Cuban peoples Self rule', you forgot to mention that they aren't allowed to do much at all.

 http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250192005?open&of=ENG-CUB

Hey, is that the same Blair infiltrated 'Amnesty' that stated that the VICTIMS of Fallujah were as much to blame as those that GENOCIDED the city? Now there's a morally repugnant organisation I'll listen to every day of the week-NOT.

Never forget the Amnesty was DIRECTLY responsible for publishing and publicising the lies of the New York PR agency that CREATED the story of Iraqi troops throwing babies out of incubators in Kuwait.

The same Amnesty had no problem at all with the targetted bombing of hospital facilities and medical supply warehouses in Fallujah. Amnesty International is NOT what is says on the tin.

Damn, next we'll have some sad sack quote LIBERTY here.

Please remember, if the non-gov organisation is big, and static, and bureaucratic, its infiltation is so trivial, it would hardly count as a training exercise for the 'security services'

That the vast majority of Cubans fully support the revolution therefore the people's will is being done much more there than in any 'democratic' western society.

David Icke and Twilight?

Castro has never been prepared to test the depth of support for his revolution by doing something so mundane as calling an election.

Castro called for an election in 1976 and due to massive protests from the Cuban people backed down. They knew all about elections from US puppets in the past. Elections do nothing for a country, its all about greedy politicians trying to get into comfortable positions and actually do nothing for a countrys benefit. We see what people in the west think of elections thats why theyre all flocking in record numbers to vote in every election. Thats why here you have a govt with less than 20% support of the voting population. We know all about elections.

Castro is more supported by Cubans than any British of American goon will ever be in their own country.

Fidel is one old man it is clear to any person with an IQ over the room tempature that one old man is not holding back the fascist lunatic american criminals from invading Cuba like they tried before.

The Cuban People are responsible for the heroic defense of the freedom they so much enjoy I pity you ignorance.

nasty things, elections, then. Well, that gives you one view in common with the fascists.

COnsidering Hitler and Mussolini both came to power through elections. Elections would be fine if the people of Cuba had the lame western mentality which claims that if you dont like some1 you can replace them after 4 years, but in reality means that your choices are of 3 parties, with the same platform who control 99.99% of the media, just so that when u come back from work tired every day and turn on the tv they can bang into your head the notion that you have to vote for them. If you think thats not fascist then you're a fascits and you dont even know it. Cubans are proud of their movement, its based on solidarity and togetherness and that's why the USA sees Cuba as such a threat. You obviously dont know what the true meaning of oppression is coz ur ok with walking round the streets being watched by thousands of cameras, having your phone conversations or mobile phone messages being tapped on demand and having a government who is trying to create 'enemies of the people'left riht and centre just to distract them from the real criminals (themselves) Id like to see your scepticism extend to the establishment as well as indymedia rather than focus on one side. Questioning is good but make sure you ask all the questions not just half.

You know, it's sometimes pretty hard to hold elections when the nearby superpower does everything it can to disrupt the chances of the choice of the people. Let's have a look at some Latin American elections.
Chile, Allende, socialist candidate, so the CIA organised a general strike, and helped Pinochet into power, murdering Allende and thousands of others in the process.
Look at Venezuela now, with the US funnelling millions of dollars in aid to the oppostion parties in order to oust Chavez, via the National Endowment for Democracy. Chavez was democratically elected, but when he was briefly ousted by a militiary coup, the US were the first to accept the new ( thankfully short-lived ) regime.
Haiti, Aristide, democratically elected, left wing. Kidnapped by the US and flown out the country, while US funded anti-Aristide forces took over the capital.
Nicaragua. The democratically elected Sandanistas take power, and the US wages a war against them, funding the 'Contras', death squads, who murder thousands of people, until the Sandinistas are voted out of office by a population tired of the conflict.

Elections can be a tricky business in Latin America, because the bloody United States of America can't tolerate anybody being elected who they don't like, and do everything in their power to get rid of the regime. For example, how fair is an election in Cuba, as long as the US have their blockade in place, and the economic pressure that puts on the people, who might vote against Castro, just because they're tired of the sanctions? How fair would an election be in Cuba, with the US providing millions of dollars in aid to anti-Castro oppostion forces?
Cuba has been remarkably free considering the recent Latin American history of vicious right-wing and US backed dictatorships. And the human rights situation in Cuba is not even a quarter as bad as the US-backed 'democracy' of Colombia. Considering a nearby superpower is trying everything in it's power to destroy the Cuban government, there has been a surprising lack of torture, death-squads, 'disappearances', which you saw with Pinochet, in Central America, and even to this day in Colombia, all of whom were or are funded by US dollars.

Sceptic, why don't you read about the history of Latin America, or even visit the place, and maybe you will be able to appreciate exactly how exceptional Cuba has remained while US funded, tyrannical regimes have tortured and murdered their people in the neighbouring countries. And take note, that now in Latin America, the people are voting for governments who are friendly towards Castro and Cuba. Castro is considered a hero by the Latin American people, who are tired of Gringos trying to tell them what to do and who should be their leaders.

El pueblo unido jamas será vencido.

As far as I'm concerned they can elect who they like - Castro, Chavez, whoever. They make their choice and they live with it.

Chavez isn't popular with the US - given the language he's been using, I'm not altogether surprised.

Allende is always quoted - but different times, different customs. That was the height of the Cold War, and in wartime you make some funny friends [vide Stalin] and enemies.

I'm quite prepared to accept the US has meddled in South America, and often for the worse. However, the actions of the US confer no moral virtue on Castro. Indeed, if the US hadn't put sanctions on Castro, the regime might have crumbled earlier. It's probably held together more by dislike of the US than any love for Castro.

As for apathy in politics in Britain - oddly enough, it's a rather healthy sign. People turn to political extremes when things are going wrong. Whether it's true or not, people in Britain don't get worked up abput politics because they reckon there's not a lot to get worked up about.

Fidel Is the leader of the Cuban people because they want him to be their leader your spew “if the US hadn't put sanctions on Castro , the regime might have crumbled earlier” is a totally ignorant statement the Cuban people love the Free Cuba that is Cuba today thanks to the Cubans and Fidel's hard work and intelligence



the fascist americans lame attempts to punish the Cuban People for taking their freedom and Country back, has had no effect on the great Cuban peoples Revolution the americans are like a mosquito a bug ,irritant kind of like you, except you much more closely resemble a maggot

"because they want him to be their leader"

Realy? They don't have a lot of choice, do they?

After almost a century of men and women exercising their right to vote in Britain they realised that it wont make the blindest bit of difference who they vote for. Unless you think people in the UK who work the longest hours in Europe, and have the highest living cost think theyre alright. I dunno you do the maths.

"Allende is always quoted - but different times, different customs. That was the height of the Cold War, and in wartime you make some funny friends [vide Stalin] and enemies."

Ummm, yeah, it's been almost two years since the US last invaded another country. You talk about 'in wartime' but you seem to forget that we are at war right now. Either the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the more abstract 'War on Terror'.

Empires act in a certain way, they always have, at least for the past few thousand years of known history.

Well Sceptic, at least we can agree aobut a few things. Do you agree it would be better to drop the sanctions against Cuba, ease up the pressure, and see what happens to Cuba then? Because I agree, to a certain extent, that anger at the US is what keeps Castro in power, but then, he has always been a revolutionary, trying to free Latin America from US imperial domination. And maintaining that freedom is more important to Cuba, than the rather dubious freedom of voting between 2 extremely similar parties both of which have their tongue far up the arse of the US. That has been the situation in most Latin American countries for a while, and the people are tired of it, and are actually somewhat sceptical about 'democracy' if you look at polls.

However, I do believe the people should be able to choose their leaders more freely than they can in Cuba at the moment, but I think a pre-requisite for free and fair elections is that there is no foreign interference in those elections, or in the situation of that country. If you look at how many civil rights have been taken away in the US after 9-11, and then you think about how Cuba has had to put up with proportionately much greater pressure and terrorism than the US has, then maybe you can understand the Cuban situation a little bit.

Anyway, do you agree with ending sanctions against Cuba?

I would certainly support the removal of sanctions.

As history shows, the best way for a dictator to get his people to rally behind him is to point out the threat from a foreign power. "Support me against the nasty XXXXs". The US has shot itself in the foot by its hostility to the Cuban regime - understandble enough in 1962, but not today. The worst insult the US could give to Castro is to ignore him.

Democratic politics tends to end up as two not dissimilar parties arguing for the middle gorund. The middle ground is where most voters are to be found, so, if you want to be elected, that's what you've got to go for. On rare occasions - 1945 and 1979 in Britain - there are seismic shifts in where the common ground lies. Thus with Chavez today.

But I think if the US shrugged off Chavez' rhetoric, and ignored his provocative speeches, a lot of ground would be cut away from him. Why has he got the attention he has? Not because he's doing wonders for Venezuela (he might be, but that's not what catches people's attention) but because of the speeches he's been making. And the US are rising to his bait. For what can Chavez really do? He needs to sell oil on the international market, otherwise he'll go broke. The market being international, there's no real way he can say where the oil goes. And suppose he does send all his oil to China. Well, that means China buys less on the international market, so prices go down. The reason why OPEC was so succesful in the 70s was that all the producers took action. One producer by himself will not have nearly the same impact.