Talk:Fidel Castro/Archive 14

Notes for the blind communist Castro lovers editing wikipedia and for the man himself
There seems to be a group of people around here in wikipedia with very strong leftist tendency that are very blind as to no recognize Castro for what he is. But not to worry. History will take care of him like it took care of Hitler and Stalin and other horrible dictators the people in the world have suffer. There is a lot of talk in wikipedia about having a neutral POV but there is no such thing here. All the Castro's agents and lovers are here polishing his image probably getting paid with free vacations by the dictator at Varadero beach in Cuba while many true Cuban heroes die in prison just for opposing Castro and what he represents. A decadent regime, a waste of time for the Cuban people. Castro I know you or your agents will read this. So do not worry. History will take care of you and be assure that you will not look this good as it appear here. You could have been great a great leader if you had help Cuba get out of a dictator like Batista and then surrender power to the people to democracy! But you want to know something. You became worst than Batista the moment you started killing many innocent people just at the beginning of the revolution. You yourself killed the revolution with all the blood and with your unlimited greed for power. You claim Cuba is the most democratic country in the world.

"Right"!How many people prefer to die on the tooth of a shark better than at your hands? How many desperate people abandon the island? Because there is no other choice? or maybe because they are anyway dying an slow death at the hands of your regime, controlling every little bit of information as you an your agents are doing here at wikipedia. Cleaning up your image! It amazes me. Because this goes to show what you are. A megalomaniac! too worry about what history will tell about you, about what your legacy will be. Do not worry Fidel Castro. I will let you know this. Do not even let yourself think for a second that you are at the same level as Jose Marti, Feliz Varela or even a Simon Bolivar. You do not get even up one inch in front of them in fact I can tell you that you go down for miles and miles. You must be full of envy about Chavez! because his got the oil money you never had! and because of it he can buy some people. But do not be! Some people are not for sale. Some people will not buy the lies you sell. This is for you, all the leftist who have never live in a totalitarian regime, and who fantasize about Castro and Che I will also be sorry to disappoint you by telling you that you Castro that you are not even at Che's level, yes the same one you made a martyr, an icon of the revolution, Your first patron saint. The same one you sell in t-shirts and postcards now and you profit from! That is because at least Che had principles, something you really do not know what it is or even fathom, he(Che) probably believe in communism and that it was a good thing because of his youth, while on the other hand you Castro just used it for your own personal benefit and profit.

Ask yourself why Che die? why Camilo Cienfuegos die? and many others close to power in Cuba?

Many people said that Castro himself send someone to kill him! He just can not stand someone close to power(because he is very afraid to loose it he is paranoid about it,obsess with power, anybody close to him have to be very careful no to upset him or to contradict any of his ideas even the bad ones. Poor guys, I am sorry for them. Castro have subjugated and dominated the Cuban people who have suffer for years without end his power and very long rants. But no more.. Just like everything that is born some day you too Fidel Castro will also die sooner or later. Do not worry, when you die we the Cubans enjoying freedom will not celebrate your death but will rejoice about the change that will happen to our homeland after you will be gone. Sorry to see all the time wasted but not to worry. Cuba will be rebuild. All the Cuban blood you have spilled in and out of the country will not be in vane. You know why that will be? Because, Cubans will have learn their lesson.

For you, all the leftist who have never live in a totalitarian regime, believe me if you impartially read all the news about Fidel Castro and check all his speeches from the very beginning of the revolution you can see his evolution. How power have corrupted him and his regime. How many innocent people have been kill in the name of the revolution? how much intolerance! how many times he has sell out his "principles". Just to refresh old memories Cuba was suppose to be for Cubans at the beginning of the revolution. For a while Now because the commander was afraid of loosing his grip on power he had to let tourist come into the island to save his precious revolution and the achievements of the revolution.("health care" and "education")

If your search for Revolution in the dictionary you find that it means "change" but Castro have become the "counter-revolution", because he does want to persist in power he can not change because it will mean that he has to change, and if he does it means he will have to admit that he was mistaken. But that can never happen. He is always "right"! even when he is "wrong"! and therefore he keeps himself on archaic ideas and old conceptions that are no longer valid in today's modern world. Yes, Castro you are old as a dinosaur and just as they became extinct so will you!

See, I am happy. Very happy and is because you and your blind followers here at wikipedia feel the need to repaint this brutal dictator's life as something good. I tell you this. He does not care for anyone even for you that blindly clean up his article in wikipedia without thinking in the millions of oppressed people suffering his regime for so many years. He does not even care for his own family. What it is that he cares about?

Only power! Absolute power! and to pass in history books as something good but Castro you should know this that you have not learn in so many many years of your dictatorship. Informed People in free societies are entitle to think what they want and to form opinions free of your manipulations and base on facts and when people check facts about you and the things you have done they will find out about you no matter how many stupid people you can mesmerized now with your free vacations to Cuba or free health care propaganda while Cubans in Cuba do not have access to this, or to the same quality of health care as your PR agent Michael Moore here in the US make us believe with his communist commercials. Yes, history will portrait you for what you are. A dictator! someone that does not tolerate any opposition. Some one very vane that is so concern about his self image that could be consider narcissistic! a Megalomaniac, and yes we also know about your disciples Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales and Ortega all following in your foot steps. Not to worry! History will take care of them too. All of you start by offering something that seems good to some people and end with regimes with huge repression and the total loss of personal freedoms for all individuals. But history will collect all of this. Yes it will be there, all of it. To all of you that required proof that many people in Cuba do not like Castro and his government. What more proof than the massive exodus of Cubans around the world. More than 2 million Cubans are in exiled! Yes, Fidel Castro. That is what will be written in history books. How families had to abandon their homeland to a neurotic manipulator, a dictator without scruples a criminal a mafiosi in the same league as Al Capone,Hitler and Stalin a terrorist. That is what history will write about you.

Hasta la victoria siempre. Comandante en Jefe nosotros los que no estamos de acuerdo contigo venceremos! (SilentVoice 05:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)).

UMAP
Within the "References and footnotes" section, there is the following note:

^ Castañeda, Jorge (1998). Compañero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara. New York: Vintage. ISBN 0-340-56650-7, 62. The text to which this note is linked is:

"Military Units to Aid Production, or UMAP's, were labor camps established in 1965, according to Che Guevara, for “people who have committed crimes against revolutionary morals” as well as Castro's concept of "social deviants," including homosexuals and AIDS victims, in order to work "counter-revolutionary" influences out of certain segments of the population.[99]" Che Guevara was not making policy in Cuba in 1965, nor did he ever set up "UMAP". Furthermore, page 62 of Castañeda's book is definitely not a source for any statement to the effect that he did, or that he made comments about the same; in fact, that page deals exclusively with the period in 1953 when Guevara was travelling from Ecuador to Costa Rica, en route to Guatemala.--Zleitzen 08:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Z: obviously that happened, the question is who then, my guess it was Ramirito on Castro's orders, was responsible, and another citation must be found for such an important matter, since just to erase it the statement would be a whitewash. And Wikipedia would not want to do that would it (:>). BTW Is Wikipedia going to cover Guevara's burning of incriminating documents and executing the record keepers when he got to Havana (Díaz-Versón, Salvador 1980 One man, one battle. World Wide Pub. Co. New York ASIN B0006E1ULI pp. 104-106). El Jigue 9-4-06


 * Readded with proper citation. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 18:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Las Cuentas del Comandante
The article now ends with "The Castro family's substantial wealth was in no way spared from the expropriations of the immediate post-revolutionary period." I like the way that nobody mentions how Ramon Castro was left in charge of the whole "socialized" kit and caboodle on that huge parcel of land. When your family controls everything and everybody on the island (except Guantanamo Base, and some embassies) you live the "life of Riley". That way that this whitewash of Fidel Castro is now makes even more apparent, that this article is more and more a "enga~na bobos." see   xe xe El Jigue 9-6-06

Ramon was the manager of a nationalized farm. From what I've heard he's never been a particularly political person. He was agriculturist before and after the revolution, lives a simple life, and hasn't been reported as accumulating riches.

As for the "Life of Riley" the Castro's certainly enjoyed that before the revolution. Fidel and Raul could have been rich-kid playboys like George & Jeb Bush. It's a historical fact (inconvenient for Batististas) that they gave-up a privileged existence and endured hardships and dangers for the sake of their ideals. prem28885 7-Sep-2006 10:51 GMT

Hmmmmm That was in war. although I remember the comforts of the carefully built wooden houses in la Comandancia in La Plata and Raul's armored jeep at Central Oriente in 1958. As to the present day Fidel Castro arrived in Argentina this year with three planes, 400 bodyguards, and an armored limousine. Angel Castro never had the money that the Bush family had, besides the old "Gallego" was stingy "como el solo" and one cannot but help note your date line placing the day of the month before the actual month. When eventually all comes out one will see that Castro like Mao who was carried on a litter during the long march, never really suffered much want. Apparently he even had his favorite amphetamines, oh excuse me his "vitamin pills" even on the Granma. El Jigue 9-7-06

Arriving at a conference with a large delegation, bodyguards & an armoured limo are hardly evidence of cupidity. Fidel is a head of state and a target for assassination. If he's in this game for the money he's gone about in a funny way is all that I can say.Prem28885 16:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Not even the US President travels with 400 of his own bodyguards and in three brand new planes. You are correct Castro is not in it for the money but he is in it for the power. Meanwhile country-children in Cuba go without shoes, an important matter since hook-worm a major intestinal parasite which enters by the sole of the feet see Schreier, Alta 2001 Vamos a Cuba. Heinemann Library. Reed Educational & Professional Publishing Chicago ISBN 1575723840 Photograph on page 19. You may find this publishing house more to your  taste since among its few offerings it also prints The Communist Manifesto – by Marx and Why I Am Not A Christian by  Bertrand Russell  El Jigüe 9-7-066


 * I was in Farnborough (England) when Bill Clinton arrived for some summit. He had 2 C-5 Galaxies (a *very* large aircraft) and a 747 (the locals said that was for Hillary - probably a joke). He also brought dozens of secret service agents (who were allowed to carry automatic weapons). He didn't need 400 because he could trust the British authorities to protect him. Fidel could hardly trust the Argentine army - many of who's officers are graduates of the School of the Americas and veterans of the Dirty War. As for the your other point the objective evidence suggest Cuban kids are the healthiest and best educated in Latin America (healthier and better schooled then poor kids in the USA).Prem28885 17:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Prem: I see. One wonders how come there are people all over the world ready to sacrifice their lives to kill Castro, and yet he has survived in power for 48 years. Galaxies are transports thus one could wonder what were they bringing. Airforce 1 is the 747 that the US President uses. Argentina now long under a socialist government has long rid itself of "veterans" of the dirty wars. One also notices that these "veterans" were tried, but none of the surviving leftwing terrorists were. BTW your "most objective evidence" apparently includes that of international agencies who simply accept Castro government data without correction. Now tell me about the plagues of rats in London and I will tell you about dengue in Cuba. xe xe El Jigue 8-9-06.


 * Jigue - The socialist government in Argentina has as much control of its army as Salvador Allende had of the army in Chile. These Latin american armies are essentially autonomous. The CIA and Pentagon have more control over them then the civil authorities. Not one in 10000 of the Agrentinian war criminals have been indited - let alone imprisoned. People like Alfredo Astiz (no doubt a hero to you) are still free, so are the people who sent Juan Gelman's son & daughter-in-law to Uruguay to be murdered (his granddaughter was given to a Uruguayan police officer).

Prem28885 14:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't know anything about Agrentinia never heard of the place.... Now perhaps I am slightly more familiar with Argentina where Hebe Pastor de Bonafini proclaimed her happiness at the fall of the Twin Towers (may those innocents rest in peace) Here is a reference to that statement from a source that should be "radical" enough for you El Jigue 9-11-06


 * What Hebe Pastor de Bonafini said was wrong - I won't condemn her because the USA aided and abetted the murder of her children and a mother's grief can excuse such an irrational outburst. The 11th of September 2001 crimes were not carried out by the Latin American Left, but by the people (bin Laden et al) who were armed trained and financed by the US neo-con security apparatus. BTW the gallant Argentine security forces have also been implicated in AMIA Jewish Community Center bombing in 1994 - Fidel hasn't survived 600 assssination attempts by trusting people like this. Just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean they're not out to get you.Prem28885 12:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Somewhat chicken heading
It seems to me that the heading:

"This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy as it directly concerns one or more living people. Negative material, especially if potentially libelous, must be removed immediately if it is unsourced or poorly sourced. The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals. Concerns relative to this policy can be addressed on the living persons biographies noticeboard."

is somewhat less than cowardly and definitely provides and excuse to avoid and delete criticism of living leaders. Well what can one expect here..... xe xe El Jigue 9-11-06


 * And what exactly is the alternative? A free-for-all where any sort of pro or anti disinformation is allowed? The unfortunate fact is that in an article about some one like Fidel Castro or George Bush all we can do is state the bald facts. Information must be sacrificed for the sake of consensus. I too think this is a pity - which is why when editing this article I have simply pointed-out the dubiousness of certain sources and left the readers to make up their own minds (instead of deleting tendentious claims).Prem28885 11:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Prem: "Information must be sacrificed for the sake of consensus."

Since in a controlled state such as Cuba information is repressed and events are difficult to document, your position allows or even promotes impassioned defense of a dictator who has been in power for almost 50 years in which he has beggared the Cuban people, and killed tens thousands if not much more on the island and all over the world is most touching. These actions clearly demonstrate the power of faith in less than admirable causes over reason that has bedeviled this planet since time immemorial. One day if you are lucky you will find the strength try to atone for this, but then like Gunter Grass, it may be far to late for you. El Jigue 9-12-06


 * You say impassioned - I say objective. I think Castro has certainly commited human-rights abuses but on a scale that pales besides the enormities of the US-backed thugs in the region. In Guatemala alone 200,000 people - mostly Mayan Indians - were butchered by the US-installed regime. And at least Castro was trying to liberate Cuba from US domination and uplift the working-class. The CIA and its henchmen kill for the sake of commercial interests like the United Fruit Corporation. You will obviously disagree with this - so what goes in the article? Every spurious bit of nonsense comming out of Miami and the various US goverment agencies? Or the hagiographies of the Left? The only solution is to stick to well-documented facts. The "sacrifice of information" cuts both ways - e.g. the article on Dubya doesn't dwell on how exactly his glorious defense of Texas airspace against the VietCong came to be arranged.Prem28885 18:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

"And at least Castro was trying to liberate Cuba from US domination and uplift the working-class" -- Oh, really? I thought he just wanted naked power, like every other asshole dictator on the planet. I guess you're right, though, he has in fact allowed numerous free elections since he took power. Moron. Alex77777 05:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Alex7777

From your statements above it seems that our concepts of objectivity and reliability of data vary considerably (:>) El Jigue 9-13-06

I see information on the virtues (:>) of Jesus "Enrique" Lister Forjan is sadly lacking here, for a few details on Lister's support for Castro see a new source written by a friend of mine. El Jigue 12-9-06

Wealth
I've removed Ultramarine's addition "Castro and loyalists are said to control several billions of dollars in real estate, bank accounts, private estates, yachts and other assets — called “the Comandante's Reserves” — in Europe, Latin America and Asia." as the article cited includes only a recycling of more of Werlau's unsubstantiated insinuations. MichaelW 22:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have given 3 sources and Werlau cites numerous sources. Read NPOV.Ultramarine 22:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

"
 * You gave one source first time round and your expansion hardly improves things. Your three sources are interlinked and reduce to one on examination. And that one is the unsubstantiated reports of a defector.


 * The Werlau report (source 3) relies largely on the Cuba Monthly Economic Report, Special Issue, August 1997 (source 2) and your original citation (source 1) simply quotes Werlau. The Aug 1997 report says "The information reported in this special edition of the Cuba Monthly Economic Report comes from just such a source [a high level defector] — Jesus M. Fernandez..."


 * Do you not think that the U.S. agencies so keen on subverting Cuba would have uncovered actual evidence by now, were things the way the defectors paint them? MichaelW 23:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This a valid view which has verifiable sources. You can add further criticsm of this to article if something is missing.Ultramarine 00:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Werlau's paper gives many different source for Castro's wealth. As she notes, these different sources give a similar picture of the corruption.Ultramarine 01:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * "What is striking about defectors' accounts is their consistency. This is more impressive because they originate from independent sources unrelated to one another who have had dissimilar access to the structure of power and whose testimonies cover different events and stages and have been collected over a long period. In fact, over the years, many of these accounts have appeared in low-profile media reports in different countries or have been published as memoirs written almost exclusively in Spanish -far from the best-seller circuits and widely ignored by the international mainstream media. By systematically compiling this assortment of tales, a coherent story emerges of a vast international conglomerate backed up by sophisticated financial dealings in world capital markets. Fidel, Inc. consists of scores of enterprises, sizeable hard currency holdings, and numerous real estate assets inside and outside Cuba, all under Fidel or Raúl Castro's personal control and concealed from official national statistics."Ultramarine 01:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * With the vast resources of the CIA, NSA et al scrutinizing Cuba in more detail then any other country on earth (remember Bush redirected resources in the US Customs Service from counter-terrorism to enforcing the embargo on Cuba, so we know what his priorities are) this is the best evidence they can come-up with? Not a single piece of reliable evidence for even the most trivial corruption! If they had anything they would be shouting it from the roof tops. One remembers Condi Rice's claims about Cuba's supposed biological warfare programme, an incredibly flimsy case that was torn to pieces within hours. Prem28885 13:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW Maria Werlau tells me: "...i interviewed eight high-ranking defectors personally."

"Manuel Beunza (mailto:MannyGG99@aol.com) Jesus  Marzo Fernandez Alcibiades  Hidalgo Hernan  Yanes Juan  Benemelis Alina  Fernandez Manuel  Garcia Diaz (mailto:ehessel@forbes.com) Jorge  Masetti"

"Plus, the paper cites numerous other independent sources, all of which can be verified, including the former second in command of Cuba's Air Force, Gen. Rafael del Pino."

"I have spoken to other top defectors in the past, whose accounts are consistent with the thesis, whom i didn't quote, because it was repetitive and i would have had to call them again, get testimony on file, etc. Thus, i treat these as anecdotal accounts"

Still all this still will not satisfy some. So again. I sit back and laugh at the deletion for these scissor happy censors are helping support my thesis that Wikipedia is politically biased and inaccurate. Please don't quote that contrived "Nature" article without citing the response from Encyclopedia Britanica.

As to the germwarfare capability. Castro booted out the scientists who objected to this use. Let me see if I can get a comment. El Jigue 9-18-06

BTw have you seen the Percherones of Castro at El Jigue 9-19-06


 * I guess the reference to Nature is a joke. But for those with an irony-bypass ....
 * Nature is a peer reviewed scientific (ie generally not politically contentious) journal - hence its reliability. Peer review is arduous, when I was at university my supervisor could spend several weeks reviewing an important article, and there would be several reviewers. Nevertheless being published in such a journal does not constitute acceptance of a scientific claim - there is also the necessity of independently reproduced results (the case of a certain Korean embryologist springs to mind). These allegations against Castro could not be further removed from this situation. I think you would accept the following:


 * i) Castro has many political opponents in the USA and elsewhere


 * ii) Many of them have deep pockets and are less than scrupulous in their methods


 * iii) A defector has many incentives to ingratiate himself with these people.


 * Hence the need for solid evidence - bank accounts, details of properties etc.


 * Such evidence is lacking.


 * None of your sources' allegations have been endorsed by a non-partisan organization or news organization. The US government which has not been slow to make accusations against Castro has been remarkably silent on this account (BTW the germ warfare allegation evaporated when people started asking hard questions - the State Department ended up admitting that what their allegation amounted to was that Cuba had the *capability* of pursuing a bio-warfare programme - as indeed does any country with a bioscience infra structure. ie the whole thing was complete nonsense).


 * So we are left with a lack of evidence. I say because Castro isn't corrupt - you say because he is good at covering his tracks. Either way if we allow your "evidence" into the article we will need to change the philosophy of wikipedia fundamentally. We will have to allow any nonsense from conspiracy nuts, UFOlogists, people who believe the world is controlled by lizards (they exist see David Icke)... ie just like the rest of the internet - after all, these allegations are published on numerous anti-Castro websites. The whole point of wikipedia is to have some degree of quality control.Prem28885 18:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * NPOV states that all signifciant views should be included. This is one. We are not stating that it is the truth, only reporting what other says, as per Wikipedia policy.Ultramarine 18:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Biographies of living persons says different. But if you're right this will also be execellent news for the lizard theorists ;) Prem28885 18:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Werlau's paper was published in an academic journal, certainly a reliable source.Ultramarine 19:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Forgive me for thinking that the "Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy" a group that consists for the most part of Cuban exiles, and their progeny, doesn't *quite* have the credibility of Proceedings of the Royal Society or Nature ;) Prem28885 19:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * "On December 29, 1990 ASCE became an affiliated organization of the Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) under the sponsorship of the American Economic Association (AEA)." Note that the policy you mentioned above does not require DNA evidence or a court conviction for stating something. For public figures it states: "If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article — even if it's negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it."Ultramarine 19:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been reading this discussion for days now and I fail to see how this helps the article improvement in any way. I think whether Castro and his regime qualify as fascism is more of a topic on a discussion forum. Please talk about the article on this talk page, not political technicalities which do not directly deal with the article. mensch • t 21:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Mensch if one makes "a priori" judgment that Castro was not influenced by Mussolini, then this makes little sense. However, since Castro is known to have read works by Mussolini one can can consider, give the notable resemblence of their slogans, that there is high probability that the  Italian Fascist dictator did influence Castro. This is not novel scholarship, since it has been pointed out here and elsewhere many times before with support of diverse other citations. El Jigue 9-25-06


 * EJ, before you get too carried away with your Mussolini flight of fancy, remember that Mussolini is probably echoing Garibaldi's "Roma O morte". In fact it is likely to be the Italian patriach and international revolutionary Garibaldi that Castro is attempting to emulate. Not the fascist leader Mussolini. Back to the drawing board for you.--Zleitzen 03:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Z: Before you call this "a flight of fancy", you will have to admit: that in Cuba of the 1930s and 1940s Fascists were still active, and Castro, even in Jesuit highschool, had contact with them (Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh who visited Cuba (too early to directly influence Castro, but certainly not too early to influence Cuban politics), and even great poet and absolute political idiot Ezra Pound thought that the fascists were the bee's knees); Castro read Hitler's work while in prison on the Isle of Pines, and when in power (it looks as if FC is retired for good and only will be shown on state occassions) Castro had cordial relations with Francisco Franco.....  So give me a quote from Garibalidi, something beyond what a relative of a relative of mine used to leap on a table and cry out 'Viva Garibalidi, y todos los que luchan con el.'  Besides Mussolini was still in power until 1944, Castro was about 17 then. Garibaldi on the the other hand died in the 1880s way before even Angel Castro reached Cuba. If you said that in an academic venue you would be laughed out of the podium, unless of course you brought marxist friends to back you up. xe xe El Jigue 9-29-06

On Cuban transport system
It seems that a recent proposed comparison of British buses with the circumstances of Cuban transport is a little (:>) exaggerated , Chinese buses may or may not help El Jigue 9-28-06

Rumors that Castro is dead
Once again rumors haves started that Fidel Castro is dead. .

In a more humorous vein:

AP believes Raul Castro may be among the living dead

Symbolic of the common lack of knowledge of the Cuban condition by the international media is a report by Vanessa Arrington of Associated Press. This report from Cuba states in part: “His speech, which closed the union's 19th congress in Havana, earned him a standing ovation from the crowd of about 1,400 people, which chanted ``Vive Raul!''” (footnote 1). Unfortunately for Vanessa this means: “Is Raul alive?”

Footnote 1 Vanessa Arrington (accessed 9-29-06) “Raul Castro urges labor union to lead Cuba's corruption fight”

Many think that Vilma Espin (wife of Raul Castro), who helped consolidate communist control over the July 26 movement by betraying Frank Pais has just died. El Jigue 9-29-06

Is castro the current president?
The state of Cuba says officially that Castro is not the president, because the Cuban Constitution dictates the transfer of presidential duties to his brother in case of illness, thus away from Fidel himself. However, Pseudonym Zleitzen declares here on Wikipedia, that he is currently the president and has boldly removed the edits of myself and one girl from this afternoon. Who has more credibility? The government of Cuba or Zleitzen from Wikipedia. Pun intented! >I Teemu Ruskeepää 21:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you can site your source then i'll totaly agree. The goverment of a country is the best authority on who is the leader. --Marvuglia 21:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't the September 7 statement a sufficient source? "Other people are running the show now, but I'm still here as the grandfather of the revolution." He is also seemingly relaxed and passive in photos, which I have seen in the Metro Magazine of Helsinki, while recovering from the cancer, thus not running quite anything outside of the constitution. We should just assume that he's not the president anymore, since that's their law. Any of the public appearances aren't as good of a reason. Teemu Ruskeepää 05:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

As much as Z and I disagree I would take his word over Fidel or Raul's.  In an uneasy transition in an authoritarian state it is hard to tell is the leader for some time, until the power struggles end. Rumors are running now, but it seems that it is merely Vilma Espin, Raul's wife, who has passed on... El Jigue 9-29-06
 * Acording to the goverment of Cuba's offical wesite Fidel is still president. http://www.cubagob.cu/ingles/default.htm click goverment then click on members. Until it and the UN say otherwise Castro is still president. Raul is VP and as such fills in when the president is unable to do so (Same as America). --Marvuglia 07:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

What I marvel at is that so many believe the Cuban government announcements. Observations suggests that Raul is in charge of what high level control there is now in Cuba. However, any such circumstance need time for it all to shake out, whether Raul will survive in power, is not known, the re-emergence of former terror chief "Ramirito" suggests Raul is insecure. It seems that the US government, or at least Frank Mora of the US War College, is in contact with "Raulites," through the mediation of a high level Seguridad del Estado "defector." However, such irregular contacts do not imply US support or tolerance for Raul, and have been highly criticized and would if made official violate US Law. El Jigue 9-30-06

Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe Castro as current dictator or ruler of Cuba? President implys elected with consent of the people which Castro clearly is not.205.188.116.9 16:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Look up the term president on wikipedia, it means this: "Among other things, President today is a common title for the Head of state of most republics, whether popularly elected, chosen by the legislature or a special electoral college. It is also often adopted by dictators." So, clearly the term has no ties to democracy and should stay.--Marvuglia 21:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Fidel Castro to rule Argentina
Many overseas consider Fidel Castro's rule is over, except in Argentina where many want him as president. "Dunno” what that means however, the Argentines have not been known for their enlightened political or military decisions. El Jigue 10-3-06

Maybe they feel this is only fair: after all they gave Cuba Che; it's only right that they take Fidel in return. Ah, come back Evita!. White Guard 22:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of Argentina - what I've always found so very shocking about the country is the fact that the Plaza De Mayo mothers have come out often in support of the Castro government. You'll recall that these are the mothers of those who disappeared during the brutal military dictatorship of the 70s - 80s. To think that folks who suffered so much at the hands of one extremist leader could support another is simply shocking. It is almost as if they haven't the slightest respect for the lives of their departed children. Extremism is dangerous on either side of the table - be it left-wing or right. I have never been able to get my head around the Plaza de Mayo mothers' support for the Cuban revolution. Sad, really.Goatboy95 16:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You're quite right, but it's a bit like the contest between God and Satan: if one side is all bad the other side must be all good. White Guard 22:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Giles Goatboy and WG. Well one heresy deserves another. "Febe" head of the Mothers of the Plaza loved 9/11 and was so delirious with joy when it occurred that she told the press how she felt. El Jigue 10-6-06

Remember, It is not a forum so please, spare your thoughts. I see no reason why you should have a go with Argentina. Latinamericans can only be understood by Latinamericans. And the name is "Hebe", mercenario....

Domingo Amuchastegui, Raul's man in the US?
According to rumors based upon his statements, behaviours, and contacts in the US, Raul's man negotiating on the General's behalf with the US government is Domingo Amuchastegui. Amuchastegui, a "former" Cuban intelligence official is a source, but not mentioned in the above capacity, for information on high level Cuban command structure in William Ratliff recent article. El Jigue 10-1-06

Argentina is a GREAT country... but they are being caring! And its likley that Fidel Castro is about to die.

location of dying Fidel Castro
Presumably dying Fidel Castro is. according to reliable source, on the fourth floor, ward G, of the CIMEQ hospital in Havana. Security is said to "be out of this world" El Jigue 10-6-06

Reported to have cancer.
Time Magazine is reporting that Castro is reported to have cancer, citing U.S Intelligence Reports.

"But U.S. officials tell TIME that many in the U.S. government are now convinced that Castro, 80, has terminal cancer and will never return to power. "Certainly we have heard this, that this guy has terminal cancer," said one U.S. official." dposse 18:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Raul says Castro recovering
Vanessa Arrington AP reporter, considered by many to be pro-Castro, reports that Raul Castro says, that Fidel Castro is recovering .Tje AP report states in part: """He is not dying like some of the press in Miami is saying," Raul Castro told a youth congress in Havana. "He is constantly getting better."

The younger Castro said Fidel has a telephone next to him "and he's using it more and more every day." He said he had a long working session with his brother just two days ago.""

"" "He is dying like some of the press in Miami is saying," Raul Castro told a youth congress in Havana. "He is constantly NOT getting better."

The younger Castro said Fidel has a telephone next to him "and he's using it more and more every day." He said he had a long working session with his brother just two days ago.""

On the otherhand rumors are rife from unofficial sources in Cuba, media in the US, and "vox populi" in Miami that Fidel Castro is dying or dead. However, far more telling seemingly disturbed supporters of Castro are blasting this news at that same site, and thus unintentionally adding credence to these speculations, since the old saying goes "when in worry when in doubt run around and yell and shout. " How long can the Cuban government keep its supporters in such doubt is not known. It is said that Stalin had been dead for 34 days before the news was released. El Jigue 10-9-06

After 1959 the U.S. government admitted to almost no wrongdoing in Latin America


...after 1959 the U.S. government admitted to almost no wrongdoing in Latin America. As Castro erased U.S. influence from Cuba by taking over U.S.-owned farms, alarm bells sounded in Havana and Washington. Expropriation was theft, U.S. landowners argued (not without some reason), and the State Department agreed. But it was more than that. Expropriation was typically irrational "Yankee-hating" because U.S. landowners had been good to Cuba. U.S. officials repeatedly argued this line to Cuban officials, who shook their heads in disbelief. Nor once did U.S. policymakers express doubts about the benefits of U.S. foreign investment to Cubans. Not once did they suggest that owners who valued their land four or five times higher than their taxable amount were greedy. And not once did they concede that maybe, just maybe, U.S. investment had been exploitative. The dialogue of the deaf that surrounded the Cuban Revolution was another reminder of the long-standing U.S. reluctance to plumb the depths of anti-U.S. discontent.

More excerpts of this paper: Talk:Anti-Americanism...RWV 08:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hm, the U.S. government position sounds pretty reasonable to me. Or should we be instead focused on the fact that people in Cuba and elsewhere are completely irrational? Alex77777 05:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Alex7777

Castro and Religion
In a recent interview with Oliver Norton, when Castro was asked about his religious beliefs he said that he "did believe in God, what he didn't believed was in organized religions and all those things created by man."--tequendamia 20:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes he was trying to hedge his bets just in case there was an afterlife. It is said Fidel Castro had a second operation, even Brazilian president "Lula" thinks he has "had it" saying "I only regret that Fidel Castro did not carry out a process of political opening while he was alive,"   El Jigue 10-22-06

Hmmm. The above referenced NewsMax article only quotes NBC 6 Miami's political analyst Carlos Alberto Montaner as saying that he thinks that "...probably [Fidel] has undergone a second surgery;" Lula made no such statement. As to the matter of religious belief, Fidel is on tape in stating to Oliver Stone, 'Look, I have never been a believer because of the dogmatic methods used to persuade me about God.' He goes on to state he absolutely does not believe in an afterlife. Stone asks Fidel whether he thinks that 'this is one life and that's it,' and Fidel responds, 'yes, I am completely convinced of that.'--the Oliver Stone film is entitled "Comandante." Cheers, Chris 12-27-2006

Castro's deathwatch
Castro's death watch is being carefully and humorously watched at Babalu site. El Jigue 10-24-06

It is said that the Cuban government is already planning the funeral, El Jigue 10-26-06


 * I've been hearing similar rumors. Should we put a {current} or {current-section} flag on the article or a section of it? Or is that premature? -- Narsil 00:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Wait! Wait!!!!!!! Fidel Castro may have joined the "undead" since Chavez has made the statement "He is walking around already and goes out at night to tour the countryside, towns and cities. I'm soon going to go see you, Fidel," Chavez said during a speech to cacao producers in Venezuela Friday." " El Jigue 10-28-06

It is way too premature, wait if it comes out in the mainstream press that he is dying. Even if he is it might easily be 6 months or more ahead even if he has terminal cancer, SqueakBox 17:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

That might be an excellent idea if Cuba allowed free access to all reporters. Right now that video looks like a scene from the "Night of the Living dead," and that is after well over two months of "recovery". El Jigue 10-29-06

Its been 3 months and I agree he still looks very sick in the video released yesterday, though clearly not at death's door (I have worked witth sick old people and while he looks completely incapable of a high powered job I still reckon he could live for years), SqueakBox 20:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

While it is clear that Castro is dying of some sort of stomach-related cancer, it would be too premature to start an entry in the biography. Better to wait till more facts are available since anything at this point would be nothing more than well-informed speculation and nothing more. Cheers. Goatboy95 16:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that we only get to "see" Castro under the most favorable conditions and that only for a brief time. It seems that his status is still best described as bein one of the "living dead," still breathing but only sporadically and imperfectly functional. He also may be subject to delusions, and that can be dangerous to all around him if he still retains some power. El Jigue 11-5-06


 * These conversations about Castro's health, are all very interesting; but it's not for here, (a wiki-blog would be more suitable). The 'talk page' is for discussion on 'how the article can be improved', what should be added (with varifiable sources) to the article OR what should be removed. Again leave speculations/observation of events, off this 'talk page'. Pleas & Thank you GoodDay 00:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the US government according to Fox News this morning is accepting the hypothesis, previously. mentioned on the Cuba discussion page. that Fidel Castro has terminal cancer. The novel aspect of this report is the putative belief of the US government that Castro will not see 2007. Of course this is a dec;ared official secret of the Cuban government El Jigue 11-12-06
 * To this IP adress that's using the name 'El Jigue', Please stop cloggin up the 'talk pages', your're only disrupting them. GoodDay 23:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Verifiable information
It appears clear that Fidel Castro's cancer advances and that his "chemo" treatment has failed. Fidel Castro it seems (see complete article cited below) will never return to power.

See "HAVANA - Cuba's foreign minister backed away Monday from his prediction that Fidel Castro will return to power by early December, raising questions about the pace of the communist leader's recovery from intestinal surgery." El Jigue 11-6-06


 * Wasn't he treated at the CIMEQ via radioactive "seeding" (brachytherapy) around the time Farrakhan underwent this same treatment? And aren't they both suffering the same sequelae (bleeding out, etc.) now? -- Polaris999 20:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * ( Addendum: Source re Farrakhan's condition: Louis Farrakan Letter re Health -- Polaris999 23:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC) )
 * Then by all means, add these facts to the Article. GoodDay 22:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hello GoodDay -- I don't think that my information reaches the level required by WP:V, which is why I have not yet incorporated it into the article. It is my hope that someone who reads it here will provide a source that will either prove or disprove it; in the former case, I will immediately add it to the article. -- Polaris999 18:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

GD the source is an official of the Cuban government who in the same report has admitted he was incorrect in previous statements. El Jigue 11-7-06

Prime Minister of Cuba
I've added the fact (in the article), that Castro is BOTH President & Prime Minister of Cuba. GoodDay 23:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello GoodDay -- I'm just wondering what is the source of that information? -- Polaris999 00:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Polaris, Fidel Castro is still formally President of the council of state and the council of ministers (prime minister) - despite the transfer of duties.  This should remain on the various pages until we hear of any official announcement that he is no longer either.--Zleitzen 01:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Zleitzen -- I am not attempting to address the transfer of duties issue but rather the assertion that he is "Prime Minister". It is my understanding that he has not held that office since 1976 when it was abolished!  While some may consider that being President of the Council of Ministers means that he is in effect "Prime Minister", the fact is that the office of "Prime Minister" does not exist in Cuba. The titles he uses are "Presidente del Consejo de Estado" y "Presidente del Consejo de Ministros".  Although many strange things are going on here ("here" meaning this Talk page) recently, am I now supposed to believe that Fidel Castro does not know what his own titles are? -- Polaris999 01:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * A verifiable source for the above is Sitio del Gobierno de la República de Cuba which says --


 * And a bit of background is provided by the CIA Factbook


 * chief of state: President of the Council of State and President of the Council of Ministers Fidel CASTRO Ruz (prime minister from February 1959 until 24 February 1976 when office was abolished; president since 2 December 1976); First Vice President of the Council of State and First Vice President of the Council of Ministers Gen. Raul CASTRO Ruz (since 2 December 1976); note - the president is both the chief of state and head of government


 * head of government: President of the Council of State and President of the Council of Ministers Fidel CASTRO Ruz (prime minister from February 1959 until 24 February 1976 when office was abolished; president since 2 December 1976); First Vice President of the Council of State and First Vice President of the Council of Ministers Gen. Raul CASTRO Ruz (since 2 December 1976); note - the president is both the chief of state and head of government


 * cabinet: Council of Ministers proposed by the president of the Council of State and appointed by the National Assembly or the 31-member Council of State, elected by the Assembly to act on its behalf when it is not in session


 * elections: president and vice presidents elected by the National Assembly for a term of five years; election last held 6 March 2003 (next to be held in 2008)


 * election results: Fidel CASTRO Ruz reelected president; percent of legislative vote - 100%; Raul CASTRO Ruz elected vice president; percent of legislative vote - 100%


 * Furthermore, Cuba's Constitution (in Spanish) and Constitution(in English), promulgated in 1976 and modified in 1992 states:


 * Article 95: The Council of Ministers is the highest ranking executive and administrative body and constitutes the government of the Republic. The number, denomination and functions of the ministries and central agencies making up the Council of Ministers are determined by law.


 * Article 96: The Council of Ministers is composed of the head of state and government, as its president, the first vice president, the vice presidents, the ministers, the secretary and the other members that the law determines.


 * -- Polaris999 02:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've always taken the term "President of the council of ministers" to be a continuation of the role Castro had as prime minister (or premier) since 1959, as the BBC seem to have done. It is perhaps worth examining the distinction between Prime minister and prime minister. If you check the page, I have restored the long standing lead which I believe is accurate.--Zleitzen 02:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that the lead as currently written (your restoration) is accurate. However the BBC may feel about the situation, Fidel Castro used the title Prime Minister from 1959 up until the re-organization of the Cuban Government in 1976 when it was abolished, and has never used it since then. -- Polaris999 04:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The info box, has the prime-ministership still exsisting (with F.Castro the incumbent). The info box, contradicts the first paragraph of the article. Indeed it was the infobox; that lead me to put Castro as President/Prime Minister of Cuba. SO which is it? PM (1959-76) then President (1976- ) OR PM (1959- ) & President (1976- )? GoodDay 16:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've updated the Infobox; pointing out Castro was the last PM of Cuba (1959-76). Added, Prime-Minister's office abolished. This was done, to remove contradition in Infobox. GoodDay 17:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * PS, see further contradictions in Prime Minister of Cuba & List of Prime Ministers of Cuba articles. GoodDay 17:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, GoodDay. It would seem to me that since the office of "Prime Minister" has not existed in Cuba since 1976, neither Fidel Castro nor anyone else can be said to occupy it. In view of this, and in light of the fact that the three highly reliable sources I have cited above are in agreement on the subject, I believe that the first alternative you suggest, i.e.  PM (1959-76) then President (1976- ) is the preferable one, but I would amend it to read "PM (1959-76) then President of the Council of State and of the Council of Ministers (1976 - )" which is 100% accurate. -- Polaris999 18:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've made the proper changes, to the infobox. I'll also make the correct changes to the relating articles Prime Minister of Cuba & List of Prime Ministers of Cuba. Thanks for clearing up this confusion for me Polaris999. GoodDay 18:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Glad to be able to help out, GoodDay. Thanks to you for making the appropriate changes. BTW I just did a quick copyedit of the FCR article -- hope you will take over from here! -- Polaris999 00:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Mirta Diaz-Balart in this article
Here's a poser for you - the article has some outdated information regarding Mirta living in Madrid. In actuality - Mirta moved back to Havana a while back to be with Fidelito. The only reason I know this (don't want to get into details here) regards my family, etc. That's all I'll say. Now, I bring this up to see if anyone can find information to officially verify the fact. I've looked high and low but can find nothing - has anyone seen anything that can be used as an official source?

Best,

Goatboy95 22:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Define official source in a one party state (:>) El Jigue 11-27-06

Hi there,

Has nothing to do with the state - have there been any published articles anywhere on the subject? Has anyone in a journalistic capacity or something similar actually seen her in Cuba, etc, etc - I can't find a darn thing. Continuing the search. ..

Goatboy95 18:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Giles: the last thing I can find is a 2000 report by Juan Tamayo, who was then with the Miami Herald " this is a Weberman site, and he is even more prone to speculate than me. She may be with Delia Soto while they both wait perhaps joyously, for the old coot to die, the   trouble is Delia's life is a state secret too.  Juan Tamayo is probably trying to find out, or you could try and track Mirta down through Fidelito  (that is not advisable), or you could ask US Rept Lincoln Diaz Balart but I doubt if he knew he would tell you. Vanessa Bauzá   is probably trying to find out the same thing, and probably no Cuban-American  trusts her, and probably the Cuban government does not either. A million "probabilities" and billion "perhapses."  On December 3rd his nibs is supposed to show; however. he may be so pumped up with amphetamines and steriods, he probably will not be rational,and his speech may have to be "lip-sycronized," still it could be that his wives will be there... El Jigue 11-27-06

Hello El Jigue, She is with Fidelito - that I know for a fact - just can't find anything in print on it. I guess that's not really all that surprising considering what/who we're talking about here. ..

Anyhow, talk soon. Ciao.

Goatboy95 17:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Giles Raul it seems is missing or very busy. Dunno what the means, could be anything from Fidel is "en Capilla" to a purge by the Mayimbe, but I would guess Raul is merely suffering a hangover. Juan Ameida, but not Ramirito is a million times better, unless there is an option of Cuba finally returning to democracy. El Jigue 11-28-06
 * Again, EJ stop blogging the talk pages. Keep your blogs to your own IP adress pages. You're only disrupting here and your're not helping your Cuba pro-democracy movement by going against Wikipedia policies. GoodDay 21:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Mirta Diaz-Balart, I think Beardo, who is fairly up to speed on these matters, asked for a source for her return to Havana on her page some time ago. I have no doubt you are correct, Goatboy. Ann Louise Bardach (no hissing please EJ) writes in her book "One knowledgable source claims that Mirta returned to Cuba in early 2002 and is now living with Fidelito and his family".(Cuba Confidential page 67) Apparently Raúl arranged all the various visits and her return, and she still has a certain influence over Fidel.--Zleitzen 23:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Right, I do seem to recall that tidbit in Bardoch's book. Let's see if I can track down another tangential source through her writing.

Thanks!

Goatboy95 16:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Already added it. Giles ;) (sorry, couldn't help myself) --Zleitzen 21:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Great - going to check it out now. Goatboy95 22:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

80th Birthday Bash
Could someone, add to the article (with a varifiable source) Fidel Castro's no-show, at his public 80th birthday bash? This bit of info, would help update the Cuban President's current health. GoodDay 18:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Colonel Buendia the reference you requested is found at: .El Jigue 12-2-06
 * Thank you. GoodDay 23:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Castro's obelisk on Turquino
Apparently an obelisk is being built on Turquino peak the highest in Cuba in order to perpetuate Castro's memory. It is rumored that government of a free Cuba will charge admission and exit fees to visitors to help support the widows and orphans caused by the regime. This recalls "El Valle de los Caídos" built by Franco to commemorate all the dead in the Spanish Civil War. El Jigue 11-29-06


 * Perhaps that's where they plan to put his ashes ? -- Beardo 00:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Since you have varifiable sources, on these facts. You should add them to the article. GoodDay 20:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems wiser to wait until the obelisk is completed before inserting it in the article. El Jigue 11-29-06
 * Good point, wait until then. GoodDay 21:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Childhood and education - POV warning!
Text says:
 * In late 1945, he entered law school at the University of Havana. While at the University he repeatedly was involved in gangs in order to assure himself political power . In 1950, after his graduation from law school, Castro opened a small law practice in Havana.

However much I dislike the post-revolution acts of Castro, NPOV is more important for me, than expressing this opinion. I think the formulation is weaselly! The motivation for Castro to join groups (not necessarily gangs), might have been social, not a specific "sinister lust for power" (My weasely formulation, if offended then go shout at me at my talk page - I'll listen and apologize if appropriate). (Understanding doesn't always imply accepting) 𐌵𐌰𐌸: Rursus 09:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I've rewritten that section - also making mention of Rolando Masferrer who was an important figure during that era. More importantly to me is the photograph. Is that Castro standing in the black suit? It doesn't look like him to me.--Zleitzen 12:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I read it and found everything being good. THX10^6! Rursus 14:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The photo=?=Castro? Good question! Then a fatter Castro with a very freshly grown beard. Otherwise the eyebrows seems to belong to Castro. Rursus 14:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I admit that he looks not unlike Castro. But as far as I knew, his patented beard only sprouted ten years later in the Sierra Maestra. He also had a spiv moustache for years, and one must admit that he looks nothing like the man in the picture on this page – History Will Absolve Me who certainly is Fidel.--Zleitzen 14:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed - but that pointing finger is VERY Castro ! See here for some more photos http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/castro-1945-1953.htm - these look more like the guy in the suit than Fidel with the guards. Maybe he did have a beard for a few months. Sadly the yahoo source for the photo has expired. -- Beardo 16:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have seen that "black suit" photo described as being of FCR many times. First instance, as I recall, in Jules Dubois' book.  Looks like him to me.  BTW I think that those dark splotches around his chin are shadows, not a beard; compare to the faces of others standing nearby ... -- Polaris999 17:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

While it is widely known that FC was involved with violent gangs, the statement abouat assuring his political power is dubious. I don't think we should be making assumptions as to his motivations. It has been documented that he often roamed the university campus armed in those days. Anyhow, the fellow in the black suit is indeed Fidel Castro - that's a very well known photograph you've uncovered.Best.

Goatboy95 17:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The "black suit" picture appears at with the caption "University student Fidel Castro (center, standing, in black) talking to fellow students during a protest on November 11, 1947." -- Polaris999 23:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * But that's just a mirror of Wikipedia. -- Beardo 02:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * But the article at answer.com is not the same version as the one that was here on WP last night when I wrote about the "black suit" image and its caption. Since the time when I posted the above comment re the caption, Zleitzen has restored the "black suit" photo and its caption to the article. -- Polaris999 15:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * P - yes, it's a copy of an earlier version of the Wikipedia article. So it cannot be used as any form of verification. -- Beardo 16:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello Beardo. Sorry for the confusion, I had only intended it to be a clue, not verification.  If one of us were to look through the FCR article's History page, I was thinking that we could find who originally posted that photo and ask him about the source. -- Polaris999 19:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Follow-up: Here is the best I have been able to do -- it is from Spiegel Online, Photo Gallery : Fidel Castro's Life in Pictures. The "black suit" photo itself is shown at with the caption, "As a student in 1947, Fidel Castro, wearing a black suit, speaks to fellow students during a protest rally." and Reuters is credited. -- Polaris999 20:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well done Polaris. It still doesn't look like him to me but there you go. By the way, the 12th photograph from Spiegel Online of an old Castro giving a speech in front of the red of a Cuban flag, which appeared in many newspapers fairly recently, is extraordinary. Certainly worthy of EJ's dartboard.--Zleitzen 21:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed - well done. And that shows it is just shadows, not a beard. -- Beardo 21:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

One more second chance?
Fidel Castro's entire life seems to have been characterized by the way he has repeatedly received "second chances", often in the most astonishing circumstances. Should he make it to 13 August 2008, he will apparently get yet another -- in this case, a second chance to celebrate his 80th birthday, and &mdash; in this instance &mdash; the real one. As he revealed in this letter that he wrote to US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on 06 November 1940, wherein he states that he was "twelve years old" at the time he was writing, his real birthdate was 13 August 1928, not 13 August 1926 as many documents indicate and as is now widely accepted (although often questioned). Apparently because of his tall stature and precocious abilities, at some point in his career prior to the 1953 attack on the Moncada barracks he decided to add two years to his age, perhaps with the objective of making himself appear more mature and credible as a leader. -- Polaris999 00:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There have been various disputes about Castro's age on this page. I've tended to side with the official story to save confrontations - if it read 1928, numerous drive by editors would revert almost immediately - particularly in recent times due to the birthday bashes. It does seem to warrant a Polaris style content note though to explain this. The letter to Roosevelt is on wikicommons - which claims it is fair game to use - and I was about to add it to the article with a small piece about its origins, so by coincidence you have proceeded my thoughts. --Zleitzen 00:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Zleitzen -- I assume the letter is public domain since it must have became the property of the U.S. government when it was received at the White House. I definitely would not suggest changing his "official" birthdate in the article, since it is just that: even when asked point blank in interviews, FCR has been careful to skirt the issue of in what year he was really born. I think of it in a context similar to the Queen's birthday which, if I understand correctly, is celebrated on a day that is not the day when she actually came into the world. -- Polaris999 02:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Though at least the Queen, perhaps six months (or two years) older than Fidel, manages to actually show up to her state funded birthday bashes. But then she hasn't been smoking Havana cigars and staying up all night most of her life. (At least I don't think she has anyway). Speaking of monarchs, I believe Castro most closely resembles George III. Nationalist firebrand who ruled for 60 years before he literally went mad. Extremely popular and hated in equal measure throughout the world. I'll consider writing the page's first content note to explain the birthdate issue.--Zleitzen 00:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, it's best to leave Castro's birth year as '1926'. After all, it seems internationally excepted as his birth year. GoodDay 00:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Coronel Buen Dia Your suggestion now should be in his obit since Castro is dead according to three reliable sources, apparently already embalmed. Raul is negotiating with the US for survival...El Jigue 12-12-06


 * Interesting -- but last time I noticed, it looked as if he had "already been embalmed" for several years. (Perhaps the Abakuá had a role in this?) Anyway, are any of your sources re his demise citable so that we could add these reports to the article? -- Polaris999 05:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * In the phrase patria o muerte, Raul is now patria, and his brother muerte ? -- Beardo 08:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If anyone has an undisputed source of Castro's death, then add it to the article. GoodDay 01:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Rumors are that a massive (billion dollar) reward is going around for a captured Raul, so he can be tried in Spain. That is probably premature, besides not only would Zapatero have a fit, but the captors would have to avoid the fate of those who captured Noriega in Panama, only to give up and be executed. Rumors are also circulating that low ranking members of the Comites de Defensa are being killed to "blind" the Cuban security forces. This second rumor seems to inaccurate since the very few cases reported seem to be motivated by personal revenge. El Jigue 12-16-06 :Rumors are that if 'Little Joe' doesn't stop blogging 'talk pages' again. I'm may report him to the Administrators again. GoodDay 19:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Wealth
I've had a sweep around the "wealth" section. Largely because the main link was dead, others didn't even correspond to the point in question. I'm not in a very good mood today, so I'll ask; What kind of magazine includes state owned industries in a list of personal wealth - thus making Castro, who clearly leads a more austere lifestyle than most leaders - two times wealthier than the Queen? Words fail me. Thank goodness I don't subscribe to Forbes magazine.--Zleitzen 02:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The sort of magazine with far more readers in Florida than in Havana ? -- Beardo 04:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That's an interesting point, Zleitzen although, Castro's lifestyle is anything but austere. It must have been about three years ago that I saw a video smuggled out by a family friend that showed FC at one of his homes, a very swank mansion. Castro family members dined on lobster, VERY fine French wines and lounged around the luxury pool, etc, etc. I've actually been looking for the video on youtube, etc but have had no luck - very odd - lots of references to the video online but on one seems to have it. "La Vida Privada de Fidel Castro." Even back to the 60s when my grandfather often held meetings with the fellow, he was living VERY high on the hog indeed. No austerity for Fidel - not by a long shot! Take care.

Goatboy95 20:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Goatboy. I remember seeing what I imagine is the same video. Is it the one with Castro floating around in his pyjamas? --Zleitzen 23:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't recall pyjamas but I do recall him floating around the pool - big table, lots of food, several family members around. I think there was a bathing suit involved. LOL. If you are ever able to find it - drop me a line, eh?

Cheers. Goatboy95 14:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The ones the ex of his son sold in Miami ? Most people saw that as an extreme anticlimax - after all the hype about the luxury it actually looked terribly normal. (Though I don't recall what wine they had). There was even a theory that it had been planted by Cuban security services to make it look normal. (I recall it being when I lived in 9na - so that would be first second half of 2002 ? -- Beardo 15:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * That's what I though as well Beardo. Of course Castro wasn't exactly living out of the back of his car, but then neither was Nelson Mandela who was President while much of South Africa was without basic amenities of electricity and water. There was nothing about the video that made me think that Castro was two times richer than the Queen. In fact there was very little to suggest that Castro was two times richer than me! I also have a big table, pajamas, a bathing suit and drink wine! --Zleitzen 18:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed, Z. Or even two times richer than Havana's nouveaux riche - the owners of the best paladares or the plush casas particulares. -- Beardo 22:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Z: property does not have the same meaning in a marxist state. Access to property does. Thus Castro had apparently exclusive access to three new jet liners and endless residences......Thus while technically as poor as a church mouse he was de facto richer than Cresus (flying carpets don't count (:>)) El Jigue 12-16-06


 * EJ, as I am sure you realize, the fact is that anything on the Island he wants, immediately becomes his. Animate objects can resist at their own peril. -- Polaris999 18:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope - not that one - although I have seen that video as well. Can't remember where the heck I saw this one. Oh well, inconsequential. I would imagine FC isn't stupid enough to have any of his assets in his name. I'd certainly agree that he's up there with the Queen however. The man controls everything - industry, tourism, the whole banana. And you think Pinochet had millions stored away foreign banks?! HAH - that's a pittance ($28 MIL) compared to FC.

I must say however that event that video smuggled out of Cuba by one of his children's girlfriends showed a VERY lavish lifestyle compared to your average Cuban. I don't know. I found it rather offensive. I'm so glad the commandante was able to enjoy 700-dollar bottles of wine while I was struggling to find cooking oil and being denied higher education due to my lack of communist party affiliation. Thanks Fidel! Yer swell!

OK, enough sarcasm - this isn't wiki-appropriate.

Best to all.

Goatboy95 16:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Cigar and speech
Castro is known as a chain cigar smoker and he loves to give day-long speeches. Well, does he smoke while speaking to the millions? -- Toytoy 14:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * He gave up cigars some years ago, and now doesn't give the long speeches either.


 * Do they have cigars in the afterlife ? -- Beardo 15:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * He gave up smoking possibly 20 years ago saying he didn't want to encourage people to smoke.Just found this - courtesy of InterWorld Radio - "President Fidel Castro gave up smoking in 1986, and has famously said the best thing to do with a cigar is to give it to your enemy." MichaelW 17:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Or sell it to los yumas ? -- Beardo 19:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * No doubt FCR would consider that selling it to the "enemy" is even better than giving it to him. -- Polaris999 23:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Transfer of duties
An editor reverted my summary of the events of Castro's transfer of duties, which is detailed on another page, claiming a policy issue. I don't know who this editor is, but I would be keen to clarify the reasons why? Update: The editor was User:WHeimbigner. Perhaps this editor is better versed in the Cuba range of articles, and the subject matter than me. I have restored my brief summary, but will offer it to other editors for consensus. --Zleitzen 06:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I reverted your edit because it looked like it might have been vandalism (which I do, on occasion, make a mistake about). You might want to leave the history of Fidel Castro there (as well as having the information about the change of power.) Sorry 'bout the mistake, WHeimbigner 07:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * So it was a mistake. No problem.--Zleitzen 07:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Foreign Relations
Under "Other Countries" in this section, mention should be made of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter's visit to Cuba in 2002. The following two paragraphs of text (entirely enclosed in quote marks) are from the Wikipedia article on Jimmy Carter, with the simple addition of the words "Former U.S. President Jimmy" to the beginning of the text by myself for clarity) (NOTE:  I would've added all this to the Fidel Castro article myself except that the article is presently locked on 12/16/2006):

"Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter visited Cuba in May 2002 and met with Fidel Castro. He was allowed to address the Cuban public on national television with a speech that he wrote and presented in Spanish. This made Carter the first President of the United States, in or out of office, to visit the island since the Cuban revolution of 1959.

In June 2005, Carter urged the closing of the Guantanamo Bay Prison in Cuba, which has been the center point for recent claims of prisoner abuse." --70.19.176.80 14:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

One notices that a certain peanut farmer, overlooked that the conditions, numbers, and guilt of those imprisoned in Guantanamo are vastly different from the far larger numbers of those imprisoned by Castro in Cuba. El Jigue 12-16-06
 * If you guys got the varifiable resources for this, add it to the article. GoodDay 19:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, it was significant that Jimmy C was allowed to make his speach uncensored - and spoke about the Varela project. This was broadcast on Cuban TV. I'll try to put something in the article here. (I don't think the comments about Guantanamo are relevant here - better in other articles - much less any commentary on them.) -- Beardo 20:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Beardo we have a catch 22 circumstance The Cuban government does not allow the Red Cross access to Cuban prisons and so the official Cuban sources are most often quoted. There are quite a few sources on prisoners in Cuba (e.g. ); however, in a country where "dangerousness." "disrespect." etc. are crimes it is difficult to resolve which prisoners are political and which merely criminal. For instance is it criminal to possess a chicken not authorized by your ration book. Even the real as opposed the official number of total prisoners is unknown and can only be estimate at perhaps 2x the given official number. This circumstance is similar to that of health statistics. El Jigue 12-17-06
 * Can we add, any of these (above points) to the article? GoodDay 22:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Mexico
The article states "'While he was being held at the prison for political activists on Isla de Pinos, he continued to plot Batista's overthrow, planning upon release to reorganize and train in Mexico'" Is that true? I was under the impression that the descision to go to Mexico was made after his release. And due to difficulties in Cuba, both Castros being under threat, and Fidel finding himself and his methods marginalised by the anti-Batista groups.--Zleitzen 07:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I used to have a reference note from verifying that. Sounds like the note has disappeared, but I have read that in more than one place. If the article were in any kind of working order, I would try to find my references again. I remember, from several sources, that while Castro was in prison he was preparing in a number of ways and that he was not "exiled" from Cuba but left voluntarily after release. Mattisse 00:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Dalia and wealth again
I am sure there's some useful stuff here - http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/16258230.htm

"Although the family lived better than most Cubans, Menéndez said, conditions at the house were hardly luxurious.

"My friends would say, `Oh, you live in a house with a swimming pool, you eat meat every day,' " she says. But when she and Alex got married, workers "built him a room on top of the garage. He's a big guy, and he barely fit between the bed and wall. That is not luxury."

and

Menéndez also doubts that Fidel really has the nearly $1 billion fortune that Forbes magazine recently reported.

"What if this all ends?" she recalls him saying. "Nothing of this is mine; it all belongs to the state. What my children will get after I go is what the revolution gives them as thanks for my being president. But I will leave nothing to them."

She blames Dalia for a miscarriage and the break up of the marriage. -- Beardo 13:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Juicy stuff indeed, Beardo! LOL Cheers.Goatboy95 21:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is fun, however as with the products of any writer one should evaluate Ana Menéndez's statements in light of her political belief system. El Jigue 1-1-06

Castro, Fidel
Just a grammar point: you cannot say that "Ever since the bay of pigs...Cuba HAS HAD a...relationship with the...soviet bloc." The expression "Ever since", in conjunction with "has had" implies that the bloc still exists today.125.231.5.114 14:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)Chris. Fulker

The Fidel Castro Ruz Bio
A distinction should be made between Castro's involvement in the "Insurrection"(1953-1959) against the Batista dictatorship (1952-December 1958) and the Revolution 1961 to the present. The initial intent of the anti-dictatorship insurrection was to reinstate the 1940 constitution and restore democratic elections, see Castro's "History Will Absolve Me." Once in power the 26 of July Movement - the only rural insurrectionist group, that was one of several groups working to overthrow the dictatorship, moved to take the process forward to a Marxist-Leninist Revolution declared by Castro in his famous Havana Declarations.

Ouramericas 20:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Dr. Andres I. Perez y Mena aperezymena@yahoo.com

A distinction should also be made between a "Revolution" and ongoing totalitarian oppression, which is what has existed in Cuba since 1961. Alex77777 04:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Alex7777

This article may need revision.
In this article, under the section labeled Cuban Missle Crisis, there is this line, "In a personal letter to Khrushchev dated 27 October 1962, Castro urged Khrushchev to launch a nuclear first strike against the United States if Cuba were invaded, but Khrushchev rejected any first strike response.[53]" The [53] is a link to a copy of that letter form George Washington University.

My problem with that is this; Oliver Stone's film Comandante is a two hour collection of 30 hours worth of interviews between Stone and Castro filmed in Cuba over 4 days. At 47:09 in the film they discuss this letter. Stone asks Castro if what his critics and American historians say is true, that he endorsed a first strike policy to Khrushchev. Castro's response, is that he did not endorse a first strike policy. What he had intended to say to Khrushchev was distorted as it was translated by a Russian Ambassador who spoke very poor spanish.

I personally prefer to trust the words of someone who was directly involved in an event (Castro) rather than the words of someone who is writing about it at a later date and who also resides in an informationally unreliable and biased country (American historians).

The only reason I bother to point this out is because this is the very example of how history is mis-shaped by tiny dents and dings form people who are "authoritative." Given the time when this was taking place and given the undeniably huge amount of false and exaggerated propaganda being issued from the US about Cuba, I think it is more plausable that the Ambassador mis-interprted what was said than Castro endorsing a policy that seems contradictory to all his previous statements and actions at that time.

When refering to a line from a specific letter written between two political leaders, citing the actual letter is the most reliable and correct thing to do. But, if information is brought to light that throws the validity of said letter out the window, then said citing should be replaced by the newly exposed information.

Is this grounds for changing the article?

Hoopi4432 21:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hoopi, Castro has contradicted himself a great number of times (e.g. his declarations for Cuban democracy and his communist ties). One should keep in mind like any adroit and less than scrupulous politician, his statements conciously or unconciously fit the need of the moment. El Jigue 1-1-07
 * I would agree with El Jigue in that Castro is a masterful politician. You could provide another viewpoint with proper sourcing. It's really not a question of whom you personally trust but rather one of following Wikipedia policy and guidlines: WP:V and WP:RS plus WP:CITE. Sincerely, Mattisse 01:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Acham's Razor would seem to apply here - lean towards the simplist solution or interpretation - What's more likely to have happened? 1) Castro advocated a first-strike policy in a letter to Kruschev, that fact was revealed, FC needed to cover his ass and thus made up the interpretor's story or 2) It was the interpretor who botched everything up. . . . "I never said that."

Now, which is more believable? It would seem that in keeping with the personality and policies of the subject, FC, number one would make a bit more sense. Still, you certainly had your ears open during that film. . ..

Cheers.

Oh, one more thing - I'd refer you to the documentary of Robert McNamara entitled "Fog of War." When McNamara and several other former Kennedy administration officials went down to Cuba for the 40th anniversary of the missile crisis, he was apparently told by Castro that they were ready and willing to push the button. . . incidentally - that's an excellent docu.

Best,

Goatboy95 16:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Goatboy95 15:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Giles: There is an "tongue in cheek," but very rational, evaluation of Castro's health at. Perhaps all Castro data needs to be shaved with Occam’s (or Ockham's) Razor. El Jigue 1-2-07 p.s. Castro is now rumored to be in a Spanish hospital. In my view this is unlikely to be true because were it so the Spanish Government might feel obliged to try him a matter which the Spanish courts so far have refused to do since Castro was "head of state" something that may no longer apply. Still this vividly illustrates the lack of transparency of the Cuban government...

Galicia people
Fidel Castro should be put in the Galician people category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.165.53 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 14 January 2007


 * Why ? His father may have been Galician, but does that mean he is, too ? -- Beardo 17:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Beardo Spain has also has "a right of return," on the other hand they also try dictators who are out of power El Jigue 1-16-07


 * Well - when he exercises that right, then he can go into that category ! -- Beardo 20:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Latest
Perhaps this is more detail than we need :

"A first operation to extract part of his large intestine and connect the colon to the rectum was a failure and the link broke, releasing feces into the abdomen that caused another peritonitis, the newspaper reported.

A second operation to clean and drain the infected area and perform a colostomy also failed, the paper said. A third operation implanted a prothesis, it said.

When Spanish surgeon Jose Luis Garcia Sabrido visited Castro in late December, Cuban doctors were considering another operation, the paper said.

"The patient required drainage for more than half a liter of fluids a day, which is causing him a severe loss of nutrients," the paper reported."  http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2007-01-16T023957Z_01_N18357550_RTRUKOC_0_US-CUBA-CASTRO-MONDAY.xml&src=rss&rpc=22 -- Beardo 08:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Beardo this seems to be correct.

How ironic that Castro ended up being literally as well as figuratively full of shit.

Fidel Castro dying
It seems finally clear that Fidel Castro is dying after a series of failed gastro-intestinal operations. Endless discussion at El Jigue 1-16-07
 * It was predicted (can't remember by whom) that Fidel Castro would live 150 years. Looks like he ain't gonna make it. GoodDay 20:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * GoodDay, it was his personal physician who proclaimed that Fidel Castro would live to be 140 years old. He made this prediction only a few weeks before Castro experienced the gastrointestinal crisis that led to the first of the surgeries from which he has not yet recovered. You can check out the doctor's comments here: Castro's Doctor Boasts His Client Will Live to 140. -- Polaris999 17:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Polaris, that report can be taken to suggest that Castro was submitted to some kind of gene therapy either to block telemerase in potentially cancerous cells (which might well result in limited healing) or (less likely) to promote telemerase in somatic cells which would promote "immortality" but facilitate cancer. Both techniques are available in experimental laboratories, but are not known to have been performed on humans. El Jigue 1-20-07y


 * Very interesting interpretation, El Jigue! That report also suggests to me that his "personal physician" was non compos mentis, to put it as politely as possible. I wonder where he is now?  -- Polaris999 22:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 140 years, another example of Communist propaganda (designed to make Fidel appear invinceable, to the oppressed Cuban people). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GoodDay (talk • contribs) 22:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Hugo Chavez has said, Castro is 'fighting for his life'. We could add this to the article. GoodDay 02:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Medical jargon
From the "Illness and transfer of duties" section:
 * "...reported Castro was in 'very grave' condition, having trouble cicatrising, after three failed operations..."

Now, I have never heard of that word, and I find it likely few readers of the article will have. Perhaps somebody who knows about this stuff could kindly interpret that for us.

cic·a·trize(sk-trz) To heal or become healed by the formation of scar tissue. there you go, first hit on google.

Or maybe it's just vandalism. Danthemankhan 15:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It means his incisions aren't healing normally, leading to seepage, peritonitis, etc. Please see the article I added earlier today to the "External Links" section which discusses another serious complication that is afflicting him, i.e. post-operative cholecystitis. -- Polaris999 16:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Cuban Vice-Presidents
I've added the rest of the Veeps, to the Infobox. My wiki-source Cuban Council of State. PS- If anyone knows how to archive this talk page, I suggest they do it soon. GoodDay 23:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that list of VPs is necessary - we've never included that before. -- Beardo 00:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But they are Vice Presidents of Cuba; also the section heading was already Vice President(s) (with an 's'). Oh well, if it's removed, I won't protest. GoodDay 00:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Nationalist Figures?
"find like-minded partners in regional nationalist figures such as Hugo Chávez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia."

What is nationalist in Chavez and Morales? They even try to open their countries to make a bigger latinamerican block. Or it is the regional-nationalism or something?. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bauta (talk • contribs) 16:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Nationalist in that they don't march to Washington's tune ? -- Beardo 22:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * serious? cause i don't see anything nationalist in their politics, economies and philosophies to call'em nationalists. Maybe that word shouldn't be in the phrase.--Bauta 22:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

No not quite Nationalist is now a euphism for communist, note this term was once applied to the National Socialists, then to their sympathizers in the Americas such as once was Peron. El Jigue 1-31-06

In fact the term is ussually applied for regimes that actively seek economic autarchy. These regimes tend to be comunists or poor democracies with semi-dictators or presidents for life (i.e. Kim Jong Il, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, etc..) In my view Morales in Bolivia doesn't qualify just yet. The opposite is a democratic regime without economic and political controls (wich is more or less the case for most of the world).

New photo / video
I have added to the transfer of duties page.

Here's the report from Juventud Rebelde - http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2007-01-30/fidel-y-chavez-se-abrazan-de-nuevo-en-la-habana/ Is it a sign of the times that the article includes a link to a YouTube copy of the video, as well as its own ? -- Beardo 07:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

None of this is really credible until Castro appears live in front of foreign reporters. El Jigue 1-31-07

Bay of Pigs air support
I removed the sentence "President Kennedy had withdrawn support for the invasion at the last minute by canceling several bombing sorties that could have crippled the entire Cuban Air Force" and someone re-inserted it with a reference to a rambling article on a far-right wing web site. An article which of course gives no references to first-hand accounts, documents etc. about this, we just have to take the word of a conservative named Humberto Fontova. But beyond this, Fontova doesn't say anything that supports the idea that Kennedy withdrew support that had been pledged, canceled sorties that had been scheduled and so forth. Fontova's article does not fall under the Reliable sources category, but more importantly, Fontova is not even a source for the allegations made. This is being remove again. Ruy Lopez 12:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow!!! First you label Fontanova as "far-right" then you remove any reference to his cite. Following that reasoning, all the material from the Cuban government, which by definition is "way far left" must be deleted also. Please reverse your actions. If you prefer other references use participant/author Lynch, Grayston L. 2000 Decision for Disaster: Betrayal at the Bay of Pigs. Brassey’s Dulles, Virginia ISBN 1574882376 pp. 75-81, El Jigue 2-10-07 208.65.188.149 16:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Despite additional references provided, "Ruy Lopez" has again deleted material referring to suspension of air sorties on Castro government plains, not even taking the time to read references provided. A request intervention has been filed, to investigate circumstance as possible "Vandalism." El Jigue 2-10-07208.65.188.149 23:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe Ruy Lopez is in some ways correct in the fact that actual air support during the invasion was never on the table as far as Kennedy was concerned and this has been misconstrued over the years. Check Arthur Schlesinger's 900 days and desclassified records, EJ. However, it is certainly the case that several bombing sorties aimed to knock out the Cuban airforce in preparation for the invasion were cancelled by Washington much to the dismay of the CIA and José Miró Cardona in New York.-- Zleitzen  (Talk) 12:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Have restored material in part, changing the source to trusty Hugh Thomas as per usual, EJ. -- Zleitzen (Talk) 12:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Z: Thank you. However, Arthur Schlesinger was a strong partisan of Kennedy, and it is clear that the US Naval forces at the scene were prepared to fight, only the Commander in Chief could give the order to countermand the planned secondary strikes (see Lynch reference above). Additional extremely well documented information with photographic evidence is provided by Enrique Ros (Ros, Enrique 1994 (1998) Giron la verdadera historia. Ediciones Universales (Colección Cuba y sus jueces) third edition Miami ISBN 0-89729-738-5 pp. 190-193) in which the US Coast Guard is shown cutting out the weaponry of independent exile support boats in Miami at the time of the invasion. In addition, the Nicaraguan airforce was denied refueling facilities in the US to support the invasion (Somoza-Debayle, Anastasio and Jack Cox 1980 Nicaragua Betrayed Western Islands Publishers, pp. 169-180 ISBN 088279235), knowing Somoza, as suspect as Castro in this regard, one worries about veracity. However, first hand witnesses on both sides point out that was a defecting Nicaraguan fighter pilot Carlos Ulloa Rauz, flying for Castro was killed after sinking the supply ship Rio Escondido, at the time (Lagas, Jacques 1964 Memorias de un capitán rebelde. Editorial del Pácifico. Santiago, Chile, p. 104 and Somoza-Debayle, and Cox p.177). Thus the Lynch and Ros postulate that Kennedy deceived and dumped the exile force seem inescapable. One proof of Lagas authenticity is his note that Orlando Lara Batista the famous escopetero who supported Cienfuego en “el llano” was then sidelined as a “interventor” in a panty factory (Uloa p. 146) El Jigue 2-11-07208.65.188.149 16:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe there are many references that it was on the table. MikeRiggs 23:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Castro's political ideology?
This article doesn't really go into Castro's political ideology, influences, or domestic/economic policies. As one of the most prominent enduring "Socialist Republics" i'd personally like to more about Casto vis-a-vis these issues. Itoldalthea 05:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)iToldAlthea

Why not call Castro a dictator?
I am concerned about this article's reluctance to describe Castro as a dictator. Whether someone is a dictator is a mostly (though not entirely) factual question, not just a matter of opinion (see the definition in dictator, which has to do with how much the person exercises over the government). How much factual dispute about whether Castro, in practice, has sole power over the Cuban state? If not, Castro might (arguably) be a benevolent dictator, but that wouldn't make him a nondictator.

Note that WP:UNDUE indicates that we shouldn't give undue weight to marginal opinions by describing them as though they stood on the same footing with other opinions. Elliotreed 00:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The article says in the lead "Castro is described by opponents as a dictator", as per policy. -- Z leitzen (talk)  00:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the dictator comment. There seems to be a reluctance by wikipedians to call ditactors people that History will describe as such: Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe, Presidents of central asian republics, etc. I trust this is not because of the (so many times quoted) bias some people attribute to Wikipedia (to which I do not fully suscribe). I think Wikipedia should establish prerequisites and a detailed list of characteristics of what a dictator is in the relevant article. That way Wikipedia could call "dictator" leaders DEFINED as such. In this case I believe that the lack of checks and balances, lack of multy party elections, imprisonment of dissidents, influence over all institutions in Cuba by Castro and the FACT (pleeeeease don`t ask me for sources on this!!) that Castro has ruled for 48 years (and in the same way as Stalin and Hitler appears to want to die in power) is more than enough evidence that the man is indeed a dictator!!

I still believe in wikipedia as a project, but unless some changes are made I am afraid that it will loose all credibility over time. I wonder if Hitler and Stalin were alive, would they be call "conservative leader with some antisemitic alegations" or "progressive premier with unconfirmed reports of use of forced labor" by wikipedia???

I specially call editors to reflect on this.

Nobel Peace Prize
I see that no one talks much about all the good things Castro has done. He has done many great things to help mankind. For many years he has be fighting against Drugs and terrorism. In 2001, Fidel Castro was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for sending medical and engineering aid to developing countries.Dm2ortiz 16:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thing is, anyone can get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. I don't imagine your addition will last, references to Nobel Prize nominations tend to get removed for that reason. Someone removed the same fact when I added it to the Elizardo Sanchez article so I don't see why Castro should keep his mention. -- Z leitzen  (talk)  16:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Nominatiion for a Nobel Prize is not considered notable, SqueakBox 16:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The Nobels are not the type of prize where it's an honor just to be nominated.  George W. Bush was nominated for the Peace Prize too; I doubt many Castro supporters would take that as evidence of the great things Bush has done. Elliotreed 17:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

(Sarcasm)''Right, it's not like it's an Oscar or something. If we started listing all his accomplishments it start looking a Biography''(Sarcasm) The the point is why was he nominated.Dm2ortiz 18:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Presumably, like other nominees, he was nominated because he had a friend or admirer in a position to nominate him; such a position might be, for example, "a professor of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology" according to the rules of the Nobel Committee which you can peruse at http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/nominators.html . -- Polaris999 23:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a Biography of a man's life. The nomination was somthing that happed to him and sending Aid was something he did do. With George W. Bush we list the good and bad we should do the same with everyone.Dm2ortiz 15:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your point here. Are you saying that the Peace Prize nomination is notable or just that the reason he was nominated is notable?  The latter seems reasonable enough to me. Elliotreed 16:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Castro IS a terrorist. He funds the Farc in Colombia. All hes expeditions to Angola and Congo were to destabilize the governments there. Castro executed 5,000 civilians in his first year that is more than Batista in his whole dictatorship. Castro has murdured 50,000 civilians in Cuba so far. This is like Bush executing 2 million Americans for not agreeing with him. Castro is no better than Hitler. As for the drugs and mafia he fought is a complete lie. I love it when stupid leftwinged idiots who have never lived in a communist country talk good about it when they live in a democratic one.

Does anyone really not know why the U.S. turned against Castro?
Here's why, directly from the wikipedia on Cuba:

"In October 1959, Castro openly declared himself to be friendly towards Communism, though he did not yet claim to be a Communist himself, and the liberal and other anti-Communist elements of the government were purged, with many who had initially supported the revolution fleeing the country to join the growing exile community in Miami. In March 1960, the first aid agreements were signed with the Soviet Union. In the context of the Cold War, the U.S. saw the establishment of a Soviet base of influence in the Americas as a threat and plans were approved to remove Castro from power (see The Cuban Project)."

Claiming that Castro didn't move to a Marxist, pro-Soviet position until after the Bay of Pigs is simply inaccurate.

Although the above is accurate, it does not really reach the root of the matter. When castro seized power, the Cuban economy was on very shaky ground - 80% of exports was sugar. Seeking to stabilize inflation etc he made a deal with the USSR to refine some oil for them. However, all the cuban oil refineries - which were owned by US bussinessmen - refused to process the oil. Castro therefore seized the oil companies. The USA emposed a trade embargo. this was very bad for Cuba as it had taken 90% of Cuba's exports. Castro responded by seizing all American businesses. USA responded with the BAy of Pigs fiasco and numerous assassination attempts ( nearing 400 to date) so Castro sought protection from the USSR. Tejackson 19:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Why is a citation necessary for a distinct lack of evidence?
In Personal, under Wealth, the last sentence--"These attempts often must rely on the testimonials of defectors who were close to Castro, and investigators have not been able to give hard evidence of his real worth"--apparently needs a citation. Why? Doesn't it strike anyone else as a bit Kafkaesque that one would need evidence to prove there is a lack of evidence? Or is someone just being sneaky with subtext, implying that Castro does indeed have massive amounts of wealth and we just have to prove it?

I'm just some wandering passerby, but I'm going to remove that little bit because it seems to imply a well-hidden bias. However, I'm perfectly willing to listen to anyone who can tell me why that particular sentence needs a citation; in fact, I'm a rather curious what the rationale could be.


 * edit: oh. Wasn't paying attention.  Looks like the page is protected.  But hey, really: could someone explain the rationale behind this?

--72.84.199.148 05:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)just some guy
 * Well, #1) I'm pretty sure it's against wiki policy to ever remove a citation needed tag, except under specific circumstances. As far as why it would be valid in the first place, everything in wikipedia is supposed to have 'come from someplace else.'  If, indeed, the statement "These attempts often must rely on the testimonials of defectors who were close to Castro, and investigators have not been able to give hard evidence of his real worth" is true, then there should be a primary source which backs it up.  An actual published article (or book, etc) which quotes these "defectors who were close to castro" should be in existence somewhere.  If something like that doesn't exist, then the statement is probably the opinion of the person who added it, or else hearsay. --Faits 03:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

No-show at May 1 celebrations
Castro apparently has not even made an appearance at this year's May first celebrations, where he most commonly, and as far as I can recall, always appeared and gave a very long speech. This is quite puzzling, and apparently at odds with reports of his improving health. What is more puzzling, since he (or some one who resembles him) could have readily been placed in the reviewing stand, without need of a Castro speech, and a pre-prepared speech could have been readily sent out on the loud speakers (for it is too far away to readily detect synchronized lip moviment). One explanation is that a lesson is being taught by Raul and/or the present Cuban leadership, and that this lesson is that Fidel Castro is no-longer even nominally in charge._El Jigue208.65.188.149 20:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I DID MANY RESEARHES ON FIDEL CASTRO AND ONLY THIS SITE HAD DOWN THAT HE WAS A FATHER SO HOW DO PEOPLE KNOW THAT HE WAS THE FATHER AND IS HIS"SON"STILL ALIVE?Bold text''Italic text'

This bio is an important one and more info on Castro's personal life and experiences should be imculded; eg, the fact he lived in the Bronx,his unsucessful effort at major league baseball (the defunct Washington Senators farm team) as well as his relationship with his common law wife and numerous children. There's a lot of rumor on Castro but there is a great deal of fact as well.

add trivia?
Do you think they should add this to the Wikipedia article about Fidel Castro?

"At the University of Havana Castro not only earned a degree in law, he also played baseball for them."

Sounds feasible.

Then perhaps one should cover other "trivia" such as Castro's attempt (July 1948, Ros, Enrique 2003 Fidel Castro y El Gatillo Alegre: Sus Años Universitarios (Coleccion Cuba y Sus Jueces) Ediciones Universal Miami ISBN 1-59388-006-5 p. 259) on the life of Rolando Masferrer who in 1945 had been expelled from the Cuban communist party (García Montes, Jorge and Antonio Alonso Ávila 1970 Historia del Partido Comunista en Cuba. Ediciones Universal, Miami. Page 362). These authors place Ernest Hemingway talking to “El Tigre” (Rolando Masferrer, a veteran of the Spanish Civil War and then a soon to be expelled communist party leader) in the Havana Soviet Embassy on November 7 1945. At the time, according to these authors, Blas Roca and Fabio Grobart were desperately trying to stop Masferrer from leaving the communist party. At this event Masferrer refuses to shake the hand of Cuban communist leader Anibal Escalante. For details on Masferrer's expulsion from the communist party see de la Cova, Antonio Rafael. (2007 The Moncada Attack: Birth of the Cuban Revolution.. University of South Carolina Press ISBN-10: 1570036721 ISBN-13: 978-1570036729 p. 287 "Masferrer and the novelist Carlos Montenegro founded the weekly magazine Tiempo en Cuba in January 1945. Eight months later they were expelled from the Communist Party for denouncing its leadership for its bourgeoisie and corrupt lifestyle.”) El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Na... the info can be added to the article but the creation of a trivia section will eventually end in someone adding a tag and it will be subsecuently removed, try to find somewhere it fits. - 凶  00:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Latest photos
Latest photo shows same kind of jump suit he was wearing for the last few months. Apparently his TV make up was better, but that did not hide the odd look in his eyes as if he was not quite there. We will have to wait until he is shown live responding to questions to reach any conclusions. El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


 * But they did at least show him talking to the cameras, rather than just brief clips of him chatting with a visitor. -- Beardo 13:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Castro-Masferrer feud
The prolonged Castro-Masferrer feud dates at least from when Masferrer broke with the overt Cuban Communist party in 1945. A friend brought to my attention that Orlando Piedra, an important supporter of Batista, gave prolonged interviews in a significant if badly written book:

Raimundo, Daniel Efrain 1994 Habla el Coronel Orlando Piedra (Coleccion Cuba y sus Jueces), Ediciones Universal ISBN-10 0897294793  ISBN-13: 978-0897294799 Pages 93-94 refer to the death of Manolo Castro, and offers the insight that it was Rolando Masferrer’s men who, rather than the police who, were chasing after Fidel Castro with lethal intent. According to this account Castro is captured in the company of a woman and child as he tries to flee to Venezuela via the Cuban airport of Rancho Boyeros south of Havana by the Cuban Bureau of Investigation as witnessed by sergeant of that organization Joaquin Tasas. Castro is released the next day. This matter is a little odd since Fidel Castro was believed to have organized the death of Manolo Castro (p. 99). Pages 40-41 discuss the death of Camilo Cienfuegos, attributing the cause to Camilo’s prevention of the execution of General Cantillo, and his possible support of Huber Matos. The death of Camilo, here placed in the outskirts of Havana, is attributed to Raul Castro, who is said to have shot Camilo twice in the head. Orlando Piedra seems a reliable, if abhorrent, source since he advocates total war killing all (p. 44, see also pp. 207-208), finds commendable that Batista would find government jobs for children of subordinates (p. 55). Page 67 notes, in bold, the presence at the Floridita Bar of the author and other Cuban law Pages 98-101 show a “Police dossier” on Fidel Castro listing his height as only "6 pies" (six feet p. 98), and listing Castro as one of the “autores intelectuales” in the murder of Manolo Castro (p. 99); page 215 states Castro with Alfredo Guevara and other were involved in murder of Jorge Eliezer Gaitán. Pages 102-103 give the corresponding dossier of Raul Castro, noting his return to Havana loaded with propaganda on June 7, 1953 from the eastern block (presumable after a meeting with communist officials who may well have included Fabio Grobart.) Pages 129-131 (see also pp. 213-214) Police dossier on Jesus Gonzalez Cartas (El Extraño) o (Matasiete),reported to have ordered the death of  Masferrer, on September 7, 1949. Pages 217-218 give a brief bio on Rolando Masferrer Rojas, does not mention Masferrer’s communist past. However, this bio does mention his attempt (could have been disingenuous) to rally support of Prio on March 10, 1952 and finding none joins Batista in his coup, and talks of the bombing that killed Masferrer in front of his (Florida) house. Unnumbered page following 208, states that Orlando Piedra Negueruela: “Participio en el golpe de estado de 10 de marzo, y luego era ascendido a coronel. Por decreto presidencial fue nombrado jefe del Buró de Investigaciones. Supervisor de la Policía Secreta, supervisor de la Policía Judicial, y asesor técnico del Buró de Actividades Comunistas (BRAC).”     El Jigue208.65.188.149 16:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

why are we refusing to call Castro a Dictator?
I propose we should call him for what he is "a Dictator". Here I am providing a link to the meaning of Dictator in wikipedia check the section Modern era definition of dictator and tell me if this is not a perfect match for Fidel Castro?

Fidel Castro came to power in Cuba by a coup d'etat. Once in office as military chief he vested in himself all kinds of powerful titles like "comandante en jefe de las fuerzas armadas revolucionarias" commander in chief of the revolutionary army ,"primer secretario del partido comunista de cuba"(first secretary of the communist party), presidente del consejo de estado y de ministros) (president of the ministers and of the state) and the list goes on. All to show that he is the man in charge with all the power necessary to destroy anyone or everyone in Cuba or outside. The national Assambly is a farce  puts up in order to give the impression of Cuba being democratic. The way people get elected to the National Assembly is by balloting but (this is the interesting part!) the people that appear in the ballot are there with the communist party approval. So no one in that assembly will dare disagree with Castro or his brother. Interestingly, I remember a speech his brother Raul Castro gave to the military people over there around 1989 he asked them to say "yes" and they all say "yes" and later he asked them to say "no" and they all say no and after he was done horribly manipulating all of them he continue saying "you see, this is the problem we have" you are all followers.This seem very funny to me, since the reason they are still in power is because they manage to surround themself with adept followers that will do whatever they say unconditionally.

Castro has always wear his olive green military uniform, is just of late that we have seen him in other cloth. Nothing personal of him or his family is know is almost God like. If you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality you will also find the Castro has practice Cult of personality. If you have not seen a documentary by Oliver Stone a few years back about Castro called "Comandante". You will see this lady running after Castro and adoring him almost God like! This adoration by some Cubans is due to the things that Castro can provide for his "unconditional" followers. In many of the important research centers in Cuba or where Castro feels. He can personally stimulate people with money gift (like 50 chavitos) more or less equivalent to 50 US dollars. Something that Chavez have learn quickly from his mentor, by paying venezuelas's poor for their vote. something like this is provide maybe once a year and also from month to month an small plastic shopping bag with items like soap, detergent and tooth paste and a few other things very valuable in Cuba since none of that can be found in the stores available for Cubans. SilentVoice 01:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC).

Thank God there is someone with a brain here. CASTRo is a dictator always has been always will be. Hes murdered 50,000 Cubans not to mention the tens of thousands that died at sea escaping.
 * Nope, keep 'Dictator' out of it. It's a 'critic' phrase, which suggested lack of NPoV. This page is neither a 'Castro fan page' or 'Castro bash page'. GoodDay 20:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, the 'brain' comment (above) is a bit insulting. Could you please scratch it out? GoodDay 23:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well It seems to me this is more a fan page than a bash page for the sake or with the excuse of NPOV. since it tents to describe him as a good leader. As to the NPOV here is the thing. If you check as I mentioned the dictator definition he does definitely matches it word for word.So what happen to truth? I still do not understand why the refusal to name him for what he is? I admit he is not the worst of the lot of dictator but he is no saint either. Still he is a dictator and is very hard for me to understand why we can not call him that. If I say Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin, Mao Se dung, etc were dictators everyone pretty much everyone will agree with that I guess taking away those Nazi lovers and fascists that will love to go back to the old days of totalitarian regimes, with no freedom of expression. So is it because they are already dead, we can call them dictators? It is true that he lust for power. That is why he refuse to make his retirement official! and why he is one of the longer living dictators in the world. More than 45 years having his way! Also remember that many of the things we know outside of Cuba is part of his propaganda machine. If you have seen a Che t-shirt somewhere you have witness how powerful his propaganda machine is. When have you see him advertising or saying how many Cubans he has executed just because they do not happen to agree with the revolution (hint here - they do not agree with him) Is like the French absolutism "l'état, c'est moi" full control. He is poster child for control freak! or asm we called more politely  a Dictator. Most of you have never seen the regime in action or a totalitarian government. Most of you all the knowledge you have is about second hand propaganda by Oliver Stones documentaries and now Michael Moore. It is a bit unfortunate that the American government does not let Americans visit Cuba legally and experienced it on their own without let it then self be guided by the Cuban government that I am sure will try to portrait everything over there very rosy when the opposite we know is true, otherwise we will not see so many Cubans risking their life and their children life to scape the regime. It will open the eyes to many Americans that day dream about socialism and leftism. If you ask Fidel, every problem Cuba has is due to the American blockade!(check the long speeches). Do you think that is true? His economic problems are due to the mismanagement, they are about putting the wrong people (about placing people without the right talent in the wrong position. And you can asked yourself why do they do this? Short answer is because they place people in every position that are unconditional to the system that will follow orders and directions and unfortunately for him talent and politics do not necessary go together. So there you have it. A dictator needs followers, and it can not tolerate other leaders beside them because they challenge their authority. Now since he has being this way I can safely predict that socialism or communism in Cuba will not last after he is gone. Why? because they are all followers even his brother Raul Castro is a follower. The future leaders of Cuba maybe outside or unknown to the current government. See the biggest problem in the world for any country is the problem of succession. The Roman emperors learn it. Read Machiavelli and you will see the makings of Fidel Castro's kingdom. Passing power to none other than his brother! is that democracy? It looks to me more like a monarchy like slavery. And just for a second please think of the millions of Cubans that are in Cuba suffering the system and also in the millions that scape but still suffer the system thru their close relatives still in Cuba! Think while we debate here on NPOV on the many he has executed on the thousands that have died at sea! The many that have lost parents, children at sea. Just because there is one stubborn man in power that want to have his way! Now do not come and tell me that you can vote him out because ballots over there only have him and his cronies! Is that the way democracy is? What if for 45 years we only had Clinton and Hillary or Bush having their way? Do you think that will be good? (First thing a dictator do is take out freedom of the press) No first amendment for you anymore. So much for constitutions when dictators like Castro and Chavez manipulate followers into anything they want! You may asked yourself why are this people so stupid to let them grab so much power in the first place. I will answer it is a problem of convenience! many people do benefit from people like Chavez and Castro in those countries. But it will soon gets to a point were not to many people are having fun with the system and they do turn against them but then is too late! they do not have a way to get them out of power. That's what happen to Cubans and that is what is happening now in Venezuela! Sorry I did not mean to do this so long but is necessary that people in the world do not do the same mistakes we Cubans did and now the poor Venezuelans are going in the same direction. But I guess nobody learns unless they experienced. So go to Cuba, do not get the government guided tour. live with a family especially outside of Havana where the reach of the government control apparatus is more lax and you can experience the system and learn that life in Cuba is a constant struggle to survive to live! to get the food and the bread to earn a living. Hope people every where learn so it does not happen to them. Nobody deserve that!

SilentVoice 22:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC).


 * Dear Silent Voice - The Cuban Revolution was somewhat more than a coup d'etat - read the definition.
 * Also, have you noticed the inclusion in the article of the line "Castro is described by opponents as a dictator...". This is an encyclopedia, we cannot judge only describe. In the case of many live contraversial issues it is only possible to describe differing attitudes and lines of thought about the subject.
 * We aren't refusing to call him a dictator. We are refusing to ONLY call him as a dictator.
 * And in case you didn't notice, Chavez isn't a dictator - he has been elected a couple of times and rules by popular consent, not military power. MichaelW 23:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I couldn't have said it better, MichaelW. GoodDay 23:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC)