Log in

View Full Version : What Fidel Castro really said (what does not work is capitalism!)



khad
12th September 2010, 14:47
http://islamiacu.blogspot.com/2010/09/fidel-castro-aclara-sobre-modelo-cubano.html (http://anonym.to/?http://anonym.to/http://islamiacu.blogspot.com/2010/09/fidel-castro-aclara-sobre-modelo-cubano.html)

Translation via google:

Fidel Castro on Cuban model clarified: what does not work is capitalism.

The Cuban government, some interpretations published today disqualified from interview with American journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic magazine.

During the presentation of his latest book "The strategic counteroffensive" in the Aula Magna of the University of Havana, Fidel Castro said Goldberg asked if he believed the Cuban model was something still worth exporting.

"It is clear that this question implied the theory that Cuba was exporting the revolution. I reply" The Cuban model no longer works even for us. "He expressed no bitterness or concern," said Fidel Castro, according to Television Cubana.

But actually said, "is that my answer meant the exact opposite of what the analyst Goldberg and Julia Sweig, who accompanied him, performed on the Cuban model.

"My idea, as everyone knows, is that the capitalist system and not even good for America or the world, leading from crisis to crisis, which are becoming increasingly serious, comprehensive and repeated, of which no can escape. How could provide such a system to a socialist country like Cuba, "said Fidel Castro.

Turning to the issue of the Cuban Missile Crisis the first secretary of Communist Party of Cuba said "it is true, I addressed the issue and I asked the question.

Literally, as he puts it in the first part of his story, his words were: "I asked: At one point it seemed logical that you would recommend to the Soviets to bomb the United States. Did you recommended still seems logical now? Fidel said: Having seen what I seen, and not worth it at all. "

I had explained well, and to writing, the contents of the message "... if the United States invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons in such circumstances should not be left to the first blow as that inflicted on the USSR when the June 22, 1941, the German army and all European forces attacked the USSR. "

It can be seen, "he explains Fidel Castro, that this brief allusion to the subject, in the second part of the delivery to the public of the news, the reader may not realize that" if the U.S. invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons " In this case I recommended to prevent the enemy struck the first blow, nor the profound irony of my response "... Had I known what I know now ..." in obvious reference to the betrayal by a president of Russia, saturated alcohol substance, gave the most important U.S. military secrets in that country.

I keep thinking, "said the leader of the Cuban Revolution, which Goldberg is a great journalist, able to explain to amenity and master their views, which require debate. No inventa frases, las transfiere y las interpreta. No invents phrases, transferred and interpreted.

Fidel Castro full message in the presentation of his book "strategic counteroffensive"

We are in a rare moment of human history.

These days you meet the deadlines given by the Security Council United Nations for Iran to comply with the requirements dictated by the United States, related nuclear research and enrichment of uranium for medical and electrical energy production.

That's all you can try.

The fear of seeking nuclear weapons production, is only a guess.

Around the sensitive issue, the U.S. and its Western allies, including two of the five nuclear powers with veto power, France and the United Kingdom, supported by the capitalist powers richest and most developed of the world, have prompted a growing number sanctions against Iran, an oil rich country and Muslims. Today approved measures include inspection of their trade, and harsh economic sanctions that lead to strangulation of the economy.

I have followed closely the serious dangers of this situation, since the occurrence of an outbreak of war at that point, the war quickly would become nuclear, with lethal consequences for the rest of the planet.

Not seeking publicity or sensationalism in reporting such hazards. Simply to alert world opinion in the hope that warned of this grave danger, helping to prevent it.

At least, it has attracted attention to a problem that was not even mentioned in the mainstream of world opinion.

This forces me to use some time for the launch of this book, whose publication work hard. I did not want to coincide with days 7 and 9. The first meeting 90 days mandated by the Security Council to determine whether or not Iran complied with the requirement to allow inspection of its merchants. The first meeting 90 days mandated by the Security Council to determine whether or not Iran complied with the requirement to allow inspection of its merchants.

So far, we only have the unusual statement by the Director General of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), Japan's Yukiya Amano, a man of the Yankees. This threw all the wood on the fire and, like Pontius Pilate, washed his hands.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran said his statement with deserved contempt. A news release from the agency EFE, said that his statement that "'Our friends should not worry because we do not believe that our region is in condition for new military adventures", and "Iran is fully prepared to respond to any invasion military 'was an obvious reference to Cuban leader Fidel Castro, "who warned of the possibility of an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran with U.S. support'."

The news on the topic follows another, and mingle with others of significant impact.

The journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic magazine, already known for our public, publishes parts of the long interview held with me, some interesting point of which has been programmed before the future and long article.

"There were many strange things during my recent stay in Havana," he tells [...] "But one of the most unusual was the level of self-examination of Fidel Castro. [...] But the fact that Castro was willing to admit he had made a mistake at a crucial time of the Cuban Missile Crisis in Cuba seemed truly amazing [...] he regretted that he had asked Khrushchev nuclear rockets launched against the United States. "True, I addressed the issue and I asked the question. Literally, as he puts it in the first part of his story, his words were: "I asked: At one point it seemed logical that you would recommend to the Soviets to bomb the United States. Did you recommended still seems logical now? Fidel said: Having seen what I seen and have known what I know now, not worth it at all. "

I had explained well, and to writing, the contents of the message "... if the United States invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons in such circumstances should not be left to the first blow as that inflicted on the USSR when the June 22, 1941, the German army and all European forces attacked the USSR. "

Can be seen that this brief allusion to the subject, in the second part of the delivery to the public of the news, the reader might realize that "if the U.S. invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons" in this case I recommended prevent the enemy struck the first blow, nor the profound irony of my response "... Had I known what I know now ..." in obvious reference to the betrayal by a president of Russia, substance saturated with alcohol, gave United States military's most important secrets of that country.

At another point in the conversation Goldberg says: "I asked him if he believed the Cuban model was something that was worth even export." Clearly, this question was implicit theory that Cuba was exporting the revolution. I reply "The Cuban model no longer works even for us." He expressed no bitterness or worry. I have fun now to see how he interpreted to the letter and see for what it says Julia Sweig, an analyst at CFR that accompanied it, and developed the theory presented. But the reality is that my answer meant the exact opposite of what the two American journalists interpreted on the Cuban model.

My idea, as everyone knows, is that the capitalist system and not even good for America or the world, leading from crisis to crisis, which are becoming increasingly serious, comprehensive and repeated, of which there can escape. How such a system could serve for a socialist country like Cuba.

Many Arab friends, to hear that I spoke with Goldberg, became worried and sent a message pointing to him as "the greatest supporter of Zionism."

From all this we can deduce the confusion that exists in the world. I hope therefore that what I tell my thinking is useful.

The ideas expressed by me are contained in 333 Reflections, to see that happen, and of these, the last 26 are referred exclusively to environmental problems and the imminent danger of a nuclear conflagration.

Now I add in a very brief summary.

I have always condemned the Holocaust. In reflections on "Obama's speech in Cairo," "The blow on the prowl" and "expert opinion", I stated clearly.

I've never been an enemy of the Jewish people, which I admire their ability to resist for two thousand years of dispersion and persecution. Many of the brightest talents, Karl Marx and Albert Einstein were Jewish, because it is a nation that survived the most intelligent, under a law of nature. In our country, and the world, were persecuted and slandered. But this is only a fraction of the ideas I advocate.

They were not the only persecuted and slandered for their beliefs. Muslims, for well over 12 centuries, they were attacked and persecuted by European Christians, because of their beliefs, as had been the early Christians in ancient Rome before becoming the official religion of the empire. The story should be accepted and remembered as it is, with its tragic realities and fierce wars. That I have spoken and, therefore, rightly explained the dangers that runs humanity when these have become the greatest risk of suicide for our fragile species.

If we add a war with Iran, even if conventional in nature, it would be better that the United States turned off the light and fired. How could it resist a war against 1 500 million Muslims?

Defending peace is not to a true revolutionary, renouncing the principles of justice, without which human life and society would be meaningless.

I still think that Goldberg is a great journalist, able to explain to amenity and master their views, which require debate. No invents phrases, transferred and interpreted.

Do not mention the content of many other aspects of our conversations. Respect the confidentiality of the issues we address, while I look forward to his lengthy article.

Current news coming on stream from all sides, forcing me to fill your presentation with these words, whose seeds are contained in the book of "strategic counteroffensive" I have just presented.

I believe that all peoples have the right to peace and enjoyment of property and natural resources of the planet. It's a shame what is happening to the population in many African countries, where they are millions of children, women and men among its inhabitants skeletal because of lack of food, water and medicines. Graphics is news coming from the Middle East, where Palestinians are deprived of their lands, their houses are demolished by monstrous equipment and men, women and children, bombarded with white phosphorous and other means of destruction, and horrific scenes of families wiped out by bombs dropped on Afghan and Pakistani villages for unmanned aircraft, and the Iraqis who die after years of war, and more than a million lives sacrificed in this war imposed by a U.S. president.

The last thing I could expect was the news of the expulsion of the French gypsies, victims of the cruelty of the French extreme right, which already amounted to seven thousand of them, the victims of another kind of racial holocaust. It's elementary strong protest of the French, which, simultaneously, the millionaires limit the right to retirement, while reducing employment opportunities.

U.S. hear of a minister of the state of Florida, which proposes to burn in his own church, the Holy Book of Quran. Even the Yankee military chiefs and European war punitive missions quaked at the news that they considered risky for soldiers.

Walter Martinez, the renowned journalist Dossier program Venezolana de Televisión, was amazed at such madness.

Yesterday, Thursday, 9 in the evening, news came that the pastor had given up. Would need to know what they told the FBI agents who visited him "to persuade." It was a huge media show, chaos, things typical of an empire that is sinking.

I thank you all for your attention.

September 10, 2010

Ocean Seal
12th September 2010, 23:56
The American journalist clearly tried to turn Castro's words against him. The New York Times starts off so provokingly by stating that Fidel Castro admits that the Cuban system does not work anymore. Good thing that he made his statement clear or else the capitalists would have had a field day.

Red Commissar
13th September 2010, 00:18
With all this chatter that has come from his statements as of late, I think Castro has some topics to cover on his "Reflections" thing.

RadioRaheem84
13th September 2010, 00:28
Still though. What did he mean?

How did he go from saying that the Cuban model no longer works to meaning that capitalism doesn't work?

What Would Durruti Do?
13th September 2010, 02:29
Still though. What did he mean?

How did he go from saying that the Cuban model no longer works to meaning that capitalism doesn't work?

Perhaps the Cuban model is capitalist?

Naaah.

fa2991
13th September 2010, 04:17
Still though. What did he mean?

How did he go from saying that the Cuban model no longer works to meaning that capitalism doesn't work?

The Havana Times has a suggestion...

http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=29198

deLarge
13th September 2010, 04:52
I might be inclined to agree with the Havana times article. If the Cuban model isn't working, it is a problem with the implementation of socialism rather than socialism itself. Moving to something resembling soviet democracy may help overcome some of their problems.

The Vegan Marxist
13th September 2010, 05:37
Perhaps the Cuban model is capitalist?

Naaah.

Yeahhhhh....nice try. :rolleyes:

How is this hard for people to understand? Let's look at what was stated:

"I asked him if he believed the Cuban model was something that was worth even export." ~Goldberg

"The Cuban model no longer works even for us ... The capitalist system is not even good for America or the world, leading from crisis to crisis, which are becoming increasingly serious, comprehensive and repeated, of which there can escape. How such a system could serve for a socialist country like Cuba." ~Fidel Castro

If you would just sit back & actually think about it, he's clearly pointing out that the Cuban model being exported, or at least trying to be exported, to other countries, capitalist countries at that, is not helping Cuba & leaves it at a dead end - as we can all clearly see. They've apparently given this some thought, due to where Cuba is now allowing some privately run businesses to continue, which if done correctly can help build up the economy again.


I might be inclined to agree with the Havana times article. If the Cuban model isn't working, it is a problem with the implementation of socialism rather than socialism itself. Moving to something resembling soviet democracy may help overcome some of their problems.

There is no problem of implementing Socialism in a country that is already Socialist. The problem is trying to uphold & protect Socialism within the country & to have the ability to advance further. Which, if the Cuban model was to continue, as in the path it's remained on for quite some time & tried exporting it through other countries, then this advancement & protection of Socialism will not happen.

Tablo
13th September 2010, 05:43
Perhaps the Cuban model is capitalist?

Naaah.
Oh, snap!

State-capitalism you say?! Impossible in a workers state!! :laugh:

penguinfoot
13th September 2010, 05:48
Incidentally, this is not the first time that the media has tried to mischaracterize statements or police proposals from the Cuban government and interpret them as signs that the country is about to destroy all the gains of the revolution. When controls on the purchasing of electronics and staying in hotels were removed, those moves were interpreted to mean that the government was now tolerating larger differences in living standards - and yet the only reason those controls had been put there in the first place was to ensure that a privileged elite was not able to emerge during the special period when Cuba's economy was in crisis, such that their removal is a sign that the economy has now sufficiently improved to allow for high-end consumption, with the expectation that those goods and services will now be viable for a substantial part of the population. Similarly, the formalization of wage differentials was interpreted to mean a move away from socialist standards of distribution and remuneration, despite the fact that the Cuban government has never had a commitment to absolute wage equality, and the reforms themselves were largely a formalization of practices that were already in place.

None of this should blind us to the very real concessions that have been made to imperialism and nor should we avoid debating the nature of Cuba's economy, but this does show the need to be wary of how the media seeks to form its own reality in relation to Cuba.

Lodestar
13th September 2010, 06:06
The American journalist clearly tried to turn Castro's words against him. The New York Times starts off so provokingly by stating that Fidel Castro admits that the Cuban system does not work anymore. Good thing that he made his statement clear or else the capitalists would have had a field day.


Jeffrey Goldberg doesn't seem to be that kind of journalist. I think he misinterpreted what Fidel said, or there was a fundamental mistranslation or misunderstanding. The media machine swarmed all over this misquote like voracious piranha.

REDSOX
13th September 2010, 09:59
I do wish some people on these boards check the FACTS about what castro said and not come on here repeating bourgeois tittle tattle.

khad
23rd September 2010, 16:55
I do wish some people on these boards check the FACTS about what castro said and not come on here repeating bourgeois tittle tattle.
Yeah, really. I can't believe that leftists here are still posting that stupid Zionist article.