Friday, September 26, 2008

Humberto Fontova and Anatasio Blanco Take Opposite Sides on Remittances

Like Marc Másferrer but without being subjected to an auto-da-fé, Anatasio Blanco has broken ranks with "Founding Editor" Val Prieto and Babalú's other revanchists and declared his support for remittances, the Cuban people's only lifeline at this apex of national crises. As I asked recently: "Is it possible for 17 Cubans (and philo-Cubans) to approach the subject of Cuba with perfect conformity of minds?" Apparently not:

I do not believe this means we should shy away from providing our families with financial assistance at a time of great distress. It is for those receiving the funds to be discreet if necessary. The way this money is handled once it reaches the hands of our brothers is entirely up to them, not us.

While this type of story is all-too-common, I don't believe it should impede us from helping our padres, tios y primos in a bid to alleviate at least a bit of their perpetual suffering.

No doubt many will disagree with me, and that's alright, but, those are my "two cents."

Regards,

-AB

Posted by: CubaWatch at September 25, 2008 01:47 PM

Let's see if another of Babalú's 15 contributing writers cares to prove that he has no homicidal intent vis-à-vis the Cuban people. Humberto Fontova, whom I admire as a popularizer of Cuba's pre-revolutionary history and debunker of the myth of social progress under Castro, has offset Anatasio's defection from the cult of the Human Pressure Cooker by declaring himself one of those who would choke the Cuban people in order to strangle Castro:

From "Paredon!-Paredon!"--to "Please send me remittances!"

"Paredon! Paredon! Paredon!"......"Si Fidel es comunista, me ponen en la lista!" "Gusano!...Gusanos!...Mercenarios!!"

This was bad enough when so many of us were leaving. This was also screamed at the captured men and boys who put their lives on the line to liberate Cuba during the Bay of Pigs, as they were marched in hand-cuffs and Cuban crowds spat at them and screamed insults....Wonder how many of those screamers are now screaming for remittances from those same gusanos?

Just wondering.

Posted by Humberto at September 25, 2008 04:59 PM

Fontova's contention that Cubans should turn their backs on their relatives on the island because their grandfathers or great-grandfathers once shouted "¡Paredón!" amounts to nothing less than a bar sinister on all Cubans. Worse even than guilt by association, he advocates guilt by blood. He does not say for how many generations Cubans should be thus cursed; but we suspect that it is at least the Biblical seven generations. Fontova makes no pretense that he wants to starve the Cuban people in order to facilitate their freedom. He is quite clear that he only wishes to punish them. His honesty is actually refreshing after so much dissimulation.

The Cubans responsible for installing Fidel Castro in power 50 years ago, who cheered his every usurpation and fed his insatiable blood lust, are now Castro's age, give or take 10 years. No Cuban born after 1959 ever shouted "¡Paredón!" and they constitute the overwhelming majority (85%) of the Cuban population. Nor would it be fair to say that all surviving septugenerians or octogenerians did, either.

What is undoubtedly true, however, is that as many paredonistas live in Miami as in Cuba. There is no such thing as an ex-fidelista just as there is no such thing as an ex-Nazi. Although they may have succeeded in putting miles and years between themselves and the scene of their crimes, and even if they feign regret or deny their complicity, they are no less guilty than those who never regretted their crimes or denied their complicity. If these fidelistas sin Fidel had remained in Cuba, they would not have escaped the consequences of their acts. Their decampment to Miami was the historical and moral equivalent of the Nazis' flight to South America. Many of these characters transmogrified into anti-Communists and became the most rabid enemies of the very people whose lives and country they destroyed before fleeing from the general conflagration.

So when is Fontova going to call for the denaturalization of the children and grandchildren of Miami's historical fidelistas sin Fidel? When will he label them hypocrites and worse for wishing to punish the children of Cuba for the crimes which their fathers and grandfathers committed while they themselves were children in Cuba? When is Fontova going to demand the seizure of their assets and the distribution of this money as reparations to Castro's victims on the island? When is he going to suggest that they should go hungry in expiation of the crimes of their fathers?

An exile who seeks revenge on innocent Cubans is no different from the bloodthirsty rabblerouser that led the masses in crying "¡Paredón!" at the dawn of the Revolution.

15 comments:

Vana said...

Nor were former Nazi's in East Berlin forgotten by the allies when the Soviet Union tried to choke the lifeblood out of the population, an airlift occured that saved their lives, if the allies who lost untold number of lives during the war were willing and able to assist their former enemy, why can't we?

There's a schism happening at Babalu, am glad to see Anastasio is not on the side of the butchers.

Excellent post Manuel you are as always correct, for the mayority of the population living now in Cuba never screamed Paredon.

Ms Calabaza said...

Vana,

great point about the airlift. I would venture to say that many of those that yelled paredon are living their last years in Miami,New Jersey, San Juan ... What are you gonna do with them? We're talking about human beings here.

Anonymous said...

Este blog murio?

Anonymous said...

De acuerdo al blog de Fantomas Bono de U2 esta molesto con que fidel no acepte ayuda. I wonder que dira Bono de los remittances

Manuel A.Tellechea said...

ms. calabaza:

Time has already taken care of most of them. In ten years, it will have taken care of all of them.

An effort should be made once Cuba is free to hold accountable Castro's closest collaborators and all his henchmen who have committed blood crimes.

All of the culprits are not in Cuba. To have the moral authority to try those in Cuba we cannot pardon those in Miami or elsewhere.

But neither should we hold their children and grandchildren accountable for the sins of their progenitors, as Humberto Fontova proposes. That is a blade that cuts both ways, and I don't think that the heirs of the fidelistas sin Fidel in Miami would want that, either. (Most, incidentally, have no idea of their parents' revolutionary antecedents and see them only as victims not perpetrators of our national tragedy).

The cycle of revanchism must end for Cubans to unite as one people. Of course, this can only happen after justice has been done.

Agustin Farinas said...

MAt,
you are making too much sense and the advocates of the pressure cooker idea unfortunately are not thinking rationally. As a rule they do not have any close relatives back in Cuba so they do not have much concern for those living there. Their memory and links with the remaining family is a distant one, hence their strong advocacy of the pressure cooker theory. Their pressure theory will be applied to someone's elses family, not theirs. It is a very selfish way of thinking.

Manuel A.Tellechea said...

Agustín:

I have tried to hammer into their heads in an hundred different ways the same basic idea -- You cannot love Cuba and hate Cubans. But you are right. That concept is too much above their heads. Cuba to them means their parents' memories, not flesh and blood people. It is easy to discount the humanity of specters. Except that Cuba is not populated by specters.

Anonymous said...

All of the culprits are not in Cuba. To have the moral authority to try those in Cuba we cannot pardon those in Miami or elsewhere.


Y que piensas hacer con los de Miami, paredon , paredon

Manuel A.Tellechea said...

anonymous:

Castro's erstwhile henchmen in Miami are admittedly in a privileged position. They have the option of never returning to Cuba again and may so evade a final reckoning. This, of course, will also be their punishment; perhaps not the one that they deserve but certainly a fitting one nonetheless. Our country, also, will benefit by their continued absence.

The firing squad, which was introduced to our country by Castro, shall never sound again in a free Cuba. The memory of our martyrs shall not be profaned with the blood of their henchmen.

persuasive said...

FEEDING FRENZY @ BABA WORLD

POST DEBATE REPUBLICAN ORGY AT BABALANDIA

neither of them have a clue about the bailout. in fact I don't think there's anyone in congress or the white house that does.

IMHO, the bailout as originally proposed is a disaster.

But I don't think these guys were really there to focus on the economy which is what we all did want to hear about.

other than the 1st series which dealt on the bailout to which neither answered the question, I think McCain held his own which is an advantage against Obama.

Sadly, as it has been for so many elections, it always comes down to the less of two evils.

Posted by Cigar Mike Pancier at September 26, 2008 11:42 PM

Even if either one of them could talk in detail about the bailout it would come across as boringly wonky. The hypothetical answer I give in the post is about the crisis but not the bailout. It would have fit in McCain's narrative about straight talk (plenty of blame to go around) it would have fit his narrative about bipartisanship (we can't play the blame game and need to work together) and it would have satisfied common sense conservatives and painted Obama as an old-fashioned liberal who has more "great" ideas like Fannie and Freddie.




Posted by Henry Louis Gomez at September 26, 2008 11:49 PM

Interestingly enough, fact check called out obama for his mistatement and published this which speaks of the 1999 repeal of Glass Steagal by Clinton and a bipartisan congress which included Biden, Dodd, and the other libs behind Obama. McCain did not vote for the bill.

I did a paper in economics on the act back in the 1980's and I myself concluded that the banks and brokerages should not mix. Sadly I was right. Here is what fact check notes:

"Some of the abuses that occurred stemmed from the 1999 repeal of a Depression-era law that separated banks from brokerages. In legislation supported by former President Clinton and Robert Rubin, now a top Obama adviser and Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, this separation was ended — allowing banks and insurance companies to sell securities.

But while regular banks were strictly regulated by the government, Wall Street banks and other non-bank institutions — many of the same institutions whose abuses led to the current crisis — were allowed to operate with less regulation."

Posted by Cigar Mike Pancier at September 26, 2008 11:53 PM

McCain would never attack a Dem the way we would. That, unfortunately, is his style.

Posted by George L. Moneo at September 26, 2008 11:53 PM

You're very right George.




Posted by FreedomForCuba at September 26, 2008 11:55 PM



WHAT DEBATE WERE THESE REPUBLICAN MIAMI MAFIOSOS WERE WATCHING


IN REEGARDS TO FOREIGN POLICY OBAMA DESTROYED MC CAIN

OUCH

Anonymous said...

You better buy the duct tape while you can.

Anonymous said...

Comment left a Bubulu, just in case they decide to erase it

I think McCain's body language is a symptom of a greater problem. I mean even if Obama is an idealistic lunatic, I believe he is actually running under the impression that he is the best man with the best ideas. McCain, however, by the standard of his own memoir, Worth The Fighting For, is running because of personal ambition.

"I didn't decide to run for President to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism.

In truth, I wanted to be President because it had become my ambition to be President.

I was sixty-two years old when I made the decision and I thought it was my one shot at the prize."


Listen to it in McCain's own voice here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eKwTL8SwbI

Posted by Dveg at September 27, 2008 12:02 PM

Manuel A.Tellechea said...

anonymous:

Ambition is not a sin or character flaw. It is merely a desire to test one's mettle, to rise above one's circumstances and to succeed. It is not the negation of altruism but its complement. Unambitious men are altruistic to no effect. If you can't realize your own dreams then you will never be able to realize anybody else's.

Anonymous said...

Only among liberals is ambition considered a sin.

Anonymous said...

If my punishment is never to return to Cuba in order for Cuba and it's people to be free - then so be it.