Seduction Spa
Toronto Escorts

Trump’s Attack on Cuba

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
Trump’s Attack on Cuba
by John Wight
Donald Trump’s presidency has descended into farce. The undignified manner in which both he and his adversaries in Washington have conducted themselves since his election sits in sharp contrast to the dignity of those countries and governments demonized as enemies of everything the Rome of our time holds dear – namely untrammelled power, greed, and domination.
The latest country to be targeted by Trump is Cuba, thus continuing with his agenda of dismantling his predecessor Barack Obama’s legacy – whether his healthcare plan at home or rapprochement with Iran and Cuba abroad. Along with the p5+1 Iran nuclear deal, Obama’s decision to normalize diplomatic relations with Havana is the only foreign policy achievement of which he can be proud, something that cannot be said of his drone war, his role in the destruction of Libya, or his administration’s concerted attempt to destabilize Syria.
Though Cuba may be a tiny country of just 11.3 million people compared to its superpower neighbor located 90 miles to the north, in terms of its contribution to humanity, its status as a beacon of justice, solidarity, and dignity even in the face of US aggression, it is a veritable giant. Whereas the US sends missiles and Marines to poor countries in order to kill their people, Cuba sends medicines and doctors to heal them. It marks the difference between a culture of death and a culture of life, between cultural values of oppression and domination and cultural values of solidarity and internationalism.
Let us be frank, for there is no other way to put it, US President Donald Trump is a clown. He is a billionaire businessman, a real estate huckster with the wisdom of your average-sized plank of wood – a man whose ability to get elected as the country’s president is an indictment of a society in which anti-human values of fame, celebrity, and unfettered wealth reign. And as for those who seek to defend Trump on the basis that Hillary Clinton is worse, this is like defending typhus in relation to cholera, or indeed vice versa. In other words, they are two sides of the same proverbial coin.
The way the President has sought to endear himself to a clutch of reactionary Cuban exiles in Miami, allowing them to dictate his regressive stance on Cuba, speaks volumes about his notion of ‘leadership’. It confirms there is no low he will not stoop to in order to appease the assorted ultra right wing ideologues and fanatics who make up his base. Threats levelled against Iran and North Korea, illegal missile strikes against Syria, and now confrontation with Cuba, this is the sum total of a foreign policy driven by the same mindset as the head of your average mafia crime family.
During his**speech**declaiming against Obama’s policy vis-à-vis Cuba, Trump said, “They**[the Obama administration]**made a deal with a government that spread violence and instability in the region and nothing they got, think about it, nothing they got, they fought for everything and we just didn’t fight hard enough, but now, those days are over.”
Reading those words is like being transported through the looking glass into a parallel world in which up is down and down is up. The only government that has “spread violence and instability in the region” is the US government, going all the way back to the infamous**Monroe Doctrine**of 1823, when the country’s then president, James Monroe, laid claim to Latin and South America as Washington’s backyard in relation to the European colonial powers. The region, ever since, has been scarred by an unbroken thread of proxy wars, the subversion of democratic governments, collusion in human rights abuses, including torture, and the wilful violation of international law whenever and wherever it has suited Washington’s geostrategic and economic interests.
Cuba’s crime in the eyes of Washington is not anything bad it has done or is doing, but the good, representing as it does a social and economic model that puts people before profits. It is a model responsible, since the Cuban revolution, for huge advances and**achievements**in healthcare, literacy, education, and biomedicine. The fact those achievements have been made in the face of a decades-long US economic and trade embargo, designed to bring Cuba to its knees, makes them all the more remarkable.
And while Cuba may not conform to the liberal democratic yardstick held up by Washington as the sine qua non of a country and society deemed worthy of respect, the pride with which the Cuban people regard their island’s history of defiance against the empire to the north reduces Trump’s verbal broadsides to the ranting of yet another US president drowning in ignorance, if not arrogance.
The late Fidel Castro put it best:
“With what moral authority can [the US] speak of human rights…the rulers of a nation in which the millionaire and beggar coexist; where the Indian is exterminated; the black man is discriminated against; the woman is prostituted; and the great masses of Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, and Latin Americans are scorned, exploited, and humiliated…Where the CIA organizes plans of global subversion and espionage, and the Pentagon creates neutron bombs capable of preserving material assets and wiping out human beings.”
Amen.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Trump’s Attack on Cuba
by John Wight
Thanks for highlighting what was in the OP, but Google already three dumps out different appearances of that title and author, and who knows with what edits. Or how many more will turn up; this thread among them. Before the fur starts to fly over web-words, it's always helpful to think everyone can work from the same actual text, the author wrote.

If you want to be the 'author' for TERB purposes, and take responsibility for it, as you edited it (or not) fine, but then why attach John Wright's name?
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
Thanks for highlighting what was in the OP, but Google already three dumps out different appearances of that title and author, and who knows with what edits. Before the fur starts to fly over web-words, it's always helpful to think everyone can work from the same actual text.

If you want to be the 'author' for TERB purposes, and take responsibility for it, as you edited it (or not) fine, but then why attach John Wright's name?
I guess you joined Aardies party of the interpretively challenged, who need to know where a text is published to judge it's content.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
I guess you joined Aardies party of the interpretively challenged, who need to know where a text is published to judge it's context.
Exactly. It's been the standard for rational thought and debate since the invention of writing.

Did you mean to write 'content'? Context is defined by when and where, and is indeed a serious part of assessing content, theme and purpose The trivial truism doesn't support the unworthy aspersion you attached it to.

I'm sorry if you've lost track of your source, or find the labour of a cut and paste too onerous, but no one should resent being asked; it's a sign the material's being taken seriously.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
Exactly. It's been the standard for rational thought and debate since the invention of writing.
Only for the weak minded. Educated people have learned to read and interpret a text, and decide on its merit. I might be so bold as to add, that they also invite different viewpoints and opinions.

While it may not be what the North American educational system teaches, there was rational thought and debate before that.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,069
0
0
Can anyone explain the upside of normalizing relations between the US and Cuba? I'm not buying the argument in the piece that Cuba's illegal sale of stolen IP pharmaceuticals makes it a beacon of international humanitarian relief efforts.

They seem like that neighbour you've lived next door to for 20 years, and you're just better off never getting to know.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Only for the weak minded. Educated people have learned to read and interpret a text, and decide on its merit. I might be so bold as to add, that they also invite different viewpoints and opinions.

While it may not be what the North American educational system teaches, there was rational thought and debate before that.
When we know what the text actually is, then we can interpret and assess its merit. Until then, as many a TERB debate gives evidence, all we have are personal suppositions and opinions.

If personal opinions are what you want, just ask: Do you think Trump is attacking Cuba? If you want to elicit educated interpretations of a thoughtful, reasoned text on its merits, your first, simple, basic grown-up job is to establish that text. Even privately-schooled Europeans have been doing that since long before Erasmus.

You'll also get opinions and different viewpoints, don't worry.

Have fun.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
The undignified manner in which both he [The President] and his adversaries in Washington have conducted themselves since his election
Wow 870 words and only 18 of them worth the time to read and that not even a complete sentence.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
When we know what the text actually is, then we can interpret and assess its merit. Until then, as many a TERB debate gives evidence, all we have are personal suppositions and opinions.


Have fun.
You had the text right in front of you, but did not dare to read and interpret it and assess its merit before you knew where it was "published".

Don't take it personally, you are the result of an educational system that does not encourage independent and critical thought.

That is the reason, USA has ended up with Trump as President. half of the population believes everything Fox News says, and considers CNN and MSNBC fake news. The other half believes everything CNN says and considers Fox News crap. Nobody has the ability, willingness or energy to decide any issues for themselves. We see it here on Terb in spades, most members recite mantras instead of thinking. If anybody posts any criticism of any action or policy of the government of USA, it takes about 10 seconds before someone posts that "he hates the US".

My theory is that the educational system is structured to serve an imperial power, people need to think and do what they are told, Sparta instead of the founding fathers dream of Athens. I noticed it myself, when I came to run operations in North America; my subordinates to my surprise would just do what I told them without questioning what I told them. I literally had to coach them on "arguing" with me.

As I have posted before, I spent a fair amount of money to send my children to Europe to get a proper education.
 

KBear

Supporting Member
Aug 17, 2001
4,169
1
38
west end
www.gtagirls.com
Can anyone explain the upside of normalizing relations between the US and Cuba?
Cuba was propped up by socialist USSR until they collapsed, then by socialist Venezuela until they collapsed. The US now has some opportunity to support the Cuba people and hope they move towards a more open and free society, or US can isolate Cuba and hope for collapse, and a new more open form of government takes its place.

The stuff about Cuba sending doctors sound good until you realize that doctors can't leave Cuba.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
Oh I see, on the Continent it isn't important to source information. Hmm well it is in the British Isles, Canada, the U.S.A. etc. . .
I find it really sad, and more than a little troubling, that someone can reach the high position of being called to the bar, without a minimum of independent analysis and critical thought (which we in old Europe call "to be able to read".

And, please do not include UK. It does not suffer from the North American disease in this regard.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
You had the text right in front of you, but did not dare to read and interpret it and assess its merit before you knew where it was "published".

Don't take it personally, you are the result of an educational system that does not encourage independent and critical thought.

That is the reason, USA has ended up with Trump as President. half of the population believes everything Fox News says, and considers CNN and MSNBC fake news. The other half believes everything CNN says and considers Fox News crap. Nobody has the ability, willingness or energy to decide any issues for themselves. We see it here on Terb in spades, most members recite mantras instead of thinking. If anybody posts any criticism of any action or policy of the government of USA, it takes about 10 seconds before someone posts that "he hates the US".

My theory is that the educational system is structured to serve an imperial power, people need to think and do what they are told, Sparta instead of the founding fathers dream of Athens. I noticed it myself, when I came to run operations in North America; my subordinates to my surprise would just do what I told them without questioning what I told them. I literally had to coach them on "arguing" with me.

As I have posted before, I spent a fair amount of money to send my children to Europe to get a proper education.
Your points about the educational system are well-meant and perhaps true enough, although I doubt you have any knowledge of where, how or how far I was educated and by whom.

But my issue is with TERB Forums, and a source-request is my way of dealing with a complaint similar to yours. I've had my fill of reading cut-and-pasted articles from who knows where, only to discover — eventually — that the paster had cut-out entire sentences and/or paragraphs that displeased them without any indication, and was still presenting the butchered rump as a prize pig of the hapless author or institution whose name they hadn't the integrity to remove.

And/or they hadn't scrupled to include their own ideas among the quoted words of their source, again without indication, presumably to acquire their borrowed authority. I've resolved not to waste time on paste-ups that may not meet the standard of a primary school essay, and go straight to the original to read whatever catches my attention. It's a rule I've made for myself, and nothing to do with you or this topic in particular.

To my mind, when someone asks others to think about something, they owe them trustworthy source material. And the reader's first step in thinking for themselves, as asked, is to consider and evaluate the material. Any screed the enquirer refuses to attribute properly isn't worth time or thought.

I'm certain that even in Europe a certain amount of class-time is spent on how to do that. All you forgot to include was the link, (what we called in the olden days of my education, the publication information)
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
Your points about the educational system are well-meant and perhaps true enough, although I doubt you have any knowledge of where, how or how far I was educated and by whom.

But my issue is with TERB Forums, and a source-request is my way of dealing with a complaint similar to yours. I've had my fill of reading cut-and-pasted articles from who knows where, only to discover — eventually — that the paster had cut-out entire sentences and/or paragraphs that displeased them without any indication, and was still presenting the butchered rump as a prize pig of the hapless author or institution whose name they hadn't the integrity to remove.

And/or they hadn't scrupled to include their own ideas among the quoted words of their source, again without indication, presumably to acquire their borrowed authority. I've resolved not to waste time on paste-ups that may not meet the standard of a primary school essay, and go straight to the original to read whatever catches my attention. It's a rule I've made for myself, and nothing to do with you or this topic in particular.

To my mind, when someone asks others to think about something, they owe them trustworthy source material. And the reader's first step in thinking for themselves, as asked, is to consider and evaluate the material. Any screed the enquirer refuses to attribute properly isn't worth time or thought.

I'm certain that even in Europe a certain amount of class-time is spent on how to do that. All you forgot to include was the link, (what we called in the olden days of my education, the publication information)
I am disappointed that you do not trust me to post the article, the whole article and nothing but the article. You should know that I have never done any of the dastardly things you mention
 
Last edited:

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
I am disappointed that you do not trust me to post the article, the whole article and nothing but the article. You should know that I have never done any of the dastardly things you mention
As I said, nothing to do with you. It's how I have determined to cope with TERB. You I trust, and you may recall I only asked that you confirm a source I'd found. But instead of confirmation followed by debate on the topic, we got off-track onto 'why should I' and such.

All the other stuff we've since gone back and forth with about education and attribution standards is just distracting from your announced topic. If you had followed the title with your own thoughts and conclusions, we'd likely be debating them now, but as I said, I've made it my rule to comment on secondary sources only when I can see them for myself, and the secondary source was all you posted. Now that I've explained the thinking that led to my decision, I'll leave you to it.

Enjoy.
 

managee

Banned
Jun 19, 2013
1,731
2
0
Only for the weak minded. Educated people have learned to read and interpret a text, and decide on its merit. I might be so bold as to add, that they also invite different viewpoints and opinions.

While it may not be what the North American educational system teaches, there was rational thought and debate before that.
If you were being glib here, this would have been outstanding.

It remains incredibly important to know where a text is published (or sometimes, where it's not able to be published) in order to effectively determine the context of its content.

You drank too much of the Kool Aid or took too many red pills if you're convinced pedigree means nothing when it comes to journalism.

If I read that Trump Obstructed Justice on Breitbart, that means something. If I read Trump Obstructed Justice in the Washington Post, that means something else. if I read Trump Obstructed Justice on a website filled with grammatical errors, in an article where the author uses a pseudonym, that means something else. If I read it on Reddit, it means something else. if I read it on TERB, it means something else...

Context is important.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
If I read that Trump Obstructed Justice on Breitbart, that means something. If I read Trump Obstructed Justice in the Washington Post, that means something else. if I read Trump Obstructed Justice on a website filled with grammatical errors, in an article where the author uses a pseudonym, that means something else. If I read it on Reddit, it means something else. if I read it on TERB, it means something else...

Context is important.
While I agree with you in general, I think you are on a slippery slope to only read something you are likely to agree with. I believe it is important to seek out alternate and conflicting opinions. (not alternate facts).
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,357
4,778
113
As I said, nothing to do with you. It's how I have determined to cope with TERB. You I trust, and you may recall I only asked that you confirm a source I'd found. But instead of confirmation followed by debate on the topic, we got off-track onto 'why should I' and such.

All the other stuff we've since gone back and forth with about education and attribution standards is just distracting from your announced topic. If you had followed the title with your own thoughts and conclusions, we'd likely be debating them now, but as I said, I've made it my rule to comment on secondary sources only when I can see them for myself, and the secondary source was all you posted. Now that I've explained the thinking that led to my decision, I'll leave you to it.

Enjoy.
The reason I generally have not bothered to give the reference to where an article was published, is that the texts I post most often has been lifted from either Counterpunch or Zerohedge, which themselves are collections of articles originally posted elsewhere. You will notice, though, that the articles I post always include an author reference.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts