Cuba Executes Three Charged in Ferry Hijacking

[SlowwHand]

Cuba Executes Men Charged in Hijacking
1 hour, 57 minutes ago


HAVANA - Three men charged with terrorism for hijacking a passenger ferry last week were executed Friday after summary trials, the government reported.

The men were prosecuted Tuesday in summary trials for "very grave acts of terrorism" and given several days to appeal their sentences, according to a statement read on state television.

However, the sentences were upheld both by Cuba's Supreme Tribunal and the ruling Council of State, and were carried out at dawn Friday, the statement said.

Capital punishment in Cuba is always carried out by firing squad. It has been used sparingly in recent years.

Another four men received life sentences, it said.

No one was hurt when the group, reportedly armed with at least one pistol and several knives, seized the ferry and its 50 passengers in Havana Bay early April 2 and ordered the captain to sail to the United States.

Later that day, the 45-foot ferry Baragua ran out of fuel in the high seas of the Florida Straits, and officers on two Cuban Coast Guard patrol boats that chased them there tried to persuade the hijackers to return to the island.

The hijackers allegedly threatened to throw passengers from the boxy, flat-bottomed boat overboard but soon agreed to let the ferry be towed 30 miles back to Cuba's Mariel port for refueling.

After the boat was docked in Mariel, west of Havana, Cuban authorities eventually gained control of the ferry April 3 and arrested the suspects after a quick-thinking French woman hostage jumped into the water to confuse her captors.

The standoff ended with all the hostages, then the suspects, jumping into the water.

The Baragua was hijacked a day after a Cuban passenger plane was hijacked to Key West, Fla., by a man who allegedly threatened to blow up the aircraft with two grenades. The grenades turned out to be fake.

Ten of the Cubans aboard that flight opted to remain in the United States and 19 others asked to go home.

Another Cuban plane was hijacked to Key West less than two weeks earlier.

The hijackings coincided with a crackdown on dissidents in Cuba and rising tensions with the United States.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Cuba Sentences Last of 75 Dissidents
Fri Apr 11, 2:10 AM ET

By ANITA SNOW, Associated Press Writer

HAVANA - The last jail sentences in a crackdown on Cuba's opposition were announced as Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) condemned the campaign as "despicable repression."


The series of trials — none of them lasting more than a day — has been criticized by governments and human rights groups around the world. Cuba's government has said the trials are necessary to save its socialist system from increased hostility from Washington.


The 75 dissidents have received sentences of up to 28 years.


"There has never been anything similar to this in the history of Cuba," said Elizardo Sanchez, whose Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation has monitored the arrests and trials.


Powell called the trials "the most significant act of political repression in decades" and said the United States would ask the Human Rights Commission in Geneva to condemn Fidel Castro (news - web sites)'s government.


"We call on Castro to end this despicable repression and free these prisoners of conscience," he said in a written statement Thursday. "The United States and the international community will be unrelenting in our insistence that Cubans who seek peaceful change be permitted to do so."


Cuba also has faced criticism for the speed of the prosecutions with opponents saying they were carried out when the world's attention was focused on the Iraq (news - web sites) war. But Cuba has denied the charges, saying the arrests came before the start of the fighting.


The four sentences announced Thursday included a 25-year term for dissident physician Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet.


The defendants were accused of receiving money from the U.S. government and working with Washington to undermine the socialist regime.


Tensions between Havana and Washington have increased since U.S. Interests Section Chief James Cason, the top U.S. diplomat in Havana, began assuming a higher profile in his support of the opposition.


Cason denies accusations that the U.S. Interests Section had dissidents on the payroll, saying the mission operates no differently than American embassies in other countries.


Cuban opposition leaders on Thursday urged a further international censure of Fidel Castro's government.


"We call on all democratic governments and organizations of the world — that have not done so already — so to openly reject this wave of repression," read a letter signed by five leaders of the local opposition.


"We direct this call in particular to our brother countries in Latin America, which up to now have not spoken out in this needed censure of the only totalitarian regime" in the region.


Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque defended the quick trials and heavy sentences. "There has been an obsession by the governments of the United States to fabricate an opposition in Cuba, to create a fifth column," he said Wednesday.


Perez Roque also read from a letter written by President Bush (news - web sites) to Biscet, congratulating the doctor — who was sentenced Thursday — for winning the Democracy's People Award from the International Republican Institute in February.


"I find this letter very strange," Perez Roque said, adding that Bush had never written a letter to well-known government doctors and researchers who have developed vaccines against illnesses such as meningitis.





The foreign minister said the dissidents were not charged with criticizing the government, but for receiving American government funds and collaborating with U.S. diplomats.

Perez Roque presented letters and detailed lists of payments he said proved the defendants were getting money from the U.S. government.

For instance, Perez Roque said that in the home of independent journalist Oscar Espinosa Chepe, investigators found evidence that over one year he received $7,154 — a huge sum in a country where an average government salary is $25 a month. A wad of $13,000 in cash allegedly was found stashed in the lining of a jacket.

Espinosa Chepe, who wrote about the Cuban economy for Web sites in Miami, was sentenced to 20 years.

The U.S. Agency for International Development has given more than $20 million since 1997 to non-governmental groups in the United States to support Cuban's opposition movement and promote democracy, human rights and free enterprise on the communist island.

Dissidents who escaped the crackdown vowed to continue their efforts to bring greater freedoms to Cuba.

"This is not the end of the peaceful opposition," said pro-democracy activist Oswaldo Paya.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


Observation:

All you communist-wannabes are free to leave the States at your earliest convenience.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[DinoDoc]

Cuba Executes Three Charged in Ferry Hijacking

If they actually did it, good for Castro at giving out a just sentence.

[SlowwHand]

A ferry hijacking.
That gives "boat people" a whole new slant.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Observation:

All you communist-wannabes are free to leave the States at your earliest convenience.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Observation:

People in the US actually have the right to hold opinions. They can even disagree with yours. If you keep trolling and being insulting, it's going to be hard to keep you on my nearly-exempt list.

So chill, in other words.

[SlowwHand]

Chill? They can have any opinion they want, they're not in Cuba, with the other commies.
Might be nice if they appreciated that fact, just a little.

You made my point.
What a ma-roon.


Uh oh.

[Sava]

Apparantly Slowwhand doesn't respect freedom.

[SlowwHand]

How the **** do you figure?

[Sava]

It's okay for people to express their political views as long as they are consistent with your own.

[Gatekeeper]

So when does the invasion begin?

[SlowwHand]

People can show their ignorance from now until the cows come home.

Some have that as a primary goal.

Let's see.
No government intervention, all liberties intact, but want to proclaim themselves Communist or Socialist.
BIG News Flash!
Makes zilch,zip, notta sense.

But hey, feel free.

[Sava]

Have you even read Karl Marx, or do you think he's the guy with the funny eyebrows?

[SlowwHand]

Karl Marx is dead.

[Sava]

So is George Washington, your point?

My point is that I believe your conception of what Communism is has been skewed. You point to authoritarian style governments as examples, but their very nature goes against everything that Communism stands for. I can call my cat a fish, but that doesn't make him one.

[Arrian]

Sava,

I think the basic nature of man & the requirements of communism are such that communism must be totalitarian & oppressive, or it must at some point cease to be communist.

Clearly, the communist view of human nature differs from mine, and thus they would argue that communism doesn't require oppression.

But so far the only examples we've had to go on were either totalitarian monstrosities or overthrown (thinking of Chile here) before we got to see what they would become.

-Arrian

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Chill? They can have any opinion they want, they're not in Cuba, with the other commies.
Might be nice if they appreciated that fact, just a little.

You made my point.
What a ma-roon.

And hey, in good ol' capitalist Chile, they didn't even get sham trials, or 28 year sentences.

Gee, Castro's a dictator? Who'da thunk it?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Arrian
Sava,

I think the basic nature of man & the requirements of communism are such that communism must be totalitarian & oppressive, or it must at some point cease to be communist.

Clearly, the communist view of human nature differs from mine, and thus they would argue that communism doesn't require oppression.

But so far the only examples we've had to go on were either totalitarian monstrosities or overthrown (thinking of Chile here) before we got to see what they would become.

-Arrian

The basic nature of man is amoral, opportunistic, craven and predatory. (Macchiavelli was a sentimental optimist) The differences with practical communism and practical capitalism is just in the mechanisms of exploitation.

[Menlas]

Originally posted by Arrian
I think the basic nature of man & the requirements of communism are such that communism must be totalitarian & oppressive, or it must at some point cease to be communist.

That's an interesting question...i have always wondered what would have USSR become if Lenin's successor had been Troski, or someone else than Stalin (who appeared to be a dictator of the worse kind). Maybe it would have worked, even if i doubt it...

[SlowwHand]

There isn't ANY communist country that is a barn-burning success story.

If Chile is the best one can offer, that's sad.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Observation:

All you communist-wannabes are free to leave the States at your earliest convenience.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

If freedom of speach and democracy bothers you so much, you can feel free to move to Afghanistan.

[Alvaro]

The USSR would have been a disaster had it been Leon Trotski in control. Stalin was the party secretary, the person who made things happen.

He modernized the country marvelously and with lightning speed it became from the most backwards country east of Greenwich to a super power.

It sure as hell cost alot of lives but Trotski, inspite of being the 'father' of the Red Army, was very agricultulraly minded whilst Stalin was a die-hard industrialist.

Trotski's USSR would have never survived the German onslaught of WW2.

The whole system of government is predictable and similar with regards to the 'old' communists around Lenin and Stalin. Stalin was the right marker as far as militarism went and that is the main reason behind USSR coming out a victor in 1945.

[GePap]

A sad enterprise this: sicne I don;t back the deatj sentence, it does not matter who carries it out. It is also sad that the "trial" went as it did.

I understand why it was done (to scare people into not hijacking any more things) but it was wrong anyway.

[Shi Huangdi]

"And hey, in good ol' capitalist Chile, they didn't even get sham trials, or 28 year sentences."

And Chile relates to the topic, how? Can't you stick to the subject?

"Gee, Castro's a dictator? Who'da thunk it?"

Many left wingers on this forum have put Cuba up on a pedestal, have admire it, and have called it a good model of working communism. Trying to divert attention from the topic at hand by saying "Ya, well country Y is also bad!" is something I would expect from one of this forum's left wingers. But not from you.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"And hey, in good ol' capitalist Chile, they didn't even get sham trials, or 28 year sentences."

And Chile relates to the topic, how? Can't you stick to the subject?

Sorry to inconvenience you, but comparison/contrast are valid analytical techniques.

Sloww tries to make a linkage between communism, the (perfectly fine, as far as I can see) execution of hijackers (trying to flee is one thing, endangering other's lives and holding a knife to the throat of a hostage is another), and repression of political dissidents.

Repression of dissidents is more a matter of the individual leader and leadership style, than the economic or political system.

Gorbachev stayed commie, but massively reduced political repression in the former USSR. The PRC has been going ever more capitalist, but has so far maintained it's repressive policies towards dissidents.

"Gee, Castro's a dictator? Who'da thunk it?"

Many left wingers on this forum have put Cuba up on a pedestal, have admire it, and have called it a good model of working communism. Trying to divert attention from the topic at hand by saying "Ya, well country Y is also bad!" is something I would expect from one of this forum's left wingers. But not from you.

In some ways, Cuba is. Despite the rather ridiculous US trade embargo, Cuba has managed to achieve infant mortality, life expentancy and literacy standards that are first world level, and vastly superior to most of Latinamerica and virtually all the Caribbean states. GDP per capita is abysmal, but the commie "market" screws PPP calculations, so it's hard to conclude that Cuba's GDP per capita is either not as bad, or much worse, than PPP adjusted GDP per capita in many other countries in the region.

To say it's the worker's paradise is bullshit, but to say it's the worst regime in the hemisphere is equally bullshit.

[GePap]

The worst place to live in the area is without a doubt Haiti.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Alvaro
Stalin was the party secretary, the person who made things happen.

He modernized the country marvelously and with lightning speed it became from the most backwards country east of Greenwich to a super power.

He also did it in a very brutal and inefficient way.

It sure as hell cost alot of lives but Trotski, inspite of being the 'father' of the Red Army, was very agricultulraly minded whilst Stalin was a die-hard industrialist.

Actually, Bukharin was the representitive of the peasants. Trotksy's faction was the workerist faction, and workers aren't known for putting forward pro-agriculturalist policies. In order to defeat Trotsky politically, Stalin sided with Bukharin, which means Stalin was backing the agriculturalist policy. Once Trotsky was defeated and exiled, Stalin took Trotsky's industrialization plan, took out the voluntary and worker-controlled aspects and took out the the reasonable time frame.

Trotski's USSR would have never survived the German onslaught of WW2.

It's highly unlikely that Hitler would have even risen to power, since the international Communist movment would have had Trotsky leading it, rather than Stalin. We wouldn't have had the disasters in China, where Stalin as much as orderd the communist part to put it's head on Chiang Kai-Shek's chopping block. We wouldn't have had the Communist Party in Germany ignoring the Nazis, decalring them a flash in a pan, and saying that the real danger was from the social democrats. We wouldn't have had the General Strike in Britain ending in surrender when they had effective control of the country. We wouldn't have had the Communists stabbing the Spanish Revolution in the back. I can't say what would have happened, but the world would be a very different place indeed.

Slowwhand, if someone hijacked the Staaten Island ferry and threated to throw people off, you'd be screaming at the top of your lungs for the death penalty. You're being a hypocrite. You're the guy who demanded that the father of those five salin kids should be tried to, because since he didn't share your righteous indignation, that he must have been in on it. Don't play like you have sympathy for criminals.

For the record, I don't think they should have been executed.

I would also point out that the US is giving money to dissidents in Cuba. Someone is, anyway. There's no way they could have access to the resources they do without someone footing the bill.

[monkspider]

whatever happened to Sloww? Once such a respectable member of the community, now the new Fez.

[PLATO]

I doubt anyone would ever highjack the Staten Island Ferry to get to Cuba. Highjacking a ferry in Cuba to get to the US is a very different scenario. People seeking freedom from oppression should be encouraged and supported in any way possible. The Cuban community in South Florida does this by exercising the political and economic rights that living in the US provides them.

Castro should realize that his time is coming to an end and that his regime will likely only slightly survive him. He could rehape his entire legacy by loosening repression and encouraging reform. The fact that he has taken the response that he has only shows the world how morally bankrupt a form of government he chose for the Cuban people

[Sandman]

Seeing as Trotsky would probably have not executed the bulk of the Red Army officers and would have continued their technological development, I would have expected them to have been more than a match for the Wehrmacht.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO1003
I doubt anyone would ever highjack the Staten Island Ferry to get to Cuba. Highjacking a ferry in Cuba to get to the US is a very different scenario. People seeking freedom from oppression should be encouraged and supported in any way possible.

These people put the lives of fifty people at seious risk. That ferry was not a sea going vessel, and could easily have capsized or sunk, killing many. Those are rough seas with very swift currents, and there are also sharks. Lots of sharks.

I don't agree with the DP, but I think the Cuban government needed to send a message that you don't put others' lives at risk for your own "freedom."

BTW, the "freedom" that most of these people flee for isn't the freedom to critize the government or peasably assemble. It's the same freedom that has Mexican peasants dying in the Sonoran desert as well as trashing the plash up, i.e., the freedom to work in a better economy than the one in which they live. Don't act like it's some noble cause that drives people to flee Cuba. They just want to make more money, like the vast majority of people who come here.

[Propaganda]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Alvaro
Stalin was the party secretary, the person who made things happen.

He modernized the country marvelously and with lightning speed it became from the most backwards country east of Greenwich to a super power.

He also did it in a very brutal and inefficient way.

It sure as hell cost alot of lives but Trotski, inspite of being the 'father' of the Red Army, was very agricultulraly minded whilst Stalin was a die-hard industrialist.

Actually, Bukharin was the representitive of the peasants. Trotksy's faction was the workerist faction, and workers aren't known for putting forward pro-agriculturalist policies. In order to defeat Trotsky politically, Stalin sided with Bukharin, which means Stalin was backing the agriculturalist policy. Once Trotsky was defeated and exiled, Stalin took Trotsky's industrialization plan, took out the voluntary and worker-controlled aspects and took out the the reasonable time frame.

Give me a break. Trotsky was the one looking for alliances. Trotsky's problem was that he had problems with Zinoviev, who wouldn't give him the support. Bukharin, as well. Stalin, on the other hand, wasn't exactly looking for an alliance; he already had support(BTW, yes, at that time Stalin supported continuing Lenin's policy of NEP, but only in the short-term). The fact that Bukharin and Zinoviev fled to him only reinforced him. As for 1929, Trotsky proposed his own plan for socialist construction and was overwhelmingly defeated. Thusly, he was exiled to Mexico, where he made himself a career by selling out Communists("Stalinists" read: Marxist-Leninist or other) to the US and Mexican gov'ts, all so that the US would grant him a visa. His undoing came as a result of this, as the Mexicans got their revenge on him.

For Trotsky, I guess what you reap is really what you sow.

Trotski's USSR would have never survived the German onslaught of WW2.

It's highly unlikely that Hitler would have even risen to power, since the international Communist movment would have had Trotsky leading it, rather than Stalin. We wouldn't have had the disasters in China, where Stalin as much as orderd the communist part to put it's head on Chiang Kai-Shek's chopping block. We wouldn't have had the Communist Party in Germany ignoring the Nazis, decalring them a flash in a pan, and saying that the real danger was from the social democrats. We wouldn't have had the General Strike in Britain ending in surrender when they had effective control of the country. We wouldn't have had the Communists stabbing the Spanish Revolution in the back. I can't say what would have happened, but the world would be a very different place indeed.

Disasters in China? The Communists won, didn't they? . As for Germany, it is doubtful the Communists would have taken it, considering the disaster of 1919(thanks to the Social Democrats). The Nazis had the support of the people anyway, even as early as the late 20s. As for Britain, what would you have proposed? The Spanish Revolution is a difficult subject to discuss(for me, anyway), but we did aid the Republicans there. Also, IMO, the ones who stabbed the Communists in the back were the anarchists.