Che Guevara: kuolemasta 49 vuotta 

Kiitos taas tästä artikkelista Kuosmalle!
Alkuun pitää myöntää että sorruin joskus nuorena idealisoimaan Guevaaraa kun elin valtamedian tiedon varassa mutta sittemmin totuuden valjettua kommunismin ja monen muunkin asian suhteen on tuo idealismin hehku hiipunut ja karu totuus murtautunut esiin.
Laitan tähän nyt suuren määrän tietoa joka ei ole mitenkään positiivista tämän lopulta sionistien ja kommunistien kätyriksi paljastuvan ’vapaustaistelija’-miehen eikä Kuubankaan kannalta. Pohtikoon tätä puolta asioista sitten kukin omalla tahollaan

Che Guevara oli halpa murhaaja
Guevara oli pesunkestävä autoritaarisuuden kannattaja. Kuuban vallankumouksen jälkeen Guevara johti Cabanan vankilaa, missä teloitettiin lähinnä demokraattisia menetelmiä kannattaneita entisiä asetovereita. Che oli siis toisinajattelijoiden likvidoija samaan tyyliin kuin vaikkapa Lavrenti Berija Neuvostoliitossa.
http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/che-guevara-oli-halpa-murhaaja

The Truth About Che Guevara

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/truth-about-che-guevara
The cult of Ernesto Che Guevara is an episode in the moral callousness of our time. Che was a totalitarian. He achieved nothing but disaster. Many of the early leaders of the Cuban Revolution favored a democratic or democratic-socialist direction for the new Cuba. But Che was a mainstay of the hardline pro-Soviet faction, and his faction won.

— After Castro took over Cuba, Guevara took control of La Cabana Fortress prison and oversaw the execution of several hundred people. After this position, he became president of the Cuban national bank and worked to increase trade with the Soviet Union and decrease trade relations with the United States.
His next position was as minister of industry. However, Guevara left this position to attempt to encourage rebellions in other countries. He attempted to convince Bolivians to overthrow their government, but not many people were interested. He was captured by the Bolivian army while attempting to lead a guerrilla troop against them. The army killed him on Oct. 9, 1967 and he has been written about in many books since his death.
https://www.reference.com/history/short-summary-che-guevara-s-life-story-fbbb2cc9f9d2c8e3

Ariel Sharon was Che Guevara’s Cousin — Che Guevera’s mother was Celia Sheinerman, 
daughter of Russian Jewish immigrants to Argentina. According to this account on a Zionist site, translated from an unnamed Russian source, Guevera dedicated himself to Judaism when he learned of his heritage. He visited Israel where he met his first cousin, Ariel Sharon.
Celia De La Serna was born in 1908 into a Buenos Aires religious family of Jewish emigrants from Russia. She was named Celia in memory of her aunt killed during the pogroms. Until age of eighteen, Celia Sheinerman grew up in the closed and stuffy emigrant ghetto, getting a traditional Jewish education. However, upon official maturity, she immediately left the parents’ house and religion, changed her Jewish name and only a year later married Ernesto Guevara Linch, a native of Argentina. A year later, she gave birth to Ernesto. Neither Che nor his four brothers and sisters ever suspected their Jewish roots.
http://henrymakow.com/2016/04/che-guevera-was-jewish.html
http://simplyjews.blogspot.fi/2007/06/believe-it-or-not.html

Cuba: Communism Part of Illuminati Charade — The people work for peanuts in the name of ”equality” and ”social justice” while  leaders like Castro are billionaires and live high on the hog.  Sure, the people get free health care and indoctrination (education) but so what if you live in poverty in a police state? 

According to Nathaniel Weyl,  Ernesto Guevera and Fidel Castro were trained as Soviet agents. The ”revolution” was largely funded and supplied by the Soviet Union. But they couldn’t have succeeded without the complicity of the US, proof that the Cold War was an Illuminati charade.

MAKOWIN HAVAINTOJA KUUBASTA — by Henry Makow Ph.D.: I’ve been to Cuba on vacation. It’s a country with a rich heritage and thriving economy that was frozen in time in 1959 when Castro took power with Soviet help. 
Communism is so dysfunctional that food is in limited supply in Cuba. 
RUOKAA ON NIUKASTI, POLIITTISIA OIKEUKSIA EI LAINKAAN. KOULUTUS ON AIVOPESUA … KAIKKI VAURAUS MENEE KOMMUNISTISELLE ELIITILLE JA SALAINEN POLIISI VALVOO ETTÄ KANSA TUKKII SUUNSA, JOKAINEN JOKA EI HYVÄKSY SYSTEEMIÄ JOUTUU VANKILAAN
Generally, the food is what you’d expect in a submarine a month from port. Trust me to mention food first! Citizens also have no political rights. 
Yes, the people are all equal — dirt poor.  Yes, they get free education and health care but education is indoctrination and people cannot toil for nothing if they are sick. Their MD’s get $20 a month. The people are paid in platitudes. 
Essentially, you have a prosperous island (oil, sugar, nickel, tobacco, coffee) with a large labor force that works for a pittance. All the wealth seems to flow to the Communist nomenklatura and their sponsors.  Secret police are everywhere and no one can say a word against the regime. 
When I asked a cab driver about the revolution, he immediately clammed up. Anyone who doesn’t accept the Communist version of reality is subject to imprisonment. 

Herberto Padillo, a poet who was tortured for ”deviationism” said after his escape to the US: ”I have lived in frightening laboratories for social experimentation, spaces walled by test tubes, where the same experiment always ended with the same result: tyranny. I have learned something of the value of freedom.” (”And the Russians Stayed” Carbonell, p. 295)  

 JFK dropped the ball when he failed to invade Cuba during the Bay of Pigs. It’s absurd that the US was ”defending freedom” in Vietnam but did nothing to help an enslaved population of seven million people 90 miles from its shore. I doubt if the CIA seriously intended the Bay of Pigs invasion to succeed. While I find Communism repugnant, I support Obama’s lifting of sanctions because this should help the average Cuban.   
Fidel Castro came to power in Cuba because of the covert help of New World orderlies in the US State Dept. and mass media. They cut off arm sales to Batista while at the same time supplying Castro, partly by Russian submarines. This told the Cuban military which way the wind was blowing and they quietly defected.

This is the conclusion of Nataniel Weyl in ”Red Star Over Cuba” (1962, p.152.) Weyl was a Communist in the 1930’s and knew the top leaders of the Cuban Communist Party. He actually worked for the central bankers at one time, as Latin American research chief for the Federal Reserve System. He is one of many Jews who recognized Communism as a dangerous satanic ruse and devoted his life to exposing Comintern subversion in Latin America. 
Rothschild-dominated Freemasonry was probably also a factor. Communism is a Masonic order; both Castro and Guevara were Masons. Other Freemasons include Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin and most Presidents incl. Barack Obama. Obviously Castro was installed by the Masons.  Freemasonry is big in Cuba: there is a 15- story Grand Lodge of Cuba HQ in Havana. A compass and square is on top of the globe.
 
WHY THE MEDIA (AND EDUCATION) SOFT-PEDAL COMMUNISM (For New Readers) 
KOMMUNISTIT AINA PYRKIVÄT MAAILMAN HALLINTAAN ’PALVELLAKSEEN KANSAA’ … VALHE TOIMII KUN MEDIA JA HALLINTO ON PANKKIIRIEN KÄSISSÄ, SAMOJEN JOTKA SPONSOROIVAT KOMMUNISMIA.

Communists always portray their demented drive for world domination in terms of serving the people. Not surprisingly, many suckers swallow this bait. (I did.) But, why do these dupes include the US State Dept. and media establishment? The US government, media and most corporations are controlled by the central banking cartel, i.e. the Rothschilds, Warburgs, Rockefellers etc. These are the same people who sponsored Communism.
According to Humberto Fantova’s ”Che! Hollywood’s Favorite Tyrant”, Guevara was complicit in the execution of 10,000 Cubans after the revolution: He was ”a bloodthirsty executioner, a military bumbler, a coward, and a hypocrite…it’s no exaggeration to state that Che… was the godfather of modern terrorism. And yet Che’s followers naively swallow Castro’s historical revisionism. They are classic ”useful idiots.” the name Stalin gave to foolish Westerners who parroted his lies…”

Marxism’s role is to destroy traditional values and individual freedoms. Now that the work has been done in Latin America, it is time to transcend over to a ”benevolent” new world order semi-dictatorship, with capitalism for the elite and social marxism for the poor, much like China. Move over Castro, here comes a Cuban Trudeau. 

http://henrymakow.com/the_death_wish_of_western_civi.html

Cuba is a Model for the NWO — KUUBA ON NWO:N MALLIMAA
The April 6, 2015 cover of Time magazine showed a picture of a dilapidated house in Havana, with the question ”Cuba: What Will Change When The Americans Arrive?” 

Here’s what I think: Nothing will change in Cuba because Castro’s Cuba is more advanced [in the NWO] than the U.S. 

Actually, Americans have much to learn from Castro’s Cuba. No wonder David Rockefeller and other CFR honchos describe Castro’s Cuba as ”a model to follow.”[1]

What can Americans learn from Castro’s Cuba? Among other things, they can learn how to destroy the middle class. For many decades, the CFR conspirators have been destroying the American middle class. Well, Castro did it in Cuba in just a few years.
— MITÄ VOIMME OPPIA CASTRON KUUBASTA? : KUINKA KESKILUOKKA TUHOTAAN. EI IHME ETTÄ ROCKEFELLERIT JA CFR PITÄVÄT SITÄ MALLINA JOTA TULEE SEURATA: KAPITALISMIN LUKSUSTA ELIITILLE JA MARXISMIA KÖYHILLE.
http://henrymakow.com/2016/04/Cuba-is-a-model-for-the-NWO.html

Joten eipä ole ihme kun ’NWO-Obama’ ylistää Kuubaa sen saavutuksista:
”Yhdysvallat tunnustaa edistyksen, jonka Kuuba on tehnyt kansakuntana, sen suunnattoman suuret saavutukset koulutuksessa ja terveydenhoidossa. Ja mikä kenties tärkeintä, minä vahvistan, että Kuuban kohtalosta ei päätä Yhdysvallat tai mikään muukaan kansakunta. Kuuba on täysivaltainen ja omaa oikeutetusti suuren ylpeyden, ja Kuuban tulevaisuudesta päättävät kuubalaiset, eivät ketkään muut.” (presidentti Barack Obama, lehdistökonferenssi [yhdessä Kuuban presidentin Raul Castron kanssa] Havanna 21.3.2016)

Valtaistuimella ei istu USA, eika eksytykseksi rakennettu feikki-israel-juutalaiset. Kaikilla ihmiskuntaa alistavilla psykopaateilla on valtioiden nimesta riippumatta vain yksi jumala – Vatikaani ja City of London!

Fidel Castro: how a Jesuit asset is manufactured
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1981/eirv08n48-19811215/eirv08n48-19811215_036-fidel_castro_how_a_jesuit_asset.pdf

Nathalie Cardone: Comandante CHE Hasta Siempre: 🙂

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSRVtlTwFs8

Muchas gracias, M. Harhama. Tuota en ollut aikaisemmin nähnyt. Nathalie Cardone on mieluisa tuttavuus.

Vaatimattomaksi vastalahjaksi otteita El Chen YK-puheesta vuodelta 1964:
(…)
The delegation of Cuba to this Assembly, first of all, is pleased to fulfill the agreeable duty of welcoming the addition of three new nations to the important number of those that discuss the problems of the world here. We therefore greet, in the persons of their presidents and prime ministers, the peoples of Zambia, Malawi and Malta, and express the hope that from the outset these countries will be added to the group of Nonaligned countries that struggle against imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism.

We also wish to convey our congratulations to the president of this Assembly [Alex Quaison-Sackey of Ghana], whose elevation to so high a post is of special significance since it reflects this new historic stage of resounding triumphs for the peoples of Africa, who up until recently were subject to the colonial system of imperialism. Today, in their immense majority these peoples have become sovereign states through the legitimate exercise of their self-determination. The final hour of colonialism has struck, and millions of inhabitants of Africa, Asia and Latin America rise to meet a new life and demand their unrestricted right to self-determination and to the independent development of their nations.
(…)
(…) Imperialism wants to turn this meeting into a pointless oratorical tournament, instead of solving the serious problems of the world. We must prevent it from doing so. (…)

(…) our country is one of the most constant points of friction. It is one of the places where the principles upholding the right of small countries to sovereignty are put to the test day by day, minute by minute. At the same time our country is one of the trenches of freedom in the world, situated a few steps away from U.S. imperialism, showing by its actions, its daily example, that in the present conditions of humanity the peoples can liberate themselves and can keep themselves free.

Of course, there now exists a socialist camp that becomes stronger day by day and has more powerful weapons of struggle. But additional conditions are required for survival: the maintenance of internal unity, faith in one’s own destiny, and the irrevocable decision to fight to the death for the defense of one’s country and revolution. These conditions, distinguished delegates, exist in Cuba.

(…) imperialism, particularly U.S. imperialism, has attempted to make the world believe that peaceful coexistence is the exclusive right of the earth’s great powers. We say here what our president said in Cairo, and what later was expressed in the declaration of the Second Conference of Heads of State or Government of Nonaligned Countries: that peaceful coexistence cannot be limited to the powerful countries if we want to ensure world peace. Peaceful coexistence must be exercised among all states, regardless of size, regardless of the previous historical relations that linked them, and regardless of the problems that may arise among some of them at a given moment.

At present, the type of peaceful coexistence to which we aspire is often violated. Merely because the Kingdom of Cambodia maintained a neutral attitude and did not bow to the machinations of U.S. imperialism, it has been subjected to all kinds of treacherous and brutal attacks from the Yankee bases in South Vietnam.

Laos, a divided country, has also been the object of imperialist aggression of every kind. Its people have been massacred from the air. The conventions concluded at Geneva have been violated, and part of its territory is in constant danger of cowardly attacks by imperialist forces.

The Democratic Republic of Vietnam knows all these histories of aggression as do few nations on earth. It has once again seen its frontier violated, has seen enemy bombers and fighter planes attack its installations and U.S. warships, violating territorial waters, attack its naval posts. At this time, the threat hangs over the Democratic Republic of Vietnam that the U.S. war makers may openly extend into its territory the war that for many years they have been waging against the people of South Vietnam. The Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China have given serious warnings to the United States. We are faced with a case in which world peace is in danger and, moreover, the lives of millions of human beings in this part of Asia are constantly threatened and subjected to the whim of the U.S. invader.
(…)
(…) imperialism attempts to impose its version of what coexistence should be. It is the oppressed peoples in alliance with the socialist camp that must show them what true coexistence is, and it is the obligation of the United Nations to support them.

We must also state that it is not only in relations among sovereign states that the concept of peaceful coexistence needs to be precisely defined. As Marxists we have maintained that peaceful coexistence among nations does not encompass coexistence between the exploiters and the exploited, between the oppressors and the oppressed. Furthermore, the right to full independence from all forms of colonial oppression is a fundamental principle of this organization. That is why we express our solidarity with the colonial peoples of so-called Portuguese Guinea, Angola and Mozambique, who have been massacred for the crime of demanding their freedom. And we are prepared to help them to the extent of our ability in accordance with the Cairo declaration.

We express our solidarity with the people of Puerto Rico and their great leader, Pedro Albizu Campos, who, in another act of hypocrisy, has been set free at the age of 72, almost unable to speak, paralyzed, after spending a lifetime in jail. Albizu Campos is a symbol of the as yet unfree but indomitable Latin America. Years and years of prison, almost unbearable pressures in jail, mental torture, solitude, total isolation from his people and his family, the insolence of the conqueror and its lackeys in the land of his birth — nothing broke his will. The delegation of Cuba, on behalf of its people, pays a tribute of admiration and gratitude to a patriot who confers honor upon our America.

The United States for many years has tried to convert Puerto Rico into a model of hybrid culture: the Spanish language with English inflections, the Spanish language with hinges on its backbone — the better to bow down before the Yankee soldier. Puerto Rican soldiers have been used as cannon fodder in imperialist wars, as in Korea, and have even been made to fire at their own brothers, as in the massacre perpetrated by the U.S. Army a few months ago against the unarmed people of Panama — one of the most recent crimes carried out by Yankee imperialism. And yet, despite this assault on their will and their historical destiny, the people of Puerto Rico have preserved their culture, their Latin character, their national feelings, which in themselves give proof of the implacable desire for independence lying within the masses on that Latin American island. We must also warn that the principle of peaceful coexistence does not encompass the right to mock the will of the peoples, as is happening in the case of so-called British Guiana. There the government of Prime Minister Cheddi Jagan has been the victim of every kind of pressure and maneuver, and independence has been delayed to gain time to find ways to flout the people’s will and guarantee the docility of a new government, placed in power by covert means, in order to grant a castrated freedom to this country of the Americas. Whatever roads Guiana may be compelled to follow to obtain independence, the moral and militant support of Cuba goes to its people.[15]
(…)
I would like to refer specifically to the painful case of the Congo, unique in the history of the modern world, which shows how, with absolute impunity, with the most insolent cynicism, the rights of peoples can be flouted. The direct reason for all this is the enormous wealth of the Congo, which the imperialist countries want to keep under their control. In the speech he made during his first visit to the United Nations, compañero Fidel Castro observed that the whole problem of coexistence among peoples boils down to the wrongful appropriation of other peoples’ wealth. He made the following statement: “End the philosophy of plunder and the philosophy of war will be ended as well.”

But the philosophy of plunder has not only not been ended, it is stronger than ever. And that is why those who used the name of the United Nations to commit the murder of Lumumba are today, in the name of the defense of the white race, murdering thousands of Congolese. How can we forget the betrayal of the hope that Patrice Lumumba placed in the United Nations? How can we forget the machinations and maneuvers that followed in the wake of the occupation of that country by UN troops, under whose auspices the assassins of this great African patriot acted with impunity? How can we forget, distinguished delegates, that the one who flouted the authority of the UN in the Congo — and not exactly for patriotic reasons, but rather by virtue of conflicts between imperialists — was Moise Tshombe, who initiated the secession of Katanga with Belgian support? And how can one justify, how can one explain, that at the end of all the United Nations’ activities there, Tshombe, dislodged from Katanga, should return as lord and master of the Congo? Who can deny the sad role that the imperialists compelled the United Nations to play?
(…)
All free men of the world must be prepared to avenge the crime of the Congo. Perhaps many of those soldiers, who were turned into sub-humans by imperialist machinery, believe in good faith that they are defending the rights of a superior race. In this Assembly, however, those peoples whose skins are darkened by a different sun, colored by different pigments, constitute the majority. And they fully and clearly understand that the difference between men does not lie in the color of their skin, but in the forms of ownership of the means of production, in the relations of production. The Cuban delegation extends greetings to the peoples of Southern Rhodesia and South-West Africa, oppressed by white colonialist minorities; to the peoples of Basutoland, Bechuanaland, Swaziland, French Somaliland, the Arabs of Palestine, Aden and the Protectorates, Oman; and to all peoples in conflict with imperialism and colonialism. We reaffirm our support to them.
(…)
In adding our voice to that of all the peoples of the world who ask for general and complete disarmament, the destruction of all nuclear arsenals, the complete halt to the building of new thermonuclear devices and of nuclear tests of any kind, we believe it necessary to also stress that the territorial integrity of nations must be respected and the armed hand of imperialism held back, for it is no less dangerous when it uses only conventional weapons. Those who murdered thousands of defenseless citizens of the Congo did not use the atomic bomb. They used conventional weapons. Conventional weapons have also been used by imperialism, causing so many deaths.

Even if the measures advocated here were to become effective and make it unnecessary to mention it, we must point out that we cannot adhere to any regional pact for denuclearization so long as the United States maintains aggressive bases on our own territory, in Puerto Rico, Panama and in other Latin American states where it feels it has the right to place both conventional and nuclear weapons without any restrictions. We feel that we must be able to provide for our own defense in the light of the recent resolution of the Organization of American States against Cuba, on the basis of which an attack may be carried out invoking the Rio Treaty. If the conference to which we have just referred were to achieve all these objectives — which, unfortunately, would be difficult — we believe it would be the most important one in the history of humanity. To ensure this it would be necessary for the People’s Republic of China to be represented, and that is why a conference of this type must be held. But it would be much simpler for the peoples of the world to recognize the undeniable truth of the existence of the People’s Republic of China, whose government is the sole representative of its people, and to give it the seat it deserves, which is, at present, usurped by the gang that controls the province of Taiwan, with U.S. support.
(…)
We must repudiate energetically the “two Chinas” plot. The Chiang Kai-shek gang of Taiwan cannot remain in the United Nations. What we are dealing with, we repeat, is the expulsion of the usurper and the installation of the legitimate representative of the Chinese people.

We also warn against the U.S. Government’s insistence on presenting the problem of the legitimate representation of China in the UN as an “important question,” in order to impose a requirement of a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. The admission of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations is, in fact, an important question for the entire world, but not for the machinery of the United Nations, where it must constitute a mere question of procedure. In this way justice will be done. Almost as important as attaining justice, however, would be the demonstration, once and for all, that this august Assembly has eyes to see, ears to hear, tongues to speak with and sound criteria for making its decisions. The proliferation of nuclear weapons among the member states of NATO, and especially the possession of these devices of mass destruction by the Federal Republic of Germany, would make the possibility of an agreement on disarmament even more remote, and linked to such an agreement is the problem of the peaceful reunification of Germany. So long as there is no clear understanding, the existence of two Germanys must be recognized: that of the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic. The German problem can be solved only with the direct participation in negotiations of the German Democratic Republic with full rights. We shall only touch on the questions of economic development and international trade that are broadly represented in the agenda. In this very year of 1964 the Geneva conference was held at which a multitude of matters related to these aspects of international relations were dealt with. The warnings and forecasts of our delegation were fully confirmed, to the misfortune of the economically dependent countries.

We wish only to point out that insofar as Cuba is concerned, the United States of America has not implemented the explicit recommendations of that conference, and recently the U.S. Government also prohibited the sale of medicines to Cuba. By doing so it divested itself, once and for all, of the mask of humanitarianism with which it attempted to disguise the aggressive nature of its blockade against the people of Cuba.
(…)
So long as the economically dependent peoples do not free themselves from the capitalist markets and, in a firm bloc with the socialist countries, impose new relations between the exploited and the exploiters, there will be no solid economic development. In certain cases there will be retrogression, in which the weak countries will fall under the political domination of the imperialists and colonialists.

Finally, distinguished delegates, it must be made clear that in the area of the Caribbean, maneuvers and preparations for aggression against Cuba are taking place, on the coasts of Nicaragua above all, in Costa Rica aswell, in the Panama Canal Zone, on Vieques Island in Puerto Rico, in Florida and possibly in other parts of U.S. territory and perhaps also in Honduras. In these places Cuban mercenaries are training, as well as mercenaries of other nationalities, with a purpose that cannot be the most peaceful one. After a big scandal, the government of Costa Rica — it is said — has ordered the elimination of all training camps of Cuban exiles in that country.

No-one knows whether this position is sincere, or whether it is a simple alibi because the mercenaries training there were about to commit some misdeed. We hope that full cognizance will be taken of the real existence of bases for aggression, which we denounced long ago, and that the world will ponder the international responsibility of the government of a country that authorizes and facilitates the training of mercenaries to attack Cuba. We should note that news of the training of mercenaries in different parts in the Caribbean and the participation of the U.S. Government in such acts is presented as completely natural in the newspapers in the United States. We know of no Latin American voice that has officially protested this. This shows the cynicism with which the U.S. Government moves its pawns.
(…)
As is well known, after the tremendous commotion of the so-called Caribbean crisis, the United States undertook certain commitments with the Soviet Union. These culminated in the withdrawal of certain types of weapons that the continued acts of aggression of the United States — such as the mercenary attack at Playa Girón and threats of invasion against our homeland — had compelled us to install in Cuba as an act of legitimate and essential defense.

The United States, furthermore, tried to get the UN to inspect our territory. But we emphatically refuse, since Cuba does not recognize the right of the United States, or of anyone else in the world, to determine the type of weapons Cuba may have within its borders.

In this connection, we would abide only by multilateral agreements, with equal obligations for all the parties concerned. As Fidel Castro has said: “So long as the concept of sovereignty exists as the prerogative of nations and of independent peoples, as a right of all peoples, we will not accept the exclusion of our people from that right. So long as the world is governed by these principles, so long as the world is governed by those concepts that have universal validity because they are universally accepted and recognized by the peoples, we will not accept the attempt to deprive us of any of those rights, and we will renounce none of those rights.” The Secretary-General of the United Nations, U Thant, understood our reasons. Nevertheless, the United States attempted to establish a new prerogative, an arbitrary and illegal one: that of violating the airspace of a small country. Thus, we see flying over our country U-2 aircraft and other types of spy planes that, with complete impunity, fly over our airspace. We have made all the necessary warnings for the violations of our airspace to cease, as well as for a halt to the provocations of the U.S. Navy against our sentry posts in the zone of Guantánamo, the buzzing by aircraft of our ships or the ships of other nationalities in international waters, the pirate attacks against ships sailing under different flags, and the infiltration of spies, saboteurs and weapons onto our island.
(…)
If in any assembly Cuba assumes obligations of a collective nature, it will fulfill them to the letter. So long as this does not happen, Cuba maintains all its rights, just as any other nation. In the face of the demands of imperialism, our prime minister laid out the five points necessary for the existence of a secure peace in the Caribbean. They are:
1. A halt to the economic blockade and all economic and trade pressures by the United States, in all parts of the world, against our country.
2. A halt to all subversive activities, launching and landing of weap- ons and explosives by air and sea, organization of mercenary invasions, infiltration of spies and saboteurs, acts all carried out from the territory of the United States and some accomplice countries.
3. A halt to pirate attacks carried out from existing bases in the United States and Puerto Rico.
4. A halt to all the violations of our airspace and our territorial waters by U.S. aircraft and warships.
5. Withdrawal from the Guantánamo naval base and return of the Cuban territory occupied by the United States.”
(…)
Forty-seven countries meeting at the Second Conference of Heads of State or Government of Nonaligned Countries in Cairo unanimously agreed:

Noting with concern that foreign military bases are in practice a means of bringing pressure on nations and retarding their emancipation and development, based on their own ideological, political, economic and cultural ideas, the conference declares its unreserved support to the countries that are seeking to secure the elimination of foreign bases from their territory and calls upon all states maintaining troops and bases in other countries to remove them immediately. The conference considers that the maintenance at Guantánamo (Cuba) of a military base of the United States of America, in defiance of the will of the government and people of Cuba and in defiance of the provisions embodied in the declaration of the Belgrade conference, constitutes a violation of Cuba’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Noting that the Cuban Government expresses its readiness to settle its dispute over the base at Guantánamo with the United States of America on an equal footing, the conference urges the U.S. Government to open negotiations with the Cuban Government to evacuate their base.

The government of the United States has not responded to this request of the Cairo conference and is attempting to maintain indefinitely by force its occupation of a piece of our territory, from which it carries out acts of aggression such as those detailed earlier.

The Organization of American States — which the people also call the U.S. Ministry of Colonies — condemned us “energetically,” even though it had just excluded us from its midst, ordering its members to break off diplomatic and trade relations with Cuba. The OAS authorized aggression against our country at any time and under any pretext, violating the most fundamental international laws, completely disregarding the United Nations. Uruguay, Bolivia, Chile and Mexico opposed that measure, and the government of the United States of Mexico refused to comply with the sanctions that had been approved. Since then we have had no relations with any Latin American countries except Mexico, and this fulfills one of the necessary conditions for direct aggression by imperialism.

We want to make clear once again that our concern for Latin America is based on the ties that unite us: the language we speak, the culture we maintain, and the common master we had. We have no other reason for desiring the liberation of Latin America from the U.S. colonial yoke. If any of the Latin American countries here decide to reestablish relations with Cuba, we would be willing to do so on the basis of equality, and without viewing that recognition of Cuba as a free country in the world to be a gift to our government. We won that recognition with our blood in the days of the liberation struggle. We acquired it with our blood in the defense of our shores against the Yankee invasion.

Although we reject any accusations against us of interference in the internal affairs of other countries, we cannot deny that we sympathize with those people who strive for their freedom. We must fulfill the obligation of our government and people to state clearly and categorically to the world that we morally support and stand in solidarity with peoples who struggle anywhere in the world to make a reality of the rights of full sovereignty proclaimed in the UN Charter.

It is the United States that intervenes. It has done so historically in Latin America. Since the end of the last century Cuba has experienced this truth; but it has been experienced, too, by Venezuela, Nicaragua, Central America in general, Mexico, Haiti and the Dominican Republic. In recent years, apart from our people, Panama has experienced direct aggression, where the marines in the Canal Zone opened fire in cold blood against the defenseless people; the Dominican Republic, whose coast was violated by the Yankee fleet to avoid an outbreak of the just fury of the people after the death of Trujillo; and Colombia, whose capital was taken by assault as a result of a rebellion provoked by the assassination of Gaitán. Covert interventions are carried out through military missions that participate in internal repression, organizing forces designed for that purpose in many countries, and also in coups d’état, which have been repeated so frequently on the Latin American continent during recent years. Concretely, U.S. forces intervened in the repression of the peoples of Venezuela, Colombia and Guatemala, who fought with weapons for their freedom. In Venezuela, not only do U.S. forces advise the army and the police, but they also direct acts of genocide carried out from the air against the peasant population in vast insurgent areas. And the Yankee companies operating there exert pressures of every kind to increase direct interference. The imperialists are preparing to repress the peoples of the Americas and are establishing an International of Crime.

The United States intervenes in Latin America invoking the defense of free institutions. The time will come when this Assembly will acquire greater maturity and demand of the U.S. Government guarantees for the life of the blacks and Latin Americans who live in that country, most of them U.S. citizens by origin or adoption.

Those who kill their own children and discriminate daily against them because of the color of their skin; those who let the murderers of blacks remain free, protecting them, and furthermore punishing the black population because they demand their legitimate rights as free men — how can those who do this consider themselves guardians of freedom? We understand that today the Assembly is not in a position to ask for explanations of these acts. It must be clearly established, however, that the government of the United States is not the champion of freedom, but rather the perpetrator of exploitation and oppression against the peoples of the world and against a large part of its own population.
(…)
Cuba, distinguished delegates, a free and sovereign state with no chains binding it to anyone, with no foreign investments on its territory, with no proconsuls directing its policy, can speak with its head held high in this Assembly and can demonstrate the justice of the phrase by which it has been baptized: “Free Territory of the Americas.” Our example will bear fruit in the continent, as it is already doing to a certain extent in Guatemala, Colombia and Venezuela.

There is no small enemy nor insignificant force, because no longer are there isolated peoples. As the Second Declaration of Havana states:

No nation in Latin America is weak — because each forms part of a family of 200 million brothers, who suffer the same miseries, who harbor the same sentiments, who have the same enemy, who dream about the same better future, and who count upon the solidarity of all honest men and women throughout the world…

This epic before us is going to be written by the hungry Indian masses, the peasants without land, the exploited workers. It is going to be written by the progressive masses, the honest and brilliant intellectuals, who so greatly abound in our suffering Latin American lands. Struggles of masses and ideas. An epic that will be carried forward by our peoples, mistreated and scorned by imperialism; our people, unreckoned with until today, who are now beginning to shake off their slumber. Imperialism considered us a weak and submissive flock; and now it begins to be terrified of that flock; a gigantic flock of 200 million Latin Americans in whom Yankee monopoly capitalism now sees its gravediggers…

But now from one end of the continent to the other they are signaling with clarity that the hour has come — the hour of their vindication. Now this anonymous mass, this America of color, somber, taciturn America, which all over the continent sings with the same sadness and disillusionment, now this mass is beginning to enter definitively into its own history, is beginning to write it with its own blood, is beginning to suffer and die for it.

Because now in the mountains and fields of America, on its flatlands and in its jungles, in the wilderness or in the traffic of cities, on the banks of its great oceans or rivers, this world is beginning to tremble. Anxious hands are stretched forth, ready to die for what is theirs, to win those rights that were laughed at by one and all for 500 years. Yes, now history will have to take the poor of America into account, the exploited and spurned of America, who have decided to begin writing their history for themselves for all time. Already they can be seen on the roads, on foot, day after day, in endless march of hundreds of kilometers to the governmental “eminences,” there to obtain their rights.

Already they can be seen armed with stones, sticks, machetes, in one direction and another, each day, occupying lands, sinking hooks into the land that belongs to them and defending it with their lives. They can be seen carrying signs, slogans, flags; letting them flap in the mountain or prairie winds. And the wave of anger, of demands for justice, of claims for rights trampled underfoot, which is beginning to sweep the lands of Latin America, will not stop. That wave will swell with every passing day. For that wave is composed of the greatest number, the majorities in every respect, those whose labor amasses the wealth and turns the wheels of history. Now they are awakening from the long, brutalizing sleep to which they had been subjected.

For this great mass of humanity has said, “Enough!” and has begun to march. And their march of giants will not be halted until they conquer true independence — for which they have vainly died more than once. Today, however, those who die will die like the Cubans at Playa Girón. They will die for their own true and never-to-be-surrendered independence.
(…)
That cry is: Patria o muerte!

Che Guevaran jäähyväiskirje Fidel Castrolle 1.4.1965

Fidel:
At this moment I remember many things: when I met you in Maria Antonia’s house, when you proposed I come along, all the tensions involved in the preparations. One day they came by and asked who should be notified in case of death, and the real possibility of it struck us all. Later we knew it was true, that in a revolution one wins or dies (if it is a real one). Many comrades fell along the way to victory.

Today everything has a less dramatic tone, because we are more mature, but the event repeats itself. I feel that I have fulfilled the part of my duty that tied me to the Cuban revolution in its territory, and I say farewell to you, to the comrades, to your people, who now are mine.

I formally resign my positions in the leadership of the party, my post as minister, my rank of commander, and my Cuban citizenship. Nothing legal binds me to Cuba. The only ties are of another nature — those that cannot be broken as can appointments to posts.

Reviewing my past life, I believe I have worked with sufficient integrity and dedication to consolidate the revolutionary triumph. My only serious failing was not having had more confidence in you from the first moments in the Sierra Maestra, and not having understood quickly enough your qualities as a leader and a revolutionary.

I have lived magnificent days, and at your side I felt the pride of belonging to our people in the brilliant yet sad days of the Caribbean [Missile] crisis. Seldom has a statesman been more brilliant as you were in those days. I am also proud of having followed you without hesitation, of having identified with your way of thinking and of seeing and appraising dangers and principles.

Other nations of the world summon my modest efforts of assistance. I can do that which is denied you due to your responsibility as the head of Cuba, and the time has come for us to part.

You should know that I do so with a mixture of joy and sorrow. I leave here the purest of my hopes as a builder and the dearest of those I hold dear. And I leave a people who received me as a son. That wounds a part of my spirit. I carry to new battlefronts the faith that you taught me, the revolutionary spirit of my people, the feeling of fulfilling the most sacred of duties: to fight against imperialism wherever it may be. This is a source of strength, and more than heals the deepest of wounds.

I state once more that I free Cuba from all responsibility, except that which stems from its example. If my final hour finds me under other skies, my last thought will be of this people and especially of you. I am grateful for your teaching and your example, to which I shall try to be faithful up to the final consequences of my acts.

I have always been identified with the foreign policy of our revolution, and I continue to be. Wherever I am, I will feel the responsibility of being a Cuban revolutionary, and I shall behave as such. I am not sorry that I leave nothing material to my wife and children; I am happy it is that way. I ask nothing for them, as the state will provide them with enough to live on and receive an education.

I would have many things to say to you and to our people, but I feel they are unnecessary. Words cannot express what I would like them to, and there is no point in scribbling pages.

Fidel Castron muistopuhe Che Guevarasta 18.10.1967

I first met Che one day in July or August 1955. And in one night — as he recalls in his account — he became one of the future Granma expeditionaries, although at that time the expedition possessed neither ship, nor arms, nor troops. That was how, together with Raúl, Che became one of the first two on the Granma list.

Twelve years have passed since then; they have been 12 years filled with struggle and historical significance. During this time death has cut down many brave and invaluable lives. But at the same time, throughout those years of our revolution, extraordinary persons have arisen, forged from among the people of the revolution, and between them, bonds of affection and friendship have emerged that surpass all possible description.

Tonight we are meeting to try to express, in some degree, our feelings toward one who was among the closest, among the most admired, among the most beloved, and, without a doubt, the most extraordinary of our revolutionary comrades. We are here to express our feelings for him and for the heroes who have fought with him and fallen with him, his internationalist army that has been writing a glorious and indelible page of history.

Che was one of those people who was liked immediately, for his simplicity, his character, his naturalness, his comradely attitude, his personality, his originality, even when one had not yet learned of his other characteristics and unique virtues.

In those first days he was our troop doctor, and so the bonds of friendship and warm feelings for him were ever increasing. He was filled with a profound spirit of hatred and contempt for imperialism, not only because his political education was already considerably developed, but also because, shortly before, he had had the opportunity of witnessing the criminal imperialist intervention in Guatemala through the mercenaries who aborted the revolution in that country. – A person like Che did not require elaborate arguments. It was sufficient for him to know Cuba was in a similar situation and that there were people determined to struggle against that situation, arms in hand. It was sufficient for him to know that those people were inspired by genuinely revolutionary and patriotic ideals. That was more than enough.

One day, at the end of November 1956, he set out on the expedition toward Cuba with us. I recall that the trip was very hard for him, since, because of the circumstances under which it was necessary to organize the departure, he could not even provide himself with the medicine he needed. Throughout the trip, he suffered from a severe attack of asthma, with nothing to alleviate it, but also without ever complaining. – We arrived, set out on our first march, suffered our first setback, and at the end of some weeks, as you all know, a group of those Granma expeditionaries who had survived was able to reunite. Che continued to be the doctor of our group.

We came through the first battle victorious, and Che was already a soldier of our troop; at the same time he was still our doctor. We came through the second victorious battle and Che was not only a soldier, but the most outstanding soldier in that battle, carrying out for the first time one of those singular feats that characterized him in all military action. Our forces continued to develop and we soon faced another battle of extraordinary importance. – The situation was difficult. The information we had was erroneous in many respects. We were going to attack in full daylight — at dawn — a strongly defended, well-armed position at the edge of the sea. Enemy troops were at our rear, not very far, and in that confused situation it was necessary to ask people to make a supreme effort.

Comrade Juan Almeida had taken on one of the most difficult missions, but one of the flanks remained completely without forces — one of the flanks was left without an attacking force, placing the operation in danger. At that moment, Che, who was still functioning as our doctor, asked for three or four men, among them one with a machine gun, and in a matter of seconds set off rapidly to assume the mission of attack from that direction. – On that occasion he was not only an outstanding combatant but also an outstanding doctor, attending the wounded comrades and, at the same time, attending the wounded enemy soldiers.

After all the weapons had been captured and it became necessary to abandon that position, undertaking a long return march under the harassment of various enemy forces, someone had to stay behind with the wounded, and it was Che who did so. Aided by a small group of our soldiers, he took care of them, saved their lives, and later rejoined the column with them. – From that time onward, he stood out as a capable and valiant leader, one of those who, when a difficult mission is pending, do not wait to be asked to carry it out.

Thus it was at the battle of El Uvero. But he acted in a similar way on a previously unmentioned occasion during the first days when following a betrayal, our little troop was attacked by surprise by a number of planes and we were forced to retreat under the bombardment. We had already walked a distance when we remembered some rifles of some peasant soldiers who had been with us in the first actions and had then asked permission to visit their families, at a time when there was still not much discipline in our embryonic army. At that moment, we thought the rifles might have to be given up for lost. But I recall it took no more than simply raising the problem for Che, despite the bombing, to volunteer, and having done so, quickly go to recover those rifles.

This was one of his principal characteristics: his willingness to instantly volunteer for the most dangerous mission. And naturally this aroused admiration — and twice the usual admiration, for a fellow combatant fighting alongside us who had not been born here, a person of profound ideas, a person in whose mind stirred the dream of struggle in other parts of the continent and who nonetheless was so altruistic, so selfless, so willing to always do the most difficult things, to constantly risk his life. – That was how he won the rank of commander and leader of the second column, organized in the Sierra Maestra. Thus his standing began to increase. He began to develop as a magnificent combatant who was to reach the highest ranks in the course of the war.

Che was an incomparable soldier. Che was an incomparable leader. Che was, from a military point of view, an extraordinarily capable person, extraordinarily courageous, extraordinarily aggressive. If, as a guerrilla, he had his Achilles’ heel, it was this excessively aggressive quality, his absolute contempt for danger.

The enemy believes it can draw certain conclusions from his death. Che was a master of warfare! He was an artist of guerrilla struggle! And he showed that an infinite number of times. But he showed it especially in two extraordinary deeds. One of these was the invasion, in which he led a column, a column pursued by thousands of enemy soldiers over flat and absolutely unknown terrain, carrying out — together with Camilo [Cienfuegos] — an extraordinary military accomplishment. He also showed it in his lightning campaign in Las Villas Province, especially in the audacious attack on the city of Santa Clara, entering — with a column of barely 300 men — a city defended by tanks, artillery, and several thousand infantry soldiers. Those two heroic deeds stamped him as an extraordinarily capable leader, as a master, as an artist of revolutionary war.

However, now after his heroic and glorious death, some people attempt to deny the truth or value of his concepts, his guerrilla theories. The artist may die — especially when he is an artist in a field as dangerous as revolutionary struggle — but what will surely never die is the art to which he dedicated his life, the art to which he dedicated his intelligence.
(…)
His conduct may have been profoundly influenced by the idea that people have a relative value in history, the idea that causes are not defeated when people fall, that the powerful march of history cannot and will not be halted when leaders fall. – That is true, there is no doubt about it. It shows his faith in people, his faith in ideas, his faith in examples. However — as I said a few days ago — with all our heart we would have liked to see him as a forger of victories, to see victories forged under his command, under his leadership, since people of his experience, of his caliber, of his really unique capacity, are not common. – We fully appreciate the value of his example. We are absolutely convinced that many people will strive to live up to his example, that people like him will emerge.

It is not easy to find a person with all the virtues that were combined in Che. It is not easy for a person, spontaneously, to develop a character like his. I would say that he is one of those people who are difficult to match and virtually impossible to surpass. (…) – In Che, we admire not only the fighter, the person capable of performing great feats. What he did, what he was doing, the very fact of his rising with a handful of men against the army of the oligarchy, trained by Yankee advisers sent in by Yankee imperialism, backed by the oligarchies of all neighboring countries — that in itself constitutes an extraordinary feat.

If we search the pages of history, it is likely that we will find no other case in which a leader with such a limited number of men has set about a task of such importance; a case in which a leader with such a limited number of men has set out to fight against such large forces. Such proof of confidence in himself, such proof of confidence in the peoples, such proof of faith in man’s capacity to fight, can be looked for in the pages of history but the likes of it will never be found.

And he fell.

The enemy believes it has defeated his ideas, his guerrilla concepts, his point of view on revolutionary armed struggle. What they accomplished, by a stroke of luck, was to eliminate him physically. What they accomplished was to gain an accidental advantage that an enemy may gain in war. We do not know to what degree that stroke of luck, that stroke of fortune, was helped along, in a battle like many others, by that characteristic of which we spoke before: his excessive aggressiveness, his absolute disdain for danger.

This also happened in our war of independence. In a battle at Dos Rios they killed [José Martí the apostle of our independence; in a battle at Punta Brava, they killed Antonio Maceo, a veteran of hundreds of battles [in the Cuban war of independence]. Countless leaders, countless patriots of our war of independence were killed in similar battles. Nevertheless, that did not spell defeat for the Cuban cause.

The death of Che — as we said a few days ago — is a hard blow, a tremendous blow for the revolutionary movement because it deprives it, without a doubt, of its most experienced and able leader. – But those who boast of victory are mistaken. They are mistaken when they think that his death is the end of his ideas, the end of his tactics, the end of his guerrilla concepts, the end of his theory. For the person who fell, as a mortal person, as a person who faced bullets time and again, as a soldier, as a leader, was a thousand times more able than those who killed him by a stroke of luck.

However, how should revolutionaries face this serious setback? How should they face this loss? If Che had to express an opinion on this point, what would it be? He gave this opinion, he expressed this opinion quite clearly when he wrote in his message to the [Tricontinental] Latin American Solidarity Conference that if death surprised him anywhere, it would be welcome as long as his battle cry had reached a receptive ear and another hand reached out to take up his rifle.

His battle cry will reach not just one receptive ear, but millions of receptive ears! And not one hand but millions of hands, inspired by his example, will reach out to take up arms! New leaders will emerge. The people of the receptive ears and the outstretched hands will need leaders who emerge from their ranks, just as leaders have emerged in all revolutions.

Those hands will not have available a leader of Che’s extraordinary experience and enormous ability. Those leaders will be formed in the process of struggle. Those leaders will emerge from among the millions of receptive ears, from the millions of hands that will sooner or later reach out to take up arms.

It is not that we feel that his death will necessarily have immediate repercussions in the practical sphere of revolutionary struggle, that his death will necessarily have immediate repercussions in the practical sphere of development of this struggle. The fact is that when Che took up arms again he was not thinking of an immediate victory; he was not thinking of a speedy victory against the forces of the oligarchies and imperialism. As an experienced fighter, he was prepared for a prolonged struggle of 5, 10, 15, or 20 years, if necessary. He was ready to fight 5, 10, 15, or 20 years, or all his life if need be! And within that perspective, his death — or rather his example — will have tremendous repercussions. The force of that example will be invincible.

Those who attach significance to the lucky blow that struck Che down try in vain to deny his experience and his capacity as a leader. Che was an extraordinarily able military leader. But when we remember Che, when we think of Che, we do not think fundamentally of his military virtues. No! Warfare is a means and not an end. Warfare is a tool of revolutionaries. The important thing is the revolution. The important thing is the revolutionary cause, revolutionary ideas, revolutionary objectives, revolutionary sentiments, revolutionary virtues!

And it is in that field, in the field of ideas, in the field of sentiments, in the field of revolutionary virtues, in the field of intelligence, that — apart from his military virtues — we feel the tremendous loss that his death means to the revolutionary movement.

Che’s extraordinary character was made up of virtues that are rarely found together. He stood out as an unsurpassed person of action, but Che was not only that — he was also a person of visionary intelligence and broad culture, a profound thinker. That is, the man of ideas and the man of action were combined within him.

But it is not only that Che possessed the double characteristic of the man of ideas — of profound ideas — and the man of action, but that Che as a revolutionary united in himself the virtues that can be defined as the fullest expression of the virtues of a revolutionary: a person of total integrity, a person of supreme sense of honor, of absolute sincerity, a person of stoic and Spartan living habits, a person in whose conduct not one stain can be found. He constituted, through his virtues, what can be called a truly model revolutionary.

When people die it is usual to make speeches, to emphasize their virtues. But rarely can one say of a person with greater justice, with greater accuracy, what we say of Che on this occasion: that he was a pure example of revolutionary virtues!

But he possessed another quality, not a quality of the intellect nor of the will, not a quality derived from experience, from struggle, but a quality of the heart: he was an extraordinarily human being, extraordinarily sensitive!

That is why we say, when we think of his life, when we think of his conduct, that he constituted the singular case of a most extraordinary human, able to unite in his personality not only the characteristics of the man of action, but also of the man of thought, of the person of immaculate revolutionary virtues and of extraordinary human sensibility, joined with an iron character, a will of steel, indomitable tenacity.

Because of this, he has left to the future generations not only his experience, his knowledge as an outstanding soldier, but also, at the same time, the fruits of his intelligence. He wrote with the virtuosity of a master of our language. His narratives of the war are incomparable. The depth of his thinking is impressive. He never wrote about anything with less than extraordinary seriousness, with less than extraordinary profundity — and we have no doubt that some of his writings will pass on to posterity as classic documents of revolutionary thought.

Thus, as fruits of that vigorous and profound intelligence, he left us countless memories, countless narratives that, without his work, without his efforts, might have been lost forever.

An indefatigable worker, during the years that he served our country he did not know a single day of rest. Many were the responsibilities assigned to him: as president of the National Bank, as director of the Central Planning Board, as minister of industry, as commander of military regions, as the head of political or economic or fraternal delegations.

His versatile intelligence was able to undertake with maximum assurance any task of any kind. Thus he brilliantly represented our country in numerous international conferences, just as he brilliantly led soldiers in combat, just as he was a model worker in charge of any of the institutions he was assigned to. And for him there were no days of rest; for him there were no hours of rest!

If we looked through the windows of his offices, he had the lights on all hours of the night, studying, or rather, working or studying. For he was a student of all problems; he was a tireless reader. His thirst for learning was practically insatiable, and the hours he stole from sleep he devoted to study.

He devoted his scheduled days off to voluntary work. He was the inspiration and provided the greatest incentive for the work that is today carried out by hundreds of thousands of people throughout the country. He stimulated that activity in which our people are making greater and greater efforts.

As a revolutionary, as a communist revolutionary, a true communist, he had a boundless faith in moral values. He had a boundless faith in the consciousness of human beings. And we should say that he saw, with absolute clarity, the moral impulse as the fundamental lever in the construction of communism in human society.

He thought, developed, and wrote many things. And on a day like today it should be stated that Che’s writings, Che’s political and revolutionary thought, will be of permanent value to the Cuban revolutionary process and to the Latin American revolutionary process. And we do not doubt that his ideas — as a man of action, as a man of thought, as a person of untarnished moral virtues, as a person of unexcelled human sensitivity, as a person of spotless conduct — have and will continue to have universal value.

The imperialists boast of their triumph at having killed this guerrilla fighter in action. The imperialists boast of a triumphant stroke of luck that led to the elimination of such a formidable man of action. But perhaps the imperialists do not know or pretend not to know that the man of action was only one of the many facets of the personality of that combatant. And if we speak of sorrow, we are saddened not only at having lost a person of action. We are saddened at having lost a person of virtue. We are saddened at having lost a person of unsurpassed human sensitivity. We are saddened at having lost such a mind. We are saddened to think that he was only 39 years old at the time of his death. We are saddened at missing the additional fruits that we would have received from that intelligence and that ever richer experience.

We have an idea of the dimension of the loss for the revolutionary movement. However, here is the weak side of the imperialist enemy: they think that by eliminating a person physically they have eliminated his thinking — that by eliminating him physically they have eliminated his ideas, eliminated his virtues, eliminated his example.

So shameless are they in this belief that they have no hesitation in publishing, as the most natural thing in the world, the by now almost universally accepted circumstances in which THEY MURDERED HIM after he had been seriously wounded in action. They do not even seem aware of the repugnance of the procedure, of the shamelessness of the acknowledgement. They have published it as if thugs, oligarchs, and mercenaries had the right to shoot a seriously wounded revolutionary combatant.

Even worse, they explain why they did it. They assert that Che’s trial would have been quite an earthshaker, that it would have been impossible to place this revolutionary in the dock.

And not only that, they have not hesitated to spirit away his remains. Be it true or false, they certainly announced they had cremated his body, thus beginning to show their fear, beginning to show that they are not so sure that by physically eliminating the combatant, they can eliminate his ideas, eliminate his example.

Che died defending no other interest, no other cause than the cause of the exploited and the oppressed of this continent. Che died defending no other cause than the cause of the poor and the humble of this earth. And the exemplary manner and the selflessness with which he defended that cause cannot be disputed even by his most bitter enemies.

Before history, people who act as he did, people who do and give everything for the cause of the poor, grow in stature with each passing day and find a deeper place in the heart of the peoples with each passing day. The imperialist enemies are beginning to see this, and it will not be long before it will be proved that his death will, in the long run, be like a seed that will give rise to many people determined to imitate him, many people determined to follow his example.
(…)
From the revolutionary point of view, from the point of vie of our people, how should we view Che’s example? Do we feel we have lost him? It is true that we will not see new writings of his. It is true that we will never again hear his voice. But Che has left a heritage to the world, a great heritage, and we who knew him so well can become in large measure his beneficiaries.

He left us his revolutionary thinking, his revolutionary virtues. He left us his character, his will, his tenacity, his spirit of work. In a word, he left us his example! And Che’s example will be a model for our people. Che’s example will be the ideal model for our people!

If we wish to express what we expect our revolutionary combatants, our militants, our people to be, we must say, without hesitation: let them be like Che! If we wish to express what we want the people of future generations to be, we must say: let them be like Che! If we wish to say how we want our children to be educated, we must say without hesitation: we want them to be educated in Che’s spirit! If we want the model of a person, the model of a human being who does not belong to our time but to the future, I say from the depths of my heart that such a model, without a single stain on his conduct, without a single stain on his action, without a single stain on his behavior, is Che! If we wish to express what we want our children to be, we must say from our very hearts as ardent revolutionaries: we want them to be like Che!

Che has become a model of what future humans should be, not only for our people but also for people everywhere in Latin America. Che carried to its highest expression revolutionary stoicism, the revolutionary spirit of sacrifice, revolutionary combativeness, the revolutionary’s spirit of work. Che brought the ideas of Marxism-Leninism to their freshest, purest, most revolutionary expression. No other person of our time has carried the spirit of proletarian internationalism to its highest possible level as Che did.

And when one speaks of a proletarian internationalist, and when an example of a proletarian internationalist is sought, that example, high above any other, will be the example of Che. National flags, prejudices, chauvinism, and egoism had disappeared from his mind and heart. He was ready to shed his generous blood spontaneously and immediately, on behalf of any people, for the cause of any people!

Thus, his blood fell on our soil when he was wounded in several battles, and his blood was shed in Bolivia, for the liberation of the exploited and the oppressed, of the humble and the poor. That blood was shed for the sake of all the exploited and all the oppressed. That blood was shed for all the peoples of the Americas and for the people of Vietnam because while fighting there in Bolivia, fighting against the oligarchies and imperialism, he knew that he was offering Vietnam the highest possible expression of his solidarity!

It is for this reason, comrades of the revolution, that we must face the future with firmness and determination, with optimism. And in Che’s example, we will always look for inspiration — inspiration in struggle, inspiration in tenacity, inspiration in intransigence toward the enemy, inspiration in internationalist feeling!

Therefore, after tonight’s moving ceremony, after this incredible demonstration of vast popular recognition — incredible for its magnitude, discipline, and spirit of devotion — which demonstrates that our people are a sensitive, grateful people who know how to honor the memory of the brave who die in combat, that our people recognize those who serve them; which demonstrates the people’s solidarity with the revolutionary struggle and how this people will raise aloft and maintain ever higher aloft revolutionary banners and revolutionary principles today, in these moments of remembrance, let us lift our spirits and, with optimism in the future, with absolute optimism in the final victory of the peoples, say to Che and to the heroes who fought and died with him:

Hasta la victoria siempre!
Patria o muerte!
Venceremos!

Che Guevarasta kirjoitettua

You know how much I admire Che Guevara. In fact, I believe that the man was not only an intellectual but also the most complete human being of our age: as a fighter and as a man, as a theoretician who was able to further the cause of revolution by drawing his theories from his personal experience in battle.
– Jean-Paul Sartre

I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed ’an innocent’. Those persons executed by Guevara or on his orders were condemned for the usual crimes punishable by death at times of war or in its aftermath: desertion, treason or crimes such as rape, torture or murder. I should add that my research spanned five years, and included anti-Castro Cubans among the Cuban-American exile community in Miami and elsewhere.
– Jon Lee Anderson (author of Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life,1997)

Che was loved, in spite of being stern and demanding. We would give our life for him.
– Tomas Alba (fought under Che)

Why did they think that by killing him, he would cease to exist as a fighter? … Today he is in every place, wherever there is a just cause to defend.
– Fidel Castro

It’s like he is alive and with us, like a friend. He is kind of like a Virgin (Mary) for us. We say, ”Che, help us with our work or with this planting,’ and it always goes well.”
– Manuel Cortez (farmer who lives next door to the schoolhouse where Guevara was executed)

We also honour the great Che Guevara, whose revolutionary exploits, including on our own continent, were too powerful for any prison censors to hide from us. The life of Che is an inspiration to all human beings who cherish freedom. We will always honour his memory.
– Nelson Mandela

This secular saint was ready to die because he could not tolerate a world where the poor of the earth, the displaced and dislocated of history, would be relegated to its vast margins.
– Ariel Dorfman (professor of Latin American Studies at Duke University)

In my mind, the discussion with Che has continued for all these years, and the more time passed, the more he has been right. – Even today, dying while putting in motion a never ending struggle, he continues, always, to be right.
– Italo Calvino

The death of Che Guevara places a responsibility on all revolutionaries of the World to redouble their decision to fight on to the final defeat of Imperialism. That is why in essence Che Guevara is not dead, his ideas are with us.
– Stokely Carmichael (Black Power leader)

With the news of Che’s death, rallies were held from Mexico to Santiago, Algiers to Angola, and Cairo to Calcutta. The population of Budapest and Prague lit candles; the picture of a smiling Che appeared in London and Paris…when a few months later, riots broker out in Berlin, Paris, and Chicago, and from there the unrest spread to the American campuses, young men and women wore Che Guevara T-shirts and carried his pictures during their protest marches.
– Erik Durschmied (historian and journalist)

Che was wearing green fatigues, and his usual overgrown and scraggly beard. Behind the beard his features are quite soft, almost feminine, and his manner is intense. He has a good sense of humor, and there was considerable joking back and forth during the meeting … Although he left no doubt of his personal and intense devotion to communism, his conversation was free of propaganda and bombast. He spoke calmly, in a straightforward manner, and with the appearance of detachment and objectivity … I had the definite impression that he had thought out his remarks very carefully — they were extremely well organized.
– Richard N. Goodwin (US Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs)

That he was shot after capture demonstrates the fear that the Bolivian authorities felt even of an imprisoned Che. They were afraid to bring to him to trial: afraid of the echoes his voice would have aroused from the courtroom: afraid to prove that the man they hated was loved by the world outside. This fear will help to perpetuate his legend, and a legend is impervious to bullets.
– Graham Green

Revolutionaries are not normal people’: an understatement in relation to Ernesto Che Guevara. Physician, brilliant intellect, competent soldier, charismatic leader, developed—and eventually creative-Marxist economist, always a man able to capture the spirit of an experience in his own being, Che remains one of the four or five greatest revolutionaries in modern history.
– Alfredo López

Che was not only a heroic fighter, but a revolutionary thinker, with a political and moral project and a system of ideas and values for which he fought and gave his life. The philosophy which gave his political and ideological choices their coherence, colour, and taste was a deep revolutionary humanism. For Che, the true Communist, the true revolutionary was one who felt that the great problems of all humanity were his or her personal problems, one who was capable of feeling anguish whenever someone was assassinated, no matter where it was in the world, and of feeling exultation whenever a new banner of liberty was raised somewhere else.
– Michael Löwy

On his trips, he would receive gifts from his hosts, some of them very expensive. He would get presents for me as well, and he would give them away if he considered them too ostentatious. I was given a color TV only to see Che pass it on to a factory worker. And back then, it was sort of an unimaginable item. Once, after a trip to Algeria, he received a barrel of an excellent wine. When he arrived home, he told me to give it to the army barracks near our home. I would not always unconditionally obey his mandates. Knowing that wine was one of the few treats he allowed himself, I kept five liters.
– Aleida March (Che’s widow)

He was just like a Christ, with his strong eyes, his beard, his long hair. He is very miraculous.
– Susana Osinaga (nurse who cleaned Guevara’s corpse)

He was demanding of everyone and practiced being a personal example. Once, Guevara and other ministry officials were served steaks during a severe food shortage. Steaks are a treasured meal for Argentines, but Guevara became incensed and ordered it all removed. ”What is this? No one is touching this meat. Take it away.”
– Tirso Saenz (Che’s aide)

Che Guevara taught us we could dare to have confidence in ourselves, confidence in our abilities. He instilled in us the conviction that struggle is our only recourse. He, was a citizen of the free world that together we are in the process of building. That is why we say that Che Guevara is also African and Burkinabè.
– Thomas Sankara (commonly referred to as ”Africa’s Che Guevara”)

He taught me to think — he taught me the most beautiful thing which is to be human.
– ”Urbano” (former Cuban rebel fighter)

Guevara remains a national hero in Cuba where he is remembered for promoting unpaid voluntary work by working shirtless on building sites or hauling sacks of sugar. To this day, he appears on a Cuban banknote cutting sugar cane with a machete in the fields.
– Rosa Tania Valdes (journalist)

He had eyes that seemed to go through you. I’ve interviewed all sorts of famous people, from Ben Gurion to Bob Dylan, but no one has ever made an impression on me like Che did. There was something Christ-like about him. I really felt that when he was talking to me, he was telling the truth.
– Marilyn Zeitlin (journalist)

Universal Condemnation of the US Economic Sanctions against Cuba
By Salim Lamrani
Global Research, November 07, 2016

For the twenty fifth consecutive year, the UN General Assembly expressed its condemnation of the economic, trade and financial blockade imposed by Washington on Cuba for more than half a century. The obsolete sanctions – which date back to the Cold War – are immoral, affecting the most vulnerable sectors of civil society, illegal due to their retroactive and extraterritorial scope and constitute the principal obstacle to the island developing[1].

Out of the 193 countries at the Annual Meeting of the UN General Assembly, 191 urged the United States to put an end to the punishment inflicted on the Cuban people which impacts every sector of society. For the first time since 1992, the year the resolution demanding the elimination of measures of economic reprisal imposed since 1960, was initially presented, Washington decided to abstain from voting. Thus it recognized the failure of its policy of hostility vis-à-vis the Cubans as well as the reality that it had been isolated on the international scene. Israel which has always chosen to follow the US vote has also chosen to abstain[2].

During her address, Samantha Power, the US representative to the United Nations announced the White House’s decision not to reject the text of the resolution as it had done in previous years:

“For more than 50 years, the US has applied a policy aimed at isolating the Cuban government. For more than a quarter of a century, the members of the United Nations had voted in favour of the resolution […] which condemns the US embargo. […] Instead of isolating Cuba, […] our policy has isolated the United States, even within the United Nations. Today, the United States will opt to abstain from voting. This represents another modest step to put an end to the US embargo once and for all[3]”.

This historic vote forms part of the package of measures adopted by Barack Obama since dialogue with Havana resumed on 17 December 2014. Since this date, the White House has proceeded to liberate three Cuban political prisoners and has taken Cuba off the list of countries supporting terrorism. It has also announced repeatedly – six times in total – a sparce lifting of economic sanctions even if their scope is very limited. Thus for two years, the “Democratic” administration has resumed diplomatic relations with Cuba, proceeded to reopen an embassy at Havana, established direct commercial flights between the two countries, broadened the categories (12 in total) of US citizens authorized to go to Cuba and agreed for certain US investments in the island, especially in the telecommunications sector. Barack Obama’s historic visit to Cuba in March 2016 has sanctified this new era for US – Cuban relations.

The most recent measures were announced on 14 October 2016, that is, two weeks before the vote in the United Nations. These measures permitted, inter alia, US citizens authorized to travel to Cuba to bring back rum and Cuban tobacco, free of quantitative restrictions. However, Washington still forbids the classic importation of these products on the US market. Similarly, in March 2016 Barack Obama had announced that henceforth Cuba could use the dollar for international transactions. More than six months after this announcement, Havana has still not been able to carry out trade in US currency, as international banks fear they would be sanctioned by the US Treasury Department[4].

The Cuban government, through its spokesman Bruno Rodríguez, Minister of Foreign Affairs, has welcomed Barack Obama’s gesture. Nonetheless, he was forced to recall that economic sanctions were still in force:

“The economic, trade and financial blockade continues. This causes damages to the Cuban people and constitutes an obstacle for the country’s development. […] There is no Cuban family nor a sector in the country that has not suffered from its ramifications: at the level of health, food, services, price of products, salaries and retirement. […] Due to its strictly extraterritorial character, it also directly affects all UN Member[5]”.

No administration will have stuck its neck as far out as the Obama administration to normalize US-Cuba relations. That said, as his final mandate reaches its end, the US President has not exercised his prerogative as head of state to dismantle the network of economic sanctions against Cuba. In actual fact, the White House, could, for example, be able to re-establish bilateral trade between US and Cuban businesses, authorize US investments in Cuba and authorize Cuba to acquire non-food products on loan on the US market. The sectors subject to a Congressional decision are relatively narrow and can be overturned by the Executive.

From the time they were initially imposed more than half a century ago, the economic sanctions have cost the Cuban economy 125 billion dollars and constitute the principal obstacle to the development of the Island. They constitute a serious violation of international law and outrage the international community which once again has expressed its opposition to the coercive measures imposed on the Cuban people. Lifting them is indispensable to normalizing relations between Cuba and the United States.
# # #
Article in French :

Condamnation unanime des sanctions économiques des Etats-Unis contre Cuba, October 31, 2016 (published on Global Research’s French language website: mondialisation.ca
# # #
Ph.D. in Latin-American and Iberian Studies at Université Paris IV-Sorbonne, Salim Lamrani is the Maître de conférences at Université de La Réunion, a journalist and expert in Cuba-US relations.
———-
Notes

[1] Somini Sengupta & Rick Gladstone, “U.S Abstains in U.N. Vote Condemning Cuba Embargo”, The New York Times, 26 October 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/world/americas/united-nations-cuba-embargo.html?_r=0(site visited 29 October, 2016).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Samatha Power, “Remarks at a UN General Assembly Meeting on the Cuba Embargo”, United States Mission to the United Nations, 26 October 2016. https://usun.state.gov/remarks/7510 (site last visited 29 October 2016).

[4] Barack Obama, “Presidential Policy Directive: United States-Cuba Normalization”, The White House, 14 October 2016. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/10/14/presidential-policy-directive-united-states-cuba-normalization (site visited 28 October 2016).

[5] Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, “Speech of Cuban Minister of Foreign Relations, Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, in presenting the draft Resolution ‘The Need to put an end to the economic, trade and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba’, in the UN General Assembly ”, Cubadebate, 26 October 2016. http://www.cubadebate.cu/opinion/2016/10/26/bruno-rodriguez-eeuu-se-abstiene-en-onu-pero-el-bloqueo-sigue/#.WBT4zHrj-2U (site visited on 29 October 2016).

In memoriam, Fidel Castro

Condemn me, it does not matter: history will absolve me.
History Will Absolve Me (1954), a summary of arguments Castro made in the trial of the Moncada Barracks attack

”Kuten koko maailma tietää, minun ajatukseni on, että kapitalismi ei toimi Yhdysvalloissa eikä muuallakaan maailmassa, vaan ajaa maat kriisistä toiseen.”
(Fidel Castro)
#
Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz (13.8.1926 Birán, Kuuba – 25. 11. 2016 Havanna, Kuuba)

[Lainaus alkaa:]Venäjän presidentin Vladimir Putinin mukaan Kuuban edesmennyt johtaja Fidel Castro oli ’aikakautensa symboli’.

”Tämän arvostetun valtiomiehen nimeä on oikeutetusti pidetty modernin maailmanhistorian symbolina. Fidel Castro oli Venäjän vilpitön ja luotettava ystävä”, Putin lähetti surunvalittelunsa Fidel Castron veljelle, Raúl Castrolle uutistoimisto AFP:n mukaan.”
(…)
Putinin mukaan Castro onnistui rakentamaan ”vapaan ja itsenäisen Kuuban” ja että vallankumousjohtajasta ”tuli kansainvälisen yhteisön vaikutusvaltainen jäsen, joka toimi inspiraationa monille maille ja ihmisille”.

”Castro oli viisas mies, joka katsoi aina tulevaisuuteen luottavaisesti. Hänen muistonsa tulee säilymään ikuisesti venäläisten sydämissä”, Putin hehkutti.

Muissakin Kuuban liittolaismaissa ylistettiin Castroa. Venezuelan presidentti Nicolás Maduro sanoi Castron toimineen inspiraationa maalleen.

”Jatkamme voitokasta taistelua. Fidel Castro on esimerkki taistelusta kaikille maailman ihmisille. Kunnioitamme hänen perintöään”, Maduro sanoi uutistoimisto Reutersin mukaan.

”Suuruus on jättänyt meidät, Fidel on kuollut. Eläköön Kuuba, eläköön Latinalainen Amerikka!” totesi puolestaan Ecuadorin presidentti Rafael Correa. [Lainaus päättyi.]

http://www.hs.fi/ulkomaat/a1480129488446
#
This man more than superseded my every expectation I had…if you live with a man under duress (this is before the victory…) he is I think…he will rank in history with some of the greats.
Errol Flynn, in an interview on the Canadian TV program Front Page (1959)

The most honest, courageous politician I have ever met.
Jesse Jackson, during a 1984 visit to Havana, as quoted at the Latin American Network Information Center at the University of Texas at Austin

I wanted to meet you for many reasons, above all, because you are a very brave man.
Jawaharlal Nehru, during a 1960 visit to New York, as quoted at the This Day That Age dated September 29, 1960 Nehru meets Castro
#
Fellow workers and peasants, this is the socialist and democratic revolution of the working people, with the working people, and for the working people. And for this revolution of the working people, by the working people, and for the working people we are prepared to give our lives.
Original Spanish: ”Compañeros obreros y campesinos, esta es la Revolución socialista y democrática de los humildes, con los humildes y para los humildes. Y por esta Revolución de los humildes, por los humildes y para los humildes estamos dispuestos a dar la vida.”
On 16 April 1961, in a funeral oration in Vedado for victims of the air raids the day before, Fidel Castro referring to the January 1959 Cuban Revolution. Quoted in José Ramón Fernández. 2001. Playa Giron/Bay of Pigs: Washington’s First Military Defeat in the Americas, p. 56
#
Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev on Saturday hailed Castro, who died aged 90 on Friday, for ”strengthening” his island nation.

”Fidel stood up and strengthened his country during the harshest American blockade, when there was colossal pressure on him, and he still took his country out of this blockade to a path of independent development,” Interfax news agency quoted Gorbachev as saying.

”In the past years, even when Fidel Castro was not formally in power, his role in strengthening the country was huge.”

Gorbachev added that Castro would be remembered as a ”prominent politician” who managed to leave a ”deep mark in the history of mankind.”

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/fidel-castro-death-world-reactions-161126095542185.html
#
South Africa’s current president, Jacob Zuma, also had warm words for the Cuban leader, thanking him for his help and support in the struggle to overthrow apartheid.

”President Castro identified with our struggle against apartheid. He inspired the Cuban people to join us in our own struggle against apartheid,” Zuma said in a statement.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said in a statement that ”the Chinese people have lost a close comrade and a sincere friend”.

Xi hailed Castro for his contribution to the development of communism both in Cuba and around the world.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/fidel-castro-death-world-reactions-161126095542185.html
#
In Bolivia, where Ernesto ”Che” Guevara died in 1967 in a failed bid to export Cuba’s revolution, President Evo Morales said in a statement: ”Fidel Castro left us a legacy of having fought for the integration of the world’s peoples … The departure of Comandante Fidel Castro really hurts.”

Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said: ”A great has left us. Fidel has died. Long live Cuba! Long live Latin America!”

The government of El Salvador issued a statement expressing ”eternal gratitude” to Castro and the Cuban people for their help during bad times their country went through.

Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, said his nation is mourning the loss of a ”great friend”.

Imran Khan, former Pakistani cricketer turned leader of Tehreek-e-Insaf party, defined the Cuban leader as an ”icon” in a statement on Twitter.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/fidel-castro-death-world-reactions-161126095542185.html

Fidel Castro Ruz. His Legacy Will Live Forever
By Fidel Castro Ruz and Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, November 26, 2016

Today, November 25, 2016 Fidel Castro Ruz, leader of the Cuban Revolution has passed. His legacy will live forever.
The Cuban Revolution constitutes a fundamental landmark in the history of humanity, which challenges the legitimacy of global capitalism.
In all major regions of the World, the Cuban revolution has been a source of inspiration in the relentless struggle against colonial domination and US imperialism.
Fidel Castro was the embodiment of these struggles against global capitalism, committed to a World of Peace, a World of truth, where people join hands, a World of understanding, a World of tolerance and respect.
Fidel Castro was “a man of tremendous integrity, with an acute mind and sense of humor, committed in the minute detail of his speech to social progress and the advancement of humankind, conscious of the dangers of the US led war and the Worldwide crisis, with exceptional skills of analysis and understanding of his fellow human beings, with a true sprit of internationalism and a tremendous knowledge of history, economics and geopolitics.” (quoted from my 2o10 introduction)
Fidel’s passing occurs at a time of crisis and upheaval of the World capitalist system.
The World is at a critical crossroads. At this juncture of our history, most progressive movements towards socialism have been destroyed and defeated through US led wars, military interventions, destabilization campaigns, coups d’etats.
The socialist project in Cuba prevails despite the US economic blockade, CIA intelligence ops and dirty politics.
Let us be under no illusions. Washington’s intent is not only to destroy and undermine the Cuban Revolution but also to erase the history of socialism.
Fidel Lives.
The battle against war and neoliberalism nonetheless prevails.
For the concurrent demise of neoliberalism and militarization which destroy people’s lives,
For the outright criminalization of America’s imperial wars,
For a World of Social Justice with a true “responsibility to protect” our fellow human beings,
Long Live Fidel Castro

Fidel Castro Ruz at the United Nations General Assembly in 1960 (left)
* * *
Below is the introduction of my conversations with Fidel Castro on World War III and the Dangers of Nuclear War followed by the transcript of Fidel’s statement on the Dangers o Nuclear War
To read the full text of the conversations click here
Conversations with Fidel Castro: The Dangers of a Nuclear War
first published in November 2010
In October 2010, I had the opportunity of spending several days at Fidel Castro`s home in the suburbs of Havana. Our conversation and exchange which was subsequently published focussed on the dangers of nuclear war.
I had read Fidel Castro and Che Guevara during my high school days in Geneva, Switzerland and later at university in Britain and the US. When meeting him in person, I discovered a man of tremendous integrity, with an acute mind and sense of humor, committed in the minute detail of his speech to social progress and the advancement of humankind, conscious of the dangers of the US led war and the Worldwide crisis, with exceptional skills of analysis and understanding of his fellow human beings, with a true sprit of internationalism and a tremendous knowledge of history, economics and geopolitics.
On a daily basis, Fidel spends several hours reading a large number of detailed international press reports (As he mentioned to me with a smile, “I frequently consult articles from the Global Research website”…).
We focussed in large part on the dangers of nuclear war. Fidel Castro has the knack of addressing political details while relating them to key concepts. We also covered numerous complex international issues, focussing on the role of prominent political personalities, heads of State, authors and intellectuals. On the first day, when I met Fidel at his home, he was reading Bob Woodward’s best-seller The Obama Wars which had just been released. (See Picture below).

In this broad exchange of ideas, Fidel was invariably assertive in his views but at the same time respectful of those whom he condemned or criticized, particularly when discussing US presidential politics.
Fidel is acutely aware of the mechanisms of media disinformation and war propaganda and how they are used to undermine civil rights and social progress, not to mention the smear campaign directed against the Cuban revolution.
A central concept put forth by Fidel Castro in our discussions was the ‘Battle of Ideas”. The leader of the Cuban Revolution believes that only a far-reaching “Battle of Ideas” can change the course of World history.
In addressing and understanding this Worldwide crisis, commitment to the Truth and analysis of the lies and fabrications which sustain the corporate and financial elites is of utmost importance.
The overriding powers of the Truth can, under appropriate conditions, be used as a revolutionary instrument, as a catalyst to unseat the war criminals in high office, whose role and position is sustained by propaganda and media disinformation.
In relation to 9/11, Fidel had expressed his solidarity, on behalf of the Cuban people, with the victims of the tragic events of September 11 2001, while underscoring the lies and fabrications behind the official 9/11 narrative and how 9/11 has been used as a pretext to wage war.

Our focus was on nuclear war, which since our meeting last October [2010] has motivated me to write a book on the Dangers of Nuclear War. (Michel Chossudovsky, Towards a World War III Scenario. Global Research, Montreal, 2011)
The corporate media is involved in acts of camouflage. The devastating impacts of a nuclear war are either trivialized or not mentioned. Against this backdrop, Fidel’s message to the World must be heard; people across the land, nationally and internationally, should understand the gravity of the present situation and act forcefully at all levels of society to reverse the tide of war.
The “Battle of Ideas” is part of a revolutionary process. Against a barrage of media disinformation, Fidel Castro’s resolve is to spread the word far and wide, to inform world public opinion, to “make the impossible possible”, to thwart a military adventure which in the real sense of the word threatens the future of humanity.
When a US sponsored nuclear war becomes an “instrument of peace”, a “responsibility to protect” condoned and accepted by the World’s institutions and the highest authority including the United Nations, there is no turning back: human society has indelibly been precipitated headlong onto the path of self-destruction.

Fidel Castro Ruz, October 15, 2010
Fidel’s “Battle of Ideas” must be translated into a worldwide movement. People must mobilize against this diabolical military agenda.
This war can be prevented if people pressure their governments and elected representatives, organize at the local level in towns, villages and municipalities, spread the word, inform their fellow citizens regarding the implications of a thermonuclear war, initiate debate and discussion within the armed forces.
What is required is a mass movement of people which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of war, a global people’s movement which criminalizes war.
In his October 15, 2010 speech, Fidel Castro warned the World on the dangers of nuclear war:
“There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people. In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.
Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!”
The “Battle of Ideas” consists in confronting the war criminals in high office, in breaking the US-led consensus in favor of a global war, in changing the mindset of hundreds of millions of people, in abolishing nuclear weapons. In essence, the “Battle of Ideas” consists in restoring the truth and establishing the foundations of World peace.
“The Battle of Ideas” must be developed as a mass movement, nationally and internationally, waged by people across the land.
Fidel Castro Ruz has indelibly marked the history of both the Twentieth and Twenty-first Century.
Below is the transcript and video of Fidel’s historic October 15 2010 speech focussing on the dangers of a nuclear war, recorded by Global Research and Cuba Debate in his home in Havana in October 2010.
The American and European media in October 2010 decided in chorus not to acknowledge or even comment on Fidel Castro’s October 15, 2010 speech on the Dangers of Nuclear War. The evolving media consensus is that neither nuclear war nor nuclear energy constitute a threat to “the surrounding civilian population”.
* * *
Fidel Castro’s October 15, 2010 Message on the Dangers of Nuclear War
The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime.
Each and every government in the world has the obligation to respect the right to life of each and every nation and of the totality of all the peoples on the planet.
Today there is an imminent risk of war with the use of that kind of weapon and I don’t harbour the least doubt that an attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran would inevitably evolve towards a global nuclear conflict.
The World’s peoples have an obligation to demand of their political leaders their Right to Live. When the life of humankind, of your people and your most beloved human beings run such a risk, nobody can afford to be indifferent; not one minute can be lost in demanding respect for that right; tomorrow will be too late.
Albert Einstein himself stated unmistakably: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. We fully comprehend what he wanted to convey, and he was absolutely right, yet in the wake of a global nuclear war, there wouldn’t be anybody around to make use of those sticks and stones.
There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people.
In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.
Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!
Fidel Castro Ruz
October 15, 2010

50 vérités sur Fidel Castro
Par Salim Lamrani
Mondialisation.ca, 27 novembre 2016
Opera Mundi 2 janvier 2016

Le leader historique de la Révolution cubaine a marqué à jamais l’Histoire de Cuba et de l’Amérique latine, faisant de son pays un symbole de dignité et de résistance.

1. Issu d’une fratrie de sept enfants, Fidel Castro est né le 13 août 1926 à Birán dans l’actuelle province d’Holguín, de l’union entre Angel Castro Argiz, un riche propriétaire terrien espagnol originaire de Galice, et Lina Ruz González, cubaine de naissance.
2. A l’âge de sept ans, il part pour la ville de Santiago de Cuba et réside chez une institutrice chargée de son éducation. Celle-ci l’abandonne à son sort. « J’y ai connu la faim », se rappellera Fidel Castro et « on avait trompé ma famille ». Un an plus tard, il intègre le collège religieux des Frères de la Salle en janvier 1935 en tant qu’interne. Il quittera l’institution à l’âge de onze ans pour le collège Dolores, en janvier 1938, après s’être rebellé contre l’autoritarisme d’un enseignant. Il poursuit ensuite sa scolarité chez les jésuites au collège de Belén de La Havane de 1942 à 1945. Après des études brillantes, son professeur, le Père Armando Llorente, écrit dans l’annuaire de l’établissement : « Il s’est distingué dans toutes les matières littéraires. Excellent et rassembleur, il a été un véritable athlète, défendant toujours avec courage et fierté le drapeau du collège. Il a su gagner l’admiration et l’affection de tous. Il poursuivra des études de droit et nous ne doutons pas qu’il remplira de pages brillantes le livre de sa vie ».
3. Malgré son exil à Miami en 1961 suite aux tensions entre le gouvernement révolutionnaire et l’Eglise catholique cubaine, le Père Llorente a toujours conservé un souvenir nostalgique de son ancien élève : « On me reproche souvent de dire du bien de Fidel. Moi, je ne peux pas dire du mal du Fidel que j’ai connu. De plus, un jour, il m’a sauvé la vie et ce sont des choses qu’on ne peut jamais oublier ». Fidel Castro s’était jeté dans un fleuve pour sauver son professeur qui était emporté par le courant.
4. En 1945, Fidel Castro entre à l’Université de La Havane où il entreprend une carrière de droit. Elu délégué de la Faculté de Droit, il participe activement aux manifestations contre la corruption du gouvernement du Président Ramón Grau San Martín. Il n’hésite pas non plus à dénoncer publiquement les bandes armées du BAGA liées aux autorités politiques. Max Lesnik, alors secrétaire général de la Jeunesse Orthodoxe et camarade de Fidel Castro, se remémore cet épisode : « Le comité ‘30 Septembre’ [créé pour lutter contre les bandes armées] avait pris la décision de dénoncer le gouvernement et les gangsters durant la session plénière de la Fédération des étudiants. Dans le salon, plus de 300 étudiants des diverses facultés se pressaient pour écouter Fidel quand quelqu’un cria […] : ‘Celui qui parlera trop, parlera pour la dernière fois’. Il était clair que la menace s’adressait à l’orateur. Fidel s’est levé de sa chaise et d’un pas posé et ferme marcha vers le centre du grand salon. Après avoir demandé une minute de silence en souvenir des martyrs […], il s’est mis à lire une liste officielle avec les noms de tous les membres des gangs et des dirigeants de la Fédération estudiantine universitaire stipendiés par le gouvernement ».
5. En 1947, à l’âge de 22 ans, Fidel Castro participe avec Juan Bosch, futur Président de la République Dominicaine, à une tentative de débarquement de Cayo Confite pour renverser le dictateur Rafael Trujillo, alors soutenu par les Etats-Unis.
6. Un an plus tard, en 1948, il participe au Bogotazo, soulèvement populaire déclenché par l’assassinat de Jorge Eliécer Gaitán, leader politique progressiste, candidat aux élections présidentielles en Colombie.
7. Diplômé de droit en 1950, Fidel Castro exerce en tant qu’avocat jusqu’en 1952 et défend les petites gens, avant de se lancer en politique.
8. Fidel Castro n’a jamais milité au sein du Parti Socialiste Populaire (PSP), parti communiste de la Cuba prérévolutionnaire. Il était membre du Parti du Peuple Cubain, également appelé Parti Orthodoxe, fondé en 1947 par Eduardo Chibás. Le programme du Parti Orthodoxe de Chibás est progressiste et se base sur plusieurs piliers : la souveraineté nationale, l’indépendance économique par la diversification de la production agricole, la suppression des latifundios, le développement de l’industrie, la nationalisation des services publics, la lutte contre la corruption et la justice sociale avec la défense des travailleurs. Fidel Castro revendique son appartenance à la pensée de José Martí, de Chibás et anti-impérialiste. Orateur de grand talent, il se présente aux élections parlementaires en tant que candidat du Parti du Peuple Cubain en 1952.
9. Le 10 mars 1952, à trois mois des élections présidentielles, le général Fulgencio Batista brise l’ordre constitutionnel en renversant le gouvernement de Carlos Prío Socarrás. Il obtient le soutien immédiat des Etats-Unis qui reconnaissent officiellement la nouvelle dictature militaire.
10. L’avocat Fidel Castro dépose plainte contre Batista pour rupture de l’ordre constitutionnel : « Si des tribunaux existent, Batista doit être sanctionné, et si Batista n’est pas sanctionné […], comment ce tribunal pourra-t-il ensuite juger un citoyen pour sédition ou rébellion contre ce régime illégal produit de la trahison impunie ? » La Cour Suprême, inféodée au nouveau régime, juge la demande irrecevable.
11. Le 26 juillet 1953, Fidel Castro prend la tête d’une expédition de 131 hommes et lance une attaque contre la caserne Moncada de Santiago de Cuba, seconde forteresse militaire du pays, et contre la Caserne Carlos Manuel de Céspedes de la ville de Bayamo. Le but était de prendre le contrôle de Santiago – berceau historique de toutes les révolutions – et de lancer un appel à la rébellion dans tout le pays afin de renverser le dictateur Batista.
12. L’opération est un échec sanglant et de nombreux combattants – 55 au total – sont assassinés après avoir été brutalement torturés par l’armée. En effet, seuls 6 d’entre eux avaient perdu la vie lors des combats. Quelques-uns réussissent à s’échapper grâce au soutien de la population.
13. Fidel Castro, capturé quelques jours plus tard, doit sa vie au sergent Pedro Sarría, qui refuse de suivre les ordres de ses supérieurs et d’exécuter le leader du Moncada. « Ne tirez pas ! Ne tirez pas ! On ne tue pas les idées », s’était-il exclamé face à ses soldats.
14. Durant sa plaidoirie historique intitulée « L’Histoire m’acquittera », Fidel Castro, qui assure sa propre défense, dénonce les crimes de Batista et la misère dans laquelle vit le peuple cubain et présente son programme pour une Cuba libre basé sur la souveraineté nationale, l’indépendance économique et la justice sociale.
15. Condamné à 15 ans de prison, Fidel Castro est libéré deux ans plus tard, en 1955, suite à une amnistie accordée par le régime de Batista. Il fonde le Mouvement 26 Juillet (M 26-7) et fait part de son projet de poursuivre la lutte contre la dictature militaire avant de s’exiler au Mexique.
16. Fidel Castro y organise l’expédition du Granma, en compagnie d’un médecin nommé Ernesto Guevara. Fidel Castro n’a aucun mal à convaincre le jeune argentin qui se souvient : « Je l’ai connu durant une nuit fraîche à Mexico, et je me souviens que notre première discussion tourna autour de la politique internationale. Quelques heures plus tard – au petit matin – j’étais l’un des futurs expéditionnaires ».
17. En août 1955, Fidel Castro publie le premier manifeste du Mouvement 26 Juillet qui reprend les points essentiels de sa plaidoirie « L’Histoire m’acquittera ». Il y est question de réforme agraire, d’interdiction des latifundios, de réformes économiques et sociales en faveur des déshérités, d’industrialisation de la nation, de construction de logements, de baisse des loyers, de nationalisation des services publics de téléphone, gaz et électricité, d’éducation et de culture pour tous, de réforme fiscale et de réorganisation de l’administration publique pour lutter contre la corruption.
18. En octobre 1955, afin de récolter des fonds nécessaires à l’expédition, Fidel Castro réalise une tournée aux Etats-Unis et se réunit avec les exilés cubains. Le FBI met sous étroite surveillance les clubs patriotiques M 26-7 fondés dans les différentes villes.
19. Le 2 décembre 1956, Fidel Castro embarque dans le port de Tuxpán au Mexique à bord du bateau Granma d’une capacité de 25 personnes. Les révolutionnaires sont 82 au total et mettent le cap sur Cuba avec l’objectif de déclencher une guerre de guérilla dans les montagnes de la Sierra Maestra.
20. La traversée se transforme en cauchemar en raison des conditions climatiques. Un expéditionnaire tombe à la mer. Juan Almeida, membre du groupe et futur commandant de la Révolution, se remémore l’épisode : « Fidel nous a dit la chose suivante : ‘Tant que nous ne l’aurons pas sauvé, nous ne bougerons pas d’ici’. Cela a ému tout le monde et a éveillé notre combativité. On s’est dit qu’avec cet homme, personne ne serait abandonné. On mettait pourtant en péril l’expédition. Mais on l’a finalement sauvé ».

21. Après une traversée de sept jours, au lieu des cinq prévus, le 2 décembre 1956, la troupe débarque « dans le pire marécage jamais vu » selon Raúl Castro. Elle est dispersée par les tirs de l’aviation cubaine, et pourchassée par 2 000 soldats de Batista qui attendaient les révolutionnaires.

22. Quelques jours plus tard, à Cinco Palmas, Fidel Castro retrouve son frère Raúl et 10 autres expéditionnaires. « Maintenant, nous allons gagner la guerre », déclare le leader du M 26-7 à ses hommes. La guerre de guérilla débute et durera 25 mois.
23. En février 1957, l’interview de Fidel Castro réalisée par Herbert Matthews du New York Times permet à l’opinion publique étasunienne et mondiale de découvrir l’existence d’une guérilla à Cuba. Batista avouera plus tard dans ses mémoires que grâce à ce scoop médiatique « Castro commençait à devenir un personnage de légende ». Matthews nuance cependant l’importance de son interview : « Aucune publicité, si sensationnelle qu’elle fût, n’aurait pu donner quoi que ce soit plus tard si Fidel Castro n’avait pas été précisément l’homme que j’avais décrit ».
24. Malgré les déclarations officielles de neutralité dans le conflit cubain, les Etats-Unis ont apporté leur soutien politique, économique et militaire à Batista, et se sont opposés à Fidel Castro jusqu’aux ultimes instants. Le 23 décembre 1958, à une semaine du triomphe de la Révolution, alors que l’armée de Fulgencio Batista est en déroute malgré sa supériorité en hommes et en armes, a lieu la 392ème rencontre du Conseil de sécurité nationale, en présence du Président Eisenhower. Allen Dulles, directeur de la CIA, exprime clairement la position des Etats-Unis : « Nous devons empêcher la victoire de Castro ».
25. Malgré le soutien des Etats-Unis, ses 20.000 soldats et une supériorité matérielle, Batista ne put vaincre une guérilla composée 300 hommes armés lors de l’offensive finale durant l’été 1958 qui mobilisa plus de 10 000 soldats. Cette « victoire stratégique » révèle alors le génie militaire de Fidel Castro qui avait anticipé et mis en échec l’opération Fin de Fidel lancée par Batista.
26. Le 1er janvier 1959, cinq ans, cinq mois et cinq jours après l’attaque de la caserne Moncada du 26 juillet 1953, triomphe la Révolution cubaine.
27. Lors de la formation du gouvernement révolutionnaire en janvier 1959, Fidel Castro est nommé ministre des Forces armées. Il n’occupe ni la Présidence, dévolue au juge Manuel Urrutia, ni le poste de Premier Ministre, occupé par l’avocat José Miró Cardona.
28. En février 1959, le Premier Ministre Cardona, opposé aux réformes économiques et sociales qu’il juge trop radicales (projet de réforme agraire), présente sa démission. Manuel Urrutia fait alors appel à Fidel Castro pour occuper le poste.
29. En juillet 1959, face à l’opposition du Président Urrutia qui refuse de nouvelles réformes, Fidel Castro démissionne de son poste de Premier Ministre. D’immenses manifestations populaires éclatent alors à Cuba, exigeant le départ d’Urrutia et le retour de Fidel Castro. Le nouveau Président de la République Osvaldo Dorticós le nomme de nouveau Premier Ministre.
30. Les Etats-Unis se montrent immédiatement hostiles à Fidel Castro en accueillant les dignitaires de l’ancien régime, dont plusieurs criminels de guerre qui ont dévalisé les réserves du Trésor Public, emportant dans leur fuite 424 millions de dollars.
31. Pourtant, dès le départ, Fidel Castro fait montre de sa volonté d’entretenir de bonnes relations avec Washington. Néanmoins, lors de sa première visite aux Etats-Unis en avril 1959, le Président Eisenhower refuse de le recevoir et préfère aller jouer au golf. John F. Kennedy exprimera ses regrets à ce sujet : « Fidel Castro fait partie de l’héritage de Bolivar. Nous aurions dû faire un accueil plus chaleureux au jeune et fougueux rebelle lors de son triomphe ».
32. Dès octobre 1959, des pilotes en provenance des Etats-Unis bombardent Cuba et retournent en Floride sans être inquiétés par les autorités. Le 21 octobre 1959, une bombe larguée au-dessus de La Havane fait deux morts et 45 blessés. Le responsable du crime, Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, retourne à Miami sans être inquiété par la justice et Washington refuse de l’extrader à Cuba.
33. Fidel Castro ne se rapproche de Moscou qu’en février 1960 et n’acquiert des armes soviétiques qu’après s’être heurté au refus des Etats-Unis de lui fournir l’arsenal nécessaire à sa défense. Washington a également fait pression sur le Canada et les nations européennes sollicitées par Cuba afin de l’obliger à se tourner vers le bloc socialiste et ainsi justifier sa politique hostile vis-à-vis de La Havane.
34. En mars 1960, l’administration Eisenhower prend la décision formelle de renverser Fidel Castro. Au total, le leader de la Révolution cubaine réchappera à non moins de 637 tentatives d’assassinat.
35. En mars 1960, le sabotage par la CIA du navire français La Coubre chargé d’armes dans le port de La Havane fait plus d’une centaine de morts. Dans son discours en hommage aux victimes, Fidel Castro lance le slogan « La Patrie ou la mort » inspiré de celui de la Révolution française en 1793 « Liberté, égalité, fraternité ou la mort ».
36. Le 16 avril 1961, suite aux bombardements des principaux aéroports du pays par la CIA, prélude de l’invasion de la Baie des Cochons, Fidel Castro déclare le caractère « socialiste » de la Révolution.
37. Lors de l’invasion de la Baie des Cochons par 1400 exilés financés par la CIA, Fidel Castro monte au front et se retrouve en première ligne de combat. Il inflige une sévère défaite aux Etats-Unis en écrasant les envahisseurs en 66 heures. Sa popularité atteint alors des sommets à travers le monde.
38. Durant la crise des missiles d’octobre 1962, le général soviétique Alexei Dementiev était aux côtés de Fidel Castro. Il raconte ses souvenirs : « J’ai passé aux côtés de Fidel les moments les plus impressionnants de ma vie. J’étais la plupart du temps avec lui. Il y eut un moment où nous avons considéré comme proche l’attaque militaire des Etats-Unis et Fidel a pris la décision de lancer l’état d’alerte. En quelques heures, le peuple était en position de combat. La foi de Fidel en son peuple était impressionnante, et la foi de son peuple et de nous-mêmes, les soviétiques, en lui également. Fidel est, sans discussion aucune, l’un des génies politiques et militaires de ce siècle ».
39. En octobre 1965, le Parti Communiste Cubain (PCC) est créé en remplacement du Parti uni de la Révolution socialiste (PURS) né en 1962 (qui substitua les Organisations révolutionnaires intégrées – ORI – créées en 1961). Fidel Castro est nommé Premier secrétaire.
40.En 1975, Fidel Castro est élu pour la première fois à la Présidence de la République suite à l’adoption de la nouvelle Constitution. Il sera réélu à ce poste jusqu’en 2006.
41. En 1988, à plus de 20 000 kilomètres de distance, Fidel Castro dirige depuis La Havane la bataille de Cuito Cuanavale en Angola, au cours de laquelle les troupes cubaines et angolaises infligent une cuisante défaite aux forces armées sud-africaines qui avaient envahi l’Angola et qui occupaient la Namibie. L’historien Piero Gleijeses, professeur à l’Université Johns Hopkins de Washington, a écrit à ce sujet : « Malgré tous les efforts de Washington [allié au régime de l’Apartheid], Cuba changea le cours de l’histoire en Afrique australe […]. La prouesse des Cubains sur le champ de bataille et leur virtuosité à la table des négociations s’avérèrent décisives pour contraindre l’Afrique du Sud à accepter l’indépendance de la Namibie. Leur défense victorieuse de Cuito Cuanavale fut le prélude d’une campagne qui obligea la SDAF à quitter l’Angola. Cette victoire eut des répercussions au-delà des frontières de la Namibie ».
42. Observateur lucide de la Perestroïka, Fidel Castro déclare au peuple dans un discours prémonitoire du 26 juillet 1989 qu’en cas de disparition de l’Union soviétique, Cuba devra résister et poursuivre la voie du socialisme : « Si demain ou un autre jour nous nous réveillons avec la nouvelle qu’une grande guerre civile a éclaté en URSS, ou même si nous nous réveillons avec la nouvelle que l’URSS s’est désintégrée […], Cuba et la Révolution cubaine continueraient à lutter et à résister ».
43. En 1994, en pleine Période Spéciale, il rencontre pour la première fois Hugo Chávez avec lequel il noue une forte amitié qui durera jusqu’à la mort de ce dernier en 2012. D’après Fidel Castro, le président vénézuélien était « le meilleur ami qu’a eu le peuple cubain ». Tous deux mettent en place un partenariat stratégique avec la création en 2005 de l’Alliance Bolivarienne pour les Peuples de notre Amérique qui regroupe désormais huit pays de l’Amérique latine et de la Caraïbe.
44. En 1998, Fidel Castro reçoit la visite du Pape Jean-Paul II à La Havane. Ce dernier demande « au monde s’ouvrir à Cuba et à Cuba de s’ouvrir au monde ».
45. En 2002, l’ancien président des Etats-Unis Jimmy Carter réalise une visite historique à Cuba. Il intervient en direct à la télévision : « Je ne suis pas venu ici pour m’immiscer dans les affaires internes de Cuba, mais pour tendre une main amicale au peuple cubain et offrir une vision du futur pour nos deux pays et pour les Amériques […]. Je veux que nous soyons amis et que nous nous respections mutuellement […]. Etant donné que les Etats-Unis sont la nation la plus puissante, c’est à nous d’effectuer le premier pas ».
46. En juillet 2006, suite à une grave maladie intestinale, Fidel Castro est contraint de se retirer du pouvoir. Conformément à la Constitution, le Vice-président Raúl Castro lui succède.
47. En février 2008, Fidel Castro renonce définitivement à tout mandat exécutif. Il se consacre alors à la rédaction de ses mémoires et publie régulièrement des articles sous le titre de « Réflexions ».
48. Arthur Schlesinger Jr., historien et conseiller spécial du Président Kennedy, a évoqué la question du culte de la personnalité après un séjour à Cuba en 2001 : « Fidel Castro ne fomente pas le culte de la personnalité. Il est difficile de trouver une affiche ou même une carte poste de Castro à La Havane. L’icône de la Révolution de Fidel, visible partout, est le Che Guevara ».
49. Gabriel García Márquez, écrivain colombien et Prix Nobel de littérature, est un ami intime de Fidel Castro. Il a en dressé un bref portrait et souligne « la confiance absolue qu’il place dans le contact direct. Son pouvoir est à la séduction. Il va chercher les problèmes là où ils sont. […] Sa patience est invincible. Sa discipline est de fer. La force de son imagination le pousse jusqu’aux limites de l’imprévu. »
50. Le triomphe de la Révolution cubaine le 1er janvier 1959 dirigé par Fidel Castro est l’événement le plus marquant de l’histoire de l’Amérique latine du XXe siècle. Fidel Castro demeurera comme l’une des figures les plus controversées du XXe siècle. Néanmoins, même ses plus farouches détracteurs reconnaissent qu’il a fait de Cuba une nation souveraine et indépendance respectée sur la scène internationale, aux indéniables réussites sociales dans les domaines de l’éducation, de la santé, de la culture, du sport et de la solidarité internationale. Il restera à jamais comme le symbole de la dignité nationale qui s’est toujours aligné aux côtés des opprimés et qui a apporté son soutien à tous les peuples qui luttaient pour leur émancipation.
———-
Article original en portugais :

http://operamundi.uol.com.br/conteudo/reportagens/33239/50+verdades+sobre+fidel+castro.shtml
———-
Docteur ès Etudes Ibériques et Latino-américaines de l’Université Paris IV-Sorbonne, Salim Lamrani est Maître de conférences à l’Université de La Réunion, et journaliste, spécialiste des relations entre Cuba et les Etats-Unis.

” Patria o muerte, venceremos. ”
Fidel Castro (13.8.1926–25.11.2016)
#
”[Fidel Castron] [k]uolinuutisen jälkeen [Kanadan pääministeri Justin] Trudeau (…) kutsui [Fidel] Castroa muun muassa ’merkittäväksi johtajaksi’.” (http://www.savonsanomat.fi/ulkomaat/Lausunnollaan-%C3%A4rsytt%C3%A4nyt-Kanadan-p%C3%A4%C3%A4ministeri-ei-osallistu-Castron-hautajaisiin/883501)

Mitä Kanadan pääministeri Justin Trudeau siis sanoi?

Verkkouutisissa todettiin muun ohella: [Lainaus alkaa:] Justin Trudeaun mukaan Fidel Castro muun muassa oli ”elämää suurempi hahmo, joka palveli kansaansa” ja teki ”merkittäviä parannuksia saarivaltakuntansa koulutukseen ja terveydenhoitoon”. Trudeaun mukaan Castrolla oli valtava rakkaus kuubalaisia kohtaan, joilla puolestaan oli ”syvä ja kestävä kiintymys ’el Comandanteen'”.[Lainaus päättyi.]
#
Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on the death of former Cuban President Fidel Castro

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today [= 26.11.2016] issued the following statement on the death of former Cuban President Fidel Castro:

“It is with deep sorrow that I learned today of the death of Cuba’s longest serving President.

“Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and healthcare of his island nation.

“While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for “el Comandante”.

“I know my father was very proud to call him a friend and I had the opportunity to meet Fidel when my father passed away. It was also a real honour to meet his three sons and his brother President Raúl Castro during my recent visit to Cuba.

“On behalf of all Canadians, Sophie and I offer our deepest condolences to the family, friends and many, many supporters of Mr. Castro. We join the people of Cuba today in mourning the loss of this remarkable leader.”
#
Noin siis todellinen valtiomies, Kanadan pääministeri Justin Trudeau.

Sellaisia valtiomiehiä ei valitettavasti löydy omasta maastamme. Oman maamme poliittinen johto (Tasavallan presidentti, pääministeri ja ulkoasiainministeri) on ollut hiiren hiljaa, vaitonainen à la ’kurjat pelkuriraukat’. Miksi? Todennäköisesti poliittinen johto pelkää ainoan supervallan reaktiota? Tai kenties vaitonaisuuden syynä on tietämättömyys tai poliittinen ideologia? Poliittinen johtomme koostuu oikeistolaisista tai porvareista, jotka palvelevat viimeisessä analyysissä maailman valtaeliittiä. Se taas tunnustaa raakaa uusliberalistista kapitalismia, joka käy järjettömiä sotia sorrettujen iankaikkiseksi alistamiseksi ja ’kuppaamiseksi’. Lopputuloksena on kafkamainen maailma, jossa kaikki rikkaudet on ryöstetty äärimmäisen upporikkaan yhden (1) prosentin omistukseen.

Ja kun pienen Kuuban rohkea ja viisas kansa rohkean ja viisaan Fidel Castron johdolla ajoi maasta verisen diktaattorin, joka oli pysynyt vallassa ainoastaan USA:n tuella, USA:n valtaeliitti aloitti raivoisan valtioterrorin ja kauppasodan mainittua saarivaltiota vastaan. Häpeä ainoalle supervallalle! Ja häpeä oman maamme nykyiselle valtiojohdolle!

Viimein tuli Fidel

Luulivat kai voivansa loputtomiin keinotella
vuokraslummituotannolla ja koota hirmuvoittoja
ja entistäkin julmemmin kansaa pettää ja rosvota
sitä vastaan juonitella. Ja viimein tuli Fidel.
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!

Luulivat kai voivansa riehua kuin viidakossa
samalla kun vuoristossa jo tulevaisuus kajasti
ja entistäkin hurjemmin atareissansa[?] rypeä.
oli Kuuba peliluola, kun viimein tuli Fidel.
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!

Luulivat kai voivansa loputtomiin valehdella
huijareita kehuskella kelpo kansalaisiksi
ja entistäkin hurjemmin parjata Sierran sissejä
korvatuilla[?] pelotella. Ja sitten tuli Fidel.
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!

Luulivat kai voivansa apinoida demokratiaa
vaikka orjuutettu kansa teki nälkäkuolemaa.
Ja entistäkin julmemmin pitivät ryöstöjä rattonaan,
lahjuksia laillisina. Ja viimein tuli Fidel.
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!
Ja kävi käsky armoton: Jo riittää se riisto ja rosvous!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6ZH1Od8X-o
Kannattaa katsoa myös = > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3K1b0TS8rRQ
Kannattaa katsoa myös = > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKK3e4-OQ4w
Kannattaa katsoa myös = > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39XUAhG7ows

”Matkat Neuvostoliittoon 1960–1962 ja Hruštšovin takinkääntö…”

Höpö höpö. Kuuban ohjuskiistassa Neuvostoliitto pääsi tavoitteeseensa eli siihen että se pakotti Usan vetämään ohjuksensa Turkista. Turkin ohjusten takia NL laittoi pistoolin Kennedyn ohimolle kysyen:”shall we play the game”’. Kennedy joutui nöyrtymään. Tämä paljastuu siinä että JFK:n nimenomaisesta vaatimuksesta tämä hänen kyykyttäminen oli salattava medialta. NL ei ollut tässä kranttu, olihan se päässyt tavoitteeseensa. Kuuba oli pelkkä pelinappula. Olitteko kenties yllättyneitä?