This interesting exchange between Congressman Jeff Flake and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing marks an important policy change.
President Bush threatened to veto virtually any relaxation of
“As you know, the embargo is part of our law. I mean, a President cannot lift the embargo. That has to be done by an act of Congress. If the Congress decides that’s in the
33 comments:
this represents a vitally important revelation. congress has repeatedly voted to end travel restrictions for americans only to have bush veto or threaten veto, so it was pulled.
now if the current admin accepts the will of congress it means the travel restrictions will be over.
and once the travel restrictions end, there's a good chance the embargo will fall after. timing, who knows, but this is a very good sign and creates an energy of its own regardless of the political wills on either side for normalization.
anonimo
The other part of the testimony did not differ much from the biological solution to the Cuban situation talked about by previous administrations. I think that Sec.Clinton was also communicating that the Administration would not initiate any actions unless there was some move from Havana. The issues are not necessarily settled in Congress. Relaxation measures tend to pass in each chamber separately and then get scuttled in the inevitable conference. Unless a bill solely focusing on the travel ban or the embargo passes both chambers, the relaxation provisions are likey to be written out of the conference bill. I have no doubt that such a bill would be signed by President Obama unless Havana creates a ruckus.
Vecino de NF
Do we all agree with Congressman Flake's and Secretary Clinton's assesment that the Cuban government does not want normal relations with the USA?
Vecino de NF
Do we all agree with Congressman Flake's and Secretary Clinton's assesment that the Cuban government does not want normal relations with the USA?No. I have always found that argument (used by both sides) to be completely bogus. The only truth there is that normal relations will never be put ahead of Cuba being able to act independently in the name of its ideals (in Angola, for example). Some people expected Cuba to lay down at the feet of the Empire and accept enemy planes violating their airspace or other indignities just for the sake of better relations. That will never happen. Cuba has gone this long without relations, so there is no sake in selling out their principles or sovereignty now. The fact that no one in the US power elite seriously believes this argument is the reason why we still have the embargo today. If there were any real evidence to the contrary, there would be normal relations today.
it ain't that simple, ano. There are still many legislative obstacles to a full U.S. surrender to Castro. But you can keep on praying -- although you may be an atheist since you are such a toady for the communists in Havana.
Leftside,
What does the USA gets out of normal relations with Cuba? If the answer is nothing, then why change its policy? Please educate me!
Vecino de NF
Hey Phil, the bill to lift the travel restrictions has been referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, any idea how someone can tell when they will address it, if ever?
anon 519 ouch, that really hurt! oye gusano, o gusanito, cause you have be a child,, or child like, if that's the best you can come up with. quick what year is this? 1962? nope, wrong again.
don't need to pray, cause whether in committee or not the political will and cabron bush no longer around, and the gusano jefes in miami just don't have the clout anymore. and now the administration has given a very clear green light to ending the travel restriction and the embargo.
pero no llores, we'll remember you over a mojito in bodeguito del medio, like one remembers the dinosaurs -- big, dumb and extinct.
anonimo
typical american revisionism. the planes were shot down with no provocation,i just flying over havana on a sunday stroll dropping innocent leaflets. oh wait, they did it more than a dozen times. and they were warned not to. and the usa govt knew about it and did nothing. and they were filing illegal flight plans. and no govt in the world would tolerate illegal incursions from an area with a history of dropping bombs and bio chemicals.
but that don't matter. nah. and we really did invade iraq for WMDs
oh well, whatever works for the ignorant masses. just end the travel restrictions and embargo, and flake is doing it the right way after years of beating his head against the bush tactics.
hey vecino, go read the prince.
anonimo
ano, what you and your ilk don't understand is that US policy towards Cuba is much bigger than a single ethnic community in the US. No US President is going to base decisions on any anticipated reciprocal gestures from Castro. He has burned too many before.
Job well done, Phil. A bonus for you for being such a faithful proponent of the further enrichment of the castro brothers.
Henry, to get so worried about a few extra million dollars a year for the Cuban Government really shows how thin your position is. If the Revolution is as weak and hated as you and the hard-liners always tell us, these extra dollars would be meaningless and you wouldn't have to embarrass yourself by insulting our host.
leftside:
the fear is palpable among the gusanos as they see 50 years of policy control going down the tubes. as well, the embargo industry is very lucrative to many of these people, and once normalization occurs their razon d'etre evaporates, probably with a sizable portion of their income.
history is passing them bye and it scares them to death, so the closer it comes the louder their shrieks.
anonimo
anon 849 -- my ilk, my word how harsh
cuba policy was made by the US government, then handed over to the gusanos by Reagan. now that's ending. CONGRESS will decide if the travel restrictions and embargo will end -- and the obama admin just said they wont object or veto the will of congress. that's a huge difference from the bush perspective of the past eight years, and his underlings in the house and senate.
it is out of the president's hands re the travel restrictions for americans and the embargo. he has no control except to veto and that has been publicly announced he will not.
i understand it, apparently your type, or ilk, does not.
nice try though. well actually it wasn't
anonimo
ano, do you understand how Congress works? There are any number of ways to thwart the will of the majority.
Anonimo,
I strongly suggest you seek medical help. I try to defend your right to voice your opinion and your response is condescending and insulting. Whatever points you make are invalidated by your rhetoric. Fortunately I am familiar with this tactic of insulting those that disagree with one's opinion so I can dismiss those that employ it. One thing is clear you are not interested in finding common ground just to destroy those that disagree with you. If you reflect the Cuban government's position either on purpose or inadverntenly, I doubt we can have normal relations between the Cuban government and the USA, or the Cuban government and those that disagree with it.
I feel sorry for you.
Vecino de NF
and how was my response to you condescending or insulting? not sure i follow you.
anonimo
anon 1005 -- thwart the will of the majority, that's a great democracy you got there. you're right, the will of the majority re cuba has been thwarted for years now, but it looks like that may be coming to an end.
there are plenty of ways for congress to thwart things, but it appears those attempts to thwart will be thwarted. why are you so scared of congress reflecting the will of the people, and obama saying he won't veto?
anonimo
Anonimo,
To quote you "hey vecino, go read the prince".
condescending : showing or implying a usually patronizing descent from dignity or superiority
To quote you again: "then handed over to the gusanos"
insulting: giving or causing insult; characterized by affronting rudeness, insolence
Enough said.
Vecino de NF
vecino, good grief so sensitive. i told you to go read the prince in context to what flake was doing in response to your comment about everyone agreeing. flake has for years been trying to pass legislation ending travel restrictions and embargo, but met with no success due to the bush admin and republican control of congress. so now he's saying lift the embargo to piss the cuban govt off. there was no malice in the comment, just a flip remark to show how politics can work -- Machiavellian.
as far as the other comment goes not sure the context or if it was directed at you.
thanks for the definitions, i hate it when comments are obtuse
non-insultingly yours
anonimo
ok i understand the other comment re gusanos; it wasn't directed at you; only those who insult without thinking. i don't think you're a gusano, though i don't agree with hardly anything you say at least you have a point of view other than calling someone a toadie etc.
there are too many here who just come in, throw an insult, then run away without leaving any tag. those are the ones my comment was aimed at. and those are gusanos who just keep spitting out the same old propaganda crap that's been heard for 50 years. i won't let that slide.
but the gusanos throwing insults was not directed at you. unless you start insulting me.
still non insulting but sometimes sarcastic and intolerant of ignorance
anonimo
Anonimo,
Just knock it off like I told the guy with the sophomoric play on your handle! This blog can be very useful for exchanging ideas with the aim of finding common ground. Using terms like gusanos does not help in doing that, and treating everyone that disagrees with you like they are mentailly impaires or just uneducated doesn't either. I am not going to put anything in capitals because I think you get my drift. I'll be happy to keep exchanging views with you if the tone changes.
Vecino de NF
im sorry, i didn't realize you were the arbitrator of this blog.
if someone insults me and says ridiculously ignorant things it is up to me to decide how to respond. if the moderator deems those responses excessive then he can remove them.
i don't need you or anyone to tell me how to respond. if someone comments respectfully i'll do my best to reciprocate; which i have done consistently. if the post presents a different opinion that's fine, i can respond to that.
But if someone just wants to insult me directly i'll give it back. i have no use for those gusanos who lurk here whose only purpose is to make sure no common ground is found, or simply want to make an ignorant statement. if you don't like that opinion there's nothing i can do about it. but i don't need anyone lecturing me.
i'll give respect to those who deserve it, and unless you are the person who controls this blog then your opinion of my tone really has no meaning. whether you want to continue to respond to my posts is your decision, with respect
anonimo
Anonimo,
You said "but i don't need anyone lecturing me" but you reserve your right to lecture everyone else! I am not and do not aspire to be the moderator of this or any other forum but I do reserve the right to call them as I see them.
Vecino de NF
and so do I
enough of this -- lets get back to things cuba
still waiting for you to answer the question
anonimo
Anonimo,
What was the question again? (I have been tracking the swine flu outbreak. Rather strange, apparently is a previously untyped virus)
Vecino de NF
for those who try and ignore history --
back in July 1964 the New York times ran an article by Lisa Howard (she was one of many intermediaries taking messages back and forth from Fidel and JFK). the article quoted Fidel as expressing his desire to extensive discussion on all issues, release of political prisoners, ending of aid to Latin American revolutionary groups, and negotiate settlement for expropriated property. LBJ refused to respond, or even explore the possibility, or call Fidel's bluff if that's what they thought it was. just one in a long line of missed opportunities due to america's intransigence -- all they wanted was to destroy the regime, allow for no negotiation and to continue to 'tighten the nuts' on the cuban people, as LBJ indelicately put it. a continued indictment of american style foreign policy towards a much smaller weaker nation, only to try reimpose its short 50 year hegemony on cuba.
so enough with the continued propaganda that fidel never wanted to negotiate with the USA, or that the revolution will fall apart upon normalization. it has been the american side consistently refusing to explore negotiation. looks like that should change soon.
anonimo
oh, ok, ano, argument is over. you found an article in the New York Times. Was Herbert Matthews still with the paper then?
well anon 1054 that was just one example. it was lisa howard, not herbert. and if you want more go to peter knornblun's site -- my point is that cuba has tried to negotiate with USA at multiple, various times, all in order to resolve the differences. so why hasn't america taken fidel up on his offers, even if to call his bluff.
so what is your point, if you have one?
and how bout a moniker at end so we know what we should call you -- otherwise we'll think of something.
anonimo
call me chingon.
My point is no serious student of Fidel Castro would ever argue he was EVER ready to negotiate with the United States over the issues it cared about: armed subversion and human rights.
And please stop citing Peter Kornbluh. he's a long-time Castro apologist.
typical gusano reaction; when facts are brought up there's just something in your dna that doesn't allow you to even consider them.
throughout the past 50 years there's substantial proof -- including verification from the American side -- that cuba has wanted to negotiate with the USA. fidel has often indicated, as now does raul, a desire to talk based on mutual respect and the acceptance of self-determination. why wouldn't they want normal relations with USA for economic reasons, as well as for the americans to end their war against cuba.
So I give one example re NY times article going back to 64, and there are many, many more dealing with every president except Bush lite, and you just discount it.
or you resort to a personal attack. when peter kornblun releases documents from the american side re the proof of these attempts at discussions you call him a castro apologist. Do you do it out of a pathological fear or is it just Pavlovian?
you are the poster boy for why things are finally changing and that reactionary voices like yours will be put into the trashcan of history. i understand your frustration, it's not easy to waste so much time and energy on another losing battle.
assume you are working hard then for the end of travel restrictions and embargo so the regime will implode in a matter of months as others assert
keep up the good work, your anti-castro efforts have been so effective. see you in another 50 years
anonimo
latest news -- arlen spector switches to the dems; with al frankin coming in that gives them filibuster proof senate. and so when the travel restrictions come through they won't be stripped in committee and won't be compromised in senate. obama already said he'll respect wish of congress. wait for it, first the travel then the embargo. it will end.
anonimo
Hello all
http://www.moroccanwholesale.com/ - order meridia online
But according to the expert advice, you should know about certain things before actually using it out.
[url=http://www.moroccanwholesale.com/]buy reductil[/url]
Such information can also be collected from you doctor clinic or any other health centre.
buy cheap meridia
Also a good amount of people have used this drug and till now no one has complaint regarding this drug.
Post a Comment