User login
Planning for a Post-Fidel Cuba
Patrick Doherty -
February 18, 2008 - 7:00pm
Today, the New America Foundation's U.S.-Cuba Policy Initiative gathered leading Cuba watchers and scholars to discuss the implications of Fidel Castro's announcement that he will not seek nor will he accept the role of Cuban President and Commander-in-Chief. (On Sunday, Feb. 24, the Cuban Council of State is expected to hand power to Fidel's brother, Raul Castro, ending Fidel's 49-year rule with a constitutional succession.)
An MP3 audio recording of this conference call is available below. Participants in the call, which I moderated, included:
- Rep. Jim McGovern
U.S. Congressman (D-Mass.) - Col. Lawrence Wilkerson (ret.)
Co-Chair, U.S.-Cuba Policy Initiative, New America Foundation
Former chief of staff to secretary of state Colin Powell - Julia Sweig
Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies, Council on Foreign Relations - Peter Kornbluh
Director, Cuba Documentation Project, National Security Archive - Sarah Stephens
Executive Director, Center for Democracy in the Americas - Jake Colvin
Director, USA*Engage, National Foreign Trade Council
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Cuba Conference Call (MP3) | 24.27 MB |
Prop 8 Losers
There was an article in today’s LA Times about opponents to Proposition 8 boycotting local businesses that contributed to the “Yes on 8” cause. The tactics of intimating and threatening local businesses, is one of the many examples why homosexually is very dangerous to our society and why we should do everything possible to stop these terrorists.
These radicals attempted to intimate selected individuals and churches that had made contributions and threatened them to vote no on Proposition 8 or they would regent it. Isn’t this a form of intimation or a terrorist threat? Where is the federal government when someone commits a crime to rig the outcome of an election?
It hasn’t been proven yet, but it’s obvious that these out of control extremists sent the Moron Temple an envelop with some sort of white substance just because they supported Proposition 8. Isn’t this a form of terrorism? Where is the federal government when terrorists threaten the life of church going people? If this were a black church, would there be a different respond from the government? Where is the federal government when someone threatens to use a bio-chemical agent in retaliation for contributing money to the “Yes on 8” campaign.
When will society stand up to these extreme idiots and their campaign of terror? If we as a society give in to these home grown terrorists, the very core of our democracy will begin to deteriorate. If we give in to this depraved lifestyle, what’s next?
If the Taliban or Al Qaeda had done the exact same thing, you can bet that every citizen would rise up and fight back with everything that this great Country has. So how can these homegrown terrorists get away with terrorizing, intimating and threatening people who are just exercising their most basic right? Because not one person will stand up and say a word for fear of being labeled homophobic. This leads to the next question of who are the real bigots? They are the ones using the exact same tactics the Taliban or Al Qaeda uses to inflict fear to achieve their objective.
What’s really surprising about this whole thing is that our politicians, from local mayors to the governor, are supporting these terrorists. When these politicians took office, they took an oath to up hold the constitution of the United States and the laws of the land.
Finally, where is the federal government in all this? Terrorists who use intimation and threats in an attempt to change someone’s vote is a federal offence. If minorities groups were intimated by extremists, the fed’s would not spare any expense to prosecute these terrorists.
Wake up America before it’s to late…
These radicals attempted..
These radicals attempted to intimate selected individuals and churches that had made contributions and threatened them to vote no on Proposition 8 or they would regent it. Isn’t this a form of intimation or a terrorist threat? Where is the federal government when someone commits a crime to rig the outcome of an election?
Post new comment