Slashdot Mirror


ZunZuneo: USAID Funded 'Cuban Twitter' To Undermine Communist Regime

barlevg (2111272) writes "In a country where the government severely limits access to the world wide web, ZunZeneo, an anonymous SMS-based social network, drew more than 40,000 Cuban users at its peak, the Associated Press reports. On it, people shared news and opinions about music and culture. But what none of its subscribers knew was that the project was secretly funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), though a series of shell corporations and foreign bank accounts, and that its stated goal was 'renegotiate the balance of power between the state and society' in the Communist stronghold, hopefully leading to a 'Cuban Spring.'"

173 comments

  1. Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How terrible the US government is, using the concepts of a free exchange of ideas to overthrow another regime!

    Well, ok, to be fair in the US, most of those free ideas are scams, but it's still slightly better than bombs and poisoned cigars.

    1. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by PerlPunk · · Score: 2

      Mod up parent, please.

    2. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How terrible the US government is, using the concepts of a free exchange of ideas to overthrow another regime!

      I'm sure the Occupy movement would call them out on this hypocrisy.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They hate us for our freedom. Underhanded manipulation of their local political system for our own agenda has nothing to do with it.

      --
      I hate printers.
    4. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How terrible the US government is, using the concepts of a free exchange of ideas to overthrow another regime!

      I'm sure the Occupy movement would call them out on this hypocrisy.

      Why? Occupy got it's message out.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    5. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With FBI and NSA keeping tabs on them under the pretext of "domestic terrorism"?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

      "Free exchange of ideas"

      I have never heard propaganda defined quite like that before.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    7. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by towermac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to argue, but it's not just our agenda. Freedom is the agenda of mankind.

    8. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

      Not CIA? That's what I expected.

      Cuba is sort of the poster child for how the US is incompetent at elaborate spy-type skulduggery. I understand Castro has an entire museum dedicated to showcasing failed plots. Including the famous "poisoned baseball".

    9. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, I guess on the morality scale, this is an improvement over open assassination attempts and blowing up airliners to discourage tourism. I guess that's "moral progress" by slimy U.S. standards.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    10. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not CIA? That's what I expected.

      Ha, who do you think USAID is a front for?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    11. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or he has a museum of fake props that he created to make people think the CIA wants him dead.

      It's not like they can deny the activity.

    12. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They hate us for our freedom. Underhanded manipulation of their local political system for our own agenda has nothing to do with it.

      Fools thinking, the US has tried to gain Cuba as a Territory for years, one can argue their reasons for communist ideals, but if you ever watch the Che Guevara 3 part movie, read books, memoirs, ect you'll find out he wasn't about power, he was about freedom, Castro seemed more interested in power and corruption in the beginning when the two started the message he was like Che at one point, but as you would expect he got off on controlling people. Did he want to destroy the US yes he did because we wanted their country. And because it was alleged Russia was trying to use them for possible nuclear strikes against the US.

      You actually believe what you wrote? Sounds like Uncle Sam's go to boy! Anything you hear is coming from are government, or the media/press, who themselves could give a shit about reporting anything remotely true Communism isn't this mythological thing that involves complete oppression of everything, and hatred of freedom.

      You can look at are own government and see those similarities, for years they tried to block out anything they deemed evil aka censorship, they tried to make distilled alcohol illegal, they made drugs illegal, and even come up with bullshit mythological propaganda to convince citizens or scare them into supporting a ban. And the best part is the documents, memos, and reports they used were all fabricated, even the people responsible for forcing this ban came out and said it was all bullshit. And gave no creditable reason for them going after a nation wide ban. I go on with how free this country likes to claim it is, you can argue that we have always had a government controlled press, and now government controlled citizens, with the spying allegations. These are the same things the US government claims about communism. Only they are more creative in coming up with think tank wording to call it something else.

       

    13. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Sockatume · · Score: 2

      You want to give people the tools to overthrow their own regime? Fine.

      You want to give them the tools, then clandestinely take control of those tools once they're popular to foment a favourable rebellion that suits your own interests? No.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    14. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Freedom to subvert using tax monies gained with no regulatory oversight within a foreign policy framework dictated by corporate interests?

      Sign me up!

    15. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      US AID has a very long history of fomenting trouble in other countries. They have been a CIA front for a long time. Money/Aid does not come for free. This is not the first case. They have been active in India too for a long time doing this sort of crap. Its the targeted countries' fault of course that they ever let them in.

    16. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cuba and the US kinda mirrors the roadrunner vs coyote cartoons...

    17. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      "Free exchange of ideas"

      I have never heard propaganda defined quite like that before.

      From the article it sounds like there was plans to possibly introduce propaganda at some point but they never
      reached the threshold to do that. Basically they were just giving people a "free speech" platform.
      I'm all for phase 1 and my guess is that phase 1 would probably be enough as if people who are unhappy
      are given a way to secretly organize in an oppresive state then chances are they will eventually organize
      themself without the need for propaganda.

      I think creating ways for people all over the world to freely talk and organize in places where it is illegal is a great non-military idea.
      Something like a bunch of satelites running TOR accessible from anywhere would be awesome.

    18. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Well sure, but they also were subject to arrests, and in some cases post-demonstration harassment such as being put on TSA no-fly lists.

      I'm pretty sure you can "get your message out" in Cuba too, it's the consequences of doing so that are the problem.

      All of which said, I agree with the AC, this is a non-scandal. It's up there with "OMG! NSA tapped phones of German leaders!" Well, yeah. That's what it's supposed to do. I'm glad the Germans are our friends right now, but...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    19. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry man, It's kill or be killed, eat or be eaten, dominate or perish... That's just the nature of things. The graveyards are full of people with the "moral high ground".

    20. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      It's not like they aren't publicly known for a lot of the atrocities Castro accuses them of.

    21. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by JimSadler · · Score: 1

      How about we simply allow Cuba's problems to be Cuba's and keep our hand out of the picture completely? The problem is that when we work to destabilize a government we often end up with a rebellion that ends up with an even worse government in place. Cuba's brand of communism has become a bit less harsh and will probably continue to moderate itself. But if we cause turmoil they could easily revert to a form of communism more like Stalin had in place in Russia. That would mean far greater suffering for the Cuban people. Right now Russia has great turmoil. Many people are suffering in the new Russia as their system was destroyed when the Soviet Union was broken. There is a certain risk that they will revert to a ridged and violent form of communism due to their current miseries. We can not see why North Korea is so greatly isolationist but I suspect it is simply because they are aware that other nations can manipulate the public so easily. Yes North Korea needs to change but it really must be internal rather than a result of covert actions by other nations.

    22. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      comma he said while typing on equipment developed largely by corporations.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    23. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as "Freedom" is the US defined version, right? Cubans can't possibly make their own decisions, right? US has to tell them what is right. Control is the agenda of mankind. You will never be free until you understand that.

    24. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      using the concepts of a free exchange of ideas to overthrow another regime

      If it only were the concepts of a "free exchange of ideas". Instead, they want to control what Cubans see (just like the Cuban counterpart). They could aim to let the Cubans access the internet as a whole, twitter included, and I would see that as a worthy goal. But alas, they make it as hard as possible. They could easily let some companies do business with Cubans who can pay (or they families abroad). But no, currently, one would need not only to smuggle the equipment into Cuba (which would be expected of an oppresive regime), but also to smuggle it out from the US (which is not consistent with a freedom-seeking regime), and then prevent the GPS from reporting back the true location of the modem. Instead, USAID spends lots of money (I don't have the numbers at hand) making sure that those selected by them have access to, and only to, what they want.

      That's what irks me the most about the Alan Gross situation. Instead of making a public stance, removing the embargo for telecomunication/satellite equipment and services, and making a greater statement in the process, they opted to keep the prohibition for all but those hand-picked by USAID (and left Gross paying for the consequences when he was found).

      (Disclosure: I no longer live in Cuba, but it stills irks me to see this.)

    25. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by mi · · Score: 1

      but if you ever watch the Che Guevara 3 part movie, read books, memoirs, ect you'll find out he wasn't about power, he was about freedom

      Yeah, sure. And so was Stalin... And to gain that "freedom", the opposition had to be executed or incarcerated — and no amount of romantic movie-watching can change this fact. "To ensure, everyone is good, let's kill all the bad."

      Your attempt to distinguish between Che Guevara and Castro is noted — and discarded. There is no practical difference important to anyone, but historians. If anything, Castro is better — at least, he took the trouble of running the country, whereas Guevara left to continue enjoying himself.

      Communism isn't this mythological thing that involves complete oppression of everything, and hatred of freedom.

      Communism is simply the most murderous school of thought known to humanity. Even Hitler's peculiar strand of Fascism is but a distant second, while other Fascists (like Mussolini and Franco) don't come close to Stalin, Pol Pot, or the Kim dynasty.

      Rant all you want about Marxism theory, but everywhere it was put into practice the result was mass-murder... And to what end? The survivors were left with both — economic misery and absence of human rights... Compare Cuba, where we failed, with Chile, where we succeeded — which one is a shithole and which is the Latin America's top economy? Compare South and North Koreas. Compare Western and Eastern Germanies...

      Would the world have heard about "Nokia", would Linux ever have been written, if Stalin succeeded taking over Finland in 1939, the way he took over Estonia (and others)?..

      These are the same things the US government claims about communism.

      A very simple, yet universal answer to this kind of anti-American statements is thus: whatever wrong you can accuse the US of over the last 100 years, was provably committed far more gravely and severely by a Communist government over the last 50 years.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    26. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by mi · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure you can "get your message out" in Cuba too, it's the consequences of doing so that are the problem.

      Are you seriously comparing getting onto a no-fly list with incarceration? Wow... It is just as idiotic as comparing losing one's job due to McCarthy's investigations with being sent to GULAG for 25 years... Oh, wait...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    27. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by mi · · Score: 1

      I have never heard propaganda defined quite like that before.

      There is nothing automatically wrong with propaganda. It may very well be truthful — and usually is, when the US does it.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    28. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not why. The Republicans here ate Cuba because they have a much better health care system for a fraction of the cost. Doctors in Cuba actually treat people rather than demanding upfront payments. Also, Cuba doesn't put people in prison for not being able to pay their bills. You don't have to choose between bankruptcy or medical care. That goes against everything CONservatives stand for. They believe that if you aren't rich then you do not have the right to live. Just look at the RmoneyCare that the Republicans recently forced down our throats here in the US under the name ACA. If you are not wealthy enough to afford health insurance, they will have the IRS attack you.

    29. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by VVelox · · Score: 1

      The problem with this becomes they are communist and with that comes the baggage of permanent revolution.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

    30. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Free exchange?
      How many "ideas" were autotypes by USAID or Koch brothers? Not to mention the Bautistettes? Serously, NO ONE thinks the U.S. does anything for "freedom" given our penchant for killing people who resist our aggression in Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and about 300 other regions / states / nations.

    31. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      | Rant all you want about Marxism theory, but everywhere it was put into practice the result was mass-murder...

      Well, there you have your problem. Virtually none of Marx's actual ideas were put into practice by the so-called Communist parties. He wasn't about party politics at all, in fact. He was about putting economic power into the workers' hands, grass-roots power, i.e. the people in a factory/workplace make the decisions as a group. Which would involve informing everyone of the needed decisions, then voting on the course of action.

      None of that happened under the Soviets and Chinese. They paid lip service to Marx the way the crusaders paid lip service to Jesus whilst the butchers civilians in the middle-east.

    32. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm a bit skeptical of any free speech platform controlled and monitored by a hostile foreign government. Pretty sure such a thing would be illegal in the USA, and a source of national outrage.

    33. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. haha. ha. oh damn. funniest thing i've read all day... is this a coldf pseudonym or something? too funny.

    34. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1
      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    35. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Kinda strange that you conflate offering a free public speech platform with "elaborate spy-type skulduggery."

      Not really surprising that the real world doesn't match your expectations.

    36. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      And what about Castro's atrocities? Free pass, I guess .... at least for the crowd here.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    37. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Atrocities on both sides don't make a right.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    38. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Given Che's bloodthirsty nature I have little doubt where most of those atrocities occurred.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    39. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      Ahh Cold. nice to see you have abandoned all pretext of truth and/or rationality (...I always suspected you were faking it), Bountry Hunters and Child Predatorsz, Inside The FBI Entrapment Strategy.

    40. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Obviously we can't have the idea of the fringe Left engaging in political violence floating in polite company. After all, what would that do to the "peace" movement?

      Bridge bombing case: Appellate court upholds the sentences of 4 terror suspects

      The men had pleaded guilty in federal court in Akron to conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and other weapons charges.

      A federal jury convicted a fifth man, Joshua Stafford, of similar charges. Dowd sentenced him to 10 years in prison in October.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    41. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fools thinking, the US has tried to gain Cuba as a Territory for years

      Fool thinking in 1800's terms. Why get new territory when it comes with new responsibilities.
      Better to run the thing via proxy and get all of the benefits and none of the disadvantages. (Like giving the people rights and things)

    42. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      As long as "Freedom" is the US defined version, right?

      Actually no. Services like twitter are freely available in places around the world who have all kinds of varying opinions on what "free" is; at least, varying from the US version anyways. Some of these countries, particularly in Europe, set some pretty hefty restrictions on free speech even, such as labeling it hate speech if they don't like it. And really, that is acceptable so long as that is what the people of that country want.

      What ultimately matters is that the government doesn't hold an ironclad control over speech that is so strong that the people aren't allowed to decide for themselves what they want to be right and wrong. All the US is doing here is enabling Cubans to have that power.

      Cubans can't possibly make their own decisions, right? US has to tell them what is right. Control is the agenda of mankind. You will never be free until you understand that.

      On the contrary, this is far from that. The Cuban government currently says that Cubans can't possibly make their own decisions (if they can, then they're breaking the law.) What we're doing is giving them the power to make their own decisions.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    43. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Kinda strange that you conflate offering a free public speech platform with "elaborate spy-type skulduggery."

      Not really surprising that the real world doesn't match your expectations.

      The real world also doesn't match your perceptions.

      The spy-type skulduggery I was talking about is the long history that the US government and notably the CIA have in Cuba and how pathetic and ineffective it has been.

      As for the USIA in particular, I'll leave that to others to debate, but that's not who I was referring to,

    44. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Virtually none of Marx's actual ideas were put into practice by the so-called Communist parties.

      You are quite wrong there. Far too many of Marx's bloody ideas were put into practice.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    45. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      So do you have anything to complain about that isn't 40-50 years old or so? I've got something for you. The Cubans have been either executing or imprisoning people for political dissent the entire time, it hasn't stopped. Neither has the torture and mistreatment. And the numbers aren't small either. Since they don't seem to be making much progress there, are they "slimy" in your book? Worse? Surely not better? Or is it only the US, the country you claim to be from, that is "slimy"?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    46. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      They hate us for our freedom. Underhanded manipulation of their local political system for our own agenda has nothing to do with it.

      What the Cuban government truly hates is when it looks like any freedom might leak into their communist dictatorship. They put lots of people in prison, starve, and beat them, to keep that freedom from leaking in. Making something like twitter easier to get to isn't much of a threat to that. And as long as there are enough people running interference for the Cuban government, often voluntarily, the Cuban government will find it easier to keep their people in chains.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    47. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      In this case, US didn't tell them anything. Rather, it gave them a tool to discuss it between themselves. What's your beef with that?

    48. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      But Pol Pot's atrocities were infinitely worse than Castro's, so Fidel is alright by your logic.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    49. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 2
      FBI illegally abuses its power in the worst way to entrap 5 very stupid people and you can suddenly cook up a story to disqualify a movement of hundreds and thousands (or any movement that is politically inconvenient, that is). Intellectually dishonest, much - entrapment is^H^H was illegal for some very good reasons - but hey, that is how you t/roll.

      How FBI Entrapment Is Inventing 'Terrorists' - and Letting Bad Guys Off the Hook:

      The guy who convinced the plotters to blow up a big bridge, led them to the arms merchant, and drove the team to the bomb site was an FBI informant. The merchant was an FBI agent. The bomb, of course, was a dud. And the arrest was part of a pattern of entrapment by federal law enforcement since September 11, 2001, not of terrorist suspects, but of young men federal agents have had to talk into embracing violence in the first place... In all these law enforcement schemes the alleged terrorists masterminds end up seeming, when the full story comes out, unable to terrorize their way out of a paper bag without law enforcement tutelage."

      You forgot some labels: "Who else are we supposed to be afraid of? Certainly animal-rights and environmental radicals."

      But don't worry your pretty little heads over the epidemic of far-right insurrectionism that followed the election of Barack Obama: all told, according to a forthcoming data analysis by Neiwert, there have been 55 cases of right-wing extremists being arrested for plotting or committing alleged terrorists acts compared to 26 by Islamic militants during the same period. The right-wing plots include the bombing of a 2011 Martin Luther King Day parade in Spokane and the assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller in 2009. Neither of their perpetrators, it goes without saying, had been arrested before they attempted their vile acts; neither required law enforcement entrapment to conceive and carry them out. It's just too bad for their victims they did not fit the story federal law enforcement seeks to tell.

    50. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by daem0n1x · · Score: 2

      So, atrocities are OK as long as they are US-sponsored, right?

    51. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you just go away and do something useful?

      Your Russian counterparts are active in this thread on another forum.
      If it isn't obvious who the Russian shills are they go by the name PaleMan and Zeo (Claims to be from Serbia but whatever.)

      Just go ever there and derail the discussion with more misinformation. At least you won't bother civilians then.

    52. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      And your logic leaves you unable to say 5,000 deaths in a long running pattern of murder and toruture is worse than 1 death.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    53. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      No, but since you're left throwing things against the wall to see what will stick that will probably be the best you can do. The list of Cuban government atrocities against their own people is long and bloody, and the oppression of the Cuban people by Castro regime continues to this day. But that doesn't count since it isn't "US-sponsored," right?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    54. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that's exactly what the US wants. Control of all the means of communication, so they can decide who is allowed to talk to whom. Free exchange of ideas my ass. I am literally flabbergasted that you idiots believe this shit. Up until the Ukraine fiasco, this site was flat out anti government. People here understood that 99.99% of everything coming from the press and gov are bullshit. Now, all of a sudden, Amerika can do no wrong again. You are so fucking stupid I have lost all hope for humanity. Nuclear war is coming, because you are literally too stupid to stop it.

    55. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's exactly what the US wants. Control of all the means of communication, so they can decide who is allowed to talk to whom.

      This is the exact reason that we need as many channels controlled by as many different people as possible.
      I see the USA adding a second channel to Cuba as a good thing even if they have other motives.
      I would likewise see it as a good thing if Cuba, China, etc, added another communicaton channel in the USA.
      When I want to know what's really happening I typically try to cross check the US media with the BBC or
      countries hostile to the US to see the rest of the story.

    56. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by daem0n1x · · Score: 2

      Actually, you're right. Human rights violations happen every day in a secret prison in Cuba. Prisoners are kept there indefinitely with no due process and are regularly tortured. What an atrocity!

      You've probably heard about the place. It's called Guantanamo.

    57. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Are you seriously comparing getting onto a no-fly list with incarceration?

      No, I'm comparing incarceration with incarceration, and being put on the no-fly list with post demonstration harassment. You'll find it easier to get by in ordinary life if, when reading sentences, you don't skip words.

      Original sentence again, try reading all the words this time: Well sure, but they also were subject to arrests, and in some cases post-demonstration harassment such as being put on TSA no-fly lists.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    58. Re:Oh goodness me, non-military means! by mi · · Score: 1

      Original sentence again, try reading all the words this time: Well sure, but they also were subject to arrests, and in some cases post-demonstration harassment such as being put on TSA no-fly lists.

      Stop splitting hairs — nobody in the US gets imprisoned over speech. Arrested — for refusing to obey law-enforcement's orders — maybe. But arrest is not the same as incarceration — not in the US.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  2. I hope this is BS by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    Because doing anything like this ultimately is counterproductive if found out.

    Considering the nature of Cuban propaganda, it will use this, whether it's true or not, as another banana skin to hurl at the US foreign policy.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:I hope this is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that Cuba has propaganda? oh yeah American News, just like this controlled cuban twitter, must be true so, Cuban propaganda it is. ... carry on gullible sir, carry on.

    2. Re:I hope this is BS by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that Cuba has propaganda?

      Probably the fact that every country has propaganda? The US has Voice of America; other states have semi-official or even official government news agencies.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:I hope this is BS by gmack · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you've ever met anyone from Cuba they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

    4. Re:I hope this is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you've ever met anyone from the U.S. they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

    5. Re:I hope this is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you've ever met anyone from Cuba they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

      If you've ever met anyone from America they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

    6. Re:I hope this is BS by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      And if you've ever met anyone from Cuba, they'll also tell you that Cuba is nothing like what it's portrayed to be in the U.S. news. Or just ask any European who (unlike us "free" Americans), is actually able to vacation there.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    7. Re:I hope this is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you've ever met anyone from Cuba they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

      If you've ever met anyone from America they will tell you that the outside world is nothing like what they are told on the news. How is that not propaganda?

      I have met people from the U.S. Other than Fox News viewers-- most of whom, as far as I can tell, have never left the U.S.A.--many of them are reasonably well informed about the rest of the world, know people who have immigrated from other countries, and very often have travelled to other countries.

      So I call BS on your post.

      --on the original topic, I will say that I think that this is what the U.S.A. SHOULD be doing. Skip the CIA bullshit and the invade-other-countries bullshit and the sell-guns-to-groups-overthrowing-governments-they-don't-like bullshit. Support freedom of information? Yes, I can get behind that.

    8. Re:I hope this is BS by gmack · · Score: 1

      Depends what part of the US you are from. The Americans I talk to from red states seem to have more problems with that then the rest.

    9. Re:I hope this is BS by gmack · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm not American, and as someone who knows a few Cubans, I can tell you most of the country isn't like the tourist zones.

    10. Re:I hope this is BS by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      So, your point is that the Americans you met outside of the US have travelled to other countries?

      Who would imagine?

    11. Re:I hope this is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Can confirm as a Canadian. I have travelled there, and there are two distinct countries in Cuba.

      One that tourists are allowed to see (which extends off of places like Veradero to cover good portions of Havana and anywhere which tourists travel for experiences like river excursions and the like)
      The other one contains the people of Cuba who have zero contact with foreigners, and zero access to US currency which drives the black market down there.

      Neither of them is really adequately portrayed in North American media because neither of them serve to advance the narrative that the media is content with pushing. Either "Castro is evil, his people need us to give them freedom" or "These people live idylic, peacefull lives, free from the trappings of Western modern society, and they are happy with their lot in life".

      The reality is far more nuanced that either of those sound bites.

    12. Re:I hope this is BS by cusco · · Score: 2

      That's the case in most of the world. The non-tourist areas are always poorer, friendlier and have much better food than the resort areas.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    13. Re:I hope this is BS by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Well then, maybe you'll be interested in the experiences of this American.

      The Lost World, Part I
      The Lost World, Part II

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    14. Re:I hope this is BS by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You should search the web for pictures of the propaganda that the Cubans put up right next to the US base at Guantanamo Bay. You can see with your own eyes what their craft looks like, no need to resort to media corporations' interpretations.

  3. "between the state and society" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The private sector is not synonymous with "society".

    A democratic state (which neither the US nor Cuba is) is precisely "society".

  4. A rose growing in shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The US government working at the behest of the Cuban American National Foundation is wearisome, but helping Cubans communicate is actually a good thing. An improvement over arming drug dealers at least.

    1. Re:A rose growing in shit by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      The CIA isn't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. They're trying to ferment a violent government coup. Once a U.S. puppet is in place, you can kiss this free communication goodbye again.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:A rose growing in shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      helping Cubans communicate is actually a good thing.

      Sure. The reality is, they are helping Cubans be spied upon and it is all about control and putting the Cubans under our thumb.

      An improvement over arming drug dealers at least.

      Give me the drug dealers over the terrorists (three-letter agencies) any day.

      Drug dealers have a code, morals, something besides power for its own sake.

    3. Re:A rose growing in shit by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You seem to have confused your acronyms.

  5. USAID by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    USAID is suppose to be an aide organization. The moment they have to start laundering money they have gone off the reservation and entered CIA territory.

    There is a place for clandestine operation to work against regimes we don't like, that is why we have a foreign intelligence agency, CIA. Our government is completely out of control and way to large this is just more proof!

    Not only that it completely undermines the mission of USAID to have it associated with these type of shenanigans; its supposed to be about soft power, its supposed to be about building trust. Here we have one more department with in the government demonstrating laws don't matter, not ours and certainly not any other sovereigns. Shameful...

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:USAID by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is the same thing here on Brazil. USAID here helps every one who wants to overthrow any government that does not comply doggedly what the U.S. told to do.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:USAID by cavreader · · Score: 1

      The US does not act in a vacuum. It is not the only country with aggressive intelligence agencies looking to collect information from every one they can. And the preposterous claims that the US should not spy on it's "friends" is hilarious in the extreme. Countries don't have "friends" they only have interests which are constantly in flux. Outside of some initial indignant statements for public consumption concerning the NSA foreign intelligence programs the issue has been gradually pushed to the background because hypocrisy does have it's limits. When the Russian FSB, China's MSS,
      England's GCHQ, Brazil's ABIN, France's DCRI, Germany's BND, and all the other international agencies close up shop then the NSA and CIA can be disbanded.

    3. Re:USAID by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      USAID is suppose to be an aide organization.

      Like many U.S. NGO's, it's a front. Why do you think so many countries are distrustful of U.S. aid groups?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:USAID by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Color me naive, but I think I'm actually okay with an aid organization providing services that most of the rest of the world enjoy to people trapped within a country that rules over them as a dictatorship. That sounds a lot like aid to me, and if they need to engage in shenanigans to get that aid to the people, I'm okay with that too. After all, when a government stands in the way of its people receiving basic services, you have to do stuff like that. And if they're hoping that the people will use that service in a way that benefits the organization? You know what, that's really no different than any other aid they offer either, when you get down to it.

      I'm all for giving the US a hard time over its spying and whatnot, but this? I really don't have a problem with this unless they were actively using it to try and incite a Cuban Spring, rather than merely passively providing it and letting things develop on their own.

    5. Re:USAID by fermion · · Score: 1
      From their website

      "USAID is the lead U.S. Government agency that works to end extreme global poverty and enable resilient, democratic societies to realize their potential."

      So things like anonymous communications that allows the citizenary to communicate without their government surveling them can be considered part of that mission. USAID is actually directed to promote democratic governements. It is like the old Radio Free America. They do not actively undermine governments, but they do put propaganda on the airwaves that tell the people of those legitimate governments to rebel.

      Of course all this falls apart when we note that US is no longer recognizing anonymous and free communications as a fundamental right of the citizen. This is a bit hyperbolic, but a lot of our taxpayer money is being spent collecting open communications and attempted to minimize anonymous communication.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:USAID by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      As an American I am okay with that. I would not expect USAID to provide material support to groups the rest of the State Department wants to see go away.

      Its one thing for USAID to give money in an overt and legal way to group some foreign regime might not like much, but tolerates within its boarders.

      Its quite another for our aide organization to violating the laws for foreign countries, which at least in this case with Cuba they must have been because otherwise why the shell companies and secrecy.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    7. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Venezuela, Argentina, and Brazil (not to mention pretty much the rest of South America) are all places USAID funds CIA projects that aim to overthrow democratically elected governments. Are you saying the people of those countries have no right to be pissed at the U.S. for trying to destroy their political institutions in order to replace them with corporate yes-men?

    8. Re:USAID by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      They do not actively undermine governments

      Do you believe in Bigfoot too?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    9. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "anonymous communications that allows the citizenary to communicate without their government surveling" is just the means to the end: installing a 'pro-american democracy' that will be open to strangulation by American companies.

    10. Re:USAID by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Did you skip the part where they would start broadcasting their own propaganda over the network once it was popular?

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    11. Re:USAID by X.25 · · Score: 2

      USAID is suppose to be an aide organization. The moment they have to start laundering money they have gone off the reservation and entered CIA territory.

      If you think USAID has ever been an "aid" organization, I have a bridge you might be interested in.

    12. Re:USAID by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      As a Kool-aid-drinking, propaganda eating USian, I can assure you that [I] simply do not understand what you are talking about. ...I have no idea...

      FTFY.

      I'm pretty sure any non-USian american knows exactly what he is talking about.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    13. Re:USAID by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      No, some countries do have friends, the US not so much. The US has the kinds of friends most rich people have.

      Please, please, stop thinking that reality is exactly what the propagandists tell you it is. The world will be a better place once the US Ministry of Truth shuts down.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    14. Re:USAID by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      At least you recognise you are naive. Now please do something about it!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    15. Re:USAID by mean+pun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is the same thing here on Brazil. USAID here helps every one who wants to overthrow any government that does not comply doggedly what the U.S. told to do.

      As an American, I can assure you that simply do not understand what you are talking about. While I have no idea whether any US agency cares any about government change in Brazil, I can tell you that Lula was no problem at all. The man was rational and competent and if he and the US had different ideas from time to time, at least there was some logic to what he was doing. Dilma Rousseff is a completely different story. Early on she came on with the same anti-US ranting and ravings that are quite popular in South America these days. Geez, I don't think I've ever seen anything more embarrassing from a national leader than her photo with Fidel where she looked like an aging rock groupie wanting to suck him off at the first chance she got.

      Oh dear, oh dear. Yes, I have to agree here; that is horrible. Terrible. Possibly even Terrorism. Ranting and raving against the US! Having her photo taken with Fidel!! Because no US politician would ever rant or rave against neighbouring counties. Or have their photo taken with dubious world leaders.

      If the US is trying to support opposition to her presidency, well, that is a fight that she started.

      Certainly. If a politician says some mean things about the US, that TOTALLY justifies US meddling in that politician's country. There is lots of jurisprudence here, because it is exactly the time-honoured schoolyard argument that teachers like so much: "But teach, THEY started it!". (And in the same time-honoured schoolyard tradition, the original offence is of course microscopic compared to the retaliation.)

    16. Re:USAID by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      ...those countries have no right to be pissed at the U.S. for trying to destroy their political institutions in order to replace them with corporate yes-men?

      You hit the target. It's what they're trying here (with more or less success) since the military dictatorship (1964).

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    17. Re:USAID by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      ...While I have no idea whether any US agency cares any about government change in Brazil...

      Wow... Just wow... Dude, you are incredibly stupid or ridiculously naive. Think about it. Really try! I want a government that governs for my country, not for U.S. corporations. I do not want a "yes-man" like AC said. The problem is that your government disagrees.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    18. Re:USAID by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Color me naive, but [...] I really don't have a problem with this unless they were actively using it to try and incite a Cuban Spring, rather than merely passively providing it and letting things develop on their own.

      There is a wide range of gray between active and passive here. I'm willing to bet they were in an area that would make you uncomfortable.

    19. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He did. He expressed his opinion in a constructive and coherent way. Can we expect the same from you at any point?

    20. Re:USAID by cavreader · · Score: 1

      I see absolutely no propaganda in my earlier statement. Are you actually saying only the US operates foreign intelligence programs to push for desired outcomes that could benefit its own interests? As far as a US Ministry of Truth goes the US is the only major power that places national firewalls or internet filters to restrict access to any information. People that speak of Ministries of Truth are just upset that their pet opinions might not be as popular as they would like them to be. Anyone expressing a differing opinion is automatically stupid, lying, or a state agent looking to suppress the truth.

    21. Re:USAID by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Quite likely, and mere moments after I submitted the comment I realized that I had completely failed to consider or address that topic.

    22. Re:USAID by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Countries don't have friends, they have allies. Sometimes leaders have friends that are leaders of other nations.

      Don't anthropomorphize nations, they hate that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    23. Re:USAID by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Last time a red crashed the Brazilian currency I got a couple of cases of good Brazilian Rum for $.99/750ml. I'm all for leftests running Brazil into the ground.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    24. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certainly. If a politician says some mean things about the US, that TOTALLY justifies US meddling in that politician's country. There is lots of jurisprudence here, because it is exactly the time-honoured schoolyard argument that teachers like so much: "But teach, THEY started it!". (And in the same time-honoured schoolyard tradition, the original offence is of course microscopic compared to the retaliation.)

      As an American, you are right. Call them out on being bullies if you feel that way. That is a good thing.

    25. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow... Just wow... Dude, you are incredibly stupid or ridiculously naive. Think about it. Really try! I want a government that governs for my country, not for U.S. corporations. I do not want a "yes-man" like AC said. The problem is that your government disagrees.

      Many Americans want the same thing, a government that governs for the U.S., not for U.S. corporations.

      Unfortunately, we are stuck in an endless game of conquest and greed, with no end in sight. Any criticism is suppressed and we just double down, thinking if we keep pushing people hard enough they will just give up and give in.

      Many people here do not know, do not care to know, and never will know what is done in their name. They would likely care if they found out, but that step rarely happens.

      Not necessarily a conspiracy -- people here are just so trusting and complacent, the bad guys usually have little trouble.

      What started as resistance is now...mass stretches of apathy, united. Not everyone is so gullible, but few want responsibility or accountability. Much easier to just trust our politicans are looking out for us.

      We are not taught to question things, we are taught that knowledge corrupts. There are people here who really believe that, spreading the good word, thinking they are doing good. It is sad and pathetic.

    26. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where it says you're the guy they need to check with in order to determine the full breadth of responsibilities for each agency.

      I'd prefer to let Congress and the President figure that out between them. Since those are people I can vote for.

    27. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      As an American I would not want aid any government agencies worrying about foreign laws against free speech, or other laws that we formally consider to be evil.

    28. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Putin and W. loved each other and even used the same brand of tooth paste. Great friends! Allies, not so much.

    29. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      There is a wide range of gray between active and passive here. I'm willing to bet they were in an area that would make you uncomfortable.

      Probably not, since the project failed. You want to retool your attack. ;) A reasonable extended concern would be in what they would have done if it was successful, which is unknown. As a project that failed to attract the interest of the Cubans, for whatever reason, we know that they were not able to use it to wander into whatever gray areas they may or may not have had in mind.

    30. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Of course all this falls apart when we note that US is no longer recognizing anonymous and free communications as a fundamental right of the citizen.

      As an American with an interest in civics and history, I'd like to point out that however you feel about anonymity, that was never a fundamental right.

      It was always the case that you have a right to privacy in your personal effects including communication, but it was up to YOU to keep it private. The restriction was never on knowing who something belongs to. Instead, the Right is to be free of government interference in your communication and to be free of the government searching your effects without cause.

      Clearly, to me, the government is violating that and is searching my electronic papers. But that is a violation of being free from search, not of some right to anonymity.

      I was stopped by the police just a few days ago. I have no right to anonymity, and while I have a right not to be stopped without cause, I do have to identify myself when requested, even if the stop is without just cause, or otherwise unlawful. As long as they don't search my papers, they're always allowed to try to figure out who I am.

    31. Re:USAID by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Did you skip the part where they would start broadcasting their own propaganda over the network once it was popular?

      You did, apparently. Neither happened; it did not become popular, and they did not broadcast their propaganda over it.

    32. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USAID was never about helping poor people and was always just another foreign policy tool.

    33. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with USanything building trust nowadays.
      Better to pretend you're a different country.

    34. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realise that works both ways. Many places think your laws are silly.

    35. Re:USAID by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Oh dear, oh dear. Yes, I have to agree here; that is horrible. Terrible. Possibly even Terrorism. Ranting and raving against the US! Having her photo taken with Fidel!! Because no US politician would ever rant or rave against neighbouring counties. Or have their photo taken with dubious world leaders.

      Well, that is the Slashdot rule, isn't it? Whenever the subject of Iraq comes up you can bet that someone will point out that decades ago pictures were taken of Donald Rumsfeld meeting Saddam so that "totally proves" that Saddam was put in power by the US, and was a US puppet, and .. and ... and. Or is this one of the many rules that is only operative when it is to the disadvantage of the US?

      Certainly. If a politician says some mean things about the US, that TOTALLY justifies US meddling in that politician's country. There is lots of jurisprudence here, because it is exactly the time-honoured schoolyard argument that teachers like so much: "But teach, THEY started it!". (And in the same time-honoured schoolyard tradition, the original offence is of course microscopic compared to the retaliation.)

      You may notice that individual nations deal with each other, there is no "teacher." But you wouldn't suggest that anyone speak out of turn, right? Not even for human rights, for those that have no voice?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    36. Re:USAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry about it, only a minor part of the world is in the asshat club.

    37. Re:USAID by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      The fact that the project failed does not preclude activity that was in the gray area.

  6. "We need more people in our NSA records" by mromanuk · · Score: 1

    Probably this was to put the cubans in the NSA files too, because their stupid government censure them (instead of spying them). Uncle Sam can fix that for you.

    --
    Martin - Dattabank
  7. Cuban spring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But winter is coming...

    1. Re:Cuban spring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure they're talking about the metal coil, otherwise it doesn't make sense.

  8. that's really stupid of them by Error27 · · Score: 2

    The government already has the CIA for this stuff. It was amazingly dumb of USAID to start doing the CIA's job. The head of USAID should resign followed by a full investigation.

    But that won't happen because the government has stopped caring about appearances any more.

    1. Re:that's really stupid of them by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      The CIA needs fronts. They can't just hand out money with "Central Intelligence Agency" printed on the checks.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:that's really stupid of them by Error27 · · Score: 2

      It's not clear that USAID was at the front on this opperation. They were funding it secretly through shell companies. When it comes to clandestine operations the CIA has better qualifications. It's just stupid, and more stupid.

    3. Re:that's really stupid of them by coinreturn · · Score: 2

      It's not clear that USAID was at the front on this opperation. They were funding it secretly through shell companies. When it comes to clandestine operations the CIA has better qualifications. It's just stupid, and more stupid.

      You assume that USAID is more than just a front for the CIA.

    4. Re:that's really stupid of them by cusco · · Score: 1

      This has been the job of USAID since it was founded, undermine governments that were not friendly to US economic powers and replace them with more cooperative ones. The CIA does this militarily, USAID does this economically and culturally. They also fund, through the Consulate system, English as a Second Language institutes that are supposed to promote US business and culture. I worked at one for a year in Peru.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  9. Are they the only one? by stewsters · · Score: 2

    And this is why Twitter does not need to be profitable to be in business. The investors are shell companies working for other governments, hoping they will cause a US spring.

    1. Re:Are they the only one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There will never be a US spring because we're stuck in eternal September.

  10. Freedom... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...from reason, sound behavior & mores. Slashdot, won't you, piece of self-similar faggot, just disappear? Of course not, the mass, being governed by entropy, is bound to self-destruction, hence you shall remain a favorite. For a time.

  11. Assange questions? by kooky45 · · Score: 1

    Didn't one or more of the people accusing Julian Assange of criminal conduct work for USAID?

  12. USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by GameboyRMH · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's funny how butthurt they are about Cuba and how much effort they put into overthrowing Castro. It's like they don't have any bigger problems.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Batista was a U.S. puppet, and his cronies (who are now a significant voting block in FL) lost a lot of money and power when Castro came in. They want it back, and they want it back BAD. The U.S. will murder, commit terrorism, or do anything else to accomplish this goal.

      The most shameful incident (IMHO) came in 1976, when a CIA agent blew up a civilian Cuban airliner, killing 78 innocent people. And said CIA agent is still living free (and protected) in the U.S. to this day. The U.S., my country, openly committing terrorism for petty economic ends. Fucking pathetic.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by c2me2 · · Score: 0

      Wow. It's almost like they pointed nuclear weapons at the US, or something.

    3. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow. It's almost like the U.S. took over Cuba and squashed their fledgling independence movement, before setting up the mafia to run the island as a resort for well connected businessmen and politicians from the States, then upon the instigation of a successful revolution tried for decades to overthrow Cuba's government via economic sanctions, assassination, and terrorism, or something.

    4. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by Megol · · Score: 2
      They did? I think you should do some historic research on this topic.

      Fact: The US sanctioned Cuba long before the missile crisis, in fact they started when the communists took control of the country. Strangely the US didn't do that when their puppet ruled there, quite heavy handed _and_ quite non-democratic. Documented facts.

      Fact: The US placed nuclear missiles in Turkey in order to be able to strike into the Soviet heartland long before the missile crisis. That the Soviet wanted to do something similar is called provoking nuclear war for some strange reason, why wasn't the US move called out in the same way?

      Fact: The US silently withdrew their nuclear missiles from Turkish territory which satisfied the Soviets and ended the crisis. Why isn't that fact commonly known by US citizens (those I've communicated with at least)? In short: when the US stopped threatening the Soviet the Soviets didn't need to place missiles on Cuban territory. Strange that.

    5. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by Copid · · Score: 1

      Unprecedented. We couldn't possibly have cordial relations with a country that points nuclear weapons at us. And barely over a half century ago! The wounds! So fresh!

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    6. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      It would have been great had Batista been replaced with a democratic government. Instead, Cuba got worse. At least Batista was an idealogical blank. Look up what Cuba did to black Africans. It ain't pretty.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again...

    8. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Batista was a U.S. puppet, and his cronies (who are now a significant voting block in FL) lost a lot of money and power when Castro came in. They want it back, and they want it back BAD. The U.S. will murder, commit terrorism, or do anything else to accomplish this goal.

      The most shameful incident (IMHO) came in 1976, when a CIA agent blew up a civilian Cuban airliner, killing 78 innocent people. And said CIA agent is still living free (and protected) in the U.S. to this day. The U.S., my country, openly committing terrorism for petty economic ends. Fucking pathetic.

      Castro was a Soviet puppet, and his cronies (who are now a significant power block in Cuba) gained a lot of money and power when Castro came in. They want to keep it, and they want to keep it BAD. The Cuban communists will murder, commit terrorism, jail the opposition, or do anything else to accomplish this goal.

      It is hard to pick the most shameful incident, but surely Che's bloodbaths must be considered.

      The Truth About Che Guevara

      Cuba is a police state and Che was its co-founder. Cubans “love” him the same way Romanians “loved” Nicolae Ceausescu and East Germans “loved” Berlin Wall architect Erich Honecker

      You know what happens to Cubans who display open hatred of Che?

      They get arrested.

      When he was still alive, they were executed or herded into slave-labor camps.

      So yeah, everyone “loves” him. It’s required by law. Woe to those who disobey State Security.

      The human spirit is a powerful force, though, and some Cubans can’t take it. A million and a half fled to the United States to escape the instruments of Che Guevara’s repression, many across the Florida Straits where the odds of survival are no better than two out of three. Others resisted at home, especially during the 1960s, the decade of global rebellion.

      CHE GUEVARA

      In his book Che Guevara: A Biography, Daniel James writes that Che himself admitted to ordering "several thousand" executions during the first year of the Castro regime. Felix Rodriguez, the Cuban-American CIA operative who helped track him down in Bolivia and was the last person to question him, says that Che during his final talk, admitted to "a couple thousand" executions. But he shrugged them off as all being of "imperialist spies and CIA agents."

      Vengeance, much less justice, had little to do with the Castro/Che directed bloodbath in the first months of 1959. Che's murderous agenda in La Cabana fortress in 1959 was exactly Stalin's murderous agenda in the Katyn Forest in 1940. Like Stalin's massacre of the Polish officer corps, like Stalin's Great Terror against his own officer corps a few years earlier, Che's firing squad marathons were a perfectly rational and cold blooded exercise that served their purpose ideally. His bloodbath decapitated literally and figuratively the first ranks of Cuba's anti-Castro rebels.

      Oh, and here are more of the people that you label as Batista "cronies," which ordinary people would refer to as people fleeing violent oppression.

      Castro launches Mariel boatlift, April 20, 1980

      On this day in 1980, Cuban President Fidel Castro proclaimed in Havana that any Cuban who wished to immigrate to the United States could board a boat at the nearby port of Mariel. During the ensuing months, some 125,000 Cubans fled to Florida in about 1,700 packed boats, at times overwhelming the U.S. Coast Guard and immigration authorities.

      I guess anyone that wan

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    9. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      You're referring to Cuba, a major outpost of communism in the Western hemisphere that aided attempts to overthrow governments around the world? Who could possibly object to the spread of murderous communist governments?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    10. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      It's funny how butthurt they are about Cuba and how much effort they put into overthrowing Castro. It's like they don't have any bigger problems.

      I believe that close to 2,000,000 people have fled Cuba and came to the US over the years. You don't suppose there might be something there, do you?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    11. Re:USA's attention to Cuba seems silly by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Castro wasn't even a communist when he started. He went that way because US was supporting Batista, and soviets were the only ones who'd give him support.

  13. Yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and that its stated goal was 'renegotiate the balance of power between the state and society'

    And what are they doing to correct the balance of power between the state and society in the US?

    What about the balance of power between the rest of the world and the US state?

    Because the rampant spying and ignoring of the Constitution means telling other countries what to do makes you hypocritical bastards.

  14. disingenuous article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USAID is a funding agency and they don't "plan" these things. They are more like VC's. This evil "scheme" to enable communications and collaboration in Cuba with the hopes that it would help them move towards an open democracy was pitched to them and the "documents" were created by the founders of the network not "evil" USAID operatives.

    This is sensationalist journalism trying to get eyeball ad revenue during hoopla about Snowden disclosures. And in so doing is going to make it difficult for other aid projects that focus on freedom and communications to get funded for fear of "bad press".

    1. Re:disingenuous article by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      USAID is a funding agency and they don't "plan" these things.

      Yeah, that's the CIA's job.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  15. Gee, what a shocker by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

    U.S. government, CIA, and old Batista cronies once again tries to overthrow Cuban government by any means necessary, film at eleven!

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Gee, what a shocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should send to Cuba the same people they got working on Venezuela right now. Learn from the experts.

  16. More slimey bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its stated goal was 'renegotiate the balance of power between the state and society'

    We should worry about renegotiating the balance of power in our own country before worrying about another foreign nation. Many elites in our government are guilty of many crimes, yet they walk freely. Meanwhile, Fidel sits around and smokes cigars all day, and that's a reason to go after him?

  17. National Endowment for "Democracy" - CIA front by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

    Relevant news: On Democracy and Orchestrated Overthrows in Venezuela and Ukraine

    The National Endowment for Democracy has been seen working behind the scenes in Ukraine, Venezuela, Turkey...

    Also check out operation Gladio: secret networks of far-right groups orchestrating false-flag and other attacks against communist or any other left-wing movements in Europe, since WWII. 1992 BBC documentary (bad quality though) "killed hundreds of innocent Europeans and attempted to blame the deaths on Baader Meinhof"

    This shit comes back to bite you, erodes US credibility.

  18. USAID is not a NGO by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    USAID is suppose to be an aide organization.

    Like many U.S. NGO's, it's a front...

    NGO stands for "Non Government Organization". USAID is not a NGO.

    http://www.usaid.gov/who-we-ar...

    As I read the article, it seems to say that the USAID helped set up social networks in Cuba that weren't controlled by the government. That sounds like a good thing to me. I'm puzzled why any /. readers would object to this.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:USAID is not a NGO by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Informative

      it seems to say that the USAID helped set up social networks in Cuba that weren't controlled by the government. That sounds like a good thing to me. I'm puzzled why any /. readers would object to this.

      Because the goal isn't to set up social networks, it's to start a violent coup and ultimately reinstall a U.S. puppet government in Cuba. These social networks are just a means to a slimy end.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:USAID is not a NGO by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      As I read the article, it seems to say that the USAID helped set up social networks in Cuba that weren't controlled by the government. That sounds like a good thing to me. I'm puzzled why any /. readers would object to this.

      Because dice sold us out to right wing propagandists, because that is where the money is in media these days.

  19. same in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we need someone to create a site for free and open communication to undermine the American regime

    1. Re:same in the US by tarlong · · Score: 1

      Indeed we do. Cuba, along with Puerto Rico and La Española (Dominican and Haitian Republics) were "given' (Read, sold to) as war spoils from Spain. Even though Cuba and La Española were in the process of independence from Spain, if not independent already (have to check that one out, memmory fails me; a bit hazy on that one, I admit). Puerto Rico had kick started its independence process also. Already we had gained Autonomous Powers from the Crown, the first step for independence)

      I mentioned this because, if you do some research, after the war, congress passed a few laws "allowing" these states to continue their "independence" with a little but important "BUT". That was that the US reserved the right to impose its politics on these territories. Cuba and the La Española became all-included resorts for the US aristocracy and Puerto Rico became their major test field. Agent Orange was tested here in our backyard. Contraceptives were tested here and a whole lot of other stuff that keeps being uncovered all the time.

      I am an American citizen by birth (I was born here in Puerto Rico after the US passed a law forcing the citizenship on us so they could legally use the selective service on our people. If you don’t believe me, seek out info on the Infantry Regiment 65 and Puerto Ricans in the US armed forces and the laws that were passed on that subject.) and tend to think of myself as an US American but I cannot deny the atrocities our government has committed in the name of democracy.

      I say to hell with it. If a country wants to go fuck itself, we should let them be, IF and this is a BIG IF, the people of a country make an independent attempt to seek our help, then and only then we may try to give them DIPLOMATIC aid. Aside from that we should, as a country, keep our freaking fucking paws of their shit and let them live unhappily ever after. We have so much more pressing problems at home already without trying to solve problems offshore that we have not addressed properly ourselves.

      Propaganda indeed. I am afraid that we are not as free and democratic a country as have been led to believe.

      BTW, I have it in good faith (Cuban Friends and relatives that have LIVED in Cuba before and after the Castro takeover) that Cuba is not the slice of hell we have been pictured but is also far from paradise as some make it look. If left to market forces, the Cuban government will fall on their own. By placing so much attention to what they do, we only give them a moral stand point to continue baby crying to the UN. Drop the embargo and let the market take over.

      --
      What? A beutiful butterfly you say? And how exactly are you going to turn into a beutiful butterfly then?
  20. Renegotiation [Re:USAID is not a NGO by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    it seems to say that the USAID helped set up social networks in Cuba that weren't controlled by the government. That sounds like a good thing to me. I'm puzzled why any /. readers would object to this.

    Because the goal isn't to set up social networks, it's to start a violent coup and ultimately reinstall a U.S. puppet government in Cuba. These social networks are just a means to a slimy end.

    Why do I care about the purported goal-- what we should care about is what they were actually doing, which was setting up a social network independent of the Cuban government. That's a good thing.

    The stated goal, in any case, was not "to start a violent coup." I don't know if the US government even knows what it wants (Cuban policy seems to nearly zero priority in the US, outside of south Florida)-- but the quote from the article was "its stated goal was 'renegotiate the balance of power between the state and society' ".

    Rephrasing that to make it say "let's start a violent coup" is rather distorting. "Renegotating the balance of power between state and society" sounds like a good thing-- in the US, too.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Renegotiation [Re:USAID is not a NGO by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      You may not realize this, but stated goal != actual goal in most foreign affairs of the US government; hence all the secrecy and shell games.

    2. Re:Renegotiation [Re:USAID is not a NGO by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Overcomplicated.

      Simplified and shortened: 'stated goal != actual goal in most foreign affairs'

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Renegotiation [Re:USAID is not a NGO by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Overcomplicated.

      Simplified and shortened: 'stated goal != actual goal in most foreign affairs'

      True, but I didn't want to be accused of painting with such a wide brush.

    4. Re:Renegotiation [Re:USAID is not a NGO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what we should care about is what they were actually doing, which was setting up a social network independent of the Cuban government. That's a good thing.

      That is cute. Better would be setting up a social network independent of the US government. Why is one ok but not the other?

      Rephrasing that to make it say "let's start a violent coup" is rather distorting. "Renegotating the balance of power between state and society" sounds like a good thing-- in the US, too.

      What makes you think there is any difference besides branding? What makes you think the message is not already pre-distorted and what you call distortion is merely removal of the rephrasal? How would you be able to tell the difference?

  21. Fake? What for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has been more than 600 documented attempts against Castro alone.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_attempts_on_Fidel_Castro

    Also, check operation mongoose

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project

    1. Re:Fake? What for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence their inability to deny it.

      I just think the museum is full of fakes.

  22. In 2009/2010? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    The US is *still* doing this crap, presumably to cater to the folks who were for the dictator Batista, or the Mafia, who's still pissed at loosing all the money from those casinos?

    Why is the US so in bed with China, if those in the "intelligence community" (for values of each of those words approaching zero as a limit) are so desperate to bring down China?

    I want my tax dolars wasted on this back.

                      mark

    1. Re:In 2009/2010? by TripleE78 · · Score: 1

      A lot of it comes down to Florida being a swing state in the presidential elections among other things political and money based, which causes all sorts of inane issues (think high tariffs on sugar plus subsidized corn to appease Iowa primary voters). Cuba is a rich untapped places to sell shitty entertainment and open up to corporate development. We're losing that market to Europe and Canada because someone named Castro is still in power, and you don't get to be in power here if you support that family. So, while we wait for the old school Batista supporters to die off, we keep doing this shit.

      China, well, we're in an economic cold war with them, and on top of that, they're Communist in name only these days. They are a weird hybrid of fascism and corporatism now. They have us by the balls and are playing a game that makes our politicians have wet dreams. Of course we're supporting them.

      So yeah, I want a refund too.

  23. What they do, what they say [Re:Renegotiation] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    That's why we should be more interested in what they do than what they say.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:What they do, what they say [Re:Renegotiation] by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      That's why we should be more interested in what they do than what they say.

      And yet, I'm sure we'll never know what they actually did here. The only one storing all those past social media missives is a US three-letter agency.

  24. I see nothing wrong with this by spitzak · · Score: 1

    I'm unclear if this article is supposed to raise righteous anger at some evil by the old USA. But this sounds exactly like something we should be doing to promote our views, and probably a lot more effective than any threats or insults.

    1. Re:I see nothing wrong with this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm unclear if this article is supposed to raise righteous anger at some evil by the old USA. But this sounds exactly like something we should be doing to promote our views, and probably a lot more effective than any threats or insults.

      The only view that matters, is how do you treat people who disagree with you.

      What is wrong with it, is we have enough problems at home, we don't need to be conquering the globe. Aside from the fact that we should not be conquering the globe in any case.

      What makes you think there are not threats and insults? That is just classified, don't you know.

      What makes you think this is anything besides a spying effort?

      I suppose Cuba declared war on us? Or are we just bullying everyone again?

      Pray tell, how is giving people a cage equated to freeing them?

  25. This proves yet again that American imperialism by compucomp2 · · Score: 1

    is alive and well. The Americans will stop at nothing to conquer the world. "Freedom" and "democracy" are merely code words for slavery at the hands of the Americans. I praise Cuba for their continued heroic resistance to the evil imperialistic power literally in their backyard. They've shown that the world will not simply bow down to American power like the Americans want.

    1. Re:This proves yet again that American imperialism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Americans will stop at nothing to conquer the world. "Freedom" and "democracy" are merely code words for slavery at the hands of the Americans. I praise Cuba for their continued heroic resistance to the evil imperialistic power literally in their backyard. They've shown that the world will not simply bow down to American power like the Americans want.

      I agree with you, but please, these are not Americans who are doing this. Whether we are responsible for letting it happen is debatable, but please do not think real Americans buy this. They are just silenced and live under slavery as well.

      Real Americans, would see the irony, and see who is bullying who, and realize America is an ideal and a spirit of resistance, not a place. Quite the opposite of those in power now.

      I do not mean to be an apologist, but please do not call them Americans. They aren't. Despite what they say. Despite what they pretend to be.

    2. Re:This proves yet again that American imperialism by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      "Freedom" and "democracy" are merely code words for slavery at the hands of the Americans. I praise Cuba for their continued heroic resistance to the evil imperialistic power... They've shown that the world will not simply bow down to American power ...

      What the Cuban communists have shown is that they are willing to execute or imprison people by the thousands each year to maintain a brutal dictatorship with backwards Marxist economic policies that have been abandoned by nearly every country in the world due to their repeated failure. Their "heroic resistance" to democracy, any real measure of freedom, and a functioning economy, have resulted in around 2,000,000 people fleeing the country at no small risk to themselves, especially if they get caught. The Cuban people are slaves now of their own government. Your praise is entirely misplaced.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  26. that's not how you do it... by steak · · Score: 1

    If you want to end communism in cuba put a mcdonalds and a walmart in havana and wait about a month.

  27. And because we do this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is fair game for any other country to try to create an American Spring. Great. Pinnacle of freedom.

  28. What is it with the US and CUBA? by fygment · · Score: 1

    Way back when, while a corrupt Cuban government was allowing US companies to rape the island and it's people, there was a "Cuban Spring". The people were spurred to overthrow a malignant regime and seek freedom. Didn't work out so great because at the time Communism was deemed a viable political model for a free people, but that's life.

    So now it's many years later, win hearts instead of continuing the antagonism. Right now the little subversions and embargoes mean innocent people get hurt say: participating in the subversions and getting caught, dying in the ocean in a bid for freedom, or suffering from a lack of goods. Instead, establish diplomatic bridges that will in time yield exactly what you want, another Cuban Spring, only this time without bloodshed because you will have swayed the Cuban leaders not just the masses.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.