US JUSTIFIES INTERFERING IN OTHERS’ ELECTIONS

US JUSTIFIES INTERFERING IN OTHERS’ ELECTIONS

Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.

“When we have wanted to overthrow other governments, we have done so in the best interests of the people of those countries.” Such a tender philosophy was the one that James Robert Clapper Jr, former head of the National Security Agency (NSA), declared before a congressional committee in Washington, D.C. Clapper did this on May 8, 2018, with all naturalness, trying to justify Washington’s electoral interference in more than eighty countries.
In the same way, this gentleman expressed himself when he promoted his book Facts and Fears, where he tackles issues such as alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections and in the Syrian conflict. In Syria, the United States has been the main support for terrorists seeking to overthrow the legitimate government of that Middle Eastern country.
The interference in the electoral processes of more than eighty countries throughout history was done thinking “in the best interests of the people” of these nations, Clapper reiterated in an interview granted to Bloomberg, when speaking of the American history of interference in the elections of other nations.
Clapper is remembered in his country for hiding the truth about the massive surveillance program developed by the National Security Agency (NSA) before it was brought to light by Edward Snowden.
Certainly, intervention in other people’s electoral processes has long been a recurring component of Washington’s foreign policy.
In Latin America, the expulsion from power of a legitimately-elected president is considered the most condemnable intervention, although they abound, practically, in the history of all the countries in the region. Jacobo Arbenz, in Guatemala; Salvador Allende, in Chile, or Joao Goulart, in Brazil, are just some examples that have preceded in time the recent Manuel Zelaya in Honduras; Fernando Lugo in Paraguay and Dilma Rousseff in Brazil.
On a global scale, it is known that, in 1947, the U.S. forced the Italian government to exclude all communists and socialists in the first post-war cabinet in exchange for U.S. economic aid to rebuild Europe destroyed by the World War.
Thereafter, the CIA (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency) did everything in its power, legally or illegally, to prevent the participation of Communists in the Italian government, while covertly financing Christian Democratic candidates there and elsewhere in Western Europe. The Italian elections of April 1948 were the first in which the CIA’s intervention in the affairs of another country was felt. Without the CIA, the Italian Communist Party would have won those 1948 elections broadly.
From then on, for decades, whenever the Communists, either in alliance with the Socialists or on their own, threatened an electoral triumph, the United States raised the threat of exclusion from the Marshall Plan to prevent it.
The now-retired intelligence official explains that he wrote the book to inform the public of the “both internal and external” threats facing the United States, and to explain that President Donald Trump is not the problem of the American country, but only the symbol of a broader problem because “the truth is relative.
On February 13, U.S. intelligence directors warned the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee that “Russia appears to be preparing to repeat the tricks it unleashed in 2016 as the 2018 midterm elections approach: cyberattacking, filtering, manipulating social networks, and perhaps others.
Days later, special prosecutor Robert Mueller used social networks to formulate accusations against 13 Russians and 3 companies run by a businessman linked to the Kremlin in order to attack Hillary Clinton, support Donald Trump and sow discord.
Most Americans were understandably impacted by what they saw as an unprecedented attack on their political system. However, intelligence veterans and academics who have studied covert operations have a different and rather revealing view.
If any government in the world totally lacks the authority and moral standing to condemn the interference of any nation, powerful or weak, large or small, rich or poor, in the internal affairs of another, that nation is the United States because of its long history of abuses against its enemies as well as its allies.
But for Washington to go out and denounce or protest the interference of any nation in its electoral affairs is simply an insult to the collective intelligence of humanity; an unacceptable shame from any point of view.
October 11, 2018.

Advertisements

CANADIAN DAILY DRAGS BAD COMEDY OUT

CANADIAN DAILY DRAGS BAD COMEDY OUT
By Manuel E. Yepe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.

The Canadian government has partnered with its brain injury experts to investigate the causes and effects of alleged health problems that have affected Canadian and U.S. diplomats accredited in Havana. So says an article in the Ottawa Starr newspaper headlines, signed by Bruce Campion-Smith, its reporter for local political affairs. Global Affairs, [the Canadian foreign ministry], has arranged for the Brain Repair Center, affiliated with Dalhousie University, as well as the Nova Scotia Health Authority and IWK Health Center, to investigate the potential causes and mysterious symptoms that allegedly affected a dozen diplomats and their accredited family members in Cuba. A senior federal government official told The Star that an
investigation led by the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) conducted with the cooperation of Cuban authorities, which has lasted more than a year, does not even appear to have come close to determining what may have happened and whether anything really happened.
Since 2016, when several U.S. diplomats were joined shortly after by some Canadians, they have been involved in a series of mysterious incidents that left them suffering symptoms such as dizziness, nausea, headaches and difficulty concentrating, similar to those of a concussion but without cranial trauma to explain the cause, the Canadian newspaper states.
“In spite of all the investigations carried out, the cause or causes of the health incidents experienced by our staff are still unknown. We basically continue to search, investigate and work with our
counterparts,” said the official, who spoke on the condition that his testimony remain anonymous, according to The Star.
Investigations have been hampered from the outset by mysterious circumstances. First, because the U.S. side did not allow accredited experts of any nationality clinical access to those affected or to the U.S. military doctors who could see them within a period of time close to their supposedly being affected. They argued that the patients were personnel working in intelligence tasks, obliged to respect strict rules of secrecy because of the profile of their tasks.
In addition, many media outlets have exploded the imagination of their audiences with science fiction versions of ultrasonic weapons that could be microwaves, speculation about the size of such weapons and the capabilities of such presumed devices.
But perhaps the main obstacle has been that the issue has been turned into a vehicle for denunciation of Cuba by Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio. Though he is not Cuban and has never visited the island, Rubio intends to take advantage of his Cuban ancestry to benefit his presidential aspirations, in the context of the tense relations between Washington and Havana.
Rubio managed and obtained support from President Trump to give the issue global resonance. To encourage him, Rubio assured the American President, using false data, that in Florida counties with abundant Cuban population, Trump had obtained the majority of the votes over Hillary Clinton in the 2018 presidential elections, something that was proved to be false and showed Rubio’s scarce political base among Cubans.
Dr. Michael Hoffer, a brain injury specialist at the University of Miami who cared for several Americans with symptoms, confirmed that their cause is unknown.
Like the Americans, Canadians also experienced incidents in their homes or in hotels and at their workplaces. All revealed anomalies in the boody organs that help determine gravity and balance. Americans and Canadians also agree in the experience of having suffered vestibular problems of the ear and in the balance.
It is interesting to note how the course of the investigations always revolves around the search for the perpetrator(s) of the attacks, their motivation and methods. But they overlook the possible responsibility for the harm to American or Canadian personnel is not from countries that are enemies of the United States or Canada. Nor are they caused by mysterious acoustic attacks themseves, but by actions carried out by the authorities of the American intelligence community, carrying out trials of some kind of clandestine program or secret weapon, at the cost of the naïve sacrifice of their own soldiers and allies.
For now, it seems like a comedy with no predictable end.
October 3, 2018.

TRUMP REPRESENTS A SPLIT IN THE RULING CLASS

TRUMP REPRESENTS A SPLIT IN THE RULING CLASS
By Manuel E. Yepe

Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.

It is good that many on the U.S. left are beginning to see that the clashes between Trump and his supporters against the so-called “resistance,” reflect a “split in the ruling class.”
This is the view of Greg Godels, the prominent American communist journalist who used to use the pen name Zoltan Zigedy. “It is a very healthy advance because it rules out confusion fomented by the Democratic Party leadership, childish sensationalism, and the meaningless simplicity of the capitalist media.
According to Godels, this is a real and fierce battle between different groups among the richest and most powerful. It’s a conflict that gives deeper meaning to the strange mischief of the Trump era. Behind the harsh and illusory images of a corrupt vulgar person like Trump, to whom only by the “heroic” protectors of freedom and security (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.) object, hides a real struggle for ideas, interests and the future. It is good that more people are seeing it as a struggle between the rich and the powerful fighting over their different visions of the future of capitalism: “a split in the ruling class.”
Many times in the last two years, Greg Godels has written about the emergence of alternatives to market fundamentalism such as
neoliberalism and globalization in the conventional wisdom of the ruling class. He has argued that the rise of economic nationalism in advanced economies is an expression of that alternative. Intensified competition in energy policy is offered as a material symptom of economic nationalism, as is disinterest in maintaining a relatively peaceful backdrop for securing and promoting trade.
The United States is more interested in selling arms than in resolving its many wars (it is known that Secretary of State Pompeo convinced members of the Trump administration, publicly embarrassed by the massacre in Yemen, not to cut off support for Saudi Arabia because of such misdeed due to the possible loss of $2 billion in arms sales). A recent reflection by Joshua Green, Bloomberg Businessweek national correspondent, entitled The Dividends of Anger, accounts for how the recognition of the changing political terrain provoked by the crisis. Trump’s slogan of economic nationalism “Make America Great Again” explains how it was the anger over the financial bailout that gave Trump the presidency. Green recalls Obama’s infamous meeting at the White House with the CEOs of the major banks, where he frankly told them, “My administration is the only thing between you and the gallows.
Reflecting on Obama’s words, Green warns: “Millions of people lost their jobs, their homes, their retirement accounts and fell out of the middle class. Many more live with an anxiety that gnaws at them. Wages were static when the crisis broke out and have remained static throughout the recovery. Recently, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the share of U.S. workers in non-agricultural income has fallen almost to its lowest level since World War II.
This harsh indictment of post-apocalyptic capitalism captures well the conditions that have fuelled the fear of such pitchforks. Make no mistake, those who rule the major capitalist centers pay attention to anger, not to respond to it, but to divert it.
The history of American politics in the last decade is the story of how the forces that Obama and the Democratic Party failed to contain, restructured the world by unleashing energies on the left (Occupy Wall Street) and on the right (the Tea Party). The critical mass of conditions that led to Donald Trump had its genesis in these reactions?
Trump was able to prepare a campaign based on responding to anger with measures of economic nationalism, patriotism and, paradoxically, partisanship for the working class.
Of course, the idea that Trump was planning to build a workers party or intended to transform the Republican Party into a “workers party” is ridiculous, but it is remembered that his campaign was driven by anti-immigrant animosity with the argument that jobs were being taken away from them. When Trump declared his candidacy, Americans of all stripes were bitter with the ruling elites of both parties, and on that rests Trump’s opportunistic position of attacking them, including the Republicans.
Greg Godels concludes that only a concerted effort to create or nurture a truly independent, anti-capitalist movement that addresses the real needs of workers makes sense today, when bourgeois parties voluntarily sacrifice workers’ interests for the sake of capitalism. October 1, 2018.

PECULIAR ASPECTS OF DEMOCRACY IN THE USA

PECULIAR ASPECTS OF DEMOCRACY IN THE USA
By Manuel E. Yepe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann
The United States is a “democracy” only in the sense that citizens have a theoretical right to vote for a number of nominated officials. It is a freedom that almost half of Americans consider meaningless. This is why only 56% of Americans voted for president in 2016, and for Congress two years ago less than 40% voted.
Like most “democratic” socialists in the United States, Bernie Sanders, the surprising favorite of large numbers of Americans in the 2016 election campaign, conflates bourgeois electoral freedom with real democracy, one which empowers people to put the political economy at the service of the common good.
In doing so, Sanders seeks to create a chaste foundation for siding with U.S. imperialism, says Glen Ford, executive director of the Black Agenda Report. His in-depth article was reproduced September 20 by the Marxist-Leninist website MLToday.
The U.S. is an oligarchy in which big businessmen almost always get away with it while average citizens and mass organizations have little or no influence in politics.
There is a dictatorship of the wealthy classes, says Glen Ford, recalling that the superpower is governed by oligarchs. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in 1967, they are also the biggest promotors of violence in today’s world.
Washington’s closest allies in this global mission are the former colonial powers of Western Europe and the former colonies of white settlers of Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The foreign policy of the superpower ruled by white multi-millionaires aims to preserve the global order of white supremacy that served for more than 500 years to keep most of the world under its exterminating and enslaving rule.
According to Ford, “it’s no wonder that Bernie Sanders, and so many other politicians who consider themselves progressive in the United States, avoid articulating clear foreign policy positions. That’s how two-thirds of progressive Democratic candidates for Congress act.” An example of this is that Sanders’ supporters in the campaign team of Bronx Congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez left out of their program platform mention of a “Peace Economy,” or which denounced U.S. military interventions in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia.
A true U.S. foreign policy needs a list of enemies. Sanders found them in an authoritarian axis whose members “share attributes of hostility toward democratic norms, antagonism toward a free press, intolerance toward ethnic and religious minorities, and the belief that the government should benefit its own selfish financial interests. These leaders are also deeply connected to an oligarchic network of billionaires who see the world as their economic toy.”
The U.S. government, as the toy of 12 of the world’s 15 richest people, should be at the top of Bernie Sanders’ list. But no, according to his worldview, only Trump classifies as a world-class villain, even though he is, by himself, a minor oligarch compared with others of his ilk.
But it is significant that the geopolitical center of this new oligarchic authoritarian axis of evil is not located on Wall Street or in London, but in Russia and China. They are seen as the enemies whom the warmongers of the Pentagon and the CIA pretend to fear and hate, mainly the Americans.
Sanders does not clearly oppose U.S. imperialism. On the contrary, he offers a supposedly “progressive” justification for preserving it. The new oligarchic authoritarian axis of evil seeks to give “progressives” a reason to accept, and even love, U.S. militarism and imperialism. Sanders wants the United States to improve relations with “our old democratic allies” in Western Europe because he believes that China and Russia are more dangerous malefactors and function as a single satanic unit.
Glen Ford’s essay concludes by expressing his hope that Sanders will achieve good results in the 2020 primaries, and that he will defeat all other corporate Democratic hopefuls for the nomination. But Ford thinks it will force the top authorities of the Democratic Party to sabotage Sanders’ own campaign once again.
“Sanders will never leave the Democratic Party, but perhaps a critical mass of his followers will come out of that capitalist pigsty in search of real, and truly democratic socialist solutions,” predicts Glen Ford.

September 24, 2018.

Manuel E. Yepe. TRUMP’S STUFF AND NONSENSE AT THE UN

TRUMP’S STUFF AND NONSENSE AT THE UN
By Manuel E. Yepe
https://englishmanuelyepe.wordpress.com/
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.

Americans suffered one of the worst embarrassments they have had to go through in this century when their President, Donald Trump, arrived late and was unable to address the UN General Assembly in the first round, which, as the host country of the world’s highest body, was his due.
But that was only the first of a large number of gaffes that Trump has committed before the UN. The second was when he began his speech by stating that he was there to “share in the extraordinary progress we have made.” This caused an explosion of laughter in the audience of high representatives of the world community. The laughter rose in tone when he added “in less than two years my administration has achieved more than any other in the history of our country,…the US economy is flourishing like never before and we have the lowest unemployment in the last 50 years.
To that I would later add an inconceivable barrage of lies:
“unemployment among Latinos and blacks and other groups has declined;” “we have passed the biggest reforms in history,” “America is now stronger, safer and richer than before I took office,” he concluded to the astonishment of the audience. He justified trade war against China and assured the world that the United States was not going to “apologize” for defending its interests.
Forgetting that he spoke at the United Nations, he said the US would not cede its sovereignty to the “bureaucratic” spaces administered by the United Nations. He attacked many of the world’s institutions such as the UN Human Rights Council.
Regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC), he said that it has no jurisdiction, legitimacy or authority and that it “violates all the principles of justice” and therefore the United States neither recognizes it nor will support it.
On international relations, he maintained the tone that defines him as a hero: “I have forged close ties and friendships with leaders from all over the world.” However, he didn’t allude to the rise in tensions with historic allies such as the European Union, Germany, and Mexico; nor to the worsening of their ties with Russia and China.
The main U.S. media highlighted the isolation of the country provoked or exacerbated by President Trump’s speech at the UN.
During his election campaign, Trump claimed that the world was laughing at the United States. Now it’s really laughing at Trump, says an editorial in The New York Times.
Yesterday the president apparently confused the UN General Assembly with a campaign rally, boasting that his administration achieved more successes than any of the previous ones. This was answered by laughter among those present, says the NYT. An editorial in USA Today questioned Trump’s isolationist policy, expressed in the slogan “America First. “The world’s biggest problems, such as climate change, terrorism, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, trade disputes or refugee flows, require international solutions,” the newspaper says. CBS puts it this way: “After 20 months in office, the president is much more adept at burying the international agreements signed by his predecessors than at replacing them with something better. (…) The spontaneous response of the dignitaries to Trump’s speech demonstrated the isolation of the U.S. president between allies and enemies alike. Trump’s nationalist policies created divisions with former partners and cast doubt in some circles on the reliability of Washington’s commitments.
The news site Político also highlighted the growing isolation of the ruler that was shown during several speeches in the plenary. As an example, it cites the speeches by the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, and the French leader, Emmanuel Macron, both of whom defended multilateralism. “U.S. presidents used to set the global agenda at the United Nations General Assembly. Now they’re laughing at Trump,” Ben Rhodes, who was former President Barack Obama’s chief foreign policy adviser, wrote on Twitter.
It could be said that Donald Trump’s speech, full of nationalist rhetoric in this UN Assembly, served to formalize the abandonment by the United States of “globalism” and his embrace of “patriotism.” In addition, it reiterates the empire’s threat to not fulfill his country’s economic obligations to the organization, because these are “unjust” to the superpower.
September 26, 2018.

Manuel E. Yepe. DIGGING OUT OF THE SONIC ATTACKS TALE

DIGGING OUT OF THE SONIC ATTACKS TALE
By Manuel E. Yepe
https://englishmanuelyepe.wordpress.com/
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
It seems that the State Department propagandists, the CIA and other U.S. agencies are not finding it easy to get out of the ridiculous situation they have gotten themselves into with the issue of acoustic attacks against their embassy staff in Havana.
For experts and observers of this type of propaganda at the highest level of government, the denunciation of an imaginary attack against the United States by another country is not something new in Washington. We must remember the explosion of the battleship Maine in Havana Bay; the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii; the incidents in the Gulf of Tonkin in Vietnam and the supposed presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which respectively served as lying justifications for launching wars against Spain in 1898, Japan in 1941, Vietnam in 1964 and Iraq in 2003.
The first of these invented situations served to inaugurate the imperialist status of U.S. foreign policy by leaving Washington in possession of the vast Spanish colonial empire.
The United States has surprised the world by the naivete with which US public opinion has accepted official versions of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the abominable terrorist act against the Twin Towers. These two fables look more like tales of Hollywood horror and mystery than anything else. The second of these two tales served as pretext for its so-called “war on terrorism” and, as part of it, the curtailment of the civil liberties of the people of the U.S. As a rule, the Cuban government -which has been one of the preferred victims of U.S. imperialism lately- has avoided responding to each of the media tricks plotted by Washington in order to avoid its further circulation. It has been the facts themselves, and the friends and sympathizers, who have answered them.
In order to attack Cuba, US propaganda has even added to the 20,000 martyrs left by the Batista tyranny imposed on the island by Washington. They’ve added the number of torturers and murderers of the deposed regime executed by judicial sentence of the popular
revolutionary tribunals to the triumph of the revolution. They leave out the aggressors and assailants executed because of the invasion of the Bay of Pigs (Girón Beach) sponsored by Washington and the victims of the hundreds of terrorist acts and attacks promoted by the United States against Cuba in recent times.
With these they try to stain with gross manipulation the very clean record of respect for human rights that the Cuban revolution has always maintained.
In the great farce of sonic attacks, which already has the guise of silent comedy, no guilty parties are identified and the alleged victims are not known either because, evidently, they have not existed.
Observers of U.S. politics maintain that Senator Marco Rubio was the one who devised the show so that the great scandal with his hegemonic participation would make him presidential with his sights set on becoming the first Hispanic president of the United States.
Rubio was aware of certain acoustic problems presented by several officials of the intelligence services accredited to the U.S. Embassy in Cuba. There, a lawsuit was being filed against the American Technology Corporation (ATC), manufacturer of the LRAD-RX equipment used by the National Security Subcommittee (NSSC) to communicate with its agents in Cuba who could be responsible for such ailments. This highly-specialized espionage equipment had just been acquired by the State Department for the diplomatic mission in Havana.
Rubio skillfully devised or commissioned the script to be developed for the spectacle of the sonic attacks. His greatest audacity was to involve, as the main sponsor, President Donald Trump. Michael Wolff points out in his book FIRE AND FURY, much has been written about Trump’s “acting like a child, suffering from psychopathologies such as delusions of grandeur and paranoia, that he is an ignorant person who neither reads nor listens and is totally incapable of fulfilling the duties of his office”.
Therefore, it was to be assumed that in a few weeks nobody would remember the farce of Trump’s sonic attacks, which would only have added to the list of his many “eccentricities”.
But the lie took flight and now the US does not know how to get itself out of the mess with as few political casualties as possible.

September 7, 2018.

CUBA AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY

CUBA AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
By Manuel E. Yepe

Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.

After several years of U.S. military occupation, Cuba lived a period as a pseudo-independent republic under U.S. tutelage. The island served as a model semi-colony that would attract former Spanish possessions already independent and new acquisitions to be captured for that status.
During that period, until the triumph of the liberating revolution in 1959, Cuba experienced technological advances propitiated by North American companies. They used the introduction of infrastructural and technological advances for their own expansion and for experimental and advertising purposes. That was why Cuba became the leader in Latin America in terms of the introduction and diffusion of new technologies in the mass media and telecommunications.
One of the first objectives of the revolutionary process begun in 1959 in Cuba had to be the extension of public services throughout the country. Sectors such as electricity and the mass media received a high priority in order to extend their coverage to almost the entire population of the island.
This was not the case with telephone service, which was not identified as a priority sector in the same way as radio, television and the print media, considered to be of greater social significance. It is estimated that until the early 1990s, around 40% of telephone installations were manufactured in North America before 1960. Its infrastructure became obsolete and without authentic spare parts because of the blockade imposed by the United States and showed problems of compatibility with the technology of countries that could dodge it to trade with the Island.
From 1959 to 1994, telecommunications in Cuba fell below the level of the other Latin American countries. National security and defense issues had to be given high priority in the face of constant aggressiveness by Washington and its agencies of terrorist subversion and domination.
Paradoxically, the situation changed substantially when the U.S. Congress passed the Torricelli Act (“Cuban Democracy Act”) in 1992. It reinforced the policy of trade sanctions against the island in “Track One” but, in “Track Two”, supposedly favored the democratization of Cuba through an active policy of promoting communications and contacts with the island. It explicitly included the lifting of sanctions on telephone and postal communications.
Cuba had denounced this “Track Two” as a weapon of ideological subversion in Washington’s war against the island. But the Cuban government did not put obstacles in the way of the re-establishment of telephone communications between the two countries.
Finally, in October 1994, the US Federal Communications Commission gave the green light for the agreements that Cuba had negotiated with a number of U.S. telephone companies on the distribution of revenue from calls. On November 25, 1994, direct telephone communication between the two countries was officially reopened.
Due to the imperative of its reintegration into the capitalist world economy, Cuba had to carry out a restructuring of its productive apparatus including a greater opening to foreign investment. Cuba had to modernize its telecommunications, an enormous task given the existing infrastructure backlog and, above all, the tight economic and financial blockade that it still suffers to this day.
The Cuban government, placed great hopes in information technology since 1964, when Che Guevara, Minister of Industry, inaugurated an automation department. In 1969, the Center for Digital Research was founded. In 1970, the Center built the first Cuban computer, the so-called “CID-201”.
As a result of bilateral agreements of 1973 and 1976, the USSR committed itself to supporting Cuba in the creation of a computer industry, and in 1978 the first computer assembly plant on the island came into service. In 1980, the Second Congress of the Communist Party stressed the need to encourage the development of information technologies, and in 1982 an automated national and international data exchange centre was created.
In 1983, the first international satellite connection was established, giving Cuba access to some 50 Soviet data banks. In August 1994, Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba, S.A. (ETECSA) was created as a monopoly for fixed telephony, with the character of a public limited company and a mixed company.
Cuba’s official adhesion to the Internet took place in October 1996. In 1999, the National Information Policy was formulated. It took up Strategic Guidelines and the Program for the Informatization of Society, announcing their technological convergence in the same Ministry of Electronics, Informatics and Telecommunications. September 17, 2018.

CUBA AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY

CUBA AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
By Manuel E. Yepe
https://englishmanuelyepe.wordpress.com/
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.

After several years of U.S. military occupation, Cuba lived a period as a pseudo-independent republic under U.S. tutelage. The island served as a model semi-colony that would attract former Spanish possessions already independent and new acquisitions to be captured for that status.
During that period, until the triumph of the liberating revolution in 1959, Cuba experienced technological advances propitiated by North American companies. They used the introduction of infrastructural and technological advances for their own expansion and for experimental and advertising purposes. That was why Cuba became the leader in Latin America in terms of the introduction and diffusion of new technologies in the mass media and telecommunications.
One of the first objectives of the revolutionary process begun in 1959 in Cuba had to be the extension of public services throughout the country. Sectors such as electricity and the mass media received a high priority in order to extend their coverage to almost the entire population of the island.
This was not the case with telephone service, which was not identified as a priority sector in the same way as radio, television and the print media, considered to be of greater social significance. It is estimated that until the early 1990s, around 40% of telephone installations were manufactured in North America before 1960. Its infrastructure became obsolete and without authentic spare parts because of the blockade imposed by the United States and showed problems of compatibility with the technology of countries that could dodge it to trade with the Island.
From 1959 to 1994, telecommunications in Cuba fell below the level of the other Latin American countries. National security and defense issues had to be given high priority in the face of constant aggressiveness by Washington and its agencies of terrorist subversion and domination.
Paradoxically, the situation changed substantially when the U.S. Congress passed the Torricelli Act (“Cuban Democracy Act”) in 1992. It reinforced the policy of trade sanctions against the island in “Track One” but, in “Track Two”, supposedly favored the democratization of Cuba through an active policy of promoting communications and contacts with the island. It explicitly included the lifting of sanctions on telephone and postal communications.
Cuba had denounced this “Track Two” as a weapon of ideological subversion in Washington’s war against the island. But the Cuban government did not put obstacles in the way of the re-establishment of telephone communications between the two countries.
Finally, in October 1994, the US Federal Communications Commission gave the green light for the agreements that Cuba had negotiated with a number of U.S. telephone companies on the distribution of revenue from calls. On November 25, 1994, direct telephone communication between the two countries was officially reopened.
Due to the imperative of its reintegration into the capitalist world economy, Cuba had to carry out a restructuring of its productive apparatus including a greater opening to foreign investment. Cuba had to modernize its telecommunications, an enormous task given the existing infrastructure backlog and, above all, the tight economic and financial blockade that it still suffers to this day.
The Cuban government, placed great hopes in information technology since 1964, when Che Guevara, Minister of Industry, inaugurated an automation department. In 1969, the Center for Digital Research was founded. In 1970, the Center built the first Cuban computer, the so-called “CID-201”.
As a result of bilateral agreements of 1973 and 1976, the USSR committed itself to supporting Cuba in the creation of a computer industry, and in 1978 the first computer assembly plant on the island came into service. In 1980, the Second Congress of the Communist Party stressed the need to encourage the development of information technologies, and in 1982 an automated national and international data exchange centre was created.
In 1983, the first international satellite connection was established, giving Cuba access to some 50 Soviet data banks. In August 1994, Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba, S.A. (ETECSA) was created as a monopoly for fixed telephony, with the character of a public limited company and a mixed company.
Cuba’s official adhesion to the Internet took place in October 1996. In 1999, the National Information Policy was formulated. It took up Strategic Guidelines and the Program for the Informatization of Society, announcing their technological convergence in the same Ministry of Electronics, Informatics and Telecommunications. September 17, 2018.

SECRETS OF THE TWIN TOWERS REVEALED

SECRETS OF THE TWIN TOWERS REVEALED
By Manuel E. Yepe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann

The U.S. CIA and the Saudi Arabian monarchy conspired to keep secret the details of the attack on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York and other targets in the United States on September 11, 2001, according to a documented book by journalists John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski that will soon be released.
The authors achieved in 2009 an astonishing interview with Richard Clarke, antiterrorist advisor of the White House during the
administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, whose publication enraged the CIA, especially its director, George Tenet, who had hidden crucial information about the plans and movements of Al-Qaeda, including the arrival in the United States of the future participating kidnappers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.
The CIA and the NSA, with Saudi complicity, articulated a false cartoon to cover up the U.S. government’s involvement in the affair. But for hundreds of family members and an increasing number of former FBI agents, this year’s September 11 ceremony fanned a calmed, but not extinguished, rage over the conspiracy of silence maintained by senior former U.S. and Saudi Arabian officials.
For many former national security officials, the unanswered questions about the events leading up to the September 11, 2001 attacks overshadow those of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, because September 11 changed the whole world. Not only did it lead to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the fracture of the Middle East and the advance of Islamic militancy, but it also brought the United States closer to its virtual conversion into a repressive national security state. This is manifested, according to the authors of the book, in that U.S. foreign policy has endowed itself with a strategy for the extermination of popular movements in Latin America. According to the new book, Mark Rossini, one of the two FBI agents assigned to the CIA’s “Osama bin Laden” unit, said he was sad and depressed because the agency’s managers mysteriously prevented them in 2000 from informing their headquarters about the presence in the United States of the future Al Qaeda conspirators who would execute the great terrorist act, and again in the summer of 2001. “It is clear that the attacks did not need to occur and that there has been no justice,” Rossini said, according to the book.
In 2002, Tenet swore to Congress that he was not aware of the imminent threat because that information came on an unmarked urgent cable and “nobody read it. But five years later he learned the truth when Senators Ron Wyden and Kit Bond forced him to disappear an executive summary of the CIA’s 9/11 investigation, which stated that no fewer than 50 people read one or more of the Agency’s six communications containing travel information related to these terrorists.
Until then, Clarke had trusted Tenet, his close colleague and friend. Claiming desperation for not having the means to spread the astounding revelation, in 2009 the former anti-terrorist aide wrote a book he titled, Your Government Failed You, which was largely ignored. Clarke says he long believed that it was a small group of low-level officials who obtained this information and did not realize its importance. But it turned out that more than fifty CIA officials knew, including Tenet. Tenet and two of his “anti-terrorist” aides, Rich Blee and Cofer Black, issued a statement calling Clarke’s theory “reckless and deeply wrong.
But now Clarke is not alone. Duffy and Nowosielski found other former agents and key FBI officials who have developed deep doubts about Tenet’s history. The only element on which they disagree is what officials were responsible for the alleged subterfuge.
John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski’s book relates many other aspects that add gravity to their denunciation: Saudi complicity with kidnappers; Saudi government support for al-Qaeda in recent years; the discovery of the role of monarchy agents surreptitiously funding public relations efforts to derail a congressional bill that would allow a group of family members to sue the kingdom for 9/11 damages; that officials from the Saudi kingdom’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs were actively helping kidnappers settle in California.
The ghost of September 11, 2001 continues to haunt the White House as one of its greatest historical excesses.
September 6, 2018

CAPITALISM’S CRAZINESS WON’T LAST MUCH LONGER

CAPITALISM’S CRAZINESS WON’T LAST MUCH LONGER
By Manuel E. Yepe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann
Ultimately, people like to dream of a better world. They like to commit themselves, even to sacrifice for another being, or for an ideal, or for a revolution. The madness that the West has spread across the planet to keep capitalism and imperialism in control of the planet will not last much longer. Soon, people will understand that there is nothing more glorious than building their own country, improving conditions around the world, cleaning up our environment, loving and fully committing to that work.
But before that, however, the lies will have to be exposed. War is war, peace is peace. Aggressors are aggressors and victims are victims.
The West has immobilized people all over the world with its filthy, depressing lies. Soon, I’m sure; the world will rise up and demand the truth! With the truth, the psychological balance will return. People will learn to dream again. The alienation that the West has been spreading will be confronted with dreams and imperialism will scream, howl, try to chew on everything that moves, but sooner rather than later it will lose all its power.
Millions of people are now; again, ready to fight for it and hopefully, it will kick the bucket. I believe in it.
The preceding paragraphs summarize the ideas of philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist Andre Vltchek, a native of Leningrad, of Czech parents and resident in the United States. He has written several books, including The Great October Socialist Revolution, in a substantial essay entitled The West has taken a philosophical blow to the left, published in the online magazine New Eastern Outlook.
People all over the world, including certain groups within the imperialist countries, feel that they have already endured too much. The main media, academia, the most visible propagandists of capitalism have been trying to convince the world that ideology has died, or at least become irrelevant and that the left is actually… the right! It is an extremely complex but important event. The main problem is that, after decades of philosophy being locked up, imprisoned, inside the decadent classrooms of decadent universities, most people have lost all idea of what they really dislike; of what they reject and what they want.
People all over the world have had enough. Even certain groups within the imperialist countries have endured enough. Philosophy and issues as deep and essential as “the direction in which the world should evolve” were no longer discussed at UNESCO meetings, but were no longer discussed by the presenters of surface talk shows. Light pop music, horror films, the promotion of selfish, often childish, values and desires did not satisfy the masses, but damaged them, reducing their ability to think, analyze and draw sober and well-informed conclusions.
Increasingly, the left has been defamed and conflated with the extreme right, even with fascism. In fact, comparing communism and fascism was tremendously rewarded. In the West, thousands of thinkers and ideologues have made their living doing nothing more than that. In Europe or North America, when you tune into any television or radio station you hear the great political leaders of the left being systematically called demagogues, populists, or worse, and they make crazy comparisons between Stalin and Hitler. Never a logical comparison like Hitler’s with Churchill or German Nazism with European colonialism. The political reality becomes extremely confusing, Vltchek says.
The biggest problem is that the vast majority of Western citizens have succumbed to this propaganda. They are no longer able to question anything related to these issues, and if they want to question them, they don’t even know where to look for sources that could effectively challenge the official dogma.
They are indoctrinated, but they believe they are free. Not only that, they do not realize that they are deeply conditioned and brainwashed: they really think they are in a position to preach, obliged to enlighten others, instructing the world with what they have been taught.
And so, they talk and write, they get paid for it. They join the UN, international cultural institutions and NGOs, universities, and continue to spread all those dogmas developed by Western ideologues for one and the same purpose: to exploit and control the world. August 23, 2018.