Re: Bible printing press confiscated in Cuba


"Dan Christensen" <dchris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1sN5f.1332$hW.612@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> "PL" <pl.nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:X4K5f.120596$xE3.108137@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Dan Christensen" <dchris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:p6E5f.1324$hW.879@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> "PL" <pl.nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:Fir5f.26925$mN2.1111164@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>>>> Recently, US religious leader, Pat Robertson, (snip)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing to do with the church in Cuba.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Everything to do with ongoing US aggression (snip)
>>>>
>>>> nothing to do with the people in Cuba.
>>>> You can't blame a preacher of the assembiy of God in Cuba for something
>>>> Pat Robertson said.
>>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Pat Robertson, is not just any preacher. (snip)
>>
>> but he has nothing to do with the Cuban minister that was hassled and
>> arrested, no?
>>
>
> Religion is very politicized in the US (snip)

We are talking about Cuba.

> And anyway, being questioned is not the same as being arrested.

He was arrested and taken to the police station.
As usual the facts expose you lies.
"Police then took Pastor Eliseo Rodriguez Matos, head of an Assembly of
God church in the area, to the local police station for interrogation."

>>>>>>> A US-based religious organization that is very active politically on
>>>>>>> the extreme right. Maybe a CIA front???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Get real comrade Dan.
>>>>>> This is just part of the standard repression against religion in
>>>>>> Cuba.
>>>>>> We have seen a lot of examples recently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't seen any credible reports of such "repression."
>>>>
>>>> You even contradict Granma comrade Dan.
>>>> So "credible" to you is what you say.
>>>> Get real.
>>>> To any normal person it is clear that repression in Cuba is on the
>>>> increase.
>>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> So you have no evidence of any actual repression of legitimate religions
>> (snip
>>
>> Yep I have.
>> The Castro government continues to prohibit the construction of new
>> churches.
>
> Even if true, this is hardly religious persecution. (snip)

Is true. You can't refute it.
It is a way to stop regligious life.

"Existing buildings, those built prior to the Revolution, are often over
100 years old and desperately in need of renovation and repair, but
official permission is hard to get. Yet many churches have gone ahead
without seeking permission, renovating and expanding the Church
facilities as much as finances allow until they are explicitly
prohibited from doing so by the government. Yet this puts them in a
precarious legal position, opening them up to the rarely enforced but
continuing threat of crippling fines, closure or even demolition."

>> It also enforces a regulation that prevents any Cuban or joint enterprise
>> from selling computers, fax machines, photocopiers or other equipment to
>> any church, except at exorbitant prices.
>
> Likewise.

False. It is a way to stop religious expression.

>> http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=1012
>
>
>> Also
>> http://es.catholic.net/laiglesiahoy/mundoarticulo.phtml?consecutivo=77678
>>
>>
>> The Government monitors all religious groups, including registered and
>> established institutions. The authorities also monitor church-run
>> publications.
>
> With the US-based, (snip)

they have nothing to do with this.

> > Government harassment of private houses of worship continued,
>> with evangelical denominations reporting evictions from houses used for
>> those purposes. According to CCC officials, most of the private houses of
>> worship closed were unregistered, making them technically illegal.
>>
>
> See recent postings on how they are to be registered. (snip)

More than that comrade Dan.
Much more than that.
Anyway: freedom of religion means freedom, not supervised and controlled
activities.

>> There were sporadic reports that local Communist Party and government
>> officials harassed members of Jehovah's Witnesses.
>>
>
> Only "sporadic?"


Not really.
You are right.
The harassment of 3Jehovah's witnesses" goes a lot further as they refuse
military service on religious grounds.

>> On August 30 2000,
>
> Old news.


Still relevant.

>> the independent press agency Group Decor
>
> Independent of whom? (snip)

Castro: they bypass the information embargo of Castro.

>> reported that evangelical pastor Pablo Rodriguez Oropeza and his wife
>> Enma Cabrera Cabrera were evicted from the house where they had lived for
>> 6 years. The press agency did not report the reason for the eviction.
>>
>
> It would be interesting to know why they didn't report it.


still happened.

>> In October 1999,
>
> Old news.

still valid as nothing has changed.

>> the leader of the United Pentecostal Church, Santos Osmany
>> Dominguez Borjas, was expelled from Havana by security agents and was
>> forced to relocate to Holguin. Osmany returned to Havana a few months
>> later. Members of the United Pentecostal Church of Cuba-Apostolic
>> ("Iglesia Pentecostal Unidad de Cuba-Apostolica") previously had split
>> from the "Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ" because they did not agree
>> with their church's membership in the CCC. Due to this split the group
>> was not registered officially as a religious group.
>>
>
> Sounds like a real troublemaker even within the Cuban religious community.

FREEDOM of religion remember?

>> During 1999 and the first 6 months of 2000,
>
> Old news.

Still relevant as nothing has changed.

>> state security officers
>> regularly harassed human rights advocates who sought to attend religious
>> services commemorating special feast days, such as the September 1999
>> celebration in honor of Our Lady of Charity, or before significant
>> national days.
>
> Very little to do with religion, (snip)

everything to do with their freedom of religion

>> There were some reports that state security officers detained
>> laypersons in order to prevent them from attending Christmas services and
>> processions. Some persons who planned to participate in a religious
>> procession reportedly were going to use the event to protest the
>> continued imprisonment of political activists and other dissidents.
>>
>
> As above.


True: a violation of these people rofht to freely worship.

>> The Ministry of the Interior continued to engage in efforts to control
>> and monitor religious activities, and to use surveillance, infiltration,
>> and harassment against religious groups and religious professionals and
>> lay persons.
>>
>
> No evidence.


Lots.

>> In April 2000,
>
> Old news.


Still relevant

>> a leading editor of one of the Catholic Church's magazines
>> was criticized in a major editorial of the Communist Party's newspaper as
>> a "known counter-revolutionary."
>>
>
> So what?


repression of his freedom of religion/ He writes about religion, remember.

>> http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2001/5612.htm
>>
>
> The US State Department (snip)

confirming and confirme by lots of other sources.


>> Cuba House Churches Face New Restrictions
>> Tuesday, Sep. 20, 2005 Posted: 12:36:52AM EST
>>
> [snip more of the same]

as comrade Dan is stuck and can not refute the facts.
The facts are there: Cuba violates freedom of religion and has recently
stepped up its campaign againts religious groups.

>Lobbyist(snip)

Just lies and misquotes.

As I said comrade Dan.
Every time you post that lie about me I post the truth about you. You can
not deny that you are a self declared Stalinist cyber activists who lives in
a nice 250,000 dollar suburban house in Canada (realtor site with images can
be given at your request) while playing the communist.
Stuck as you are without arguments all you have left are lies, personal
attacks and moronic innuendo

Remember the lie about "lobbying in Geneva" while I actually was on vacation
in Cuba (as the source IP
address of my posts in SCC at that time prove).
This was your false claim:
"Taking a little break from arm-twisting in Geneva, Mr. Lobbyist?"
Link:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/b6375f9783e47aee?q=g:thl1746703614d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8
Your inability to substantiate any of it is the best proof of your lies.

Nothing more than another example of your lies and misquotes like the ones
below:

YOUR LIE about Wayne Smith
"It is clear from Smith's article here (and his website, CIP Online)
that he does, in fact, support an immediate and unconditional lifting
of your beloved embargo."
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3f1fe3a55c12d7d7?dmode=source&hl=en


YOUR own words:


'We should reduce tensions, not aggravate it, making it clear to the Cuban
government that we do not have hostile intentions toward them,'' Smith said
during a 40-minute speech at a conference titled Cuba and the United States:
Relations in Permanent Conflict, Causes, Effects and Solutions.
''I did not say lift the embargo without conditions,'' he said.


http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/cuba/12157593.htm
You can enter after a free registration.


Permanent copy in the Cubaverdad archive:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/16823


YOUR LIE about Amnesty International.
Another example of the same lie: putting words in people's mouth.


Do you deny that in your posts you put some snippets from the report
quoted below and on your site you also falsely claim about the same
report
that:


"Today, for the first time, Amnesty International has explicitly
denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its
support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"


http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html


Link to the "report": (the one you don't give)
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB


They aren't calling for an "immediate and unconditional" end to the
trade
sanctions in that report. Aren't they?
Do you deny you snipped the words "immediate and unconditional" from
this
sentences in the report (THE ONLY PLACES WHERE THEY ARE USED):


"in 1.


"On the basis of the available information, therefore, Amnesty
International considers the 75 dissidents to be prisoners of
conscience(2) and calls for their immediate and unconditional
release."


In 8.1


"· to immediately and unconditionally release the 15 prisoners
previously named by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience.


· to immediately and unconditionally release anyone else who is
detained or imprisoned solely for having peacefully exercised their
rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly."


and added to those snippets your own words to create this sentence on
your
lying website:


" Amnesty International has explicitly denounced
the US embargo on Cuba in humanitarian terms, and made clear its
support for
the immediate and unconditional lifting of these cruel sanctions"


that sentence:
1. isn't in the report
2. isn't supported by the tenure and the conclusions of the report


You snipped two three words used by Amnesty to condemn the Castro
regime and
abused them in a sentence to imply support for your cause: a BLATANT
LIE.


What the report actually recommends about the "embargo" is:


"Amnesty International calls on the United States government


· to immediately suspend decisions on any measures that could toughen
the embargo.
· to review its foreign and economic policy towards Cuba, with an aim
towards ending this damaging practice.
· to place enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of its concerns in developing new policy towards Cuba."


Clearly no immediate and unconditional end is demanded as Dan claims.
The request is for not stiffening the sanctions and to review a policy
that places "enjoyment of the full range of human rights at the
forefront of its concerns".


See:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250172003?open&of=ENG-CUB


PL


.

Relevant Pages
Loading