“The Year of Loving Dangerously” by Ted Rall

I just finished Ted Rall’s “The Year of Loving Dangerously.” Forget the sex – Rall’s story makes clear why our society needs safety nets. As Rall himself writes, the book is “a chronicle of desperation, of how easy it is for anyone — even a white male attending an Ivy League school — to fall off the merry-go-round of U.S.-style laissez faire capitalism.” Though Rall turns things around, his story is the exception, and is testimony only to the fact that he lived to tell the tale. Millions of others aren’t so lucky, and there but by the grace of God go I. Though a graphic novel, I’ll be excerpting from “The Year of Loving Dangerously” over the next several weeks in hopes of attracting you to a copy of this wonderfully-illustrated, non-navel-gazing work.

“The Year of Loving Dangerously” is Ted’s first collaborative effort. Ted wrote and scripted the book, based on his experience getting arrested, dumped, expelled and evicted onto the mean streets of Manhattan in 1984 (the book’s title tells you what he did after that), and “Bluesman” artist Pablo G. Callejo provides lush, full-color painterly artwork. The introduction is by Xaviera Hollander, author of “The Happy Hooker.”

“Year” is an allegory for the economic collapse, showcasing what can happen to anyone, even a white Ivy-educated male, who suffers a run of bad luck. It’s also a shot across the bow of other male graphic artists who wallow in self-pity and alienation.

Excerpts coming soon…

Hi Pappillon – exclusively from the Ghent Six

Michael Morkov and Alex Rasmussen at the Ghent Six.

Read Hood’s interview with American six-day racers Carroll and East here. Did Pappillon share the link to this interesting salary-centric piece by Hood? We can’t remember, nor can we be troubled to look – sooooo: repeat! Listen to the Money Talking.

Navel Gazer Paul Kimmage

Felix Lowe, laying-low and commenting on cycling as Blazin’ Saddles, recently twatted a link to his current Eurosport blog post, which includes the following gem [delivered at Paul Kimmage’s expense]:

“…elsewhere, soup-spitter Paul Kimmage (interviewer of the year, no less) managed to write another navel-gazing piece about himself and just how good and clever he is when sending text messages, masquerading as an interview with Brailsford, in last weekend’s Sunday Times…”

It’s a slow Thanksgiving, yes, but there’s something genuinely fun and entertaining about one cycling journalist dissing another via the ‘net. The offending interview/text message exchange can be read here.

World Press Cycling Championship

Though still nearly a year off, look for at least one Pappillon contributor – if not more – to compete in the World Press Cycling Championship in Lierde, Belgium in 2010. Details to follow.

Guest Post: Neighbor, Are You Ready to Listen?

Editor’s note: the following is another in a series of guest posts authored by various contributors who’ve been invited to write on the topics of their choice for Pappillon. Read on to the words of Flick and find yourself challenged to think critically about mass media, politics and the trustworthiness (or perhaps Truthiness?) of government in the United States – as opposed to just “buying into” the “party line.” Flick reviews the words of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright in the context of an Obama Presidency that is now 12 months old, and against the historical backdrop of what one might describe as some of the “shadier” dealings of the US Government.

We’re nearly one year into President Barack Obama’s government, and I hope that the months that have passed will allow a more dispassionate, reasoned evaluation of the presidential election of 2008. Can we evaluate the veracity of the popular understanding of components of the Obama/McCain contest without the high emotion and polemic that followed in real-time the twists and turns of the campaign? I think so. In this short post, I will revisit the infamous statements of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and the mainstream media’s reporting of the same. I’ll take Rev. Wright’s comments at face value and then test their truthfulness against the historical record, while also reviewing how they were covered by the press.

Any random sampling of US citizens might deliver the resulting description of Rev. Wright as a “racist minister who hates America.” It’s my belief that, given the chance to espouse their views on Wright (assuming they had some), those polled would be able to recite – line and verse – their “party’s” take on whatever detail of Wright’s statements is in question. But I sincerely doubt that they could critically evaluate those same details against the historical record and devoid of political bias, regardless of their ultimate position on whether or not Obama was affiliated with Wright and his America-hating ways.

Furthermore, I believe it highly unlikely that you’ll be able to find people who would be able to tell you anything about the Jeremiah Wright controversy other than it involved the acerbic phrase,”God Damn America.”

So, instead of rehashing the old campaign-centric debates, lets take a look at what Wright actually said (writes words, in blue, are taken from such reliable sources as Wikipedia). In a sermon, Wright first makes the distinction between God and governments, and points out that many governments in the past have failed:

“Where governments lie, God does not lie. Where governments change, God does not change.” 

Wright then states:

“[The United States] government lied about their belief that all men were created equal. The truth is they believed that all white men were created equal. The truth is they did not even believe that white women were created equal, in creation nor civilization. The government had to pass an amendment to the Constitution to get white women the vote. Then the government had to pass an equal rights amendment to get equal protection under the law for women. The government still thinks a woman has no rights over her own body, and between Uncle Clarence who sexually harassed Anita Hill, and a closeted Klan court, that is a throwback to the 19th century, handpicked by Daddy Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, between Clarence and that stacked court, they are about to undo Roe vs. Wade, just like they are about to un-do affirmative action. The government lied in its founding documents and the government is still lying today. Governments lie.”

I don’t think that there’s anyone who would disagree with these points. Governments lie. It’s the truth.

“The government lied about Pearl Harbor too. They knew the Japanese were going to attack. Governments lie. The government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. They wanted that resolution to get us in the Vietnam War. Governments lie. The government lied about Nelson Mandela and our CIA helped put him in prison and keep him there for 27 years. The South African government lied on Nelson Mandela. Governments lie.”

The Pearl Harbor issue is debatable at best. The one to really look at in this section is the Gulf of Tonkin. Declassified documents show that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident – the event used by the Johnson administration as moral cover for America’s full-scale entry into the Vietnam War – was fabricated. The US Government doesn’t even bother to deny the truth (that the Incident did not take place as originally claimed), but rather simply lumps it in with other unfortunate transgressions made by previous administrations and US leaders. As far as Mandela goes, the evidence of the CIA’s cooperation with the South African government on the imprisoning of Mandela for 28 years – 28 years – is considerable. [Ed.: you’ll have to take Flick at his word here, as he didn’t include any links to the evidence.]

Wright continues:

“The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African American men with syphilis. Governments lie. The government lied about bombing Cambodia and Richard Nixon stood in front of the camera, ‘Let me make myself perfectly clear…’ Governments lie. The government lied about the drugs for arms Contra scheme orchestrated by Oliver North, and then the government pardoned all the perpetrators so they could get better jobs in the government. Governments lie…. The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. Governments lie. The government lied about a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein and a connection between 9.11.01 and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Governments lie.”

In my semi-professional opinion, this is the meatiest portion of Wright’s diatribe, and Tuskegee is one of the most shameful acts of deception and cruelty this country has ever committed – and against its own citizens, at that. If you don’t know the history, agents of the US Government (acting through the U.S. Public Health Service) recruited 399 impoverished African-American sharecroppers with syphilis for research related to the natural progression of the untreated disease, in hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks. In this Dr. Josef Mengele-like research project, the U.S. Government allowed the study participants to suffer for upwards of 40 years without treatment, just to see what would happen. Even after it was determined that penicillin was an effective treatment for syphilis, the study continued and the subjects remained UNTREATED, for no appreciable reason. Unaware they had been affected, these men went on with their lives, in many cases spreading the disease to their wives and children. This isn’t fiction that forms the basis for some conspiracy theory, nor is it ancient history. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment (also known as the Tuskegee syphilis study or Public Health Service syphilis study) was a documented clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama, by the U.S. Public Health Service. It is also something that the US Government waited to acknowledge and apologize for until 1997. 

On May 16, 1997, President Bill Clinton formally apologized and held a ceremony for the Tuskegee study participants: “What was done cannot be undone. But we can end the silence. We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye and finally say on behalf of the American people, what the United States government did was shameful, and I am sorry … To our African American citizens, I am sorry that your federal government orchestrated a study so clearly racist.” As has been reported previously, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study significantly damaged the trust of the black community toward public health efforts in the United States, and provided clear evidence of the ability of our Government to do intentional harm to its own citizens while at the same time denying that anything was amiss!

But moving on, we KNOW that President Nixon lied about Cambodia’s neutrality during the Vietnam War. We KNOW that Bush/Reagan/North lied and were pardoned for Iran-Contra. And at this point even Bush and Cheney admitted that there was no effective collaboration or even link between Al Queada and Saddam Hussein. These are all facts…truths…and proof that the Government of these here United States has lied to its own people.

But back to Rev. Wright: it’s no accident that he slips an HIV-bomb into the sermon. Alas, it’s also no accident that this reference was the only one to enjoy wide-spread media coverage. But rather than report on Wright’s accusations about HIV in the context of other examples of the US Gov’t’s willingness to turn the cross hairs of destruction upon this nation’s citizens, the mainstream media carved-up the Wright sermon and omitted all but the HIV accusation, which was then dismissed as unproven rhetoric. You see, the Government of the United States of America doesn’t do that sort of thing…..Hitler’s Germany allowed such horrors…Russia did that sort of thing…but never in AMERICA could such ghastly deeds occur at the government’s own hand! Except, of course, for Tuskegee, MK ULTRA, human radiation and other examples of government-sanctioned experiments on human subjects.

He spoke about the government’s rationale for the Iraq War:

“The government lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq being a threat to the United States peace. And guess what else? If they don’t find them some weapons of mass destruction, they gonna do just like the LAPD, and plant the some weapons of mass destruction. Governments lie.”

“And the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian descent fairly, she failed. She put them on reservations. When it came to treating her citizens of Japanese descent fairly, she failed. She put them in internment prison camps. When it came to treating her citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. She put them in chains, the government put them on slave quarters, put them on auction blocks, put them in cotton field, put them in inferior schools, put them in substandard housing, put them in scientific experiments, put them in the lowest paying jobs, put them outside the equal protection of the law, kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness. The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America…”

There’s not a lot of value in beating the dead horse here. As embarrassing as it is…true, true and true. But as terrible as these failings of the state are, they should not be ignored or put aside. Even the intentional denial of care to humans infected with a treatable disease – as in Tuskegee – does not mean that our country is not great. What these failings illustrate is a phenomena that our Founding Fathers were aware of: that unbridled power in the form of government promoted tyranny, if left unchecked, will always manifest itself as oppressive, vindictive and exploitative. These transgressions of the United States Government aren’t an indictment of America as a concept, or an indictment of Americans as a people. Rather, these acts were all ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL – and the acts of corrupt, fallible men who were able to subvert the controls that should have held them in check.
A review of the more shameful moments of our nation’s past, should, however, serve as the proverbial wake-up call to each and every one of us that GOVERNMENTS DO LIE. What I find so ironic is that its the VERY SAME people who condemned Rev. Wright a year ago are the same ones who now attend town hall meetings on health care and modern day tea parties to condemn the Obama administration for conspiring to mislead the masses in order to promote a partisan agenda. Yes! Government has the capacity to LIE, you are correct. But the US Government under President Barack Obama hardly has that market cornered.

No, no, no, not God Bless America. God damn America — that’s in the Bible — for killing innocent people. God damn America, for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America, as long as she tries to act like she is God, and she is supreme. The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent…”

Probably the only segment of the Wright sermons to receive widespread media coverage… But perhaps what is most troubling to me is the fact that if one conducts an online search for actual news coverage of the above statements, what is returned ad nausea are discussions about poll numbers, accounting’s of how many times Obama and family went to church, missives about racism, and details on the cost of Rev. Wright’s house. What doesn’t turn-up, however, are any readily-apparent examples of critical analysis by the mass media of the factual veracity of Wright’s speeches, or any reporting on the disturbing truths that he harnesses in the service of his anti-US message.

It is this lack of critical evaluation and analysis that causes me the greatest concern, because it is reflected at the micro-level by discussions between neighbors, co-workers and even drinking buddies at the local brew pub. Rev. Wright raises what should be considered seriously-damaging events from US history that portray Government as an agent of misinformation, manipulation, or outright immorality and unethical behavior (especially in the case of Tuskegee). This is not happening, however, and in writing this piece, I hope to challenge my neighbors to think critically on issues of great import to this country; to stop regurgitating the preformed ideas of their respective political parties and realize that silent actors within the most powerful branches of the US Government are able to act with impunity on a global scale, whilst avoiding detection by miring the common folk in endless, circular debates about whether or not Barack Obama did enough to denounce the statements of his former pastor, clarify his relationship with Wright, or respond rhetorically with his view of America under the US Government (such as with the speech, “A More Perfect Union“).

I appreciate the opportunity to share my views with you, Dear Reader, via this interesting and, at times, controversial blog – Pappillon. I hope to further develop the themes of this post at a later date, and look forward to your feedback.
[Ed. Thanks, Flick! Readers, please leave feedback as comments, that, while moderated, will be published as quickly as possible.]

Yo, Un-Named Media, VDB was laid to rest yesterday!

Thank god for Cyclingnews.com (never thought I’d say that after 2006), which had the decency to cover the funeral of VDB yesterday. Velonews.com, however, couldn’t be bothered to even note that VDB was interred in the family crypt and finally put to rest.

I happened to have an 11 year-old copy of VeloNews by my desk, because it was the first one in which my writing was paid for and published. And ironically, that issue also contained the 1998 Paris-Nice coverage. Well, needless to say, we know who won: VDB – but if you read the article, and the headlines from that issue of VN, and then compared it to the disdain, disrespect and utter contempt with which VN covered VDB’s death, if you are a fan of the sport, it’s traditions and know of the world before The Lance, I would hope that their conducts disgusts and revolts you, or at least makes you angry.

Fine, Cyclingnews did a great job covering the funeral. But VeloNews – CN’s erst-while competitor – didn’t even mention it!!! That ****es me off to no end. Irrational or not, it really ****es me off. In fact, despite all of the ongoing VDB-like drama in my own life (Which I thankfully keep behind closed doors), I spent an hour last night writing a letter to “The Editor” at VN taking them to task for the coverage they gave VDB when they described him as “Belgium’s new star *Vandenbroucke* unbeatable in Race to the Sun.” (VeloNews Volume 27, Number 5, March 30, 1998)

Classic media opportunism…they devote hundreds of words to VDB when they want to crown him king-apparent, then, eleven years later, with his brilliance long-since tarnished by hardly-unusual scrapes with the doping police, and a fall from grace made ten-times worse by the mental illness from which VDB clearly suffered – the hijos de putas editing VeloNews on the weekends can’t even note on their webpage that he had finally been laid to rest (and honored a who’s-who of Belgian cycling, including Van Petegem, Museeuw and Patrick Lefevere).

If you want to read what I wrote and see the pictures, click here. If you’re so inclined, use my letter as a template for writing your own, chastising VN. And if you think they did they RIGHT thing, or don’t care about VDB and you feel like sharing that with me, bring it on: joe-at-joepapp-dot-com. Only in the cycling “press” in the United States would the funeral of a just-dead 34 year old former star of professional cycling not even be noted…

The Blogs did a better job covering and commenting on VDB’s passing. Take this entry from Whacksonville.

Juventud Rebelde y la información secuestrada

From Jorge Ferrer at El Tono de la Voz, comes this report on the opinion piece “Against the demons of kidnapped information” written by  José Alejandro Rodríguez, which appeared only briefly on the website of Juventud Rebelde, before it was taken down several hours later.

“Juventud Rebelde subió ayer a su edición digital el artículo “Contra los demonios de la información secuestrada” firmado por José Alejandro Rodríguez. Apenas unas horas más tarde el artículo fue retirado del site del “Diario de la juventud cubana”. Tampoco aparece en la edición impresa de hoy. Lo reproduzco aquí por su extraordinario interés. Por el modus ponens y por la censura a que fue obligada la redacción de ese diario.”

Contra los demonios de la Información Secuestrada
José Alejandro Rodríguez

16 de Octubre del 2009 20:19:38 CDT

‘Voy a soñar, una vez más. Voy a imaginarme que nunca lo he meditado hasta el cansancio. Voy a creerme que vengo a estrenar un enfoque inusitado. Voy a convencerme de que vale la pena seguir bregando por esa preterida criatura llamada información, cautiva entre silencios y controles desmedidos.

La misión del periodista es informar; claro que también opinar, recrear la realidad, describir, narrar… pero antes que todo informar. Porque para desplegar todos los géneros, formas y discursos del periodismo, primero hay que estar informado… e informar.

La información es un deber del periodista y es un derecho del ciudadano, de ese sujeto histórico que ha sostenido esta Revolución, y que nunca como hoy necesita conocer el terreno que pisa y abona, en medio de múltiples complejidades. Nunca como hoy ese Liborio requiere definir y redefinir las coordenadas en que transita su vida. Nunca como hoy urge de la información para poder interactuar con la sociedad y participar en ella, como un sujeto activo, y no como un “pichón” –frase muy en boga por estos días- que espera le suministren su dosis exacta de la información desde arriba.

El problema, -y lo estamos viviendo en Juventud Rebelde- es que la información no escapa a la excesiva centralización de nuestra economía y de la sociedad en general, algo que para nada tiene que ser un fatídico componente genético del socialismo, como algunos creen; más bien lo entorpece en sus potencialidades democráticas. Bien arriba se decide muchas veces qué decir e informar, qué no decir de los grandes temas de la sociedad, aún cuando la terca vida transcurra allá abajo, con sus complejidades.

A estas alturas, da tristeza constatarlo, una ministra puede permitirse rechazar una solicitud de una periodista y cercenar el derecho a más información, asumiendo que ya fue a la Mesa Redonda a desempacarlo todo. O más bien todo lo que se quiere decir. La hiperbolización de la Mesa Redonda como el escenario de la información suprema, es un atentado a la necesaria versatilidad y variedad que distingue al buen periodismo. Esa «mesaredondización» es un aporte redondo a la burocratización del periodismo, con el debido respeto para los colegas de ese espacio, que no son los responsables del fenómeno.

Alguien –juro que no imagino quién es ese alguien- puede decidir que determinadas medidas en el escenario socioeconómico se pongan en práctica, sin una estrategia informacional dirigida hacia el sujeto histórico que las asumirá. Ejemplos sobran de cambios que se han registrado sin la necesaria información en nuestros medios: del proceso de solicitud y entrega de tierras en usufructo, algo que supuestamente dinamizará nuestra agricultura, hubo un instante, dos, tres… ha habido ¿o habrá todavía?, en que no se podía hablar ni apenas mencionar. Se me dijo en esta redacción que venía de arriba.

No se reflejó en los medios el rico proceso de debate promovido por Raúl hace dos años, expresión cimera de nuestra democracia socialista. Tampoco se puede hoy mencionar este último, en el cual militantes del Partido y revolucionarios más allá del carnet, debaten los problemas que aquejan a sus colectivos.

Se convoca a la prensa para que acompañe gregariamente la promoción de la Resolución sobre el pago por resultados del Ministerio del Trabajo y Seguridad Social. Este redactor se emociona con acariciar un rescate de la Ley de Distribución Socialista, que tanto se nos ha alejado: Entrevista al viceministro del MTSS, crea expectativas con aquello de que los que trabajen más y mejor podrán ganar y vivir mejor.

Al final, la aplicación de la Resolución aborta, los burócratas se resisten a complicarse en las normas y las formas de pago móviles. Es más fácil el igualitarismo, lo que te toca. Y nadie explica por qué el pago por rendimiento está obstaculizado en Cuba.

Un reportero, por indicación de sus directivos, acude al Ministerio de Economía y Planificación para que, ante la avalancha de rumores sobre la desaparición de los comedores obreros en la prensa extranjera, con sus enfoques cismáticos y tendenciosos en ciertos casos, ese ministerio confirme si es verdad, y lo fundamente, y si no es verdad lo rebata. El ministro delega en la viceministra, la viceministra le dice al reportero que debe consultarlo con el ministro…Ahí empieza el peloteo, hasta que la viceministra le confiesa al periodista que hay una experiencia en estudio, pero no se desea informar de eso «por ahora». A la semana, aparece en Granma un trabajo al respecto, y el reportero se siente engañado. ¿Será el concepto de la «mesaredondización» o la «granmatitis»? ¿Será que en Granma adquiere majestad suprema la información?

Ejemplos sobrarían, de cuántos funcionarios se abrogan el derecho a decidir qué se puede informar, después de mirar hacia arriba para recibir la extremaunción de la noticia ya muerta. Casi nadie se atreve a informar a la prensa y desplegar relaciones horizontales sin la venia de sus superiores. Y muchas veces la genuflexa cadena transita por varios niveles e instancias…hasta que la noticia ya está sepultada por la propia vida.

Es cierto que la información es un arma de doble filo, porque revela las luces, pero también los hoyos oscuros de la realidad. Pero la información es un bien público, y no podemos sustituirla por la oportuna información permitida, por la información virtual, por la información-propaganda o la información conveniente, la información con pinzas, o como quiera llamársele. La información es información.

En todo caso la información, con todos sus matices, con sus claroscuros, siempre nos hará más eficaces y revolucionarios, más concientes del momento histórico; más preclaros para discernir lo posible de lo imposible, y más participativos; porque todo –incluida la información- no se puede cocinar desde cenáculos. El cubano necesita mirar hacia el futuro, saber qué sucede, y no andar a tientas y a ciegas, a merced del mendrugo de información. El cubano necesita participar activamente, proponer y ser tenido en cuenta, sopesar entre el bien y el mal, para fortalecer su Revolución.

Claro que no hablaré de las culpas de los periodistas, unos más osados, otros más cansados y conformistas. En la medida en que persista este modelo de política informativa restrictivo y controlador, se fomentarán más los desencantos e hibernaciones entre nuestros profesionales.

Y sin información, sin participación del sujeto histórico, es imposible cimentar concientemente un socialismo más pleno y democrático.

Después de todo esto, no vamos a cortarnos las venas de la profesión. El periodista revolucionario tiene que seguir batallando aquí y allá. Si se te cierran las puertas, esa puede ser la noticia. Una alternativa ante la cerrazón es enfocar los fenómenos desde otras fuentes no tan institucionales y tan arriba, desde el pueblo que es el principal sostén de esta Revolución. Y hacerlo con compromiso y seriedad.

Juventud Rebelde ha ganado buen trecho y prestigio en esta pelea cubana contra los demonios de la información secuestrada. ¿Vamos a retroceder? Ese es el desafío mayor para la nueva dirección de este periódico que aún no se sabe, pero que, en definitiva somos todos.’

H/T Jorge Ferrer – El Tono de la Voz

Though I don’t often read her work, Yoani Sánchez provides a view of the significance of the piece, and its subsequent disappearance. Quoting from the English-language version of her blog, Geneation Y:

“No one knows the mechanisms of censorship in Cuba better than those who write in the few newspapers of national circulation. The press here has been turned into a delicate profession required to measure adjectives, carefully weigh topics and often to hide personal opinions in order to keep a job. It is a life decision to be a journalist for the official media, I know, but I also know some who have been trapped in the twists and turns of complicity, waiting for the day when they can write what they think.

From the Juventude Rebelde newspaper office where Reinaldo worked until 1988, there is very little left because most of his colleagues now live in Miami, Mexico and Spain. Others have retired from the profession, disillusioned with the aborted glastnost and the consecutive calls for criticism, which ended up being bait for the most daring. José Alejandro Rodríguez survived all this and carried his personal battle into the “Receipt Requested” section where he published readers’ letters with their complaints and questions. Every time I read his crusade against bureaucracy and poor work, I sense the regressive countdown that will probably culminate in his professional silencing.

A few days ago José Alejandro could take no more. He took everything he has accumulated about the “excessive centralization” that the press on this Island is subject to and condemned the secrecy surrounding government decisions. In his article “Against the demons of kidnapped information” he used the language of an honest man who always believed in the possibility of humanizing the current system through the transparency of information. I respectfully differ with him, because what has been built on a foundation of hiding, condemning and filtering cannot survive the clear light that emanates from an incisive and free journalism.

The three pages of his harangue lasted just a few hours on the on-line version of Juventud Rebelde. The article was kidnapped by the shrewd hawks of orthodoxy, who know well the danger of a Nation that begins to learn everything you have hidden.”

Pobre Cuba…