Mostly those criminals who plagued Miami and the plantation owners/gangsters who were exiled for their part in the hell the Cubans endured under Batista.
So, are you acknowledging that he sent his Cuban prisoners to the US? That he essentially 'pardoned them' and sent them to a country that wasn't prepared to receive them? Keep in mind, that it wasn't just criminals that Castro sent over to the US. I doubt every single one celebrating in the streets is celebrating his death. Here's a story from the
Tampa Bay Times. Considering there are 91 year olds celebrating his death (assuming she's not a convicted felon, but I doubt it) it still begs the question. Hey, these people were
leaving Cuba. They wanted to
flee Cuba. Why? If it was such a great place to live and such a wonderful area, why leave Cuba and come to the Dark Side (United States)? I think that question alone begs the question on the defence side of Castro. If he was not as bad as they, the
Cuban populace, said he was then whom exactly should we listen to?
This is pure conjecture and has no feasible backing. Pray tell where Castro would have gotten $900million from?
https://www.therealcuba.com/?page_id=74
Even this wildly bias anti Castro, Anti Cuba page outright states their only source is just guessing.
I actually got this number from Forbes magazine. Forbes collects this data and utilizes the collected assets of the dictator's governmental holdings as well as their best estimate of his private holdings. So far as I know, Castro's son did indeed owned a yacht at some point. I don't know if he has it any more, but that is something that needs to be addressed and I still cannot find an answer. If someone tells you they have no money and then you see their family party around on a multi-million dollar vessel, you begin to ask questions. Castro's worth went from 500M (Forbes' last estimate) to 900M (Forbes' most recent estimate). I'm still looking for this, but when I find it, I'll let you know.
This is just deflection. Castro was the defacto voice, sure, but he was not the only person ever making decisions. Adolf Hitler was not the sole person making decisions in Germany, Stalin wasn't the sole person making decisions in the USSR etc.
As for not shooting political dissidents, sorry, how many American Communists were displaced or disposed of during the dark days of McCarthyism? How many young black Americans have been executed for crimes they were never fairly tried for?
Actually, I don't believe this is deflection at all, I believe that bringing up African Americans unlawfully persecuted in the US more of a deflection. Again, it takes at least 12 people to convict someone here, if one person says 'I'm not so sure' then you have a hung jury. The 12 jurors must all agree on the evidence and what was said and discussed within that court, and there are appeals as well. Some of this stuff, I feel, hasn't happened in numbers you seem to be concerned about since the '60s, and even then, again, perpetrated by the minority and not the majority.
I'd say that the internment of all Japanese Americans more in-line with what we're discussing. Castro was the sole voice needed to send someone off to the firing squads, and he personally oversaw several of these 'sentences' handed out as well as his brother Raul. No appeals, no retrial and no jury. It isn't the same; I'm calling apples and oranges. Castro personally sent people to the firing squads that were waiting outside the courthouse. Does our system work like that in the US? No. We're talking the immediate carrying out of the death penalty on Castro's end. We're not discussing the Americans who were in the wrong by dragging someone else and hanging them from a tree, as this is without a trial nor a jury and not secularly can be tied to the United States government.
Castro's actions are his own, and overseeing active firing squads doesn't give Castro much wiggle room.
Revisionism aside, The USA as a country did not decriminalize homosexuality until 2003.
If you want to get technical, the
sodomy laws were repealed in '03. At the federal level, it still sticks at about 1993.
If you want to boil this down even further (they were being very sneaky-sneaky with the laws) homosexuality, as you say, was never actually
technically, illegal;
sodomy was. This is where the sneaky-sneaky comes into play. You could be gay or lesbian but you could not commit sodomy. Unfortunately, I doubt that these laws were used to target anyone but the gay community. Very distasteful, but the law is a strangely worded piece that reaches around the Federal decision to remove such laws.
Yes, you could be beaten to death by hick rednecks, but the courts don't encourage murder. . . so, with federal law overriding state law, I'd even point you towards Harvey Milk, an openly gay politician running for local office. Unfortunately he was assassinated, by a disgruntled employee (Dave White) no less, not specifically for being gay.
A lot of these laws are also being retroactively removed, such as laws crafted in the mid to late 1800s. Some states are being grilled for attempting to utilize some of these aged laws, such as Louisiana. Unfortunately, the way the Federal level and the state level function poorly. Federal law can say 'this is unconstitutional' but cannot erase laws that states have crafted, so it is up to the state to clean up its own mess. As far as I understand, the way the system works is designed to prevent the formal government from controlling the local government and vice-versa. Strange, and extremely difficult to explain.
So, we're kind of both right and wrong on some things, it seems. Also, considering the remaining holdouts were an extreme minority of the US population you have to consider that damning the entire country when the vast majority of the people here actually agree with you to be slightly irking. One of these states was actually Florida, and as far as I can recall, there really wasn't anyone concerned about the police using the laws there. Although Florida is . . . Florida, and the crass joke of the US a lot of times due to 'Florida Man'.
Whilst it is wrong that lbgt people cannot marry in Cuba, many within your home country (as you pointed out) is still fighting to try and reverse the decision to allow lbgt marriage
I believe that I did mention that the US was still having troubles with this. I don't believe I ever laid the sole blame on just Cuba. I think I did say that we still have issues here. It'd be weird if I said this was a magical land full of wonderful people ohoho! We have lots of unsavory cunts here in the United States, but unfortunately, if said unsavory cunts are abiding by the law, their vote counts just as much as mine. Unfortunate, but true.
I understand your legal system is somewhat unique in this sense. I am not saying that America is inherently a bad country, I am simply saying those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Again, not throwing stones. Just wish people wouldn't defend a murderer. Let me know if I'm defending one, as I'd need to know. I don't feel up for much more discussing the US in a thread about Fidel Castro. I mean, at what point do we stop going back in time in the US' history? The same time Castro came to prominence? I just feel that if you're responsible, you're responsible. Stalin and Adolf certainly did more than their fair share of ordering atrocities, but I believe that both died before Castro even rose to power . . . I could be wrong about Stalin though, off the top of my head I want to say he died in '56.
