U.S.- Summit of the Americas: Time of the Vultures?

U.S.- Summit of the Americas: Time of the Vultures?
Fecha de publicación: 
13 April 2015
Imagen principal: 

Just after the end of that meeting, several possible republican presidential candidates attack the encounter Raul-Obama.

An article from EFE issued in Washington expressed this Sunday that he was harshly criticized while “many considered it historical.”

Written by Raquel Godos, the information quotes, among other things the statements of the Texas senator, Ted Cruz.

The latter said in an official statement that Obama’s approach grants the Castro brothers legitimacy in the international scene.

There is the expression of someone as ignorant as ill-intentioned, because Cuba is one of the countries with more legitimacy credentials in that regard.

Some hard facts prove it.

Will Texan Cruz know that since 1992 most of the nearly 190 countries that comprise the U.N. General Assembly every year has demanded the end of the North American blockade to the island?

Does he know that 33 nations of this region chose Havana to preside over (pro-tempore) the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC)?

And that the island was appointed a few months ago to head the sessions of the Sixty-seven World Health Assembly (WHO) in Geneva?


Has Mr. Cruz learned that Cuba has been chosen and reelected to be part of the United Nations Human Rights Council?  

Furthermore, does it ring a bell, that after confronting another extreme rightwing plot to avoid its presence in Summits of the Americas, now was invited to the Seventh?

Ted Cruz, as the article from EFE reminded is a man “next” to the Neo-Nazi sect Tea Party.

Then, with incredible bluntness, the senator admitted that Obama’s performance toward Cuba “abandons the pro-North American opposition.”

“This president, highlighted the news agency, demonstrates to be willing to do what nine prior presidents from both parties had not done: to give refuge to a communist dictator in our own hemisphere.”

On the other hand, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, close to sell his candidacy, made evident his rejection to the Raul-Obama dialogue, and called the first one a “cruel dictator.”

With a single fact, among so many, is enough to know who Jeb is, like the British journalist, Greg Palast narrates to the detail in his book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.”

Considered a best seller by The New York Times, it sheds light on the huge fraud in Florida during the 2000 elections to guarantee George W. Bush's victory as president.

Back then the governor of that state was, in fact, the republican presidential candidate's brother.

Now, Florida senator, Marco Rubio, close to make public similar electoral purpose, catalogued as “ridiculous” the possible de-listing of Cuba from the list of countries that sponsor terrorism.

This character drags a background that includes financial scandals back when he was a member of parliament in that state, even an accusation of the Washington Post to have lied with electoral intentions on the origin of his parents.

In the last months he has outstood for spreading a ferocious opposition to the opening of embassies in Washington, and Havana.

Bob Menendez, extreme rightwing democratic senator for New Jersey also joined that tendency.

The latter devised a harsh attack to the encounter held by the leaders of Cuba and the United States during the VII Summit.

Bob anticipated at Fox News Sunday program that his president makes a calculation mistake when estimating that “if it stretches the hand to dictators, these they will loosen the fist.”

When did the senator speak to Fox Television? In moments that he confronts serious accusations of the Justice Department for his steady corrupt performance.

The serious accusations are big enough that some observers foresee the beginning of the end of his political career.

According to the same analysis of EFE, the political turn of Obama towards the island has a great support among citizenship and a two-party majority in the Congress.


Then, what outcome could take away from the vultures who in Washington oppose the bilateral approach?

Due to his great lack of reputation, to keep wading against a process that points to be really thorny, and piece by piece possible.

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.