Posted on 03/09/2007 11:16:11 AM PST by slickeroo
Cuba Loves Hippie Software
Humberto Fontova
Friday, March 9, 2007
Take in equal parts: lyrics from John Lennon's "Imagine," Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" and simmer.
Then add a pinch from "Age of Aquarius." Now you have the manifesto of The Free SoftWare Foundation, founded by software guru Richard Stallman, famous foe of commercial avarice and stalwart friend of freedom.
"Copyright laws violate basic morality," writes the shaggy MIT graduate. "People should be free to use software in ways that are socially useful. When a program has an owner, the users lose freedom to control part of their own lives."
"The issue is freedom," stresses Stallman. "Freedom for everyone who's using software, whether that person be a programmer or not. Free software — rree society — free as in freedom."
Stallman himself looks like a cross between Arlo Guthrie (circa Woodstock) and Wavy Gravy.
Stallman was the recent guest of honor of Cuba's Stalinist regime.
This year's International Conference on Communications and Technology was held in Havana on Feb. 14, and attended by 1,300 delegates from 58 nations. Stallman was a keynote speaker.
An intrepid bunch, these delegates. Much like those 2.4 million tourists who visit Cuba annualy, these delegates also somehow foiled the the fiendish "Yankee Blockade of Cuba!"
The official host of this conference was Ramiro Valdez, Cuba's spanking new minister of information and technology.
Everyone familiar with Cuban history (this naturally excludes all the MSM Cuba experts) know Ramiro Valdez as the Cuban regime's Lavrenti Beria, with a dash of Heinrich Himmler. This was a position he inherited when his chum Ernesto "Che" Guevara was promoted from Cuba's chief executioner to minister of the economy, where he murdered the Cuban economy as efficiently as he had murdered hundreds of defenseless Cuban men (and boys.)
You will search the hundreds of mainstream media stories on the Valdez appointment, and on his hosting of the conference, in utter vain for any mention of this gentleman's background.
Imagine the Nazis signing a peace accord" with Britain in 1941 and the regime surviving.
Imagine Heinrich Himmler then promoted to Germany's information minister and nary a mention of his background in the London Times or The New York Times. Heck, imagine J. Edgar Hoover appointed by Nixon as U.S. press secretay and his background ignored in all media pronouncements of the event.
Alas, regarding Cuba news in the mainstream media, we've come to expect different standards. The standards Alice found behind her Wonderland's looking glass seem rational in comparison.
Keynote speaker Richard Stallman was obviously tickled that a Stalinist regime had adopted his "Open Source Software" and worked the multinational audience of hipsters and geeks into a froth.
As usual, the mainstream media, the writers for John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, David Letterman, Bill Maher, etc. found no material worthy of their bosses' smirky irony in the scene. Here's a man adamant about people having "the freedom to control every part of their lives" as guest of honor for a regime that mandates what its subjects, read, say, earn, and eat (both substance and amount), and where they live, travel, or work.
Here's a hippie-dippy spokesman for peace, love, and total freedom who regards copyright laws as intolerably oppresive smiling gratefully — while being introduced onto the podium by a secret police chief for a KGB and STASI-trained force who jailed and tortured more political prisoners as a percentage of population than Stalin's police under Lavrenti Beria, and who executed at a higher rate than Hitler's pre-war Gestapo under Heinrich Himmler.
Here's a fanatic for free information flow accepting accolades from a regime that jails the most journalist per capita on planet earth.
According to the Paris-based (not Miami — please note!) Reporters Without Borders, Cuba (a tiny nation of 11 million people) today holds 20 percent of the world's jailed journalists. Imagine Castroite repression with China's population! Cuban "Law 88," passed in February 1999, cranked up the repression several notches, mandating up to 20 years in prison for "providing information that could be useful to U.S. policy."
Imagine a similar law in the U.S. that jailed reporters for "providing information useful to Al-Qaida polcy!" Imagine the news: "An eerie silence enshrouds New York's near-empty newsrooms and editorial offices as long queues of fresh convicts shuffle into the nation's federal prisons . . ."
Today, Cuba — a nation that in 1958 had more TVs and telephones per capita than any continental European country — has fewer Internet connections than Uganda, the lowest number in the hemisphere.
Reporters Without Borders (NOT the Cuban-American-National-Foundation — please note!) scoffs: "The (Cuban) authorities' chief reason for keeping citizens away from the Internet is to prevent them from being well-informed."
Ramiro Valdez claimed that his Cuban Internet crackdown (not that there's much to crack down on) was to prevent, "the diffusion of information promoting terrorism, racism, fraud, and . . . fascist ideologies."
A Freudian slip, I think this could be labeled. Valdez seemed to be reading from the Cuban regime's very resume.
Valdez referred to Internet technology as a "wild colt to be broken and tamed." Needless to say, nary a murmur of protest issued from the reverential attendees, including Stallman, much less the MSM. (Imagine the media hullabaloo if, say, Attorney General Gonzalez blurted something of the sort!)
A courageous Cuban human-rights activist and samizdat reporter named Guillermo Farinas recently sent an open letter to the regime requesting the same Internet rights for Cubans as enjoyed by every Latin-American citizen. (Chances are, he would have gladly settled for those enjoyed by the citizens of of Red China.)
Ex-secret police chief Valdez responded quickly and decisively.
His goon squads ambushed Farinas just last week. The mob's odds against the unarmed (but you knew that because he lives in Cuba) Farinas were typical for the gallant Castroites, about 20 to one. From the Bay of Pigs through the Escambray rebellion to Angola it's the same story of this sort of unrelenting bravery and chivalry.
These sadists — in the pay Charles Rangel's favorite Latin regime and directed by Richard Free as in "freedom!" Stallman's smiling host — bashed Farinas to the ground and pummeled him fearfully. A grisly picture of him just smuggled out of Cuba was posted on the blogs Uncommon Sense and Babalu.blog.
Stallman — if interested in the genuine rationale for his Cuban hosts enthusiasm for his "Open Source Software" — might take a look.
Humberto Fontova is the author of "Fidel; Hollywood's Favorite Tyrant," a Conservative Book Club "Main Selection."
^^^^^^^^^^^^They're both leftists.
You've failed to prove that point^^^^^^^^^^^^
What do you expect, shall I link you to Rush's audio where he talks about Apple's reluctance to advertise on his show?
Look at Al Gore, who sits on Apple's board. Look at Warren Buffet, who's buddy buddy with Gates.
Furthermore, take a look at what Steve Jobs said about the teachers unions recently. That isn't anything new. I've heard numerous conservatives say basically the same things over the past few years, and every single time the media and the left attack them feverishly.
Have you noticed how Jobs got a pass? Rush noticed it too.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_022007/content/01125108.member.html
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Only if you're a big lib, only if you're a big Democrat, do you get applauded for this kind of talk.^^^^^^^^^^^
It seems that everybody in the world who's paying attention.... Except for you.... knows that Jobs is a big lib.
Here's Jobs' political donations. He's a huge democrat.
http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/Steve_Jobs.php
Same thing with Gates. Salon did a piece a few years ago about him being a closet liberal. Even other freepers have noticed how Gates is a leftist. Some of them have even mentioned it to you personally, as I have. But for whatever reason you refuse to believe it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1791025/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1566839/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1749362/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a5c43eb731f.htm
Here's Gates' political donations. As you look at the list, he appears to be moving further to the left.
http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/Bill_Gates.php
You've been to busy attacking a leftist named stallman you haven't stopped to notice that you already had one in your own box.
And besides, Torvalds is(one of) the shining star of the OSS movement, not Stallman. But the media does give Stallman alot of love and affection.
If you don't want to accept it, that doesn't change it. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Richard Stallman are all leftists. Some more left wing than others. Look at Sun's embracing of the GPL.
It looks like you had better sell off your computer, no matter what software you use it comes from leftists.
Stallman campaigns for the Green Party and spends his recent time in Cuba, no one else is close.
And besides, Torvalds is(one of) the shining star of the OSS movement, not Stallman.
Torvalds is a foreigner who was raised by well known communists who studied in Moscow. Why are you so anti-American, US products like OSX and Solaris are better anyway.
Other people's hard work.
Please show proof for this accusation.
Leftist blog: High incidence of proprietary software, abnormally high proportion of Macs. Conservative blog: Abnormally high proportion of free software, even full Linux systems.
Free software, the choice of leftists. Don't think so.
Theft is not in that sentence. He disagrees with copyright, but he honors it as far as we know, and himself relies on it to a great extent.
So what has he actually stolen?
Not quite. Stallman started the Free Software movement.
And, he is a bit of a kook, but sometimes kooks do good things, and I think creating the GPL was a good thing.
Without it, we would have little or no competition in the PC software business.
See how this sounds:
Copyright granted on any original work for one non-renewable term of fifty years.
Period.
No exceptions.
Wouldn't that be fairer than the current system?
Copyright granted to registered works only. If you want to take advantage of copyright's incentive, the least you can do is register your work. Copyright lasts for 14 years, with two 14-year renewals allowed. This moves abandoned works into the public domain as they should be.
To accommodate the fast-paced Internet publishing and collaborative online works, all works given a 60-day assumption of registration if properly marked with date as intent to register ("© 12 March 2007" as opposed to "© 2007" for a registered work). The copyright office sets up a server and allows running accounts. All publications such as this need to do is submit newer works within 60-days (can easily be made automated) and pay a nominal registration fee as part of the running account.
From your own link:
The most memorable attack on free software has come from Microsoft - who accused the GNU General Public License (which is at the heart of the way the Linux project works) of being an instrument to destroy (intellectual) property - in effect a tool of communism (in the pure Marxian sense - I don’t think anybody has claimed Richard Stallman is a KGB sleeper - at least I hope they haven’t).
And, you know, they have a point. Free software is in many ways a world of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.”
Note that was said by a leftist and OSS lover, who was surprised that conservatives tend to use OSS more than leftists. He thought everybody who uses OSS was like him, but he was wrong.
Most end users are too ignorant to even know it exists yet, or much about it. But communist governments, and the DNC here in the US, are all over it, and using it on their servers.
Don't act surprised, you yourself created a vanity title right here on FR called "Democrats ahead of Republicans on Open Source" back during the last Presidential election that showed Kerry and the DNC running Linux, and Bush and the Republicans running Microsoft. Now you want to claim Democrats don't actually use it, ROFL!
^^^^^^^^Stallman campaigns for the Green Party and spends his recent time in Cuba, no one else is close.^^^^^^^^^^
Once again, I didn't say that Gates and Jobs were the same kind of leftist that Stallman is.
But it's a matter of fact that they are leftists. I'm not the only one who's noticed it.
^^^^^^^^^^Torvalds is a foreigner who was raised by well known communists who studied in Moscow.^^^^^^^^^^^
Gates' parents were also leftists. So what?
^^^^^^^^Why are you so anti-American, US products like OSX and Solaris are better anyway.^^^^^^^^^^^
Red hat has the best OS I've used so far, that includes macs. I've not used solaris.
Besides, with Sun embracing the GPL, the difference would be negligible for me to move from linux to solaris.
I'd still have a commie in my box. Would you approve of me having a communist in my computer as long as it's an american communist?
And you know the context of the thread, clearly explained by me that I thought the Republicans could benefit for practical reasons such as cost (work smarter, have more money left to win the election), yet you still push the lie that it's about ideology for me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.