ff in Cuba
 

jeff miller wrote:
rw wrote:


http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_p.../cis_1097.html


perhaps there is a CLE program with an international sponsor, or you
could get a journalist badge from a flyfishing mag?

jeff

I'm only interested in traveling to cuba (for some epic sal****er ff)
LEGALLY as an ordinary citizen. It's a matter of principle.

The US travel restrictions to Cuba, and the embargo in general, are not
only counterproductive -- a product of pandering to swing voters (Cuban
Americans) in a swing state (Florida) -- but they also violate the
rights of American citizens.

Sorry for intruding on the oh-so-fascinating discussion of Gaza and Israel.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

ff in Cuba
 

On Jan 1, 5:59*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
I know many
people who have done exactly that, not for fly fishing but
for cigars.

Is that really necessary? Aren't Cuban cigars available in Jamaica?

Joe F.

ff in Cuba
 

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:14:52 +0000, Lazarus Cooke
wrote:

Dave La Course wrote:

The only
people who are killing Palestinians are Hamas.

This is a complete sentence not quoted out of context.

I think that it stands as an indication of Dave's view of things.

It's a bit like saying that, in the 1940s, the only people killing Jews
were other Jews.

Lazarus

Lazarus, Lazarus, Lazarus. Hamas knows that Israel is going to
destroy their rocket launch sites/mortar pads. It is a given. They
are firing into a sovereign nation. Their act is one of war. Period.
So, if Israel is going to destroy the rocket site, why not put the
site in someones home, or a school, or a hospital. Then when Israel
destroys that home/hospital/school, the entire world, Lazarus
included, will condemn the action. They won't condemn Hamas' action.
Why should they? Hamas is the underdog, the "innocent one". Everyone
KNOWS that Israel will defend themselves, they have to or they will be
annihilated.

Would not the rockets be just as effective if they were fired from an
empty field, and empty park, a highway leading into town, *anyplace*
besides someone's home? Of course they would be, but the outcry would
not be there, would it? "Israel takes out launch pad in middle of
desert. No one killed." is NOT the headlines Hamas wants. They want
headlines that read, "Israel attacks innocent civilians and 100 are
killed." Well, hell yeah they were killed. They were sitting on top
of a weapon system firing into a sovereign state.

If Hamas fought this war they way a war should be fought (without
involving citizens), there would be no one killed except the
terrorists firing the rockets/mortars, AND the innocent Jews and Arabs
at the end of the terrorists rocket run.

You have absolutely no idea of what is happening simply because, like
Fortenberry and Snedeker, you do not want to see Israel succeed.

I don't know where you live, but if your neighborhood was bombarded by
an outside force, would you not retaliate, or would you sit there and
take it? Answer THIS question before you blow your righteous horn,
Lazuras.

To compare what happened to the Jews in WWII to what is now happening
is comparing apples to oranges. Hamas is as much to blame for the
death of those Palestinians as the Jews are. Live with it, you
anti-Semitic *******!

Dave

ff in Cuba
 

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:06:57 -0800 (PST), DaveS
wrote:

And since you insist . . . . As per working with the poor, I'll match
my years, both volunteer and paid, fixing programs and rooting out
cheaters, (mostly among administrators and upper middle class people
by the way,) some of whom were also vague about their understanding
that government property was not their personal property. My current
Mother Teresa gig in this regard is raising fresh food for the
"Helpline/Fishline" food bank. In season we raise mostly green beans,
squash, peppers, eggplant, some greens, and corn enough for deliveries
about once a week July-September, and lots of apples from late August -
October. Its something, but pathetic compared to what society and
this country have given to me. Next year we will do more and maybe pop
for a pig or half a cow from my lessee. As I am sure you are aware
food banks are shortest on fresh foods. I should and can do more.

Good for you, David. I am very happy to hear this. It restores some
of the respect I have for you.

As for reporting corruption, like I said, there is NO LAW against
owning a new car and collecting food stamps or getting free food from
the many food pantries in Lowel. I have nothing to report, for I have
not seen a law broken. Period.

Go Israel, Survive

Dave, RWC

ff in Cuba
 

rb608 wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I know many
people who have done exactly that, not for fly fishing but
for cigars.

Is that really necessary? Aren't Cuban cigars available in Jamaica?

Apparently there are some Cuban cigars which are available
only in Cuba.

I'm thinking if the embargo ever gets lifted non-export Cuban
cigars and Cuban fly fishing will both lose a great deal of
cachet.

--
Ken Fortenberry

ff in Cuba
 

On Jan 1, 4:18*am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
Snip

You still haven't answered my question: *What would YOU do if
Bainbridge Island was bombarded illegally from a terrorist group in
Canada? *Would you finally be angry about a sovereign nation being
invaded by another? *Or would you sit back, tell the wife and kids
that it's ok because the terrorists are the good guys?

Your ideology still sucks.

Go Israel. *Go Bainbridge Island

Dave, RWC

Hummmmm, what would I do? Lets see what my choices are?

Choice 1. Bomb the apartment houses in the densest parts of Vancouver
for 6 days with high explosives because I think the terrorists and
their families have flats in those buildings. Make those neighbors
pay because they should have known and done something to those bad
people in Apt 111f, on the 11th floor of the second building on the
court of that part of their complex. Stop bombing when death ratio
reaches 250 pallies to 1 Israeli, or when Pentagon complains that use
of US munitions threaten American readiness levels, whichever come
first. Fight the survivors for another 70 years. Live on a diet of
fear.


Choice 2. Tell the Canadians that it's OK to send their kids to school
and we will not kill any more for giving the finger to our armed
drones when the operators get bored, tell them we know you are good
and hungry and cold (because we caged you in for the last 6 months and
cut off the fuel we were selling you at 20% over world prices) its OK,
we won't shoot any more of your fisherman, it is OK to cross the
border to buy food, and when you get warm again, and when your bellies
are full again, we will have a serious talk about these assholes among
you who are scaring our people with your **** poor rockets. And then I
would quietly send agents into Canada and Vancouver and start killing
the rocket boys, one by one, skinning out and desecrating the bodies
in culturally disturbing and meaningful ways.

Choice 3. Other.


Hummmmm. Let's see. Call me pacifist, call me liberal, call me for
diner, but I tend to favor choice 2.

Dave

ff in Cuba
 

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 19:39:22 -0800 (PST), DaveS
wrote:

Choice 2. Tell the Canadians that it's OK to send their kids to school
and we will not kill any more for giving the finger to our armed
drones when the operators get bored, tell them we know you are good
and hungry and cold (because we caged you in for the last 6 months and
cut off the fuel we were selling you at 20% over world prices) its OK,
we won't shoot any more of your fisherman, it is OK to cross the
border to buy food, and when you get warm again, and when your bellies
are full again, we will have a serious talk about these assholes among
you who are scaring our people with your **** poor rockets. And then I
would quietly send agents into Canada and Vancouver and start killing
the rocket boys, one by one, skinning out and desecrating the bodies
in culturally disturbing and meaningful ways.

Too phunny. You have drank all of the koolaid they could give you.
They were starving, and cold because they couldn't get food and fuel.
And yet, they seem to have NO problems whatsoever in getting rockets,
mortars and other weapons. Gee, why not smuggle in some food
concealed IN the rockets and the mortar tubes would carry lots of
kerosene. Voila! Problem solved. That'll fool thos bad Jewish
people.

Bottom line, David, you WOULD retaliate. Just like the Israelis are.

Go Israel, Survive

Dave, RWC

ff in Cuba
 

On Jan 1, 6:58*pm, jeff miller wrote:

perhaps there is a CLE program with an international sponsor, or you
could get a journalist badge from a flyfishing mag?

In 1999 I got a Visa to visit Cuba for two days. I accompanied
somebody doing a photo shoot for bass fishing in that little Island.
Getting a visa to legally visit cuba really isn't that difficult. From
what i understand the Bush boys have done however is tie in some
currency rules that pretty much means unless you have family or a darn
good excuse you can't pay for lodging, food, or transportation.

i can't speak for the bone fishing but if the Island ever becomes
readily available to Americans, the BASS boys are going to go nuts.

ff in Cuba
 

On Jan 1, 10:47*pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
They were starving, and cold because they couldn't get food and fuel.
And yet, they seem to have NO problems whatsoever in getting rockets,
mortars and other weapons. *Gee, why not smuggle in some food
concealed IN the rockets and the mortar tubes would carry lots of
kerosene. *

Surely you don't suggest that the ease of smuggling relatively small
amounts of rocket components is in any way equivalent to importing
enough food, water, and fuel to feed and warm a population of a
million or so people. Also, you do know that the manufacture of
rockets within Gaza is significantly simpler than growing food there.
The equivalence you argue simply doesn't exist.

ff in Cuba
 

On Jan 1, 7:47*pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Well Dave we are soon going to get to the second phase. You see when
you starve an animal, it gets angry, and then it bites. Allot of this
is about Olmert, already in legal trouble over corruption in Israel,
and condemned by combat soldier groups IN ISRAEL for the mismanagement
of the recent Israeli defeat in Lebanon at the hands of Hezbollah, so
Olmert and some others are trying to maintain the myth of Israeli
military invincibility.

Hamas has nothing in the air to take on the Israeli 300+ fighters and
ground attack planes, nor can the Arab world deter the minimum of 100
to max 400 nukes estimated the Israelis have, so Hamas' armed wing is
waiting. Hamas is in tunnels and bunkers 20 meters down, waiting for
the Israeli ground assault. They will follow the same plan that
Hezbollah developed for Lebanon.

Hamas will let the Israeli ground attack, tanks and APCs, pass, on
into the densest built-up areas, where the tanks will be in single and
double echelon. And then Hamas will use tactics like so . . . they
will cripple one of the vehicles back in the line, and then take on
the individual vehicles in detail (example, rpgs to screw up the
automated turret defense guns, then something to cook the tank etc
etc.). As the Israelis retreat/reposition Hamas will attrit them using
roadside munitions etc.. Hamas is likely to use the same cellular C&C
structure of small, independent units, empowered with prepositioned
munitions, and independent tasking and decision authority. It will be
bloody, and count on the Israelis using white phosphorus and DU. But
say what you will, the IDF reservists are not the USMC, and the IDF
ground will have high casualties.

Maybe a high causality, second defeat will pull down the Israeli
rightwingers. I doubt it. I worry that in a full bore defeat, the
Israelis will use one of their nukes, like they almost did once befor.

Israel needs to make peace with its neighbors and recognize the right
of Palestine to exist as a nation within the pre-1967 borders. If
Israel continues to hold the Palestinians captive within an expanded
Israel, the simple arithmetic of birthrates will ultimately eliminate
the reality of a majority Jewish State. People who "support Israel"
thru blind acceptance of rightwing Israeli actions and tactics, no
matter how stupid or short sighted, need to consider the long term
outcomes.

David