That's one rich commie!!!

[Devastatin Dave]

http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/04/news...o_forbes.reut/

Wow, what a man of the people!!!
Like most elitist leftist... Do as I say, not as I do. Sorry to tarnish the alter of Castro my left leaning Organites.

[Major Robert Dump]

I can't believe he's the beneficiary of all that. I think all of the old, withered protestors of Cuba should take to the street -- nude -- and let Castro know how they feel about it. "Breasts not Billions!"

[Byzantine Prince]

No real point in saying ha has a lot of money. Money only matters if you actually spend it to be in nice hotels and wear expensive clothing or being able to have your sons and daughters go to a nice school. Castro isn't really benefiting, plus he is old as hell.

[JAG]

Castro, who says his net worth is nil, is likely the beneficiary of up to $900 million, based on his control of state-owned companies

.....

state... owned. I know that you over there in the US don't really know what it is, but it doesn't mean Castro has 900m because of it, it means it is run by Castro and his government.

[Divinus Arma]

ya. And Stalin was pauper, too.


In other news, Bill Gates is still the wordl's richest man, with current net worth estimated at 50 billion, down from a high of 90 billion a few years ago.

[Sjakihata]

http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/04/news...o_forbes.reut/

Wow, what a man of the people!!!
Like most elitist leftist... Do as I say, not as I do. Sorry to tarnish the alter of Castro my left leaning Organites.

You havent got a clue, have you?

[Divinus Arma]

You havent got a clue, have you?

Uh... If you and Jag are such fans of Castro, why don't you defect to Cuba? I'm sure his government would welcome you, place you in positions of power, and trumpet your arrival in his propaganda efforts.

Cuba was better under the Mob.

[Papewaio]

Uh... If you and DD are such fans of Bill Gates, why don't you defect to MS? I'm sure his Indian Callcenters would welcome you, place you in positions of meekness, and overlook your arrival in his propaganda efforts to oust Google.

PCs were better under IBM.

Now play nicely or I will have to hyperbole all of your arguements... except for Twinkie I would have to degauss or is that de-gass his to resemble something tangible. Somedays I'm sure MRD and DD are related.

[Devastatin Dave]

Somedays I'm sure MRD and DD are related.

Inbreeding's a *****.

(Language - Beirut)

[Papewaio]

Particularly when they run to fast

[Major Robert Dump]

Inbreeding's a *****.

how many times have I told you, its not inbreeding if do it once. stop giving away the Colonels recipe!!!!!111


(Qouted language - Beirut)

[Idaho]

ya. And Stalin was pauper, too.

Among Stalin's innumerable sins and crimes - living in oppulence wasn't one of them.

[Tribesman]

I don't understand , how comes the British Queen isn't higher up the list ?
I mean she must have been the beneficiary of British Gas , British telecom , British Airways , British Aerospace , British Rail , Britsh Leyland , British Nucear ,...shipbuilding , steel , ports authority , postal service , military .....surely the realisation of the asset value of all the states assets would have really boosted her personal wealth as head of State
Then again maybe the premise of putting a countries wealth down to the personal ownership of the head of state is a load of crap .
If not then I wonder why Chirac is not on the list as a beneficiary of all of Frances nationalised assets .

You havent got a clue, have you?
Ah ...maybe that explains it

Cuba was better under the Mob.
Divinus , can you think of a single thing where Cuba was actually better for the Cubans , under murderous dictatorship backed by foriegn criminals ?

[Spetulhu]

Cuba was better under the Mob.
Divinus , can you think of a single thing where Cuba was actually better for the Cubans , under a murderous dictatorship backed by foriegn criminals ?

It was real, honest American criminals getting the money instead of some Cuban communist?

[Kralizec]

In other news, Bill Gates is still the wordl's richest man, with current net worth estimated at 50 billion, down from a high of 90 billion a few years ago.

That's because at one point he gave away half of his money to charity, for wich he has my deepest respect.
I thought the Ikea guy topped him after that, though.

Cuba was better under the Mob.

You think Batista was better then Castro?

Oh dear...

[rory_20_uk]

I think you're wrong there...

Although Bill is giving away money, the decrease is probably more down to the drop in share price of Microsoft shares since the heady peaks of the .com bubble. Giving away $40 billion would have made more news.

[Devastatin Dave]

.....

state... owned. I know that you over there in the US don't really know what it is, but it doesn't mean Castro has 900m because of it, it means it is run by Castro and his government.

Did you know that the word "naive" doesn't appear in the dictionary?

[Sjakihata]

Did you know that the word "naive" doesn't appear in the dictionary?

Well, it does if you spell it naïve

[Tribesman]

Did you know that the word "naive" doesn't appear in the dictionary?
Well Dave , you have been shown as naive for making a faulty assumption based on a newspaper article .
Which shows that you naively believe things , even if they are from a source that you often bemoan , if you think they fit your naive ideas .
And to top it all , you show complete naivety about an issue like state ownership .
Congratulations

[ShadesPanther]

To copy GrimSta from the TWC

[lars573]

I don't understand , how comes the British Queen isn't higher up the list ?
I mean she must have been the beneficiary of British Gas , British telecom , British Airways , British Aerospace , British Rail , Britsh Leyland , British Nucear ,...shipbuilding , steel , ports authority , postal service , military .....surely the realisation of the asset value of all the states assets would have really boosted her personal wealth as head of State
Then again maybe the premise of putting a countries wealth down to the personal ownership of the head of state is a load of crap .
If not then I wonder why Chirac is not on the list as a beneficiary of all of Frances nationalised assets .

B (load of crap) is the right answer. HM the Queen is bacially the highest paid civil servant in G.B. She is given an annual salary as the monarch. The profits from all those state owned industries go to the royal teasury. And the time when the monarch had control over the royal treasury went out with public executions and knee socks with short pants. The Queen however is an extensive land owner. The problem (as the article said) is it's hard to tell what is owned by the state and what is still owned personally by the Queen.

Cuba was better under the Mob.
Divinus , can you think of a single thing where Cuba was actually better for the Cubans , under murderous dictatorship backed by foriegn criminals ?

Too true. Of all the communist revolutions in the 20th century Castros is the only one I'll always support. Plus the idea of him being worth 900 Mil is complete propagandist BS. Libel is what it is, Castro should sue. The idea that Castro benefits from the state owned coproations and endevors is rediculous.

[Vladimir]

Don't you reactionaries and leftists know that Castro IS the state?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Of all the communist revolutions in the 20th century Castros is the only one I'll always support. Plus the idea of him being worth 900 Mil is complete propagandist BS. Libel is what it is, Castro should sue.

Castro should sue? He wouldn't know what that is. If a Cuban Davito Devaste would have posted that $900 million nonsense Castro would have him imprisoned, tortured and murdered.

That Batista sucked more than Castro is true, but no excuse to worship Castro. I won't support the Soviet Union just because Tsarist Russia was an aristocratic dictatorship.

[lars573]

Don't you reactionaries and leftists know that Castro IS the state?

Don't you reactionary rightwing nutjobs know that he's not. He's the biggest cog sure, but only a cog.

Castro should sue? He wouldn't know what that is. If a Cuban Davito Devaste would have posted that $900 million nonsense Castro would have him imprisoned, tortured and murdered.

Yeah right. Imprisioned yes. Tortured, hmm not really sure. Murdered, you'd have to do more than try and make him look bad to get killed.

That Batista sucked more than Castro is true, but no excuse to worship Castro. I won't support the Soviet Union just because Tsarist Russia was an aristocratic dictatorship.

\
Actually properly led the aristocratice dictatorship is what Russia should have kept.


Castro is a ruthless sometimes brutal despot that steps on individuals in the name of the greater good. Those who came before him were ruthless always brutal desposts out to step on everyone who didn't make them richer. Backed by foreginers who wanted the majority to be poor peasants to better exploit them for their own wealth. Given those 2 choice I'd pick Castro every time. He's the lesser of 2 evils.

[Tribesman]

That Batista sucked more than Castro is true, but no excuse to worship Castro.
Louis , who worships Castro ?
Castro is just another politician , he does some good things , he does some bad things .
Instead of giving it the "worship Castro" bit , why not ask why people hate Castro ?
As this topic , like the last one on Cuba , has shown that those that hate Castro tend to use arguements that are either entirely untrue , or very deeply flawed .
There are lots of reasons to criticise Castro , just as there are for Chavez , but invariably those that bring up the subject , ie. those that feel strongly against it , nearly always try and use made up rubbish to attempt to make their point .
I wonder why that is ?

[Redleg]

That Batista sucked more than Castro is true, but no excuse to worship Castro.
Louis , who worships Castro ?
Castro is just another politician , he does some good things , he does some bad things .
Instead of giving it the "worship Castro" bit , why not ask why people hate Castro ?
As this topic , like the last one on Cuba , has shown that those that hate Castro tend to use arguements that are either entirely untrue , or very deeply flawed .
There are lots of reasons to criticise Castro , just as there are for Chavez , but invariably those that bring up the subject , ie. those that feel strongly against it , nearly always try and use made up rubbish to attempt to make their point .
I wonder why that is ?

I just love when the pot calls the kettle black, ignoring its own color.....

[Tribesman]

Is that revisionism Red , or can you find a post where I have expressed my disgust about a political leader based on made up rubbish rather than the politicians actions ?

[Ronin]

since when is castro a communist?

he might say he is.....his state propaganda machine might say it too...but if that guy is a communist then I´m a swedish swimsuit model with big boobs....


P.S.- and for the love of god....let´s not put dumb answers just to counter something we don´t like.....Castro is a son of a <something I can´t say here> but to imply that Batista and is mob buddies were any better is just ridiculous

[Redleg]

Is that revisionism Red , or can you find a post where I have expressed my disgust about a political leader based on made up rubbish rather than the politicians actions ?

I just love when the pot calls the kettle black, ignoring its own color.....

[Louis VI the Fat]

Tribesman, the whole routine about him get's on my nerves.

The right, specifically, right-wing America, is utterly obsessed with him. Making him appear bigger, more relevant than he really is.

The left in turn dig the way he get's on America's nerves. They admire his defiancy, to the point were they become his apologists.

Both forget that Castro is nothing more than an irrelevant, petty dictator. Not the worst by any means, but still a dictator.

Those that feel strongly against him, nearly always try and use made up rubbish to attempt to make their point indeed. But those opposing this rubbish then blissfully ignore the fact that Cuba is in the end a country where dissidents get beaten, locked up and killed.

There is something intellectualy dishonest about the whole Cuba debate. Both sides are putting arguments forward that don't comply to their own standards.