It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Forbes Magazine Estimates Fidel Castro's Net Worth At $550 Million

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
I just had this thought...

What if Castro was smart and had shares in Halliburton?


$550 million is not chump change, wonder if he is invested in Arabusto Oil too :lol;




posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
$550 million is not chump change, wonder if he is invested in Arabusto Oil too l;

That's one of the problems with news from an 'organ.' Where's the beef? So what about Castro- how about some real info on the Royals and Sultan, etc. Where's the part of the story about the Queen's inherited drug money?

See what I mean? Castro= bad guy.

O.K.- so how about everyone else?

Do we stop at Castro?



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Let's see now -

Assumptions:

1.1959 as Castro start date e.g 45 years to end of 2004
2. Came in with no funds
3. Makes 5% annual return on investments
4. Bilks same amount every year

So - plugging that into excel FV function gives ~ $3.2M/year

He could have done better, then again he is a putz....



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   
You are making the assumption that fidel was not backed by the soviets back in the days, which is wrong. fidel was backed completely by communists, he is a communist after all.



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Yeah - would lower my annual bilk number if he had some seed cash.

Also, with just us rich gringo's and all the Cuban smokes we smuggle in, he should have made boatloads in the last 10 years....

I'll actually fire one up to salute his bilking stupidity....



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
You are making the assumption that fidel was not backed by the soviets back in the days, which is wrong. fidel was backed completely by communists, he is a communist after all.

I'm pretty sure Castro also had a lot of U.S. help earlier on.


Thinkquest
Eventually, Batista decided the situation was hopeless. His generals had arrived at the same conclusion, and were glad when Batista decided to give up the fight. Batista fled to Spain, by then having amassed a fortune of $300 million through bribery and embezzlement.


Pro Castro site
Fidel Castro was among those captured and imprisoned. In his defence speech, immortalised as 'History will absolve me', Castro identified three social forces that would determined his revolutionary strategy and alliances.

'The big landowners, reactionary clergy and transnational corporations represented by Batista.'

'The national bourgeoisie, capitalists in contradiction with imperialism, but among whom only the most progressive would support a revolution.'

The masses, 'the 600,000 Cubans without work%. The 500,000 farm labourers who live in miserable shacks,% the 100,000 small farmers who live and die working land that is not theirs,% the 30,000 teachers and professors,% so badly treated and paid; the 20,000 small businessmen weighed down by debts; the 10,000 young professional people who find themselves at a dead end% These are the people, the ones who know misfortune, and are therefore capable of fighting with limitless courage.'
-and-
At the time of the Revolution, the largely rural population had an average annual income per person of $91.25 - an eight of that of Mississippi, the poorest state in the USA. Only 11% of Cuba drank milk, 4% ate meat, 2-3% had running water, and 9.1% had electricity. 36% had intestinal parasites, 14% had tuberculosis, and 43% were illiterate.
-and-
During 1959, the CIA began monitoring the telephone conversations of Cuban leaders. Subversive radio stations transmitted to Cuba from Miami, the Bahamas and Central America.
At the end of the year, the CIA began to land saboteurs in Cuba.
On 6 July, the US sugar quota from Cuba was cut off. Castro nationalised US-owned sugar mills.
In July, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended the President authorise a full invasion

I'm not saying Castro has been good for Cuba. On the contrary, he has been a lightning rod drawing hurtful policies to the very people he was supposed to be lifting up.

The people Castro replaced deserve as much stuff heaped on them as anyone. Cuba was nothing more than a slave state for the non-Oligarchy. Sure a few clawed their way up, but most did not and were slaves by another name.
.

.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks
See what I mean? Castro= bad guy.
O.K.- so how about everyone else?
Do we stop at Castro?


No reason too if you feel the need. Even with a neutral eye context, why does Castro have any more than any of his citizens? Should not a Communist be equal to his poor masses.

If an article cames across the news wire about the Sultan of Bruni or the Queen of England's fortune implying a conspiracy or coverup I will be happy to post the results. For that matter I did post details and links to both Bush's and Kerry's financial statemnts during the elections.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
No reason too if you feel the need. Even with a neutral eye context, why does Castro have any more than any of his citizens? Should not a Communist be equal to his poor masses.

O.K., let's try this from another angle. (
your Castro fixation)

Forbes story doesn't even make an attempt to include their own data. Why focus on one dictator when the world has more than a few to go around- and yes FRED they all have pledged this and that- why lay on one when there are other people far more relevant to the wealth angle?

This thread is about the MOST wealthy isn't it?

I don't see any indication in the thread title that says

'worlds most corrupt dictator'
-or-
'Castro is a thief'

No, the thread is supposed (get this?) to be about the MOST wealthy people.

call a MOD

j/k

Forget everything above- this thread IS slanted. I just re-read the title duh-

O.K., so Castro is too rich!
.

.


[edit on 20-3-2005 by JoeDoaks]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

I'm pretty sure Castro also had a lot of U.S. help earlier on.
.


No he did not recieve help from the US....

One of the things castro was going to do was to take over all those American businesses in Cuba, which he did...why would the US help him?...

First of all, he was a self confesed socialist, following the doctrine of Marxism, or the people's revolution, also known as the worker's revolution.

Second, he ousted the president of Cuba that was backed by the US.... So, why would the US want ot oust a pro-democratic government in favor of a "revolucionario"?.... or as they are better known, a communist?

Anyways, for anyone interested in Cuba before and after fidel castro, here is a good link with full of facts.

The following is some of the data about Cuba before castro came to power.


This data is found in the archives of the World Health Organization.

LABOR RELATIONS: In 1958, an industrial worker in Cuba earned an average salary of the equivalent of $6 US dollars per each 8-hour work day, while an agricultural worker earned the equivalent of $3 US dollars. Cuba then ranked number eight (8) in the world as far as salaries paid to industrial workers, outperformed only by the following countries:

the United States ($16.80)

Canada ($11.73)

Sweden ($ 8.10)

Switzerland ($ 8.00)

New Zealand ($ 6.72)

Denmark ($ 6.46)

Norway ($ 6.10)

As far as salaries for agricultural workers, Cuba was number seven (7) in the world, outperformed only by the following countries:

Canada ($7.18)

the United States ($6.80)

New Zealand ($6.72)

Australia ($6.61)

Sweden ($5.47)

Norway ($4.38)

This data was published by the International Labor Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1960. In 1958, Cuba had a labor force of two million two hundred four thousand workers (2,204,000). The rate of unemployment at that time was 7.07%, the lowest in Latin America, as per data from the Cuban Labor Ministry.



www.fiu.edu...

What is of worth noticing is part of the introduction in that same link, which shows what one of castro's current self proclaimed mentors is doing to his country...


From the first few days following the revolutionary victory of 1959 in Cuba, after the hasty departure of dictator Fulgencio Batista, the new government initiated a progressive control of all the media, an act that went hand in hand with a propaganda campaign unprecedented in the history of the island.

As can be seen 38 years later, the purpose of the campaign was and has been to create an unfavorable image of pre-revolutionary Cuba, an image that would justify the subsequent political conduct of the dictatorship of Fidel Castro.

Some people believe that to disseminate information that demonstrates that pre-Castro Cuba was truly a developing country is to justify the acts of Batista. The truth is that the Cuban progress of that time was fundamentally a result of the efforts of all sectors of that society during 57 years of republic, after almost five centuries of life as a nation.


Excerpted from above link.



[edit on 21-3-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 04:55 PM
link   
While we busily beat up on Fidel (Castro) a little background is in order. Castro came from an upper class family. He was no poor campesino. He was educated and articulate. He also was a born anti-oligarchist. He was involved in failed attempts at revolutions in other countries and spent time in the infamous Isle Pines Cuban prison.

Maybe not a person to admire, but certainly a person to understand just a bit better and the causes that allowed such a revolution to take place.


Global Security paper on Cuba
    As successor to Spain, as the overseer of the island's affairs, the United States unwittingly perpetuated the Cubans' lack of political responsibility. Cubans enjoyed the assurance that the United States would intervene to protect them from foreign entanglement or to solve their domestic difficulties, but the situation only encouraged their irresponsible and indolent attitude toward their own affairs and was not conducive to responsible self-government.

(ref. The below cite)
Enrique Meneses, Fidel Castro, (New York: Taplinger
Publishing Company, 1966), p. 58.


Castro bio site A member of the social-democratic Ortodoxo party in the late 1940s and early 1950s, Castro was an early and vocal opponent of the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista. On July 26, 1953, Castro led an attack on the Moncada army barracks that failed but brought him national prominence. At the time, his political ideas were nationalistic, antiimperialist, and reformist; he was not a member of the Communist party

True or not- this is how I remember things as well.
Prior to Batista-


Cuba heritage.com (pro-Castro)
Castro intended to campaign for a parliamentary seat in the election of 1952 but General Fulgencio Batista overthrew the government of President Carlos Prio Socarras in a coup d'etat and canceled the election. Castro went to court and charged the dictator with violating the constitution. The court rejected Castro's petition. With no legal recourse left, Castro organized an armed attack by 165 men on the Moncada Barracks . . .

After leaving prison Castro eventually ended up in Mexico, training under Alberto Bayo (strangely missing from the articles). Castro formalized his revolutionary plans. Bayo is an interesting man. A Colonel that became a General (I don't remember when):


Yahoo Store about Bayo's Book- 150 QuestionsFor a Guerrilla
Bayo prepared for his role as Castro’s instructor for some three decades -- he fought the Riffs in North Africa for several years -- was a company commander in the Spanish Foreign Legion -- led an expedition against the Baltic Islands -- commanded several airfields in Southern Spain -- and organized a guerrilla warfare school!

After fleeing from the victorious Franco, Bayo went to Cuba, then Mexico, and helped organize revolutionary attempts against the Dominican Republic and Nicaragua.

    The book itself is fascinating. I had a copy long ago. Anyone interested in real guerrilla training needs this book (along with the (Amazon.c om) Boy Scouts Manual- best survival book ever printed. Another fine book on guerrilla warfare is (Amazon.com) Guerrilla and the other books by Lettow-Virbeck ). ATS post (half way down the page)


Alberto Bayo was ruthless and tough. He had fought the Riffians in North Africa and understood guerrilla tactics from a governmental perspective. A Loyalist during the Spanish Civil War, he escaped when Franco came to power. In Mexico he operated a subversive training center.

Castro and his men were not the best of students. Had they learned more, the disastrous Granma invasion would have gone differently as would the subsequent escape into the Sierra Maestra mountains (precipitous and jungle covered, virtually trackless).

One of the 'mythical' revolutionaries was Che Guevara. Che was from the upper class as well. An educated man (graduate of medical school) he also was a revolutionary.


Penn State write up of Che Guevara and Catsro's “invasion”


Global Security site noted above (half way down the page)
While his force was training, Castro traveled extensively throughout the United States, attempting to raise financial and moral support for his cause from exiled Cubans and American sympathizers. By the time he returned to Cuba, he had established some 62
Cuban "patriotic clubs," raised approximately $50,000 in cash and received pledges for considerably more.

Now to all those claiming Castro was ALWAYS supported by the Soviets and never received American support I say- history is not on your side.

Is the 'average' Cuban been better off?

I really don't know. The landed, the owners, the well to do certainly are not. Information regarding Cuba is so twisted by all concerned only history can judge.
.

.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   
There's always problems when it comes to history regarding enemies of the United States. Most of the time, it just seems that all enemies of the United States are made out to be absolute demons and most Americans simply don't take the time to read up on history, only toeing the Administration line.

Perhaps this is the fault of being governed by a democracy for too long? It's citizens stop questioning the authorities?

Eternal Vigilance.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by rapier28]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 11:12 PM
link   


Originally posted by rapier28
Perhaps this is the fault of being governed by a democracy for too long? It's citizens stop questioning the authorities?


People grow lazy and ignorant when they dont step outside their comfort zone... And this is precisely what is happening in the United State at the moment (among other regions)... And this is precisely why the US government is able to get away with so much...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join