Cuba banned Michael Moore's 2007 documentary, Sicko, because it painted such a "mythically" favourable picture of Cuba's healthcare system that the authorities feared it could lead to a "popular backlash", according to US diplomats in Havana.
The revelation, contained in a confidential US embassy cable released by WikiLeaks , is surprising, given that the film attempted to discredit the US healthcare system by highlighting what it claimed was the excellence of the Cuban system.
But the memo reveals that when the film was shown to a group of Cuban doctors, some became so "disturbed at the blatant misrepresentation of healthcare in Cuba that they left the room".
Castro's government apparently went on to ban the film because, the leaked cable claims, it "knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them."
This is... this is just... wow.
WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting 'mythical' healthcare system | World news | guardian.co.uk
Is there anyone who can take that movie - and Michael Moore in general - seriously after this? It was so dishonest in its portrayal of the Cuban health care system, it was banned in Cuba for making them look too good. There's something really awe-inspiring about that. You'd think that they'd be tossing it everywhere they could to use as propaganda if it was anywhere even close to being honest (to show why they're better than those capitalist American scum, etc). Yet somehow it must have crossed the line of dishonest and entered the realm of complete fantasy at some point.
So a US government diplomat during the Bush era sent a cable on what the Bush administration wanted to hear... wupti do... Problem with such a cable, no proof and 100% personal opinion (and wishful thinking) of the sender based on hearsay and a diplomat who was most likely a Bush political appointee.. which means same views and tactics as Bush and his administration in "spicing up" official correspondence to fit the world view of the administration leadership and be as far from factual as possible.
While I have no love for the Cuban government, things should always be factual and be able to be backed up.
Hey, Alanis Morissette -- here's an ACTUAL example of "irony."
hazlnut said:His films are from a liberal POV. Fact-based.....
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...55858-michael-moore-hypocritical-story-2.html
I can proudly say that the only time I've supported Mr. Moore was when he blew himself up in Team America. :mrgreen:
why? they are terrorists.
j-mac
Cyber.
j-mac
truth is treason in an empire of lies
Former health insurance executive Wendell Potter recently revealed that the insurance industry -- which had decided to spend millions to go after me and, if necessary, "push Michael Moore off a cliff" -- had begun working with anti-Castro Cubans in Miami in order to have them speak out and smear my film.
So, on January 31, 2008, a State Department official stationed in Havana took a made up story and sent it back to his HQ in Washington. Here's what they came up with:
XXXXXXXXXXXX stated that Cuban authorities have banned Michael Moore's documentary, "Sicko," as being subversive. Although the film's intent is to discredit the U.S. healthcare system by highlighting the excellence of the Cuban system, he said the regime knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them.
Sounds convincing, eh?! There's only one problem -- the entire nation of Cuba was shown the film on national television on April 25, 2008! The Cubans embraced the film so much so it became one of those rare American movies that received a theatrical distribution in Cuba. I personally ensured that a 35mm print got to the Film Institute in Havana. Screenings of 'Sicko' were set up in towns all across the country. In Havana, 'Sicko' screened at the famed Yara Theater.
But the secret cable said Cubans were banned from seeing my movie. Hmmm.
You don't seem to have a problem believing the leaks when they about American government or big business. Why are you doubting the cuban one?
PeteEU says
2.) His death would not stop the leaks or others for doing something similar. In fact it would more than likely make people even more determined to hit the US with leaks. There is already a new competing site that opened yesterday so this kind of exposing of government and big business is set to continue regardless of threats or murders. And frankly I think it is a good thing as a principle. If such sites expose illegalities by government and/or big business then I am all for it.
3.) What real damage has the leaks actually done other than a bit of pride and embarrassment? A list of "key sites" that most terrorists and enemies most likely knew of already? Making Hilary and a few ambassadors look like fools? Telling the truth about foreign leaders.. oh the shock!http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...-declares-julian-assange-should-killed-3.html
The big problem with this story is...wow...just wow... Sicko was not only shown in theatres across Cuba, but the government made it a point to show it on national TV. LOL
From Moore's site:
¡Viva WikiLeaks! SiCKO Was Not Banned in Cuba | MichaelMoore.com
Ok, According to Moore everything about Cuba from WikiLeaks is false. The lies go back as far as 1961. Hmmmmmmm.....but everything we'll be reading that is bad about America, we will be accepting as truth.
If anyone can explain to me if I have someting wrong, please do. I am really confused.
Ok, According to Moore everything about Cuba from WikiLeaks is false. The lies go back as far as 1961. Hmmmmmmm.....but everything we'll be reading that is bad about America, we will be accepting as truth.
If anyone can explain to me if I have someting wrong, please do. I am really confused.
Start from reading the whole link I posted. Bottom line, the movie was shown.
Start from reading the whole link I posted. Bottom line, the movie was shown.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?