About that Cuban boy, Elian Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rambi who wrote (8143)	7/6/2000 12:01:37 AM
From: greenspirit	of 9127

I understand what you're saying. However, here I believe lies at the heart of our disagreement. Allow me to highlight in order be clear about this. However, I DO believe that they had no right to keep him after they defied the order to turn him over to his father. I think they DID become "criminals" of a sort after that point. I think Elian needed to be removed from this situation and the government had allowed itself, for whatever reasons, to be manipulated into a corner There was no order. If a court order had been legally presented to them, I would completely agree with you. No such order existed. As a matter of fact, it lies at the heart of why Clinton and Reno were so exasperated and made the grandstanding action they did. The 11th circuit initially ruled unfavorably to them and they feared a further ruling in the same direction unless they obtained custody and challenged the asylum. That's where the government crossed the line in my mind. They simply should have waited to obtain a court order, (after the ruling if need be) and presented it to the relatives. Just like thousands of court orders are presented daily across the land. Also you are misstating priorities-- at least mine. This was not about an immediate father-son reunion for me; it was about a country forcing its own values of freedom on a man who didn't want to accept them. On this point I also disagree in the sense that I really don't believe we know what the father wanted. Fear of the type practiced by communist dictators is known and long been acknowledged after such dictators are thrown out. Can you imagine the kind of fear someone raised nearly his entire life as a simple man in Cuba would have toward a figure like Castro? It's the kind of fear difficult for us to imagine, but it's real and I firmly believe it exists. Castro and his brother rule by fear. When Castro looks you in the eye and tells you to say "so and so" or else. Only the bravest and (possibly foolish) of people would say no. He probably knows very little about life and safety in America. And has been indoctrinated into believing that Castro can reach you anywhere. This is especially true when you consider that Castro's people never let him out of his sight the entire time he was in the United States. The point I am making is that we can never know what Juan Miguel wanted. He may have wanted to stay, or he may have wanted to go to Cuba. So the point of view of knowing is invalid to me. The Supreme court and the 11th circuit ruled on a very narrow area of law. Not on the actions of the seizure. That will have to wait for another day. Michael

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next