Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (16697)	4/8/2000 7:24:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

That's what we have a court system for. The task for the judge is to decide what is BEST for the child. Not best for America, for Clinton, or for Castro. << Michael, I very much appreciated your well reasoned post on the plight of Elian Gonzoles and related parties. Unfortunately, the specter of Castro looming large in the background makes the case extremely difficult to judge on the face of it. As a parent, I would normally "err" on the side of parental rights too, but "Father Castro" certainly muddies the water as to the decision making process about what is best for the child. Speaking as a mother, all I can say is I have watched the file footage of little Elian with his cousin (his surrogate "mother") and his Great Uncle and can see that he appears to be adjusting and happy to be with them. I am also hearing from the Miami family that the little boy does not wish to return to Cuba. If the family is being truthful, my question would be WHY? Obviously, Elian is too young to understand the political situation or even that his return would mean a denial of personal freedom in his future. My guess would be that if little Elian fears returning to Cuba, it has to do with his relationship with his father Juan Miguel. I realize that we have not been able to get to the bottom of the situation and do not know all of the facts about the inter-personal relationships, but that is the very reason why it is IMPORTANT to let a family court look at all of the issues and evidence and make a decision in the best interest of Elian. I don't know if you remember, but there was a video aired a couple of months ago showing Elian visiting his father in Cuba. I remember commenting to my husband at the time that just viewing the interaction between the father and the son on the video DID NOT assuage any qualms I had about returning the boy to Cuba. The father appeared "aloof" and young Elian had an air of "resignation" about him in that snippet of film. I realize I may be reading much into that little piece of film, but I found it could be illustrative of why the child "fears" going back to Cuba. Additionally, if you recall, the Miami nun (whose name escapes me for the moment) was in favor of returning Elian to Cuba UNTIL she saw the interaction between the Grandmothers and the little boy. Something tells me that all is not right in the family and the nun was able to detect an undercurrent of dysfunction that made her change her mind on what would be the ultimate "best interest" of Elian. There has been something about the father's behaviour in this entire episode that simply does not "ring true" to me as a parent. I feel either he is using his son to gain political advantage with Castro in Cuba (Big fish in little pond) or else he is under some type of threat from Castro's regime that would cause him to act in contradiction to the best interest of his son. Either case, imo, works against sending Elian back to Cuba, for I see him as a political pawn in either situation. I believe if the little boy is returned to Cuba, he will ultimately be under the direct control of Castro. I believe that his chance of ever seeing freedom (apart from another revolution) will be next to nil. I believe that he will be so heavily indoctrinated that he will never be able to come to his own conclusions about his future and what he wants. If he ever shows ANY anti-Castro sentiment, I shudder to think about what may happen. Ultimately, if he returns it seems to me that he will be nothing less that Castro's "child", because who among us actually believe that Castro will ever allow this young boy and his family return to the United States. That would be the ultimate humiliation for Castro and I am certain that he will use any means necessary to see that it doesn't. Elian DESERVES to have his voice heard. The Miami family have the right to present their case before a family court and let the court decide. You have to question WHO'S interests are being served by abrogating these rights? I think therein lies the answer to the Elian's plight. bp

To: greenspirit who wrote (16697)	4/10/2000 5:52:00 PM
From: Brian P.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I'll try to type out and post some excerpts from Jane Kay's book if I have time. Looks like not too many Texans have read it, to say the least: nytimes.com April 10, 2000 IN AMERICA / By BOB HERBERT Take a Deep Breath At the beginning of 1995, Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth and a couple of other smog-choked urban centers in Texas had a fledgling emissions testing program in place that was designed to curtail pollution from cars and trucks. Ground-level ozone readings had reached alarming levels, especially in Houston, and the testing program was developed by the state to meet federal clear-air requirements. But even though the air in Houston was changing the perception of children about the color of the sky and the experience of breathing, the testing program was not popular with motorists. It was inconvenient. Texans, like most Americans, like to gas up and go. No time for inspections. And the program was anathema to the chattering hysterics of talk radio. If there was one thing they understood, it was polluted air. Houston might have had a problem in 1995, might even have been disappearing in an increasingly toxic haze, but that was a matter best dealt with later. Sure, some of the weaker types -- the asthmatics, the elderly -- were gasping and wheezing, but that happens. The immediate issue was how to get rid of the tests. Enter the brand new governor of Texas, George W. Bush. He was now in charge of appointments to the agency that had gone through the excruciating and expensive work of gearing up the emissions testing program, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission. Mr. Bush agreed with the angry motorists and the talk-radio crowd. It wasn't that he was against clean air, he said. He just didn't think motorists should be inconvenienced. And he sure didn't like the federales in Washington telling Texans what to do. The first legislation Mr. Bush signed as governor was a bill that put the emissions tests on hold. It didn't matter that the program was ready to go, that the contracts had been signed and an enormous cadre of workers hired by the contractors, and that dozens of gleaming new inspection stations were all set to open. Meant nothing. The state legislature passed the moratorium and the governor signed it. And that was just the beginning. The program would soon be killed. Texas was not yet ready to grapple with the reality of air pollution. At a legislative hearing in March of 1995, the Rev. Aubrey Vaughan, head of a group misleadingly called Citizens for a Cleaner Houston, railed against the emissions tests, claiming, according to an account in The Houston Chronicle, that there was no evidence of an ozone problem in Houston, and no scientific evidence that ozone is a health threat. The reverend declared that God is the "only one who can control pollution problems." And he observed that "a good, hard, steady rain would help us all." When the state formally scrapped the testing program later in the year it not only turned its back on an increasingly serious health hazard, it reneged on its multimillion-dollar contract with the lead contractor for the program, Tejas Testing Technology, which would eventually go bankrupt. Tejas sued and won. A settlement of $140 million was worked out, and the way the state raised the money said a lot about the way Governor Bush and other top state officials view the environment in Texas. They raided the state's environmental programs -- critical programs like the superfund for cleaning up contaminated sites and the Texas clean air fund -- for $130 million of the $140 million they were forced to pay to Tejas. In other words, the environment in Texas was twice punished -- first, when the inspection program was killed and again when the lawsuit was settled. Since then the air quality problems in Texas have only gotten worse. Houston is now the smoggiest city in America, having roared past the longtime champ, Los Angeles, for that gruesome distinction. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has rejected as inadequate the latest clean air proposals from Texas and is threatening to cut off billions of dollars in highway funds and impose Draconian cleanup measures. And get this -- state officials now think it might be a good idea to come up with a stringent vehicle emissions testing program. Meanwhile, George W. Bush is running for president, declaring himself an environmentalist and promising to do for the rest of us what he has done so well in Texas.