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 : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (926)	4/14/2000 11:02:00 PM
From: TheLineMan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

OK. One last word yes. To take or attempt to take a child across national or state lines without the consent of the other parent is kidnapping according to Federal law and most state laws. Likewise not returning a child to a parent when ordered by a court constitutes kidnapping. But using a child for political propaganda is simply disgusting. Most judges would throw the book at the Miami relatives. I hope politics doesn't enter into this and the nuts in Florida get their just desserts.

To: average joe who wrote (926)	4/14/2000 11:33:00 PM
From: The Barracuda™	Respond to of 9127

Attorneys for Elian are currently arguing before the court of appeals that prior to Elian being returned to Cuba, the Dept Of State should confirm that Cuba is in compliance w/ the United Nations accord on human rights. From my Hasta La Vista post: "The life of slavery to which Burns was returned could only be called totalitarian. The slavemaster owned all the means of production. Almost all work was forced labor, including that of the children. Because the slavemaster rationed food, clothing, medicine and other basic necessities, many slaves had to seek whatever ?after-hours? work they could find, in order to supplement their meager provisions and be able to survive. Whenever the master contracted out his slaves to others, he took most of the pay, leaving only a pittance for the person who earned the money. There was no freedom of speech, assembly or association. Access to books and newspapers was controlled. Meetings of more than a few people were forbidden and harshly punished. Slaves could not travel without permission. Many religious activities were suppressed. There was no such thing as due process of law. Any dissenting voices were silenced. At the slavemaster?s whim, slaves suspected of being dangerous, i.e., those who did not readily obey or show the proper attitude of subservience were punished severely. Beatings by the master?s caretakers were common, often resulting in death. But the people responsible for such abuses acted under the protection of the slavemaster and were rarely sanctioned or prosecuted. >>>>>>>>>This depiction must seem eerily familiar to many Americans. Although it accurately portrays the lives of most slaves in the South in 1854, the information was actually taken from public U.S. State Department documents describing . . . life in Cuba in 1998."<<<<<<<<<<<<

To: average joe who wrote (926)	4/15/2000 12:23:00 AM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9127

>Did the people that took the kid in anticipate this kind of commotion? YES. Not only that, they acted in such a way to raise this issue to a political question when it is a pure father-son issue (and the law is behind Elian's father not only here but pretty much everywhere). Even drunks could realize the potential goldmine that this boy could bring to them...they jumped on it without any concern for the little boy...in other words, pure scum, they belong in jail