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: Dayuhan who wrote (17828)	4/30/2000 1:19:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 769667

Steven, if it was my child, I would NOT want a bunch of INS agents busting down the door with machine guns. That to me is one of the worst kind of nightmare scenario's imaginable. That home was open to the news media and just about anyone who wanted for weeks. If the INS's intelligence is that pathetic, someone should be fired. I don't believe for a minute that a priest walking up to the house with plainclothed agents would have any difficulty obtaining the child if given a court order. To believe otherwise, is to buy into the propaganda coming out of the Justice Department. Unfortunately, we will never know. Perhaps the child should go to back to Cuba with his father. I am not going to judge the personalities involved. To me, it's only speculation based on sketchy news information. I view both parties as potentially decent parents. After all, we really know very little about his father, mother or relatives. I've heard the father and mother were divorced three years before the child was born. I've also heard the father hadn't seen the boy for three years before he left. Other reports indicate differently. We can't really know for sure, because he came from a communist country which doesn't allow freedom of the press. To me, both sides can potentially be great people or not. I really don't know. That's why we have a family court and judges. If my son or daughter were being held by relatives. I would have taken the first flight to Florida and walked up to the house and said, let me have him. And seen where it went from there. Painting the protestors as some kind of evil group of thugs is simply buying into more of the media propaganda spin. That boy was in no danger in that home. After all, the INS itself placed him there only a few months ago. We also still don't really know if the father wants to take the child to Cuba. I don't believe he has spent one minute outside of the prying eyes of Cuban diplomats or agents of Castro. Care to guess why? The best thing that could happen for Elian is for the father to declare asylum himself and ask to stay in the U.S. What caring father would want his son raised in Communist Cuba when compared to America? Unfortunately, he's probably been brainwashed (indoctrinated) by Castro. The justice department is supposed to uphold the law. Breaking into a law abiding citizens home and shoving machine guns in the faces of children is reprehensible and illegal without a court order. And I don't believe for a minute 6 year old children are snatched this way by the INS, even in latino communities as you suggest. As a matter of fact, I'll bet you can't find one other incident in which a 6 year old child was snatched in a similar manner by INS agents. Especially without a court order. It's not kidnapping when a relative of yours is given to you to take care of. If disputing custodial rights of a relative is regarding as kidnapping, then we probably have thousands of grandparents kidnapping their children in America today, while they await a court hearing. There was no reason to attack the protesters and storm the home. No one was in any real danger. There was a custody case working its way through the courts. In America, we resolve legal disputes in court. Without a court order, federal agents stormed the home of a law-abiding citizen and seized a person. Janet Reno and the INS were the ones who kidnapped a child illegally. Even liberal legal experts like Alan Dershowitz and Laurence Tribe say that Clinton and Reno acted illegally, that they had no court order. Michael

To: Dayuhan who wrote (17828)	4/30/2000 1:53:00 AM
From: haqihana	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Steven, It appears there are some things you missed. Juan did not have custody of Elian. The boy was conceived 3 years after the mother and father were divorced during an attempted, but failed, effort to reconcile. The mother had custody of the child in Cuba. Although he visited the home of the father, he did not live there. It has been reported that the father was aware of the attempt to reach the U.S. by the mother, and that she was taking the boy with her. I have no way of knowing the veracity of this report. In the U.S., the uncle of the child had been granted custody, and this grant had not been changed at the time of the raid. Reno said that they had a valid warrant but, there has been some information to the contrary published in the press, and aired on TV newscasts. It was also reported that the INS had someone watching the home for weeks before the raid and that no weapons had been seen taken into the home. Certain protesters in the street made comments that they would be "ready" for any attempt to take Elian but, no such threats were made by those living in the house. Yes, the asylum thing was a political ploy but, the father did not have legal custody and, until such a big deal was made of the boy's survival, he didn't seem to care. After all, he made no attempt to come to America for 4 weeks after the rescue. The boy was NOT kidnapped by the Miami family. I feel this situation should have been held pending until the courts decided the issue according to law. Although, I do not believe the boy was put in any physical danger by the raid, I do believe unnecessary mental anguish, and fear was caused. I don't think anyone here is arguing whether the boy should stay or go but, are disturbed by the probably illegal, and definitely high handed tactics used during the raid. The main point being, that this administration does not give a hoot about the due process of the law. They do as they please, legal or not, and then cover their a**es by destroying evidence and any other means available to them. That obvious attitude of the administration is what I adamantly disagree with. Please remember, the father never had legal custody of the child. The custody held by the uncle had not been revoked. ~H~

To: Dayuhan who wrote (17828)	4/30/2000 1:54:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Steven, interesting quote supporting my notion that this hasn't happened before. Judge Andrew Neapolitano, legal analyst for Fox TV, said, "Here the ruling of the court was flagrantly disregarded." Neapolitano, referring to a ruling of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, added: "There is no precedent in United States history to seize a child in a custody case without a court order ... this was a high-class kidnapping."