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: Yogizuna who wrote (4869)	5/11/2000 9:37:00 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

GONG!!!! Wrong answer. The child was already "taken" from Juan-Miguel and was meant to live here with his mother anyway. That is life in an alternate reality. Elisibeth Brontons is DEAD. D-E-A-D DEAD. She's not coming back. No electro-shock, no transfusions, no nothing is changing that. She took the boat across the River Styx. She never made it to America. In the world that we live in, Juan Gonzalez is ALIVE. His son is ALIVE. Whatever he was meant to do, changed dramatically when his mother died. Your shoddy thinking is a shallow rationalization to prevent the reunion of father and son and to prevent Juan from asserting his primacy in deciding for HIS SON. You should note that Elisabeth no longer has any say in our world. Ouija board testimony is not usually accepted in the 11 District Court of Appeals. (Note my careful avoidance of using never. I know enough to know that anything may happen in court.) Nor seances I would wager. As to your portrayal of the house-cleaner, weekend-sailor, stand-on-the-boat-while-his-cousin-saved-him-from-the-water opportunist, as some grand rescuer mugged by jack-booted thugs, you need to rethink your portrayal. Had the Relatives abetted by this interloper not been DEFYING the LAW, none of that would have been necessary. NONE. Had they such overwhelming concern for the boy he would have been peacefully handed over at the OpaLacka Airport to be returned to his father. But NO. Their selfish pursuit of the media spotlight, their agenda of spitting on Castro, so blinded them that they risked the boy's safety to make their political statement. They should be ashamed. And so should you for attempting to glorify their wholly selfish motives wrapped in some "-ism" nonsense.

To: Yogizuna who wrote (4869)	5/11/2000 10:57:00 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

But, yogi, Elian was taken (without paternal permission- despite Gao's comments, I don't believe his complicity has been verified- others say he was stunned that they were gone and called MIami because he thought that might be what happened))-- anyway- taken by his mother (who almost killed him in the process) in order to follow her boyfriend to Miami. (One article quotes her best friend in Cuba as saying she was desperately in love and hadn't a political thought in her head- true? Who knows?) His MOTHER decided to bring him here. Therefore, he is MEANT to live here! She DIED for this!! She wanted... she wanted.... Vox populi BUt wait! Who is SHE to decide this? His mother? Pah! Who does she think she is?? He is an individual-! How can she make these decisions for him! Did no one ask him what HE wanted?? Did he want to get on that rickety raft? DId he have a clue what he was doing sailing off to a foreign land? This is about as logical as our telling Juan he has no paternal rights. Because we agree with her, she gets to wear a halo, but Dad, poor man, is a pawn and a dupe and should have no say in his child's future. What you fail to see I think is that I agree with most of your principles. ANd your opinion about Castro. ANd Clinton. (not sure about Reno yet) But see you as just as misguided as you think I am. Ah well... Also I think that the whole stormtrooper image is irrelevant to THIS part of the discussion. Besides I can not bear Donato Dalrymple .