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: greenspirit who wrote (8500)	7/13/2000 10:27:34 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9127

Continued....... Politics and fear lie at the heart of why the government took action when they did. Clinton and Reno feared the 11th circuit courts ruling. Further, they realized if the court did rule against them and for the asylum request, that Elian would probably say he wanted to stay and seek asylum. They therefore concluded that in order to ensure Elian said no at the asylum hearing, he must be captured and drugged if need be into submission. Hence the drugs, the isolation, and the Cuban agents watching him and his father around the clock. Politically this just couldn't happen. So (out of panic) they acted in a grandstanding manner in order to create the illusion of a severe danger where none existed. The boy was in practically no danger whatsoever living there. Two or three more weeks wouldn't have matter a bit. Except of course to the potential outcome. So they spun and spun the stories painting the "Miami relatives" and "Miami Cuban Americans" as evil thugs hell bent on killing anyone who approached the home. Many bright Americans bought the stories hook-line-and-sinker and still do to this day. These are the most probable assumptions based on the characters involved and evidence at hand. Michael

To: greenspirit who wrote (8500)	7/13/2000 10:52:38 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 9127

I would think the INS would have some parental "fitness" metrics they use in order to evaluate a proper home for a child. I would guess not. It is not something for which they would be likely to have a precedent or a set policy, and I suspect that the placement with the Miami household was based entirely on their being the nearest relations. If an evaluation of fitness were required, the natural step would have been to have it done by whatever social service agency has jurisdiction. If this had been done, the household would almost certainly been rejected. This not meant as a slander to that family, but is simply true: there are certain factors which are generally regarded as absolute disqualification for adoption or foster placement. Couples have to be married. Adoption by a single parent is like passing a camel through the eye of a needle. Unemployment or any history of psychiatric problems or alcohol abuse would mean summary disqualification. Was it the INS who went to the circuit court, or was it the family? The INS doesn't have the authority to willy-nilly shift children from one home to another when a custody dispute is taking place. Actually it does, if the child is an illegal alien. A shitty law it may be, but it is the law. let's say that Elian was granted the freedom by the court to decide on his own whether to stay or go. I don't think a circuit court can do that. Separation of powers, and all that stuff. The answer is pretty clear to me. Politics If any political advantage were gained, I could understand that. I don't see that any was. The natural political move would be to bury it in the courts and keep it there until after the election. I don't buy the threat of another boatlift at all. No logic to it, and no real threat.

To: greenspirit who wrote (8500)	7/13/2000 11:02:35 PM
From: Rambi	Respond to of 9127

We seem to not agree on whether this was a custody case. I am under the impression that it was NOT a custody case by the time the relatives were ordered to give up Elian. Family court had ceded to federal. The judge who gave custody in family court was later tarnished by conflict of interest accusations and the next judge to hear the case ruled firmly against hearing this as a custody case. At that point it became only a federal INS case. JUdge Moore dismissed the asylum petition, Reno ordered the relatives to return Elian and they flat out refused. They didn't even show up.They said you have to come and get him. So what exactly did the INS need? The courts had refused to give the relatives custody. Therefore they didn't HAVE custody. The 11th had said that Elian had to stay in the US until the appeal on the asylum ruling took place. They had nothing to say about custody. No, it does NOT make sense at ALL to me that this be a matter handled in family court. Elian was not an AMerican citizen. Nor was Juan. This was absolutely NOT a family law matter. I see now what you are saying--- that initially INS should have determined whether the relatives were fit. As an old service worker, I would have done exactly what INS did. Michael- this was TEMPORARY. Before a permanent placement were ever made, a full, exhaustive home study would have been required. But one ALWAYS tries to place with relatives in an emergency for the child's emotional well-being. I don't see that as a mistake at all. Except that of course, no one could have predicted that the relatives would attempt to rewrite everyone's script, abuse the system that attempted to do what was right for Elian at the outset BEFORE CANF and everyone else got involved. You are certainly right about politics; it would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. But this doesn't strike me as particularly horrifying or shocking. It's certainly nothing new and I don't think it's as nefarious as some make it out to be.