|
Frequently
Asked Questions (& Answers)
What
is the fundamental issue in the Elián Gonzalez case?
Who
is really guilty of "playing politics"?
What
about the father's rights?
Who
is the real villain that prevents the reunification of the family?
Isn't
the the U.S. embargo of Cuba the cause of Cuba's economic woes?
Isn't
it in Elián's psychological interest to be sent back to Cuba?
Is
Cuba really that bad a place?
Doesn't
free-speech exist in Cuba?
Isn't
the fundamental issue in the Elián Gonzalez case the rights of Elián's
father?
No, the fundamental issue is Elián's rights. It
is not who can speak for the child, but what
the best interests of the child are.
The
fundamental question in the Elián Gonzalez case: is communism
physically harmful to human life? Life in totalitarian Cuba, after
all, is life in slavery. A parent has the right to determine his
child's upbringing -- but not to inflict physical harm. A parent has
no right to beat up a child, or to keep a child imprisoned in a
cell. That becomes a violation of the child's individual rights. But
a communist state is simply one huge jail, where the citizens are
under the physical control of their wardens. That is what Elián faces if he goes back, and this is why he should not be sent
back.
Elián's right to his own life -- a right that does not exist in Cuba as a
matter of law -- takes precedence over all other rights. Elián is not a piece of
property -- but is a human being with his own interests. Elián's
mother willingly risked death on a desperate voyage to liberty. She
was drawn by the American principle that each individual has an
inalienable right to be free.
Who
is guilty of "playing politics"?
The INS and its supporters are still trying to pretend that
communism is not a system of enslavement, and that the difference
between America and Cuba is merely one of "lifestyle."
This Administration orders the Coast Guard to physically repel Cuban
refugees who approach our shores, resulting in the disgraceful sight
of American officials firing water cannons upon Cubans to keep them
from reaching U.S. soil. The zealous advocates of Elián's deportation are clinging to a discredited philosophy that refuses to
acknowledge the tyrannical nature of life under socialism.
It is
the American Leftists -- in the press and government -- who are
"playing politics" by pretending that a dictatorship is a
free country. It is the Leftist press -- like CNN does with a play
taken from Ted Turner's ex-wife's playbook -- who attempt to
"white-wash" communism by failing to give coverage to
critical news that would provide evidence to invalidate their
political views.
Despite the lip-service the American Left pays to the freedom to
vote, free-speech, etc. they are opposed to it on principle, and
only support these rights when it aids their goals of furthering
slavery (i.e., we should have freedom to vote until a completely
Leftist government is in power).
By ignoring the political status of Cuba, and claiming to be
"anti-ideological", one is in fact promoting the ideology that
would lose in any ideological debate: the vicious anti-human
doctrine of communism.
The reason why those who wish to return Elián to Communist Cuba do not want to consider "politics" is
because a communist country is unfit for human existence. To
consider this fact, would eliminate any possibility of Elián
being sent back to the island prison of Cuba.
By refusing
to "play politics" one is promoting the pro-communist
political viewpoint that Cuba is a free country, fit for human
existence.
What
about the father's rights?
Keeping Elián in America is no violation of the rights of the father
(who -- if he has any genuine affection for the boy and were free to
express it -- would announce his fervent desire to have his son live
in freedom).
The
fundamental question in the Elián Gonzalez case: is communism
physically harmful to human life? Life in totalitarian Cuba, after
all, is life in slavery. A parent has the right to determine his
child's upbringing -- but not to inflict physical harm. A parent has
no right to beat up a child, or to keep a child imprisoned in a
cell. That becomes a violation of the child's individual rights. But
a communist state is simply one huge jail, where the citizens are
under the physical control of their wardens. That is what Elián faces if he goes back, and this is why he should not be sent
back.
Elián's right to his own life -- a right that does not exist in Cuba as a
matter of law -- takes precedence over all other rights. Elián is not a piece of
property -- but is a human being with his own interests. Elián's
mother willingly risked death on a desperate voyage to liberty. She
was drawn by the American principle that each individual has an
inalienable right to be free.
The purpose of a family is to help the children become free,
independent adults -- not to guarantee them a life of childhood and
adult slavery.
Who
is the real villain that prevents the reunification of the
family?
It is Castro who is preventing family reunification by keeping his
borders closed to those who wish to flee his dictatorial rule. Those
in America who disregard this fact are his accomplices.
Isn't
the the U.S. embargo of Cuba the cause of Cuba's economic woes?
This statement ignores the fact that every country in the world
(except the United States and Israel -- which in part is why the Left hates
Israel) has normal trade relations with Cuba. As rich as America is,
is it the only country in the world that has wealth?
The reason why Cuba is poor is that the right to life -- the basis of
a free market -- does not legally exist in Cuba. It is Cuba's
absolute socialist system that should be condemned -- not the
U.S. embargo. In Cuba there is no private property; no private
employers (the only employer is the state); the only honest
way to support oneself in Cuba is in the black market -- which is next
to impossible.
To recommend that the United States drop the embargo with Cuba after
Castro nationalized (robbed) the property of all the American
companies who invested there (which triggered the embargo) is unjust
to the Americans he looted.
The same policy that brought down Apartheid in South Africa is
the same policy that will bring down the Castro Regime -- if it is
allowed to work.
To send money to Cuba will only further enrich Castro, as all
foreign funds invested there do now (since foreign investors don't
pay Cubans, but pay the Castro regime, of which the actual workers
only receive a miniscule portion). It is the looters in these
foreign countries, ready to "profit" from slave labor,
that prop up
and further empower the Castro regime.
Isn't
it in Elián's psychological interest to be sent back to Cuba?
Elián's
interests would not be served by sending him back to Castro, as in
Cuba the only parent is the state (Cuba's Code of the Child).
On the basis of everything that has gone by from Castro's side -- with
all this propaganda effort and so on -- it would be extremely
detrimental to the child to be sent back to those conditions.
because the state of Cuba cannot
afford to have him inside the island saying, "I want to go back
to Miami." So until Elián is worked on -- to have him
say what they want him to say as his father does -- Elián would not
have peace on the island. They will have to twist his mind to the
point that Elián would perhaps suffer a tremendous amount of
psychological damage on account of these efforts to make him be a
spokes-child of the government.
Any psychologist who says Elián should be sent back to a country
where he will be taken away from his family, once he reaches age 11,
to "volunteer" in farm camps where he will plant and cut
sugar cane, and tobacco, is guilty of malpractice.
Is
Cuba really that bad a place? The press makes it seem like it is
almost a better place to live in then America.
See the Human
Rights Watch Report
and judge for yourself. Also read the 100's of articles on
the Cuban
American Democracy Project.
Doesn't
free-speech exist in Cuba, which is what I have been led to believe
by the American press?
Yes, that is what the bulk of the American press has led many
viewers to believe by how they treat the comments of those they
interview in Cuba -- most notably Elián's father. One editorialist in USA
Today even has the gall to write, "The irony is that
demonstrations by Cuban exiles in Miami demanding that the United
States not return this child have been portrayed as spontaneous,
democratic actions, while massive demonstrations in Cuba calling for
his return are cynically characterized as merely more master
manipulation by Fidel Castro."
The truth is that the demonstrations in the U.S. were spontaneous
and free -- as the U.S. government did not plan them, but private
citizens did.
In Cuba if you hold a demonstration not
approved by Castro government you can spend
five years in a brutal Cuban cell. In Cuba, if you do not
take part in such demonstrations you will be treated more or less
the same.
What do you think would happen if a Cuban -- in Cuba -- said the boy
should stay in the United States (as his mother wished)? That a USA
Today editorialist could apply terms such as spontaneous and
'democratic' to a country where if you attempt to do either you will
be thrown into the Cuban
Gulag is beyond me. It is in principle this utter
white-washing of Nazism that led to so many deaths of the Jews in
Germany.
Funny how the so-called advocates of "democracy" in the
Leftist press, ignore "democracy" when it suits their real
purpose: the advancement of statism.
|
