An interesting email tying together the Elian situation

John/az2

New member
I just recieved this email. Not knowing too much about the whole situation, I found it to be quite interesting and agree with her conclusions.

I apologize in advance for the formatting.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Hello everyone, Some of you got a short letter from me last Saturday bewailing the situation with Elian Gonzalez. I received a number of e mails in support of the action. In the hopes of gaining some understanding for why I felt so devastated I have spent most of this week in intensive study.

I hope that you will allow me to share my findings with you. Thanks, Debbie

#1. Elian was found on Thanksgiving day and registered for political asylum by the 11th of December. This case was widely reported for about 2-3 weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas. The initial threats came from Castro for Elian to be returned within 72 hours and he organized all sorts of demonstrations in Havana and issued all sorts of wild statements such as the US was responsible for the boat sinking. I believe that Elian's uncles did exactly what the Cuban community does for every Cuban refugee who comes ashore... they take them down to immigration and register them for political asylum. Once the papers are signed and turned over to the courts the persons requesting asylum are under the authority and protection of the courts until the issue is decided. Cut and dried. It was Castro who originally made an issue of Elian not the father Juan and it came right on the heels of a meeting with Clinton to lift the embargo. I also learned that there are several laws that apply only to Cuba, probably resulting in all the trouble we have had with them via the Bay of Pigs and the steady stream of refugees. Two of these special laws were reported in the early days after the rescue. Law #1. reported in the Fayetteville Observer-Times (FO-T) on December 8, 1999 said "under Anti-Castro laws -- in force for 30 years - even a 6 year old is eligible for United States residency" the article stressed that the Miami court should try to reach a non-political judgment that serves Elian's best interest. "Russ Bergeron of INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) stressed that Cuba has a distinct status under US law and "the decisions we've made are in complete compliance with immigration law" (the INS gave Lazaro Gonzalez custody of Elian which was later backed by Florida courts and then the US 11th circuit court of appeals) The article stated that if Elian had arrived from any other country he could have been returned to his father with-in days. Law #2 was actually an agreement between Castro and the US placed over Castro's growing frustration over so many political refugees. In 1994 an agreement was reached that the Coast Guard would patrol the waters between Cuba and Florida and if any boats were caught they were to be returned to Cuba and if they made it to the shores of Florida they could stay. (quoted from a FO-T on Dec 11, 1999)

#2. This situation quickly became a political hot potato but Castro was largely treated as one would expect an enemy government to be treated. All the articles I read in the paper were fair and impartial, favoring the US justice system to do its' job. It wasn't until after the first of the year that the reporting tactics changed. When the reporting started favoring returning the child to Cuba, the Cuban community quickly pulled together to see that just laws were carried out as they had been initiated. In the beginning Juan Gonzalez submitted documents to the court proving that he was employed, married, Elian's father etc. In other words, Cuba was working with the courts in compliance with United States law as reported in the FO-T on Dec 15, 1999. This was the last news of Elian contained in our local newspaper until 3 January 2000. When the reporting resumed, the tactics had changed completely both on the part of Clinton, Reno and the media.

#3. President Clinton and Janet Reno both talked right from the beginning about going along with the "rule of Law" but both of them have broken every law in the books in regard to this case. How they managed this was by having the INS issue "laws" and accuse the Gonzalez', the Cuban community and the courts of civil disobedience. According to an article in the FO-T on 10 January 2000 "the INS is part of the Executive branch". That means that the INS was created by executive order. "Executive Orders" were originally created as an extension of the President's Constitutional power as the executive branch of the government (his mandate to carry out laws passed by Congress). From 1783- 1947 a total of 80 executive orders are to be found on the books. Since 1947 that number has increased to 13,147 executive orders on the books. A very dangerous trend in the executive orders was begun by President Kennedy on 16 February 1962. They began to give the President of the United States control over such things as communications, environment (EPA), health, welfare, educational functions and the INS among many other agencies which formerly would have been under the aegis of Congress to assist them in the creation of just laws regarding each agency. These executive orders basically give the President dictatorial powers because all of the agencies created by the executive orders function outside of Constitutional law and under the direct command of the President of the United States (see Executive orders at http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/eo.html ). On Jan 6, 2000 "the government" ordered the Gonzalez' to turn the boy over to the INF. The Cuban community immediately accused the INF of abusing their own law, which they did, almost certainly by the president's command. From that point the INS/ President were stopped at every turn by the courts because this case is first and last a court matter and every person who has been trained and respects Constitutional law recognized that a serious breach had occurred in the matter over Elian. The interesting thing about the executive orders is that they have been on the books for 30 years, but Pres. Clinton is the first president to overtly use them to test our reaction. It is not a political matter, nor is it a matter to be decided by "the government", meaning Clinton and his cronies outside of Federal Laws as established by the Constitution. Many of the executive orders are unconstitutional. Right or wrong, good or bad, Elian's signature is on a request for political asylum. According to US law this matter is the court's concern and Elian is required to go through the court system. He, according to our law, must have his day in court. All agencies (including the INF) concerned are required, by law, to work with the courts, not against them.

#4. right after the first of the year, the media turned this whole situation into a political mob action. I have been listening to the stories from both sides of the aisle and I think that the truth has been so skewed by the media for their own advantage, that it is impossible to know what the truth really is. People are reacting based totally on emotion. The facts are irrelevant! The law doesn't matter! That boy should be with his father (which I agree with, incidentally)!

Those who support Juan Gonzalez, the father, say that the mother possibly kidnapped Elian (Casto's initial allegation) and took him with her and her boyfriend bound for Chicago, that Elian lived 5 1/2 years of his life with his father, that the father has a good job in Cuba and supports his family well. They say that the Cuban community are out for revenge against Castro, that they have brainwashed the child, deliberately withheld him from the governments' just claims that the boy be turned over to them, that they have broken the laws in keeping the child, turned him into a media event and paraded him before the nation trying to get sympathy, and many other arguments.

The uncle side says that Juan Gonzalez knew that Elian was on his way to Florida (this was in the papers at least twice before Christmas) and phoned them the day that Elian left Cuba with his mother, that the government is trying to overthrow the existing system of immigration laws, that the father is a child abuser and the mother was trying to get Elian away from him, that when Elian goes back to Cuba, he will not be with his father but will be sent to propaganda camps as all 6-8 year olds are in Cuba, that Juan Gonzalez is a prisoner on Andrews AFB, that he cannot speak his mind and says only what he is told to say, that part of his family, notably a daughter and the grandmothers left in Cuba would suffer incredible abuse if Juan does not return, that his only contacts are with his lawyer who represents Castro and other Cuban nationals and Janet Reno.

Violent emotions have been being bred for months... deliberately, I think, by packs of lies on both sides. I do not buy the emotional garbage they are trying to sell us. I think something far deeper is going on here.

#5. Janet Reno tried on at least 3 occasions to supercede the courts using "laws" fabricated by the INS and was blocked each time by a court order. It was interesting to see that the people who were blocking her were Congressmen such as Dan Burton and others trained in the law.... People who have studied and know the law. She was engaged each time in an unconstitutional act by making demands that she had no authority outside the court system to make. Interestingly enough after December 1999 the media deliberately never again mentioned the fact that Elian had signed a petition and that the family was working through the courts to resolve the issue. Instead they made monsters out them and portrayed them as trying to defy the "just laws" of our government. The media also tried to hide the fact that, when this became a political hot potato (their own doing, I believe), Lazaro immediately initiated negotiations with Reno at the same time that they were trying to speed Elian's case through the courts. Of course the Miami Gonzalez family wanted to keep the boy but they were willing to abide by the courts decision. At the same time as the court case was on going they were negotiating with Janet Reno for "joint" access to Elian. On the night of the raid Lazaro had agreed to every condition that Washington wanted and they were very close to an agreement. Washington was the one who kept backing down and hedging. Both sides had decided on a safe house in Washington D.C. where father and son could stay and where Elian would have contact with his lawyers, Juan with his, and where all the other relatives could also have family time with Juan and Elian. The Miami Gonzalez' are also Juan's family.

#6. when the IMF raided the house in Little Havana; they had intelligence that there was not one weapon among the crowds in the streets. There had been none from the beginning if the reports, I have heard in the last several days... from many sources, are true. One reporter was able to photograph what appeared to be mob action by throwing rocks into a crowd until they turned and attacked him. The resulting photo's were billed as lawlessness among the Cuban/Americans. In actual fact, many of the people were nuns and priests, all were engaged in peaceful protest. More as a show of support for the laws they felt were being abused and the Gonzalez family. The IMF also knew that there were no weapons in the Gonzalez house. There have 2 more raids since Elian was taken both confirming that no weapons were in the house. There are many, including the democratic Senator from Florida, (who helped to acquit Clinton in his impeachment trial last year) to whom Clinton personally promised that there would never be a night time raid; to a 30 year friend, fellow lawyer and supporter of Janet Reno who was working from the Florida side actually on the phone with the Florida Gonzalez' s and Janet Reno when the raid took place, (and several others whom I have forgotten) who all testified today that they were within MINUTES of resolving this issue peaceably.

#7. The 4th amendment states "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Fact; there was NO warrant presented by the IMF to search the house or seize to Elian and the warrant held was obtain after hours from a court lackey and issued to a person not to the IMF. In fact there was a legal court order prohibiting Elians' removal from the house. This is what makes the IMF raid a Gestapo type action reminiscent of a Nazi regime rather than the free United States of America! I believe that had the Gonzalez' received a court order that the case had been resolved in Juan's favor they would immediately turned him over to the courts to be returned to his father.

#8. the 5th amendment states "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Fact; the Gonzalez family was not convicted of a capital crime in a court of law and were in fact working with the courts and the existing laws to a satisfactory completion. They do not belong to any branch of the military. It is not a time of war. There was no danger. Fact; Elian was deprived of liberty without due process of law. To literally break the doors down, enter the house and forcibly extract the boy was an act of violence on the part of the United States government! This overriding of the court system was a VERY serious offense by the United States department of justice and ultimately the President of the United States. To extract that boy by violent extraction was in direct violation of the 5th amendment, effectively robbing Elian of his liberty without due process of law! I fear that a hole has been kicked into the Constitution so large, that we will likely not recover from it.... Not that that is the end of everything, of course. We were told by the Prophet Joseph Smith " I prophecy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government with be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left...". (Joseph Smith DHC, Vol 4, p.89, March 4, 1840) similar predictions were made by John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Orson Pratt and Brigham Young among others all quoted in the book "The Coming of the Lord" by Gerald N. Lund pp. 53-56

Conclusion: it is my personal opinion (and one I have heard mirrored in many newscasts, newspaper articles, internet articles and talk shows that I have been exposed to in the last 3 days)

#1. That for whatever reason, there is much evidence that Clinton promised Castro that Elian would be returned no matter what it took.

#2.That the media manipulation was a deliberate action on the part of Washington to create support for returning Elian to Cuba, no matter which laws had to be broken to do it. Almost everything Clinton does is based and driven by polls. I believe that he has learned exactly how to manipulate the American people for his own ends. It was his intention to set at defiance the American people against our own laws in favor of a little boy being returned to his father, which I have not a doubt would have been accomplished through the court system in a way that would have preserved our laws and not destroyed them. I believe Clinton deliberately demonized the Cuban community and tried and succeeded in making them look like thugs, law-breakers, and demons.

#3. I believe that Clinton, Reno and Castro did not want Juan Gonzalez exposed to his Miami relatives, fearing that the truth might come out, hence before the agreement could be implemented the raid was done. I believe that if conditions had been different that Juan would have requested political asylum for his whole family.

#4. That Clinton deliberately initiated the raid to "put the fear of God" into the American people and to intimidate this nation and in so doing effectively destroyed 2 of our 10 basic rights as citizen of this nation. I have looked at several sites on the Internet in the past few days as was appalled to see that major in-roads have been made into the destruction of the other amendments as well.

#5. I believe that Clinton intentionally and with forethought broke the 4th and 5th amendments to see #1. if he could get away with it and #2. to see what the response of the American people would be. We are cheering our own demise!

#6. Since being forcibly removed, Elian has been denied access to his personal lawyers or more accurately his lawyers have been denied access to him, since being taken to Andrews AFB. He most certainly is experiencing true brain-washing by Castro's psychiatrists and lawyers.

#7. The Cuban Gonzalez's and the American Gonzalez' have been denied all access to each other...although I heard today that that might change, if the American Gonzalez' are declared mentally competent! They most certainly will not be.

#8. The media has been denied all access to Andrews AFB and the Gonzalez' and they are not the least upset about it... how strange. What happened to freedom of the press? or are they willing accomplices? How come they do not demand to see the boy for themselves?

#9. How low could they possibly have stooped to have performed this raid on the holiest weekend in all of the Christian world?

#10. it is known that a number of people who were "hired" by Clinton/Reno defected to the other opinion when finding out certain facts that have not been revealed to the American people. A Catholic nun is a case in point. She was the liaison between the grandmothers and the Gonzalez's representing Reno and she became and ardent supporter for the American Gonzalez's.

#11. Andrews AFB was basically commandeered by the INF. It was not even accessible to the commanding General of the Army. When has that ever happened?

#12. laws that were put in place to help the 90 and 9 should not be thrown out for the one, especially when they were created to assist the "One". I believe that we were lied to, to achieve the political ends of President Clinton. There was no emergency here. If President Clinton had picked up the phone, he could just as easily hurried the courts along. International pressure would have weighed well in the courts. Instead he destroyed more than we now realize.

#13. There are obviously many facts which are not known, but it is obvious to me that there are enough facts to ascertain that this became a political bomb for far more reason than returning Elian to his father. The courts would have accomplished the same end and were in the process of doing so. I believe it was Clinton/Reno who interrupted the process for their own political ends.
[/quote]

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
 
Back
Top