Not that an Ana Menendez column has to be examined closely for meaning; after all she is what she is. But I noticed some words and phrases in her column about the soon-to-be-infamous custody case that are rather illuminating about Ms. Menendez. Check this out:
On one side: The wealthy Cuban-American family that, though unrelated to the girl, is acting as her custodian here. On the other: The Cuban father represented pro-bono by Ira Kurzban with help from the polarizing Magda Montiel-Davis, whose own battles after she kissed Fidel seem to have permanently fixed her features into a defiant scowl.
And this:
There’s no doubt the girl could have a happy and comfortable future with her well-off Miami custodians, whom therapists describe as doting. Children bond with foster families. If that were a reason to keep them from their parents, the foster program (or for that matter, the old Pedro Pan program) couldn’t function.
And finally this:
There are many instances where a child might be financially or ideologically better off in someone else’s care. Does that mean the poor do not have a right to raise their children? Does that mean we’re going to raid North Korea for its toddlers? Of course not. The family bond is strong, and tradition and law protect it.
Does Ms. Menendez have something against wealth? It certainly seems so to me. She makes reference to it enough times in her article. But I have a question. Which is better for a child: a home with adoptive parents who will give her what she needs to grow up healthy in body and mind, or a home in a regime where, if she’s lucky, her father will get extra stipends for being a lackey of a murderous regime that does not give a flying fuck about its children — or anyone else.
Where is Elian today? The last time I saw him on television, that winning smile he had in Miami had turned into the sunken-eyed look of a frightened automaton. I repeated many times during the Elian crisis that any parent in a similar situation would not want his or her child growing up in Cuba — other than a parent who was a devout follower of fidel, or a coward. It’s that simple, folks. I’m a father and I would do whatever was necessary, including giving up my life, to give my child a better life. That’s it in a nutshell.
Once again, we are on this train heading to who-knows-where. Let’s pray the judge makes the right decision and keeps the girl here.
Here is some background information on Ira Kurzban and his wife Magda Montiel:
The Herald article “Cubans Admit to Visa Lies,” by Zita Arocha, on December 3, 1980, page 2-B, stated: “Three Cuban-born pilots suspected of spying for the Castro government pleaded guilty in federal court Tuesday to lying on a U.S. visa application, said their attorney, Ira Kurzban.”
In February 1982, Mr. Kurzban was the corporate lawyer for American Airways Charters (AAC), a front company for the Castro regime, headed by Fernando Fuentes Cobas, that ferried passengers and contraband between Miami and Havana. The AAC was shut down by the Federal government and Fuentes Cobas was convicted in Federal court in Miami of trading with the enemy. He fled to Cuba before serving his one-year sentence and died there shortly thereafter. Fuentes Cobas was interred in the Pantheon of Revolutionary Immigrants in Colon Cemetery in Havana.
In February 1982, Mr. Kurzban also represented the Cuban National Bank in another trial in Federal court in Miami. He was helping Cuban officials recover $8.7 million that their government had lost to a coffee swindle in 1978 by German citizen Karl F. Fessler.
Mr. Kurzban is better known in the Cuban exile community as the husband of Fidel Castro admirer Magda Montiel. In April 1994, Montiel was part of a group of Cuban immigrants who met with Castro. She appeared in a news video kissing his cheek and saying to him: “Thank you for all you have done for my people; you have been a great teacher to me.”
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/dialogue/magda-montiel.jpg
Six Cubans American employees who worked for her law firm immediately resigned to protest her affection for the Cuban dictator. After she returned to Florida, more than 1,500 Cuban exiles held a peaceful protest in front of the Kurzban residence in Key Biscayne denouncing her actions. Mr. Kurzban referred to them as “right wing lunatic elements.” (See: “Cuba consternada por ataques a Montiel,” El Nuevo Herald, April 30, 1994, page 2-B).
Wow, look at that long horse face on Magda Montiel. It is very similar to Herald columnist Ana Menendez. Are they related? They share the same anti-Cuban exile mentality. I bet they would both be finalists in a Mr. Ed look-alike contest.
Menendez (sic) disqualified herself from any serious consideration as a commentator on Cuban issues a good while ago. I think it’s time to stop dignifying her and her two-faced employers with any notice of what she writes or says. Such notice, however negative, gives her a kind of validation, when the fact is that she’s entirely irrelevant in real terms.
So leave her to gratify her exilephobic minders and amuse those who like the vicarious enjoyment of Cuban-bashing. Al bagazo, poco caso.
asombra,
I believe you have brought this up in the past, and I have also previously mentioned that no matter how asinine Ana Menendez is on virtually any topic, yes we do need to pay attention to her. If she was a blogger with an average of 50-60 site visits a day (I resemble that remark), sure no problem. But when you’re a feature columnist for a major metropolitan newspaper whose words and ideas are read and interpreted by thousands of people, we need to keep an eye on her.
It’s that plain and simple.
Robert, my position on this matter remains the same. The woman has no credibility among the community she presumes to comment on (except, I suppose, among the usual suspects), and if that community rejects her and finds her irrelevant, then where is she, really?
However, you and others are free to disagree with me and act accordingly, obviously.
George, I agree with your last paragraph whole-heartedly.