That bureaucratic policy sounds practical--the Coast Guard and INS need some rules of engagement. But the story of the refugees who landed on the isolated bridge "south of Marathon Key" Florida (is this it?) is one that falls between the cracks. As these things go, somebody asked somebody else, and someone else operated under their interpretation of the letter of the law. Now they've got a PR mess on their hands:
"Through a legal review, the migrants were determined to be feet-wet and processed in accordance with standard procedure," Coast Guard spokesman, Petty Officer Dana Warr, said in a statement.Because they landed and remained stationed at an old road bridge near the Keys that is no longer connected to dry land, they became wet footed. The absurdity of this was pointed out by Florida Senator Mel Martinez:
"Because they reached an old bridge and not a new bridge there's a judgment they didn't reach American soil? The semantics used to return these men and women - who have risked so much to reach freedom and are now returned to an uncertain future - are an embarrassment," Martinez said in a statement.With further clear-headed thinking coming from US Rep
from Miami:
U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, called the decision absurd. "If any crime would have been committed on that bridge, the perpetrators would have been arrested and charged with violating U.S. laws," she said in a statement.Indeed. This sounds like one of the worse cases of bureacratic bungling in years. President Bush, the stage is yours. These people are fleeing totalitarianism and risked their lives for freedom. Seems the least we can do is remove some of the "red" tape. Besides, you are running the risk of being associated with this kind of thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment