Humane-Rights-Agenda Blog: 10-01-2006= Aztlannet

<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<><>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<><>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
All Articles at Aztlannet_News Report Blogsource for October 1st, 2006=
http://humane-rights-agenda.blogspot.com/2006/10/10-01-2006-aztlannetnews-report.html
<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<><>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

List of News Articles and URL Weblinks

Aztlannet_News Report Articles
for October 1st, 2006

<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<><>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5033107,00.html

September 30, 2006
The Activist, Professor, and the Rights Movement that Led to Love
By Myung Oak Kim, Rocky Mountain News

Gabriela Flora, with her flowing brown hair and her fast Spanish, has been a leading local voice for compassionate treatment of illegal immigrants since the debate blew up last spring. She gives fiery speeches at rallies and has stood her ground amid heckling from supporters of Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a national advocate for strict enforcement of illegal immigration laws.
But when pro-immigrant activists gather today at Columbus Park in northwest Denver, the 35-year-old organizer with the American Friends Service Committee will be more than 100 miles away, preparing for one of the most important events of her life.

Flora will stand under a Mongolian-style canvas yurt at 11,000 feet to exchange vows with Jim Walsh, an immigration and labor history professor at the University of Colorado at Denver.

For Flora and Walsh, immigration weaves a sturdy thread through their relationship.

The two met in Denver's Curtis Park in August 2005 at a gathering of the Coalition for Human Dignity Beyond Borders. After the meeting, Walsh regaled Flora with a story of his stay with a Quaker family in New York while on a bicycle trip.

They kept in touch for the next several months and began dating in January.

Both have deep connections to the immigration issue. Born in Colombia, Flora spent about a half-dozen years in Latin America. She focuses on the immigration issue at AFSC and was a key organizer of the massive pro-immigrant marches last spring.

Walsh, 39, an avid anti-war activist and long-distance bicyclist, shifted his community work to immigration when he saw a repeat of a historical trend he teaches his college students: a rise in nativism and hatred against new waves of immigrants.

Walsh participated in the March 25 rally at Civic Center Park that drew about 50,000 and another rally April 10 at Sloan's Lake Park. He's also produced a play about immigration called "Speak American?" with a group called the Romero Troupe.

Walsh, a native of suburban Pittsburgh, said he was awed by Flora when he heard her speak at a Tancredo immigration event.

"I thought, 'Man! I like this woman.' She spoke truth to power. She was a warrior for justice."

Flora said Walsh's compassion grounds her and "reminds me of the foundation of the work that I do."

Walsh proposed to Flora at Curtis Park.

They chose Leadville for the wedding, partly because Walsh did extensive graduate school research about Irish immigrant miners in that town.

Walsh said he participates in the immigrant-rights movement because his roots include poverty and union struggles.

"I had no idea this could change my life to this extent."

The couple on love, marriage and immigration

Our relationship works because:
Walsh: "We are from very different backgrounds and are constantly learning from each other. At the end of each day we retire to the solace that is us."
Flora: "We deeply love and respect each other, share values and make each other laugh."

What I love the most about him/her is:
Walsh: "I love and admire her courage."
Flora: "I love and admire his deep sense of compassion."

Why immigration is important:
Walsh: "I'm from poverty, and all my life I've studied movements of the poor for dignity and justice. I recognized that this is the civil rights movement of my era. There was no way I could have been on the sidelines."
Flora: "This is about more than just fixing the immigration system. It's about how are we going to live together? What kind of world are we creating for our children and grandchildren? I don't want to pursue an agenda of fear which I think is dictating the anti-immigrant sentiment we're currently experiencing. Instead, I want us to push for justice and inclusion and love to create communities that I want to live in and for future generations."

Rally today
• What: "Somos America/We are America" rally and voter registration drive
• When: 10:30 a.m.
• Where: Columbus Park, West 38th Avenue and Navajo Street

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-rally2sep30,0,6197244.story?coll=stam-news-local-headlines

September 30, 2006
Rally to focus on immigrants' rights
By Vesna Jaksic
Staff Writer

Partly in response to a number of raids by immigration officials nationwide in recent months, including arrests of 11 day laborers in Danbury last week, immigrants' advocacy groups are preparing to rally in Hartford tomorrow.

About a dozen pro-immigration groups in Connecticut, including a union representing building workers in Stamford, plan to demonstrate at the Capitol. Organizers said they hope the demonstration will be the first such event since the spring, when similar rallies gained momentum in the state and across the country.

Congress did not pass legislation many immigration advocates have been pushing for, such as a bill that would provide a path toward legalization for many of the nation's estimated 12 million undocumented aliens. In the meantime, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has stepped up its raids, arresting workers who are in the country illegally and their employers.

"In Connecticut, we didn't see these raids before but right now we're seeing more raids," said John Lugo, a member of the Regional Coalition of Immigrant Rights, a statewide group that is one of the event's sponsors. "That's why we decided to put on the march and tried to put the community together."

One such raid occurred in Danbury last Tuesday, when ICE agents arrested 11 day laborers. ICE has in the past targeted undocumented aliens with criminal backgrounds, but this seems to be the first group arrest in the state of undocumented aliens without a criminal record, officials said.

Paula Grenier, a Boston-based spokeswoman for ICE, said none of the men had criminal backgrounds, but all were in the country illegally.

"We make arrests every day for individuals who violate immigration laws and we do make arrests of those in the country illegally who do not have criminal records," she said.

The men, who are all from Ecuador, were waiting for a hearing by a federal immigration judge in Hartford, she said.

ICE agents acted on a tip from Danbury police, Grenier said. Capt. Robert Myles, a spokesman for the Danbury Police Department, said officers have been warning the laborers for two months not to disrupt traffic while looking for work.

"At some point we contacted ICE agents to help us see if we can solve this problem," Myles said. "It's common knowledge through our dealings within the police force that many of these people down there are of illegal status."

Immigration is a federal law that is enforced by federal authorities. But in cities such as Danbury, which have large immigrant groups, some police departments have increasingly been contacting federal agents. Stamford's mayor and police chief have maintained that local officers should not enforce federal law.

Tomorrow's rally, which is scheduled for 2 p.m., is also meant to be an anti-war demonstration. Many pro-immigration groups are also against the war in Iraq, so they have decided to combine the two causes, said Khalil Iskarous, secretary of the Middle East Crisis Committee, a New Haven-based group that is one of the rally's sponsors.

"I'm a U.S. citizen but I'm an immigrant and very much believe that exploitation is wrong, which is, I think, what's happening to undocumented immigrants," he said. "They come here because we need them -- but we exploit them by not giving them documents. So we wanted to do our first sort of unity march and rally against war and exploitation."

Connecticut has from 70,000 to 100,000 undocumented aliens, according to estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center.

Art Perry, the Connecticut political director for Service Employees International Union Local 32 BJ, which represents many building workers in Stamford, said the union plans to have a presence at the rally because it wants immigration reform so that workers' rights are protected.

Paul Streitz, who heads Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control, which has been the state's most outspoken group against immigration, did not return a call for comment Thursday. But in last Friday's e-mail from his organization, Streitz praised the Danbury arrests.

"Congratulations to the hardworking Danbury police force and ICE," the e-mail stated. "They want to protect the people of the city and the nation. They are prevented from doing their jobs by mayors and other government officials who want to turn Danbury into a Third World slum and the United States into a Third World nation."

Local Hispanic leaders have said pro-immigration rallies have helped unite the area's immigrants.

"That has been very energizing and I think it has given us some identity as a group," said Juan Pazmino, a Stamford resident who chairs the Education Committee of the Hispanic Initiative, an effort by area community leaders to address issues affecting Hispanics. "It also has given education to many people who are very unaware of certain regulations and laws that are affecting them. So by attending all these meetings and rallies, they understand they also have a right and they are a force."

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-immig30sep30,1,5561758,full.story?coll=la-news-politics-national

September 30, 2006
Border Barrier Approved
The bill, which calls for 700 miles of fence and beefed-up enforcement, easily clears the Senate. It does not include a guest worker program.
By Nicole Gaouette, Times Staff Writer
Email= nicole.gaouette@latimes.com

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Friday approved and sent to President Bush a bill calling for construction of a 700-mile wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, voting overwhelmingly for a project that became the centerpiece of efforts to improve border security and stem illegal immigration. Bush is expected to sign the measure into law.

"Most immigrants come to America with good intentions, but not all of them," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said in supporting the bill. "We need an enforcement-first approach … [that] allows us to get full operational control of our border."

The bill, which passed 80 to 19 and is identical to legislation passed by the House last week, authorizes the building of double-layered fencing in areas near Tecate and Calexico, Calif., and border towns in New Mexico, Arizona and Texas. It also empowers the government's Homeland Security secretary to "take all actions … necessary" to stop "all unlawful entries into the United States."

The legislation's opponents dismissed it as a costly political gimmick that would have little effect on stopping illegal immigration. They also chided Congress for failing to create a guest worker program or to address the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S.

The fence is "a feel-good plan that will have little effect in the real world," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.).

Even before the bill passed, it prompted an angry condemnation from the Mexican government.
"We have indicated in a clear and unambiguous manner that the wall is unnecessary and that it is not a gesture that shows friendship between the countries of Latin America, the Caribbean and the United States," said Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez. He said Mexico would send a note of diplomatic protest about the fence to the White House.

The debate on immigration dominated much of this year's congressional session, especially after Bush in a nationally televised speech in May called for a sweeping rewrite of current policy. He called for legislation that, in addition to increased border security, would create a path to U.S. citizenship for many illegal immigrants and a guest worker program as part of a broad effort to control entry into the U.S.

The Senate later that month passed a bill embracing the approach, but efforts to reach agreement with the House quickly reached a stalemate.

Republican House leaders objected to citizenship proposals as a form of "amnesty" for illegal immigrants and insisted that any legislation passed this year should focus on enforcement at the border. With an eye on the November midterm election, they argued that their view was in line with the sentiments of most voters.

After months of back-and-forth over the issue, the fence bill is the main result of the debate, representing a partial victory for House Republicans. Some other enforcement measures sought by the House, such as making it easier to deport illegal immigrants linked to gangs, fell by the wayside.

As part of the larger push to secure the border, the House and Senate on Friday approved and sent to Bush a spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security that, among other provisions, will alter the way Americans travel to and from Mexico, Canada and the Caribbean.

The bill, which Congress made a priority to pass before recessing for the November election, will require U.S. citizens to present a passport when returning from other countries in the Western Hemisphere, ending Americans' ability to cross these international borders with simply a driver's license or other forms of identification. The provision, recommended by the independent commission that investigated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, is to take effect June 1, 2009.

The $33.7-billion spending bill also significantly boosts funding for border security and enforcement of immigration laws at work sites and elsewhere.

The bill will enable the Department of Homeland Security to hire an additional 1,500 border patrol agents and buy 6,700 more beds at detention centers for illegal immigrants. In the past, the lack of enough beds at these facilities has caused authorities to release some of the illegal immigrants they apprehended. The bill also provides $1.2 billion to pay for border fencing, vehicle barriers and improved sensor equipment at border crossings.

The money "provides flexibility for smart deployment of physical infrastructure that needs to be built along the Southwest border," said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

Estimates of the cost of construction of 700 miles of fencing range from $2 billion to $9 billion, so Congress will need to allocate more money for the project in future years. Fencing over about 90 miles now runs along the border with Mexico. Some secondary fencing has been installed 50 to 200 yards north of the border around San Diego and Tucson. The Secure Fence Act specifies that fencing extend 10 miles to the east and west of Tecate, Calif., and from 10 miles west of Calexico, Calif., to five miles east of Douglas, Ariz.

In other areas, the fencing would start five miles west of Columbus, N.M., and extend to 10 miles east of El Paso; extend from five miles northwest of Del Rio, Texas, to five miles southeast of Eagle Pass, Texas; and from 15 miles northwest of Laredo, Texas, to Brownsville, Texas.

The Homeland Security spending bill also makes it a criminal offense to build tunnels under U.S. borders, and includes prison terms for landowners who allow the tunnels to be built on their property.

The measure was sponsored in the Senate by Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and in the House by David Dreier (R-San Dimas). Although Feinstein was among those voting for the fence bill, she was highly critical that it did not include a guest worker program, arguing that such a measure was vital to agriculture in California and other parts of the country. On Friday, she joined with Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho) in a failed effort to attach the program to the bill.

Labor shortages in the field are costing billions of dollars in lost produce this year. Feinstein, noting that California produces about half of all America's fruits, vegetables and nuts, warned that harvest problems in the state would affect consumers in the other 49.

"I don't know what it takes to show that there is an emergency," she said. "I think next year we should be ready, willing and able to [create a guest worker program], but we will have lost one agricultural season. I just hope that someone will listen."

California's other senator, Democrat Barbara Boxer, also voted for the fence bill. Other prominent Democratic senators who supported it included Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois.

Overall, the bill was backed by 54 Republicans and 26 Democrats; opposing it were 17 Democrats, one Republican (Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island) and the Senate's lone independent (James M. Jeffords of Vermont). Some of those voting for the bill said they believed it could serve as a prelude to the type of broader changes in immigration policy sought by Bush.

"Many people have told me they will support comprehensive immigration reform if we secure the border first," said Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). "I hope we can use passage of this bill as a starting point toward long-term, comprehensive immigration reform."

Immigrant advocates expressed skepticism that the 700 miles of fencing would ever be completed, given how costly it may prove. They also predicted the bill would have the unintended effect of hurting the long-term prospects of the Republican Party by sparking intense opposition among Latinos.

"I'm going to go out on a limb and say we'll never see a 700-mile wall along the southern border," said Frank Sharry, executive director of National Immigration Forum. "This is about incumbent protection, not border protection."

Cecilia Muñoz, a vice president at the National Council of La Raza, characterized the fence bill as "more symbolism than substance." She added, "It's pretty clear to me it's going to have a negative impact on Republican prospects."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Times staff writer Hector Tobar contributed to this report from Mexico City.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/29/fence.congress.ap/index.html

September 29, 2006
Congress OKs 700 miles of fence on border with Mexico

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republicans will go into the elections with a message that they've made great strides fighting illegal immigration, including authorizing a fence along one-third of the U.S.-Mexico border and making a $1.2 billion down payment on it.

Among its final tasks before leaving to campaign, the Senate on Friday night passed and sent to President Bush a bill authorizing 700 miles of fencing on the nearly 2,000-mile long southern border.

No one knows how much it will cost, but a separate bill also on the way to the White House makes a $1.2 billion down payment on it. A 14-mile segment of fence under construction in San Diego is costing $126.5 million. (Watch senators tussle over whether fences work -- 1:45 )
The fence bill was passed by the House two weeks ago. The Senate vote Friday night was 80-19.

In addition to money for starting work on the fence, a homeland security bill Congress was completing Friday includes $380 million to hire 1,500 more Border Patrol agents and money to build detention facilities to hold 6,700 more illegal immigrants until they can be deported.

"We have made giant steps in terms of our ability to control illegal immigration," House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters.

The fence bill became House Republicans' immigration focus in September after they abandoned President Bush's call to bring millions of illegal immigrants into the American mainstream.

In addition to the money in the Homeland Security spending bill, Boehner cited Bush's deployment of the National Guard on the border and more frequent arrests of illegal immigrants at work sites.

"The perception that has been painted mistakenly is that the United States government, our Congress is not delivering to the American people on a huge problem that's out there," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee. "We're active."

Democrats and immigration advocates say Republicans can hardly claim victory. House Republicans failed to win measures for deporting immigrant gang members and empowering local police to enforce immigration laws. Their biggest obstacle turned out to be another Republican, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said the border security achievements trumpeted by Republicans don't measure up to the more comprehensive reforms her party backed. What the GOP calls achievements fall "very far short of what Democrats have proposed over and over and over again," she said.

After a debate that stretched over three months, the Senate in May passed a sweeping immigration bill that combined tougher border enforcement measures with new guest worker programs and a plan to give millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S. a shot at citizenship.

Despite Bush's ringing endorsement of the measure, the House would have no part of it, sticking to the bill it passed five months earlier that would treat illegal immigrants and people who offer them aid as felons. Rather than negotiate a compromise with the Senate, Republican leaders plucked out many provisions of the House bill for new votes in both the House and Senate over the past two weeks.

"It's been two years of high visibility, high volume debate in terms of which way to go in the immigration system," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum. In the end the debate ended in a tie, he said.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, called the fence "a bumper sticker solution for a complex problem… It's a feel-good plan that will have little effect in the real world," he said. "We all know what this is about. It may be good politics, but it's bad immigration policy. That's not what Americans want."

Sens. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Dianne Feinstein, D-California, made an 11th-hour appeal to colleagues to include in the fence bill a measure to help the agriculture industry, which relies heavily on undocumented workers. Those workers have become harder to find because of increased border enforcement and availability of jobs for the workers in construction and other industries, they said. Consumers ultimately will pay the price for that at the grocery store, they added.

"Pickers are few and the growers blame Congress," Craig said, reading a news headline. "The growers ought to blame Congress. They ought to blame a government that has been dysfunctional in an area of immigration that has been problem for decades."

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/31321.html

Friday, September 29, 2006
Prison term for sale of citizenship papers
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B2

SACRAMENTO -- A 42-year-old Sacramento woman was sentenced Thursday to 30 months in federal prison for selling citizenship papers to undocumented immigrants, authorities said.
Luz Bhullar pleaded guilty in May to selling citizenship documents for unlawful use, unlawful sale of Social Security numbers, and aggravated identity theft, according to a press release issued by the office of U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott.

U.S. District Judge David F. Levi also ordered Bhullar to serve three years of federal supervision, the release stated.

Her husband, Davinder Singh Bhullar, 47, was indicted in May on federal charges of conspiracy to bribe State Department employees and visa fraud. He is a fugitive, according to the release.
Two State Department employees and nine other defendants were convicted in that case, which involved a fraudulent visa scheme.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/29946.html

Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Angelides slams 'shameful and phony' Iraq war
By Peter Hecht - Bee Capitol Bureau
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A4

Before a raucous anti-war crowd at San Francisco State University, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides on Tuesday vowed to fight to bring California's National Guard troops home "and do my part to end George Bush's failed adventure in Iraq."

Angelides, seizing upon the war to energize his underdog campaign to unseat Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, took to the road to deliver speeches in Northern and Southern California condemning U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Constitutional scholars argue that a governor lacks authority to order state National Guard units home once they have been federalized by the president. Yet, undaunted, Angelides used the campaign swing to contrast his stand on the war with Schwarzenegger's and to insist that the Iraq debate deserves to be heard in the governor's race.

He argued that use of the California National Guard for "this fool's errand" overseas is threatening the state's security and leaving California vulnerable should a terrorist incident or natural disaster occur at home.

"When a shameful and phony war compromises the governor's basic ability to meet the needs of our people, when it puts us at greater risk of injury and fatality when a disaster strikes our state, then you better believes it's an issue in the race for governor of the state of California," Angelides declared to loud applause at the San Francisco State event.

Schwarzenegger has supported President Bush's policies in Iraq and hasn't questioned the deployment of the California National Guard in the war. Although he recently said he supported efforts to find an "exit strategy" for the Iraq war, he said pulling out troops and "just walking out ... would be the wrong thing to do."

Angelides' speech came as a new Field Poll showed him trailing Schwarzenegger by 10 percentage points in the governor's race. Most notably, only 61 percent of Democrats said they intended to vote for Angelides.

But Angelides' strategists say they are counting on the candidate to pull back into the race by winning at least 80 percent of Democratic vote.

And with Democrats overwhelmingly opposing the war -- by 91 percent in an earlier Field Poll -- Angelides was stirring his base with anti-war rhetoric. He pledged that, if elected governor, he would "take any action, including going to court," to bring home state National Guard members serving in Iraq.

Before Angelides' speech at the Cesar Chavez student union, activists passed out anti-war leaflets and a sound system blared such protest hymns as the Vietnam-era "War" and "Let's Impeach the President," a recent release by Neil Young.

But some students opposed to the war didn't buy into Angelides' call to bring the National Guard troops home.

"I think it's just empty rhetoric and posturing," complained Dell Brooks, president of the San Francisco State political science student association. "Do something tangible for the California people. Why is he politicking on the national stage? He can't do anything about it anyway."

But Sacramento resident Chris Gembinski, 20, another political science student at the university, said he was inspired by Angelides taking a stand.

"I don't think the National Guard should be there in the first place. It needs to be said," Gembinski said. "Many Californians are against the war. It can help him."
++++++++++++++
About the writer:
The Bee's Peter Hecht can be reached at (916) 326-5539 or phecht@sacbee.com

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/27/AR2006092701287.html

House Passes Detainee Interrogation Bill
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; 5:58 PM

The House approved an administration-backed system of questioning and prosecuting terrorism suspects today, setting clearer limits on CIA interrogation techniques but denying access to courts for detainees seeking to challenge their imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere.

The 253-168 vote was a victory for President Bush, who yielded some ground during weeks of negotiations but fully embraced the language that House members approved with support from 34 Democrats and all but seven Republicans. Senators also began debating the measure today and defeated the first of five amendments opposed by the administration. Senators predicted their chamber will approve the legislation Thursday.

That would enable Bush to hold a signing ceremony on a high-profile bill about a month before the Nov. 7 elections. He was scheduled to meet with GOP senators in the Capitol Thursday morning for a final pep rally before the measure's expected passage. Republicans hope to campaign on the bill as proof of their party's toughness against terrorists, and many congressional Democrats decided to swallow their misgivings to avoid being portrayed as less than vigilant against suspects captured in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.

Barring a last-minute snag, the House and Senate action will conclude three months of debate that began in June, when the Supreme Court struck down Bush's proposed system of military commissions to try so-called unlawful enemy combatants. Such combatants enjoy fewer rights than prisoners of war, and much of the congressional debate has centered on which, if any, rudimentary legal rights should apply to the detainees. The administration also was eager to protect CIA officers from possible prosecution or lawsuits stemming from aggressive interrogation techniques such as water-boarding, which simulates drowning.

The White House proposed legislation that would have embraced much of the military commission setup and interrogation practices. But a trio of Republican senators -- John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) and John W. Warner (Va.) -- forced him to modify several points.

The compromise legislation does not seek to clarify the Geneva Conventions, as Bush had hoped. But it gives the executive branch substantial leeway in deciding how to comply with treaty obligations that fall short of "grave breaches" of the conventions.

It bars military commissions from considering testimony obtained through interrogation techniques that violate "the cruel, unusual or inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited" by the 5th, 8th and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution. But it allows such testimony from practices that occured before Dec. 30, 2005, when Congress adopted the Detainee Treatment Act. Some Democrats said the loophole signals U.S. acceptance of abusive practices, but GOP sponsors said the language was essential to protect well-intended CIA officers from vague guidelines.

The Senate debate today followed negotiations yesterday between White House national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley and Republican senators. They did not resolve a dispute over whether the captives should have access to U.S. courts. That meeting centered on what is known as a "court-stripping" provision that bars U.S. courts from considering habeas corpus filings by detainees over their confinement and treatment. It affirms the Bush administration's assertion that it has an incontestable right to hold persons detained as "unlawful enemy combatants" for the duration of the battle against terrorism.

"Habeas has to be resolved," and it will most likely be addressed on the Senate floor, Warner, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters yesterday after meeting with Hadley.

Three foes of the habeas corpus provision -- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) -- introduced yesterday an amendment to overturn the administration-backed provision by allowing foreign nationals in military or CIA custody to challenge the legality of their detentions after one year.

Graham, who supports the suspension of the habeas corpus process, predicted that the Specter amendment "will be defeated, I think, in a bipartisan fashion, with a solid vote."

Administration officials have said that the controversial provision is warranted because "unlawful enemy combatants" are not entitled to the same rights as regular soldiers or U.S. citizens; because isolation and the threat of indefinite detention aid U.S. interrogations; and because habeas corpus petitions could obstruct or delay the military trials of detainees.

But human rights groups and defense lawyers have condemned the provision as unconstitutional. They said it could leave detainees "to rot" in jail.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Staff writer R. Jeffrey Smith and staff researcher Madonna Lebling contributed to this report.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092600144.html

Wednesday, September 27, 2006; 1:04 PM
White House Refuses Release of Full Intelligence Report

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House refused Wednesday to release the rest of a secret intelligence assessment that depicts a growing terrorist threat, as the Bush administration tried to quell election-season criticism that its anti-terror policies are seriously off track.

Press secretary Tony Snow said releasing the full report, portions of which President Bush declassified on Tuesday, would jeopardize the lives of agents who gathered the information.

It would also risk the nation's ability to work with foreign governments and to keep secret its U.S. intelligence-gathering methods, Snow said, and "compromise the independence of people doing intelligence analysis."

"If they think their work is constantly going to be released to the public they are going to pull their punches," Snow said.

In the bleak National Intelligence Estimate, the government's top analysts concluded Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for jihadists, who are growing in number and geographic reach. If the trend continues, the analysts found, the risks to the U.S. interests at home and abroad will grow.

Peppered with questions Wednesday about the report, he said the NIE report was "not designed to draw judgments about success or failure, it's an intelligence document, it's a snapshot."

Snow said the report confirms the importance of the war in Iraq as a bulwark against terrorists. "Iraq has become, for them, the battleground," he said. "If they lose, they lose their bragging rights. They lose their ability to recruit."

He said that a bleak intelligence assessment depicting a growing terrorist threat was only a "snapshot" -- not a conclusion

The document has given both political parties new ammunition leading up to November's midterm elections. For Republicans, the report provides more evidence that Iraq is central to the war on terrorism and can't be abandoned without giving jihadists a crucial victory. For Democrats, the report furthers their argument that the 2003 Iraq invasion has inflamed anti-U.S. sentiments in the Muslim world and left the U.S. less safe. Democrats continued their push Wednesday for release of the rest of the report.

"The American people deserve the full story, not those parts of it that the Bush administration selects," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, warned, however, that releasing more of the intelligence assessment could aid terrorists. "We are very cautious and very restrained about the kind of information we want to give al-Qaida," Hoekstra said.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, in Tirana, Albania for a meeting of defense ministers, said Bush had declassified the report's key judgments, after parts of it were leaked to the news media, so that "the American people and the world will be able to see the truth and precisely what that document says."

The NIE report, compiled by leading analysts across 16 U.S. spy agencies, says the "global jihadist movement -- which includes al-Qaida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells -- is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts."

A separate high-level assessment focused solely on Iraq may be coming soon. At least two House Democrats -- Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California and Rep. Jane Harman of California -- have questioned whether that report has been stamped "draft" and shelved until after the Nov. 7 elections.

An intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the process, said National Intelligence Director John Negroponte told lawmakers in writing only one month ago that he ordered a new Iraq estimate to be assembled. The estimate on terrorism released Tuesday took about a year to produce.

The broad assessment on global terror trends, completed in April, escalated an election-year battle over which party is the best steward of national security.

At a news conference Tuesday, Bush said critics who believe the Iraq war has worsened terrorism are naive and mistaken, noting that al-Qaida and other groups have found inspiration to attack for more than a decade. "My judgment is, if we weren't in Iraq, they'd find some other excuse, because they have ambitions," the president said.

But Sen. Joe Biden, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said Wednesday that Bush has allowed Iraq to fester as a training ground for terrorists, and U.S. voters are worried about it.

"On Election Day, that morning, if there's still the carnage in the streets of Iraq, then it will be clear that they have concluded that this administration's policy has failed and there will be a political price for it," Biden, D-Del., predicted on CBS' "The Early Show."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the intelligence committee's top Democrat, said the decision to invade Iraq shifted focus away from U.S. counterterrorism efforts.

"There is no question that many of our policies have inflamed our enemies' hatred toward the U.S. and allowed violence to flourish," he said. "But it is the mistakes we made in Iraq -- the lack of planning, the mismanagement and the complete incompetence of our leadership -- that has done the most damage to our security."

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2006/September/25/local/stories/03local.htm

September 25, 2006
Watsonville: Immigrant Rights Coalition holds rally against recent raids
By Tom Ragan / Sentinel Staff Writer
Email= tragan@santacruzsentinel.com

More than 100 community activists and Santa Cruz County residents waved signs and chanted slogans on Sunday in a rally that demanded more rights for illegal immigrants and fewer rights for the federal government.

The protest comes more than two weeks after federal officials deported more than 100 undocumented workers from Santa Cruz, Watsonville and Hollister in a series of immigration raids called "Return to Sender."

The newly formed Immigration Rights Coalition, made up of various groups across the county, including the Watsonville Brown Berets, held the rally at the City Plaza, and nearby motorists beeped their horns in support on what otherwise was a slow and sunny day.

"No borders, no nation, stop deportation!" yelled Brown Beret member Ramiro Medrano through a megaphone.

"Land of the free?" questioned one sign.

Another said, "No human is illegal."

Coalition members handed out literature advising people in the plaza what to do if officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement — the former INS — come knocking on their doors someday.

"Don't answer it," reads one of the brochures. "It is your right not to answer it. Ask who it is and make sure they have a warrant if they want to come in."

A hotline has also been established by the immigration rights coalition, and if anybody feels that they are being unlawfully harassed by the federal government or intimidated over their legal status, they can call the number at 331-1119.

"It's sad what's been going on in the last few weeks," said Stephanie Keenan of Pajaro, a former elementary school teacher who supports immigrant rights. "We're really not being good hosts when we deport people for no other reason than trying to work and better themselves. What would we do if we didn't have the field workers? I feel ashamed of what's been going on."

In their defense, ICE officials said the immigration raids were carried out on Sept. 7 and 8 as a means of deporting only illegal immigrants who had warrants issued for their arrests, including felony sexual assault.

But the Santa Cruz County Immigration Project said of the total 107 arrested, only 19 warrants had been issued and 90 people were immediately deported without an opportunity to see an immigration judge or receive any kind of legal advice.

Lori Haley, a spokeswoman for ICE, has said in past interviews that ICE officials followed proper procedures, and that it is the job of ICE officers to arrest those who are in the country illegally.

Many have questioned why the raids came at the time that they did, and some activists feel it has something to do with the nationwide protests that unfolded last spring over a hostile House of Representatives bill HR 1147.

The bill sought to deport millions of undocumented workers from the country and make it a felony for them to be here.

"It's almost as if immigration officials are saying, "Oh, yeah, well we can flex our muscles, too," said Doug Keegan, executive director of the Santa Cruz County Immigration Project, in referring to the recent raids.

The initiative began on May 26 and included every field office in the nation from ICE's Office of Investigations and ICE's Office of Detention and Removal Operations, according to a press release issued by the Department of Homeland Security.

Among the roughly 2,179 individuals arrested in the operation, roughly half had criminal records for crimes that ranged from sexual assault of a minor to assault with a deadly weapon, to abduction. Roughly 146 of those arrested had convictions for sexual offenses involving minors. In addition, roughly 367 of the arrested aliens were members or associates of violent street gangs, including Mara Salvatrucha MS-13. Roughly 640 of those arrested were fugitive aliens who had been issued final orders of removal by an Immigration judge but failed to comply.

But the way activist Amelia McDonald sees it, it's just the federal government trying to intimidate people.

"They see that the people are becoming empowered and they saw it when they took to the streets, and now they're trying to put a stop to it by putting fear into them," McDonald said.

"But that's not going to happen. The people are taking control of their lives and speaking out, and that's their right."

The new immigration rights hotline is: 831-331-1119

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=52995e3c9ccc3e02863c968a0157dbdb

September 25, 2006
Snapshots of the National Immigrant Rights Movement
New America Media, Interviews, New America Media staff,

Editor's Note: New America Media editors interviewed 30 immigrant activists on where the movement is at as of mid-September. The interviews show remarkable scope and depth to the movement but conditions are different in every state. The following are excerpts from Longmont, Col., to Charlotte, North Car, from parts of the country that have seen vicious anti-immigrant backlash as well as important multiracial movements for immigrant rights.

DAVID OSLO, Director, IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE SERVICES, CATHOLIC CHARITIES, Wichita, KS
Immigrants made up 4.2 percent of the population of Wichita in 1990. Now it's estimated to be 12.1 percent, 97 percent of whom are Hispanic. It has made Wichita a hotpot of hate in the last few months.

When the first immigration rallies happened, with more than 3,000 people showing up (Wichita's population is 350,000) it was front-page news. The fact that many people carried Mexican flags became a big issue. It became so bad that the Hispanic community started living in fear.

There was an increase in profiling. Wichita had never had Immigration carry out raids on local businesses before, but recently there have been several. The Wichita Eagle newspaper has an opinion line that gets daily calls saying Mexicans should go back. Catholic Charities has clients who were speaking Spanish in the supermarket and had people come up and say, "If you're speaking Spanish, why don't you go back to Mexico?" Companies are getting letters saying they know they're hiring illegal aliens and will send ICE there.

People say their employers have told them they'll get laid off by the end of the month if they can't show valid IDs.

Recently, a retired police officer published an announcement saying he was going to set up a chapter of Minutemen in Wichita. There's an initiative in Topeka that English be made the only language in Kansas.

On the positive side, they're coming out in droves to find out about citizenship. Last year Catholic Charities dealt with 43 applications for citizenship. This year it's up to 121.

Catholic Charities engages its audience in Kansas by basing its presentations on Scripture. This is a very religious part of the country. They emphasize how Jesus had no place to lay his head; he was a refugee from when he was a baby.

FLAVIA JIMENEZ, Policy Analyst, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA, Washington, D.C.
The spring mobilizations were strong because of the urgency of opposing Sensenbrenner provisions that would have made undocumented immigration a felony. At the same time the Senate was moving on comprehensive reform with a path to legalization, and that was urgent too. The planets were aligned last spring, so to speak, so the mobilizations were big, with people driven by the sense of urgency.

Now that Congress has made it clear that nothing is going to happen in terms of serious reform, the sense of urgency is not as pronounced. We also have growing pains, new leadership in many places, there's also difficulty determining what bills can be supported -- so the Labor Day mobilization turnout was not as big.

But it doesn't mean there's no more movement. There are voter registration drives, U.S. citizenship campaigns, opposition to restrictive local ordinances and raids. It's very much alive.

People are fighting anti-immigrant ordinances locally, including legal challenges on constitutionality of these ordinances, also injunctions against their enforcement. It must be made clear that that the Supreme Court has determined that the federal government has jurisdiction over immigration, not local governments. Which brings the issue back to the federal government, which has done nothing but play with so-called hearings to drum up opposition to reform.

Most organizations know that whatever federal reform legislation comes out won't be perfect. We're all clear on that. But where agreement is difficult is on the issue of where the line should be drawn in determining whether a bill is acceptable or not.

For us in the National Council of La Raza, we can't give in on these principles: that some sort of path to permanent residence be provided. The communities we're in touch with absolutely want this; there must also be protections for workers, and family reunification backlogs should be diminished.

There's still some back-and-forth discussion with and among unions on temporary workers issue. The labor movement isn't of one mind about this right now.

Meanwhile, raids are taking place, unsettling immigrant families and communities. New immigrant communities, such as in the Southeast, have more challenges, being that the presence of immigrants is so new to the local populations. Border states are also dealing with what to do with flow of immigrants, deaths in the desert of people trying to cross. People have been migrating back and forth for seven generations in places like El Paso and Laredo, but now, suddenly, the only way to regulate this is through heavy-handed enforcement -- it creates a big problem in these places.

Congress will pass legislation sometime in the next two years. In the next few months, however, we must watch out for heavy-handed measures of enforcement being snuck into other legislation -- like the way the Real ID Act was snuck in. This is a real danger. The new Congress next year must be pressured into voting for comprehensive reform, whatever party ends up in power.

AMY GOTTLIEB, AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE, Newark, New Jersey
New Jersey is a confusing state -- on the surface it's wealthy, but there's a lot of poverty that's buried. We have a really big immigrant population, and it's home to the largest number of immigrant detainees in the country. Thousands of people were shipped to New Jersey in 2002-03.

The main impact of the marches: people have turned to the right issue. Statewide, we have a decent congressional delegation regarding immigration. We have a new governor but local ordinances have been popping up -- little pieces that you have to deal with, aimed at fining employers that hire undocumented immigrants, giving licenses and contracts only to employers who check for proper forms. The language of these ordinances is "We find that illegal immigration leads to negative influences...a lower quality of life." Other communities are copycatting this.

MARILYN DANIELS, MAXWELL LEGAL CENTER, Lexington, Ky.

Lexington would be classified as very conservative. The major reaction we've seen is a high level of anti-immigrant hostility, prejudice and emotionalism. We had one really good demonstration here, but that really engendered a lot of negative reaction from the citizens, primarily on talk radio and in letters to the editor. It put a lot of pressure on city government. There's hardly a day that passes without a letter to the editor that's anti-immigrant. The woman in charge of talk radio tries to be inflammatory, and people call in and it just goes from bad to worse. Our city government passed a strong measure for comprehensive immigration reform initiated by employers, but they've gotten lots of criticism for that.

What has flabbergasted us is the fast way this has become a high-profile issue. In years past nobody in Lexington even knew immigrants were here. Now people think it's the most serious issue we've got, and Kentucky has such a small population.

In Lexington we've had complainants in rural areas around the chicken processing plants. Police in 2005 set up roadblocks on the way to the chicken plant to check driver's licenses. Anyone who didn't have one was sent to court and when they got there, the Immigration enforcement was there to arrest them. Around 100 miles from here, we've had Hispanics' homes and cars vandalized.

The Lexington county police department has been exemplary. They have tried to establish rapport with the Hispanic community so that the community feels comfortable to report crimes. They have sent officers to Mexico to learn the language and culture. However, there are individual officers who are extremely prejudiced.

I don't feel that I'm part of a movement. I feel I'm in a terrible problem. I'm afraid that we're heading for even worse times. I'm afraid that they will pass punitive measures between now and the end of the year. What it does to families and children is what bothers me the most.

RONG XIAOQING, SING TAO DAILY, New York
The role of ethnic media is that we can make the voices of the constituents heard. Our constituents are Chinese immigrants and a lot of them don't speak English. But they want to say something.

After we talk to them and hear their concerns, we call the government or the legislature to ask for their comment, to say, 'Here's what the community thinks, do you have a comment?' At the same time, we take what the lawmakers say and tell it to the people. So we act as a bridge to connect the two parts that play an important role in the movement.

MARIANO ESPINOZA, Executive Director, MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT FREEDOM NETWORK
People were angry over the House bill on immigration passed last December and the report released by the Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty two weeks earlier that blamed illegal immigrants for causing a drain on Minnesota's economy. Hundreds of thousands of immigrants took to the streets in February, in March and again on Labor Day. Most were Latinos, but there were also people from other nationalities. There are 50,000 to 80,000 undocumented workers in the state. Anger united them all. It was ugly.

People were also upset by a piece of legislation proposed by the governor that would have barred cities in Minnesota from passing ordinances like those passed in St. Paul and Minneapolis to prevent police from acting as immigration officials and to prevent the undocumented from getting driver's licenses. The two cities have barred city officials from checking the legal status of those seeking city services.

In response, the governor proposed legislation to "welcome" any illegal alien who invested $500,000 in the state. Who in the world would have that kind of money to invest in our state?

BILL CHANDLER, Executive Director, MISSISSIPPI IMMIGRANT RIGHTS ALLIANCE
In April, we had over 1,000 immigrants come together in Gulfport for the first time in the history of the state. We marched through historic black communities and people joined from these communities to support the rights of immigrants. The march was six miles long.

There was very little anti-immigrant sentiment -- perhaps two people gave us the finger. Everyone else cheered us on. Immigrant workers have contributed to the recovery of the region. On May Day we had a march in Laurel, the center of poultry production, and about 500 people showed up.

The marches have given immigrant workers the confidence to stand up. The results have been xenophobia and racism revealing themselves very openly in white districts where more Latinos are moving in. A Republican competing for lieutenant governor used xenophobia and racism as part of his campaign. A leading Democratic contender introduced an amendment for employer sanctions. A conservative senator supported immigration issues. The legislative black caucus has also been very supportive and continued to support the rights of immigrants. Leading black newspapers in Jackson advocated support for immigrant rights.

There have been growing anti-immigrant bills proposed in the legislature -- from employer sanctions to the REAL ID act, making it a felony to sell an auto to an undocumented. We were able to defeat that bill. We were able to do this by getting the backing of the Mississippi Legislative Black Caucus and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which Martin Luther King Jr. founded. We got bills passed such as a court interpreter's bill requiring municipal, county and state courts to provide interpreters. A small Dream Act has also allowed immigrants who attend high school for four years to attend state colleges at state tuition.

JERRY GONZALEZ, GALEO LATINO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND, Atlanta, Ga.
There's been a backlash. Our governor Sonny Perdue is running an anti-immigrant campaign. Exactly one week after 70,000 people marched for immigrant rights (on April 10) he signed into law SB 529, the most restrictive anti-immigrant legislation that is based on the Colorado law.

We were the most vocal opposition of the legislation. They were intent on passing something, so we worked with them to make sure the law included three non-negotiable things: that it protect children, pregnant women and access to higher education. Now there are rumblings of taking away access to higher education, and there's talk of a statewide ban on renting to undocumented immigrants.

Spanish media was critical for mobilizing the big march, particularly Spanish radio. We also went on the Korean radio station WPBC-AM 1310 in Duluth to let the Korean community know what we did. Our interview on the local talk show with Kevin Kim was simultaneously translated into Korean.

There's tension between the established African American community and newly arrived immigrants. I spent two hours on the progressive black radio show WAOK during the debate on state anti-immigration measures, and the call-ins were more conservative and advocated harsher resolutions, than the response on right-wing conservative shows. The solution is to have white people and African Americans talk about immigration, to select the right spokespeople, someone who is perceived as the same.

DOUG RIVLIN, Director of Communication, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM, Washington, D.C.
The spring rallies had a big impact here. The Senate debate was still going on -- the idea that so many people would protest the House bill and support the Senate reform bill was very important at that time. It was a cool thing to be in the marches. When we first learned of the Chicago march through cell phone photos, and of other rallies, it was electric. The amazing thing was no one was really in charge. There was no national plan to do these marches.

For good and for bad, student walkouts in various cities -- they coincided with an HBO movie dramatizing the 1968 student antiwar walkouts, so that was a boost -- got under people's skins. The flags, walkouts, boycott didn't go over well with mainstream folks because they were confrontational. Still, here in D.C. it was important for politicians to see this. It was important for senators who want comprehensive reform to -- it gave them added energy for the Senate debate, to move it in a positive direction. Those who were anti-immigrant to start with became harder.

You couldn't recreate the spring actions during the Labor Day mobilization because the legislation wasn't going anywhere. For many people it wasn't as worth taking the risk that they took walking off the jobs in spring. It wasn't a bad thing, even if the turnouts were smaller. It kept the beat going -- labor, churches, advocates were there. The head of the NAACP declared they won't allow anyone to drive a wedge between blacks and immigrants. For members of Congress who are trying to fight back -- Kennedy, Honda, Guttierez, Jackson-Lee -- it was important to be at the rally and speak to a big group of people.

We're expecting a new round of bashing from the GOP in light of the election. They will try recycling old proposals in the House. It's all political and not expected to move over to Senate -- just symbols and politics. The GOP is worried about the election. They can't talk about the war, cutting taxes, the president, gays -- so they're hitching their wagon to immigrant-bashing. The most important thing in next few weeks, is how all this is playing out in the local elections, how this will play out in the long run among Latinos and immigrants vis-à-vis the Republican Party. It should be a good time for pro-immigrant politicians to highlight actual solutions, not just fences, but most are still a little afraid to go boldly. This is really the first nationwide elections where immigration is a top item. It's a time to see where it works or doesn't work.

If Democrats prevail in November, some imagine a scenario where they'll say, let's deal with it in the remaining lame duck session of Congress in December. A small GOP margin of victory could also lead to the same scenario. But we could be battling against bad or incomplete reform.

It's much more likely we'll be coming back to this issue next year in a new Congress. We're in a much better situation coming into next year. The Senate legislation changed the tenor of debate -- it's not just a problem, but there can be solutions to managing the flow of immigrants and normalizing the lives of the 12 million who are already here. According to most national polls, the country prefers the Senate approach of being tough but fair to House approach of just being tough.

GEPSIE METELLUS, Executive Director, HAITIAN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, Miami, Fl.
The immigration marches were making people very tense. Miami is one of the most diverse cities, there's great sympathy for immigrants, but there's still a lot of discomfort. You overhear immigrants themselves say while it's true that this nation was built by immigrants and immigration is wonderful, we can't take everybody in.

There's some tension in the African-American community. On one hand, it wants to be supportive of other black immigrants because immigration policy hasn't been favorable to immigrants from black nations. But there's also the feeling that these immigrants will displace African-Americans from housing, the work force and a number of services. It's the same tension and growing pains throughout the nation.

We've got to find a way to make people comfortable with the immigration issue. We put the most positive face on the Haitian community, emphasizing the positive makes you more acceptable to people. We have the highest number of Haitian Americans in public office and enrolled in adult education centers.

People are constantly looking for ways to ensure that the word gets out. Radio and TV are key ways to mobilize the community. It's traditionally a very oral community that gets news from radio. We use ethnic media; mainstream media is hard to access. It's either very expensive or you wait a long time for the story to get printed.

The trick is to get the word out to go beyond your own ethnic group and tap into others. We try to hook up with sister organizations that work in the Hispanic community, sending press releases out to everyone and holding events and rallies together. We hold joint events about immigration reform and fraud -- these are highly attended and televised.

Haiti is at a difficult crossroads, and it's likely people will continue to flee here. But politics back home don't affect us as much as immigration. It's a topic high on our radar.

RASHIDA TLAIB, Advocacy Coordinator, ACCESS, Detroit, Michigan
The marches were able to empower the community to speak out about their issues. This is good especially in the Arab and Muslim community, because after 9/11 they feared being engaged politically, marching and going to the polls. In the Michigan legislature they are targets of discussions. Even that has stirred some engagement among people here. The national campaign and movement informed the local movement.

The English-only legislation swept through the Michigan House -- it's legislation that made English the official language of the state. A House resolution counting only United States citizens for redistricting passed. It would hurt groups (that help immigrants); it would take a chunk of their funding. It would affect representation in those areas (like cities with heavy immigrant concentrations) if legal residents were not counted.

Our ties with the Latino community are growing stronger, and we're involved with a church-based coalition. We wouldn't have started working with them if it wasn't for the immigrant rights movement. They're broadening their base. We built an alliance with them that's probably been the most effective in our work.

CAMILLE ODEH, SOUTHWEST YOUTH COLLABORATIVE, Chicago, IL
The marches last spring were an important expression of how people are fed up with bad treatment and poor working conditions. I feel that the movement has created many positive changes at the community level as a whole. People are getting organized and leaders have evolved to fit the growing needs of the immigrant population. The struggle has created a sense of shared community across different immigrant groups. The movement is building infrastructure, but more importantly, there's unity being created.

The marches haven't brought around an immediate change or reaction in policy; we're still waiting on that "big change," though the process has begun. The policy debate has heightened a sense of urgency around immigration, not only concerning the Mexican border "fence," but also the repercussions of the Patriot Act on members of the South Asian and Middle Eastern communities. Communities are mobilizing, and we're working on incremental changes before taking on America as a whole.

I feel that negative backlash isn't the issue here. Though some community members say negative backlash is a problem, our communities continue to speak and organize themselves. I don't think that the situation is getting worse just because the debates are more vocal.

MOHAMMAD RAZVI, Founder/Executive Director, COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S ORGANIZATION (COPO), Brooklyn, N.Y.
On May 1 we organized to shut down the neighborhood and businesses. We did, and had a human chain of Bangladeshis, Indians and Haitians, hand in hand, under all flags: Mexican, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, etc. We chanted "legalize don't criminalize, si se puede," and at 12:16 we recognized the date Dec. 16, when that horrible draconian bill was passed. The march moved the whole community to work hand in hand. Over 100 businesses shut down and 250 people showed up. We were just one part of a huge gathering collectively in the other boroughs: Manhattan, Queens, Staten Island. In New York 55 percent of New Yorkers are either foreign born or one of their parents are.

The impact was that many individuals saw people coming together from different ethnic groups and we had a collective voice. Different faith-based communities came out: Christian, Jewish, Muslim. We felt more comfort that there were other people in the same situation and political and elected officials have also changed their tone. Before they did not want to discuss the matter openly. Now immigration is discussed more openly. Congressman Nadler now says that there should be a path toward legalization. At the moment the nation is distracted by international conflicts, but we have to move forward. Political individuals who prevent us from moving forward will be out of office very soon. The foreign-born will become citizens and will voice their opinions.

We're not asking for amnesty. We just want a roadway for individuals who have been here for many years. There is a difference between amnesty and a roadway to legalization.

We are a group that started after 9/11 to help those wrongfully detained based on their surname. The FBI and other officials rounded up suspects based on their names and without search warrants went into their houses. The first thing we realized when we began to reach out was that the majority of these individuals didn't speak English. So we began to teach them ESL and immigration issues. The first day 300 people showed up. What was once supposed to be a temporary program is now a permanent one for 5 years. We have expanded services to citizenship prep to job readiness and youth groups. The most powerful thing is our services are spread through word of mouth.

Every generation of immigrants has encountered people who look different or don't speak their language. I believe our country has a remarkable ability to accept immigrants no matter where they came from and to integrate them in very fabric of American life. That's the beauty of the country.

GOURI SADHWANI, NEW YORK CIVIC PARTICIPATION PROJECT
In New York, we finally got our two senators, both Democrats, to take the immigration issue on; and it took the marches to do that.

At the local level, we haven't seen a backlash. Those cities that are enacting anti-immigrant legislation have had that in the pipeline for a long time. That's not the case in New York, except for one case on Long Island.

On Long Island, there's a county executive of Suffolk County, Steve Levy, a Democrat, who has always been anti-immigrant. A few weeks ago, he proposed Resolution 2025, which would require that all county contractors re-verify and prove to the county that all their employees are documented. It essentially brings the federal responsibility of Immigration enforcement to the county level.

We're bringing together pro-immigrant labor unions and having them take a joint position against the bill, which is very complicated on Long Island because a lot of the unions there are not pro-immigrant. So it requires a lot of work.

You have a tension between the federal government's inability to deal with immigration, and the local government that's responding to it. But the Suffolk County resolution can't stand up in court. It's unconstitutional.

Our greatest need is better collaboration within our own movement of groups that have different strategies, so that we're pro-active, not reactionary. The immigrant rights movement is very fractured and divided, whether you're in New York, Chicago or Miami. People aren't sure whether to support the Kennedy-McCain bill or a guest worker provision; they don't know what the next step is -- is it more marches? The Sept. 7 rally fizzed out and got a lot of bad press.

Advocates and immigrant rights groups are lacking a national plan. I don't think there's a collective vision. Those marches were opposed to something (the Sensenbrenner Bill), but we haven't figured out what we're for.

DEE ANN NEWELL, Executive Director, ARKANSAS VOICES FOR THE CHILDREN LEFT BEHIND
In the state of Arkansas we have a growing Hispanic population, largely due to the need for workers in poultry plants around our state. This is very difficult work -- you are on your feet, fingers and hands are lost all the time --so they're not very desired jobs. Many of our new immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, are willing to take on those jobs, and they're very valued because they do.

However, in the last year, we have had two significant raids. One was on a poultry plant in southern Arkansas, in a town called Arkadelphia. Homeland Security came in during the night shift and arrested 52 adults. Their children awakened to find one or both parents arrested and, within 36 hours, deported. Some of the children were infants and toddlers who awakened in day care centers with both parents gone. Because the majority of these children were also undocumented, they were not eligible for any state assistance formally. So the community of Arkadelphia had to step forward to take some of these children in, including the prosecutor, who took 10 children into his own home.

Then, almost a year later, in late August of this year, we awakened to a newspaper report that was buried at the bottom of the obituary page, identifying 11 workers who were undocumented and had been arrested at Little Rock Country Club. This the most affluent country club in the state -- the true bluebloods of Little Rock -- are members, and these were the fellows who mowed the golf course.

After the men were arrested at the country club, we went to the local high school that draws from the neighborhood which has a high concentration of Hispanic families and visited the ESL classes. We put our cell phone numbers up and told them they could call any time.

In the end the men were all deported and my understanding is that all the family members went with them.

In the Arkadelphia case, the community stepped forward to take care of the children, and a flurry of letters to the editor were very supportive of the families. This time, there really hasn't been a letter to the editor or any kind of editorial writing about it. It's been very hushed, and maybe that is what the community wants, if they are feeling threatened. But I think with a little passage of time, we will need to revisit what happened. I am very concerned that, again, nobody thought about the children.

HAMID KHAN, Executive Director, SOUTH ASIAN NETWORK, LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
One of our projects is organizing taxi drivers. One of the first marches in May of this year -- that had over 700,000 people in it -- was led by four taxis. One of these taxis carried a South Asian Network banner and another had a Los Angeles Taxi Association banner.

In terms of a movement, sometimes we differ from other organizations on the idea of: "Today we march, tomorrow we vote." We tried to do voter registration back in 2004 but we pulled that program almost immediately. We really felt that we had to do longer-term political education. While it is easy to say that the South Asian community is not that active, the truth is that we feel like we need a much longer time to do useful voter registration -- it may take 10 or 12 years. We have an understanding of some of the conservative politics in this community and must know how to educate around that -- especially with wedge issues like abortion and gay rights.

I think the ethnic media is not as proactive as we'd like them to be. India West is always there, covering our events as much as they can. But there are other ethnic media ... we really have to send them the story and the pictures in order to get coverage. SAN has built a relationship with the ethnic media over the past few years but it is often a struggle.

ANGELES ORTEGA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LATIN AMERICAN COALITION. CHARLOTTE, N.C.
The growth of the Latino population in the 1990s forced us to change our mission. The population here was mainly South American and Cuban, but we have seen a 300 percent growth in the Central American and Mexican population since 1990. Within the school district it's been in the thousandth percentage growth. We serve about 10,000 people here (pop. of Charlotte: 1 million; immigrant/Latino pop: 70,000)

We have a radio program on one of two local Spanish language radio stations.

We need to understand that communities don't work the same all around the country. What works in L.A. doesn't work in Charlotte. Charlotte is very conservative. We didn't ask for total work stoppage for May 1. We did a vigil and got 10,000 people, and that's huge for Charlotte. And even for that we got criticism. But if we would have asked for a total work stoppage we would have gotten such a backlash.

Understanding how different communities work is very, very important. NC is such an anti-union state. So when you begin from that point, how you can say let's go march in the streets when people will get fired? So it's about understanding our own communities and that wasn't happening nationally. We have to understand the culture of individual states. This state is a red state! That needs to be taken into consideration; one of our sister organizations lost funding (in Eastern NC) and I think that had to do with their activities. That's painful because then what happens -- Are you really helping in a way then?

The interesting thing is that here in NC we rely so much on the labor force; that's one of the reasons NC has been so successful, that immigrant labor force has made it possible for builders to continue to build.

Within all of that there was missing info about what would happen. People automatically thought that if you do a march, you get your papers. They were coming to us after saying, OK, we did the march, when do we get our papers? There was no real middle grassroots/advocacy organizing to explain the process, explain the Civil Rights movement and how it took such a long time. People absolutely felt like they were a part of the bigger thing. To me, it was so brave. It was incredibly brave.

Some of the ethnic media have been active, some aren't. They got in trouble with English media, saying you're just serving as an advocate, you're not really doing ethically what someone in the media ought to do; I think they're somewhat still involved.

MARTA MORENO, Executive Director, EL COMITE DE LONGMONT, Longmont, Co.

Longmont is in Boulder County, 30 miles north of Denver. Our organization has been here since 1980 after two Hispanics were shot by police officers. Our demographics changed a lot in the 1990s, we're now about 20 percent Latino, where before we were about 10 percent. (Pop. Longmont: 70-80k)

Despite a slight majority among Democrats in the legislature, in July the governor called a special session and Colorado passed four to five anti-immigrant bills. They refer to undocumented people as an unauthorized presence. The bills are targeting services provided to the undocumented. One bill requires that police report anyone who they hear speaking Spanish to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). One woman went to buy orange juice and they asked her for her license and photo ID. The same thing happened to a man who went to buy gas. No other states in the U.S. have passed laws like that this year.

I feel like some of the momentum has been lost, there was a lot going on in the spring. Now with election time coming up again I would say it's picking up again. Although even among democrats it doesn't seem like the majority are sympathetic.

DAVID STEWART, Executive Director, INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF METROLINA, Charlotte, NC

On the one hand, a lot of people were saying that because of the marches they never felt so energized, that we've got to work together to defeat Sue Mirack (the boogie woman of the anti-immigration movement in North Carolina; she's positioning herself to run for governor). With her as a foil, and the marches as a positive momentum builder, many people have never been more enthusiastic. On the other hand, some of the corporations that fund us are saying "I really want to support you guys, but I'm worried about having our name associated with this kind of activity. But this is North Carolina.

The challenge we face is building alliances in Charlotte and our region. In our region the marches were overwhelmingly Latino, and one of the challenges is to build alliances with other immigrant groups and creating a broader immigrant rights dialogue. Some of these other communities are not as organized -- Africans, Middle Easterners and Asians. Our organization can play a role there.

AZAAD KHAIRA, Community Organizer, ASIA, INC., Cleveland, Ohio
The impact of the marches has been marginal, with Cleveland being the big, poorest city with low job availability and predominantly African-American, immigrants are definitely a no, no -- politicians/policy makers have a provincial outlook and cannot recognize the potential of immigrants fueling the economic growth of the city. The second problem is the myth of possible dilution of black power in the city with the arrival of immigrants.

The biggest problem is the Midwest mentality and insularity -- the same old policymakers run things, who have been around for too long and cannot appreciate the positive effects of global workers, global connections and global investments flowing into the city or region as a fuel for economic growth.

CLEMENCIA ORTIZ, LATINO AMERICAN IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE ORGANIZATION, West Palm Beach, Fl.
It's been a little quiet after the marches in April. It doesn't mean people are not continuing on this, but it's very seasonal in South Florida. Summer is the off-season. I think it will pick up again.

Organizations are strategizing. But concrete changes -- no. A lot of awareness was built. People are very concerned. They came forward to go in the streets and be aware that this is a real threat.

EUN SOOK LEE, Executive Director, NATIONAL KOREAN AMERICAN SERVICE & EDUCATION CONSORTIUM (NAKASEC), Los Angeles, CA
Protests are not new to Koreans, but our community is still trying to navigate a new system, learning what is possible here in the U.S. Can you do civil disobedience, for example? Can you walk off your job in protest?

At one press conference the Asian reporters had the most questions about protesting -- can you get arrested, what's the punishment, etc., all very basic questions about exercising your democratic rights in various ways. Even "advocacy" is very new to many immigrants who may be coming from emerging democracies -- making phone calls to government officials, doing petitions, etc.

In our view, the Labor Day activities were successful; we had large participation of Koreans, over all, for the movement nationwide, it still represented the biggest gathering of people on a single issue on a single day. But the mainstream media focused on the smaller turnouts, without bothering to explain that movements have their peaks and lows depending on surrounding circumstances.

SUBHASH KATEEL, FAMILIES FOR FREEDOM, New York
Somehow "comprehensive immigration reform" has come to mean the legalization of "Mexicans." The press has framed the issue in the context of tensions between the black community and what they call the Hispanic community. New York papers talk about it as if there's no such thing as black immigrants.

If you live in Brooklyn, half the people you see on the street are immigrants, including white immigrants from all over the world. A significant chunk of the population of New York, and a significant number of the people being deported, are black immigrants.

Black immigration has changed what's happening in black America. The new black population is immigrants. Black folks are disproportionately targeted by the deportation system.

There's a strategy among the ultra-right to turn black American citizens against immigrants in the immigration debate, playing off unemployment n the black community. That's not a fake issue.

But the debate is framed as Mexican immigrants vs. black citizens. That's just not what it looks like. The bulk of our members are black immigrants. Our supporters come mainly from Dominican and West Indian communities. We need to let people know what the real stakes are in the black community if the immigration issue doesn't get settled.

People who say immigration is not a civil rights issue don't realize that the major figures of the civil rights movement were immigrants or the children of immigrants. Malcolm X was the son of immigrants. Stokeley Carmichael was from Trinidad. Marcus Garvey was a Jamaican immigrant, and was deported to Jamaica in 1927.

There's a huge gap between what the policies being proposed in Congress are going to do, and what people think they're going to do. I don't think the average person hitting the streets was doing it for a guest worker program. Folks on the street think comprehensive immigration reform will uphold the rights of families and U.S.-citizen children. In fact, all the bills being proposed tie the right to stay in the country with employment, and don't provide protections for families. People are concerned with the high number of deaths along the border, the egregious conditions in detention centers, the deportation of green card holders. None of the immigration reform bills being proposed in Congress would address people getting deported.

ADRIAN RAMIREZ, DE-BUG, Staff Reporter, San Jose, Ca.
For me, and many young immigrants, legalization is about allowing kids to have childhoods, something many of us never had.

Immigrant children grow up fast, and carry a stress that usually only adults feel. Although I am 21 years old, I feel like I'm 30.

Carrying around that stress is no easy task for a child's mind, which is not yet ready to deal with it. I felt like I was doing something wrong. I blamed myself for wanting toys and extra little goodies that all children want. The stresses of having to look out for myself at such a young age carried on to later years in my life as well.

Over the years, the stress made me tired, frustrated, and insecure. I felt like I didn't belong in this country, because I didn't have the same opportunities my friends had. When they thought about college, I thought about how I would never be able to pay for it, or even be eligible for financial aid because of my immigration status.

Ultimately, growing up fast has had its upside as well. I feel like I have been more prepared for life's hardships and I have been able to make better choices in my life as a result. But if the immigrant rights movement succeeds, and the undocumented are given avenues to legalization, the most powerful accomplishment will be that the next generation of youth will be granted the childhood I missed

FRANK SHARRY, Director, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM
If the House Republicans win in November because their base turned out because of immigration, then we're in for hard times. If the House is taken by Democrats, the immigration card loses big time.

House Republicans know that gay marriage, Iraq, tax reform aren't doing it for them. If by running against amnesty for immigrants and building a wall does win for them, then things will be ugly.

Detention policies are going to get worse. Mandatory detention may be one of the things that passes in this end game. In the political atmosphere we have now, people who are without status or have a criminal problem may be the most unpopular people in American politics. We need to play a vigorous defense but it will take 15 years perhaps to have a leg to stand on to restore due process to this population.

Border rights activists have gotten more sophisticated. They used to take the position that the borders should be open; now they're pushing for more visas so more people can come across legally and more civilian oversight on border control. They point the way for the detention rights people. We have to address the public's desire for some semblance of order. Here's a way to set up the system so it will work.

There are hundreds of local fights and there will be more. The whole immigration debate may be happening in local towns, not in D.C.. If the House remains in Republican hands, there'll be a standoff in Washington and it will be very ugly in local communities.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzapata
<>+<>+<>+<>+<>THE END/ EL FIN<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
Liberation Now!
General Amnesty Is Sanity!!!
Peter S. Lopez ~aka Peta de Aztlan
Email= sacranative@yahoo.com
Sacramento, California, USA

¨ Join Up!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Humane-Rights-Agenda/

Related Blog= http://humane-rights-agenda.blogspot.com/

¨ Join Up!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aztlannet_News/

Related Website= http://www.0101aztlan.net/

¨ Join Up!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Border01/

Related Website= http://www.immigrantsolidarity.org/
<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<><>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
Join Up! Humane-Rights-Agenda Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Humane-Rights-Agenda/

Humane-Rights-Agenda Blog
http://humane-rights-agenda.blogspot.com/

De Tod@s Para Tod@s Blog
http://detodos-paratodos.blogspot.com/

Join Up! Aztlannet_News Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aztlannet_News/

Aztlannet Website
http://www.0101aztlan.net/index.html

<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
Report Blogsource=
http://humane-rights-agenda.blogspot.com/2006/10/10-01-2006-aztlannetnews-report.html

Humane-Rights-Agenda Blog

Sunday, October 01, 2006

10-01-2006= Aztlannet_News Report

No comments:

Twitter: Peta_de_Aztlan

Blog Archive

Key Links!