Minuteman Member guilty of Urinating in Public. Enforce the Law.

By Stephen Lemos. Phoenix New Times.

In a surprising turn of events in the pending bench trial of nativist and noted Yosemite Sam-lookalike Buffalo Rick Galeener, the grizzled 58 year-old entered Phoenix Municipal Court this morning, and pleaded "guilty" to one count of public urination. He was ordered to pay a fine of $194. According to Chief Assistant City Prosecutor Vicki Hill, the deal had been arranged in advance, and Galeener was supposed to have made an appearance before Thanksgiving to enter the new plea, but didn't make it in because he had been feelin' poorly. His trial in Judge Deborah Griffith's courtroom was set to begin today. Urinating in public is a class 1 misdemeanor, and carries a potential $2,500 fine, and six months in county stir, where, hypothetically, Galeener might have enjoyed the luxurious hospitality of his hero, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The incident, in which Galeener was spotted making water by a local Hispanic lady Paulita Cortes and her two year old son, took place on March 8, nearby the Macehualli Work Center, just south of 25th Street and Bell Road. Galeener was outside the work center for migrant day-laborers as part of a months-long protest of the site by members of United for a Sovereign America, the most virulent anti-immigrant hate group in the Valley, and one that recently marched outside of Mayor Phil Gordon's home to protest Gordon's outspoken criticism of Sheriff Joe's immigration policies. According to the Phoenix police report of the incident, Cortes spotted Galeener around noon near his 1992 Ford Ranger truck, "exposing his penis and urinating in a container." The same report stated Galeener admitted to a police officer that he had urinated, but had done so inside his truck where nobody could see him. It should be noted there's a McDonalds and a Taco Bell just about a block away from where the incident took place.
Phoenix cops cited Galeener for misdemeanor indecent exposure, but the charge was later changed by the City Prosecutor's office to public urination, which carries the same penalty. Galeener hired a lawyer, Phoenix attorney Joey Hamby, and insisted on fighting the case, though all the City Prosecutor wanted Galeener to do was plead guilty, pay a fine and walk. A mean old cuss who has been overheard in the past referring to non-whites as "monkeys," and who has a Web site where he proudly proclaims, "I hate illegals," among other racist gibberish, Galeener refused cop to the al fresco whiz up until the last minute. Macehualli's director, Salavador Reza, said Galeener's lawyer questioned one of the cops involved in the arrest, the victim Paulita Cortes, and Reza himself, long before the trial date. "The lawyer tried to portray [Galeener] as a respectable person," related Reza. "I basically said I thought he was an eccentric and had a foul-mouth. That's about it."Reza said he believed Galeener and his lawyer wanted to prove some conspiracy against Galeener existed between the cop, Cortes, and Reza. But there was no proof of such an unlikely scenario. Told of Galeener's plea deal, Reza thought the Gabby Hayes doppelganger had gotten off easy."If any day laborer had done that in a white neighborhood, they'd probably be in Arpaio's jail as a sexual predator," said Reza. "He was cut a break. On the other hand, I think he had to pay a lot of money to his lawyer. And it showed him for who he is, somebody who's so crazed with hate, that he'll go to extremes to prove a point."Galeener's earned a certain amount of infamy for his nativist activities, getting written up by the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report magazine, being parodied by pro-immigrant activists, even inspiring a Buffalo Rick impersonator at a recent Halloween/ Day of the Dead celebration, complete with a fake bottle of urine. No doubt his recent plea of guilty will only add to his unsavory reputation.

A Nation of Law against they own Rules.

The United States' commitment to separation of church and state has defined the nation, from the structure of the schools and the welfare system to the nature of American politics and society. Many citizens mistakenly point to the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom of religious practice, as the origin of this separation. Indeed, the Bill of Rights represents a crucial step toward the division of religious institutions from the affairs of the government. Yet, from the days of the early republic, the separation of church and state came about slowly, amid contentious legal, intellectual, and religious debates.

Since the first few days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush administration has taken the view that the president has unilateral, unchecked authority to wage a war, not only against those who attacked us on that day, but against all and non terrorist organizations of potentially global reach. The administration claims that the president's role as commander in chief of the armed forces grants him exclusive authority to select "the means and methods of engaging the enemy." And it has interpreted that power in turn to permit the president to take actions many consider illegal. which I will collectively call "the Bush doctrine," the administration has brushed aside legal objections as mere hindrances to the ultimate goal of keeping Americans safe. It has argued that domestic criminal and constitutional law are of little concern because the president's powers as commander in chief override all such laws; that the Geneva Conventions but...

A nation's laws must be upheld? Such simplistic paranoia is at the foundation of the anti-immigrant crowd who cannot intellectualize their belief system. For example take this editorial, A Nation of Laws; its lack of substance prevents any meaningful progress for solving this issue.

What would happen to you if police caught you on video fraudulently voting?
Would cops quickly arrest you and throw you in jail, only to have the District Attorney immediately charge you with breaking the Law(Voterfraud)? Well, see the video above.

What would happen to elected government officials if they were caught doing the same? Absolutely nothing? In fact, our representatives in the U.S. government have become so brazen, that they commit fraud in plain view, on a daily basis, while at the same time trying to pass laws that would further restrict and criminalize the public for doing the same.
This is a clear sign of excessive government, when the government is so large and overwhelmingly powerful that it's agents can abuse the civilian population without any sense of guilt, remorse, or fear - when government officials deny charges of illegal conduct made against themselves as a matter of semantics, and when agents of the government expect and get immunity from any of their actions; actions that would be criminally prosecuted upon any other citizens.
The few standing up for freedom, liberty, and the Constitution, are the only hope for America; the only hope for returning our empire-sized government to it's proper Constitutional levels of national defense, upholding the law, and protecting the rights of the people and individual liberties. There's been a lot of debate at the State Capitol on bills relating to voter integrity. Some lawmakers are pushing for measures such as requiring voters to show a photo identification before being allowed to cast a ballot.
Another bill would criminalize anyone who delivers a ballot for someone unable to drive to the polls. With so much emphasis on one vote for one person, you'd think lawmakers would make sure they follow the rules, too.

In this CBS 42 Investigates, Nanci Wilson found many don't. State Representative Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, authored the bill that would require voters to show a photo ID. "It's all about integrity," Riddle said. But the integrity of one person, one vote doesn't apply at the legislature. CBS 42 found many lawmakers vote more than once. During a vote, Riddle votes, turns around and votes again for another state representative. There's so much going on during the vote on the HPV vaccine mandate, you really have to pay attention.

First, State Rep. Mike Hamilton is at his desk. He leans over to vote a second time for his deskmate Dan Branch. Hamilton reaches back to vote for Charlie Howard, then casts a fourth vote for Wayne Smith. He's not the only one scrambling to vote.

State Rep. G.E. West and State Rep. Larry Phillips both lean over to vote for themselves and their deskmates. Phillips votes a third time for State Rep. Wayne Christian.

Donna Howard votes for State Rep. Hubert Vo. State Rep. Jim Dunnam didn't have to leave his chair to cast four votes--one for himself then for Garnet Coleman, Trey Martinez Fischer and Marc Veasey. Sometimes the voting is across party lines. Will Hartnett, a Republican, reaches back to vote for Democrat Rene Oliveira. Democrat Jim McReynolds votes for Republican Kirk England, and Republican John Davis votes for Democrat Rick Noriega. Most voters have no way of knowing if their lawmakers are actually casting their own votes. Even though the legislature is broadcast on cable TV, the cameras change when it's time to vote. But if you're sitting in the third floor gallery, you have a better view. "I certainly noticed. There appears to be far more votes on the tick board than there were people in the room," capitol visitor Laurel Weiss said. Arnie and Laurel Weiss were baffled when they came to see the legislature in action. "It seems very inappropriate and they should do something about it," Arnie Weiss said. Riddle says voting for other members is done out of necessity. "We have a lot of amendments," Riddle said. "We don't have lunch breaks, dinner breaks, restroom breaks." Necessity or not, one thing is clear, they aren't supposed to be doing it. According to the official House rules--written, voted and approved by lawmakers at the beginning of the session--"Any member found guilty by the House of knowingly voting for another member on the voting machine shall be subject to discipline deemed appropriate by the House." So, should lawmakers do it? "No, there's no question," Weiss said. "On face value it appears to be a blatant violation, an affront, of their own rules." It is against their own rules. But the issue is with enforcement. It is the speaker's job to make sure rules are followed. When CBS 42 asked Speaker of the House Tom Craddick's spokesperson about it, she just shrugged her shoulders and said it was up to the House members to decide what do to if there's a violation. Although the practice is widespread, CBS 42 couldn't find any instances of lawmakers being disciplined for voting more than once.

Fraudulent U.S. Passport and the dysfunctionality of the system.

Diplomatic Security Investigation Results in 112,Suspects Charged with Federal Passport Fraud

The Investigation Resulted in the Seizure of $650,000 and the Recovery of 80 Fraudulently Issued United States Passports.

The individuals charged included fugitives, military deserters, delinquent taxpayers, parolees, convicted felons, sex-offenders, habitual drunk drivers from over 20 countries. All wanted U.S. passports for the purpose of hiding from law enforcement authorities. Many of the individuals charged resided and worked in their deceased identities for decades, and in many cases their neighbors, employers, spouses and children never knew them by their true names.

Between July 2005 and August 2008, 112 individuals were charged with federal passport fraud and related offenses around the country. The government also seized three firearms, $650,000 in cash, one Mercedes automobile, and over 80 of the fraudulently obtained United States passports.

During their investigation, Diplomatic Security and FBI agents cross-matched computerized government death records with Department of State passport records. This process identified individuals who fraudulently applied for, and obtained, United States passports using birth certificates of deceased Americans. Continue reading here: FBI

Mississippi Police Office sentenced to life in prison for Violating Civil rights

FORMER JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI POLICE OFFICER SENTENCED TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT FOR SEXUALLY ASSAULTING A DETAINEE.

WASHINGTON - Maceo Simmons, a former officer with the Jackson Police Department in Jackson, Miss., was sentenced to life imprisonment on Aug. 4, 2008, for sexually assaulting a 19-year-old woman he had detained after a traffic stop, the Justice Department announced today.

The sentence arises out of an incident that occurred on Sept. 19, 1999. The victim was a passenger in a car, which was pulled over by Jackson police officers for running a stop sign. Simmons handcuffed the victim and placed her in the back of his patrol car. He and another officer then drove her to a remote and isolated location, where Simmons repeatedly raped the victim while the second officer acted as a lookout. Simmons was originally sentenced to a term of 20 years imprisonment, but that sentence was reversed on appeal.

"The court's sentence reflects the gravity of the defendant's egregious conduct," said Grace Chung Becker, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. "Although nothing can erase the scars of a rape, hopefully, the court's action will help the victim feel safer knowing that the perpetrator is behind bars for life."

The convictions resulted from an investigation by Special Agent Brendan Sheehan, formerly with the Jackson office of the FBI, Special Litigation Counsel Paige Fitzgerald and Trial Attorney Karima Maloney from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division

This is what I called Enter Trainment.

.

This what I called Enter Trainment because being a Sheriff (K. Jones)and go on public enterview for exposing about Undocumented Immigrants crossing the border each day, a week, a month and yearly.
And ignoring to showed the facts and sources of his statement. That's just sad and pathetic.
Know even sheriff, Police Chief, has made immigration a centerpiece for their re-election campaigns.
And Nativists, protectionists wants to seal the border. If we have an terrorist attack were they will run against? Their own border? The own Wall? or Point of no return?

Five men likely to be deported because they were fishing without a license.




Racial profiling to Latinos will continue until the Federal Goverment reacted to pass a Humane comprehensive Immigraton reform.

Five men fishing. That's the new focal point in our community over the immigration debate that continues to play out in our nation.

The Hall County Sheriff's Office has begun enforcing a new initiative known as 287 (g) that requires local law enforcement officials to turn over to federal immigration officials anyone who is arrested and lacks proper documentation.

The law was supposed to be enforced some time back but it took awhile for the feds to hook up the database computers deputies use to check the legal status of those arrested. Now that the equipment is up and running, Sheriff Steve Cronic and his staff are enforcing the statute by checking documentation and informing the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency when an arrestee does not have legal status.

Such was the case for five Mexican migrant workers who were picked up for fishing without a license April 5 at Wahoo Creek by a Department of Natural Resources officer. When they could produce no legal identification, they were booked and found to be in the country illegally, then turned over to the ICE. All five now face likely deportation, all because they were fishing without a license, hardly a crime that threatens society.

But the incident that led to their arrest isn't the real issue. Cronic and his deputies are merely applying the 287 (g) initiative as required by the federal government, no matter what charge may have led to the original arrest.

Local immigration lawyers Arturo Corso and David Kennedy claim that law officers are targeting Hispanics and running them through the ICE process unnecessarily. They believe the 287 (g) requirement should apply only to those who commit more serious crimes, such as drug offenses and violent crimes.

"There's no way five people fishing in the middle of the day would cause anybody alarm or concern," Corso said.

"My guess is there are some officers out there who are using this program to harass immigrants," Kennedy said.

Cronic and his deputies are in a no-win position when it comes to enforcing 287 (g). If they ignore it, they aren't complying with federal law. If they only apply it to those whom they feel are serious criminals, they are picking and choosing which laws to enforce, which is not their job. But if they do what the law requires, as in the case of the fishermen, they are accused of targeting Latinos.

We don't envy Cronic for the dilemma. His department knows that keeping strong relations with the Latino community is important, and that all local residents, regardless of their nationality or ethnicity, should be able to count on their protection. To that end, Cronic says the 287 (g) statute is only being applied to those arrested and not witnesses or other complainants. He also says his department monitors the record of those who are pulled over, cited or arrested to check for patterns that could be considered profiling.

Local attorney Joe Diaz told The Times he would like to see Cronic's department apply discretion to the law. But how can a sheriff do that without making up his own laws? Once someone is arrested for whatever reason and turned over to the ICE, it is a federal matter and not up to local jurisdiction.

"We're not judges and it's not our place to be judges," Cronic said. "When you do that, it's a slippery slope you go down. It's not something that should be determined at our level."

Though we sympathize with the attorneys' concerns and their attempt to protect those who lack any kind of legal safety net, we agree with Cronic. The potential for abuse in either direction is too great when law enforcement officers are urged to make up their own minds as to who should and shouldn't be arrested. True justice can only be achieved when the law is applied fairly and without prejudice to everyone.

The whole debate, once again, stems from the key problem involving immigration: Local law enforcement is asked to do what federal officials and lawmakers seem unwilling or unable to accomplish in a more effective way.

For years, Congress has been vilified by us and others for failing to craft a sensible, comprehensive plan to better deal with Undocumented immigration. Most agree that it has to start with stronger border enforcement to keep migrant workers from crossing without documentation. Porous borders have created a large and shadowy underclass frequently exploited by employers and unable to seek protection from the law. No country can allow that to continue, for the sake of immigrants or existing residents.

Once the border is secure, then a plan to deal with those who are already here, whether that be deportations or a guest worker program, is the next step. This is where the differing points of view over the issue split ways, even if they agree on border security.

But whether you are for or against increasing legal immigration, any and all reform has to come from the federal level. Failure to fix a national problem that way merely shuffles it to state and local governments and their law enforcement officers. That results in piecemeal legislation that deals with the symptoms of illegal immigration, often forcing migrants to move to a different town or state. That doesn't make them any more legal, nor solve the problem; it just passes the buck to someone else.

This is an election year, our next best chance to choose leaders to Congress and the White House who will act decisively on this issue. If our new leaders are no more proactive than those already in place, we'll continue to see more burden put upon local sheriff's and police departments who could be using their resources for other concerns.

But until that happens, it's up to Cronic and other local leaders to apply the laws they're given. They cannot be asked to enforce the law in some cases and not others. And they must continue their own outreach to the Latino community to ensure all residents that only those who break the law will come under the scrutiny of the 287 (g) statute and federal agencies.

It's a fine line to walk, and not the ideal way to address immigration. But until Congress acts to solve the issue in a more decisive manner, it's the best anyone can do

E-mail from Judson ISD trustee sparks cry of racism. he is offended by e-mails suggesting he should learn Spanish




Judson School Board trustee Richard LaFoille sent out an e-mail Tuesday suggesting the United States could prevent unauthorized immigration by digging a moat the length of the border with Mexico and filling it with alligators.

The e-mail, meant to be humorous, was a forwarded message featuring a Hallmark greeting card character known as Maxine. It also protested the singing of the national anthem in Spanish and noted, "If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone, then you're part of the problem!"

LaFoille sent the e-mail to a host of district administrators, trustees and others, including a San Antonio Express-News reporter.

Trustee Diane Bagley forwarded the message to Superintendent Willis Mackey, who was left off the original e-mail, and said while she respects freedom of speech, she does not want to receive e-mails from LaFoille that she considers racist.

LaFoille, responding to criticism over the e-mail, said he's not racist, but sent the message to people he frequently e-mails because, "I don't hide the facts

"I think that our borders need to be closed," said LaFoille, who noted that his father came to the United States from Quebec, but refused to speak French around his son.

"I don't care what color you are, black, white, green or purple, if you don't speak English, I don't want to talk to you."

LaFoille said he has been called racist in the past because he refused to vote for minority job candidates he felt were not qualified.

He said he gets along well with all kinds of people in Judson ISD, one of the most ethnically diverse school districts in the area. Nearly half of the students there are Hispanic and 27 percent are African American.

Children in the schools he represents "come up and hug me," LaFoille said. "They like me and I like them."

But he said he is offended by e-mails suggesting he should learn Spanish.

"I got about three of them last week," he said.

He also noted there are no Anglo Miss America pageants or Anglo college funds.

"It's ridiculous," LaFoille said. "I'm not saying there should be, but have you ever heard of one? And do you think if there was, people wouldn't be screaming that we're racist?"

LaFoille, elected in 2004, was unopposed last year for re-election to a three-year term.

Bagley said LaFoille's e-mail might have been meant in jest, but wasn't funny.

"It concerns me that an individual thinks those types of things are funny and yet represents our kids and our community," she said, noting she received a couple of similar e-mails from LaFoille about two years ago and asked then that he stop. "He needs to keep it within his circle of friends if that's what he wants to do. I am not in his circle of friends."

Judson's board has been known to spar, and trustee June Adair said LaFoille once asked her to stop sending him e-mails that weren't explicitly related to board business.

She said LaFoille's e-mail, which she also received, was "not exactly the most tactful thing to do ... but I got in trouble before for sending out e-mails that had scriptural or other messages."

Last year, Bagley sent a letter to the Texas Education Agency accusing her fellow trustees of racism for failing to support an African American employee for interim superintendent. The board later hired its first minority superintendent, Willis Mackey, in November.

LaFoille said Bagley is overly sensitive.

"She thinks there's racist undertones if you tell her, 'I met a person the other day and they were Hispanic,'" he said.

He said he didn't intend to send the e-mail her way, but Bagley thinks it was "an obvious jab."

"He did not agree in the past with my statements with there perhaps being a race issue in Judson ISD," she said. "He needs to go and find someone else to play with."

Linda Odell, a spokeswoman with Hallmark Cards, said the e-mail's use of the Maxine character was "absolutely not" authorized.

"What we do is bring people together in a positive way and certainly not to take political points of view," Odell said.

African American do not have a room for bigotry. They do not want the Minuteman closed to their Communitty.

Honoring The Green card Soldiers who's died in Iraq.






A young, ambitious immigrant from Guatemala who dreamed of becoming an architect. A Nigerian medic. A soldier from China who boasted he would one day become an American general. An Indian native whose headstone displays the first Khanda, emblem of the Sikh faith, to appear in Arlington National Cemetery.

These were among more than 100 foreign-born members of the U.S. military who earned American citizenship by dying in Iraq.

Jose Gutierrez was one of the first to fall, killed by friendly fire in the dust of Umm Qasr in the opening hours of the invasion.
In death, the young Marine was showered with honors his family could only have dreamed of in life. His sister was flown in from Guatemala for his memorial service, where a Roman Catholic cardinal presided and top military officials saluted his flag-draped coffin.
And yet, his foster mother agonized as she accompanied his body back for burial in Guatemala City: Why did Jose have to die for America in order to truly belong?
Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles, who oversaw Gutierrez's service, put it differently.

"There is something terribly wrong with our immigration policies if it takes death on the battlefield in order to earn citizenship," Mahony wrote to President Bush in April 2003. He urged the president to grant immediate citizenship to all immigrants who sign up for military service in wartime.

"They should not have to wait until they are brought home in a casket," Mahony said.
But as the war continues, more and more immigrants are becoming citizens in death — and more and more families are grappling with deeply conflicting feelings about exactly what the honor means.

Gutierrez's citizenship certificate — dated to his death on March 21, 2003, — was presented during a memorial service in Lomita, Calif., to Nora Mosquera, who took in the orphaned teen after he had trekked through Central America, hopping freight trains through Mexico before illegally sneaking into the U.S.

"On the one hand I felt that citizenship was too late for him," Mosquera said. "But I also felt grateful and very proud of him. I knew it would open doors for us as a family."

"What use is a piece of paper?" cried Fredelinda Pena after another emotional naturalization ceremony, this one in New York City where her brother's framed citizenship certificate was handed to his distraught mother. Next to her, the infant daughter he had never met dozed in his fiancee's arms.

Cpl. Juan Alcantara, 22, a native of the Dominican Republic, was killed Aug. 6, 2007, by an explosive in Baqouba. He was buried by a cardinal and eulogized by a congressman but to his sister, those tributes seemed as hollow as citizenship.
"He can't take the oath from a coffin," she sobbed.

There are tens of thousands of foreign-born members in the U.S. armed forces. Many have been naturalized, but more than 20,000 are not U.S. citizens.
"Green card soldiers," they are often called, and early in the war, Bush signed an executive order making them eligible to apply for citizenship as soon as they enlist. Previously, legal residents in the military had to wait three years.
Since Bush's order, nearly 37,000 soldiers have been naturalized. And 109 who lost their lives have been granted posthumous citizenship.

They are buried with purple hearts and other decorations, and their names are engraved on tombstones in Arlington as well as in Mexico and India and Guatemala.

Among them:
• Marine Cpl. Armando Ariel Gonzalez, 25, who fled Cuba on a raft with his father and brother in 1995 and dreamed of becoming an American firefighter. He was crushed by a refueling tank in southern Iraq on April 14, 2003.

• Army Spc. Justin Onwordi, a 28-year-old Nigerian medic whose heart seemed as big as his smiling 6-foot-4 frame and who left behind a wife and baby boy. He died when his vehicle was blown up in Baghdad on Aug. 2, 2004.

• Army Pfc. Ming Sun, 20, of China who loved the U.S. military so much he planned to make a career out of it, boasting that he would rise to the rank of general. He was killed in a firefight in Ramadi on Jan. 9, 2007.

• Army Spc. Uday Singh, 21, of India, killed when his patrol was attacked in Habbaniyah on Dec. 1, 2003. Singh was the first Sikh to die in battle as a U.S. soldier, and it is his headstone at Arlington that displays the Khanda.

• Marine Lance Cpl. Patrick O'Day from Scotland, buried in the California rain as bagpipes played and his 19-year-old pregnant wife told mourners how honored her 20-year-old husband had felt to fight for the country he loved.
"He left us in the most honorable way a man could," Shauna O'Day said at the March 2003 Santa Rosa service. "I'm proud to say my husband is a Marine. I'm proud to say my husband fought for our country. I'm proud to say he is a hero, my hero."

Not all surviving family members feel so sure. Some parents blame themselves for bringing their child to the U.S. in the first place. Others face confusion and resentment when they try to bury their child back home.

At Lance Cpl. Juan Lopez's July 4, 2004, funeral in the central Mexican town of San Luis de la Paz, Mexican soldiers demanded that the U.S. Marine honor guard surrender their arms, even though the rifles were ceremonial. Earlier, the Mexican Defense Department had denied the Marines' request to conduct the traditional 21-gun salute, saying foreign troops were not permitted to bear arms on Mexican soil.

And so mourners, many deeply opposed to the war, witnessed an extraordinary 45-minute standoff that disrupted the funeral even as Lopez's weeping widow was handed his posthumous citizenship by a U.S. embassy official.

The same swirl of conflicting emotions and messages often overshadows the military funerals of posthumous citizens in the U.S.
Smuggled across the Mexican border in his mother's arms when he was 2 months old, Jose Garibay was just 21 when he died in Nasiriyah. The Costa Mesa police department made him an honorary police officer, something he had hoped one day to become. America made him a citizen.
But his mother, Simona Garibay, couldn't conceal her bewilderment and pain. It seemed, she said in interviews after the funeral, that more value was being placed on her son's death than on his life.

Immigrant advocates have similar mixed feelings about military service. Non-citizens cannot become officers or serve in high-security jobs, they note, and yet the benefits of citizenship are regularly pitched by recruiters, and some recruitment programs specifically target colleges and high schools with predominantly Latino students.

"Immigrants are lured into service and then used as political pawns or cannon fodder," said Dan Kesselbrenner, executive director of the National Immigration Project, a program of the National Lawyers Guild. "It is sad thing to see people so desperate to get status in this country that they are prepared to die for it."

Others question whether non-citizens should even be permitted to serve. Mark Krikorian of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies, argues that defending America should be the job of Americans, not non-citizens whose loyalty might be suspect. In granting special benefits, including fast-track citizenship, Krikorian says, there is a danger that soldiering will eventually become yet another job that Americans won't do.

And yet, immigrants have always fought — and died — in America's wars.
During the Cvil War, the Union army recruited Irish and German immigrants off the boat. Alfred Rascon, an Undocumented immigrant from Mexico, received the Medal of Honor for acts of bravery during the Vietnam war. In the 1990s, Gen. John Shalikashvili, born in Poland after his family fled the occupied Republic of Georgia, became chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

After the Iraq invasion, the U.S. Embassy in Mexico fielded hundreds of requests from Mexicans offering to fight in exchange for citizenship. They mistakenly believed that Bush's order also applied to nonresidents.

The right to become an American is not automatic for those who die in combat. Families must formally apply for citizenship within two years of the soldier's death, and not all choose to do so.

"He's Italian, better to leave it like that," Saveria Romeo says of her 23-year-old son, Army Staff Sgt. Vincenzo Romeo, who was born in Calabria, died in Iraq and is buried in New Jersey. A miniature Italian flag marks his grave, next to an American one."What good would it do?" she says. "It won't bring back my son."

But it would allow her to apply for citizenship for herself, a benefit only recently offered to surviving parents and spouses. Until 2003 posthumous citizenship was granted only through an act of Congress and was purely symbolic. There were no benefits for next of kin.

Romeo says she has no desire to apply. She says she couldn't bear to benefit in any way from her son's death. And besides, she feels Italian, not American.

Fernando Suarez del Solar just feels angry — angry at what he considers the futility of a war that claimed his only son, angry at the military recruiters he says courted young Jesus relentlessly even when the family still lived in Tijuana.
His son was just 13, Suarez del Solar said, when he was first dazzled by Marine recruiters in a California mall. For the next two years Jesus begged the family to emigrate and eventually they did, settling in Escondido, Calif., where the teen signed up for the Marines before he left high school.
Lance Cpl. Jesus Suarez Del Solar was 20 when he was killed by a bomb in the first week of the war. He left behind a wife and baby and parents so bitter about his death that they eventually divorced.
Today, his 52-year-old father has become an outspoken peace activist who travels the country organizing anti-war marches, giving speeches and working with counter-recruitment groups to dissuade young Latinos from joining the U.S. military.
"There is nothing in my life now but saving these young people," he says. "It is just something I feel have to do."

But first he had to journey to Iraq. He had to see for himself the dusty stretch of wasteland where his son became an American. In tears, he planted a small wooden cross. And he prayed for his son — and for all the other immigrants who became citizens in death.

Undocumented Mexicans takings American Jobs?

Anti Immigrant groups, Anchor news, like Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, Glenn Spencer, Glenn Beck seems that the only violators of the Law and Stealers of American Jobs are Mexicans. Why?

On the front page of the Willamette Week today, an article written by Beth Slovak poked holes in the anti-immigrant claim that those entering the country are solely flooding through the southern Border.
In almost daily communiqué from anti-immigrant groups and radio talk show hosts, the focus always seems to be on Latinos as the sole “violators” of U.S. immigration laws and “stealers” of American jobs. With between 65,000 and 75,000 undocumented Canadians currently living in the United States, the continuous focus on Latinos begs the question of why anti-immigrant activists specifically target them with their hate speech, demagoguery and insults.
What the Willamette Week article demonstrates is the issue around immigration isn’t solely a Latino one. People from a range of ethnic persuasions and countries are affected and impacted in many ways making the case why it is important for Congress to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
He’s an... Illegal Eh-lien

He’s stealing our jobs and our women. Plus, he talks funny.By Beth Slovic

On a construction site in North Portland, an illegal immigrant pounds nails and cuts two-by-fours. With each swift motion, he’s breaking the law.
He could be the poster child for anti-illegal immigrant zealots: He’s nonchalant about his status for the most part, unconcerned about not paying U.S. taxes and indifferent to the fact that he’s “stealing” the job of a U.S. citizen.
But he passes through Portland mostly untouched by the spittle spewing from the seal-our-borders-now camp.

http://wweek.com/editorial/3415/10425/

The cycle of scapegoating, banishing the Mexican Legal and Undocumented Immigrants from U.S.(1850, 1880, 1942, 1964, 2007).


The Mexican migratory worker in southwest America is regarded as a necessary part of the bustling harvest season. The need of U.S. employers to import foreign manual labor was heightened first by the expansion of cattle ranches in the Southwest, and by the increase of fruit production in California in 1850 and 1880.

Before Mexican workers supported American agriculture, it was the Chinese who filled the labor hole. Nearly 200,000 Chinese were legally contracted to cultivate California fields, until the Chinese Exclusion Act. Then it was the Japanese who replaced the Chinese as field hands.

Between 1850 and 1880, 55,000 Mexican workers immigrated to the United States to become field hands in regions that had, until very recently, belonged to Mexico. The institution of Mexican workers in the United States was well established at this time in commercial agriculture, the mining industry, light industry and the railroad. The working conditions and salaries of the Mexicans were poor.

The presence of Mexican workers in the American labor scene started with the construction of the railroad between Mexico and the U.S. That presence grew between 1880 and 1890. As much as 60 percent of the railway working crews were Mexican. Rodolfo Tuiran, in his paper "Past and Present of the Mexican Immigration to the United States", reports that the initial flood of migrant workers to the United States were mainly skilled miners, work hands from cattle ranches in Mexico, indentured servants fleeing Mexican farms, small independent producers who were forced north by natural disasters or Indian raids and workers affected by the War of Secession.

In the aftermath of the Mexican Revolution in 1910, the Mexican government was unable to improve the lives of its citizens. By the late 1930s, the crop fields in Mexico were harvesting smaller and smaller bounties, and employment became scarce. The Mexican peasant needed to look elsewhere for survival. World War I also stoked the fire of Mexican immigration, since Mexican workers performed well in the industry and service fields, working in trades such as machinists, mechanics, painters and plumbers. These years were ripe with employment opportunities for Mexicans because much of the U.S. labor force was overseas fighting the war. Agencies in Mexico recruited for the railway and agriculture industries in the United States.

Mexican workers’ complaints about the abuse of their labor rights eventually led the Mexican government to action. Led by Venustiano Carranza in 1920, the Mexican government composed a model contract that guaranteed Mexican workers certain rights named in the Mexican Political Constitution. The contract demanded that U.S. ranchers allow workers to bring their families along during the period of the contract. No worker was allowed to leave for the United States without a contract, signed by an immigration official, which stated the rate of pay, work schedule, place of employment and other similar conditions. Thus, this became the first de facto Bracero Program between the two countries.

In 1924, the U.S. Border Patrol was created, an event which would have a significant impact on the lives of Mexican workers. Though the public did not immediately view Mexicans as "illegal aliens," the law now stated that undocumented workers were fugitives. With the advent of the Border Patrol, the definition "illegal alien" is born, and many Mexican citizens north of the border are subject to much suspicion

The Mexican work force was critical in developing the economy and prosperity of the United States. The Mexican workers in numerous accounts were regarded as strong and efficient. As well, they were willing to do hard work and long hours, in working conditions that were questionably humane. Another measure of control was imposed on the Mexican immigrant workers during the depression: visas were denied to all Mexicans who failed to prove they had secure employment in the United States. The Mexicans who were deported under this act were warned that if they came back to the United States, they would be considered outlaws.

It seemed whenever the United States found a reason to close the door on Mexican immigration, a historic event would force them to reopen that door. Such was the case when the United States entered World War II.

In 1942, the United States was heading to war with the fascist powers of Europe.
Labor was siphoned from all areas of United States industry and poured into those which supported the war efforts. Also in that year, the United States signed the Bracero Treaty which reopened the floodgates for legal immigration of Mexican laborers. Between the period of 1942 and 1964, millions of Mexicans were imported into the U.S. as "braceros" under the Bracero Program to work temporarily on contract to United States growers and ranchers.

Under the Bracero Program, more than 4 million Mexican farm workers came to work the fields of the United States. Impoverished Mexicans fled their rural communities and traveled north to work as braceros. It was mainly by the Mexican hand that America became the most lush agricultural center in the world.

The braceros were principally experienced farm workers who hailed from regions such as Coahuila, "la Comarca Lagunera," and other crucial agricultural regions in Mexico. They left their own lands and families chasing a rumor of economic boom in the United States.

Large groups of bracero applicants came via train to the northern border. Their arrival altered the social and economic environments of many border towns. Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, Texas, became a hotbed of recruitment and a main gathering point for the agricultural labor force.

The Bracero Program contracts were controlled by independent farmer associations and the "Farm Bureau," and were written in English, and many braceros would sign them without understanding the rights they were giving away nor the terms of the employment.

The braceros were allowed to return to their native lands only in case of emergency, and required written permission from their employer. When the contracts expired, the braceros were mandated to hand over their permits and return to Mexico. The braceros in the United States were busy thinning sugar beets, picking cucumbers and tomatoes and weeding and picking cotton.

At the end of World War II, Mexican workers were ousted from their jobs by workers coming out of wartime industries and by returning servicemen. By 1947, the Emergency Farm Labor Service was working on decreasing the amount of Mexican labor imported. By the 1960s, an overflow of "illegal" agricultural workers along with the invention of the mechanical cotton harvester, diminished the practicality and appeal of the bracero program. These events, added to the gross humanitarian violations of bracero employers, brought the program to an end in 1964

It was rotten timing. They entered this country the correct way. They thought they were complying with the law. Know facing deportation 16 Math and science teachers.


One day before St. Lucie students sat down to take their FCATs on Tuesday, the news broke that 16 math and science teachers recruited from India might face deportation because of problems with their visas.
One can only imagine how high Superintendent Mike Lannon's blood pressure went that day.

Lannon told me this week the school district received only a couple of days' warning about the visa glitch.

Aside from a few minor cultural differences, the program seemed fine. School administrators, faculty, students and their parents quickly adjusted to different teaching styles. Many students found their new teachers inspiring. Math and science became fun, they said.

While it was the St. Lucie School District that employed and paid the teachers, Florida Atlantic University initiated the program last summer and handled the visa paperwork through its International Office.

According to Dean Gregory Aloia of FAU's College of Education, the internship program is based on a similar model the college has used with U.S. education students for the past five years.

FAU first became aware of problems with the U.S. State Department last November. Yet it became clear late last week that the problems couldn't be resolved. The teachers were told by St. Lucie school officials not to report for work on Friday.

What a mess.

Here are 16 highly motivated and effective teachers who were making a tangible difference. Now, through no fault of their own they're unable to do their jobs. They entered this country the correct way.They thought they were complying with the law.

While a program like this might suit college students, surely it was no way to treat masters-level professional people in their 30s and 40s, people who left families at home and are already experienced teachers in their homeland. They didn't complain, I'm told, because after completing that probationary period they would be paid salaries equivalent to U.S. teachers.

Yet, within four weeks of that happening, the State Department just said no.

I'm told this mess may all boil down to a clerical error in the type of visa that was applied for. Both Lannon and FAU's Aloia say they are "cautiously optimistic" that Washington can fix the problem and the teachers will be able return to St. Lucie classrooms.

We pay substitute teachers $70 a day to be babysitters; we paid highly qualified, excellent Indian teachers $50 a day.

That's no way to treat anyone, wherever they're from

Facts, not fears, should shape immigration rules that made sense. We need a fair and unified policy on immigration. What we don't need is the kind of reaction displayed in a proposal by Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee earlier this month.

Created last year by the Legislature, the commission was asked to hold public hearings and offer a list of recommendations to lawmakers that would unify the state's conflicting policies on immigration.

That made sense. However, one of the people who proposed forming the commission now says privately that its work has bogged down as special interests have dominated it.
The commission is expected to report next month to the Legislature. Until it does, we'll keep an open mind about the quality of its recommendations.
However, its public hearings don't look promising.

In Huntsville, 300 people, mostly white and middle aged, packed a public hearing. They wanted to vent - about illegal immigration, businesses hiring illegal immigrants, and spending tax money to pay for health care and social services for illegal immigrants. When an Hispanic woman tried to speak, it took a police officer to stop some from trying to shout her down.

A hearing in Hoover, was much the same. More than 200 people attended, mostly to complain bitterly about lax enforcement of existing laws.

A final hearing in Mobile last week was the polar opposite. Few people attended; most who did expressed glowing support for migrant workers.

What the commission will make of all this anybody's guess. The earlier hearings left little doubt that immigration is an emotional, hot-button issue that inflames passions on both sides.
We need a fair and unified policy on immigration. What we don't need is the kind of knee-jerk reaction displayed in a proposal by Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee earlier this month.

Huckabee, the likeable former Arkansas governor, wants to amend the U.S. Constitution to prevent children born to illegal aliens in this country from automatically becoming American citizens.

He promised the founder of the reactionary Minuteman Project that he would force a test case in the Supreme Court to challenge birthright citizenship.

Coming from a guy who as governor sought to give illegal aliens college benefits, complained about federal immigration raids in Arkansas and refused to order the state police to enforce immigration laws, that's pretty bizarre.

Huckabee's record and his proposals on immigration are all over the board - just like Alabama's existing laws and policies. That's what happens when political policy panders to the emotions of the minute.

We only hope the Alabama immigration commission isn't relying solely on the emotive public hearings in making its report. We need hard facts - facts on numbers of immigrants; their impact on the state economy, schools, health care and social services; and the practicality and cost of legislative action.

Only if there is a sound body of facts is there likely to be a sound body of recommendations.