|
|
7/1/09 
UNREAL: INVASION USA
16 illegals sue rancher who catches them on his land
Aliens claim American violated civil rights, inflicted emotional distress By Chelsea Schilling A group of 16 illegal aliens is suing an Arizona rancher, claiming he violated their civil rights, falsely imprisoned them and inflicted emotional distress by holding them at gunpoint on his property along the border. 
Roger Barnett rancher being sued
The federal lawsuit against Douglas, Ariz., rancher Roger Barnett, his wife, Barbara, and his brother, Donald, is taking place before Judge John Roll in U.S. District Court and will run through Feb. 13. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, is representing the five female and 11 male illegals. Al Garza, National Executive Director for Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, attended the first day of hearings on Monday. While the plaintiffs allege that Barnett attacked them because he is racist, Garza, an American of Mexican descent, said Barnett has never shown any hostility toward him. 
Al Garza, National Executive Director for Minutemen Civil Defense Force says the Illegals stories don't add up! "There is no racist agenda here, or I wouldn't be a part of it because I am an American of Hispanic descent," Garza said. "We don't hate anyone from any particular country. We just want our laws enforced. This is not about color." Many of the aliens are residents of Michoacan, Mexico. Four live in Illinois, one resides in Georgia and another in Michigan. All of the plaintiffs currently living in the U.S. listed pseudonyms in the lawsuit due to "fear of adverse action based on immigration status." According to the complaint, Barnett, a resident of Douglas who owns 22,000 acres along the border in southeastern Arizona, approached the group of illegals on an all-terrain vehicle on March 7, 2004. He allegedly began yelling at them in English and broken Spanish while aiming his gun at the group. While Barnett's dog barked at the intruders, the illegal aliens accused him of ordering the dog to attack. One of the women said the rancher kicked her because she refused to get up. Barnett allegedly detained the trespassing illegals until Border Patrol agents arrived. But Garza said their testimonies don't add up. "I saw yesterday that these stories were fabricated," he said. "They were coerced into saying things that would ordinarily not be said by an illegal immigrant with no education." Garza said Barnett's dog has never been vicious and that Barnett did not kick the woman. He also said one female witness told the court the group had been robbed in Mexico and that the only time they feared for their lives was when Barnett accosted them. "She said she was not afraid in Mexico because there were only four men, and there was only one gun, and the way that they robbed them was in a very nice, very polite fashion," he said. "But when Barnett came into the picture, she said he was very vicious and he wanted to kill them. So they were more afraid of one American defending his property than four robbers on their side." 
Illegals migrating across Barnett ranch
The lawsuit alleges that Barnett never told the illegals they were trespassing and failed to post a sign notifying them that they were on private property. Because they detained the group, the Barnett family is accused of depriving the plaintiffs of equal protection and due process under the law. "What in the world are they doing on anyone's property?" Garza asked. "What are they doing in the United States? It doesn't make any sense." He continued, "They are here breaking laws. They conspired to come here. What makes anyone believe that they are credible?" MALDEF claims the family attacked, harassed, threatened and held the illegals against their will because they were motivated by racial and class-based discrimination. The Barnetts allegedly caused the group "severe emotional and mental distress," including fear, anxiety, humiliation, stress, frustration and sadness. Each illegal alien is suing for $1 million in actual damages and $1 million for punitive or exemplary damages. In March, the same judge refused to have the lawsuit thrown out, because he said he believed the family denied the aliens' right to interstate travel and that the detention was racially motivated. The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and Arizonans for Immigration Control have been rallying in support of Barnett in front of the court. Garza said property owners are forced to deal with the consequences when immigration laws are not strictly enforced. Illegal aliens cross the border and destroy private property every day. "I wouldn't blame the guy if he told them to leave," Garza said. "I would have done the same thing because of all of their discarded trash. They urinate everywhere. There is feces all over the place, discarded clothing, shoes, backpacks, cans and other things that we're responsible to pick up. They do that, and we're racist?" In a 2004 interview with Fred Elbel and Frosty Wooldridge, Barnetts said he used to pick up trash from illegals, but he no longer makes the effort. "I won't pick it up because some day, I think if our government gets up off their a-- and does the job they're supposed to, they're going to quit coming across and I can make one big concentrated effort, if I'm still alive, to get the trash off," he said. "It's going to take 20, 30 or 40 people with garbage bags to carry it off ... of one particular area. Some days, I think what the hell am I doing this for?" 
llegals stop to rest on trail that crosses Barnett ranch Garza said groups of illegals cross the border and head to Tucson, Phoenix and other staging areas in Arizona. "From there, they go into Michigan, Idaho and wherever the demand is," he said. "They find jobs in the hotel business, working at golf courses, landscaping, cooking, and washing dishes. It's not because Americans won't do these jobs; it's because they don't want to pay." While illegals may only earn $7 an hour for such jobs, Garza said they find other ways to compensate for lack of income. "They don't mind because they go on welfare and use aliases. They get welfare, food stamps, free education, section 8 housing. They don't have to pay taxes. Why not work for $7 an hour?" Garza told WND he believes politicians need to stop caving into demands for cheap labor so the influx of illegals will stop. They must secure the borders, enforce immigration law, hold people who hire illegals accountable and stop giving social benefits to noncitizens. He said, "We're inviting them by giving them an appetite for things like jobs, public and social services like welfare, free medical and things that we don't get as taxpayers." In the interview, Barnett said he has tried to contact his representatives about the wave of illegals coming across his property. "They won't listen," he said. "They're useless."
Amnesty Bill for Illegals Unlikely to Pass Senate, Group Says
By Kevin Mooney, Staff Writer (CNSNews.com) - A comprehensive “amnesty” bill to provide illegal aliens a path to citizenship is unlikely to pass the U.S. Senate next year because Republicans will be more united in opposition and Democrats will be reticent to burn political capital on the issue, according to a public policy group that tracks population growth in the U.S.
In October, Numbers USA updated its report card on U.S. senators in regard to key votes cast from 2005 to 2008 on immigration policy. Numbers USA favors policy changes that would reduce the annual flow of immigration to where it was historically prior to the late 20th century.
On the Republican side of the aisle, U.S. senators who have held permissive views toward immigration in the past have either left office or altered their position over the past year, Roy Beck, executive director of Numbers USA, told CNSNews.com.
Most of the Democratic senators who opposed amnesty bills in the past will probably stick to their position or urge the leadership to avoid bringing up a vote – at least in the first year of the new Congress, Beck said.
“I’m feeling optimistic about the Republicans,” he said. “The majority [of Republicans] has always been with us, but the Bush White House had pushed the party in a bad direction on this issue and the leadership went along. This will not be the case come next year.”
There are about a dozen Democratic senators who have opposed “amnesty” for illegal aliens and who will continue to be a factor, Beck estimates. Although some may back amnesty now that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been elected president, there likely will not be enough votes to secure passage of an amnesty bill, said Beck.
When the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S.1639), sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), came up for consideration this past June, the following Democratic senators went on record opposing the bill by way of voting against cloture (cutting off debate):
Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.)
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.)
Sen. Kit Bond (D-Mo.)
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.)
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.).
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has co-sponsored immigration legislation in the past opposed by Numbers USA, shifted his position during the presidential campaign and might find it difficult to switch back and now push for an amnesty-type bill, Beck said.
“The big question we have to ask is, ‘Will McCain become Obama’s point man in the Senate helping to push amnesty the way he did for Bush, or will he stick with the enforcement-first position he took in the campaign?’” said Beck.
“He would not have been nominated if he did not take this position, and I don’t think he will be quick to go back on this position after telling people he had gotten the message on immigration,” Beck added.
All of the U.S. senators who ran for president in 2008 received low grades from Numbers USA. President-Elect Obama received a D-minus for his most recent votes, and for his career as whole. Obama voted against an amendment on the Senate floor (S.1348) to prohibit in-state tuition for illegal aliens and sanctuary cities for illegal aliens.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) also received a D-minus for her record on illegal immigration. Clinton voted against several amendments including S.A. 1311, which would increase interior enforcement against illegal immigration.
On the Republican side, McCain did not fare much better, receiving a D across the board for his overall career and for legislation that came up in the past few years. McCain’s support for “amnesty” legislation figured prominently in the scoring.
But the good news from the perspective of Numbers USA is that the handful of Republicans who held permissive views on border security and immigration are either leaving the Senate or have modified their views.
Beck identified Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Ala.), Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), John Warner (R-Va.), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) as being particularly problematic.
Looking ahead, Beck is encouraged by the direction in which Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been moving. While his record as a whole is mixed, the Senate minority leader seems more inclined now to emphasize enforcement over amnesty, said Beck.
Two policy changes that would go a long way to curtailing the flow of illegals into the United States would be tighter worksite enforcement aimed against the hiring of illegal aliens and the elimination of chain-migration categories, Beck said.
Chain-migration refers to the influx of foreign nationals who are permitted entry into the United States on the basis of non-nuclear family ties.
Illegal Aliens Are Warm,U.S. Citizens Left Out In The Cold
Many Illegal Immigrants Reside In Public Housing
Hundreds Of Thousands Of Legal Residents On Waiting List
CHICAGO (AP) ―Untold thousands of illegal immigrants live in public housing at a time when hundreds of thousands of citizens and legal residents are waiting years for a spot.
There are no hard numbers on illegal immigrants in public housing. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reports that 29,570 people of the 7.1 million in federally funded housing are "ineligible citizens." That's less than a percent.
But authorities may be unaware of thousands more.
Chicago reports serving less than 50 ineligible non-citizens.
Some prospective tenants are angry about citizens waiting for housing aid that some illegal immigrants are enjoying.
Chicago recently opened its public housing waiting list for the first time in about 10 years and collected 259,000 names in four weeks for 40,000 slots.
(© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Minuteman Project Comment: “I suspect there are U.S. war, and non-war related, amputees who can’t get these benefits. And there are millions of elderly poor U.S. citizens who are hopelessly waiting in line for these subsidies that were originally designed for them,” Gilchrist added.
Official English wins by a landslide in Missouri 
ARLINGTON, VA – “Voters spoke decisively Tuesday on a ballot measure in Missouri to enact English as the official language of their state government,” says K.C. McAlpin, executive director of ProEnglish. “Our organization urged Missourians to vote ‘yes’ on constitutional amendment No. 1 to enshrine English as the official language in the state constitution,” McAlpin said. “Unfortunately the United States is one of the few countries in the world without an official language. So having official English in a state constitution is important to protect it from being thrown out by activist judges who want to substitute their own rule for that of the people,” he added. “The Missouri measure won by 86.3 percent in a state that narrowly split its presidential vote between Barack Obama and John McCain,” McAlpin notes. “This landslide vote confirms national polls reflecting that a vast majority of Americans – Democrat, Republican and independent— reject costly and confusing multilingualism and support English as our nation’s official language.” # # # A post-election analysis of Missouri’s landside vote
in favor of official English On Nov. 4th 2008 Missouri voters passed a constitutional amendment making English the official language of their state government by a 6-1 (86.3%) margin. All official proceedings in the state must now be conducted in English alone and English must be used at “all governmental meetings, at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated.” Zogby International conducted a post election poll to analyze the vote result and voter sentiment about making English the official language of the United States. The online survey of 808 voters was conducted from Nov. 7 to Nov. 11, 2008. (Margin of error of +/- 3.5 percent) When asked if they voted FOR or AGAINST official English in Missouri - 73% of poll respondents said they voted FOR constitutional amendment No.1 to make English the official language of Missouri.[1]
- 57% of Democrats, 96% of Republicans and 66% of Independents said they voted FOR the amendment.
- Obama voters voted 3-2 in favor; McCain voters voted 9-1 in favor.
- 74% of white voters and 78% of black voters voted for the amendment.[2]
When asked if they would SUPPORT or OPPOSE official English in the U.S. - 73% of poll respondents said they SUPPORT making English the official language of the United States.
- 59% of Democrats, 96% of Republicans, and 64% of Independents said they SUPPORT making English the official language of the U.S.
- By the same margins in Question No. 1, Obama voters and McCain voters, as well as white and black voters, favored making English the official language of the U.S.
1. The poll sample was normalized to statistically represent the statewide vote for president, not just voters who voted on the constitutional amendment. This accounts for the significant 13% disparity between the actual vote (86% favorable) and the pool of poll respondents (73% favorable). 2. The number of self-identified Hispanic and Asian voters in the polling sample was statistically insignificant. Help Make English the Official Language of Your State Click here for a state-by-state round up of official English bills currently pending in the states, including information on your state legislators and information on how to contact them directly. Encourage your town, city or county government to pass a resolution supporting declaring English as our official language.
Click here for a printable, sample resolution, or here for a model official English statute. Official English laws pending in Congress Click here to tell your state legislators to support official English. Representative Peter King (R-NY) and Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) have introduced the National Language Act, which is H.R. 769 in the House and S. 1335 in the Senate. Representative Steve King of Iowa and more than 100 other congressmen are sponsoring H.R. 997, the English Unity Act. Rep. Tom Tancredo's H.J. Res 19 proposes an official-English amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Rep. Peter King's H.R. 768 would rescind Executive Order 13166, the federal mandate to provide services in hundreds of foreign languages. Senator Elizabeth Dole has also proposed S. 2719 to repeal Executive Order 13166. ProEnglish opposes H.R. 900, a contrived effort to pressure Puerto Rico into accepting statehood, and H.R. 1645, the Gutierrez-Flake immigration plan, which fails to provide adequate incentives for immigrants to learn English. ProEnglish supports Congressman Tom Price’s H.R. 4464, which would allow employers to require employees to speak English while at work. Official English laws pending in the states Delaware: Senate Bill 130 establishes English as the common language of Delaware. Kentucky: Statute strengthens existing Official English laws; Pending House committee actions
Michigan: Statute is pending in House committee.
Missouri: The Missouri legislature has approved a ballot initiative for a constitutional amendment, to be voted on in 2008.
New Jersey: A468 provides that English shall be the official language of the State of New Jersey. Ohio: House Bill 477 would designate English as the official language of Ohio.
Oklahoma: H.B. 3349 would make English the official language of Oklahoma.
Oregon: Two statutes are pending committee action. Pennsylvania: House Bill 1958 would make English the official language of the Commonwealth. Rhode Island: A bill in the Rhode Island Assembly includes a clause requiring English for official publications of agencies and department of Rhode Island. Also, House Bill 7024 would establish English as the official language of Rhose Island. South Carolina: Requires all State agencies and political subdivisions of the State to offer all services, publications, printed audio and video materials, and test in an English-only format. Virginia: House Bill 55 would designate English as the official language of Virginia.
Washington: Amendment is pending committee action in house
West Virginia: Statute is pending. Wisconsin: Assembly Bill 806 would make English the official language of the Wisconsin.
Wyoming: Statute strengthening existing Official English laws has reportedly been introduced. |
|
 | 
My Letter To Congress During White House Amnesty Meeting(we'll remind voters next year of all who turned back on U.S. jobless) By Roy Beck, Thursday, June 25, 2009, 10:25 PM  Earlier today -- before the White House amnesty meeting -- I sent the following letter to each of the 535 Members of Congress. Most media and political focus on "reforming" our immigration system is based on concern for the 12 million citizens of other countries who have broken our immigration laws and have illegally taken residence and jobs in this country. My letter attempts to persuade these politicians that their focus should be on the 14 million Americans (and their families) who have lost their jobs and can't find another one. As I said in a CNN interview today, 6 to 7 million unemployed Americans would have jobs if not for the presence of the illegal aliens. Most importantly, my letter puts each Member of Congress on notice that 900,000 members of NumbersUSA will make sure that all supporters of amnesty answer for their actions during next year's elections. MY LETTER TO EACH MEMBER OF CONGRESS June 25, 2009 Dear Senator/Representative xmxmxmxm: One week following U.S. Labor Department reports that there were more than five job seekers for every job opening and unemployment jumped to 9.4%, President Obama is meeting with lawmakers to discuss increasing immigration. The 900,000 grassroots activists of NumbersUSA ask you to stand for the 14.5 million unemployed U.S. workers when entering any discussion on immigration. Consider the political impracticality and moral implications of a vote for amnesty or granting permanent job permits to 8 million illegal foreign workers while 14.5 million U.S. workers remain jobless. How would you explain a vote like that during your next election campaign? As the economic downturn continues and millions more Americans search for a way to support themselves and their families, we urge you to take immediate steps that will reduce the number of both legal and illegal new job seekers so we can put Americans back to work. During the midterm elections NumbersUSA and our members will work hard to reward legislators that supported the unemployed.
NumbersUSA is closely monitoring 5 GREAT true immigration reform bills that would lower overall immigration numbers and would speed putting unemployed Americans back to work: - Rep. Phil Gingrey's H.R. 878 to end Chain Migration,
- Rep. Bob Goodlatte's H.R. 2305 to end the Visa Lottery,
- Rep. Nathan Deal's H.R. 1868 to end Birthright Citizenship,
- Rep. Marsha Blackburn's H.R. 2406 to assist Local Enforcement
- and Rep. Heath Shuler's SAVE Act to mandate E-Verify.
Will you vote to protect outlaw businesses that hire illegal immigrants for jobs that should go to unemployed Americans? Instead, we ask that you co-sponsor, support and work to pass these 5 GREAT bills. They will: - Open millions of jobs currently held by illegal aliens so unemployed Americans can have them.
- Significantly reduce the 138,000 new foreign workers that we pump into the labor force every month.
- Call a time-out on chain migration and the visa lottery, both of which bring a nearly endless stream of job seekers -- without any regard to skills, education or need -- who put downward pressure on wages and benefits for Americans lucky enough not to lose their job.
Please say NO to any kind of amnesty for illegal workers, and say YES to LESS immigration in order to put unemployed U.S. workers first. Sincerely, 
Roy Beck
President, NumbersUSA
How could you complain about the Iraq War and not this?
|
|
An Immigration Lawsuit of a Different Kind A Colorado woman has sued the City of Denver claiming that the city shares the blame for her injuries resulting from an automobile accident caused by an illegal immigrant. Margaret Rains was inside a Baskin-Robbins ice cream shop when Francis Hernandez lost control of his SUV while driving nearly 80 mph and crashed into the shop, injuring Ms. Rains and killing three others. According to news reports, Rains wants the city to share the blame because she claims Denver police had arrested Hernandez several times before the accident but failed to enforce immigration laws. Rains is seeking $1.9 million in damages. Hernandez reportedly entered the United States illegally in 1991 at age 5 but was never deported. In the five years before the accident, Hernandez had been arrested nearly 20 times by several law enforcement agencies, including Denver police. —Source: Crime and Federalism
Debate on illegal immigration bill heats up
Topic: State Laws Immigration illegal legal Debate on illegal immigration bill heats up
By JEAN ORTIZ / The Associated Press Writer
OMAHA — Susan Smith has seen her words draw furrowed looks and even accusations of racism from those with a different view of how Nebraska should address illegal immigration.
But the founder of the Nebraskans Advisory Group also sees more positive responses to her Web postings, letters and testimony before policymakers.
She knows not every Nebraskan believes as she does that illegal immigrants are taking American jobs, taxing the health care, social services and educational systems and most importantly, amount to a huge national security threat.
Four bills and one resolution addressing illegal immigration are among legislation introduced by state lawmakers earlier this month.
TOPICS: illegal immigration, illegal immigrants, illegal aliens, Nebraskans Advisory Group, Omaha, legislation, state lawmakers, databases, federal database,Department of Homeland Security, Social Security Administration
LB34 -- Introduced by Sen. Brad Ashford of Omaha, it would require all employers by 2011 to verify the legal status of employees by using a federal database operated by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration. The checks would be conducted after hiring. Employers found in violation could have their business licenses suspended or revoked. Those who don’t perform the checks also would be barred from state contracts. People making false reports could face misdemeanor charges.
LB95 -- Introduced by Sen. Gwen Howard of Omaha, this bill would require companies wanting state tax breaks to promise in writing they hadn’t knowingly employed illegal immigrants in the past five years. If the state found out they had, they would be barred from receiving the incentives and would have to repay the state for tax breaks they had received in the past.
LB335 -- It would require those seeking state tax breaks to show evidence they electronically verified the legal status of all their employees. The bill, introduced by Sen. Mike Friend of Omaha, doesn’t contain language about past activity or possible repercussions.
LB403 -- Introduced by Sen. Russ Karpisek of Wilber on behalf of Gov. Dave Heineman, it would require state and local agencies verify legal status of anyone trying to collect public benefits. The bill names a host of benefits, including food assistance, unemployment, public housing, welfare and retirement. Unlike a similar bill introduced last year, it does not seek to repeal a law that allows children of illegal immigrants to receive in-state tuition under certain conditions.
LR9 -- Introduced by Sen. Tony Fulton of Lincoln, this resolution is aimed at encouraging all local, county and state law enforcement agencies in the state to enter into agreements with federal authorities to train for and gain authorization to enforce federal immigration law.
--The Associated Press
Smith, however, is convinced most Nebraskans’ beliefs are in line with hers.
And she believes this could be the year that state lawmakers take some major strides to make it harder for illegal immigrants to get jobs or collect welfare and other tax-funded benefits.
“We’re going from a lawless state to a lawful state, and it’s a huge relief,’’ Smith said.
The legislation may have stirred hope in Smith and others on her side of an intense debate, but others say they fear the proposals could further divide communities and families and ultimately damage more than fix.
Two bills (LB95 and LB335) seek to ban companies from receiving tax breaks if they knowingly hired illegal immigrants. Another (LB34) would require all employers to check their employees’ legal status once hired.
A fourth bill (LB403) is aimed at keeping public benefits such food assistance and unemployment payments from illegal immigrants.
And a resolution (LR9) seeks to encourage law enforcement agencies in Nebraska to join a federal program in which they train for and gain authorization to enforce federal immigration law.
Revenue Committee hearings on the tax-break bills are both set for Friday. Hearing dates for the other proposals haven’t been set.
Lawmakers missed the mark, said Darcy Tromanhauser with the Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest.
Tromanhauser called the proposals divisive, unproductive and expensive. She also said they are missing the most crucial part — a resolution urging federal policymakers to pass immigration reform.
“Until we reform the badly outdated system at the federal level, it doesn’t make any sense to jump in with both feet at the state level,’’ she said.
Tromanhauser is concerned about the cost of duplicating efforts to keep illegal immigrants from collecting tax-funded benefits — alluding to a federal law that already bars illegal immigrants from receiving most state benefits.
She’s surprised a lawmaker believes police, sheriffs or state troopers would want to don a second hat to enforce immigration law. Doing so could damage relationships they’ve worked to build, specifically within the Latino community. If people are distrustful of local law enforcement and swayed from reporting crime, that threatens the entire community, she said.
And she worries that mandating use of the federal E-Verify system, an Internet-based system used by about 100,000 employers nationwide to check employees’ legal status, could stress the Social Security Administration to the breaking point. The administration jointly operates the system with the Department of Homeland Security.
Illegal immigrants are coming to Nebraska for jobs, many of them in meatpacking plants and the construction industry, said Doug Kagan with Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom. It makes sense to focus first on employment measures.
“Give them a disincentive for working here by using E-Verify, then that will solve a lot of the other problems like the pressure on our welfare system and education system,’’ he said.
While some are looking at the proposals as bringing resolution, others fear the unintended consequences.
The measures, particularly the public benefits bill, have the potential to inspire discrimination and push people farther into the shadows, said Rob Dorton, an immigration attorney with Lutheran Family Services of Nebraska.
Dorton and other advocates for immigrants are heading into the session with a united front — they say for the first time. Their network, the Nebraska Immigration Advocacy Alliance, has met monthly for the last six months to talk about issues affecting immigrants, including legislation.
“Nebraska seems to have come late to the game as far as the nastiest kind of rhetoric, and I think some of those things have started to bubble up here,’’ he said.
He said the group is needed now, in part, because of that tension.
Smith has her own frustrations about inaction. That’s what got her involved in the issue a few years ago.
But she argues it’s not something Nebraska lawmakers can rest on.
She has her suggestions to strengthen the bills, including not giving employers until 2011 to begin checking the legal status of new hires. But Smith believes, for the most part, lawmakers are right on track.
“Now they understand this is not a race issue,’’ she said. “We are protecting our communities and jobs.’’ http://www.alipac.us/article3960.html
What are the costs of Illegals --- Check 28 Reasons to deport illegal aliensBy: Justicereq'd~Political Writer
I don't know what the retirement income is for a highly trained, professional engineer, who worked for most of his life, (and recalled after retirement), but do you receive as much as illegals in this country?? Many Americans (those who still have jobs) are having to work long past traditional retirement years just to pay for base costs of housing, food & medical care and now we're in the midst of a major recession. What government couldn't use an infusion of cash or equally-effective cost cutting measures of $180 - $230 Billion a year --- gee, one year's cost is almost exactly what the estimates are for deporting the illegals to their countries of origin. For the record, the amounts cited below are paid out of Americans tax pockets and some of those figures haven't been updated in ten or more years. Additionally, the below report doesn't begin to address/include private charitable donations to illegals, nor does it address items such as the costs of legal services paid by American taxpayers for those illegals who fight deportation ...
28 excellent Reasons to Deport Illegal Aliens 1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. 7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. 9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens. 11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine and marijuana, crossed into the U. S. from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report: http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf 13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. 16. Today, criminal aliens account for over 29 percent of prisoners in Federal Bureau of Prisons facilities and a higher share of all federal prison inmates. These prisoners representthe fastest growing segment of the federal prison population.Incarceration of criminal aliens cost an estimated $624 million to state prisons (1999) and $891 million to federal prisons (2002), according to the most recent available figure from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. 17. "Illegal Aliens and American Medicine". "Many illegal aliens harbor fatal diseases that American Medicine fought and vanquished long ago, such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, leprosy, plague, polio, dengue and Chagas disease." The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 18. In 2002, HIV/AIDS was the third leading cause of death among Hispanic men aged 35 to 44 and the fourth leading cause of death among Hispanic women in the same age group. Most Hispanic men were exposed to HIV through sexual contact with other men. Source (CDC): 19. If enacted the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (CIRA, S. 2611) would be the most dramatic change in immigration law in 80 years, allowing an estimated 103 million persons to legally immigrate to the U.S. over the next 20 years - fully one-third of the current population of the United States. 20. In 2007, legal and illegal aliens cost the federal government more than $346 BILLION dollars and the U.S. taxpayers paid more than $ 9,000. for each immigrant in the country! 21. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States may be as high as 20 million people, more than double the official 9 million people estimated by the Census Bureau. 1/3/05 22. Cases of Leprosy on The Rise In The U.S., The New York Times. "While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy.." Leprosy is an airbourne virus, it can also be spread by touching and coughing. 23. Two-thirds of illegal aliens lack a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not just their legal status or heavy use of most social services. http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/he98030.pdf 27. An illegal alien parent receives welfare benefits on behalf of his or her U.S. citizen child. Regardless of the parentʼs immigration status they may receive welfare and other benefits. When such a child receives assistance, the aid also helps support the childʼs illegal family. Page 1.
Why the illegals must go! 
by William Gheen
President, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)
www.alipac.us Today, Americans face an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis facilitated by multi-billion dollar drug and human importing cartels as well as corporations which are inducing the invasion by aiding and abetting illegal aliens and using their influence on the Executive Branch and elections to paralyze existing immigration laws supported by over 80% of the American citizenry.
These events are not random and chaotic. Massive illegal immigration is the result of non-enforcement and under-enforcement of our existing immigration laws.
Supporters of illegal aliens love to claim that our immigration system is broken. The system is not broken. Elite financial and political business interests who could care less about the death and devastation they are causing Americans have sabotaged the system. Their profits continue to rise as they send the rest of America spiraling downward on a path to anarchy and Third World quality-of-life conditions.
By using their influence to suspend our existing laws, these globalist special interests have deprived all Americans of political representation as well as their votes, their voice, and a functioning Republic for which our flag stands.
When the laws of the American people – debated and voted on by their duly-elected Congressional Representatives and signed into law by the President – go intentionally under-enforced by the Executive Branch, all of the principles, sovereignty, and self-governance of Americans are derailed. The will of the American public, the existing laws, the US Constitution, and the borders of our great nation are perceived as market hindrances to the global elite. We the people of America are perceived as peasants and subjects beneath the power of their influence.
The American public has spoken through our lawmakers and in numerous polls. A super majority of Americans want our existing laws enforced, those responsible for illegal immigration fined and/or imprisoned, the borders secured, and illegal aliens deported from the United States for many years or permanently. These fact remain, despite several politicized polls which attempt to manufacture consent and make you believe such views represent a minority.
The truth is that most Americans want the illegal aliens to return to the nations of which they are citizens. The rallying cry is: "Illegals Go Home!"
We could easily list 101 reasons why Americans are upset about illegal immigration. Most are concerned about the 4,000+ preventable deaths of Americans by the criminal acts of illegal aliens on our soil each year. No corporate propaganda will change the fact that most Americans do not want to surrender or capitulate to the lawless masses rushing into our nation.
No poll or politicized source is needed to prove this point because the decision is based upon our nation's successful history and basic common sense. The answer is based on something that every judge, lawmaker, and even street thug knows. The penalties must outweigh the benefits if you want to deter any action.
It is common sense and common practice in America that for any law to be a deterrent, two important factors are in play. First, the laws must be enforced, and second, the penalties for any crime must exceed the benefits to those breaking the law.
It is truly amazing that we find ourselves as a nation having to explain these basic foundations of law to corporations and politicians in the year 2007 despite their existence since the dawn of civilization! Can you imagine what would happen in America if the penalty for robbing a bank was that you had to return half of the money you stole if, and only if, you were apprehended for the crime? What if the penalty for car theft was paying a $2,000 fine if you were caught with the stolen vehicle?
The answers are clear. Within a month, you would not have a bank open in America and you would not be able to keep a car worth more than $2,000 in your driveway for more than a week. How many millions of people would quickly take up the careers of bank robber and car thief once the rewards for the crime were higher than the penalty?
If American businesses and homes left their windows and doors unlocked each night and robbers were merely removed by police when detected – only to try again the next night – what do you think would happen? If big, global businesses practiced the same non-enforcement of security similar to the lack of border security and lack of immigration enforcement they have facilitated for Americans, they would be out of business in a matter of days or weeks. If they left their doors unlocked at night and just pushed people back to the street, America would quickly descend into such chaos and anarchy that we would be unable to sustain a population of 300 million. Our population would take a hit similar to the impact of the Black Plague on Europe, and we would quickly enter a new dark age.
Since illegal aliens can never afford to compensate Americans for what they have taken, they must go. We do not need to go door to door looking for illegals to deport in America. Attrition through enforcement works. Illegal aliens are leaving the states of Georgia and Pennsylvania in droves, not because they are enforcing the laws but because they have simply announced they plan to start!
Unfortunately, the current state of affairs in America has illegals flooding in by the millions each year and many law-abiding Americans fleeing the states of California and Texas and many towns and cities in search of more safety and security. Many Americans are on the run and finding few places left to run to.
The illegal aliens are sending a clear message on the streets of Los Angeles and other major urban centers. They are saying: "This is our land. White, black, and legal Hispanics get out!"
This is great news for the housing and real estate markets, Wal-Mart, and McDonalds. They are growing the economy using rapid population growth. This is great news for big corporations and bad news for Americans.
Attrition through enforcement will work. In fact, if President George Bush were to announce on national television that America would begin securing our borders and enforcing our existing laws in one month, so many illegal aliens would leave America that Mexico would have to set up refuge stations!
Another important reason that the illegal aliens must leave for the long term is that they'll return to their home communities with a message for their neighbors that their ill-gotten gains did not pay off in America. This is the only thing that will stop, or slow, the flow. Deporting illegal aliens and sending them packing is the only real way we can put a stop to this crisis.
The politicians in DC are very aware that Americans want the illegal aliens to go. That is why their latest Scamnesty legislation includes a “touchback” provision. Under these laws, the illegal aliens can hop across the Mexican or Canadian borders where special "Ellis Island" stations are set up for them to pay a fine, receive new documentation and be back in the US within days or hours.
The lunatics advocating this plan are counting on Americans to be so stupid and so gullible that they can say, "Look, the illegals left and walked back in legally. Problem solved!" They are eager to pretend to accommodate the American desires for the illegals to leave while quickly returning their slave labor force to our nation.
They know that Americans want illegals to leave and get behind a long line of legal immigrants waiting to enter the US, including millions of people who have been waiting 5-10 years. These politicians and the illegal aliens need to be shown the way to the back of the line. The back of the line is back in the country in which they are citizens, 5-10 years down the road behind all of the talented and law-abiding people who respect our laws.
If these traitorous corporations and politicians succeed in setting up these Ellis Island stations for “Operation Touchback," the revered symbol of Ellis Island will take on a new meaning that Americans see with contempt and resentment. Ellis Island will become a name associated with the horrendous betrayal of free Americans and the deathblow to the American Republic. This is a symbol of America’s surrender and the subjugation of all her people.
If we allow the politicians in DC to sign off on the many Guest Worker, Temporary Worker, Path to Citizenship, Amnesty, Scamnesty bills written by the US Chamber of Commerce, then no wall with an army on top of it will stop the next 20 million from crashing down on our country. We will have signaled that America is weak and will capitulate and accommodate. Already, the word is out in Central and South America that they can come and stay.
Since there is literally no end to the stream of illegals who want to be in America, this will be the end of America as we have known it and as history has praised it.
In the past, when America has cracked down on illegal immigration and the American people have signaled they want the immigration brakes applied, the policies have worked. New laws written near the turn of the 20th century greatly reduced the amount of immigration into America. When Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower launched large deportation campaigns in the 1950s and 1930s, illegal immigration slowed to minuscule levels as a result.
Whether you agree or disagree with the decisions of the past, these policies were part of the successful formula that have led America to become the most opulent and successful civilization in human history.
While some argue that these enforcement measures were racist and that some American citizens of different races were improperly deported at the time, we now have the technology and methodology in place to assure that American citizens and legal immigrants are not improperly affected by our immigration enforcement efforts.
The difference is that the globalist corporations that have hijacked the American government want to stop the American citizenry from applying the brakes this time. They have taken away our ability to determine who can enter our nation and our ability to stop armed and unarmed invasions as granted by the US Constitution.
To take away the self-governance of Americans is to kill the very thing that has made us such a great and successful nation.
In a time of crisis like this, we must stand firm on the principles that have made America an attractive and great nation. We must stand firm on the rule of law. The law must be applied equally to big corporations and illegal aliens alike lest we all become slaves subject to the plans of masters instead of a free and empowered citizenry.
Illegal aliens and corporations must endure penalties for their illegal, deadly, and destructive actions that exceed the benefits they gain from their illegal activities.
The hour is late and it is time for Americans to stand up and say with one voice...
No Amnesty! No Guest Worker! Secure our borders and enforce the existing laws! Restore the American Republic!
The illegals must go.
Illegals go home!
RI: ACLU lawsuit working on behalf of illegals dismissed 
Statehouse, Providence RI PROVIDENCE, R.I.—A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit over a highway traffic stop of Guatemalan nationals that civil rights groups said was unconstitutional and an example of racial profiling.
The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said it will appeal Tuesday's decision from U.S. District Judge Mary Lisi.
The traffic stop led to deportation orders against the illegal Guatemalan immigrants and prompted legislators to introduce an anti-racial profiling bill in 2007, though that bill died in committee.
Subjects = Illegal Immigration, ACLU, Rhode Island, Guatemalan nationals, American Civil Liberties Union, U.S. District Judge Mary Lisi, deportation, Thomas Chabot, Carlos Tamup, citizenship proof, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Providence, immigration documents, Steve Brown, Steven M. Pare, lawsuit, Attorney General Patrick Lynch, law enforcement
In July 2006, Rhode Island state trooper Thomas Chabot stopped a van carrying more than a dozen Guatemalan nationals on Interstate 95 for changing lanes without signaling.
Though driver Carlos Tamup had a valid driver's license and registration and no criminal record, Chabot patted him down. Chabot asked for identification from his passengers, whom Tamup was taking to work in Westerly.
When some of them couldn't produce identification, Chabot asked them for proof of U.S. citizenship.
Troopers then escorted the van to a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Providence, where they were again briefly detained.
The ACLU suit demanded punitive and compensatory damages as well as declaratory judgment that the immigrants' constitutional rights were violated.
In her decision, Lisi said Chabot was justified in asking the Guatemalans for identification paperwork and immigration documents. She also said the ACLU's claim of racial profiling was unclear and not supported, and she found no "evidence of intentional race-based discrimination."
Steve Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island ACLU, said Lisi's decision that Chabot did not violate a state law against racial profiling was "particularly startling."
"This was a classic case of racial profiling," he said in a statement Wednesday. "The driver's license and registration were in perfect order, so the continued interrogation of the passengers was clearly based solely on their ethnicity."
Then-State Police Superintendent Steven M. Pare, who was also named in the law suit, has said Chabot acted "professionally and appropriately" during the stop, and an internal probe cleared Chabot of any wrongdoing.
Attorney General Patrick Lynch said in a statement Wednesday that Chabot only escorted the van to ICE's office after seeking advice from the federal immigration agency.
"While the law enforcement community is sensitive to and must remain sensitive to immigration issues, they must also be able to do their jobs," Lynch said. "This ruling affirms that this case was a proper law enforcement action by a well-trained State Trooper."
U.S. Issued 3,400 Visas to Immigrants from ‘State Sponsors of Terror’ in 2008
ByMatt Hadro (CNSNews.com) – A little-known State Department program has allowed about 3,400 immigrants to come to the U.S. in 2008 from the four nations that a currently listed by the State Department as “state sponsors of terror” – Iran, Cuba, Syria and Sudan.
According to a State Department report on the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, 691visas were granted to immigrants from Cuba, 1,435 to immigrants from Iran, 1,147 to immigrants from Sudan and 94 to immigrants from Syria.
The program, mandated by Congress and administered by the State Department, consists of a lottery for applicants from countries with “low rates of immigration” to the U.S.
In the 2008 diversity visa (DV) lottery, the U.S. made available 50,000 visas for applicants.
Out of 6.4 million applicants, approximately 96,000 were chosen at random from countries in six different geographic regions, and registered. The 96,000 were then allowed to apply for one of the 50,000 visas. Applicants must be “natives” of an eligible country -- in most cases, the applicant’s country of birth. Applicants must also have either a high school education or its equivalent, or “two years of work experience within the past five years in an occupation requiring at least two years of training or experience to perform,” according to the official lottery program regulations. “Qualifying work experience” is determined by the U.S. Department of Labor.
No more than 7 percent of the visas may go to persons from one single country.
According to Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, it is up to the attorney general to determine immigration numbers from the past five years, and to identify regions and states with high and low admission rates to the U.S.
Visas are then issued to persons from “low-admission states” -- states that have not sent more than 50,000 immigrants to the U.S. over the previous five-year period.
In 2007, the Government Accountability Office issued a report indicating that nearly 9,800 aliens from state sponsors of terrorism have received diversity visas since 2000.
The report, however, indicated that the diversity visa lottery program was "susceptible to fraud" and was a way for terrorists to enter the country – though no incidences have yet been reported.
“The IG (Inspector General) stated that the DV program posed significant risks to national security from hostile intelligence officers, criminals, and terrorists attempting to use the program for entry into the United States as permanent residents and recommended that State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs propose legislation to bar aliens from state sponsors of terrorism,” the GAO report said.
The State Department’s consuls agreed with the recommendation in principle, the GAO reported, but did not implement it, “expressing concern over the effect of permanently disbarring aliens who may be fleeing oppressive regimes of states that sponsor terrorism.”
True Cost of Illegals...Disgrace
The Bank: Bank of America, can I help you?
Customer: Yes, I want to cancel my account. I don't want to do business with you any longer.
The Bank: Why?
Customer: You're giving credit to illegal immigrants and I don't think it's right. I'm taking my business elsewhere.
The Bank: Well, Mr. Customer, we don't want to see you do that, but we can't stop you. I'll help you close the account. What is your account number?
Customer: (gives account number)
The Bank: For security purposes and for your protection, can you please give me the last four digits of your social security number?
Customer: No.
The Bank: Mr. Customer, I need to verify your information, but in order to help you, I'll need verification of who you are.
Customer: Why should I give you my social security number? The reason I'm closing my account is that your bank is issuing credit cards to illegal immigrants who don't have social security numbers. You are targeting that audience and want their business. Let's say I'm an illegal immigrant and you've given me a credit card. I have a question about it and call for assistance. You wouldn't be asking me for a Social Security number, would you?
The Bank: No sir, I wouldn't.
Customer: Why not?
The Bank: Because you would have pressed '2' to speak in Spanish. We don't ask for that information when calling in on the Spanish line. Here's the Snopes link for doubters: http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/bankofamerica.asp I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's for verification of the following facts. - $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77
- 2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
- 2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html - 12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html
- 17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html - 6. 3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html - 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html - 90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html - 200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are
caused by the illegal aliens.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html - The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html - During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
- The National Policy Institute, "estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period." http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf
- In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
- "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States ".
http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR By John Rocker: http://www.johnrocker.net/zhl_truecost.htm |
|
|
|
|
500K Illegal Immigrants Defying Deportation Orders 
By Denise Lavoie, Associated Press Boston (AP) - Zeituni Onyango came to the United States seeking asylum from her native Kenya but was turned down and ordered to leave the country in 2004.
Four years later, she is still here. And her nephew is about to become president of the United States.
Onyango's family connection to Barack Obama has thrown a spotlight on a phenomenon many Americans might find startling: An estimated half-million immigrants are living in the United States in defiance of deportation orders.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has stepped up efforts to catch fugitive aliens, as they are known, and now has about 100 "fugitive operations teams" around the country. In the past year, the teams have made 34,000 arrests, more than double the number two years ago. But there are still 560,000 such immigrants in the U.S.
Fugitive aliens include people who, like Obama's aunt, sought asylum in the United States but were rejected and ordered to leave the country. Others were caught entering or living in this country illegally, and failed to show at their deportation hearings.
Often, illegal immigrants who have been issued deportation notices are given a certain amount of time to get out of the country on their own. They are not forcibly put aboard a plane; these deportations essentially operate on the honor system.
Generally, if these immigrants stay out of trouble - if they don't get pulled over by police or swept up in a workplace raid, for example - they are in little danger of being thrown out of the country.
That galls many immigration reform advocates, who say the practice breeds disrespect for the law and emboldens immigrants to sneak in and stay.
"We are strong believers of enforcement of our immigration laws, and this is a priority area for getting the message across to this country, that if they've been convicted of committing crimes or if they have been ordered deported, that they will be apprehended if they try to hide and continue to stay in the country," said Jack Martin of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Government officials say that they do the best they can with the money and manpower available to them, and that they focus on the most serious cases, including those involving illegal immigrants who have committed crimes in this country.
"ICE has taken tremendous steps at closing these cases and apprehending fugitives," spokesman Richard Rocha said. "However, we prioritize our efforts on egregious violators and criminal aliens."
Overall, there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. In the last year, the government arrested and deported a record number of illegal immigrants, nearly 350,000, according to ICE.
Critics of the agency complain of the government's former "catch and release" policy along the border, in which non-Mexicans caught sneaking across were released into this country with a date to appear for an immigration hearing. Officials ended the practice in 2006. Now, these immigrants are held until their hearings.
After paying smugglers $40,000 to get his family to the United States, Juan, his wife and 3-year-old son were caught the moment they crossed into Arizona from Mexico. A judge ordered them deported, released them on bond and gave them three months to leave.
Nine years later, they are still living in the United States. But they avoid going out in public and refuse to drive for fear of getting pulled over by police.
"It's really painful to wonder if, tomorrow, somebody will knock on your door and everything will be over," Juan said.
But he said that is better than going back to their native Bolivia, where their financial prospects are bleak.
"For me, the best chance is to provide education to my children, and that's something that I can do for them here," said Juan, a 38-year-old construction worker in Maryland who supports two older daughters in Bolivia. He asked that only his first name be used to protect his family.
Advocates say many immigrants defy deportation orders because they have lived in the United States for years, married, had children and put down roots in their communities.
"Is it worth going around with that feeling that you might be discovered? Or packing up your entire family now and settling all your obligations in the United States, buying airplane tickets for your family, moving back to a country where you haven't lived for many years, where you are worried about you are going to find a job? There's another whole set of uncertainties," said Maureen O'Sullivan, a Boston immigration lawyer.
It is not clear when Onyango, the 56-year-old half-sister of Obama's late father, first came to the United States. But she moved into a state-subsidized public housing project in Boston in 2003.
After it was reported days before the election that she was in the country illegally, Onyango left Boston and went to Cleveland, where she hired an immigration attorney to fight her deportation order. She is staying with relatives in Cleveland, said her new attorney, Margaret Wong.
The Obama camp has said the candidate did not know about his aunt's status. "If she is violating laws, those laws have to be obeyed," Obama said just before Election Day.
Advocates say the only way to reduce the number of illegal immigrants is to overhaul the nation's immigration laws.
"I ask the new president, I implore the new president to provide legislation that would allow us to become legal, to have papers," Juan said. "I don't mind paying fees, but I want to come out of the shadows."
Reality TV show to depict homeland security 
Edward Sifuentes
North County Times
"They are ordinary men and women working against an epic landscape," Shapiro said in a press statement. "They have a job that is dangerous, difficult and always unpredictable."
Shapiro could not be reached for comment.
"Homeland Security USA," which includes 13 hourlong episodes, is set to begin airing Jan. 6 on ABC affiliates.
The show is billed as having "unprecedented access" to the agencies that make up the department, including the U.S. Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.
The Department of Homeland Security was created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to better coordinate the nation's efforts against future attacks. It brought 22 agencies and their 218,000 employees under one department in the largest government shuffle since the Department of Defense was created in 1947.
Christian Ramirez, a national coordinator with the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker human rights organization, said his group is concerned the series may be one-sided and gloss over the reasons that lead hundreds of thousands of people to risk their lives crossing the border illegally each year.
"The biggest fear is that it will depict migrants in an unfair manner," Ramirez said.
Without including all sides of the volatile topic of illegal immigration, the show's producers run the risk of fueling anti-immigrant sentiment among some people, Ramirez said.
Enrique Morones, who heads the San Diego-based immigrant rights group Border Angels, called the reality show "propaganda."
Ramirez said his group sent a letter to the network asking for a private screening before the show airs.
In an e-mail reply from a network official provided to the North County Times by the American Friends Service Committee, the network declined the request for an early screening.
"We appreciate that there are a variety of ways to explore this issue, and a variety of perspectives from which to do so," wrote Brad Jamison, ABC's vice president of corporate initiatives. "However, the current format of the show serves the producers' intention to tell more personal stories of some of the challenges facing the thousands of people who work for the Department of Homeland Security."
Jamison could not be reached via e-mail or through his assistant. A publicist for the show declined to comment.
William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration, a group that advocates for stricter immigration controls, said the groups opposed to the show are trying to censor content that might show the chaos at the border.
"I think that any show that would show the truth about the border will come under attack," Gheen said.
Some Web bloggers also have been critical of the show, saying it lacks a critical perspective and instead portrays immigration enforcement agents as "heroes."
"While the show will highlight the main mission of the department's 218,000 employees, it will likely not focus on the less flattering incidents, like the DHS official arrested for hiring illegal immigrants, the department's challenges with government contracting or the inability of airport screeners to unionize," wrote Ed O'Keefe, a blogger for The Washington Post.
In one promotional sneak preview, the show depicts agents with the Transportation Security Administration searching through a woman's luggage and finding belly dancer's outfits. The woman tells the agents that she intends to work as a belly dancer, but agents tell her that it is illegal to do so without a work permit.
In another preview, Customs and Border Protection agents find drugs packed into the front bumper of a car as the driver attempts to enter the U.S. through a checkpoint at El Paso. The driver is shown being led away in handcuffs by agents.
At the port of entry in San Ysidro, "a fake license plate tips a border officer to a life-threatening situation," according to promotional material, but the media release does not say what the situation was.
Michael Fisher, chief of the Border Patrol's San Diego sector, said part of the show was filmed in San Diego last year, but he said he was unaware of what specifically was filmed or when it would be shown. He said during a recent press conference that his main concern was that the agency be portrayed accurately.
"We just want to make sure that they get the facts straight," Fisher said. "We didn't want some Hollywood description of what our mission is." |
|
|