Author: mopress

  • Free All the Victims of Immigrant Prison Camps

    Email from Jay Johnson-Castro.

    Mornin’ y’all…

    It was indeed a privilege to visit day before yesterday with Reza, the fiancé of Suzi Hazahza. We have much to learn and much more to do…to fully expose the reality of Hutto and Haskell…and any prison camp that unjustly and inhumanely victimizes sincere fellow humans that are seeking the American dream. Hutto is about to be gutted. Haskell is soon to be fully exposed…then gutted.
    We need to coordinate open records requests. We need to get the details of who is being victimized on the inside of these prison camps. The information is too occult…secret…for an open society. Too much money is involved. Those responsible sadistically care more about money than they do about humanity. That’s where we the grass roots come in.

    At the same time…we cannot just be working within the system. We must make the system work. Hundreds of children and innocent people fall victim every day…while we only to get a few out every month. We need to bring to a halt such atrocities in our country and indict those who would commit such atrocities.

    While it would be a victory to get another Ibrahim or Hazahza family out…we need to get them all out. We need to free all those who for whom we do not have names or faces. If beautiful Suzi and Mirvat are being treated the way they are…how many hundreds of others are there for whom we do not yet have a story? That’s my personal quest. I have no funding. I’m not an attorney. All I have is my heart and mind…with the passion and conviction to bring an end to this perversion and corruption of a free land…and free the victims. ALL of them.

    Once one family is released…will the work to free all the others that they do not know…just as we tried to free them that we did not know? Hopefully so. Once that happens…we will have much more rapid success. We need to learn from all those that we now know…about what’s going on inside these prison camps.

    We need to collect names, countries, numbers, experiences. How many men vs. women…etc. How long have they been detained. We need a story for every one who is imprisoned unjustly. We need to get beyond the political spin jargon and start using grass roots language. We must personalize the situation of each victim in order to expose these crimes against humanity. Once accomplished…the grassroots of Haskell County and the City of Haskell will respond as did the citizens of Taylor and Williamson County . With outrage…and demand…and with protest.

    We must expose the plot to make money off of a warped and fraudulent “homeland security” scam. We must get the contracts between ICE and Haskell County and with Emerald. Let’s look at the money…and see who benefits and who has the most to loose as we expose this un-American and immoral scheme.

    That’s my personal goal. That’s what has not been done yet…and what needs to be done most urgently.

    Jay

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    The Border Ambassador

    Connecting.the.dots…making.a.difference…

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Jay J. Johnson-Castro, Sr.

    Del Rio, Texas, USA
    Ciudad Acuña, Coahuila , Mexico

  • Archive: Two Faces of Immigration Reform

    For hard-working English-language coverage of border issues, Steve Taylor’s Rio Grande Guardian is your essential one-stop shop. On Tuesday Taylor emailed an advisory with two headlines that touch two poles of border reform. One headline reports the ACLU challenge to immigrant detention policies, another headline announces that Brownsville city authorities are out to remake their border city. We see hope in the combination, and so we archive these stories below–gm

    ACLU challenges detention of immigrant children in Texas facility

    AUSTIN – The American Civil Liberties Uni*n filed lawsuits Tuesday on behalf of ten immigrant children, challenging their detention at the T. Don Hutto facility in Taylor , Texas .

    The lawsuits charge that the children are being imprisoned under inhumane conditions while their parents await immigration decisions.

    The lawsuits have been filed against Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, as well as six officials ICE.

    “There is simply no justification for imprisoning innocent children who pose no threat to anyone,” said Vanita Gupta, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program.

    “This is an affront to our core values as a nation. We need practical, realistic immigration policy, not draconian methods that are harming vulnerable kids.”

    The lawsuits charge that by operating the Hutto facility, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement violates its duty to meet the minimum standards and conditions for the housing and release of all minors in federal immigration custody set forth in a 1997 settlement agreement in the case of Flores v. Meese.

    There are approximately 400 immigrants currently detained at the Hutto facility, and half of them are children. Many of the immigrants are refugee families who came to the United States to seek asylum.

    The 512-bed former state prison is operated by Corrections Corporation of America under a contract with Williamson County.

    According to 16-year-old Egle Baubonyte, a Lithuanian girl being held at Hutto with her mother and sister, “Conditions for little kids or even babies are really bad. There’s no pediatrician. Nurses don’t care about if babies are sick. They treat us like we’re nothing.”

    Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU, said that what ICE calls a “Family Residential Facility” is in fact a converted medium-security prison that is still functionally and structurally a prison.

    Children are required to wear prison garb, receive only one hour of recreation a day, Monday through Friday, and some children did not go outdoors in the fresh air the whole month of December, 2006, according to legal papers filed Tuesday.

    They are detained in small cells for 11-12 hours each day where they cannot keep food and toys and they have no privacy, even when using the toilet.

    Despite their urgent needs, many children lack access to adequate medical, dental, and mental health treatment, and are denied meaningful educational opportunities, Romero said.

    Guards frequently discipline children by threatening to separate them permanently from their parents, and children are prohibited from having contact visits with non-detained family members.

    “While keeping families together is a laudable goal, there is nothing about Hutto that one can call non-penal or homelike. ICE claims that it opened Hutto to keep families together, but imprisoning families this way cannot be what Congress had in mind,” Romero said.

    The families represented in the lawsuits come from countries including Lithuania , Canada , Haiti , Honduras , Somalia , and Guyana , and many have fled dangerous situations and are seeking asylum in the United States .

    Barbara Hines, clinical professor of law with the University of Texas School of Law Immigration Clinic, said that regardless of where minors are housed, they ought to be guaranteed basic educational, health, and social benefits and rights.

    “ICE fails miserably to meet the required standards by placing children at Hutto,” Hines said. “These children, who can safely be released with their families under reasonable supervision, are basically imprisoned under conditions that do not meet generally accepted child welfare and juvenile justice standards. It is truly a disgrace.”

    The ACLU is bringing the lawsuits along with the ACLU of Texas, the University of Texas School of Law Immigration Clinic and the international law firm of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae LLP.

    “The choice is not between enforcement of immigration laws and humane treatment of immigrant families. There are various alternatives under which both can exist,” said Lisa Graybill, Legal Director of the ACLU of Texas.

    The public started becoming aware of the Hutto facility last December following a vigil organized by the ACLU and Grassroots Leadership, a group that monitors the private prisons industry.

    Among the participants in the vigil and a walk from Austin to Taylor was Jay Johnson Castro, Jr., who became known as the Border Wall-ker when he walked from Laredo to Brownsville last October in protest at federal plans to build an extra 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    Johnson Castro said detaining OTMs was “good business” for privatized prison systems.

    “They receive about $95 a day of our tax money per inmate. There are kick-backs to the counties that host these facilities, with counties getting $1 per inmate per day. That translates to hundreds of thousands of dollars to the county coffers per year,” he said.

    Johnson Castro has since walked from Abilene to Haskell in protest at a detention center in Haskell.

    ICE officials have repeatedly denied that the detainees are treated inhumanely.

    ********************

    Treviño launches new ten-year plan for Brownsville

    BROWNSVILLE – With a new logo, Imagine Brownsville! It’s our Future, Imagine Brownsville! Es Nuestro Futuro, Brownsville Mayor Eddie Treviño, Jr., on Tuesday announced a ten-year plan for his fast growing city.

    Treviño said the plan would establish a common vision, based on quality of life and economic development objectives. He said it would also include a strategic blueprint to achieve long term success through leveraging the City’s institutional, natural, human and infrastructure resources.

    “The City of Brownsville has experienced tremendous growth in the last few years. While this growth has created tremendous opportunities, it has also presented a number challenges to the community,” Treviño said.

    He acknowledged the City and the region are in the midst of increasing global competition for new jobs and investment. Competition will be strong and fierce, he predicted, with some regions winning and some losing.

    “We will not be one of the losing regions and to improve our chances for winning, I believe that a single comprehensive plan that defines a common vision over the next 10 years will help ensure that we improve our City’s chances for economic success.”

    Treviño launched Imagine Brownsville! at a press conference in Commissioner’s Court. More than 100 people attended, including four city commissioners, and Cameron County Commissioners Sofia Benavides and John Wood.

    The fact-finding part of the plan would cost around $800,000, Treviño told reporters

    Treviño said he wanted all the citizens of Brownsville, along with key community institutions, to help the City develop and implement the new plan. He said he also wanted neighbors like Los Fresnos CSD and the City of Matamoros to play their part.

    Treviño said the new logo refle
    cts
    “both the rich heritage of our bilingual community as well as the realization that we cannot be successful in this effort without the help of our entire community and our institutional partners working together.”

    He said intensive public participation and community involvement would take place in the next few months to help define shared objectives and vision – “how we want to live, learn, work and play in the future,” he said. This will include four public meetings and interviews with over 40 community leaders and stakeholders.

    Ben Medina, director of planning and community development for the City, said a new Web site, http://www.imaginebrownsville.com, has been created and will be launched Wednesday.

    “It will provide details of meeting locations and times. It will be bilingual and contain updated information related to the plan’s phases and its progress. It will allow anyone to submit input throughout the process and will have the ability to download all presentations made at public meetings,” Medina said.

    Treviño said another key component of the plan was establishing an Imagine Brownsville! Task Force.

    “The purpose of the Task Force is to provide leadership and guidance from the plan’s development through its implementation,” Treviño said. “The task force will be composed of local leaders working together with subcommittee work groups that represent each of the master plan elements.”

    A consulting team of planners, engineers, architects, economists and public involvement specialists will provide technical support for the project and the task force, Treviño said.

    Treviño said Fred Rusteberg, president and CEO of International Bank of Commerce in Brownsville, will chair the Imagine Brownsville! Task Force.

    “We are fortunate to have Mr. Rusteberg at the helm of this important project. He has spent the last 25 years participating in Brownsville’s progress and development and to his credit much of our success is due to his vision,” Treviño said.

    Rusteberg was founding chairman of “Brownsville First,” a grassroots effort to pass a half-cent sales tax for economic development.

    A past chairman and one of the founders of the Brownsville Economic Development Foundation, Rusteberg helped create the Brownsville Economic Development Council, of which he is past chairman. He was recently named Brownsville’s Outstanding Citizen of the Year by the Historic Brownsville Museum.

    Rusteberg said he was honored to have been asked to lead the initiative.

    “Brownsville is a unique community,” he said. “We are at the epicenter of a tremendous wave of economic opportunity. Our City forefathers have provided Brownsville with tremendous institutional and infrastructure assets and we owe it to them and future generations that we develop a strategic plan that catapults Brownsville as the premier business center of the southern U.S. border.”

    Rusteberg said the Imagine Brownsville! Task Force would spend the next two weeks calling upon individuals to join the task force.

    “I am going to ask everyone involved to roll up their sleeves and work together and with extensive community input hopefully we’ll create a road map for Brownsville to succeed over the next 10 years and beyond,” he said.

  • Archive: Tacoma Protesters Target ICE Prison

    Melt ICE! Peaceful Protest and Vigil for Human Rights

    1-4pm, Saturday, March 10
    Northwest Detention Center
    1623 East J Street – Tacoma , WA

    Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (I.C.E.) continues to terrorize immigrant communities in Washington State and across the country with increasingly militaristic raids, covert detention in for-profit facilities, and expedited deportations.

    Immigrants are not terrorists! The recent raids at the UPS plants in Auburn make it clear that enforcement-only policies do not represent our communities’ respect for dignity and human rights. And at our last vigil, the Washington Minutemen showed up to intimidate visiting families and friends during visiting hours. Please join Community to Community and Hate Free Zone of Seattle in honoring the legacy and birthday of Cesar Chavez this month by standing in solidarity with hard-working immigrant families from across the state. Let’s show ICE and the racist Minuteman movement that Washington stands for justice and human rights.

    For more information, call 360.752.3344 or send an email to notinmycounty@qwest.net.

    http://www.notinmycounty.org

    http://www.hatefreezone.org

  • Working Notes on Bettencourt Audit

    First posted Mar. 5, with two paragraphs added Mar. 7, note added Mar. 8 and two paragraphs deleted when we discovered that the copy of the Bettencourt Audit on file in the archives is not quite complete. Therefore, statements about what is NOT in the audit were corrected.–gm

    Here are some working notes from my review of the so-called ‘Bettencourt audit’ submitted on Dec. 20, 2004 to Harris County District Attorney Charles A. Rosenthal, Jr. and containing 167 allegations of illegal voting (not a couple-hundred as reported by one columnist from the Houston Chronicle).

    According to the letter of transmittal, the ‘review of election materials’ from Texas House District 149 was conducted pursuant to Texas Election Code 15.028, which reads as follows: “If the registrar determines that a person who is not a registered voter voted in an election, the registrar shall execute and deliver to the county or district attorney having
    jurisdiction in the territory covered by the election an affidavit stating the relevant facts.”

    Director of Voter Registration for the Harris County Tax Collector’s Office George Hammerlein explained Monday afternoon that ‘poll book audits’ are routinely conducted after every ‘major election’ and that a countywide review is still underway. Hammerlein says collection of the materials for House District 149 was prompted partly by phone calls ‘from both campaigns’ looking for information about particular voters. Also, says Hammerlein, Master of Discovery Will Hartnett (R-Dallas) said he would “appreciate you frontloading the research” for HD 149.

    “We probably won’t segment anything else,” says Hammerlein, indicating that voter behaviors will not be broken down according to other House Districts in Harris County. To get an idea about the “routine” nature of the report, The Texas Civil Rights Review has filed an Open Record Request with Hammerlein, asking for copies of cover memos from other “poll book audits” that have been referred to the District Attorney following annual elections since 2000.

    As a result of his review of precincts in House District 149, Bettencourt says in the cover memo that he found four voters not registered; two cancelled registrations; five registrations cancelled out of county after the election from provisional ballots; 139 voter registrations cancelled out of county after reviewing statements of residency filed by voters; one voter registration cancelled for lack of citizenship; and 16 voters who went to the wrong precinct. That’s how 167 illegal votes were identified by Bettencourt on Dec. 20.

    The Texas Civil Rights Review is interested in the role played by the Bettencourt audit in the Heflin-Vo contest. At first glance, the thick notebook (about as thick as my middle finger is long from tip to knuckle) appears to be Andy Taylor’s play book. For someone who has spent a while going through all these docs, the Bettencourt audit looks very much like the eventual files that were presented into evidence.

    In fact, according to my best count (and I would welcome Rick Casey double checking these numbers for me) the Bettencourt audit does point to 90 of the 143 voters listed as deposed in the final Hartnett report, and to 73 of the eventual 110 ballots that were discounted from either the Heflin or Vo column in the Hartnett report of Feb. 7. (Note: all numbers should read ‘at least’ because there are a number of depositions that were taken but not counted in the final report. I am only speaking of depositions reported.)

    Had the hearing been confined to cases identified by the Bettencourt audit, then on the basis of Hartnett’s rulings of deposed voters, Vo would have lost 42 votes and Heflin would have lost 31 for a net Heflin gain of eleven votes. Of course, Heflin started out 33 votes behind Vo, so the election would have easily stood the test.

    If we think in terms familiar to sales forces, there were a number of leads to illegal votes that were not generated by the Bettencourt audit. At least 53 more depositions were taken outside the database of Bettencourt-identified voters and of these, 23 votes were eventually discounted from Vo’s column, while 14 were deducted from Heflin (a spread of nine votes which still does not threaten the election, even when added to the spread of eleven from before).

    For the Texas Civil Rights Review, two questions arise at this point: First, why was the Bettencourt audit produced in the first place? and Second, how did attorneys generate their leads for pursuing voters not found in the Bettencourt book?

    The first question, why the review of illegal voters in House District 149? speaks to a concern about due process. Was the list generated because it was a close election? If so, what are the guidelines for determining how close an election has to be? etc. If the Houston Chronicle is not going to just try to sweep these questions under a rug, we’d appreciate some help getting serious answers.

    The second question goes to the point of voter harassment entailed in this Republican-led election contest. How were voters identified for pursuit?

    For instance, once again, we make reference to the “deportation” of District 149 voters into another district. Two voters who were victim to this scheme filed provisional ballots that clearly explained they were victims of a scheme, and those ballots were accepted by Harris County voting authorities. Yet along comes Andy Taylor who scoops these voters up into his net of alleged illegal voters, along with plainly written evidence that they were victims of unknown others, not perpetrators of voter fraud.

    As we have reported, Hartnett called up at least one of these voters at home and ruled they were legal voters. But why did things get that far in the first place?

    Or to put the question another way: If Andy Taylor is going to reform Texas election laws, who is going to reform Andy Taylor? He should at least be made to apologize, although we still favor a license hearing on Civil Rights grounds if such a thing is possible in Texas.

    How were voters identified for pursuit? I find three examples where one spouse is identified in the Bettencourt audit, but both spouses end up in the final report. Two of the couples in question are identified through depositions as Vo households. The third couple was not deposed.

    So this is one way that a couple of subpoenas might be served next time this sort of thing is done. Attorneys can just match spouses to voters previously identified by the local tax administrator and voter registrar.

    And let’s be clear how Bettencourt identified 139 illegal voters. They told the truth about where they lived on election day. They went to the polling places in their old neighborhoods, wrote down their new addresses, and signed their names. I don’t know what you call that kind of activity, but fraud is a terrible word for it.

    How else were voters identified for pursuit? There is an interesting case of a 24-year-old woman who registered to vote on Sept. 21, 2003, but who forgot to check the citizenship box. According to notes that I took at the archives, she filled out a “new registration” with her name and address, but failed to check the citizenship box. In August 2004 (“why the eleven month gap?”, I ask myself in my notes) she was notified by mail to complete her registration, so she sent it in again, forgetting once more to check the citizenship box. Finally on Oct. 22 she got the box checked properly and she voted on election day 2004. Whew.

    But here comes Andy Taylor again and he’s got his copy of the election code which says that because our shero did not correct her registration within ten days of notice in August, the Oct. 22 registration has to be considered brand new. And since you need to register 30 days in advance of the election, and so forth, we have on our hands an illegal voter.

    This is one of those interesting cases that Hartnett called a “battle of dueling internet pag

    es” because according to the online database on Dec. 7 our shero was listed as a registered voter (“1/1/04 through 12/31/05” note the early 2004 date) but by Jan. 26, her registration had been changed (“11/12/04 through 12/31/05”).

    After a couple of phone calls to her house, I can tell you that this voter is not much interested in talking about all this. And I’m probably not going to try again. But it is interesting to see how a voter can submit at least three registrations prior to election day, be listed in good standing in early December, and then by stroke of technicality be de-listed prior to any ruling by the Master of Discovery (who did subsequently rule her vote illegal and deductible from the Vo column.)

    The case of our shero is neatly doubled by another voter who turned 18 last Sept. On Oct. 3 she filled out her first-ever voter registration and mailed it the next day, forgetting to check the citizenship box. On Oct. 17, she filled out another form, and again forgot the citizenship box. Finally, on election day, she got the form filled out right and her vote was accepted.

    But the good standing of our second shero, like our first, did not survive. Sometime between Jan. 9 and Jan. 26, her online records were changed to reflect new effective dates for her voter registration. A voter registration that on Jan. 9 (three weeks after the Bettencourt review) was listed effective as of Oct. 31, 2004 was by Jan. 26 changed to reflect an effective date of Nov. 24. And her vote, too, was eventually deducted from the Vo column by Master Hartnett following a lengthy presentation by Andy Taylor. Again, with two phone calls I have not been able to reach her, and I doubt I will try again.

    Note added March 8: In the hearing of Jan. 27, Taylor claims that one of the above voters was flagged as not registered by the Bettencourt report, but that section of the report was not included in the version he introduced into the archive. He also claims in the hearing that it was his team that demonstrated to Bettencourt’s office why the voter’s registration should be discounted. See updated story of March 8.