Category: Uncategorized

4/26/2006 6:51 PM
By: Allie Rasmus
News 8 Austin

Manuel Mendez was working at a construction site Wednesday morning in Round Rock with dozens of others when two immigration enforcement cars pulled up. People have heard stories about it, but until now there have been few eyewitness accounts of immigration raids taking place in Central Texas.

Mendez said the officers asked him for proof of U.S. citizenship.

“I told them no, because I had left it in my wife’s car this morning when she dropped me off,” he said.

That’s when Mendez said the uniformed men told him he’d have to leave his work site — in handcuffs. But there’s one problem. Mendez is a U.S. citizen born and raised in Austin.

“They told me to put my hands behind my back because they didn’t have proof I was a citizen. But then I gave them my Social Security number,” he said.

A U.S. citizen says he was questioned and suspected of being an undocumented worker.

Mendez said the officers cleared him once they double checked his Social Security number. The incident comes on the heels of dozens of unconfirmed reports of immigration raids in Central Texas. But Mendez said he can’t believe he was questioned simply because of his ethnicity.

“They singled me out because I was Hispanic, and they thought I was not from here, they thought I was from Mexico,” he said.

Barbara Hines of UT’s Immigration Law Clinic said stopping someone solely on race is illegal, but others say it’s legal for immigration officers to stop and question someone based on their race and other factors, such as where they work, their manner of dress and language ability.

While immigration officers have the right to approach you, everyone has the right to refuse to answer questions. Hines said it’s difficult to get people to understand that.

“It’s very hard to teach people that you have the right to say, ‘no,’ because the general instinct is that if someone comes up to you you’re going to answer those questions,” she said.

It was clear the encounter had a chilling effect on workers at the Round Rock site. By the afternoon only a handful were still there. Mendez said he can’t blame them; he’s just surprised it happened at all.

The U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Department will not return calls to confirm or deny they’re responsible for the immigration raids.

But a press release issued last week on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Web site said the agency has launched a “comprehensive immigration enforcement strategy” that includes enforcement on worksites.

http://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=160728

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NAFTA STEEL PRODUCERS WELCOME MINISTERS’ REVIEW OF SPP PROGRESS AND LAUNCH OF NORTH AMERICAN COMPETITIVENESS COUNCIL (NACC); COMMIT TO STEEL’S ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN NACC

Washington DC, June 16, 2006 — NAFTA steel producers welcomed events yesterday in Washington, which included a review of progress under the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and a first meeting of SPP Prosperity Ministers with the private sector leadership of the newly established North American Competitiveness Council (NACC).

NAFTA steel producers committed to participate actively, at the highest levels, in the NACC. From the start, steel has been especially active in the SPP and a critical component of its progress. Last June in Ottawa, Ministers from all three NAFTA countries announced they have formed a “strategic partnership” with this “strategic industry.” As a successful example of sectoral cooperation between NAFTA governments and industry, the North American Steel Trade Committee (NASTC) has, in recent months, developed an agreed steel strategy to promote growth, competitiveness and prosperity in the NAFTA region.

It rests on three essential pillars:

1. External Trade — eliminating distortions through policy coordination and other actions to ensure that NAFTA steel markets reflect fair trade;
2. Internal Trade — facilitating intra-NAFTA steel trade through enhanced monitoring and other proactive measures to reduce the costs of such trade; and

3. Industry Competitiveness/Productivity — enhancing the competitiveness of the steel industry in North America through innovation and market development.

“We are pleased that the Mexican steel industry will be part of the NACC,” said Octavio Rangel Frausto, General Director of the Mexican Steel Producers Association (CANACERO). “North American steel producers look forward to exploring with NAFTA governments ways to facilitate intra-NAFTA trade, improve the functioning of the North American steel market and enhance border infrastructure and cross-border Customs cooperation.”

“U.S. steel producers welcome the appointment of Louis Schorsch (CEO, Mittal Steel USA) to serve on the U.S. Executive Committee of the NACC,” said Andrew G. Sharkey, III, President and CEO of the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI). “While the NASTC will continue to implement the agreed steel strategy, we expect the NACC to provide a means to address important ‘cross linkage’ issues, including the need to (p.2) ensure available and cost-effective energy supply in the NAFTA region and promote the competitiveness of North American manufacturing through innovation and market development.”

“Transportation and the building of a world class, 21st century infrastructure in the NAFTA region are additional important cross linkage issues where North America’s steel producers expect to play a constructive role in the new NACC,” said Thomas A. Danjczek, President of the Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA). “Steel is part of the solution to the competitiveness challenges facing North America.”

“Steel and manufacturing in general are critical to national defense and homeland security in the NAFTA region,” said David A. Hartquist, Counsel to the Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA).

“The steel strategy and the NACC complement each other in the sense that both will focus on efforts to strengthen North America’s manufacturing base.” “NAFTA governments have a responsibility to ensure that globally competitive, efficient producers in North America can achieve market-based outcomes,” said Barry Lacombe, President of the Canadian Steel Producers Association (CSPA).

“In addition to focusing on ways to improve the efficiency of the private sector in the NAFTA region, it should be a top priority of the NACC to understand and effectively address the economic strategies of China and India.”

* Over the past three years, through the NASTC, North American steel producer associations (CSPA, AISI, SMA, SSINA and CANACERO) have been working closely with the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico to explore and define the key elements of a pro-manufacturing agenda for North America. The NACC will help intensify this work.

The North American steel industry supports the overall competitiveness, prosperity and security of North America. Steel producers in North America employ more than 1.5 million people through direct and related jobs, and contribute over U.S. $80 billion in annual sales revenue. The member companies of participating NASTC associations account for more than 95 percent of the carbon and specialty steel products made annually in North America.

-###-

see pdf original

FIVE AUSTIN PLAINTIFFS FILE FEDERAL CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST AT&T FOR DISCLOSING TELEPHONE NUMBERS TO NATIONAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Five Austin plaintiffs today [May 18] filed a federal class action suit in U.S. District Court in Austin against AT&T because it has, and is currently providing the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States Government with phone call records of millions of Americans, including Plaintiffs, in violation of federal and Texas state laws, including the federal Stored Wire and Electronic Communication and Transactional Records Access Act, the federal Telecommunications Act, the Texas Penal Code, the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and Texas common law.

Pursuant to its agreement with NSA, AT&T provided, and continues to provide, the NSA with a complete listing of customers calling history, including the phone numbers of customers, the phone numbers customers dial, the location from which each call originates, the length of each call, and the location where each call terminates. In exchange for this information, AT&T received, and continues to receive, direct and/or indirect financial compensation from NSA.

The Plaintiffs filed suit on behalf of a class of attorneys, a class of journalists, and a class of financial advisors.

The five plaintiffs are:

1. James C. Harrington, attorney and Director of the Texas Civil Rights, frequently sues the federal government and criticizes its conduct with regard to civil liberties. He and the Texas Civil Rights Project have had an account for telecommunications services with AT&T (or predecessor companies) during the last three years, and continue to have this account. Harringtons mobile phone service is through AT&T. As an attorney, Harrington uses his mobile phone and other AT&T telecommunications equipment and services to communicate with clients and co-counsel.

2. Richard A. Grigg, an Austin attorney licensed in the State of Texas, who represents an individual detained in Guantanamo and though he may not communicate with his client over the phone, he uses his AT&T telecommunications equipment and services to communicate with other habeas attorneys concerning his client and his clients case. As an attorney, Grigg uses his mobile phone and other AT&T telecommunications equipment and services to communicate with clients and co-counsel.

3. Louis Black, a freelance reporter and editor of the Austin Chronicle. He has had an account for telecommunications services with AT&T (or predecessor companies) during the last three years, and continues to have this account. He uses his AT&T telecommunications equipment and services to communicate with news sources and informants, some of whom wish to remain confidential.

4. The Austin Chronicle is a publication whose primary place of business and distributorship is Austin. The Austin Chronicle has had an account for telecommunications services with AT&T (or predecessor companies) during the last three years, and continues to have this account. The Austin Chronicle contributors and staff use the AT&T equipment and services to communicate with news sources and informants, some of whom wish to remain confidential.

5. Michael Kentor is a financial advisor and founder of the Kentor Company, a financial firm. He has had an account for telecommunications services with AT&T (or predecessor companies) during the last three years, and continues to have this account. He uses his AT&T telecommunications equipment and services to communicate with clients, family, friends, and colleagues.

Through their federal case, Plaintiffs seek preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, restraining AT&T from disclosing Plaintiffs call records and those of the classes to the NSA. They also seek statutory damages to each Plaintiff as provided in federal and state statutes, in an amount no less than the sum of $1000 per each act of disclosure of call record information, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2707(c); and $100 per day per violation, pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, art. 18.20, § 16(a). They also seek punitive damages against AT&T.

Plaintiffs are represented by prominent constitutional attorney, R. James George, Jr. of George & Brothers, L.L.P., in Austin.

Media Advisory posted at Texas Civil Rights Project, May 18, 2006

This email from Paul Wright, Editor of Prison Legal News: "The fifth circuit upheld the conviction of three INS officers who showed a depraved indifference to an immigration detainees medical indifference. After a raid a 15 year old suffered a broken back, how isn’t said, but the defendants were convicted of a civil rights violation for wiping their feet on the now paralyzed child, pepper spraying him to see if he would move, driving him around Texas on the floor of a police bus, etc. He died 11 months later."

EXCERPT from opinion of the court: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT; No. 04-20131; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Richard Gonzales, Louis Gomez, Carlos Reyna:

The defendants, Gonzales, Gomez, and Reyna worked as
deportation officers for the San Antonio division of the INS.
They were members of the elite San Antonio Fugitive Unit, a group that specialized in tracking down and deporting illegal aliens with criminal records. Early in the morning of March 25, 2001, their unit, together with INS agents from Houston, prepared to raid a house in Bryan, Texas. They were advised to be alert. The night before, agents had encountered an armed 15-year old near the house.
At 8:00 AM, the raid began. The San Antonio unit rushed in
the front door while the Houston officers maintained a perimeter
around the house. Minutes later, one of the house’s occupants,
Serafin Carrera, lay paralyzed on the kitchen floor.

The testimony is unclear about which officers took down
Carrera, though Gonzales, Gomez, and Reyna were all involved.
The prosecution did not charge the defendants with excessive
force in taking Carrera down or with causing the broken neck
which he suffered in that process. Instead, the defendants were
convicted for their behavior thereafter.

All three defendants had close contact with Carrera while he
lay handcuffed on the floor. Carrera begged for help, screaming
"they broke me . . . Tell them to kill me . . . Tell them to take me to a hospital." In response, Gomez taunted, "From here you’re going to go to jail and you’re never going to get out, you son of a f*cking mother." Officer Gonzales called him "cabron" and invited his fellow officers to wipe their feet on him. The three defendants stood in the kitchen, with Carrera on the floor crying for help, trying to figure out how to get their paralyzed detainee into an INS van. Officer Gonzales, the San Antonio team leader, ordered a detention officer to pull the van closer to the house, saying "I don’t want anybody to see what’s going on." Next, Gonzales, Gomez, and two other officers dragged Carrera from the house, across the backyard, and into the van. Carrera complained of pain, asking to be shot and put out of his misery, while Officer Gomez pulled him through the van door and onto the front seat. Gomez struggled to position Carrera’s limp body on the seat, finally leaving him slumped on his side and handcuffed. As the van departed for the Brazos County Jail, Officer Reyna asked the driver to give Carrera a screen test—an unofficial maneuver in which the driver slams on the brake causing a handcuffed passenger to lurch forward and hit his face against the screen.

The nearby Brazos County Jail was not the final destination
for Carrera or any of the other detainees. The INS Officers
merely used its parking lot as a makeshift processing area for
the illegal aliens. After processing, the aliens were to be sent by bus to New Braunfels, and then removed to Mexico.

After all the aliens were loaded into two vans, the officers
returned to their cars and followed the vans to the Brazos County Jail for processing. At the jail, all three defendants dragged Carrera off the van, hitting his head against the door on the way out. They dragged him across the parking lot while taunting him and playing with his limp body. Gonzales ordered the bus driver to open the luggage compartment, and threatened, jokingly, to make Carrera ride below. INS officers testified that Gonzales said, "Let’s Mace the f*cker, see if he budges."

The three defendants dragged Carrera onto the bus. Because the bus had tinted windows, no one outside of it saw what happened next, but after a few minutes all three defendants ran off the bus choking and laughing. With a smirk, Gonzales claimed that he had an "accidental discharge" of pepper spray. A nurse was on duty at the Brazos County Jail, and a hospital just four miles away, but the defendants left Carrera by himself on the floor of the bus, handcuffed, eyes swollen shut, and foaming at the mouth. At around 11:30 AM, three hours after Carrera’s neck
was broken, the bus left for New Braunfels. Carrera rode on the
floor of the bus for three more hours until he reached the Comal
County Jail. Upon his arrival, the intake nurse refused to take
custody of Carrera without a medical evaluation. He was taken
by ambulance to a nearby hospital and then airlifted to a trauma
center in San Antonio. Eleven months later, Carrera died.

The next day, the cover-up began. Gonzales called everyone into his office and assured them, "we’re going to get through this." When Gonzales found out that a bus driver had already written a memo about the incident, he called the bus driver into his office and said, "who the f*ck told [you] to write a memo . .
. nobody told you to write any memos . . . I’m the one that’s
going to take care of the memos." Gonzales demanded that the bus driver change his account to say that Carrera had assaulted them. The driver refused.