(Hartford)

The ordinance seeks to:

* Limit police officers role in intelligence collection programs that compromise civil liberties

* Puts limits on racial and religious profiling by making officers fill out a form describing all encounters as a way to foster accountability

*Stops police from engaging in undercover infiltration of  peace and/or political groups that engage in 1st amendment activities

*Limits collaboration with federal officials, especially when concerned with immigration enforcement

Click here to download the MP3

Well, there are a couple things that concern me.

First, what’s the goals of the law and is it designed to achieve these goals. From the bill, “The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.” To enforce any law through the philosophy of deterrence is a fundamental problem because it ignores the original motivation (in this case probably rooted in the Mexican economy). I’ve see this philosophy at work all over the U.S. and it a lot of effort for a little pay off (this is a whole discussion in itself). So, the initial design, independent of anything else, I think will be ineffective and overly expensive (should a a tax concern here).

Second, deals with the concern over jobs. This is a classic issue (and a legitimate one) that bubbles up every once in a while. If you looked at the processes of legalizing a bunch of the drugs we have illegal today (pot, opium, cocaine, at one point alcohol), you’d find at the heart a political battle over a group of more ‘natural’ citizens, and a group of minorities (usually immigrants, though not necessarily). Criminalizing the drug becomes a way of scapegoating things like poor economic policies that lead to a recession or loss of wages, or poor benefits, etc.). It’s hard not to see this bill as falling nicely in this history of law making and conflict since the conditions today are ripe for similar legal practices.

Third, has to do with who the bill is designed to address which I think we’d all agree are mexican illegal immigrants or undocumented workers, or whatever term you prefer. As opposed to say, eastern Europeans, who also constitute a large, though not nearly as visible illegal immigration group (look at your local strip club for this example), or people from Southeast Asia (e.g., vietnam, laos, etc.). And since we can’t notice whether someone is in the country legally or not upon simply seeing them, how one looks then invites suspicion and from a law enforcement perspective, a shift from innocent until proven guilty to guilty until proven innocent. (this happens all the time to young black men in the city).

Fourth, and to go along with the need to prove one’s innocence over guilt, involved the related issue of legal discourse. Here, loosely defined words like ‘reasonable suspicion’ are used to essentially justify almost any stop and search. In theory we’d likely say that that’d represent a violation of once civil liberties and perhaps due process, but those things only become significant issues if one has the power to fight against a municipality, county, or state, which is rare and not to be expected among a minority population.

I think we also have to really listen to the mostly brown people who are most fearful of this bill. There might be something to their concerns. You have to be a little cautious here because lots of times we’re dealing with a socially constructed ideology that doesn’t gel with the reality of the situation, but in this case we’re talking about people who already know what it’s like to have darker skin and live in Arizona. That knowledge isn’t based off of television depictions and all that, but a real, material reality and so I think needs to be considered as well.

Remember the Noam Chomsky link I put up a while ago comparing the social, economic, political climate of today with that of the years before the rise of Nazism. He had some important points in justifying people’s anger. Jobs are tough to get, real wages have not kept up with inflation, benefits are hard to get and more expensive, our political system has been purchased by dominant economic powers. This reality will be experienced and have consequences. Chomsky, and myself, are concerned with the way this reality manifests itself. Is it more an example of scapegoating to a group seen as different and therefore threatening, or is it focused on the real policies and practices that deep-down, create the frustration in the first place.

At the end of the day I think you have a law with problems related to effectiveness, practicality, and discrimination, and really won’t be all that effective at addressing the concern over jobs, crime or whatever. It’s reactionary nature; in code is really designed to address mexican immigration and will place law enforcement in a tough position to enforce this law while likely ignoring or downplaying other criminal violations; it’s loosely worded which will allow for its easy exploitation (something already inherent in the differential power relationship between law enforcement and citizen/everyday person) and added difficulty in resisting or protecting one’s rights; that will end up costing the tax payers lots of money in the court proceedings and other (often disguised and absent the conversation) legal services (jail, deportation, immigration detention centers, etc.); and looks a little to similar to other laws that when we look back on now were pretty clearly designed to control one segment of the population that was construed as a scapegoat for a host of social issues with causes located elsewhere.

Written for the Oakland, California community.

We mourn because a little girl is dead for no reason. We mourn because a little girl is dead for terrible reasons. We mourn for Aiyana Jones, because she is yet another victim of police violence, and because as a community, we want to stand in solidarity with her community and her family – and all those who suffer at the hands of the prison-industrial complex in America.

Aiyana was murdered by the police on May 16, 2010, in Detroit, MI during a no-knock raid on her family’s home. Police threw a flash grenade into the first-floor window, where the little girl lay asleep. After police barged into the home, an alleged confrontation took place between Officer Joseph Weekley and Aiyana’s grandmother, during which it is claimed that Weekley’s gun “accidentally” went off, killing the girl. There is video documentation of what transpired, but there are many conflicting accounts at this time – and more information will undoubtedly be revealed in the near future. The lawyer for Aiyana’s family states that the video taken contradicts the police account of what happened. He states, “What I’m most concerned about is that this videotape demonstrates that police are involved in a cover-up of a child’s killing.” (CBS News) Charles Jones, Aiyana’s father, told reporters that upon rushing into the room where Aiyana was shot, the police forced him to get down on the ground – and he had to put his face in his daughter’s blood.

We do not mourn Aiyana’s death because she was so young and so innocent, though this terrible reality weighs heavy on our hearts. We mourn Aiyana as we mourned Oscar Grant, as we mourned countless individuals whose lives have been ended or forever changed by systemic police violence and the profit-driven prison-industrial complex. So while we do mourn this little girl’s murder, we also acknowledge its connection to the larger whole, which encompasses a racist system of perverted “justice” and social control.

In a sick way, Aiyana’s death represents the intersection of police violence and media spectacle – the raid on her family’s home was filmed as part of a reality television show called “The First 48.” The raid that night was being filmed for media consumption, for entertainment purposes. How disturbing and poignant that the video this film crew recorded of the incident reveals the true brutality of police violence, when its original intent was surely to “document” a dramatized story about police heroics, a story constructed for the American audience to bolster societal beliefs about the role of the police.

Though it is clear that in the coming days and weeks, more terrible facts will most likely be coming to light regarding the circumstances surrounding Aiyana’s murder, what is clear at this point is that the police are not giving an honest account of the incident. This should not be surprising. Acts of police violence are often covered up or depicted as tragic, yet solitary, incidents. By no means should we participate in perpetuating this lie. What happened that night to Aiyana and her family was business as usual when it comes to policing. It happened in Detroit, Michigan, last week – but in 2009 it happened in Oakland, California, and it happens in cities around the country – and the world – all the time.

Officer Weekley is on paid administrative leave at this time, as was Officer Tony Pirone of the BART Police following the murder of Oscar Grant.

Members of the Oakland community will gather at 11 am this Sunday, May 23rd, at Frank Ogawa Plaza in Oakland in a silent vigil to mourn a young life lost, a family shattered, and another victim of systemic police violence.

Click here to download the MP3

Some reactions by Jashon’s family to the verdict:

“A policeman has license to kill black people in our neighborhood and get away with it” -Keith Thomas, Bryant’s father.

“We still live in the slavery days. Do what you want to the niggers out here on the street, because you’re going to get away with it” - Keith Thomas

“It wasn’t no justice”, “That man killed my son, and he got applauded for it.” -Jashon’s mother, Cynthia

(continued)

A group of more than 50 students originally met last month after hearing that former Kenyan student Charles Ngetich had been forced to drink blood by his cross country coach, believing he had no other choice. After leaving the team and having his track scholarship removed, Ngetich faces the threat of deportation.

This incident, coupled with the events of the past several years (including a racial attack of a Latino student on campus; the firing of socialist Opinion Editor Marissa Blaszko by the CCSU Recorder; the discovery that black faculty members make less money than their white colleagues; racist and sexist remarks made by The Recorder; etc) has lead representatives of the student body to call this rally, as well as a future educational event scheduled for later in the semester.

The list of students who have called for the rally include officers and members of the CCSU NAACP, Africana Student Organization, Black Student Union, Youth for Socialist Action, Pride, the Ruthe Boyea Women’s Center, the African Studies Department, United Caribbean Club, Latin American Student Organization, Off-Center Magazine, Phi Sigma Sigma, Muslim Student Association, Progressive Student Alliance, Central Artist Collective, Man Enough Initiative, and others.

Speakers will include Ronnie Davis, President of the New Britain NAACP; student Gigi Neama, President of the Africana Student Organization; student Marissa Blaszko, President of the Youth for Socialist Action; as well as other students and faculty who have yet to be confirmed.

“This Wednesday, CCSU students will rally to demand an end to racism on our campus. We stand in solidarity with all students who have been the victims of harassment, discrimination, and even torture on our campus, as well as internationally,” the group’s FaceBook page reads. “Stop by and show your support–an injury to one is an injury to all!”

For more information, contact Marissa Blaszko from the Youth for Socialist Action at blaszkomaa@ccsu.edu or 860-218-0566, or Gigi Neama of the Africana Student Organization at neamageo@ccsu.edu or 860-803-3501.

In addition to the neo-nazis, 40 or so town residents also organized a counter-protest across the street from the town green in support of the East Haven police. Some of the residents tried to distance themselves from the racists by telling reporters that “this isn’t about racism”, but at the same time were screaming “go back to where you came from” at the marchers. And one visibly angered counter-protester even told a women carrying a Puerto Rican flag to “shove it where the sun don’t shine”. Several marchers still angered by the presence of the white supremacists, continued to shout back and forth to the chagrin of the “peace marshals” charged with keeping things from getting confrontational. Around 2pm, the protesters walked back past the white supremacists without incident, the one mile to hear a final speech by Emma Jones, the mother of Malik Jones who was needlessly gunned down by East Haven police in 1997 and has been fighting for racial justice ever since. Emma thanked the marchers for keeping the memory of her son alive by continuing to speak out against police violence. She also spoke about how “all oppressions are linked” and told the crowd that  “we have to make a firm commitment, that we are united” in the face of those that would try to divide us. And finally, after raising about $450, several friends and family of the marcher that was arrested earlier, headed to the police station in a show of jail solidarity.

*Several residents have expressed concern that when crossing over the border between New Haven and East Haven, they are stopped by police. Because while New Haven police are not allowed to inquire about immigration status, East Haven police do not have that restriction.

To get involved or for more info, contact: Unidad Latina at 203-606-3484 or via Email: ulaccion@gmail.com or ulaccion@yahoo.com

On Monday July 13, two people from New Haven were detained in East Haven. One was coming from My Country Store, an Ecuadorian owned business on Main Street. The other was coming visiting his girlfriend. Both were taken to jail and turned over to immigration authorities. Since the incident on Monday we have learned of at least five other cases where people were stopped for no other reason than the color of their skin and the streets they were traveling on, then pushed through the inhumane process of deportation.

Other cities, such as New Haven and Hartford, have created policies that prevent police from racially profiling Latino, particularly from asking about legal status. All we ask is that East Haven adopt a similar policy.

Mayor April Capone Almon says she is meeting with the community to resolve these issues. What she has actually done is meet with business owners and officials from the justice department. Capone Almon says she does not have the luxury of choosing which federal laws to enforce and which ones not to. New Haven and Hartford’s policies have proven that mayors do have control over their police departments, and can decide how to handle immigration issues on a local level. By saying her hands are tied she is choosing to turn her back on Latino residents as they are carted off to deportation centers.

On August 15 we are going to march into East Haven to say No to attacks on the immigrant community, no to racial profiling, and no to deportation.

You can contact Unidad Latina at 203-606-3484 or via Email: ulaccion@gmail.com or ulaccion@yahoo.com to endorse or get more information

Date: Saturday, August 15, 2009
Time: 12:00am – 2:00pm
Location: outside of Mc.Donalds at 687 Main St East Haven, CT

Facebook Event listing: http://www.facebook.com/events.php?ref=sb#/event.php?eid=107981267347

Click here to download the MP3