If I told you that the National Guard and Border Patrol were sent to the Phoenix area to enforce immigration law, that the NG or BP drew their guns on people at check points because they had brown skin, that the NG or BP would show up in the middle of the night in masks to interrogate families about drugs, what do you think would happen? (Okay, well the police might be doing this to some extent already, but what if this was happening on a mass scale in response to illegal immigration?) More copwatch patrols, forums, meetings, protests, boycotts? Or would we step it up?

This has already been happening along the border to the Tohono O'odham on the reservation.

As for the border patrol abuse, O’odham have no rights. An elderly couple while under interrogation was forced to show a shopping/groceries list to prove that their travel on the road was justified. The border patrol can drive their vehicle into your yard and hold you at gunpoint and can confiscate your tribal identification card and make a request for further proof of “American citizenship" (Source).

More...

from Zmag
By Joseph Nevins

In a November 13 speech to the Center for American Progress in Washington, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano made clear that President Obama's administration intends to move forward soon on legislation that would bring about "an immigration system that works." The administration, she promised, "will pursue reforms" true to an American identity as "both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws." In this way, Napolitano asserted, Congress and the White House would avoid the pitfalls of the "one-sided" reforms of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. "The enforcement part of the equation was promised," she said, referring to portrayals of the 1986 legislation by its proponents, "but it didn't materialize."[1]

Napolitano's announcement seems to have countered much of the conventional wisdom, and even the White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who let it be known that immigration reform—what he has called the "third rail" of American politics—would be off the table during Obama's first four years. According to this view, the administration would likely wait at least until after the midterm elections, if not until a second Obama term, before moving on the matter for fear that the political fallout would hurt the electoral prospects of Democrats.

The administration's apparent new willingness to take on immigration reform might seem like a ray of light in an increasingly bleak landscape for immigrants, especially of the unauthorized variety. But at a time of a deep economic downturn, and with anti-immigrant sentiment strongly in the air, the challenges are daunting, to say the least, in terms of Congress passing legislation aimed at easing the repressive laws and exclusion endured by immigrants.

More...

"Not since the days of Bull Connor has this country seen a public official abuse his authority in order to terrorize and intimidate communities based on the color of their skin," states a call for the big January 16th march in Phoenix against Arpaio. Sheriff Joe Arpaio is often compared to Bull Connor, the police official in Birmingham who fought civil rights activists with attack dogs, and strong water hoses back in the 1960's. He acted above the law, although some could argue that his actions were not contrary to the general orientation of the rule of law then or even today. He was more blatant about abusing protesters and disregarding federal law than most law enforcement officials, which is why Arpaio is compared to him.

During the civil rights movement, there were no marches against Bull Connor, but there were efforts to produce situations in which he would show the world what he was willing to do to fight integration. The horrible treatment of marchers drew the attention of the nation and encouraged John F. Kennedy to initiate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. To some, the Civil Rights Act was a victory, and the story somewhat ends there. This perspective makes it seem that Bull Connor was an important catalyst and therefore target (although he wasn't quite a target in the way Arpaio is today). Yet if this was the case, why do stories that focus on a wider black liberation movement rather a focus on aspects of what's called the civil rights movement that often focus on the federal government's benevolence or Martin Luther King's heroism not really mention Bull Connor at all?

More...

Please don't be fooled. If anything, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 is lip service at best. If you review the bill (the complete bill, not the summary), you will see a glaring lack at anything like a solution to the "crisis" so many speak of. Worse, it maintains that border security (read militarization) is important, includes employment verification, and also leaves out any mention of same-sex couples. It is unlikely to pass as is, or probably not even close, but I am concerned with so many people blindly celebrating this bill.

How about this as a summary for much of CIR-ASAP: review this, analyze that, assess this, study that, examine this, make recommendations, develop and implement a plan. This is the extent to which major questions are addressed: border deaths, costs of border security, human smuggling, Operation Streamline, etc. Certainly this gets nowhere near actually coming up with solutions to, much less acknowledgments regarding the injustices caused by the border and border enforcement. To me, it's nothing but superficial- surprising that they'd be mentioned, but still, just empty words. It doesn't take a genius to know that increased border security means increased deaths. Yet they are developing a study that would include "an analysis of whether physical barriers, technology, and enforcement programs have contributed to the rate of migrant deaths". And who would end up doing these studies? Is there any hope that they would be done objectively? And what then?

Not surprising at all is the callousness, or neglect of the impact on the indigenous communities and others as a result of continued border security. Let us not confuse a lack of a wall with lack of problems due to border security. The bill states, "Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary shall establish a demonstration program to procure additional unmanned aerial vehicles, cameras, poles, sensors, satellites, radar coverage, and other technologies necessary to enhance operational control of the international borders of the United States." If anything, the bill seems concerned with making border security more efficient, maybe a bit more regulated and supervised.

More...

The rate of border deaths are now at a four-year high

Migrant deaths in the Tucson Sector are the highest in four years, and a border activist expects that number to grow next year.

The Border Patrol reported that 208 bodies of suspected illegal immigrants were discovered in the sector in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30; 171 deaths were reported a year earlier.

The Coalicion de Derechos Humanos counted about the same amount, which means the Border Patrol's numbers might be becoming more accurate.

The number was unexpected because all sides agree that fewer illegal immigrants are crossing the border because of the poor economy in the United States.

“All the reports have shown that crossings have dramatically decreased, yet the deaths go against that,” Garcia said. “This tells you we were right all along. An increase of military and police-natured responses lead to more deaths. Even though less people are crossing, more people are dying.” (Source).

A lot of the crossings are taking place in dangerous mountainous areas where the trails are hard to follow, and traveling takes longer because of having to climb and not being able to go directly north. Migrants are traveling these routes because less Border Patrol are in the area, probably because they know that this area is sort of a geographical wall itself.

This is further evidence that a man-made wall will only increase deaths, as people will attempt to cross no matter the obstacles.

The obstacles and dangers have gotten worse because of the funnel-effect- the result of more militarization and security in urban and flatter areas which are safer to cross.

More