BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!

WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google

Hundreds of thousands march across US for immigrant rights

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

Hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers and their supporters took part in marches and protests in Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, Chicago, Denver, Detroit and other major cities across the United States on May 1 to protest the growing number of raids and deportations and to press for basic democratic rights. The actions included demonstrations, consumer boycotts and school walkouts.

This year’s protests were smaller than a similar immigrant “boycott” that took place last May Day in which millions of workers participated. This was due in part to stepped-up harassment and intimidation of immigrant workers by federal authorities. Also, in 2006, masses of people were spurred to action by a piece of legislation in Congress that would have turned undocumented immigrants—as well as anyone who rendered them assistance—into criminals.

In the past year, the US government deported 221,664 undocumented workers, 37,000 more than the previous year, an increase of 20 percent.

In a crackdown called Operation Return to Sender, US immigration officials have arrested more than 23,000 people nationwide. While supposedly targeting felons, most of those caught up in the sweeps have no criminal records. Immigration officers have not only targeted workplaces, but they have raided private homes without warrants and even rounded up people off the streets. In Chicago, immigration police with assault rifles reportedly closed off a mall parking lot in a Latino neighborhood and began asking everyone for papers, hauling off those without proper documents.

In many cases, the deportations have resulted in the splitting of families, with US-born children separated from their parents. The raids have been so provocative that local officials in a number of cities have issued protests.

The escalating repression is aimed at terrorizing immigrants, who are being scapegoated for the falling living standards and job insecurity facing millions of working people. At the same time, while seeking to channel anger over the failures of the profit system into anti-immigrant sentiments, the dominant sections of big business want to ensure continued access to the cheap supply of labor provided by undocumented workers.

A conflict between those right-wing Republicans in Congress who favor the mass roundup and deportation of undocumented immigrants and the Bush administration, which favors a slightly less draconian approach, has prevented the enactment of new legislation for the past year.

The legislation supported by Bush is harshly punitive. It calls for increasing the number of immigration police and requiring undocumented workers seeking permanent residency to endure long waiting periods and pay hefty fines. The guest workers program contained in the bill endorsed by Bush recalls the infamous Bracero program. It is designed to put workers completely at the mercy of corporate employers while stripping them of the few rights they currently enjoy.

As part of its crackdown on immigration, the government is contracting for the building of privately run detention centers along the US-Mexican border.

The liberal and church groups sponsoring the May 1 protests have sought to orient their protests to pressuring the Democratic Party, depicting the dispute in Congress over immigration as that between reform and anti-reform factions. In fact, the Democrats and Republicans are united in their hostility to granting basic democratic rights to immigrant workers.

Typical is the position of Senator Hillary Clinton. When asked her opinion on granting amnesty to undocumented workers at the recent debate between contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, she replied, “Well, I’m in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which includes tightening our border security, sanctioning employers of undocumented immigrants, helping our communities deal with the costs that come from illegal immigration…. After 9/11 we’ve got to know who’s in this country. And then give them a chance to pay a fine, pay back taxes, learn English and stand in line to be eligible for a legal status in this country.”

Among the tens of thousands who joined the march through downtown Los Angeles were many young people, including students from Roosevelt High and Wilson High Schools in East Los Angeles as well a large number of workers.

Quiroz, an immigrant construction worker who has won legal status in the US, told the World Socialist Web Site, “When I compare my own experience with recent immigrants, it is like night and day. Immigrants today live in fear; they can be taken at any time. When they try to find work, they have to produce documents. Everyone hopes for an amnesty. There is a rumor that if there is a guest worker program like Bush wants, there will be a $10,000 fee for immigrants to become legal. That will be beyond the reach of most immigrants. “It does not make sense for workers to be divided on this issue. Immigrant and US workers work in the same jobs, shoulder to shoulder.”

Jessica, a 20-year-old garment worker, told the WSWS, “I am angry because I think that the government must stop threatening people and carrying out raids in factories or against immigrants, like the one in that Chicago shopping center a few days ago. People live in fear, and are often afraid to leave their homes to go shopping and to go to school.”

Leyla and Claudio, who came to the United States 20 years ago, fleeing the civil war in El Salvador, also marched. “We saw terrible things and fled our country with little more than our lives,” said Claudio. “I reject the demand for guest workers; there must be a generalized legalization.”

Leyla added, “Conditions for immigrants are scandalous. Like us, many immigrants are part of the so-called informal economy because getting a job is difficult. We peddle things in the street. Undocumented immigrants suffer a lot of unemployment.”

Francisco, a young construction worker who has been in the US for 11 years, told the WSWS “, There has been an increase in raids, in Ontario, in Orange County and in the fields. That has to stop. People are afraid that they will be separated from their families. My deepest hope is that all immigrants will be legalized. However, I don’t think that this will happen; we have a long struggle ahead.

“I came from Guatemala. There are few jobs, and many people are forced to come to the United States. It is an arduous trip that can take weeks, months sometimes. More and more, the Mexican police tries to interfere with the immigrants from Central America.”

Concepción, 55, is a garment worker and a Mexican Indian from Veracruz Province. She told the WSWS that her cousin is being deported in three weeks. “She has a 14-year-old son who was born here,” she said. “She pleaded with the immigration people to let her stay. It was no use. Her son had broken his leg, and ICE allowed her to stay until the cast came off. Now they told her she has to leave because her child can get therapy in Mexico.

“If people get deported, there will be more families split up. The children will suffer most. I came from Mexico 20 years ago and became a garment worker. It is hard in the factories because the boss is constantly trying to cut costs by firing the workers with seniority and hiring new sewing machine operators at a lower wage, below minimum wage. Workers do not get more for working overtime. A lot of us become independent. We pick up cloth and sew it at home. I make tablecloths. “

Thousands also joined a march in Detroit that began in Patton Park. Among them was Carlos, who told the WSWS, “If you look at it, every person in this country is from another country, except the Native Americans. If it is not you, it is your parents or your grandparents. I don’t understand why some people are not for the immigrants in this country. It is bad. Families are being separated from each other. There is a family in San Diego with three children, all under 18 years old, and their mother and father were deported and sent to Mexico. I think the children were 16, 13 and 10. It reminds me of the time they took the Cuban boy and would not return him to his father. These people, say they are for families and rights, but there they did not care for the family at all.”

Patricia Palmino, also on the Detroit march, condemned the growing deportations of immigrants. “These are workers who are here to work, not to take someone’s job. They are here just to make a better life. You know that many of the Mexican workers work very hard and they do jobs other people do not want to do. Yet they receive much less money. Now, there is a new policy that if you are an undocumented, you can’t go to university. I believe you should have the right to go.

“I have a sister-in-law who has a son that did not have a Social Security number. He was only nine years old and needed to go to school, but they would not let him in the school. Hs dad went to the Mexican consul and did all kinds of things, and finally they got him a PIN number. A nine-year-old kid should be in school, whether they have a PIN number or not. The children are our future.”

Mindy Melete Lares, who is Puerto Rican, said she came to the march in Detroit to support immigrant rights. “I am opposed to what this government is doing. Bush, I think he is a direct descendent of the Nazis. He doesn’t care. I came here 50 years ago. When I came, they were looking for more workers and brought immigrants into the country. Now, look at how they treat immigrants.”

Ramon Antonio, who came to the march with his young daughter, told the WSWS, “I work two jobs to make ends meet. I am doing this for my kids. There is nothing in Mexico for decent jobs. That’s why we are here.”

George and Carlos are middle-school students who attended the march and rally. Both of them said most of their friends did not go to school today in order to attend the rally.

George said, “I think it is not right to send all the immigrants back. I believe they should have rights just like everyone here. They work and pay taxes like everyone. I think they should be treated the same.

Carlos agreed: “I think we should have the right to stay. I have been here since I was nine years old.”

One of the largest demonstrations in the country took place in Chicago, where hundreds of thousands marched through downtown to Grant Park.

Abundio Ramirez, a practicing immigration lawyer in Chicago for the last four years, said that he had joined the march to support his clients.

“They’re not here for amnesty,” he said. “There’s a lot of anger about IRAIRA [Illegal Immigration and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996], which brought reinstatement and a 10-year permanent bar. This destroys families. There’s a build-up of anger and frustration, and they are here to change policy. It’s like Prohibition in the 1920s. The moment they allowed alcohol to be sold and bought, it stopped the breaking of that law. The same can go for immigration.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/may2007/immi-m02.shtml

Have Your Say: Hundreds of thousands march across US for immigrant rights
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Tape ‘reveals order’ to shoot Vietnam protesters

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

- 37-year-old recording of Kent State killings found 
- National Guard always denied order to fire

Suzanne Goldenberg 

The command, as Alan Canfora heard it on a 37-year-old audio recording recently discovered in a government archive, appeared to leave no room for doubt. “Right here. Get set. Point. Fire.” Then came 13 seconds of gunfire. When it ended, four students were dead and nine injured, and the shootings at Kent State University became engraved in America’s collective memory as one of the most painful days of the Vietnam era.

Yesterday, Mr Canfora, who was among the nine students wounded on that day, demanded a new investigation into the shootings at Kent State in Ohio, saying it was time to settle conclusively what led the contingent of National Guard troops to open fire on unarmed student protesters.

“There has been a 37-year cover-up at Kent State. The commanding officers have long denied there was a verbal command to fire. They put the blame on the triggermen,” Mr Canfora told the Guardian.

He said he wants the FBI to use new technology to analyse the recording. He also said he planned to post an audio clip of the recording on two websites.

Mr Canfora, who was 21 years old at the time of the shootings, was barely 60 metres away from the Guards when they opened fire. He was shot in the wrist.

“They stopped, turned, raised the weapons, began to shoot and continued to shoot for 13 seconds,” he said. “It was like a firing squad.”

His life was transformed by the events that day. One of his friends was among the dead, and he has devoted much of his time over the last 37 years trying to bring the Ohio National Guard and the federal authorities to account for the killings.

The Guard has always claimed that no order was given to open fire, and there is speculation that the students were cut down after one of the troops panicked, triggering a volley of gunfire.

Although eight guardsmen were indicted, no one was ever prosecuted, and the episode exposed the deep disdain of the Nixon administration for dissenters. The families of the 13 killed and wounded pursued a civil suit against the state governor and the National Guard, which was eventually settled out of court.

The materials from that civil suit were eventually stored in the archives at Yale University, where Mr Canfora recently rediscovered a 30-minute recording of the protest.

The recording was made by a fellow student, Terry Strubbe, who placed an old-fashioned reel-to-reel tape recorder on the window sill of his dorm room, which overlooked the protests. Mr Strubbe, who has declined to speak to reporters, still has the original recording in a bank safety deposit box.

However, a spokesman for Mr Strubbe, Joseph Bendo, told the Guardian yesterday he was unsure whether there were sounds of an order to open fire on the original recording.

“It was never heard on our version of the tape, but maybe nobody ever listened. It’s unusual that nobody has heard it before in 37 years. Other people have heard this tape in the past, and maybe they weren’t listening for it,” he said.

But the power of America’s memories of that day are undeniable. Nearly two generations after the shootings at Kent State, it now seems unthinkable that the National Guard could ever use live ammunition against students.

The events of that day were relived endlessly in shocking images of teenagers crouching over the corpses of their fellow students in the US heartland. They also led to protests which radiated across the country, shutting down hundreds of college campuses, and forcing Richard Nixon to decamp Washington for Camp David.

Have Your Say: Tape ‘reveals order’ to shoot Vietnam protesters
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

MI5 ‘had six photos of 7/7 bomber’

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

Pressure on MI5 intensified as it was claimed that the security service did not reveal the full extent of its surveillance of the ringleader of the July 7 bombers to the official body investigating the outrage.

The BBC reported that MI5 had six clear photographs of Mohammed Sidique Khan - as well as his name, address and videos of him meeting terror suspects - a year before the 2005 bombings in London, but informed the Intelligence and Security Committee about only one grainy shot.

The report came as Prime Minister Tony Blair asked the ISC to carry out a new review of MI5’s handling of intelligence after it emerged that links were missed between the London bombers and the so-called fertiliser plotters, who were jailed for life on Monday.

And demands for a public inquiry ratcheted up a gear, with survivors and relatives of those killed in the attacks descending on the Home Office to call for a probe.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said that the emergence of the new photos suggested that “someone is being economical with the evidence”, as he renewed calls for an independent inquiry.

And ISC chairman Paul Murphy said that his committee would be willing to consider the BBC allegations in the course of its new inquiry.

Mr Murphy told the Press Association: “Obviously, we will look at this during the course of our investigation.

“I have no reason to believe that MI5 told us anything but the truth, but obviously we will keep an open mind and look at anything that arises as a result of the trial. That’s what Tony Blair has asked us to do.”

The former Northern Ireland Secretary stressed that he did not see the report on BBC1’s 10 O’Clock News and was not aware of its contents.

In a statement issued on its website in the wake of Monday’s guilty verdicts in the so-called Operation Crevice cases, MI5 said that it had not identified Khan and his right-hand man Shehzad Tanweer until after the July 7 attacks. And it insisted: “The Security Service did not withhold any evidence from the ISC.”

© owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Southern Limited 2007

Have Your Say: MI5 ‘had six photos of 7/7 bomber’
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Taped conversation between 7 July bombers casts doubt on MI5 account

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

THE row over MI5’s handling of the London suicide bombings escalated sharply last night as the Conservatives openly questioned the honesty of the Security Service’s account of events leading up to 7 July, 2005.

The Security Service is under intense scrutiny over the attacks because of the revelation earlier this week that its officers logged Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shezad Tanweer, two of the 7/7 bombers, meeting in early 2004 with Omar Khyam, who was on Monday jailed for life for plotting to explode fertiliser bombs in the UK.

MI5 has publicly insisted that it had too little information to fully identify Khan and Tanweer until after the attacks.

Crucially, the agency has assured ministers and MPs the decision not to fully investigate the two men in 2004 was made because none of the intelligence available at the time indicated they were involved in planning terrorist attacks in the UK.

MI5 has argued that bugged conversations and other evidence suggested they were mainly engaged in low-level fraud.

“They appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the fertiliser plot, and the intelligence collected on them gave no indication they posed a terrorist threat,” MI5 says in an unusual public statement on its website.

But with the end of Khyam’s trial, evidence is entering the public domain that some say contradict’s MI5’s version of events. In particular, a transcript of a conversation between Khyam and Khan in February 2004 suggests the two were clearly discussing involvement in jihadi activity.

The two were discussing Khan’s plans to travel to Pakistan, where he later attended a terrorist training camp. It is said that, during the summer of 2004, he changed his plans to fight in Afghanistan and decided instead to commit mass murder in the UK.

Khyam, a more experienced jihadist, gives Khan advice about life at the camp.

“One thing I will advise you, yeah, is total obedience to whoever your emir [leader] is, whether he is Sunni, Arab, Chechen, Saudi, British - total obedience,” he says, adding: “Up there you can get your head cut off.”

Of the trip, Khyam tells Khan: “This is a one-way ticket bruv.” He also says: “You won’t be allowed to take any of the jihad stuff for the flight.”

Significantly, the tape suggests the fraud Khan was involved in was directly linked with his plans to travel to Pakistan.

“You are going to leave now; you may as well rip the country apart economically as well,” Khyam says. “All the brothers are running scams and I advise you to do the same. You will probably walk away with 20 grand.”

Last night, David Davis, the Conservative shadow home secretary, stepped up his party’s criticism over the London attacks, again demanding a fresh inquiry. “Even as late as yesterday, MI5 were dismissing these two terrorists as ‘petty fraudsters’,” Mr Davis said. “This transcript shows that, far from ‘petty fraudsters’, they had jihadi sympathies, were associating with terror suspects up and down the country and planned to travel to Pakistan. The case for an independent, judge-led inquiry is overwhelming.”

That call was supported yesterday by several survivors of the London attacks, which killed 52 people.

Up to 50 of those affected by the bombings signed a letter from the 7/7 Inquiry Group, asking the Home Office for a public inquiry.

“A year ago we were being told that the bombers were ‘clean skins’, coming out of the blue,” said Rachel North, a member of the group. “It is quite apparent now that they were not.”

The government has rejected a public inquiry, arguing it would suck resources away from MI5. Instead, parliament’s intelligence and security committee will review its investigation of the case, which last year cleared MI5 of any culpable failure over the attacks.

JAMES KIRKUP

Have Your Say: Taped conversation between 7 July bombers casts doubt on MI5 account
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Senators Wary of Bush’s Wiretap Proposal

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

Citing FBI abuses and the attorney general’s troubles, senators peppered top Justice and intelligence officials Tuesday with skeptical questions about their proposal to revise the rules for spying on Americans.Senate Intelligence Committee members said the Bush administration must provide more information about its earlier domestic spying before it can hope to gain additional powers for the future.

“Is the administration’s proposal necessary, or does it take a step further down a path that we will regret as a nation?” asked Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-V.Wa., as he convened a rare public hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee he chairs.

For two hours, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, National Security Agency Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein and their lawyers tried to parry increasingly dubious and hostile questions. They deferred many answers to a committee session closed to the public.

With little apparent success, they portrayed the administration bill as merely an adjustment to technological changes wrought by cell phones, e-mail and the Internet since the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted in the 1970s. Under current rules, McConnell said, “We’re actually missing a significant portion of what we should be getting.”

But Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., responded, “We look through the lens of the past to judge how much we can trust you.” Like other senators, he said that trust was undermined by recent disclosure that the FBI had abused so-called National Security Letters to obtain information about Americans.

Whitehouse added another factor. “The attorney general has thoroughly and utterly lost my confidence,” he said in reference to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ shifting explanations for the dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys.

Rockefeller pressed a demand for documents in which he was joined by Republican vice chair Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri.

“There is simply no excuse for not providing to this committee all the legal opinions on the president’s program,” Rockefeller said.

The committee asked a year ago for Bush’s order _ and the Justice legal opinions supporting it _ that directed the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to eavesdrop without warrants on Americans believed to be in contact with terrorists.

Democrats and civil liberties and conservative groups complained that the directive violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires warrants from a secret court for intelligence surveillance of Americans. Bush agreed last January to put the program under the court’s supervision.

In 2006, the surveillance court approved all but one request to eavesdrop on people in the United States, according to the Justice Department. The court approved a total of 2,176 warrants. The FISA court also approved 43 warrants allowing investigators access to business records of suspected terrorists and spies.

Even though the administration insists the warrantless wiretapping was legal under the president’s constitutional powers, the administration bill contains a provision blocking lawsuits against telephone companies that cooperated. The administration has won most of the court battles so far over that spying, but one judge declared it illegal.

“Congress is being asked to enact legislation that brings to an end lawsuits that allege violations of the rights of Americans,” Rockefeller said. “We cannot legislate in the blind.”

The senators were not calmed by reassurances from the witnesses that the domestic wiretapping is still operating under the secret court’s supervision.

“There is nothing in this bill that confines the president to work within” the surveillance act in the future, said Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif. The same issue was raised by Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and Bill Nelson, D-Fla.

McConnell said the administration wants to work under the surveillance law now, but acknowledged “that does not mean the president would not use … (constitutional powers) in a crisis.”

“We want to go after the bad guys,” Nelson said, “but we want to prevent the creation of a dictator who takes the law in his own hands.” He said some senators and others legitimately believed Bush broke the law.

Earlier in the day, the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts reported that state prosecutors obtained a record number of criminal wiretap warrants last year to listen to more than 3 million phone conversations, mostly in drug cases. Federal prosecutors got only a third as many of these wiretaps, all in cases unrelated to terrorism.

Associated Press

Have Your Say: Senators Wary of Bush’s Wiretap Proposal
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Bush vetoes Iraq withdrawal bill

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

The US president has vetoed a bill that would have set a timetable for US troops to pull out of Iraq, saying a hasty exit would turn Iraq into “a cauldron of chaos”.

George Bush said he recognised the Democratic-controlled congress’s statement against the war made through the bill, but said US troops needed funding without further delay.

“Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a deadline for failure, and that would be irresponsible,” Bush said in a nationally televised speech on Tuesday, the fourth anniversary of his “Mission Accomplished” speech on an aircraft carrier declaring that major combat operations in Iraq had ended.

Bush said the legislation that would have required the first US combat troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by October 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later, would have imposed impossible conditions on American generals in Iraq.

The bill “substitutes the opinions of politicians for the judgment of our military commanders”, he said.

The president said setting a date for withdrawal would give al-Qaeda a haven in Iraq much like it had in Afghanistan before the September 11, 2001 attacks in the US, adding that fighters in Iraq were part of the network that wanted to attack the US again.

He vetoed the bill immediately on his return to the White House on Tuesday from a visit to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, headquarters of the US Central Command, which oversees military operations in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East.

Harry Reid, the senate majority leader, said before Bush’s veto that the president had “put our troops in the middle of a civil war”.

“Reality on the ground proves what we all know: a change of course is needed.”

Not giving up

Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives planned to hold a veto override vote on Wednesday, and while they do not have the votes to override his veto, they vow to keep fighting for a change in course.

Nancy Pelosi, the house speaker, said: “The president wants a blank check. The congress is not going to give it to him.”

Bush invited congressional leaders to the White House to reconcile differences.

Pelosi promised to work with Bush to find common ground, but said “there is a great distance between us right now”.

Reid said after the veto: “If the president thinks that by vetoing this bill, he will stop us from working to change the direction of this war, he is mistaken.”

Have Your Say: Bush vetoes Iraq withdrawal bill
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Related News

• Hillary Clinton is booed at campaign event
• 1978: Labour opposed ID cards to curb illegal immigration
• A Serious Blow to the Rights of U.S. Workers
• Anti-war group airs views, but Bush doesn’t see them
• Fingerprints Required for Britain Visas

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007 at 1:38 pm and is filed under Human Rights . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.