Sunday, May 2, 2010

1070 Immigration Bill Op-Ed - Latino Perspectives Magazine - May 2010 - Phoenix, Arizona

As an immigration bill that nationally embarrasses Arizona becomes bad law, our best hope in my hometown is that the rest of America doesn’t do to Arizona what Senate Bill 1070 requires our police officers to do to people with brown skin
1070 Immigration Bill Op-Ed

PHOENIX – As an immigration bill that nationally embarrasses Arizona becomes bad law, our best hope in my hometown is that the rest of America doesn’t do to Arizona what Senate Bill 1070 requires our police officers to do to people with brown skin.

“Profile” us based on stereotypes and insufficient information.

Arizona is not a state seething with hatred, eager to trample the civil rights of its citizens in haphazard pursuit of illegal immigrants. Nor are most Arizonans bigots anxious to drag our state back to the 1980s, when Gov. Evan Mecham’s absurd behavior made our home a national laughingstock.

1070 Immigration Bill Op-Ed - Latino Perspectives Magazine - May 2010 - Phoenix, Arizona

As illegal immigration falls, is America in decline? - CSMonitor.com

Not only is illegal immigration on the wane, a tiny but growing Americans are giving up their citizenship. Some see these trends as signs of decline.

What’s going on in Arizona? The state legislature has passed a law that allows the police to stop anyone on the street and ask him for his papers. If his papers are not in order, the fellow is in trouble.

As illegal immigration falls, is America in decline? - CSMonitor.com

Arizona action raises thorny issue for California Republicans - latimes.com

California Republicans have spent 16 years trying to repair the wounds from their long-ago collision with the explosive issue of illegal immigration. Then, in an election season no less, all the tumult came rushing back last week amid the national furor over Republican-controlled Arizona's decision to pass the nation's toughest immigration law.

Democrats contended that the measure would lead to racial profiling and uniformly denounced it, particularly the requirement that police demand citizenship papers from those they suspect are undocumented. Republicans here split into camps. Their candidates issued excruciatingly detailed statements of their positions that, in many cases, made their positions indecipherable.

To many who had lived through the Republican Party's slump in California — one caused at least in part by the animosities from 1994's anti-illegal immigration measure, Proposition 187 — it was deja

Arizona action raises thorny issue for California Republicans - latimes.com

Thousands in Dallas rally to keep Arizona-style immigration law out of Texas

Those who took part here were anxious that Texas might soon follow Arizona, whose law will give authorities with cause for suspicion the right to question a person's immigration status. Several Texas Republicans have said they plan to introduce similar legislation.

Thousands in Dallas rally to keep Arizona-style immigration law out of Texas

Saturday, December 6, 2008

Catholic Diocese of Phoenix postion on AZ Proposition 102 -

From the words of Thomas Jefferson

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."
- Thomas Jefferson

Civil Rights for the Gay Community

30 years after Harvey Milk lead the fight to defeat Proposition 6 in CA against Anita Bryant the fight has come to us in AZ, FL, AK and CA once again.

Have you voice heard. In the coming days, weeks and months we will present a concise clear picture of how to stand for civil rights and the right to marry regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

We - gay, lesbian, bis-sexual, transgender, queer and questioning people are human beings not "issues."

Stand Up Step Out and Sound Off - Now is the time!r

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

ANNIE ON OFFENSE

ANNIE ON OFFENSE

In the wake of the passage of Prop 102 in Arizona, Phoenix activist Annie Loyd has helped organize several successful demonstrations in reaction to the anti-gay prop.

First, there was a march on November 15 that drew thousands in downtown Phoenix. Then a 1,000-person demo in Glendale, which was initially organized to counter a planned protest by Kansas gay-hater Fred Phelps' virulently homophobic Westboro Baptist Church but turned into a sort of pro-gay marriage, gay rights love-in when WBC didn't show. And, finally, a candlelight vigil across from the Mormon Arizona Temple in Mesa, on the night the temple's popular Christmas light display opened.

"Today is a new day," Loyd told The Bird recently. "It's about the people, not the politicians."

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Immigration Raid in Arizona Could Test New State Law

Published: June 12, 2008

MESA, Ariz. — A raid on two busy water parks and the arrest of nine workers suspected of being illegal immigrants might become the first case to test Arizona’s new employer sanctions law.

The law, which went into effect in January, carries penalties that suspend or revoke business licenses of employers who “knowingly” hire illegal immigrants. It has yet to result in a prosecution.

The raid, which was carried out on Tuesday by Maricopa County deputies, followed a four-month investigation of hiring practices at the water parks, Golfland Sunsplash in Mesa and Waterworld Safari in Phoenix, said the Maricopa County sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Both parks are owned by Golfland Entertainment Centers, which is based here and operates three parks in Arizona and six in California.

Deputies arrested the workers on charges of suspicion of identity theft and using forged documents to obtain employment.

The authorities also used search warrants to seize personnel records, which they will use to investigate whether a violation of the employer sanctions law occurred, Sheriff Arpaio said.

The director of marketing for the parks, Dave Johnson, said Golfland executives were not worried about a follow-up investigation. “We don’t think we have anything to hide,” he said.

Read more - - -

Arpaio's thugs threaten to arrest a New Times reporter for looking at public records

Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 09:30:16 PM

By Ray Stern

How close did I come to getting arrested by Maricopa County sheriff's deputies today? As Maxwell Smart would say, "Missed it by that much."

mcso%20guys.jpg
These cowardly MCSO deputies refused to identify themselves.

The problem: I had the nerve to want to look at the same public records that sheriff's deputies were scouring at the City of Phoenix public records counter.

First, a little background.

You'll recall that Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon has been putting a lot of political heat on Sheriff Joe Arpaio in recent months, ripping Arpaio for conducting "crime-supression sweeps" that are really intended to find illegal immigrants. At a luncheon in March to honor Cesar Chavez, Gordon said the Sheriff's Office was doing little more than locking up "brown people with broken tail lights." He reiterated the theme in a May 2008 Latino Perspectives Magazine article, writing that Arpaio has "created a 'Sanctuary County for Felons' with his reckless priorities–that target brown skin and cracked tail lights– instead of killers and drug dealers."

Pretty harsh words, and when the sheriff gets attacked, he bites back. In late April, the Sheriff's Office put in a public records request for every e-mail obtained or received from the mayor and a bunch of his staff members, including City Manager Frank Fairbanks. Arpaio also wants to see the mayor's meeting calendar and cell phone records. As New Times columnist Sarah Fenske wrote last month, the request appears to be a fishing expedition for any records that could harm the mayor politically.

It should go without saying that this request is another example of how Arpaio abuses the police powers of his office to try to intimidate and quiet his critics.

But it's also proving that Arpaio and his deputies are hypocrites, for two reasons:

Because the sheriff's public information officials often complain when the news media attempts the same kind of fishing expedition that his office is now conducting. And because the MCSO is taking advantage of a liberal public-records policy at the City of Phoenix that allows the public to scan in or photograph public records for free to avoid copying fees.

As I've written in a previous article, the Sheriff's Office won't let anyone to scan or photograph public records it releases, instead demanding a whopping 50 cents a page for copies. As my article notes, after I argued with the sheriff's publicly funded private lawyer about this issue in October, the Sheriff's Office cited me for disorderly conduct. I pleaded not guilty and am continuing to fight the charge.

Today, I got wind that sheriff's deputies were at the City of Phoenix building at 200 West Washington scanning public records into a machine they'd brought with them. When I arrived at the 15th-floor records counter about 3 p.m., two deputies were sitting near their scanner, waiting for the device to process a stack of papers. A large file box was next to the scanner, full of thousands of pages of documents.

msco%20scanner.jpg

I strolled up to the deputies, identified myself, and asked who they were. They refused to reveal their names, but that's them in the picture at the top of this article. I told the pair I was interested in seeing what documents the city had released to them, and asked them if it was all right if I took a peek at some of the documents in the box that they weren't using at the time. They said no way, then turned over some of the public records that had been face-up so I couldn't see them.

I stated that I had the right to simply reach into the box and look at the records, but the deputy in the blue shirt said he "wouldn't advise that." Which I took to mean, by the words and his tone, that he'd arrest me.

I called the mayor's office and told Scott Phelps, Gordon's spokesman, what was happening. And a few minutes later, City Attorney Gary Verburg showed up. In no uncertain terms, Verburg told the deputies I had the right to look at the public records.

Unfortunately, Verburg had to attend a City Council meeting and couldn't stick around. By then, brave blue-shirt had called for back-up.

In walked MCSO Captain Jim Miller and a couple of other deputies, including one of the sheriff's legion of highly paid flacks, Paul Chagolla. The deputies surrounded the scanner so I couldn't get near it to see what secrets they had obtained from the city.

Miller proved himself to be a real bully, practically begging me make a move that would allow him to arrest me. He accused me of wanting to take public records literally from his deputies' hands, warning me that such an action would certainly lead to arrest. He picked up a couple of random folders sitting on the records counter and waved them in my face. "Take these papers from my hand!" he snarled. "Take these papers from my hand!"

When I declined, he grinned smugly. "Wise man," he said.

capt%20james%20miller.jpg
Captain Jim Miller, (and the back of flack Paul Chagolla's head)

Then, Chagolla took his turn. He wagged a finger in my face, threatening repeatedly to arrest me for interfering with the sheriff's "investigation" if I tried to look at the documents getting scanned, or those in the box next to the scanner. Telling him the city attorney said it was my right legally to look in the box didn't phase him. Chagolla warned that he intended to report my actions to the City of Phoenix prosecutor who is helping the Sheriff's Office ream me on the bogus disorderly conduct charge.

A Phoenix security officer showed up, as well as two or three Phoenix police officers, including one commander. Hoping to prevent the showdown from getting truly ugly, the Phoenix records clerks said I could begin looking at the boxes of documents the deputies had scanned already, and I agreed to do that.

In about an hour, I quickly flipped through a few thousand pages of copies. It was a big pile of nothing. Typical e-mails about immigration issues. Citizens e-mailing city staff members newspaper articles, sometimes railing against or lending support to the mayor's views. Boring internal memos. I went through the stacks pretty fast. It seems the Sheriff's Office is getting zilch in this publicly funded vendetta against Gordon for speaking his mind (not that this would stop Arpaio from trumping up something against Gordon. He's done it before. His minions have done it to me).

While I was perusing the documents, a city "conflict resolution manager" walked up and laid down an Arizona law book. She pointed to the section of public records law that essentially says anyone can look at any public record during business hours. And then City Attorney Verburg came back and told me and the deputies again that I had the right to look at any public record. Upon hearing that, the deputies warned me again that if I tried to look at the documents in the box next to the scanner, I'd be arrested.

Of course, by then it didn't matter, since I'd seen most of the documents they'd scanned in previously, and those in the box (as well as two or three other boxes of papers the deputies had yet to scan in) were likely just more of the same. In any case, it appeared there was nothing worth getting arrested over today. New Times will look at the rest of the records soon enough.

"It's an unusual request," Verburg said later of Arpaio's public records search. "I don't think it will turn up anything."

Whether that prediction is accurate remains to be seen. But the city should've made the sheriff's request for records a much more difficult endeavor--by forcing Arpaio to play by his own rules. That is, forbid the deputies from using a scanner. Charge them 50 cents a page.

Heck, why not make the deputies review records in the city jail, using only a pencil and paper to take notes. (Arpaio has forced reporters he doesn't like, including me, to review records, using only a pencil and paper, inside one of his county gulags.)

That is, the city should fight back with the same intimidation tactics that Arpaio unleashes routinely on anybody who bucks him.

Monday, June 2, 2008

Hamas Condemns the Holocaust

"It should be made clear that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian government in Gaza denies the Nazi Holocaust. The Holocaust was not only a crime against humanity but one of the most abhorrent crimes in modern history. We condemn it as we condemn every abuse of humanity and all forms of discrimination..."

read more | digg story

Arpaio's Goodyear Protest

On 5/31/08, in honor of Scott Norberg and many others who have died in Arpaio's custody, one protester dared ask the Sheriff a few tough questions. For more info :

read more | digg story

Give undocumented grads a chance | DesMoinesRegister.com | T

Opponents don't want to reward any sort of illegal immigration, even though it's not the fault of young people - mostly Hispanic - who had no choice in coming to the United States. Or perhaps they don't want to reopen the divisive debate over America's broken immigration system, despite the clear need for reform . . .

read more | digg story

M.I.A. from the Immigration Debate, Creating Economic Opport

For all the talk about immigration reform on the Hill, there has been notably little discussion about what is driving Mexican immigrants to pour over the border into the U.S., let alone any debate about measures that might go to the root of the problem.

read more | digg story

FRONTLINE/World Mexico . Crimes at the Border | PBS

“Unless you can stop poverty or hunger, it will never stop, because people will always want to help their families. Doesn’t matter how tall the wall is, they will just dig a hole then. So you will never stop people getting across [into] the United States.”

read more | digg story

Thursday, May 15, 2008

California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban

The California Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex couples should be permitted to marry, rejecting state marriage laws as discriminatory.

read more | digg story

Immigrants in the US Armed Forces By Jeanne Batalova, PhD

Immigrants in the US Armed Forces By Jeanne Batalova, PhD
Migration Policy Institute


May 2008

According to data from the Department of Defense, more than 65,000 immigrants (non-US citizens and naturalized citizens) were serving on active duty in the US Armed Forces as of February 2008. Since September 2001, US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has naturalized more than 37,250 foreign-born members of the US Armed Forces and granted posthumous citizenship to 111 service members.

The current presence of immigrants in the military has a number of historical precedents. According to USCIS, the foreign born composed half of all military recruits by the 1840s and 20 percent of the 1.5 million service members in the Union Army during the Civil War.

Naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents, and certain nationals of three countries in free association with the United States — the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau — are eligible for military service. In addition, Congress can deem other foreign-born individuals as eligible to serve if the secretary of a specific military branch "determines that such enlistment is vital to the national interest."

This Spotlight focuses on the statistics and policy changes regarding the foreign born in the army, navy, marines and air force. The data come from the Department of Defense (as of February 2008) and from USCIS (as of April 2008) unless otherwise noted.

Note: In this Spotlight, the terms "immigrant" and "foreign born" are used interchangeably and refer to members of the US military who are either naturalized citizens or noncitizens.

Click on the bullet points below for more information:

Statistics on Immigrant Service Members on Active Duty Citizenship and the Armed Forces Statistics on Immigrant Service Members on Active Duty

Approximately 65,000 immigrants serve in the armed forces.
As of February 2008, there were 65,033 foreign-born individuals on active duty in the US military. This number includes both naturalized citizens and noncitizens.

Read More

United for Human Rights

Today we call for all people to Stand Up and Step Out for Human Rights!
We celebrate the 60 year anniversary of the United Nations adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Take the time to know the doctrine.
Take the time to request the United States make human rights a priority!

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."

PREAMBLE

    Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

    Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

    Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

    Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

    Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

    Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

    Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1.

    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

    Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

    Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.

    No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.

    No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.

    Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

    All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.

    Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.

    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

    Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.

    (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

    (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.

    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

    (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.

    (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

    (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.

    (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

    (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.

    (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

    (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

    (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.

    (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

    (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

    (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

    (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.

    Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.

    (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

    (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

    (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

    (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.

    Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

    (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

    (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

    (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

    (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

    (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.

    (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

    (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.

    Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.

    (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

    (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

    (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

    Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Dead End

Beaten, hanged, strangled, and ignored, these men and a woman lost their lives in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's custody

By John Dickerson

Published on December 20, 2007

• On March 26, 1996, Jose Rodriquez, 39, died in a pool of his own vomit on a jail floor. His cries for help went ignored by Arpaio's jail employees. Rodriquez's dehydration, fever and twitching ultimately led to his death, even while inmates shouted for help. • On June 1, 1996, Scott Norberg, 35, suffocated in one of Arpaio's restraint chairs. Detention officers wrestled Norberg into the chair and bound his mouth with a towel. They continued to beat and Taser him after he was handcuffed, surveillance video and court documents show. His family later won an $8.25 million settlement against Arpaio.

• Mentally retarded Charles Agster III, 33, was arrested for trespassing on August 6, 2001. Detention officers pulled a hood over his head and slammed him into a restraint chair. Agster was asphyxiated to the point that he became brain dead. He was pronounced legally dead three days later. In 2006, a federal court awarded $9 million to his family.

• In 2003, Phillip Wilson was serving two months in Tent City for a nonviolent offense. Wilson was attacked by the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang and bludgeoned into a coma. He never recovered.

Deborah Braillard, 46, was documented as a diabetic in the jail's health records. Her cellmates say a nurse did not give Braillard insulin, and then detention officers ignored her when she went into diabetic shock. Braillard died on January 23, 2005, ultimately from lack of insulin.

• Legally blind and serving a short sentence in Tent City for shoplifting, Brian Crenshaw, 40, was transferred to solitary confinement after a tussle with Arpaio's detention officers. Six days later, he was found comatose in his solitary cell with a broken neck, ruptured intestines, broken toes, and severe internal injuries. Arpaio maintains Crenshaw sustained the injuries when he fell off his four-foot bed. Crenshaw died on March 14, 2005.

• In December 2005, Clint Yarbrough suffocated in a jail restraint chair. On April 18, 2007, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors approved an undisclosed settlement payout to Yarbrough's family in excess of $1 million.

• Months before Thomas Bruce Cooley, 44, was found hanging by the bed sheets in his jail cell, a federal inspector had warned Arpaio that the jail psych ward was a suicide waiting to happen. A 1996 Department of Justice report specifically cautioned that inmates could use "overhanging structures" to hang themselves.

• Three more inmates died in the same way as Thomas Cooley while in Arpaio's custody: Kevin Holschlag, Michael Sanderson, and Juan Vasquez.

Reborn In America

The images are burned into the minds of most Americans: immigrants sneaking across the border and being rounded up in raids by federal agents. And then there is the angry politician demanding that something be done. But immigrants have played a huge role in making Orlando. Few realize that one of the oldest buildings in downtown Orlando, the Rogers Building on Magnolia and Pine, was once a club for British immigrants. Or that people from Scandinavia came here in the late 1800s to help Henry Sanford plant orange trees.

Today, immigrants come to Orlando from all over the world. And many have been major contributors to the city’s growth. We looked at some people who have become leading players in Orlando and asked them to tell their stories of coming to America.

Read full story

Friday, May 25, 2007

Stand Up Step Out

We, the Independent Voices and Voters of the United States, have a historic opportunity available to us right now. We say we want change. We say we want something different. We say we are tired of politics of as usual.

We - have the opportunity to identify what we have in common and what common goals we want to focus on.

Participate in this ongoing dialogue.

Propose solutions.

Propose what you believe we have in common.

Propose how we can unite and work together to create a systematic change in the United States and create a new participatory democracy working for the people.

This is our moment - this is our opportunity to restore hope, empower a movement and activate a culture of unified common goals.