FROM SLAVE PATROL TO BORDER PATROL

Screening of Rights on the Line and Panel Discussion with Arnoldo Garcia, Monica Hernandez, and Chris Newman

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2 P.M.

Residents of border communities and activists capture the tension caused by the vigilante Minuteman Project through a powerful documentary, Rights on the Line. The Southern California Library will feature a screening of the documentary followed by a panel of activists working on issues of labor and immigration.

Just as the function of the slave patrols in the South was to impede mobility and to ensure return to the plantation, today the border patrol acts to impede mobility and to reinforce existing inequalities and social structures that leave targeted groups economically vulnerable. The panelists will explore the issues of immigration, labor, and the function of mobility across the border. Spanish translation will be available.

FREE. EVERYONE WELCOME, INCLUDING FAMILIES. REFRESHMENTS.

@ The Southern California Library

6120 S. Vermont Avenue, Los Angeles

(323) 759-6063 www.socallib.org

The discussion will also feature:

Special Interest Groups consider U.S. Immigration laws racist,inhumane and unjust. A possible answer to the problem would be abolishing all U.S. Statutes and adopting "word for word " Mexico's standards and law per their govenment constitution. How could any group in the United States including LULAC or ACLU be offended?

Contrary to popular belief, Mexico has very strict immigration laws which are enforced by every police agency in the country. The Bureau of Immigration can call upon any law enforcement officer to assist in their mission. Citizens from the United States traveling in Mexico without proper documents are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

Mexican law requires proof of citizenship, passport, photo I.D. destination and purpose of travel for any foreign national entering the Country. The foreign national cannot work and must have monetary funds to support their stay in Mexico.

Non-Immigrants, FM-3s must provide proof of identity as well as a financial statement, proof of income. This income must be 250 times the minimum wages paid in Mexico City.

To fully immigrate as an FM-2, proof of income required is 400 times the minimum wages paid in Mexico City.For some reason, the elite ruling class of Mexico does not appreciate immigrants that are not self-supporting or illegal aliens competing for jobs. Amnesty for law breakers is not an option.

Voting regulations in Mexico are very strict to prevent voter fraud in elections. What an amazing concept.Proof of identity with a government issued photo voter ID is required to vote within a polling district. A fingerprint is also taken. Elections are serious business in Mexico compared to the United States of America.

Mexico controls their Borders with military troops. The fact that many military or police units are corrupt and 65 percent of cocaine and marijuana seized in the U.S. comes from Mexico is not on the political "radar" in Washington D.C.

In 1989, the U.S. Government had armed squads of U.S. Marines as well as Army National Guard air support wings assisting in narcotics interdictions along the Arizona Border. It was a very effective operation, perhaps too effective. Politicians in Mexico were "outraged" that U.S. Marines were deployed along high intensity smuggling areas.

Very specific rules of engagement were in place for our Marines. If fired upon by armed smugglers, they returned fire ending the situation. Mexican military incursions on U.S. soil was not a factor and for a brief period of time, the U.S. Border Patrol regained control along the Line

"today the border patrol acts to impede mobility and to reinforce existing inequalities and social structures that leave targeted groups economically vulnerable. "

What a bunch of internationalist, snivelling tripe.

Border Patrol exists to enforce US law. You have a problem with that?

After reading these two posts:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/146762.php

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/146763.php

I have changed my mind about a number of issues. This is disgusting behaivor toward women in latin american countries and it needs to stop ASAP.

You always seem to have trouble connecting the simplest of dots and you like things to be defined in simple black and white terms.

You don't even know why border exists. All you care is that LAWS ARE ENFORCED!

You're a simpleton.

I have trouble understanding why Mexico is allowed to enforce its immigration laws but the is not.

No trouble here Petey... just reminding Leftist idiots like you what you routinely seem to forget and ignore...

The border patrol exists to enforce US law, and for no other reason. If you read more into it than that it's simple wishful thinking on your part. I can't fix wishful thinking, Petey, but I can remind you of basic facts. Now, if you can't handle the facts then you should get out of the reality business.

Ok, as long as you're not having any trouble. I thought this was another one of your "episodes".

You mean when I take a little extra time to hang you out to dry and public demonstrate what a functionally illiterate jackass you are?

The ones where, in a quest for a simple explanation to a complicated world, you focus on little details and forget to look at the big picture.

Ahh yesss... the 'Big Picture'... You mean like the fact that the primary function of Border Patrol is to enforce US law? Or is that just a little detail in your mind?

Please explain the big picture.

~ If capital can travel freely across borders, then why can't people? ~

The question kinda give you a hint as to who the Border Patrol really serves.

We should stop all capital from crossing borders?

"We should stop all capital from crossing borders?"

Why does it always have to be a negative with you guys.. nobody even mentioned that. The question is why one and not the other.

BTW, are you spelling Hypocrisy wrong on purpose.

...l mean, you've got the pro-labor union types who want to complain that their jobs are going overseas, & saying that these evil companies are exploiting foreign labor; their argument gets a bit fuzzy when you've got all that foreign labor willing to sneak across the border to try & get themselves one of those nice exploitative jobs. Then you've got the compassionate people, who want to see some good come for the suffering & impoverished, but they don't want to piss off the labor faction. Oh, what fun!

>>You mean like the fact that the primary function of Border Patrol is to enforce US law?...The border patrol exists to enforce US law. You have a problem with that?
Yes, I do.

Why is immigration illegal? Why not let people come & go as they please, so long as they aren't carrying in dirty bombs, or plans to blow up tall buildings? What's the freakin' deal?? Why does US law make it so hard for peaceful people to come & go?

I don't really have so much of a problem w/ the people who want to put up a giant wall along the borders -- I mean, I'm not a fan of borders myself, but if we're going to have them, I can understand the argument that they need to mean something. However, aside from the reasonable security issues, people should be able to come & go freely...and take whatever it is that's rightfully theirs with them.



sh(A)ne

Regardless, Why should this country allow illegal immigration? Mexico dosen't. My concern is not immigration, my concerns is illegal immigration. The undocumented. Who are they? That is a reasonable and a responsible question. Are they escaping justice from another country? Do they have some agenda other than working in this country? Who knows? Are they terrorist bent on killing Americans and there families? and if so, would work place enforcement expose them? There are many reasons to want to know who is in this country. Wouldn't you agree?

"The undocumented. Who are they? "

Well, maybe if they didn't have to sneak across the border an accurate record could be kept..

Just because they are impatient dosen't mean they should be allowed to break the law. Many legal immigrants wait. While they are in line the State Department checks there records. Thats the point. People who sneak across may have something to hide and should be arrested if nothing more than to check them out. Do you think these people are going to sign up for a guest worker program if they have something to hide? I think not. They will continue to break U.S. laws.

Look son,

These people are here already. Deal in the real world, not abstract theories. Obviously it would have been better if the immigration laws were reasonable and they allowed people that wanted to come here to work the ability to do so legally.

But they aren't.

It's not about being "patient" or any other of you're high and mighty, armchair musings. This is the real world.

They may already be here, but they may be forced to leave.

I am changing my mind on this issue. This not a good thing at all. http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/146763.php

That linked article says that women in Mexico are organizing and demanding their rights. What's wrong with that?

A lot of American capital has crossed out of America's borders, in the form of weapons and military might.

Shane - you haven't been reading the site for the past year have you?

Your strawman arguments... they aren't even the right strawmen. The pro-labor types are on both sides of the argument.

One distinction is between those who believe that working people benefit by having workers unite, despite a difference in status... and those who think that there should be greater segregation, and deportation.

Another is between those who think that multi-culture and/or Mexican culture and/or indigenous culture should be here, and those who think it should not. I think this is the main divide, because at the demonstrations, there's a huge difference in racial demographics. Moreover, the anti-immigrant side (ok, "anti-illegal-immigrant, pro-exclusivity re-establishmentarian side") has sought to exacerbate the divisions between "black" and "brown" people. They are thinking of race a lot.

There's also a divide between the "law and order" attitude, and the "no borders" attitude. The anti-immigrant side makes a big issue of it because it gives them a lot of leverage -- the laws favor them. The anarchists have come out to support the "no borders" ideas, but, most of the anarchists who go are also working class people of Mexican or immigrant descent.

Been out of town for a while I know you missed me. Interesting question. I believe remittance of illegal alien labor and legal alien labor to foriegn contries should be taxed. Why? because for the most part the U.S. is losing the revenue that could help the infustructure. Build more schools, re-open emergancy rooms, etc. Other than sales tax, it seems the underground economy of illegal immigrants is mainley un-taxed.

> Special Interest Groups consider U.S.

> Immigration laws racist,inhumane and

> unjust.

Er, no. Most humans on this planet consider restricting the free movements of people to be considered a violation of human rights. Trying to pretend that "Special Interest Groups" -- capitalized like some stupid fucking idiot wants to pretend that makes it sound more sinister -- are the only ones opposed to human rights violations is silly.

Now I'm personally against open borders -- which means I have to admit that when it comes to some human rights held by some people by virtue of where they were born, their rights must be supplanted by other people's rights.

It isn't fair, it isn't right, but I recognize the consequences and benefits of free and open borders and the detrimental consequences dictate we must violate other people's human rights.

Regardless, trying to pretend that human rights is some kind of "Special Interst Groups" is something only a Republican pile of compost could dream up.

My opinions only and only my opinions.

"Most humans on this planet consider restricting the free movements of people to be considered a violation of human rights."

Where can I find this information? Is there a poll? or is this your belief or opinion?

Is it because most people on this planet are poor and they would like access to countries that are better off?

I am just curiuos.

It's not about being "patient" or any other of you're high and mighty, armchair musings. This is the real world.

how is population and ecnomonic stabilization an "abstract" theory?

there are literally hundreds of millions, if not BILLIONS, of people who would love to move here and work. how is it logical to just let them come in by any number they feel like, and at any time they feel like?

the discussion isn't just about people already here, it also pertains to those who will come illegally in the future.

you guys will never win on this subject, so you'll just resort to racism or other nonsense. you'll attempt to make jokes and frauds of people on our side (those that favor secure borders) by pointing semantics out, but you will never be able to fight against the truth and logic of the argument.

"Well, maybe if they didn't have to sneak across the border an accurate record could be kept.."

They don't HAVE to sneak accross the border, Petey. They could apply for LEGAL immigration. You ever heard of that?

You said: ~ If capital can travel freely across borders, then why can't people? ~ "

I'll tell you why, Petey...

Because capital doesn't organize itself into violent gangs.

Because capital doesn't deal drugs on street corners.

Because capital doesn't cost Americans billions in hospital costs every year.

Because capital doesn't cost Americans billions in education costs every year.

Because capital doesn't send 15 billion per year OUT of the US to Mexico every year.



Get it, Petey?

">>You mean like the fact that the primary function of Border Patrol is to enforce US law?...The border patrol exists to enforce US law. You have a problem with that?
Yes, I do.

Why is immigration illegal? "

You have a problem with enforcing the law... Then you ask "Why is immigration illegal?"

Turn the lights on sh(A)ne. We are NOT talking about 'immigration'... we are talking about ILLEGAL immigration. Do you understand the difference????

Some day, when you actually pay federal taxes to support the illegals you don't seem to understand are illegals, you'll wonder why you asked such a stupid question.

>Because capital doesn't organize itself into violent gangs.

Pinkerton. Wackenhut. Blackwater.

There are also gangs, like the Mafia, the Triads, Yakuza, Eme, and biker gangs that operate as businesses.

>Because capital doesn't deal drugs on street corners.

They aren't selling drugs as a hobby. It's a job, and capital was required to create the situation where it was necessary to sell surplus inventory quickly.

>Because capital doesn't cost Americans billions in hospital costs every year.

Most injuries are on-the-job.

>Because capital doesn't cost Americans billions in education costs every year.

You have a point there. Education is capital that's spent to educate the next generation. It's a "cost of doing business."

>Because capital doesn't send 15 billion per year OUT of the US to Mexico every year.

I bet capitalists want to invest in Mexico even more heavily than they do now.

I think it's better that billions enter the market via the people, rather than via corporations.

I read a good interview about this issue:

http://spaces.msn.com/ocorganizer/blog/cns!CF609DB270D4658B!237.entry?_c11_blogpart_blogpart=blogview&_c=blogpart#permalink

From the article:

Q: In your view, what is the most fundamental misunderstanding that people in this country have about what they call illegal immigration to this country?

A: We often think that migration results from conditions in Mexico that are independent of the United States, and [of] a demand for labor—the old “push-pull” model. The fact of the matter is that for over 100 years migration has been a social consequence of the actions of American capital in Mexico. The most obvious example now is the North American Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which is uprooting on a massive scale throughout Mexico.

Q: How does that start?

A: Mexican immigration starts at about 1905 and continues on to the present. Early analysis claimed that the Mexican Revolution was the push factor. But the Mexican Revolution ends and the migration [to America] continues…By 1900 the United States virtually controlled the modern sectors of the Mexican economy…American capital took over the railroad [and] virtually all mining in Mexico. The consequence of this invasion was the displacement of people in Mexico from the traditional farmlands—where the railroads were being constructed—to larger cities.

There are not hundreds of millions of people who want to immigrate. Right now, the level is around 800,000 legal, and some unknown number illegal (but not too large).

I'd guesstimate that if you opened up the gates, you'd see around 3 million per year, mostly from Asia and Latin America. Over time, it'd stabilize to around a million or a little more per year. These are just numbers out my ass, but they're based on real numbers, not thin air and fear, like Mike's claim of "hundreds of millions."

As unemployment rises in the immigrant community, people stop immigrating. It's that simple.

Somewhere between 800,000 per year, and the low millions per year, is a better balance of legal immigration that will improve conditions for workers, by giving them more rights.

The most difficult group to handle would be refugees running away from war. Unlike immigrants, they don't move for economic reasons, and thus, don't tend to bring along money and skills. (We probably forget this because many of our refugees come from the elite, capitalist strata of war-torn countries facing communist revolution.) Refugees are likely to be the oppressed in their own countries, and may even lack literacy.

>>Trying to pretend that "Special Interest Groups" -- capitalized like some stupid fucking idiot wants to pretend that makes it sound more sinister -- are the only ones opposed to human rights violations is silly.
Exactly.

I hate that term, "special interest groups", btw. I mean, what the hell is it supposed to mean, anyway? What makes some interests "special", and what about that makes them evil?!

It seems to me that, the way it's being used, a "special" interest is one that doesn't take into consideration "the common weal". The problem though, is that there isn't a "common weal"! We all have differing interests -- "special interests", and there's nothing wrong with that.

There is, however, a set of interests held by the majority; and that make up the status quo. When you think about it this way -- if "special interests" are simply those that run counter to the status quo -- then this bitterly-negative attitude about "special interest groups" is a really frightening trend.

sh(A)ne

First, Johnk: Well said. The economic impacts of immigration are largely self-regulating; the exception of refugees being a small but valid counterpoint. Still, the situation of Cuban refugees (which I'm most familiar with) settling near Miami is one that gives me hope that social structures within the community are as capable of handling the problems that arise, as I believe they are.

Now, Scorpio:

>>You have a problem with enforcing the law... Then you ask "Why is immigration illegal?"
Um, yes. My problem with enforcing the law is sort-of indirect though; my real problem is with the law itself. (Think about it. It'll make sense. Just take it slow.)

>>Turn the lights on sh(A)ne. We are NOT talking about 'immigration'... we are talking about ILLEGAL immigration. Do you understand the difference????


Of course I do. My question was, "why should _any_ immigration be illegal?" I don't believe it should. Why should coming to this country be against the law? Where's the harm? Where's the crime?!

Immigration with a trunk-full of 13-year old Mexican girls to sell into prostitution: Yeah, that I can see being called "illegal immigration". But short of that, there should only be one category: Immigration. Come & go as you please. I expect to be able to do the same.

>>Some day, when you actually pay federal taxes to support the illegals you don't seem to understand are illegals, you'll wonder why you asked such a stupid question.
;) Sir, I hope to never pay federal taxes. I get a letter in the mail every year telling me how much I've already paid into "my" social security account (which I'd be a fool to ever expect to see), and it makes me sick. I paid most of that money while I was trying (unsuccessfully @ first) to work my way through college -- I could have made far better use of that money, and finished college a lot sooner; but the good o'l voting majority sez I'm better off saving for my retirement, & that they'll handle it for me. Great.

If you want to do something about taxes, I'd suggest you start with the real expenses, like the absurd war in iraq, the no-bid contracts for Haliburton & friends, the gzillion-dollar medicare/medicaid/perscription drug entitlement program that's nothing more than old people voting themselves benefits right out of my generation's pockets. Illegal immigrants?! C'mon.

You'll find the word "trillion" written more times in the federal budget than you will in an astronomy class! Let's start with the numbers with all the zeroes behind them; once they're gone, I'll join you in complaining about public funding for immigrants (or anyone else).

sh(A)ne

Cuban refugees are a good example of how we have a distorted perspective about refugees. They were fleeing a communist revolution, and had assets outside of the Cuban banks. They were the rich of Cuba, or the hired rentacops of the rich.

Many refugees are not the rich people of their countries.

>>Many refugees are not the rich people of their countries.
No, no: I was referring to the ones we have coming over to Miami in boats made out of bathtubs or cars or whatever else they can strap together that'll float! (Not the ones escaping the revolution; the ones escaping the effects of the revolution...47 years later.

The Cuban community in Miami has a network of assistance in place to help the "dry-feet" who make it to Florida. They help find them jobs, & get them on their feet, so to speak. It's really pretty amazing.

sh(A)ne