Archive for the ‘Arizona’ Category

Advertisements

BTC –  While racial profiling potentials dominate media coverage of Arizona’s new law, SB 1070, the privacy concerns of those profiled have been overshadowed.  Tempe Ariz. resident, David Huerta, a privacy code engineer for Haystackproject.org, expressed concerns about massive transfer of citizen data and how the handling of his private information could be insecure.   Huerta is also a speaker this week at the Computing, Freedom and Privacy Conference in San Jose, Calif.

Unfortunately for Huerta, and other hispanics, Arizona’s law enforcement will not be trained on any additional privacy handling practices specific to SB 1070, according to Executive Director, Lyle Mann, for Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board. No privacy impact assessments were conveyed to AZPOST, the agency who develops training for Arizona’s law enforcement practices.   Agencies responsible for policies to implement to the new law are the Arizona’s Sherriff’s Departments, the Arizona Department of Public Safety and any agency who may recruited as First Responders.

Law enforcement training to implement SB 1070 is expected to commence soon according to DPS Seargant,  Kevin Wood.   Privacy impact assessments for the new law were unkown or unavailable to Seargant Wood. Officers may be responsible for enforcing the law as soon as July, 29th 2010.

BTC  – Arizona Governor, Jan Brewer met with President Obama this week on immigration reform urging completion of the border wall fence, including aerial surveillance drones.  Republicans divided over the effectiveness of the fence argue security at the border will not come cheap.

Mainstream opinion, billed as news, from “conservative” or “liberal” narrative sources come across as social or racial biases vs. lower taxes and jail tight security for America. However, Classical Liberals (considered conservative) and Modern liberals find themselves in agreement on the border fence. Free-market proponents and progressive Greens on the border sound very similar.  
Please compare this Competitive Enterprise Institute, OpEd to the following OpEd release from Sierra Club border fence advocate, Scott Nicols.

Trading on Fear in an Election Year: 
Members of Congress Push for More Border Walls


By Scott Nicol 


On May 25, President Obama announced that he would deploy up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the US-Mexico border.  This followed a White House meeting with Congressional Republicans aimed at attracting support for, or at least blunting opposition to, comprehensive immigration reform legislation.  With mid-term elections on the horizon, conservative members of Congress have turned their attention to the border.  Or, more precisely, to walling it off.  In May two bills and one amendment aimed at building more border walls were introduced.  One failed, but the other two are still pending.


If you thought that the walling off of the Nature Conservancy’s Southmost Preserve marked an end to border wall construction, think again.


On Cinco de Mayo Senator Jim DeMint announced that he would reintroduce his “Finish the Fence” amendment.  It would change the Secure Fence Act to say that, “Fencing that does not effectively restrain pedestrian traffic (such as vehicle barriers and virtual fencing) may not be used to meet the 700-mile fence requirement.”  As of April 2010DHS reports that it has completed 347 miles of “pedestrian fence”, meant to stop people on foot, and 299 miles of “vehicle barriers.”  If DeMint’s amendment makes it into law an additional 353 miles of “pedestrian fence” will be built along the border.


When DeMint proposed this amendment last July, the Senate voted 54 to 44 to include it in the Department of Homeland Security’s annual appropriations bill.  The House version of the bill did not contain a matching provision, and Representative Ciro Rodriguez, who, unlike DeMint, represents a district encompassing part of the border, was able to remove it during the House/Senate conference committee. 


This time around DeMint attempted to attach his amendment to Financial Reform legislation.  Seeing that this had nothing to do with financial reform (in fact, at roughly $7.5 million per mile DeMint’s new walls would cost taxpayers $2,647,500,000) DeMint’s amendment was not adopted.  Following this failure DeMint tried to attach it to a bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  That attempt also fell short (though just barely), but he will almost certainly try again between now and the November elections.


Even more extreme than DeMint’s amendment is Representative Todd Tiahrt’s Secure the Border Act, which requires continuous double-layered border walls along the entire 2,000 mile long border, from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico.  Tiahrt made no attempt to explain how the monumental expense of his legislation would benefit his Kansas constituents, who already have Oklahoma and Texas acting as buffers between them and Mexico.


InsteadTiahrt proudly proclaimed that the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and NumbersUSA support his bill.  FAIR has earned a place on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups.  They received $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, an organization founded to promote eugenics and foster policies of “racial betterment.”


NumbersUSA has also been denounced by the Southern Poverty Law Center for its ties to nativist and racist organizations. FAIR president Dan Stein and NumbersUSA president Roy Beck both formerly edited the white nationalist publication The Social Contract.  One would expect Congressman Tiahrt to avoid their endorsements, not embrace them. 


When he announced his bill Tiahrt neglected to mention that before his election to the House or Representatives he was employed by Boeing, where he worked on a number of government contracts.  His old boss has not forgotten him; in 2009-2010 Boeing was Tiahrt’s biggest campaign contributor.  Boeing is in turn one of the largest recipients of contracts for the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), which includes both solid border walls and virtual fences.  To dateBoeing has received 13 task orders for SBI, totaling $1.2 billion


Representative Tiahrt is currently running for the U.S. Senate.  Senate races are expensive, and a successful candidate needs publicity to energize voters.  Boeing has consistently provided him with campaign cash, and NumbersUSA and FAIR make regular appearances on FOX news, where they defend anti-immigrant legislation and promote favorite legislators such as Tiahrt.


Not to be left out, Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl rolled out a “10-Point Border Security Plan”, along with accompanying legislation.  Their bill would“construct double- and triple-layer fencing” throughout Arizona.  McCain also released a campaign commercial in which he and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu walk alongside the border wall and discuss McCain’s border scheme. 


“The plan is perfect,” Sheriff Babeu intones.


“Then complete the danged fence,” McCain responds, with the domain CompleteTheDangedFence.com on the screen below him.


Those who try to visit the website are redirected to JohnMcCain.com, where they can purchase McCain t-shirts or donate to his reelection campaign. 


McCain is in a tough primary fight with JD Hayworth, who has been attacking McCain for his prior willingness to support immigration reform.  Before Hayworth threatened to unseat him, McCain told Vanity Fair, “I think the fence is least effective. But I’ll build the g–damned fence if they want it.” The possibility of losing the election has caused the Senator to embrace the border wall that he once dismissed.


Sheriff Babeu seems like an odd choice to accompany McCain alongside the Nogales border wall.  Babeu’s jurisdiction is 115 miles north of Nogales, and does not include any of the border that McCain advocates walling off.  Why not consult an actual border sheriff about his border security plan?


Because those who work on the border might give an honest answer, instead of reading McCain’s cue cards.  If he were to ask Nogales Assistant Police Chief Roy Bermudez, for example, the response might mirror Bermudez’ statement earlier this month, when he said, “We have not, thank God, witnessed any spillover violence from Mexico.”


Clarence Dupnik, Sheriff of neighboring Pima County, which also includes a long stretch of the US-Mexico border, said at that time, “This is a media-created event. I hear politicians on TV saying the border has gotten worse. Well, the fact of the matter is that the border has never been more secure.”


In fact, according to FBI statistics, crime rates in Arizona border towns, including Nogales, have remained flat for the past decade.  There has been no increase in violence as a result of “spillover” from Mexico.  There was also no decrease in crime following the erection of border walls and the hiring of thousands of Border Patrol agents.  FBI statistics show that the same is true for U.S. cities all along the border, from San Diego to El Paso to Brownsville.


Contrast what the FBI says with statements by DeMint, who said, “Drug trafficking, human trafficking, gang activity and other crimes are raging in American cities near the border.”  Or McCain, who opens his campaign spot by listing, “Drug and human smuggling, home invasions, murder…” as justifications for sending in the National Guard and building more “danged fence.”


Politicians and law enforcement seem to be looking at two completely different borders.


In fact, they are looking at completely different numbers.  The numbers that DeMint, Tiahrt, and McCain are interested are votes, not FBI crime statistics.  Facts about the border do not matter; voters’ beliefs, no matter how divorced from reality, do.  As Senator McCain indicated during his earlier, pre-campaign Vanity Fair interview, building walls and sending troops to the border are political gestures meant to get votes, not solutions to any real problem.


Just as in McCain’s commercial, for politicians the border wall is simply a prop, a stage set upon which they can project an illusion of strength and security for an audience of voters who will never see the actual border.  They are looking at voters who live far from the border, who can be told that “spillover” violence poses an existential threat to the United States, and only they (certainly not their election opponents!) can protect the nation.  Those of us who live on the actual border, and live with the land condemnations, the suspension of laws, and the environmental damage that accompany actual border walls, see it very differently.  

Scott Nicol is a spokesperson for No Border Wall, and also chairs the Sierra Club’s national Borderlands Team.  He lives in McAllen, Texas, and can be reached at NoBorderWall@yahoo.com.



BTC – “Tenther” Michael Boldin and anti-Real ID State representative Paul Oppsommer analyze Arizona’s controversial new law.

“It is important for me to say that at this date I have only skimmed various versions of Arizona SB-1070, the person who is going to be introducing it here in Michigan has not finished getting it drafted yet. But it’s my impression that early versions of the AZ bill wanted to prohibit state agencies or local governments from taking up internal bureaucratic policies that might circumvent the transferring of information on illegal immigrants to ICE. But there was then some concern that based on wording the feds could flip it the other way, and use the law to say that the State DMVs would then be handcuffed into going along with whatever REAL ID might ultimately call for regarding the sharing of information on legal citizens, or having to adopt RFID chips or other international standards. But I don’t think they want to share the data of their legal citizens in some haphazard way, and I believe they have addressed that to some degree. “ 

-Rep. Oppsommer (R-DeWitt, MI)

c/o Tenth Amendment Center

BTC – Janet Napolitano, former Governor of Arizona, has called the SB 1070 bill “bad for law enforcement”.  She now waits on the DOJ to vett the controversial new law for Constitutional compliance.

Many are outraged and exasperated over the current status of federal immigration.  However, some are yelling, “State’s rights!”  To help address the fine lines to balancing the 4th Amendment with the 10th Amendment is analyst, Rob Natelson, Constitutional Law professor for the 10th Amendment Center.

10th Amendment Center examines SB 1070 for Constitutional integrity

THIS WEEK ON WAKING UP ORWELL
PODCAST: Inside Edition with AZ Republic’s, JJ Hensley

DIY GOVERNMENT: Help Nevada fight for their rights for a free identity.
http://www.aclunv.org/category/issue/privacy/realid-redux

In this weeks news: Gizmodo’s controversial status, their many legal assists and details on “iPhonegate”, pay-to-say in Wisconsin, Red-light scameras fold and how to deal with Facebook and the EPIC amount of privacy violations due to Instant Personalization.

This week we are joined by Public Safety reporter JJ Hensley. We covered detention of US citizens since the passage of SB 1070, the now infamous Arizona law requiring citizens to show their “papers” to law enforcement on demand.

Arizona now becomes the U.S. cultural experiment for police state practices.  While due process attempts to self-manage are scorned by the Obama Administration, it does not mean Washington will deliver a better standard by moral comparison.

In a cruel twist of irony, Arizona opted out of Real ID by way of SB 1070

A BTC Exclusive

Today is a very treacherous time for the identified person in America. The identified person navigates a world which seems to take advantage of our preoccupation with basic survival. It takes an impossibly sharp individual or someone who has a uniquely comprehensive vantage point to catch all of the lines being tossed over the American giant by a ubiquitous 1%. The little cowards of Lilliput on Wall Street have somehow put bits in the mouths of the Congressional oxen and the rest is political theater. They coerce and dangle this carrot and that carrot: Immigration or Climate reform, now or later. As if it depends completely on them to do anything at all.

We look at Arizona as a bad example. For many painful years Arizona tried its best, waiting on Godot, for federal lawmakers to deal with Immigration. Meanwhile, death and deprivations prevailed in the name of business as usual. Criminal migration translated daily to modern indentured servitude, human slavery and black market trafficking. Arizonans lost patience with federal can-kicking. They were overburdened with the pains of economic and cultural imbalances. The answers were elusive over whether or not to seal the border with the National Guard currently deployed to Iraq. Washington, and it’s two-team football politics, could not be trusted any longer to address desperate, everyday needs of Arizona’s citizens and its migrants. Arizona took matters into their own hands.

Arizona has seemingly opted out of recognizing citizens rights over their new immigration law. The unfortunate truth is the practice of questioning citizenship, screening travellers and those in businesses has been in practice for years in ICE’s LEAR program. SB 1070 is simply redundant to many local law enforcement agencies. The Arizona Sheriffs Association opposed SB 1070 because local complaintants may file lawsuits against local police departments with claims federal immigration laws are not being enforced. Protections were factored in the bill late for vindictive and frivolous lawsuits.

Laws like SB 1070 alter the role of the federal immigration enforcement officer on the ground. The range of their job description is swiftly changing due to programs like Secure Communities and E-Verify. These multiplying laws, policies and programs sustain a chorus of practices to randomly demand citizenship and identity for anyone police may approach in the line of duty.

A strange irony is that an amendment to reject national ID policies was written into SB 1070 before its passage through the Arizona Senate.

The calculations of this desperate State failed reason as they reached for a bill creating a dragnet for all citizens. Regardless of the desperation felt, no State has the right to overreach the basic rights of the American citizen. SB 1070 is a miserable excuse for economic and social justice to the residents and citizens of Arizona. It is now prime for the misfortune of American travellers to be ensnared in this dragnet. There was a moderate path. There was a Constitutional path. It was just not the path the State of Arizona chose for those present within its borders.

Arizona now becomes the U.S. cultural experiment for police state practices.  While due process attempts to self-manage are scorned by the Obama Administration, it does not mean Washington will deliver a better standard by moral comparison. The football field length differences between saying and doing in Washington strike fear into those who want careful attention paid to a horrifically complicated issue. Immigration taken up now is risky business. If Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) becomes a botched political science experiment it could blow apart the nation. There are recognizable merits to the proposed CIR legislation. The mandate for a biometric ID card as a condition to work in America is not one of those merits.

Real ID/PASS ID regulations were beaten back by 25 States, including Arizona, who refused a national identity mandate. It is clear the 111th Congress is not hearing America: no national ID. Whether it’s Arizona or Washington, an arbitrary ask for citizenship papers still violates the 4th Amendment and abuses identity.

IMMIGRATION, POPULATION AND ENUMERATION

Working Americans are taxed to finance government shops and operations.  Reasonably enough, we should become acquainted with the constituency who wants to mandate a National ID card for use at every transaction in civil society.  Not just one card, but several national ID card programs. What is their compelling argument to justify a “stop and frisk” for every American? Why should we annul our 4th Amendment rights as Americans for this minority? First, we get the words of our government’s corporate sponsors.

In a militarized society, identity may be a life and death matter. However, there is no such justification in peace-time for national identity. Unfortunately, the exceptionalism of the Bush-Cheney years continues to push National Security as Homeland Security. If a legislation like the federal budget or a bill thick with security technology mandates doesn’t pass for appropriations, public-private contractors lose their place in Washington’s entitlement line. In order for the purchase orders to continue rolling out, there must be an imminent threat to the security of the Continental U.S. Next, no bid contractor-cronies, like Xe and the Chertoff Firm, fulfill orders to provide one-sided service to the American taxpayers. Somehow purging “border-invaders” from our midst was found convenient enough for special interests to sell a more safe and secure nation to Conservative America and to justify an appropriations push in D.C.

A few lobbies supplanting anti-immigrant policy closely associated with the Conservative Right are the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), Numbers U.S.A and FAIR. All three organizations are treated as one of the gang during CPAC conventions. What most Conservatives don’t know is that all three have also been funded, in part or entirely, by global green depopulists (malthusians), John Tanton and the Pioneer Fund. These funders are directly linked to the White Supremacy movement and modern eugenics. The same constituency calls for depopulation of two-thirds of the world’s humanity. Groups like Californians for Population Stabilization claim immigrants are responsible for overpopulating North America. They advocate very tough criminal penalties for being present in America without legal immigration status, exemplified by Arizona’s SB 1070. The United Nation’s Agenda 21 is another example of globalized work groups attempting to legislate who migrates and reproduces in the North American continent in context of ecological conservation.

The very same propeller heads [CIS, FAIR and Numbers U.S.A.] lobby every variety of National ID: TWIC, E-Verify, Real ID/PASS ID, and the proposed biometric worker card mandate in CIR. Senators Lindsey Graham and Chuck Schumer seem to refuse the prospect of decoupling immigration reform from a National ID card. If we look at recent world history, the national ID card was a very effective tool for population control in fascist Europe during war time and civil unrest. ID cards and arbitrary demand for “papers” start the criminalization of the identified person based on systemic categorization. Enumerated categorization of races and ethnicities are an effective tactic in singling out individuals for genocide. The 2010 Census seems like a much different prospect in light of who is trying to systemically “thin the herds” of North America’s human populaces.

WARDS OF THE STATE

Washington’s current direction for national identity is at odds with civil libertarians holding ground over their 4th Amendment. National identification, such as the social security number, is abused daily for commercial purposes. So much so, the individual becomes confused, careless and sometimes even defeated in evaluating which information is actually private. Maintaining privacy and personal boundaries is a constant battle for the identified American.

Examples of persons currently at the mercy of government agencies to manage their citizenship articles are wards of the state: foster care recipients, residents of State hospitals, prisoners, and some military personnel. A fully functional adult who is required to ask the State whether or not they can buy groceries, go to the doctor, operate a vehicle or open a bank account temporarily experiences what it might be like to be a ward of the State. In this situation, complicity is a currency for resources required to survive. Mandates for State recognized identity create a loophole some will abuse by failing to recognize an individual’s basic humanity.  In an increasingly dystopian society, inadequately identified human beings become disposable assets to the State. That’s a pretty hefty penalty for those labeled incorrectly.

The most basic of human rights are access to food, clean water, clothing, shelter and a way to earn a living or means to procure these things in order to survive. Ratcheting up the bar, American citizens  wake up every day with the right to be secure in their personal effects, their papers and their property. We are protected by the 4th Amendment.

The State of Arizona enacts SB 1070 law in August. The policy for citizens will be the same then as it has been for years. Police question travellers at Arizona checkpoints and ask “Sir/Ma’am, are you a citizen?”

If the answer is “Yes” that’s where Arizona stops and American rights start.