On Saturday July 31st, 2010 in Omaha, NE, several bands including Bright Eyes, Cursive, Desaparecidos (their first live performance since 2002), and Lullaby For The Working Class will gather together to fight for equality by playing a benefit show for the ACLU Nebraska. There will be two shows, an outdoor day time show commencing at 5pm at Downtown Benson, as well as a late night show at the Waiting Room in Omaha, NE. Tickets to the daytime show are $20. Additionally there are a limited number of Deluxe Packages available for $50 which allows access to both shows.

All proceeds from the concerts go to the ACLU Nebraska who are currently preparing a law suit against the town of Fremont, Nebraska, the latest in a series of U.S. towns that have decided to take immigration law into their own hands. ACLU Nebraska will file a lawsuit challenging the law which attempts to ban undocumented immigrants from renting, residing or being employed in the Nebraska town.

ACLU Nebraska Executive Director Laurel Marsh says, “If this law goes into effect, it will cause discrimination and racial profiling against Latinos and others who appear to be foreign born, including U.S. citizens. The ACLU Nebraska has no option but to turn to the courts to stop this un-American and unconstitutional ordinance before the law goes into effect. Not only do local ordinances such as this violate federal law, they are also completely out of step with American values of fairness and equality. We will be working with concerned citizens in Fremont who want to stop Arizona-like laws from getting on the books in their city.”

This is definitely something to pay attention to and attend if you’re able. Comment against this concert all already surfacing and include the following rather sadly grotesque statement:

The local news station also reported that some supporters of the tough immigration ordinance plan to attend the concert in protest. One of them, Susan Smith of the Nebraskans Advisory Group, told the station, “The comments that he makes are so anti-American and anti-white, he is actually the racist.”

This anti-American sentiment is quite often heard from anti-immigrants as a means to make those who care about other human beings seem like the evil ones. Truly calling someone anti-American means nothing at all. Actually, it’s quite ridiculous given this country was supposedly founded on immigration and when you fight for immigration you’re called anti-American. Obviously, as hinted in the statement above, this is about being pro-Anglo, not pro or anti American.

In this article the statement from Susan Smith of the Nebraskans Advisory Group continues:

“In Fremont, we’re trying to get the local government to get on the rule-of-law side,” she said. “This is more standing up for America.”

Being pro-anger and anti human rights is not standing up for America. It’ll actually be quite sadly comic to see people protesting a concert for equality. The protest against equality is simply a modern day out in the light version of the KKK and other both heavy and marginal racist groups. Obviously the news is edited so I don’t know what prompted Susan Smith to say Oberst was “anti-white” but the mention of color in her statement at all provides a glimpse into her and others mindsets.

Arizona Rising Up In The Name of Human Rights

Posted: July 31, 2010 by chris peterson in Uncategorized

I have to say I’m quite proud of the way the people of Arizona have come out to oppose this terrible legislation. There are a myriad of kind hearted compassionate people willing to stand of for basic dignity and human rights. It’s quite sad to see so much of the evil sneering of those placing all blame on other human beings – especially, in this case, undocumented migrants. This ‘there’s not enough room in this town for the both of us’ mentality is crude and quite anti-American.

20 Unitarian Universalist ministers arrested in Arizona immigration protest
Newark Unitarian Universalism ExaminerMichael Dalzell

Twenty Unitarian Universalist ministers from around the country were among the 83 people arrested Thursday in Phoenix, protesting the implementation of Arizona’s immigration law. The law took effect yesterday, a day after a federal judge stripped SB 1070 of some of its most controversial provisions.
“I am standing for human rights,” Frederick-Gray told the Arizona Republic before her arrest in front of the jail. “In the face of fear that is assaulting our community, we must not be silent. We must make it clear which side we stand on. We stand on the side of love.”

In the fight over Arizona’s immigration law, everybody loses

By Roberto Suro
Sunday, August 1, 2010

Arizona’s immigration law was never going to solve the problem of illegal immigration. That is not its purpose. Instead it is an invitation to a shootout in which there will be no winners. It is more of a provocation than an attempt to enact policy, and as a protest against Washington’s failure to fix a broken immigration system, it resonates.
The frustration has been building quietly since the last big push to overhaul the immigration system ended in June 2007 with the Senate locked in a stalemate. After more than a year of political drama, including massive immigrant marches in the spring of 2006, legislation had emerged with backing from President George W. Bush, some Republican moderates and most Democrats. It would have increased enforcement, offered legalization to the current population of illegal migrants and created measures to regulate future flows, including a temporary-worker program. But conservative Republicans attacked the legalization program as an “amnesty” for law-breaking migrants, while liberal Democrats split over the terms of the temporary-worker program. Comprehensive immigration reform, as proponents dubbed it, failed to get the 60 votes necessary to move through the Senate. Since then, nothing has shifted that political accounting, not even the 2008 election, which changed so much else in Washington. (click above link to read more)

What is the Rule of Law?

Posted: July 29, 2010 by chris peterson in Uncategorized

What is the rule of law anyway?   Anti-immigrant groups use this term quite frequently to clarify their position on immigration.  Supposedly the “rule of law” would state that if a person is undocumented they should be removed.  However, it does not take into account human rights, personal circumstance or anything else one would consider when humbly judging another human being.

According to most attempts to define “the rule of law” the most important consideration is in fact human rights and the individual freedom.  Laws are meant to protect freedom and promote liberty.  In this way the government works for the people as a whole rather than promoting only a select few over others.  According to the UN Charter:

Today, the concept of the rule of law is embedded in the Charter of the United Nations. In its Preamble, one of the aims of the UN is “to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained”. A primary purpose of the Organization is “to maintain international peace and security… and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the historic international recognition that all human beings have fundamental rights and freedoms, recognizes that “… 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…”

“Human rights should be protected by the rule of law.” This does not exclude those ‘humans’ anti-immigrant groups choose to demonize or marginalize. When we all wake up and see each other as humans treating one another with dignity and respect we will quickly see how things will change for the better. Immigration is a global issue. Somehow many feel that our fighting a war abroad is ok because it protects our local freedoms yet they don’t grasp the fact that actions abroad effect immigration through tyranny and oppression endured elsewhere.

What is the Rule of Law?

Behind the Arizona Immigration Law: GOP Game to Swipe the November Election

Our investigation in Arizona discovered the real intent of the show-me-your-papers law.

by Greg Palast for

[Phoenix, AZ.] Don’t be fooled. The way the media plays the story, it was a wave of racist, anti-immigrant hysteria that moved Arizona Republicans to pass a sick little law, signed last week, requiring every person in the state to carry papers proving they are US citizens.

I don’t buy it. Anti-Hispanic hysteria has always been as much a part of Arizona as the Saguaro cactus and excessive air-conditioning.

What’s new here is not the politicians’ fear of a xenophobic “Teabag” uprising. (click link above to read full article)

Immigration Rallies on Saturday April 10

Posted: April 11, 2010 by symsess in Uncategorized

Immigration reform still moves on as rallies are staged around the country. Last Saturday a large rally was held in Seattle (Rally calls for immigration reform)

“Let’s put 100,000 people in the streets and demand that President Obama and Congress make their commitment to make immigration reform happen this year!” shouted one speaker to raucous cheers.

Immigration reform supporters say they want the government to create a pathway to citizenship, in which undocumented immigrants would first get legal status, and then go through the immigration process.

The ability to move across borders is nothing new to this world. It’s makes little sense to restrict movement from place to place. If goods and services are allowed to freely move about the world then why can’t people?

We take great advantage of workers in other countries providing us cheap goods, but we get protests when they want to come and live here. I can’t say that I’ve ever seen a protest outside a Wal-Mart with anyone protesting the cheap price of t-shirts or dish towels. It’s quite sad we live in such a bigoted country when, by its own ideals, the United States should be the best most welcoming country.

From the article we hear the oft sided argument:

“That’s ridiculous,” he said. “Everybody who broke into this country illegally knows they broke into this country illegally, and they’ve been siphoning off our system.”

Schnitt says he does support immigration – to an extent.

“I’m all for immigration. We’re a country of immigrants that came to this country legally,” he says.

So we came to this country legally? Because no European law had been established prior to our coming here I guess that makes everything ok. Why do so many live in a myopic cloud without even a smidgen of humility? Truly if we were to treat people better and actually care the world would be much better.

In another New York based account of Saturday’s rallies representative Luis Gutiérrez states the time has come for reform – we’ve been waiting too long already. Immigration reform can’t wait till next year.

With the Tea Party brewing its venom this will be a tough battle, but we’ll have to keep pressing on.

Check out the many rally stories around the country.

If you’re not familiar with LaRouche you may at least know of the posters showing Obama with a Hitler mustache. Those poster are generated by his group, LaRouch PAC, and show his complete disdain for the man. Though LaRouche usually hates anyone in office (believing he should be) his disgust for Obama goes levels above his feelings of other past presidents.

In a recent post LaRouche essentially states that Obama should leave office or he will be assasinated. In an altruistic tone LaRouche states this in an effort to “help” Obama. It seems to me that LaRouche is asking for Obama to either leave office lest he be assassinated. Currently LaRouche is forging a campaign to impeach Obama, but I guess he’ll take Obama’s loss of presidency in any form.

We’re in an environment like that before JFK’s assassination, and President Obama should cut his bravado out now. His ego is his biggest vulnerability, and if he wants to survive, he should restrict his activity, and keep himself safe. LaRouche Reiterates Danger of Assassination Attempt on Obama

Not my usual type of post, but it needs to be addressed. LaRouche is a hard nut to crack and though he seems to have a few good ideas the majority are a wackadoodle mass of anger and intolerance – from asking for “ghetto” [sic] youth to be sent to working camps to using the likeness of our world’s most heinous killer to show his hated of Obama.

Palin with GunIt’s no wonder Palin’s gun imagery is moving her supporters to action. There nothing like conjuring up the idea of blowing someone to smithereens to get the base going. Sadly, a good portion of this country attributes guns to freedom and ability to take it back when you feel it’s been slowly chipped away. Nothing shows the results of growing disenfranchisement and anger than the movie Falling Down were Michael Douglas essentially loses his mind because of a traffic jam and the fact that he can’t order breakfast after 11:30am. This movie is a classic case of taking out one’s anger of the oft elusive “they” out on the most immediately know representatives – low level workers and average people. So in Falling Down Douglas lashes out at the fast food workers rather than take it out against the corporation. Prior to his meltdown he continued to support a business he so adamantly disagreed with. The gun gives him the power to demand attention. Hopefully, the patrons represent the majority while Foster (Douglas’s character) represents a fringe. Unfortunately, though the gun gives one crazy person the ability to demand attention.

Guns are violence just as glue is a binding agent. When we buy glue we intend to adhere to items together or possibly to at least prepare ourselves just in case we need to in the future. When you buy a gun you either intend to kill (the seven day rule proves this happens) or you are preparing yourself to be able to kill at some point.

Guns essentially make gods of men. There is no greater power than that which gives us the ability to take another human being’s life. To use images of targets and claim supporters should “reload” is highly irresponsible. There are a growing number of people willing to kill others in a fit of confused rage against “they.” Immigrants are being targeted, liberals are being targeted, and we’re not to far from a McCarthy style red scare. The terms communist and socialism are being thrown around with little effort to understand them.

Today’s crisis, create by businesses out of control, has given those in power (businessmen) the perfect platform to pay people like Palin and Glenn Beck to point towards the government as being evil. But isn’t government controlled by powerful businessmen? Isn’t strange that Palin, once offered some money, stepped down as Governor and is now taking every avenue to gobble up as much cash as possible? I thought she cared about the common women and men. No, it seems she just wants money like every other greed addict and inciting violence through violent imagery is a way to keep her name valuable.