Angry ass Asian American with a camera.

Posts tagged abuse.

Suddenly there was a loud banging at the door and voices shouting “Police!” and “Policia!” When no one answered, the agents tried to force the door open. Scared, Jesus hid in a closet. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began hitting objects against the bedroom windows, trying to break in. Without a search warrant and without consent, the ICE agents eventually knocked in the front door and shattered a window, shouting racial slurs and storming into the bedrooms, holding guns to their heads. When asked if they had a warrant, one agent reportedly said, “We don’t need a warrant, we’re ICE,” and, gesturing to his genitals, “the warrant is coming out of my balls.”

The ACLU and ACLU of Tennessee this week filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of fifteen residents of the apartment complex who were subjected to this large-scale, warrantless raid by ICE agents and Metro Nashville police officers. Among the plaintiffs are U.S. citizens, including a child detained and interrogated while playing soccer on the playground simply because of the color of his skin. Looking Latino and speaking Spanish is not enough to justify probable cause for questioning and arresting a person. Another plaintiff was carted away in handcuffs in front of his frightened and crying children.

“We Don’t Need a Warrant, We’re ICE” » Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union

that comment about the warrant coming from his balls—make no mistake of it, this type of sexual aggression during these raids is completely normal. The first raid that I covered had agents with guns forcing women to expel milk from their breasts to prove they were lactating (those who are breastfeeding children are often released for humanitarian reasons—not becuase ICE/the government is kind and cares—but because of legal human rights laws)—while the women were expelling milk, agents were mooing at them and making nasty sexualized comments.

it really hits home about how sexual violence is so intimately connected to control and power…

(via midwestmountainmama)

Metro Nashville law enforcement wants us to believe that their 287(g) program is carefully administered and free from bias.

Fuck them.  They are the same people who made a woman give birth chained to her bed.

(via polerin)

Don’t ever be confused to think that ICE is as humane and friendly as they stay trying to spin it… Rampant machismo, sexualized comments and threats are part of the character that is ICE. Every account I run into has these same tell-tale signs of a degenerated and dehumanized rhetoric. They told women coming back from a church retreat in Texas to sign their voluntary removal orders or else their children will be taken from them and given to be “PROPERTY” of the state…

(via peechingtonmariejust)

Literature: The Revolution Starts at Home- Confronting Partner Abuse in Activist Communities

Official Trailer from Tiffany Hsiung on Vimeo.

carlapulapu:

jaye—b:

WITHIN EVERY WOMAN

there is a story…

Within Every Woman is a documentary by Tiffany Hsiung about “comfort women,” the thousands of women were coerced or kidnapped into sexual slavery by the Japanese military during World War II. This film focuses on the aftermath of such atrocities, and the complexities involved in healing from sexual abuse.

Herstories and Histories like this also contribute and shape the mindsets of certain societies.  


Decades later, these women are breaking the silence about the abuse they endured. For some, it took over fifty years to come forward and tell their families and loved ones about their past. The hope is that their stories will inspire modern day victims of sexual abuse to come forward and speak out.

I feel really nauseated watching this, but we can’t eviscerate history out of discomfort with the truth. “Never too late to speak out.”

^truth

(via carlapulapu-deactivated20111016)

In one recent study of 150 immigrant women working in the food industry conducted by the Southern Poverty Law Center, titled “Injustice On Our Plates,” every single one—yes, that is 100 percent—reported some kind of workplace sexual harassment, and for the majority, this involved a sexual assault. According to SPLC’s Senior Staff Attorney Mónica Ramirez, most did not know they had any legal recourse. Only a handful dared to report the abuse. Ramirez says of the way the DSK case has been handled, “This is not representative for a couple of reasons. One, the fact that there was a report made—this is not common. Plenty of women who are victimized never come forward. Also, the response by law enforcement, which acted swiftly, and took it seriously, is not the situation most victims face. I am happy that it happened, but it is not the norm.”

Betsy Reed (What if DSK’s Accuser had been Undocumented?)

100 PERCENT, but only a handful “dared to report the abuse”. Imagine yourself in that situation, please. Imagine that you—privileged person—go work in an environment where you’ll more than likely be sexually harassed and/or assaulted, and where you know that if you report the crime(s), you’ll most likely be deported. For the majority of us, that is not reality, but for far too many women, it is. Now, if you can sit there and take some moral, albeit misguided, stance and tell yourself “well, they shouldn’t be here ‘illegaly’ in the first place”, I want you to stop and consider the gravity of such thoughts and realize that by placing the blame on the undocumented woman for not being here “legally,” you are not only absolving the true criminal of his actions, you are CONDONING his actions.

(via chimoltrufia)

(via stfuxenobigotry)

andythenerd:

This kind of story happens all the time:

My pal Antonio is an undocumented farm laborer, horse whisperer and superhero. He can clear an acre of brush in a single day with a machete and talk a psychotic horse down off the ceiling.

The other day the cops pulled him over for no reason, impounded his car, and threw him in jail. He was late for work and got in trouble with his boss.

His honky boss, for whom he has worked since leaving Mexico at the age of 17, is invested in keeping him dependent because he couldn’t run his farm without his indentured labor. Antonio owes him thousands of dollars for dental work that insurance would have paid for if he’d been a documented worker. His boss takes most of his paycheck to pay for the dental work, leaving him to live on $30 a week. He lets Antonio live in a crumbling old house on the property, but he won’t let him fix the bathroom or the furnace because then he’d have to pay taxes on a habitable dwelling. His boss has told him that he thinks of Antonio “like family.”

“But,” Antonio observes, “my boss’s daughter don’t live in no shithole casa.”

(via Barn tableau)

(via praxis-makesperfect-deactivated)

androphilia:

Otherwise Occupied / From Prague to Ofer | Haaretz Daily Newspaper

Israeli Knesset members might not care about shackled Palestinian teens in a West Bank military court, but their British counterparts do.

By Amira Hass

Monday, May 23, 2011

Half a year after the lower chamber of the British Parliament, the House of Commons, discussed the Israeli military court at Ofer, it was taken up by the upper chamber, the House of Lords. In both sessions, on December 7, 2010 and May 4, 2011, respectively, the court was specifically mentioned with regard to the detention and sentencing conditions for Palestinian minors by the Israeli military. In both sessions, the debates followed visits by members of Parliament.

Lord Alf Dubs made the following statement to the House of Lords on May 4: “My Lords, I recently visited the West Bank; it was my first time there. Of course any solution must acquire security for Israel, but also dignity, self-respect and justice for the Palestinians.

“As part of the visit I went to see the Israeli military courts in Ofer. I believe that the way in which these courts operate is an obstacle to achieving a just peace in the region. We went to see how children are treated by this system of military justice. Approximately 700 Palestinian children are prosecuted every year in these courts, and at the end of January this year some 222 were in jail. In the court we visited we saw a 14 year-old and a 15-year-old, one of them in tears, both looking absolutely bewildered. What shocked me as much as anything was to see that these young persons - children - had chains or shackles around their ankles while sitting in court. They were also handcuffed as they went into court. Although the handcuffs were taken off while they were in court, they were put on again as they left the court.

“When being interrogated these young people do not have the security of video recordings, lawyers or parents present. In fact, if parents want to visit, their permission might take 60 days to come through, by which time the young person might have served his or her sentence.

“The court proceedings are in Hebrew, with translations of a doubtful quality. The verdicts are mostly based on uncorroborated confession evidence. The evidence against one young person that we saw was of throwing stones at an Israeli armoured vehicle, for which he is likely to get 60 days in custody.

“I do not believe that this process of humiliation represents justice. I believe that the way in which these young people are treated is in itself an obstacle to the achievement by Israel of a peaceful relationship with the Palestinian people. I think that the Israelis should apply proper standards of human rights to the way in which they treat them.”

Dubs was not entirely precise. We recently learned of the interrogation of a minor that was recorded on video, that of a 14-year-old from the village of Nabi Salah, near Ramallah, identified by his initials, A.D. The video indeed made it easier for the defense attorneys (Gaby Lasky and Neri Ramati ) to prove that the interrogation of this minor, just a few hours after being pulled out of bed in the middle of the night, was filled with faults. A.D. was detained for 10 weeks. Had the defense not insisted on holding a trial within a trial (about the inappropriate interrogation ) and merely agreed to a plea bargain, including an admission of guilt (for throwing rocks at security vehicles 20 times “during a period unknown to the prosecution” ) without calling witnesses, A.D. would have been released sooner. That has been the case for many minors whose attorneys choose an earlier release over challenging the military judges using standard legal procedures. But in keeping with Nabi Salah’s rebellious spirit, principle was chosen instead.

A.D. was released to house arrest. The prosecution refused to withdraw charges. Last Monday, attorney Lymor Goldstein testified as to how he was prevented from meeting with his young client before his interrogation. (If the honorable lord expects the Israeli military judicial system to grant minors the right to have a lawyer present during their interrogation, then he is mistaken. ) The trial of a 14-year-old has to do with more than guilt or innocence. It is also a discussion about the legality of arresting children in nighttime raids and interrogating them in deliberately stressful conditions, while taking advantage of their childishness and wringing from them confessions that incriminate the leaders of the popular uprising.

The issues that are of interest to British MPs are not those that occupy Israeli Knesset members. But perhaps Lord Dubs himself, of Britain’s Labor Party, would interest our legislators. At the age of six he was one of 669 mostly Jewish children that British citizens evacuated from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia.

With him on his visit to Israel was Lord Mohammed Sheikh, a businessman and philanthropist who was born in Kenya to parents from the Indian subcontinent. Unlike Lord Dub the Holocaust survivor, Lord Sheikh had visited Israel before, and also went to Gaza “with the consent of those on my Front Bench and the Conservative Party,” as he told the House of Lords.

He also told the upper chamber that during their April visit, “We also spent the best part of a day with an Israeli army officer and high officials in the Israeli Foreign Office to hear the Israelis’ point of view.”

If not for this column’s reticence about futuristic speculations and idle promises, the following sentence by Lord Sheikh might have become a headline: “[Palestinian] Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said that, if and when the Palestinians get full independence, the half a million Israelis [in the settlements] would be welcome to stay in the West Bank.”

Lord Sheikh failed to mention that Palestinian leaders such as the late Faisal Husseini, former PA minister for Jerusalem, have said that settlers who agree to be citizens of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, and who do not have a record of violent attacks against Palestinians, will be allowed to remain there. The settlements will not remain deluxe ghettos for Jews only, but will be open to all. And Jewish citizens of the Palestinian state will not retain the special privileges and separate legal status that characterize their present, illegal sojourn in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem ).

Photo: ‘A.D.’ Lord Dubs, a child evacuee from Nazi-occupied Prague, was horrified. (Amira Hass)

^required reading

(via kadalkavithaigal)

There are two conflicting versions of the Ruiz story. Officials at Customs and Border Protection say they offered Mr. Ruiz the chance to pick up Emily at the airport, but he “elected to have her return to Guatemala with her grandfather.” The customs agency “strives to reunite U.S. citizen children with their parents,” Lloyd M. Easterling, a spokesman, said Tuesday.

But such a meeting could have put Mr. Ruiz at risk of detention, and he said he was never offered that option. In an interview conducted in Spanish, Mr. Ruiz, who speaks little English, said that an agent spoke to him over the telephone in English and laid out two choices: Emily could enter the custody of the State of Virginia, or she could return to Guatemala with her grandfather.

- From U.S. Returns Young Girl, a Citizen, to Guatemala, The New York Times

Why does ICE psychologically abuse immigrant parents, targeting their children? If they want to chalk it up to a mistranslation- do we really not have any Spanish speakers in CBP? Why is it that we are allowing the dialogue to shift into questioning the legitimacy of the 14th amendment for a group of people? Will the country dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal re-frame its intent, and become a country that encourages two classes of citizenship? How is this justice or at all compatible with trust in the government?

Sadly- this is not an isolated incident…. There is a reason our communities have a hard time trusting the enforcement officials, and the reasons only become stronger as (In)Secure Communities spreads across the country….

airadam:

daniellescruggs:

bremser:

Oscar Grant’s photograph of Johannes Mehserle

Oscar Grant’s photograph of transit police officer Johannes Mehserle is rare: a portrait of the photographer’s killer. Unlike the recent photograph that a politician captured in the Philippines, Grant’s photograph, taken moments before Mehserle shot him in the back, was intentional.

Much of the media attention given to the Oscar Grant case focused on a handful of videos made by other passengers on the BART train, some of which show Grant being shot. While being detained by BART police, Grant called his ex-girlfriend Sophina Mesa twice from the platform. During this time he also took the photo of Mehserle and sent it to Mesa. Grant’s photograph of Mehserle did not get as much coverage as the videos, as it wasn’t released until the trial began.

Grant’s photograph raises an important issue that faces every American: the right to photograph, videotape and document while being detained or arrested by the police. Many of us assume we have this right, but with existing wiretapping laws, you can still be arrested and your camera confiscated. Radley Balko’s Reason.com article “The War on Cameras” is essential reading on this subject.

Demian Bulwa is a reporter and editor for the San Francisco Chronicle, who has covered the Oscar Grant case since the shooting, through the entire Mehserle trial. I asked him a few questions over the phone about this photograph.

How did the prosecution and defense use this photograph as evidence in the trial?

Both sides used flat screen TVs, multimedia, everything was timed and choreographed. It seemed they felt they might lose credibility if they weren’t sharp with multimedia. At times the arguments felt like PowerPoint presentations. There were photos, quotes, videos, video of the Taser training.

It was used by prosecution to show two things: 1. that he [Mehserle] knew his Taser from his gun, that he had actually taken out his Taser twice, that he knew full well between the two weapons. 2. That Oscar was being abused and was concerned about it.

It was one of many pieces of evidence. It’s part of the puzzle, and hard to tell which ones stuck with the jury.

What facts were presented about the photograph, when it was taken? Did he take it while face down, turning around?

Grant was sitting on the ground. The guys were sitting on the edge of the platform for a while. He wouldn’t have had the opportunity in the last moments, the officers were on top of him, with his arms behind him.

Was there any suggestion by either side that taking this photograph provoked Mehserle, or was some form of resisting arrest?

I don’t recall.

Based on the evidence in the trial, and your own speculation, why do you think Oscar Grant took this photograph?

Most likely he was documenting unfair treatment. He said something to his girlfriend [during the phone call], like “I’m getting beat up here.” It was a way of documenting that, and putting Mehserle on notice. If you take a picture of someone you are saying: I’m watching your behavior. You’re accountable. You are expressing your concern and putting them on notice.

——

My goodness.

This is very unsettling when you know the context, but remarkable.

The agents completed paperwork and told the parishioners to sign their names on forms written in English. When the men and women hesitated—not knowing what they were signing—the agents reportedly told them, in a mix of Spanish and English, that if they did not sign the forms, they would be sent to separate jails, and the children would be sent to orphanages and become property of the United States.

- The Independent Weekly

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting….

When some began praying and softly singing hymns, an agent, according to the testimony, laughed and told them, “Let’s see if your God will save you from this.”

Similar to some Mennonites and the Amish, the congregation’s women do not wear pants and always wear colorful head coverings that are netted and sometimes beaded. Two agents reportedly told the women they “looked stupid,” and another asked, “Do you wear those scarves so you don’t have to brush your hair?”

The Independent Weekly reports on alleged disrespect and mistreatment of a group of immigrants to North Carolina who were stopped by Customs and Border Patrol in Louisiana after visiting Texas for a religious event. These allegations, if/when confirmed, further illustrate the reality of immigration enforcement in many places across the country. When our dialogue and rhetoric paints immigrants and people as dangerous, different and criminal- is it any wonder that enforcement officials will behave in this utterly inappropriate manner?