Mediaboss Marketing

It cannot not be said enough that those who enter our country illegally need to be caught and sent back to their country of origin, never to return to American soil again.

Of course, we would be living in a dreamworld to believe that illegal immigrants wont reenter our country once returned to their country of origin, because we read and watch all too often about these criminals reentering our country numerous times after being deported, with a small percentage of them committing crimes upon reentry.

We cant afford to continue to let these criminals back into our country. While we rarely agreed with any of former President Barack Obamas policies, he was strict on deportations and deserves credit for being tough on this issue. He understood that if you entered this country illegally, you would be deported. Obama deported nearly 3 million illegal immigrants during his eight years in office, much more than his predecessor, former President George W. Bush, did.

Like Obama, President Donald Trump has cracked down hard on these criminals since winning the election in 2016 and has been very tough on deportations and sending those back who defy our laws and reenter our country. Under Trumps watch, close to 1 million people have been deported back to their country of origin by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in his three years in office.

We respect Obama and Trump for being tough on our border and sending the message that if you enter this country illegally, even on numerous occasions, you will continue to be deported and will not be granted asylum here. The clear message behind these mass number of deportations of illegal immigrants should deter more of them from trying to enter our country.

We believe we are on the right track on deportations of those who defy our laws and we believe it would be a shame to ever alter the progress weve made.

Well, if U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic presidential candidate, has it her way, she would call for suspending deportations on our southern border if she is elected president.

On Nov. 8, Warren said that as president, she would be open to suspending deportations to pressure Congress to pass immigration reform legislation.

Warren went on to say: I believe that what were doing right now with Immigration and Customs Enforcement focusing on people who do not pose a threat, that when ICE comes into our communities, takes our neighbors, our friends, our family members, that they do not make this country safer. And that we need ICE and Customs and Border Patrol just focused on real threats from terrorism, container shipping that comes into the United States, contraband that we have to worry about, fentanyl that we need to be focused on. There are places that we should focus for our safety, but tearing families apart is not that.

This very far-left leaning candidate is simply in denial when she says these people pose no threat. Mrs. Warren, perhaps you should tell this to the parents of Mollie Tibbetts, who was allegedly murdered by an illegal immigrant, or the parents of Kate Steinle, who was killed while walking on a pier in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant who had been deported several times. Or to the families who have had their loved ones killed by MS-13, most of whom enter our country illegally.

Mrs. Warren, a lot of these people do pose serious threats not only by committing crimes, but by bringing serious diseases into our country and draining taxpayers pocketbooks by paying for their health care needs and other government benefits they receive.

Secondly, when you make derogatory comments about ICE, given the dangerous jobs it performs on a daily basis, you are undermining all the good it does for this country by arresting and deporting these criminals. If you were to become president, you would be handcuffing ICE from doing its job, part of which does indeed entail arresting and deporting illegal immigrants.

These brave agents wouldnt deserve that if Warren were to become president. Halting suspensions could also have the potential to put more American lives at risk at the hands of those seeking to enter our country to cause harm.

Lastly, by saying you are in favor of suspending deportations, you are encouraging more and more illegal immigrants to break the law and come to our country. Warrens essentially saying, Please break the law and there will be no consequences. Part of a presidents oath is to defend the laws of the Constitution. Our laws say that if you enter this country illegally, you will be deported.

Warren, if elected, would be derelict in her oath of office if she suspended deportations.

The proposal put forth by Warren is reckless and is just one reason among many why she is not qualified to be commander in chief.

Continue reading here:
Warren reckless in call to suspend deportations | Our Opinion - Bowling Green Daily News

I never fit in, croons Rose Garcia in one of the early scenes of Yellow Rose. For the young protagonista Filipina teen who sports a cowboy hat and blows off homework to pen songsthe lyrics land just a tad on the nose. From the moment she appears onscreen in Diane Paragas feature film, Rose (played by Eva Noblezada) is something of a sociocultural rarity: cruising on her bike through the streets of a small town on the outskirts of Austin, absorbed in the country tunes flowing through her headphones, heading to the rundown motel where she stays with her single mother who works as a housekeeper.

Much like its heroine, Yellow Rose defies categorization. Its equal parts musical, family drama, coming-of-age story, and timely political commentary. The film, which screens at the Houston Cinema Arts Festival on November 15, is the feature debut from Paragas, a Filipino American who grew up in Lubbock and graduated from the University of Texas at Austin. Yellow Rose tackles several under-explored subjects that could each carry a feature: a Filipina striving to break into the country music scene, an undocumented Asian family struggling to carve out a life in the United States, a budding interracial teen romance. As the film interweaves these narrative threads into a cohesive storyline, viewers may feel a slight sense of thematic whiplash. A powerful sequence juxtaposes a date night at Austins iconic honky-tonk the Broken Spoke with the visceral devastation of Roses mothers abrupt arrest and detainment by ICE. Its a striking emotional 180 that leaves both the films characters and audience reeling.

But for her immigration status, Roses character would not be out of place in a lineup of plucky teen girl protagonists of American cinema. Shes a starry-eyed artist with lofty hopes of striking it big, a slightly rebellious teen chafing against the constraints imposed by her conservative mother, an endearing misfit who catches the eye of a sweetly awkward love interest.

Yet Rose is also burdened with the knowledge that her seemingly stable existence can be torn from her without a moments notice, which makes the tonal dissonance of Yellow Rose effective. On her first day at a new job, Rose befriends a fellow undocumented coworker, only to see the establishment raided by ICE and her friend detained the next daynarrowly avoiding the same fate herself. Scenes of Rose scribbling lyrics in notebooks, sneaking out for drinks, and awkwardly navigating teen romance feel like theyve been lifted from a conventional bildungsroman, while the bleak depiction of her mothers stay in an ICE detention center and the heartbreak of their too-brief, institutionally oppressed reunion are reminiscent of poignant, family-centered incarceration dramas.

Despite remaining in development for over 15 years, Yellow Rose enters the pop culture zeitgeist as illegal immigration continues to be one of the most common and polarizing subjects nationwide. The film does the crucial work of bringing undocumented Asian Americans to the forefront of a national conversation on what is seen as a predominantly Latin American issuedespite an estimated 1 in 7 Asian immigrants identifying as undocumented, as reported in a 2015 study by the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice. Yellow Rose adds a new dimension to Asian representation in American media, subverting narratives of the privileged lifestyles of the model minority in favor of a reality thats at once harsh, unfamiliar, and of vital importance.

Yellow Rose is not without flaws. The films white cast is spared the clich of being an assemblage of bigoted Southerners, but it veers too far in the other direction. A few characters and the sheer magnanimity of their actionsfrom the matronly bar owner who knows Rose only as an underage drinker yet offers her a job and a place to stay after learning shes undocumented, to the veteran country star (played by Dale Watson) who helps the budding young singer cultivate her talent and lets her live in his backyard Airstream rent-freesometimes strain credulity.

Nevertheless, the shortcomings of Yellow Rose are overshadowed by its authentic, earnest depiction of characters and narratives rarely given a voice in mainstream media. The films principal themesthe trials and triumphs of living undocumented, the interaction between the traditionally white, masculine arena of country music and the diverse generation that stands to inherit itall explore socially relevant topics that many Americans are aware of only peripherally. All too often, these issues are oversimplified and relegated to the black-and-white arena of political debate. Were in dire need of media that presents thoughtful, nuanced depictions of hot-button issues such as immigration, not as a morality tale but in the service of a great story. Unquestionably, Yellow Rose does just that.

Read more from the Observer:

Go here to see the original:
In Yellow Rose, the American Coming-of-Age Story Finally Includes Undocumented Youth - The Texas Observer

Bahamas has imprisoned 10 Haitians who illegally sneaked into the country in a move the government hopes serves as a major deterrent to others.

The Bahamian Department of Immigration said in all, 56 Haitians, including 50 men, were arrested on November 9 this year at Deadmans Cay on Long Island.

The Department added that a check of the border control management system revealed that 10 of the migrants convicted were repeated [sic] offenders. While the 46 others were set for deportation, the others were arraigned before court.

The Nassau Guardian reports that in the past few weeks, scores of Haitians have been convicted on charges related to unlawful entry into the Bahamas.

But the Haitian Charge DAffaires in Bahamas has voiced concerns over the severity of the punishment meted out to the 10.

Dorval Darlier suggested that there was very little point in holding on as prisoners, people who could easily be deported home.

I know that The Bahamas is a country of law, but sometimes you have to see it like the humanitarian way becausethere isnt a major crime, said Darlier.

If you keep someone in jail, you are to take care of them. You are to feed [them]. I think its [better] for the government to just send them back.

Bahamas is one of the Caribbeans most stable and prosperous countries. The archipelago of islands has in recent years been the destination of some desperate Caribbeans in search of economic opportunities.

Visit link:
Bahamas goes hard on 10 Haitians for illegal immigration; 1-year prison sentences and $3000 fines - Face2Face Africa

Testimony ended and closing arguments were heard Friday in a trial stemming from immigration raids last year in O'Neill, Nebraska. Jack Williams interviewed Fred Knapp of NET News about trial developments.

Fred, could you bring us up to speed on what happened today?

One of two remaining defendants, Mayra Jimenez, took the stand on her own behalf. Jimenez was the office manager at O'Neill Ventures, a tomato growing and shipping plant in O'Neill.

Earlier, there was testimony about problems with workers supplied to that plant by Juan Pablo Sanchez Delgado, a local businessman -- problems including workers not being paid, being injured on the job, and working too many hours.

But when Jimenez was questioned by her lawyer, Candace Wooster, she admitted she was aware of those concerns, but did not know the workers were in the country illegally. And she said also that others who had testified against her had reason to lie, because they want to stay in the country and they could do that by helping the prosecution.

And what did the prosecution had to say about that?

Lesley Woods of the U.S. Attorney's Office displayed emails and tapped phone call transcripts that appeared to show Jimenez knew Sanchez Delgado wasn't deducting taxes from workers paychecks, even though he was legally required to do so, and he was taking the money.

According to one transcript, Jimenez laughed when Sanchez Delgado suggested she should slap a worker who fainted from an injury in the face to see her reaction.

There were also transcripts of her expressing fear of a raid or other actions by ICE -- Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Jimenez said even though she's a naturalized US citizen, for people like her from Mexico, that fear of ICE never goes away regardless of their legal status.

What about the other remaining defendant?

That's John Glidden, who managed several hog operations that Sanchez Delgado also supplied workers for. Like Jimenez, Glidden insists he never knew the workers were in the country illegally.

Glidden's lawyer, Carlos Monzon, said his client is a scapegoat being used to justify all the money and effort the government put into the raids. He said Sanchez Delgado, who's already pled guilty, was a thief, a liar, an opportunist and someone who testified for the prosecution only after cutting a deal to reduce his own maximum sentence from 50 years in prison to 10. And Monzon asked why the presidents and other higher officials of the companies that used those workers weren't on trial.

Fred, remind us again, what happened to the third defendant, John Good. He's no longer part of the trial.

Right. Judge John Gerrard ruled that, even though Good was alleged to have conspired to harbor illegal aliens like the other two defendants, it was a different conspiracy. Good owned Sanchez Delgado's house and the liquor license to the restaurant that Sandra Delgado ran, but wasn't involved with any of his staffing companies or his employees. And so the judge said that would be prejudicial to allow all the testimony against the other two to reflect on Good.

He could still be retried separately. That's up to the U.S. Attorney's office and they haven't decided yet.

So what happens now?

Well, Judge John Gerrard gave the jury instructions and sent them off to deliberate early Friday afternoon. They had apparently not reached a verdict by five o'clock. So I'm expecting theyll resume the deliberations on Monday.

View post:
O'Neill immigration raid trial goes to jury - NET Nebraska

Illegal immigration in Mexico has been a problem, especially since the 1970s. Although the number of deportations is declining with 61,034 registered cases in 2011[citation needed], the Mexican government documented over 200,000 illegal border crossings in 2004 and 2005[citation needed]. The largest source of illegal immigrants in Mexico are the impoverished Central American countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador bordering Mexico to the southeast.

Prior to May 2011, Mexico's immigration policy was regulated by the highly strict General Law of Population of 1970, which had been portrayed in hypocritical light when compared to immigration policies as in the US states of Arizona or Alabama. However, on May 24, 2011, President Felipe Caldern signed the new and much more liberal Migration Law. The Mexican Senate and the House had unanimously approved the migration bill on February 24 and April 29, respectively. Some of the most significant principles in this new law included new rights for migrants. The new law guarantees that foreigners and Mexican nationals will receive equal treatment under Mexican law and decriminalizes undocumented immigration, reducing it to an administrative infraction, punishable with a fine of up to 100 days' worth of minimum wage.[1]Under this equality principle all immigrants, regardless of status, nationality, or ethnicity, are granted the right to education and healthcare and are entitled to due process. Elements aimed at promoting family unity were also added. Moreover, before the government takes action (e.g. deportation) with respect to migrant children and other vulnerable individuals (women, seniors, the disabled and victims of crime), their specific needs must be prioritized and adequate services must be provided. Migrants are also granted judicial rights that they were previously denied, such as the right to due process. In addition, the law also calls for establishing a Center for Trust Evaluation and Control which will be charged with the task of training and certifying immigration personnel in hopes of curtailing corrupt practices. All Institute of Migration officials are to meet the same standards as the rest of the country's security agencies. Government officials found to be violating the law are now subject to penalties, including fines and imprisonment.

With the Mexican governments intent to control migration flows and attract foreigners who can contribute to economic development, the new migration law simplifies foreigners entrance and residence requirements. First, it replaces the two large immigration categories (immigrant and non-immigrant) with the categories of visitor and temporary resident". The status of permanent resident is maintained. In the General Law of Population the two categories incorporate over 30 different types of foreignersi.e. distinguished visitor, religious minister, etc.each with its own stipulations and requirements to qualify for entry and stay. Under the new law the requirements are simplified, basically differentiating those foreigners who are allowed to work and those who are not. The law also expedites the permanent resident application process for retirees and other foreigners. For granting permanent residency, the law proposes using a point system based on factors such as level of education, employment experience, and scientific and technological knowledge.[2] The specifics for the points system were established in the Law's regulationsArticles 124 to 127 of the Regulationspublished on September 28, 2012. According to Article 81 of the Law and Article 70 of the regulations to the law, immigration officials are the only ones that can conduct immigration procedures although the Federal Police may assist but only under the request and guidance of the Institute of Migration. Verification procedures cannot be conducted in migrant shelters run by civil society organizations or by individuals that engage in providing humanitarian assistance to immigrants.[3][4]

In the 1820s, some people from the Northern and Eastern United States entered Mexico illegally. Mexico did have legal immigration through empresario contacts. The reason for this was to create a buffer between Mexico and the growing United States. At first they tried to convince Mexicans to move into Texas. However, Texas was dominated by the warlike Comanche Native Americans. Mexican families did not want to move to Texas and risk their families lives. Mexico then offered cheap land to Anglos from the United States. These legal immigrants had to agree to live under the Mexican Constitution of 1824. Mexican Texas was bordered by the U.S. frontier areas of Louisiana and Arkansas, had the most settlement by American illegal immigrants. When Mexico realized that illegal immigration was out of control they attempted to shut it down. Mexican Texas had a population of 3,000 illegal immigrants by 1823; most of those immigrants were from the Southern United States or Appalachia. By 1825, Mexico and the Coahuila y Tejas territory legalized immigration under the condition that settlers convert to Roman Catholicism and not own slaves. However, as the settler population expanded to 7,000 and did not assimilate with Mexican culture, Mexico banned American immigration again in 1830. However, by 1835, American immigration increased to 1,000 per month. Santa Anna did away with the Mexican Constitution of 1824. Many violations under his dictatorship led to tensions and eventually the outbreak of a revolution. Texas became independent from Mexico in 1836.[5]

In October 2004, the Hechos newscast of TV Azteca reported that the National Institute of Migration (INM) in Mexico raided strip clubs and deport foreigners who worked in such clubs without the proper documentations.[6] In 2004, the INM deported 188,000 people at a cost of US$10 million [7]

Illegal immigration of Cubans through Cancn tripled from 2004 to 2006.[8]

The Mexican government has been accused of hypocrisy in terms of illegal immigration, criticizing the United States government for its treatment of illegal immigrants whilst their laws are considerably harsher by comparison.[9][10][11]

In 2006, Joseph Contreras profiled the issue of Guatemalan immigrants illegally entering Mexico for Newsweek magazine[12] and claimed that while Mexican president Vicente Fox urged that the United States grant legal residency to millions of undocumented Mexican immigrants, Mexico had only granted legal status to 15,000 undocumented immigrants. Additionally, Contreras found that at coffee farms in the Mexican state Chiapas, "40,000 Guatemalan field hands endure backbreaking jobs and squalid living conditions to earn roughly [US]$3.50 a day" and that some farmers "even deduct the cost of room and board from that amount."[13] The Mexican National Institute of Migration estimated that 400,235 people crossed the GuatemalaMexico border illegally every year and that around 150,000 of them intended to enter the United States.[14] The illegal immigration from Mexico's southern neighbors is proving to be a headache for both Mexico and the United States, which has seen an increase in illegal immigration from Central America while Mexican migration has fallen to about net zero. Most Central Americans in Mexico and the United States hail from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, with a small number from Nicaragua. Amnesty international indicates that 60% of women migrants are sexually assaulted while in transit via Mexico to the United States.[15]

On 14 September 2018, US media reported that Jacklyn the 7-year-old from Guatemala had died while in custody of US Customs. [16]

A 2019 survey sponsored by The Washington Post and Mexicos newspaper Reforma gathered information on public opinion regarding illegal immigration to Mexico.[17] It was conducted through July 9 to July 14, 2019, among 1,200 Mexicans adults and was done across the country in 100 election districts by way of face-to-face interviews.[17] According to the survey, Mexicans are profoundly frustrated with illegal immigrants following a year of increased migration through their country from Central America.[17] The survey demonstrates that only 7% of Mexicans say that Mexico should provide residency to Central American immigrants, while another 33% support allowing them to temporarily stay in Mexico while the United States comes to a decision regarding their admittance. However, a 55% majority say that illegal immigrants should be deported back to their home countries.[17] These findings disprove the perception that Mexico is supportive towards the swell of Central Americans. The data results instead suggest that Mexicans are opposed against the migrants traversing through their country, a sentiment shared by numerous supporters of President Trump.[17] The Post-Reforma survey finds that more than 6 in 10 Mexicans say that migrants pose a burden on their country because they take jobs as well as benefits that should belong to Mexicans; and a 55% majority of Mexicans support deporting migrants traveling through Mexico to reach the United States.[17]

The face-to-face survey was conducted among Mexican adults after a dramatic increase in Mexicos immigration enforcement following an agreement made in June with the United States.[18] Among the less of half of Mexicans who are aware of the June agreement, 34% are opposed while 59% are in favor.[17] Several analysts had predicted the base for the President of Mexico Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrador to be disillusioned when he agreed to heighten Mexicos immigration enforcement. But the poll instead suggests that the new approach has subtracted very little from Obradors popularity. He currently maintains a strong 70% job approval rating eight months after assuming office. A 54% majority saying that Obrador is standing up for the interests of Mexico in his dealings with the United States and immigration.[17] Furthermore, 51% of Mexicans support utilizing the countrys recently formed National Guard to repel the migration of illegal immigrants in Mexico. The Mexican National Guard was launched by Lpez Obrador and has played a major part in the intensifying of immigration enforcement. A 53% majority of Mexicans have voiced their trust in the national guard, with two-thirds of Mexicans saying that they would like the national guard to be in their city, whereas 45% report that they feel more safe with the domestic force.[17]

In July 2019, the governors of three northern Mexican states; Coahuila, Nuevo Len and Tamaulipas, signed a statement announcing that they could not accept any more migrants.[19] Governor Miguel ngel Riquelme Sols of Coahuila stated, "The number [of migrants] that the federal government is talking about is impossible for us to deal with."[20][17] Guatemalans are set comprise the largest group of migrants apprehended at the United States border this year. By nationality, it would be the very first time in modern history when Mexicans do not make up the largest migrant group.[17]

The Post-Reforma poll finds that a mere 2% of Mexicans deem immigration their countrys most important problem, with a 55% majority naming insecurity. Another 9% each mentioning corruption and unemployment, 7% cite the economy, and lastly 4% each who say that poverty, political and social problems are Mexicos primary concerns.[17]

Read more:
Illegal immigration to Mexico - Wikipedia