Dear Editor,
I just wanted to write concerning some comments in State of unBeing's editorial for issue number ten. While I write this, here in the District of Columbia the elections are being closely monitored as each member watches the fate of his position, his constituency, his party. A number of races are being closely monitored by lovers of freedom no doubt the world over. One of the most vital is Proposition 187, the so-called "Save Our State" initiative, becoming known in the underground as "Submission Or Slavery."
A few notes about Captain Moonlight's article first, though. It was interesting to see an author correct possible misreadings of his article. As a legal brief, no doubt, it wouldn't stand. None of ours could. As a political writer, though, there is no place for moderation, and the terms he used were powerful for the purpose. It is a fine line. The subtilties between 'arrested' and 'detained,' for example, are more legal that active, and in many nations such subtilties do not even exist. The detaining for 24 hours is the standard party line, but it has been upheld for 48 hours for an adult, and recently the Supreme Court refused to hear a case permitting 72 hours for juveniles. This means that it is not law across the country, but it is considered constitutional, and at any time it could be implemented.
About 187 now. This is expected to pass by a slim margin, as I recall. The Republicans are expecting a great shift Right, which I tend to doubt, and will doubt until the figures are in. Pete Wilson, Republican governor of California, has staked his reelection on this measure. We hope it will fail, but we are not optimistic.
I suppose first I will address the claims against it. Contrary to what Rush Limbaugh appears to be implying, Wilson's "racism" -- real or alleged I do not intend to address -- did not begin with this. It is indeed not "race-specific" I suppose. Blond haired and blue eyed Poles from Mexico can't come north, Jews from Mexico can't come north, Davidians can't come north, but the main people opposing it are Mexicans. Pete Wilson has practically been on the beaches pushing back Asian refugees, too, though, and it was his open letter to President Clinton that got this ball rolling to push harder on the immigrants. No, he has been called a racist for years, and either way he has come down very plainly against immigration.
187 will cause teachers, social workers, and all other workers in the public sector to become informants for the federal government. This is nothing about economics. This issue at least is one of civil liberties. It would deny health care (except for emergencies) and social care to undocumented immigrants. Most frighteningly, though, is that it cuts education and requires teachers to report children who they suspect might be illegal -- or might have illegal parents -- to the State.
This was tried in Texas, and, if I have my year correct, was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Our educators have an obligation to educate our residents, not only our citizens. It is illegal to even ask if a person is a documented immigrant or no. We are not talking here about child abuse, where it is also law that a suspicious person must turn in a suspect. No one is endangering a child here except perhaps our government. And, most frighteningly, if a child is born in the U.S. to undocumented parents, he or she is an American as much as Bill Clinton or Pete Wilson. If his or her parents are not documented, though, they will be sent back. The child's parents cannot go to social workers nor to doctors, for to do so would endanger these people who have sworn to help the people. In my opinion, this is a very frightening precedent, to create, in effect, an underground of second class citizens.
But 187 is only one of a trend that is developing on our borders. Although prominent Democrats have opposed 187 and Pete Wilson and other Republicans (i.e., Rush) have come out in support, this is not a Right agenda. Operation Gatekeeper has begun.
On the Mexican-American border, a vast iron wall has been erected, along with a one mile wide by twelve mile long police zone between the borders patrolled by the National Guard. Off the coast of California the Coast Guard is patrolling for hundreds of miles. Although this only exists between a couple of cities -- San Diego and Tijuana -- clearance has been given to extend it. There is talk of partitioning the entire international border with this three-tiered area. Comparison to the Iron Curtain may be a bit premature, powerful as this image may be, as it is claimed that it is to keep dangerous but disorganized people out, but the communists and Maoists among us I'm sure would say that the Iron Curtain was to keep the Imperialists out. Like any metaphor it depends on what emotional response you seek. Perhaps it would just be easiest, though, to present it plainly as it is: A gargantuan iron wall patrolled by armed guards on our own southern border.
In Texas, a similar program is in its experimental stage, and its success, it may be assumed, contributed to the decision to extend this across the border. The Texan version is Operation Blockade and runs between El Paso and Ciudad Juarez. This consists of a 20 mile strip with 450 border patrol personnel and a planned ten foot high wall, similar to the one in California, to run three miles and be made from scrap metal from Desert Storm. Although the anti-immigrant sentiment present in California is not present to such a degree in Texas, the feelings are being stirred up.
The cards, too, are a national endeavor. I hadn't heard that there would even be a vote on them. I had heard that the five states listed by Captain Moonlight (California, Florida, Texas, New York, and Illinois) were test sites for an already determined course of action. The Religious Right have been publishing interesting articles on the Mark of the Beast and the way modern technology can dispense with cards by invisibly branding us. I happen to be disturbed enough by the cards alone. If there will be a vote, I pray that everyone who is eligible will be there to vote against it. I fear it is too late.
With 187, though, there still is time. Whether it passes or fails, it will not die. Ansat has told me there is a lot of talk about it coming to Texas, and a lot of protest against it. This is an issue where your vote is particularly vital, since those most effected cannot vote. Everyone must look inside themselves and decide if they really want to increase the police state within the United States. If you are even doubtful, consider that there must be a better way to end this situation. Even Operation Gatekeeper has its points and is beyond prevention by voting means. 187 and the national identification card -- under any name and for any excuse -- must be prevented.
And one more thing before signing off. Although it is true, as you -- Kilgore -- said, that Crux Ansata's piece, "Torn From a Diary," is from "an Orwellian 1984-esque time," it should not be so quickly ignored. The fanatics on the Right Wing are claiming that we have been invaded or will be given over to a socialist United Nations, and it is claimed that UN military vehicles have been sighted on the west coast of the United States -- Oregon, if memory serves. Whether this is true or not -- I transmit this claim, but with the caveat that it is a rumor that I do not know I believe -- there are elements in his tale that are true.
These ever-present mysterious black helicopters, another favorite in the Right Wing press, are being used. They are used in occupied Ireland by the British. In the U.S., they were used during the Branch Davidian siege, just as Ansat states. The SAS presence is also true, as documented in the British papers.
As for the extrapolations, such as why the U.S. is in Haiti and why the helicopters were brought to Texas, I cannot say. I do not have any reason to believe it is true. It should be frightening enough that it is possible.
Greetings to Tachyon, wherever you are. I hope you come above ground soon; we all miss you and send out respect for your courage to go under. Oh, yeah. And the Dr. Graves story DID have its points.
Bobbi
November 8, 1994
Washington, D.C.