| FLY ON THE WALL |
Awwwww...look at
that smile! That
father Murphy was
such a good boy!
that smile! That
father Murphy was
such a good boy!
Father Murphy (center) accepts a check for $16,000 on
behalf of St. Johns School for the Deaf from the Knights
of Columbus in 1966. Murphy, who was fluent in American
Sign Language, was a tireless fund-raiser for St. Johns,
where he worked from 1950 to 1974. By all accounts,
Murphy was much revered in the deaf community.
behalf of St. Johns School for the Deaf from the Knights
of Columbus in 1966. Murphy, who was fluent in American
Sign Language, was a tireless fund-raiser for St. Johns,
where he worked from 1950 to 1974. By all accounts,
Murphy was much revered in the deaf community.
How strong is your faith? Do
you believe what's in the bible?
....test yourself. Let your child
spend a few nights with your
priest.........nothing will happen.
....or you can choose to stay
home on Sunday and spend
some quality time with them...the
park, movies, zoo or counting fat
people at Wal Mart.
you believe what's in the bible?
....test yourself. Let your child
spend a few nights with your
priest.........nothing will happen.
....or you can choose to stay
home on Sunday and spend
some quality time with them...the
park, movies, zoo or counting fat
people at Wal Mart.
Rev Lawrence Murphy’s paedophilia ‘as widely known, but ignored’
The emotional scars remain years later for victims of Father Lawrence Murphy, a priest who molested generations of youngsters in the US
Midwest state of Wisconsin. Donald Marshall, who was abused by Murphy when he was a teenager at a juvenile detention centre, said: “I haven’
t stepped in a church for some 20 years. I lost all faith in the Church.”
Arthur Budzinski was abused at a school for the deaf in the city of St Francis, in the Milwaukee Diocese. Murphy taught at the school from 1950
to 1974, and even became director , despite the allegations.
Mr Budzinski said the priest would come to their dormitory at night and molest the deaf pupils. He was first molested by Murphy when he was 12,
and was deceived by his “friendliness”. “If he was a real mean guy, I would have stayed away,” said Mr Budzinski, using sign language
interpreted by his daughter. “But he was so friendly, and so nice ... I knew he was wrong, but I couldn’t really believe it.” One of the lawyers
involved in the case said: “Instead of removing him from the priesthood, they just gave him a free pass.”
Documents show that the Archbishop of Milwaukee then, the Most Rev Rembert Weakland, warned Cardinal Tarciscio Bertone that Murphy had
“no sense of remorse” and did not seem to realise the gravity of what he had done. He told the cardinal that three psychologists had concluded
that Murphy was a “typical” paedophile who saw himself as “a victim”.
Pope 'failed to act' on sex abuse claims
In the documents, the victims describe how Murphy “touched” them in his office, in his car, his mother’s house, on class excursions, on
fundraising trips and in their dormitory beds at night.
Three successive bishops of Milwaukee were told that Murphy was abusing children. Yet he was quietly moved to the Diocese of Superior in
northern Wisconsin in 1974, where he remained active in parishes, schools and the juvenile detention centre, where Mr Marshall lost his faith.
Murphy died in 1998 of natural causes.
The emotional scars remain years later for victims of Father Lawrence Murphy, a priest who molested generations of youngsters in the US
Midwest state of Wisconsin. Donald Marshall, who was abused by Murphy when he was a teenager at a juvenile detention centre, said: “I haven’
t stepped in a church for some 20 years. I lost all faith in the Church.”
Arthur Budzinski was abused at a school for the deaf in the city of St Francis, in the Milwaukee Diocese. Murphy taught at the school from 1950
to 1974, and even became director , despite the allegations.
Mr Budzinski said the priest would come to their dormitory at night and molest the deaf pupils. He was first molested by Murphy when he was 12,
and was deceived by his “friendliness”. “If he was a real mean guy, I would have stayed away,” said Mr Budzinski, using sign language
interpreted by his daughter. “But he was so friendly, and so nice ... I knew he was wrong, but I couldn’t really believe it.” One of the lawyers
involved in the case said: “Instead of removing him from the priesthood, they just gave him a free pass.”
Documents show that the Archbishop of Milwaukee then, the Most Rev Rembert Weakland, warned Cardinal Tarciscio Bertone that Murphy had
“no sense of remorse” and did not seem to realise the gravity of what he had done. He told the cardinal that three psychologists had concluded
that Murphy was a “typical” paedophile who saw himself as “a victim”.
Pope 'failed to act' on sex abuse claims
In the documents, the victims describe how Murphy “touched” them in his office, in his car, his mother’s house, on class excursions, on
fundraising trips and in their dormitory beds at night.
Three successive bishops of Milwaukee were told that Murphy was abusing children. Yet he was quietly moved to the Diocese of Superior in
northern Wisconsin in 1974, where he remained active in parishes, schools and the juvenile detention centre, where Mr Marshall lost his faith.
Murphy died in 1998 of natural causes.
| RULEBOOK & BIBLE 101 WARNING: some of the "words" printed in these books can be changed and interpreted differently at anytime without notice. Please read with caution & whiteout. and toiletpaper shit might be flying your way. |
Ever confront someone with a QUESTION and their body language goes from "confident" to "defensive"? Most of the time people answer questions
before A word leaves their mouth.
I recently started reading the bible (about 2 months ago). I've read it off and on throughout the years but recently I stuck my nose in it and really
started trying to "be it". Just like any other book it's best to stick your nose in it for hours at a time and start to imagine and become part of the
story. Helps you understand a little better. Along the way I've had questions. So I've asked. Every person I've asked gave me the same answer.
They tried to explain to me that what was THERE in black and white, wasn't really THERE. Another words, what is printed in this book in plain black
& white doesn't really mean what it says. That these words sitting in front of me mean something else. Kinda confusing right? No........these are just
humans at their best. Thanks to the dialog I've had with these people in the last couple of months I was prepared for this weekend.
Few questions in Kingsville were raised concerning our RULEBOOK (The bible of USA BOXING. Which, doesn't stand for much nowdays). One was
concerning rule
101.7 (a)
(2) Open Division - minimum age, 17: maximum age, 34 (up to day boxers turns 35 years of age)
(a) Should a situation occur requiring qualifying events for US Championships, Pan American Games or Olympic Games to be conducted in the
calendar year prior to the vent, USA Boxing's Board of Directors shall have the authority to establish age criteria in compliance with international
AIBA rules. Under no circumstances will a 16-year-old boxer compete in the Junior Olympic Tournament process once the athlete has
completed in a open class qualfying event.
(3) Under Nineteen/Junior Mens Division-ages 17-18
(4) Masters Division
This rule below 101.7(e) is in bold too. The rule book, has it in BOLD. Yes, that's right BOLD LETTERS. Like it mattered at one point or another.
Rule 101.7 (e)
RESTRICTION. Junior Olympic boxers may not enter or compete in any open class (age 17 & up) boxing tournament, championship, or boxing
contest as mentioned in 101.7(2)(a). If they do compete, the boxers is no longer eligible to compete as a Junior Olympic boxer.
Now after reading the "passage" above it would be safe to say that a boxer who has competed in the Under - 19 tournament can longer participate
in the Junior Olympic tournament. Umm........wrong. They can. Why you ask? Cause they said so. . . . and that's how the ball rolls.
I called USA BOXING today (4-20-10) to ask about changes to our rulebook. They said all changes have been posted to the website (changes).
The current rule book available for download is the most recent and the one we should follow. When asked about the rule change that occurred
this weekend I was put on hold then transferred. Uh huh...tranfered.... to a machine. . . "please leave a message". Yeah, I left a message..........
"God hates homos & foreskin".
When I confronted "GOD" about the violation of rules according to our "bible" he stated that there had been an error at the Under 19 tournament
and the boxer who had advanced to the finals against one of my boxers was allowed to participate in this SR tournament. Cause of this error he
was allowed to compete in our local JO Tournament. While he was telling me this I was repeating the words, "Don't kill the messenger" in my mind
over and over. This allowed me to "smile" at the situation and find some humor in it. Well, there was NEVER any error as stated by our USA Boxing
Executive Director, Michael Martini. He simply decided to change the rule. END OF STORY. Below is a copy of his response on the DAY OF
COMPETITION.
Mark,
The National Office reviewed the circumstances relating to several Junior Olympic age boxers who were allowed to register and compete in Under
19 Tournament and have determined it in the best interest of those boxer and the organization to allow them to remain in the Junior Olympic level,
until they turn the age of an Open Class Boxer. The athletes' right to compete outweighs the decision to not allow them to compete and basically,
be in Limbo, no place to compete.
Michael Martini
Interim Executive Director
USA Boxing
Michael, they're not in limbo. They made a decision to compete in the Under 19 tournament therefore they are not eligible to compete in our JO
program.
The fact that the change was made is not a big deal. All the boxers who competed at the Under 19 tournament that entered our JO tournament
didn't advance to state. So the actual fact that this rule was/will/has been changed doesn't mean much. The way it was changed DOES mean
something. Anytime a coach questions an official they are fast to point to our rulebook. The ONE time a coach decides to point towards the
rulebook to correct an error by an official, he's denied. A nail is much easier to swallow when it's shot straight down your throat. Shoot straight.
before A word leaves their mouth.
I recently started reading the bible (about 2 months ago). I've read it off and on throughout the years but recently I stuck my nose in it and really
started trying to "be it". Just like any other book it's best to stick your nose in it for hours at a time and start to imagine and become part of the
story. Helps you understand a little better. Along the way I've had questions. So I've asked. Every person I've asked gave me the same answer.
They tried to explain to me that what was THERE in black and white, wasn't really THERE. Another words, what is printed in this book in plain black
& white doesn't really mean what it says. That these words sitting in front of me mean something else. Kinda confusing right? No........these are just
humans at their best. Thanks to the dialog I've had with these people in the last couple of months I was prepared for this weekend.
Few questions in Kingsville were raised concerning our RULEBOOK (The bible of USA BOXING. Which, doesn't stand for much nowdays). One was
concerning rule
101.7 (a)
(2) Open Division - minimum age, 17: maximum age, 34 (up to day boxers turns 35 years of age)
(a) Should a situation occur requiring qualifying events for US Championships, Pan American Games or Olympic Games to be conducted in the
calendar year prior to the vent, USA Boxing's Board of Directors shall have the authority to establish age criteria in compliance with international
AIBA rules. Under no circumstances will a 16-year-old boxer compete in the Junior Olympic Tournament process once the athlete has
completed in a open class qualfying event.
(3) Under Nineteen/Junior Mens Division-ages 17-18
(4) Masters Division
This rule below 101.7(e) is in bold too. The rule book, has it in BOLD. Yes, that's right BOLD LETTERS. Like it mattered at one point or another.
Rule 101.7 (e)
RESTRICTION. Junior Olympic boxers may not enter or compete in any open class (age 17 & up) boxing tournament, championship, or boxing
contest as mentioned in 101.7(2)(a). If they do compete, the boxers is no longer eligible to compete as a Junior Olympic boxer.
Now after reading the "passage" above it would be safe to say that a boxer who has competed in the Under - 19 tournament can longer participate
in the Junior Olympic tournament. Umm........wrong. They can. Why you ask? Cause they said so. . . . and that's how the ball rolls.
I called USA BOXING today (4-20-10) to ask about changes to our rulebook. They said all changes have been posted to the website (changes).
The current rule book available for download is the most recent and the one we should follow. When asked about the rule change that occurred
this weekend I was put on hold then transferred. Uh huh...tranfered.... to a machine. . . "please leave a message". Yeah, I left a message..........
"God hates homos & foreskin".
When I confronted "GOD" about the violation of rules according to our "bible" he stated that there had been an error at the Under 19 tournament
and the boxer who had advanced to the finals against one of my boxers was allowed to participate in this SR tournament. Cause of this error he
was allowed to compete in our local JO Tournament. While he was telling me this I was repeating the words, "Don't kill the messenger" in my mind
over and over. This allowed me to "smile" at the situation and find some humor in it. Well, there was NEVER any error as stated by our USA Boxing
Executive Director, Michael Martini. He simply decided to change the rule. END OF STORY. Below is a copy of his response on the DAY OF
COMPETITION.
Mark,
The National Office reviewed the circumstances relating to several Junior Olympic age boxers who were allowed to register and compete in Under
19 Tournament and have determined it in the best interest of those boxer and the organization to allow them to remain in the Junior Olympic level,
until they turn the age of an Open Class Boxer. The athletes' right to compete outweighs the decision to not allow them to compete and basically,
be in Limbo, no place to compete.
Michael Martini
Interim Executive Director
USA Boxing
Michael, they're not in limbo. They made a decision to compete in the Under 19 tournament therefore they are not eligible to compete in our JO
program.
The fact that the change was made is not a big deal. All the boxers who competed at the Under 19 tournament that entered our JO tournament
didn't advance to state. So the actual fact that this rule was/will/has been changed doesn't mean much. The way it was changed DOES mean
something. Anytime a coach questions an official they are fast to point to our rulebook. The ONE time a coach decides to point towards the
rulebook to correct an error by an official, he's denied. A nail is much easier to swallow when it's shot straight down your throat. Shoot straight.
| Copy of the email sent by Michael Martini USA Boxing Interim Executive Director. (with a small touch of spaghetti sauce. Used to validate it's authenticity) |
PHOENIX – Arodi Berrelleza isn't one of the targets of Arizona's new law cracking down on illegal immigration — he's a U.S. citizen, a high school
student from Phoenix.
But the 18-year-old said he's afraid he'll be arrested anyway if police see him driving around with friends and relatives, some of them illegal
immigrants.
"If a cop sees them and they look Mexican, he's going to stop me," Berrelleza said. "What if people are U.S. citizens? They're going to be asking
them if they have papers because of the color of their skin."
Berrelleza's concerns were echoed by Hispanics across the state Saturday, a day after Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill that requires police to
question people about their immigration status — including asking for identification — if they suspect someone is in the country illegally.
The new law, which will take effect in late July or early August, was cheered by many, including Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose tough
crackdowns have made him a hero in the anti-illegal immigration community. He said it gives him new authority to detain undocumented migrants
who aren't accused of committing any other crimes.
.
Get the scoop:Click here to stay up to date with Yahoo! News on Facebook
..Hispanics fear profiling under new Arizona law
Buzz up!1373 votes Send
Email IM .Share
Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks .Print .. AFP/Getty Images/File –
Demonstrators protest Arizona's new immigration law outside the Arizona state capitol building on …
. Slideshow:Immigration Reform Debate .
Play Video Video:Terry Moran on Arizona Immigration Battle ABC News .
Play Video Video:AZ Governor Signs Immigration Bill ABC News .
By JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press Writers Jonathan J. Cooper, Associated Press Writers – Sat Apr 24, 7:36 pm ET
PHOENIX – Arodi Berrelleza isn't one of the targets of Arizona's new law cracking down on illegal immigration — he's a U.S. citizen, a high school
student from Phoenix.
But the 18-year-old said he's afraid he'll be arrested anyway if police see him driving around with friends and relatives, some of them illegal
immigrants.
"If a cop sees them and they look Mexican, he's going to stop me," Berrelleza said. "What if people are U.S. citizens? They're going to be asking
them if they have papers because of the color of their skin."
Berrelleza's concerns were echoed by Hispanics across the state Saturday, a day after Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill that requires police to
question people about their immigration status — including asking for identification — if they suspect someone is in the country illegally.
The new law, which will take effect in late July or early August, was cheered by many, including Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose tough
crackdowns have made him a hero in the anti-illegal immigration community. He said it gives him new authority to detain undocumented migrants
who aren't accused of committing any other crimes.
"Now if we show they're illegal, we can actually arrest them and put them in our jails," Arpaio said.
Current law in Arizona and most states doesn't require police to ask about the immigration status of those they come across, and many
departments prohibit officers from inquiring out of fear immigrants won't report crime or cooperate in other investigations.
Now, police departments seen as weak on illegal immigration could face lawsuits. The new measure also toughens restrictions on hiring illegal
immigrants for day labor and knowingly transporting them.
Arizona has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants and is the state with the most illegal border crossings, with the harsh, remote desert serving
as the gateway for thousands of Mexicans and Central Americans.
Arpaio said he hoped Arizona's example coerces the federal government into acting to seal the border. President Barack Obama called the new
law "misguided" Friday and instructed the Justice Department to examine it to see if it's legal, but also allowed that the failure to enact
immigration reform at the national level
left the door open to "irresponsibility by others."
student from Phoenix.
But the 18-year-old said he's afraid he'll be arrested anyway if police see him driving around with friends and relatives, some of them illegal
immigrants.
"If a cop sees them and they look Mexican, he's going to stop me," Berrelleza said. "What if people are U.S. citizens? They're going to be asking
them if they have papers because of the color of their skin."
Berrelleza's concerns were echoed by Hispanics across the state Saturday, a day after Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill that requires police to
question people about their immigration status — including asking for identification — if they suspect someone is in the country illegally.
The new law, which will take effect in late July or early August, was cheered by many, including Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose tough
crackdowns have made him a hero in the anti-illegal immigration community. He said it gives him new authority to detain undocumented migrants
who aren't accused of committing any other crimes.
.
Get the scoop:Click here to stay up to date with Yahoo! News on Facebook
..Hispanics fear profiling under new Arizona law
Buzz up!1373 votes Send
Email IM .Share
Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks .Print .. AFP/Getty Images/File –
Demonstrators protest Arizona's new immigration law outside the Arizona state capitol building on …
. Slideshow:Immigration Reform Debate .
Play Video Video:Terry Moran on Arizona Immigration Battle ABC News .
Play Video Video:AZ Governor Signs Immigration Bill ABC News .
By JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press Writers Jonathan J. Cooper, Associated Press Writers – Sat Apr 24, 7:36 pm ET
PHOENIX – Arodi Berrelleza isn't one of the targets of Arizona's new law cracking down on illegal immigration — he's a U.S. citizen, a high school
student from Phoenix.
But the 18-year-old said he's afraid he'll be arrested anyway if police see him driving around with friends and relatives, some of them illegal
immigrants.
"If a cop sees them and they look Mexican, he's going to stop me," Berrelleza said. "What if people are U.S. citizens? They're going to be asking
them if they have papers because of the color of their skin."
Berrelleza's concerns were echoed by Hispanics across the state Saturday, a day after Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill that requires police to
question people about their immigration status — including asking for identification — if they suspect someone is in the country illegally.
The new law, which will take effect in late July or early August, was cheered by many, including Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose tough
crackdowns have made him a hero in the anti-illegal immigration community. He said it gives him new authority to detain undocumented migrants
who aren't accused of committing any other crimes.
"Now if we show they're illegal, we can actually arrest them and put them in our jails," Arpaio said.
Current law in Arizona and most states doesn't require police to ask about the immigration status of those they come across, and many
departments prohibit officers from inquiring out of fear immigrants won't report crime or cooperate in other investigations.
Now, police departments seen as weak on illegal immigration could face lawsuits. The new measure also toughens restrictions on hiring illegal
immigrants for day labor and knowingly transporting them.
Arizona has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants and is the state with the most illegal border crossings, with the harsh, remote desert serving
as the gateway for thousands of Mexicans and Central Americans.
Arpaio said he hoped Arizona's example coerces the federal government into acting to seal the border. President Barack Obama called the new
law "misguided" Friday and instructed the Justice Department to examine it to see if it's legal, but also allowed that the failure to enact
immigration reform at the national level
left the door open to "irresponsibility by others."
Let's level the playing field. If Arizona wants to randomly ask MEXICANS for prove
they are from the US .. Mexicans should have the right to ask any balding white man
with low top white tennis if he's a pedophile and black men with baggy jeans what
gang they belong to............idiots.
they are from the US .. Mexicans should have the right to ask any balding white man
with low top white tennis if he's a pedophile and black men with baggy jeans what
gang they belong to............idiots.
EMAIL SENT TO RAMOS BOXINGTEAM
Hi there,
I just moved to San Antonio, and I was wanting to get up with a decent boxing club. I've been training for about three years now. However, I
went onto your website's main page, and I saw your little anti-US military video. Are you just against the war? Or are you anti-military in
general? I am just curious why you place it on your site's main page, when it has nothing to do with boxing, or sports. My last question is since
I am in the military, should I even bother coming in to look at the place, or would it behoove me to look for a different place to train? Thanks
Hi there,
I just moved to San Antonio, and I was wanting to get up with a decent boxing club. I've been training for about three years now. However, I
went onto your website's main page, and I saw your little anti-US military video. Are you just against the war? Or are you anti-military in
general? I am just curious why you place it on your site's main page, when it has nothing to do with boxing, or sports. My last question is since
I am in the military, should I even bother coming in to look at the place, or would it behoove me to look for a different place to train? Thanks
RESPONSE FROM Arturo Ramos III
I guess you didn't see the video. My brother is in the USAF. Had an uncle (by marriage) who spent 30 years in the Army. Few of the boxers here
have military backgrounds. The video has nothing to do with being anti-military it has to do with knowing the truth. I personally am pretty blunt
and straight forward. If you've been training for 3 years and you come here and I see that it looks like you haven't, I'll let you know. If you're
training for a fight with our club and I feel you're not ready, you will not fight. Simple. Truth.
I guess you didn't see the video. My brother is in the USAF. Had an uncle (by marriage) who spent 30 years in the Army. Few of the boxers here
have military backgrounds. The video has nothing to do with being anti-military it has to do with knowing the truth. I personally am pretty blunt
and straight forward. If you've been training for 3 years and you come here and I see that it looks like you haven't, I'll let you know. If you're
training for a fight with our club and I feel you're not ready, you will not fight. Simple. Truth.
| I've posted this to answer any questions/thoughts that people might think I'm anti-war. Ummm...No, I love violence.I'm just anti-lie. New term. Use it Monkey. |
This is what's wrong with the place we
call the world. People are afraid to
speak against the Truth for fear of
what they will be seen as by our
Society. It's shit. There's only one way
things work, the TRUTH. if there's hard
proof that American soliders are
causing malice shut your trap, put on
your helmet and deal with it. It's right in
front of your eyes. Don't turn away.
Facts are Facts, Truth is Truth.
NOW Gimme some chon chon!
call the world. People are afraid to
speak against the Truth for fear of
what they will be seen as by our
Society. It's shit. There's only one way
things work, the TRUTH. if there's hard
proof that American soliders are
causing malice shut your trap, put on
your helmet and deal with it. It's right in
front of your eyes. Don't turn away.
Facts are Facts, Truth is Truth.
NOW Gimme some chon chon!
The Ten Most Dangerous Sports for Kids
By: Patti Ghezzi
I’m a nervous mom. I don’t want my kid taking up figure skating, ice hockey, or even field hockey.
But I was surprised to find out the top sport for sending kids to the emergency room—according to a Loyola University Study based on 2005 data
from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission—is basketball.
Huh?
Turns out, kids who play basketball at school or even in the driveway are at risk of the same knee injuries that derail NBA careers. The good news
is most injuries can be prevented with proper training and supervision. And catastrophic injuries in kids’ sports—think little Bonnie on her pony in
Gone With the Wind—are extremely rare.
There are other surprises on Loyola’s top ten list besides basketball and even more shocking, some sports that are traditionally considered
dangerous (hockey, anyone?) are notably absent from the list.
1. Basketball
More than half a million kids went to the ER in just one year with injuries sustained playing hoops. Damage to the anterior cruciate ligament, or ACL,
is a common injury and any sport involving twisting, jumping, pivoting, squatting, or making sudden stops puts kids at risk. Proper coaching is a
must.
2. Bicycling
Yes, that favorite pastime sent more kids—485,669 to be exact—to the ER than football. Wearing a helmet greatly reduces risk as does educating
children about the dangers of riding in traffic.
3. Football
This sport sent more than 418,200 kids to the ER. Sports injury statistics vary based on methodology, and the Center for Injury Research and
Policy found football to be the leading cause of sports-related injuries among kids.
4. Soccer
The ball is soft, but the sport can be dangerous, with about 175,000 soccer-playing kids seeking aid at an ER. One culprit is portable soccer goals,
which should be securely anchored to the ground.
5. Baseball
Today’s kids train hard and hit the ball hard, which is why some 155,000 Little Leaguers ended up in emergency rooms. Children should wear
proper protective gear and be taught how to safely slide into bases and other fundamentals. With all warm-weather sports, heat exhaustion is also a
threat
6. Skateboarding
They don’t call extreme sports “extreme” for nothing. More than 112,000 kids turned up in emergency rooms with skateboarding injuries. The
National Safety Council recommends the use of protective gear, such as closed, slip-resistant shoes, helmets, and specially designed padding for
elbows, knees, and hands.
7. Trampoline
It’s not really a sport—or is it?— but 108,000 kids went to the ER for trampoline-related injuries. Newer models with nets to keep kids from falling off
are safer. Backyard trampolines are for jumping, not stunts. More adventurous kids need a qualified trainer and a gym.
8. Softball
If a fast-traveling baseball can cause serious injury, so can a fast-traveling softball. More than 106,000 kids ended up in the emergency room with
softball injuries.
9. Swimming and Diving
Anytime you mix kids and water, you have potential for an injury. Swimming and diving accidents sent 82,300 kids to the ER. Head and spinal cord
injuries are a risk when kids are diving. Make sure kids know how deep the water is and that all pools, lakes, and beaches have qualified lifeguards.
10. Horseback riding
ER docs treated more than 73,500 kids for injuries related to horseback riding. A British study found serious head and spinal injuries were most
common when jumping.
Other sports that prompted ER visits: weightlifting, volleyball, golf, roller skating, wrestling, gymnastics, inline skating, tennis, and track and field.
One sport too dangerous for a hovering mom like me didn’t make the Loyola list: cheerleading. The Consumer Product Safety Commission names
this the most injury-prone sport for girls. A recent Ohio State University study identified gymnastics as the most dangerous sport for girls, with nearly
27,000 gymnasts hospitalized each year.
The deadliest sport: riding an all-terrain vehicle. There were 740 deaths in 2003, and one-third of those were kids under sixteen, according to the
safety agency.
With the right training, supervision, and equipment, most sports can be considered safe for children. Parents of kids in extreme sports point out that
danger is all around us, and you can’t raise your child in a bubble. I concur—in theory. I’m trying to adopt a mellow mama attitude, but I think you
should minimize risk when possible.
The takeaway message for me is that even seemingly safe sports like soccer and golf can cause injury, but most of those injuries are survivable
and preventable. Still, I may introduce my daughter to croquet
Via http://www.divinecaroline.com/22113/64786-ten-most-dangerous-sports-kids/2#ixzz1OU9LTQNB
During the Great Depression the unemployment rate in the United State rose to 25%. Other factors that led to the
depression were the massive bank failures and the stock market crash. There were many things that contributed to
the Great Depression. Many believe the Great Depression originated in the United States in what is now called,
Black Tuesday (October 29, 1929.) This led to a world wide shortfall.
While other countries were finding ways to survive the United (Gringo) States came up with a plan of their own.
Deport any Mexican looking human being to Mexico! That's right. If you looked like you were born in Mexico you were
going to be deported. It didn't matter if you were born in the United States and were an American Citizen. These
Gringos were looking out for themselves. They figured if they could deport all Mexicans back to Mexico it would open
up more opportunities in the workforce for the whites.
Fast forward 70+ years to today and we have something similar going on. Similar in the way that when White America
struggles they go after the easiest prey. The Mexican. Why did all of a sudden after 9/11 did securing our borders
along, Texas, Arizona and California become an issue? Before 9/11 the Gringo States didn't care about "illegals"
crossing the borders. Why? It was cheap labor. The Gringo States are growing and Mexicans are helping them build,
schools, roads, buildings, etc.. Mexicans play an important part in transforming America.
Today white America says securing our borders is important. Why? Mexicans are not coming to America to blow up
buildings, start riots, hijack planes, poison our water, etc..... Mexicans come to American to better themselves. They
come to America as a NEED not a WANT. All Mexicans want to do is what Gringos DON'T WANT to do..........WORK!
It's time for Mexicans to stand up for themselves and give these Gringos a big FUCK YOU next time they come
knocking on our door!
Below you will find some history of what Gringos did to Mexicans during the Great Depression.
Depression and the Struggle for Survival
The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food
shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat:
deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a
program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went
voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply
on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were
sent out of the country during the 1930s--many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade
before.
The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers
from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm
families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and
traveled the highways in search of work.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or
FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from
criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for
Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.
The camps also provided an unexpected benefit. In bringing together so many individual farm families, they
increased ties within the community. Many residents began organizing their fellow workers around labor issues, and
helped pave the way for the farm labor movements that emerged later in the century. This interview with a leader of
the FSA camp in El Rio, California describes some of the day-to-day issues that the camp residents dealt with.
Although farming was an important source of employment for Mexican immigrants, by the end of the 1930s Mexican
Americans were established throughout the American workforce. Mexican immigrants and their descendants could
be found in most of the industries of the Southwest, including ranching and mining. America's growing rail network
was particularly important for Mexican immigrants. The railroad industry had long turned to immigrants from Mexico
as a source of low-cost labor. In return, Mexican workers found that the railways offered not only employment, but
also mobility. They often used this relatively inexpensive form of travel to move their families further into the North
and East of the U.S., and into a more urban way of life.
U.S. urged to apologize for 1930s deportations
Enlarge By Dan MacMedan, USA TODAY
American-born Ignacio Pina, 81, returned to the USA after
16 years in Mexico.
Enlarge By Dan MacMedan, USA TODAY
Pina, then 6, at right front row, and siblings lived in Montana before
they were deported.
By Wendy Koch, USA TODAY
His father and oldest sister were farming sugar beets in the fields of Hamilton, Mont., and his mother was cooking
tortillas when 6-year-old Ignacio Piña saw plainclothes authorities burst into his home.
"They came in with guns and told us to get out," recalls Piña, 81, a retired railroad worker in Bakersfield, Calif., of
the 1931 raid. "They didn't let us take anything," not even a trunk that held birth certificates proving that he and his
five siblings were U.S.-born citizens.
The family was thrown into a jail for 10 days before being sent by train to Mexico. Piña says he spent 16 years of
"pure hell" there before acquiring papers of his Utah birth and returning to the USA.
The deportation of Piña's family tells an almost-forgotten story of a 1930s anti-immigrant campaign. Tens of
thousands, and possibly more than 400,000, Mexicans and Mexican-Americans were pressured — through raids
and job denials — to leave the USA during the Depression, according to a USA TODAY review of documents and
interviews with historians and deportees. Many, mostly children, were U.S. citizens.
Related story: Some stories hard to get in history books
If their tales seem incredible, a newspaper analysis of the history textbooks used most in U.S. middle and high
schools may explain why: Little has been written about the exodus, often called "the repatriation."
That may soon change. As the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on bills that would either help illegal workers become
legal residents or boost enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, an effort to address deportations that happened 70
years ago has gained traction:
• On Thursday, Rep. Hilda Solis, D-Calif., plans to introduce a bill in the U.S. House that calls for a commission to
study the "deportation and coerced emigration" of U.S. citizens and legal residents. The panel would also
recommend remedies that could include reparations. "An apology should be made," she says.
Co-sponsor Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., says history may repeat itself. He says a new House bill that makes being an
illegal immigrant a felony could prompt a "massive deportation of U.S. citizens," many of them U.S.-born children
leaving with their parents.
"We have safeguards to ensure people aren't deported who shouldn't be," says Jeff Lungren, GOP spokesman for
the House Judiciary Committee, adding the new House bill retains those safeguards.
• In January, California became the first state to enact a bill that apologizes to Latino families for the 1930s civil
rights violations. It declined to approve the sort of reparations the U.S. Congress provided in 1988 for Japanese-
Americans interned during World War II.
Democratic state Sen. Joe Dunn, a self-described "Irish white guy from Minnesota" who sponsored the state bill, is
now pushing a measure to require students be taught about the 1930s emigration. He says as many as 2 million
people of Mexican ancestry were coerced into leaving, 60% of them U.S. citizens.
• In October, a group of deportees and their relatives, known as los repatriados, will host a conference in Detroit on
the topic. Organizer Helen Herrada, whose father was deported, has conducted 100 oral histories and produced a
documentary. She says many sent to Mexico felt "humiliated" and didn't want to talk about it. "They just don't want it
to happen again."
No precise figures exist on how many of those deported in the 1930s were illegal immigrants. Since many of those
harassed left on their own, and their journeys were not officially recorded, there are also no exact figures on the
total number who departed.
At least 345,839 people went to Mexico from 1930 to 1935, with 1931 as the peak year, says a 1936 dispatch from
the U.S. Consulate General in Mexico City.
"It was a racial removal program," says Mae Ngai, an immigration history expert at the University of Chicago, adding
people of Mexican ancestry were targeted.
However, Americans in the 1930s were "really hurting," says Otis Graham, history professor emeritus at the
University of California, Santa Barbara. One in four workers were unemployed and many families hungry. Deporting
illegal residents was not an "outrageous idea," Graham says. "Don't lose the context."
A pressure campaign
In the early 1900s, Mexicans poured into the USA, welcomed by U.S. factory and farm owners who needed their
labor. Until entry rules tightened in 1924, they simply paid a nickel to cross the border and get visas for legal
residency.
"The vast majority were here legally, because it was so easy to enter legally," says Kevin Johnson, a law professor
at the University of California, Davis.
They spread out across the nation. They sharecropped in California, Texas and Louisiana, harvested sugar beets
in Montana and Minnesota, laid railroad tracks in Kansas, mined coal in Utah and Oklahoma, packed meat in
Chicago and assembled cars in Detroit.
By 1930, the U.S. Census counted 1.42 million people of Mexican ancestry, and 805,535 of them were U.S. born, up
from 700,541 in 1920.
Change came in 1929, as the stock market and U.S. economy crashed. That year, U.S. officials tightened visa
rules, reducing legal immigration from Mexico to a trickle. They also discussed what to do with those already in the
USA.
"The government undertook a program that coerced people to leave," says Layla Razavi, policy analyst for the
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF). "It was really a hostile environment." She says
federal officials in the Hoover administration, like local-level officials, made no distinction between people of Mexican
ancestry who were in the USA legally and those who weren't.
"The document trail is shocking," says Dunn, whose staff spent two years researching the topic after he read the
1995 book Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s, by Francisco Balderrama and Raymond
Rodriguez.
USA TODAY reviewed hundreds of pages of documents, some provided by Dunn and MALDEF and others found at
the National Archives. They cite officials saying the deportations lawfully focused on illegal immigrants while the
exodus of legal residents was voluntary. Yet they suggest people of Mexican ancestry faced varying forms of
harassment and intimidation:
• Raids. Officials staged well-publicized raids in public places. On Feb. 26, 1931, immigration officials suddenly
closed off La Placita, a square in Los Angeles, and questioned the roughly 400 people there about their legal
status.
The raids "created a climate of fear and anxiety" and prompted many Mexicans to leave voluntarily, says
Balderrama, professor of Chicano studies and history at California State University, Los Angeles.
In a June 1931 memo to superiors, Walter Carr, Los Angeles district director of immigration, said "thousands upon
thousands of Mexican aliens" have been "literally scared out of Southern California."
Some of them came from hospitals and needed medical care en route to Mexico, immigrant inspector Harry Yeager
wrote in a November 1932 letter.
The Wickersham Commission, an 11-member panel created by President Hoover, said in a May 1931 report that
immigration inspectors made "checkups" of boarding houses, restaurants and pool rooms without "warrants of any
kind." Labor Secretary William Doak responded that the "checkups" occurred very rarely.
• Jobs withheld. Prodded by labor unions, states and private companies barred non-citizens from some jobs,
Balderrama says.
"We need their jobs for needy citizens," C.P. Visel of the Los Angeles Citizens Committee for Coordination of
Unemployment Relief wrote in a 1931 telegram. In a March 1931 letter to Doak, Visel applauded U.S. officials for the
"exodus of aliens deportable and otherwise who have been scared out of the community."
Emilia Castenada, 79, recalls coming home from school in 1935 in Los Angeles and hearing her father say he was
being deported because "there was no work for Mexicans." She says her father, a stonemason, was a legal resident
who owned property. A U.S. citizen who spoke little Spanish, she left the USA with her brother and father, who was
never allowed back.
"The jobs were given to the white Americans, not the Mexicans," says Carlos DeAnda Guerra, 77, a retired furniture
upholsterer in Carpinteria, Calif. He says his parents entered the USA legally in 1917 but were denied jobs. He, his
mother and five U.S.-born siblings were deported in 1931, while his father, who then went into hiding, stayed to pick
oranges.
"The slogan has gone out over the city (Los Angeles) and is being adhered to — 'Employ no Mexican while a white
man is unemployed,' " wrote George Clements, manager of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce's agriculture
department, in a memo to his boss Arthur Arnoll. He said the Mexicans' legal status was not a factor: "It is a question
of pigment, not a question of citizenship or right."
• Public aid threatened. County welfare offices threatened to withhold the public aid of many Mexican-Americans,
Ngai says. Memos show they also offered to pay for trips to Mexico but sometimes failed to provide adequate food.
An immigration inspector reported in a November 1932 memo that no provisions were made for 78 children on a
train. Their only sustenance: a few ounces of milk daily.
Most of those leaving were told they could return to the USA whenever they wanted, wrote Clements in an August
1931 letter. "This is a grave mistake, because it is not the truth." He reported each was given a card that made their
return impossible, because it showed they were "county charities." Even those born in the USA, he wrote, wouldn't
be able to return unless they had a birth certificate or similar proof.
• Forced departures. Some of the deportees who were moved by train or car had guards to ensure they left the
USA and others were sent south on a "closed-body school bus" or "Mexican gun boat," memos show.
"Those who tried to say 'no' ended up in the physical deportation category," Dunn says, adding they were taken in
squad cars to train stations.
Mexican-Americans recall other pressure tactics. Arthur Herrada, 81, a retired Ford engineer in Huron, Ohio, says
his father, who was a legal U.S. resident, was threatened with deportation if he didn't join the U.S. Army. His father
enlisted.
'We weren't welcome'
"It was an injustice that shouldn't have happened," says Jose Lopez, 79, a retired Ford worker in Detroit. He says
his father came to the USA legally but couldn't find his papers in 1931 and was deported. To keep the family
together, his mother took her six U.S.-born children to Mexico, where they often survived on one meal a day. Lopez
welcomes a U.S. apology.
So does Guerra, the retired upholsterer, whose voice still cracks with emotion when he talks about how deportation
tore his family apart. "I'm very resentful. I don't trust the government at all," says Guerra, who later served in the U.
S. military.
Piña says his entire family got typhoid fever in Mexico and his father, who had worked in Utah coal mines, died of
black lung disease in 1935. "My mother was left destitute, with six of us, in a country we knew nothing about," he
says. They lived in the slums of Mexico City, where his formal education ended in sixth grade. "We were misfits
there. We weren't welcome."
"The Depression was very bad here. You can imagine how hard it was in Mexico," says Piña, who proudly notes the
advanced college degrees of each of his four U.S.-raised sons. "You can't put 16 years of pure hell out of your
mind."
Mexican Deportation
depression were the massive bank failures and the stock market crash. There were many things that contributed to
the Great Depression. Many believe the Great Depression originated in the United States in what is now called,
Black Tuesday (October 29, 1929.) This led to a world wide shortfall.
While other countries were finding ways to survive the United (Gringo) States came up with a plan of their own.
Deport any Mexican looking human being to Mexico! That's right. If you looked like you were born in Mexico you were
going to be deported. It didn't matter if you were born in the United States and were an American Citizen. These
Gringos were looking out for themselves. They figured if they could deport all Mexicans back to Mexico it would open
up more opportunities in the workforce for the whites.
Fast forward 70+ years to today and we have something similar going on. Similar in the way that when White America
struggles they go after the easiest prey. The Mexican. Why did all of a sudden after 9/11 did securing our borders
along, Texas, Arizona and California become an issue? Before 9/11 the Gringo States didn't care about "illegals"
crossing the borders. Why? It was cheap labor. The Gringo States are growing and Mexicans are helping them build,
schools, roads, buildings, etc.. Mexicans play an important part in transforming America.
Today white America says securing our borders is important. Why? Mexicans are not coming to America to blow up
buildings, start riots, hijack planes, poison our water, etc..... Mexicans come to American to better themselves. They
come to America as a NEED not a WANT. All Mexicans want to do is what Gringos DON'T WANT to do..........WORK!
It's time for Mexicans to stand up for themselves and give these Gringos a big FUCK YOU next time they come
knocking on our door!
Below you will find some history of what Gringos did to Mexicans during the Great Depression.
Depression and the Struggle for Survival
The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food
shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat:
deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a
program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went
voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply
on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were
sent out of the country during the 1930s--many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade
before.
The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers
from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm
families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and
traveled the highways in search of work.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or
FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from
criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for
Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.
The camps also provided an unexpected benefit. In bringing together so many individual farm families, they
increased ties within the community. Many residents began organizing their fellow workers around labor issues, and
helped pave the way for the farm labor movements that emerged later in the century. This interview with a leader of
the FSA camp in El Rio, California describes some of the day-to-day issues that the camp residents dealt with.
Although farming was an important source of employment for Mexican immigrants, by the end of the 1930s Mexican
Americans were established throughout the American workforce. Mexican immigrants and their descendants could
be found in most of the industries of the Southwest, including ranching and mining. America's growing rail network
was particularly important for Mexican immigrants. The railroad industry had long turned to immigrants from Mexico
as a source of low-cost labor. In return, Mexican workers found that the railways offered not only employment, but
also mobility. They often used this relatively inexpensive form of travel to move their families further into the North
and East of the U.S., and into a more urban way of life.
U.S. urged to apologize for 1930s deportations
Enlarge By Dan MacMedan, USA TODAY
American-born Ignacio Pina, 81, returned to the USA after
16 years in Mexico.
Enlarge By Dan MacMedan, USA TODAY
Pina, then 6, at right front row, and siblings lived in Montana before
they were deported.
By Wendy Koch, USA TODAY
His father and oldest sister were farming sugar beets in the fields of Hamilton, Mont., and his mother was cooking
tortillas when 6-year-old Ignacio Piña saw plainclothes authorities burst into his home.
"They came in with guns and told us to get out," recalls Piña, 81, a retired railroad worker in Bakersfield, Calif., of
the 1931 raid. "They didn't let us take anything," not even a trunk that held birth certificates proving that he and his
five siblings were U.S.-born citizens.
The family was thrown into a jail for 10 days before being sent by train to Mexico. Piña says he spent 16 years of
"pure hell" there before acquiring papers of his Utah birth and returning to the USA.
The deportation of Piña's family tells an almost-forgotten story of a 1930s anti-immigrant campaign. Tens of
thousands, and possibly more than 400,000, Mexicans and Mexican-Americans were pressured — through raids
and job denials — to leave the USA during the Depression, according to a USA TODAY review of documents and
interviews with historians and deportees. Many, mostly children, were U.S. citizens.
Related story: Some stories hard to get in history books
If their tales seem incredible, a newspaper analysis of the history textbooks used most in U.S. middle and high
schools may explain why: Little has been written about the exodus, often called "the repatriation."
That may soon change. As the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on bills that would either help illegal workers become
legal residents or boost enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, an effort to address deportations that happened 70
years ago has gained traction:
• On Thursday, Rep. Hilda Solis, D-Calif., plans to introduce a bill in the U.S. House that calls for a commission to
study the "deportation and coerced emigration" of U.S. citizens and legal residents. The panel would also
recommend remedies that could include reparations. "An apology should be made," she says.
Co-sponsor Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., says history may repeat itself. He says a new House bill that makes being an
illegal immigrant a felony could prompt a "massive deportation of U.S. citizens," many of them U.S.-born children
leaving with their parents.
"We have safeguards to ensure people aren't deported who shouldn't be," says Jeff Lungren, GOP spokesman for
the House Judiciary Committee, adding the new House bill retains those safeguards.
• In January, California became the first state to enact a bill that apologizes to Latino families for the 1930s civil
rights violations. It declined to approve the sort of reparations the U.S. Congress provided in 1988 for Japanese-
Americans interned during World War II.
Democratic state Sen. Joe Dunn, a self-described "Irish white guy from Minnesota" who sponsored the state bill, is
now pushing a measure to require students be taught about the 1930s emigration. He says as many as 2 million
people of Mexican ancestry were coerced into leaving, 60% of them U.S. citizens.
• In October, a group of deportees and their relatives, known as los repatriados, will host a conference in Detroit on
the topic. Organizer Helen Herrada, whose father was deported, has conducted 100 oral histories and produced a
documentary. She says many sent to Mexico felt "humiliated" and didn't want to talk about it. "They just don't want it
to happen again."
No precise figures exist on how many of those deported in the 1930s were illegal immigrants. Since many of those
harassed left on their own, and their journeys were not officially recorded, there are also no exact figures on the
total number who departed.
At least 345,839 people went to Mexico from 1930 to 1935, with 1931 as the peak year, says a 1936 dispatch from
the U.S. Consulate General in Mexico City.
"It was a racial removal program," says Mae Ngai, an immigration history expert at the University of Chicago, adding
people of Mexican ancestry were targeted.
However, Americans in the 1930s were "really hurting," says Otis Graham, history professor emeritus at the
University of California, Santa Barbara. One in four workers were unemployed and many families hungry. Deporting
illegal residents was not an "outrageous idea," Graham says. "Don't lose the context."
A pressure campaign
In the early 1900s, Mexicans poured into the USA, welcomed by U.S. factory and farm owners who needed their
labor. Until entry rules tightened in 1924, they simply paid a nickel to cross the border and get visas for legal
residency.
"The vast majority were here legally, because it was so easy to enter legally," says Kevin Johnson, a law professor
at the University of California, Davis.
They spread out across the nation. They sharecropped in California, Texas and Louisiana, harvested sugar beets
in Montana and Minnesota, laid railroad tracks in Kansas, mined coal in Utah and Oklahoma, packed meat in
Chicago and assembled cars in Detroit.
By 1930, the U.S. Census counted 1.42 million people of Mexican ancestry, and 805,535 of them were U.S. born, up
from 700,541 in 1920.
Change came in 1929, as the stock market and U.S. economy crashed. That year, U.S. officials tightened visa
rules, reducing legal immigration from Mexico to a trickle. They also discussed what to do with those already in the
USA.
"The government undertook a program that coerced people to leave," says Layla Razavi, policy analyst for the
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF). "It was really a hostile environment." She says
federal officials in the Hoover administration, like local-level officials, made no distinction between people of Mexican
ancestry who were in the USA legally and those who weren't.
"The document trail is shocking," says Dunn, whose staff spent two years researching the topic after he read the
1995 book Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s, by Francisco Balderrama and Raymond
Rodriguez.
USA TODAY reviewed hundreds of pages of documents, some provided by Dunn and MALDEF and others found at
the National Archives. They cite officials saying the deportations lawfully focused on illegal immigrants while the
exodus of legal residents was voluntary. Yet they suggest people of Mexican ancestry faced varying forms of
harassment and intimidation:
• Raids. Officials staged well-publicized raids in public places. On Feb. 26, 1931, immigration officials suddenly
closed off La Placita, a square in Los Angeles, and questioned the roughly 400 people there about their legal
status.
The raids "created a climate of fear and anxiety" and prompted many Mexicans to leave voluntarily, says
Balderrama, professor of Chicano studies and history at California State University, Los Angeles.
In a June 1931 memo to superiors, Walter Carr, Los Angeles district director of immigration, said "thousands upon
thousands of Mexican aliens" have been "literally scared out of Southern California."
Some of them came from hospitals and needed medical care en route to Mexico, immigrant inspector Harry Yeager
wrote in a November 1932 letter.
The Wickersham Commission, an 11-member panel created by President Hoover, said in a May 1931 report that
immigration inspectors made "checkups" of boarding houses, restaurants and pool rooms without "warrants of any
kind." Labor Secretary William Doak responded that the "checkups" occurred very rarely.
• Jobs withheld. Prodded by labor unions, states and private companies barred non-citizens from some jobs,
Balderrama says.
"We need their jobs for needy citizens," C.P. Visel of the Los Angeles Citizens Committee for Coordination of
Unemployment Relief wrote in a 1931 telegram. In a March 1931 letter to Doak, Visel applauded U.S. officials for the
"exodus of aliens deportable and otherwise who have been scared out of the community."
Emilia Castenada, 79, recalls coming home from school in 1935 in Los Angeles and hearing her father say he was
being deported because "there was no work for Mexicans." She says her father, a stonemason, was a legal resident
who owned property. A U.S. citizen who spoke little Spanish, she left the USA with her brother and father, who was
never allowed back.
"The jobs were given to the white Americans, not the Mexicans," says Carlos DeAnda Guerra, 77, a retired furniture
upholsterer in Carpinteria, Calif. He says his parents entered the USA legally in 1917 but were denied jobs. He, his
mother and five U.S.-born siblings were deported in 1931, while his father, who then went into hiding, stayed to pick
oranges.
"The slogan has gone out over the city (Los Angeles) and is being adhered to — 'Employ no Mexican while a white
man is unemployed,' " wrote George Clements, manager of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce's agriculture
department, in a memo to his boss Arthur Arnoll. He said the Mexicans' legal status was not a factor: "It is a question
of pigment, not a question of citizenship or right."
• Public aid threatened. County welfare offices threatened to withhold the public aid of many Mexican-Americans,
Ngai says. Memos show they also offered to pay for trips to Mexico but sometimes failed to provide adequate food.
An immigration inspector reported in a November 1932 memo that no provisions were made for 78 children on a
train. Their only sustenance: a few ounces of milk daily.
Most of those leaving were told they could return to the USA whenever they wanted, wrote Clements in an August
1931 letter. "This is a grave mistake, because it is not the truth." He reported each was given a card that made their
return impossible, because it showed they were "county charities." Even those born in the USA, he wrote, wouldn't
be able to return unless they had a birth certificate or similar proof.
• Forced departures. Some of the deportees who were moved by train or car had guards to ensure they left the
USA and others were sent south on a "closed-body school bus" or "Mexican gun boat," memos show.
"Those who tried to say 'no' ended up in the physical deportation category," Dunn says, adding they were taken in
squad cars to train stations.
Mexican-Americans recall other pressure tactics. Arthur Herrada, 81, a retired Ford engineer in Huron, Ohio, says
his father, who was a legal U.S. resident, was threatened with deportation if he didn't join the U.S. Army. His father
enlisted.
'We weren't welcome'
"It was an injustice that shouldn't have happened," says Jose Lopez, 79, a retired Ford worker in Detroit. He says
his father came to the USA legally but couldn't find his papers in 1931 and was deported. To keep the family
together, his mother took her six U.S.-born children to Mexico, where they often survived on one meal a day. Lopez
welcomes a U.S. apology.
So does Guerra, the retired upholsterer, whose voice still cracks with emotion when he talks about how deportation
tore his family apart. "I'm very resentful. I don't trust the government at all," says Guerra, who later served in the U.
S. military.
Piña says his entire family got typhoid fever in Mexico and his father, who had worked in Utah coal mines, died of
black lung disease in 1935. "My mother was left destitute, with six of us, in a country we knew nothing about," he
says. They lived in the slums of Mexico City, where his formal education ended in sixth grade. "We were misfits
there. We weren't welcome."
"The Depression was very bad here. You can imagine how hard it was in Mexico," says Piña, who proudly notes the
advanced college degrees of each of his four U.S.-raised sons. "You can't put 16 years of pure hell out of your
mind."
Mexican Deportation
Mexicans aren't really stupid but some think we are. Here's a little history on what America thinks of us.
This photo was posted on Lulac's Facebook Page. These
are the people who supposed to be protecting our civil
rights. There's no way we'll ever get the respect we deserve
if we continue to think this way. If MLK & Malcom X would
have given up when things got difficult where would we be?
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW TO HEAR SOME TRUTH - Are the Mexicans the next Jews?
are the people who supposed to be protecting our civil
rights. There's no way we'll ever get the respect we deserve
if we continue to think this way. If MLK & Malcom X would
have given up when things got difficult where would we be?
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW TO HEAR SOME TRUTH - Are the Mexicans the next Jews?
TEAM RAMOS GYM in San Antonio was featured on a music video, Fast Ronald - Friend or Foe