Well, this person is fed up with the hate-mongers who pollute our fine city and are led by the simple-minded, bigoted trio of Elise "blinded by bigotry" Marciano, John "Anti-Uncle Sam" McGowan, and everyone's favorite Native American bigot, Tom Bennett.
I have been increasingly disturbed by the tone of some recent letters on the topic of immigration. The language seems to sound more like hate speech and less like constructive or thoughtful points of view.
I was particularly taken aback by a letter appearing in the May 22 edition, "The Mexican flag belongs in Mexico." The writer referenced a photograph appearing in the May 16 edition f The News-Times of a man waving a Mexican flag. From that photograph, the writer went on to state some facts about the flag-waving man.
The facts included that the man would not learn English, that he would not adopt American customs, that he would never be a loyal patriotic citizen, that he has no respect for our laws and that he will make our country weaker. I can't imagine how he knew all these things by simply looking at a photograph.
I don't suppose the writer would have similar comments about the people waving Irish flags in the St. Patrick's Day parade.
My point is not to pick on the writer of this one letter, but to address the generally angry nature of many recent letters on the topic of immigration. I suppose, sadly, that the prevalent attitude is a product of unfortunate and unfair ethnic stereotypes which are only reinforced by the comments appearing in such letters....
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
