We [Danbury Public Schools] decided on a new initiate, we're going to give middle students two years of history and then you're going to take the high school and pull the first half of US History out of US History. So if you have kids going to Danbury High, they're going to start after reconstruction. That's after civil war, after slavery, after Jacksonian democracy, that's after the tea party…
[…]
…I earned a master degree to make sure in my English class, I'm willing to put more US History. I started teaching about the early America a few weeks ago and one of my student said "what are you a history teacher?" I said "yes if I have to be…"
Picking video clips from Elise Marciano's hate fest is too easy.
From the insanity on display last Saturday United States Citizens for Immigration and Law Enforcement hate-group rally, here's one of the most memorable rants.
This line of insanity comes from an English teacher in the Danbury school system. This bizarre individual brags how about she indoctrinate students her brand of history in ENGLISH class.
This person is spending her time teaching "her" brand of Early US History in English class? If I was a parent of a kid in one of her classes, I'd be concerned...deeply concerned.
If anyone has info on the this person (she goes by the name "Deb") please contact me at hatcityblog@yahoo.com or drop a line in the comments. Better yet, forward this clip to the Superintendent of Schools and ask him how is it that this individual is teaching her brand of HISTORY in ENGLISH class.
Dr. Sal V. Pascarella, Superintendent of School pascas@danbury.k12.ct.us 797-4700
Why would anyone vote for a politician who would embrace people with this type of mentality?
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.
