Letting the colourful skeletons out of the closet to play!

(Image is credited to Liam Liberty)

There is a big difference between keeping all our skeletons in the closet due to fear of the embarrassment, fear of the potential rejection of others, and fear of unknown changes which may happen after revelation of whatever may be the “skeleton”, even if such changes are rather small, even insignificant, as opposed to the discretion of keeping our bony little friends behind closed doors simply for the fact that these dirty little secrets really aren’t anybody’s business.

I have struggled with the question of how much personal information in conjunction with the stories I write should be told on this blog, not because of fear, but because I do not want the stories to be confused with a narcissistic gossip girl blog rather than a site with stories which can reveal the real impact that the American immigration system in the status quo has on regular people, regular families.

For a person such as myself, whom has been exposed to more uniques situations throughout a very busy life of collecting memoirs, I feel that I cannot hold back information, to which may seem too personal to reveal, because I believe that if it can make a positive impact on somebody, if only one person, to think differently about something or someone, or somewhere, then who am I too keep it in the closet, and depriving anyone, if only that one, of becoming more abstract minded after looking at that something, that someone, or that somewhere through another person’s eyes, through another person’s emotions, and through another person’s opinion, written from the heart by the soul, the signature being recognized only by choice of words. So, I have decided to use my discretion by acknowledging that if I hope for positive impact and positive change through storytelling, it means that there simply isn’t any discretion to be used.

We live in exciting times, where the way we look at human rights are positively changed through legislation. One of those changes is what I will address in this blog: the right to live forever happy with whomever you want to be your lifetime partner, no matter what gender that partner happens be and no matter where that partner happens to be from. So, I will be blogging, this time, about the impact of the Supreme Court kissing Section 3 of DOMA adieu in the year of 2013, and the impact it has had for same-sex couples, immigration wise, in the United States of America since, as well as peppering the content with personal information for the sake of influencing for the better, not in the sense of the opinion some may have about same-sex marriage and the law, but for the person who may come across this, and who despite the highest court of the land giving such marriage green light, still is struggling with accepting the reality that some people choose to live as Adam and Steve or as Ashley and Eve rather than what we have been conditioned through centuries to think: that a marriage can only be an institution as the original Adam and Eve.

What prompted the final spark to start blogging about this subject when I have so many other things which I could blog about, considering the right for a gay American to marry his or her non-American partner was, what the media realm would consider “breaking news” back in 2013. It is, because the media recently covered the breaking news of Ireland’s decision to allow gay marriages to be recognized...something which I consider a HUGE game-changer overall, as Ireland is reputed to be religiously zealous.

With that being said, I think I have completed the introduction of: Letting the colourful skeletons out of the closet to play!

First and foremost: If you are one of those persons who are uneased by the fact that some men become attracted to men only, and that some women prefer an alpha-female instead of the regular alpha-male this part of the blog is meant for you:

1. Just because you are a man does not mean that a gay man in your presence, whether you are middle-aged, or if you are young and attractive, will find you attractive. The fact is, that gay men have a sixth sense, serving as an extra instrument for survival which will react to the slightest sense of bigotry in form of homophobia, an anti-gaydar detector if you will. A slight reaction of the anti-gaydar detector due to sensing your bigotry is enough for the gay man to avoid you in the politest manner. The fact that being gay is not all about sexuality, is something the gay man knows, it is something which the whole gay community knows. The fact that that he will stay true to himself by acknowledging his homosexuality not only to himself but also to the rest of a world, which in 2015 still seems to be cruel to the gay community to a certain degree, makes him authentic; a person who strives for authenticity, finds himself on the path of self-actualization; self-actualization leads to calm, groundedness...happiness. Ergo, the gay man knowing what he is, as well as who he is, therefore is, in my opinion, the normal man. 
The fact that you would initially react to homosexuality negatively rather than staying neutral to a way of life and a community which you aren’t a part of anyway, and that such homophobia in which you possess, this "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" (as defined by Merriam Webster) most likely derives from your initial thoughts of this matter being of sexual nature, should be a concern not only to you, but also to a different community known as the mental health sector, as you may be the person with cognitive abnormalities due to suppressed anger as well as some level of sexual repression. Ergo, the homophobic man not knowing why he possesses anger toward a group of persons whom he has no connection to is, in my opinion, an unstable person, therefore, the abnormal man.

2. Just because you are a woman does not mean that a lesbian in your presence, whether you are middle-aged, or if you are young and attractive, will find you attractive. The fact is, that lesbians have a sixth sense, serving as an extra instrument for survival which will react to the slightest sense of bigotry in form of homophobia, an anti-gaydar detector if you will. A slight reaction of the anti-gaydar detector due to sensing your bigotry is enough for the lesbian to avoid you in the politest manner. The fact that being gay is not all about sexuality, is something the lesbian knows, it is something which the whole gay community knows. The fact that that she will stay true to herself by acknowledging her homosexuality not only to herself, but also to the rest of a world, which in 2015 still seems to be cruel to the gay community to a certain degree, makes her authentic; a person who strives for authenticity, finds herself on the path of self-actualization; self-actualization leads to calm, groundedness...happiness. Ergo, the lesbian knowing what she is, as well as who she is, therefore is, in my opinion, the normal man...as in human being. The fact that you would initially react to homosexuality negatively rather than staying neutral to a way of life and a community which you aren’t a part of anyway, and that such homophobia in which you possess, this "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" (as defined by Merriam Webster) most likely deriving from your initial thoughts of this matter being of sexual nature, should be a concern not only to you, but also to a different community known as the mental health sector, as you may be the person with cognitive abnormalities due to suppressed anger as well as some level of sexual repression. Ergo, the homophobic woman not knowing why she possesses anger toward a group of persons whom she has no connection to is, in my opinion, an unstable person, therefore, the abnormal man...as in human being.

3. If you are a person using religion as a shield to protect your distorted view of homosexual human beings, then let me remind you of a beautiful scripture: “For every creature of God is beautiful, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving.” Timothy 4:4...The best interpretation of this scripture that I could find was by Elliott’s Commentary for English readers, posted on www.biblehub.com: “To teach that anything created was unclean would be an insult to the Creator. The very fact that it is his creation is enough. If made by God, then it must be good.” With that being stated, I do not think that there is much, if anything at all to use as counter-argument to justify bigotry in form of homophobia.

4. Not all gay men carry feminine traits...not all lesbians are trading their femininity with brute masculinity. Imagine that you have set your greedy eyes upon a feminine woman in plum coloured stiletto heels with matching coloured lipstick, while pairing such accessories with delicate grey coloured clothing; she may as well be a woman who proposed to her girlfriend the previous evening, while presenting a one-carat Scott Kay ring, and doing so out of pure love to her...and because the law of the United States of America has given her the freedom to do so. Or, imagine that you are that single woman checking out that very masculine man in the fitness centre, dreaming of a potential first date: that man may as well have been looking at stocks and savings along with his husband the previous evening, in order to evaluate the amount of money they are able to spend on an upgraded home, so that their family can grow by adding children...and perhaps even a dog. He also was doing so because the laws of the United States of America has granted the protection and freedom for he and his husband to do so.

5. Guess what? These homosexuals you are discriminating against are someone’s children, someone’s sibling...perhaps they are someone’s parent.

I am sure that, at this point I may have someone reading this reacting by asking the rhetorical question: “Who the h*ll does she think she is, writing as if she knows everything about the gay community?” (And if you are asking such rhetorical question, no worries...I have in the past been asked that question...times and times again) Well, let me tell you exactly who I am, with regard to playing the “expert” on homosexuality: My first marriage was entered into at the very young age of 18 years. My husband was tall, blond, Greek-American,and quite handsome. We had a lot in common: We loved watching Mel Brooks VHS videos along with all of our roomies, we loved to have fun (trust me, it was some of the most memorable times of my life). We also loved dogs, cheap boxed wine, humanity of all kinds, the B-52’s and attending concerts, also along with all of the roomies, while cruising to the concerts in style by being stuffed into my flower-painted 1972 Chevy Impala...and we also had in common a little signifiant thing such as the fact that we were both attracted to men. In other words, I married one of my best friends, who happened to be a gay man.

While reflecting upon this marriage, the question remains: how does one really define the institution of marriage? How can a “traditional” marriage between a man and a woman, consummated by the way we are conditioned through old religious belief to consider such term, be the only proper type of marriage? Despite being traditional, such marriage may, perhaps, be a loveless institution, perhaps full of deception and even being one where unfaithfulness goes unnoticed as one party is consumed by own selfish misery, which was the driving factor to which the other party decided to seek acceptance through carnal gratification outside the marital boundaries?

My marriage to my first husband was never consummated. But I loved him, nevertheless.  We did, however, everything else married couples do: We lived together, we ate together, we shared the responsibility of paying rent and utilities; we socialized in the same crowds. Having a gay husband comes with benefits: without a doubt would I ever leave the house not looking well dressed. If it wasn’t my husband who objected to my combination of clothing before going clubbing, rest assured one of his friends (now also my friends) would catch any fashion faux-pas with their queer fashion hawk-eyes. Having the opportunity to observe him so many times, I used to think to myself that the way he handled our chow bred dogs, and the way he cared for every shrub and and flower in our garden all in such a gentle, caring way, how well he would handle fatherhood some day, and hoped that the fact that he was gay would not come in the way for him to make such a personal decision one day. We had disagreements like any other married couple: the fact that I left the dishes in the sink came up a couple of times as a topic of discussion, and also the confrontation of the misplacement of the potted flowers being placed in the wrong window whereas the one to which these potted flowers should be in, according to my husband, had much more possibility for sunlight; my counter-argument was that the window to which the potted flowers were proposed to be transferred to, may expose the plants of too much sunlight. And so on went our innocent institution of marriage. The fact that my husband, by marrying me, now was able to ease a very overbearing father by proving that he was married to a female; whereas I, in return, stood unto a more stabile ground in the way of staying in America and never having to permanently return to Europe to an equally overbearing mother was an immense relief of stress for both parties. I don’t expect anyone to understand nor to accept our way of marriage, although I can state that in the gay community, these type of marriages happened all the time, pre-DOMA era.

As I know that some have tried to use this marriage against me, immigration wise, although ironically enough not authorized to do so, it hasn’t gone anywhere, and never will. And I will tell you why: The fact that we didn’t lie during our interview with Immigration and Naturalization Services, as the questions never became so intimate to provide a wrongful answer during one of the most nerve-wrecking moment of my life. The fact that is that INS agents conducted and passed the background check, as all personal information, status of cohabitation, etc. were all bonafide information. That we were part of the gay community was never a hidden factor, and was something to which the INS must have been aware of...and yet permanent resident status was still granted in the year of 1990.

After a divorce two years later, we parted ways, and spoke rarely to one another. I moved on to a more traditional life with husband number two, and the gay community faded away from my life for a period, as I became busy as yet again a wife, a mother, home owner, while working weird hours hopping between the invasive cardiac catheterization team at the cath lab, and the cardiopulmonary department, skipping home to cook dinner, change diapers, confronting husband number two about the mysterious oreo-cookie crumbs on the kitchen floor trailing mysteriously toward the TV room, which weren’t there prior to the ten hour shift I had just completed...then to negotiate laundry schedule with the mother-in-law, who now had moved into the house...along with the father-in-law, and not only one brother-in-law, but two of them! Then to continue on after a couple of hours of sleep snuggled up with two babies, dogs, and the husband...as well as probably also a few oreo-cookie crumbs, which had found its way into the creases of the bed sheets, to moonlighting graveyard shifts at a Shriners Hospital pediatric unit, only to repeat the cycle. But as the gay community had made me a forever rainbow, despite entering into traditional marriage and heterosexual life, I was fortunate to have married the most non-judgemental mormon in history. When we were able escape work, diapers and in-laws on rare occasions, we would usually join the very colourful crowd of friends at our favorite gay bar, The Sun for a night of dancing and laughter...until one day the one and only tornado Salt Lake City have ever experienced decided to strike down in the very part where The Sun was located and wiped it out by tearing the bar completely to shred; which, by the way, gave every godfearing bigot in that state an opportunity to preach about god’s warning to all whom (in according to them) did not possess the Holy Spirit…! (translation: those gays)

The time and the friends I had in the gay community are moments treasured and individuals who have been able to give me more insight, through their personal storytelling into the morning hours, than any elite school may ever have taught me about homosexuality. These stories wiped off the grime of a window displaying a beautiful view into a community so misunderstood, so discriminated upon, and so stereotyped.

Although I never had friends in the gay community until I moved to the United States of America, homosexuality was not an unfamiliar subject in our family: At the most inappropriate moment, while displaying her dismay of my grandmother regarding something rather insignificant, my mother decided to reveal information about her former mother-in-law...and thus came a magnificent skeleton prancing right out of the closet of family secrets: blaming my grandmother of being a monster-in-law, and swore that the woman her senior needed to come down from her high horse as she had also made “mistakes” in her past, we were told that my grandmother was married very young, although we soon found out that she had been married to another man prior to marrying the man whom I believed to be my grandfather. In a time when being gay literally had to be kept in the closet, a young man from with a good family background had apparently married my grandmother in order to keep up good appearances. My uncle whom I believed to be my uncle all of a sudden became my half-uncle. My grandmother, in order not to be shamed soon divorced after becoming pregnant and discovering her husband’s “other life” and thereafter married my grandfather who others were lead to believe to be the father of my uncle. The subject of homosexuality has ever since been a delicate topic of discussion in the family, as there are mixed emotions not only to the subject. I see the situation of my uncle as an opportunity to challenge anyone trying to prove that homosexuality is genetically inherited, as he is evidence to the contrary, whereas he has lived a life as a heterosexual, despite having a homosexual father, and has been married twice, and fathered a child the good old traditional way.

Although there is now leverage for same-sex couples immigration wise, there is at the same time not enough protection through legislation for gay. lesbians and transgenders, which is still in many nations considered a vulnerable group, constantly targeted by bigotry and being in danger of losing their lives if their sexual orientation is exposed. Today, across the American nation, such gays, lesbians and transgender persons are detained in immigration facilities facing a potentially grim future if deported to their country of origin, while also facing the possibility of abuse inside the immigration detentions centres. The defeat in 2013, by deeming DOMA section 3 unconstitutional was a giant leap, but we cannot forget that we have brothers and sisters asking for protection whom instead of being granted a life lived in peace inside the USA, are finding themselves tangled in the immigration system.

As recently as two days ago, 28th of May, 2015, Los Angeles Eyewitness News wrote about demonstrators finding themselves arrested while trying to protest the incarceration of LGBTQ immigrants in Santa Ana: http://abc7.com/news/dozens-protest-incarceration-of-transgender-immigrants-in-santa-ana/746801/

This clearly proves that it the problem is still current and still a pressing issue which is needs be addressed by politicians.The irony here is that many of the politicians trying to shove this issue under the carpet happen to be direct ancestors of persons originating from countries which have a much more liberated  view of homosexuality, in particular, I am referring to England, whereas Sir Elton John, one of the greatest artists in British history, and who happens to be a gay man was knighted into royalty by the Queen of England; whereas British Petroleum’s former CEO, John Browne, also a gay man, entrusted with a job responsibility of an incomprehensible magnitude in which he held such position until 2007...also knighted, in the year of 1998. If England can recognize the merit of great men rather than focusing on their sexual orientation, then why is it so difficult for Americans to adapt the same attitude toward great men and women in the nation who choose to live their lives a little different for reasons which, as stated in the first part of the blog, are not skeltons in a closet, rather are they just a part of someone’s life which simply aren’t anybody else’s business to know...

Sincerely,

TheGreatDane

The twittering rumour!

Turning the rumour into humour:

Kindest regards,

TheGreatDane

"Some animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." 

George Orwell,  Animal Farm

The inspiration for this blog is credited to George Orwell and his masterpiece, Animal Farm.

For a copy of Animal Farm, please visit the link below:

http://www.book4free.us/2014/09/animal-farm-pdf.html

WELCOME, WITAMY, BIENVENUE, VELKOMMEN!

1.   To read the story, please follow the link below:

http://texasturmoil1.blogspot.com/2015/05/welcome-to-texas-part-1-of-tenor-more.html

                                                        2. To read this story, follow the link below:

http://texasturmoil1.blogspot.com/2015/05/relax-it-cannot-go-that-badcan-it.html

     3. To read the story, please follow the link below:

http://texasturmoil1.blogspot.com/2015/05/welcome-to-texas-part-3-of-10or-more.html

4. To read the story, please follow the link below:

http://texasturmoil1.blogspot.com/2015/05/welcome-to-texas-part-4-of-10or-more.html

It's time to grab your Stetson hat!

So, I have decided, that instead of flooding this blog-site with all the segments of

WELCOME TO TEXAS

It will be posted unto a separate blog-site.

You will be able to find all the hyperlinks to the segments here on this blog , all under the page.

STAY TUNED!

Two-faced politics...or not?

Senator Rand Paul

(This blog was originally posted by tgdindenmark1, 14 April, 2013)

“No man, for any considerable period, can wear one face to himself, and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true.” 

Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter.

It has been a very long week; the kind of week which seems to have no end..and the whole idea for which a weekend coming near seemed by Wednesday to be as fictitious as the myth of the unicorn. Like so many others, I have the pleasure of working full-time. And unlike many, this job is in addition to getting a non-profit organization running at full pace, which, mind you, was a concept which also seemed, by Thursday, as fictitious as (yes, you figured it out) the weekend. By the time Friday afternoon came around and the daily ritual including turning off the computer, followed consequently by gathering countless coffee cups, (which are somehow placed by other employees everywhere other than inside the office kitchen dishwasher), switching the coffee machine to “off” mode, a quick and professional “good bye” to the colleague who is the very cause of my ability to maintain a perfect poker face due to her constant not-so-professional remarks. Thanks to her, my ability to remain expressionless, much like a person with a face soaked in Botox, has now been raised to that of level expert. After a quick check in the bathroom mirror only to ensure that the non-descript job had not, in fact, turned me into a little ugly forest troll (at least not yet-although I fear it is only a matter of time), the weekend of writing could finally begin.

Earlier this week, while checking Twitter for tweets pertaining to immigration, I couldn’t help noticing the tweet from The Telegraph presenting breaking news with the headline: “Thieves steal 5 tons of Nutella.” (5 tons of Nutella… really?) I have yet to determine which part of this story was most peculiar- was it the fact that The Telegraph, a British newspaper, did reportage of a major chocolate heist in Germany, or the fact that no one noticed a gang of thugs leaving with a mountain of pallets storing the wonder spread! Although the tweet (or the news for that matter) had nothing to do with US immigration, it did remind me of other tweets that I have previously categorized as “peculiar”. One of those tweets will be the topic of this blog, and is so far the most peculiar of them all, even more so than story about the chocolate-craving criminals:

On the 21st of March, 2013, a tweet pranced its way down the twitter runway. It originated from Cato Institute, with the headline: “Rand Paul’s Pro-Immigration push.” WHAT? Surely, this had to be a mistake!

First of all, let me briefly inform any reader not familiar with American politics who Rand Paul is: An ophthalmologist and a Republican senator representing the state of Kentucky. So, why would it be so strange for a republican senator to become pro-immigration, you may think. Well, nothing, really. In fact, it would be rather refreshing, much like a fresh breath of air.

But for Senator Rand Paul to present a speech before the U.S Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, portraying to be a statesman empathetic toward immigrants, whether documented or undocumented, peppering the content of his speech with phrases in Spanish in order to highlight his empathy certainly smells...and it smells like nothing else but a political game of charades. Instead of ranting about his speech, I challenge you to take 17 minutes out of your hectic life and listen to his speech. Here you go, please click the link:

Sounds like a Republican senator likely to become a presidential candidate? Well, before anyone becomes too smitten by his performance, I would like you to watch another slice of media, which shows Senator Rand Paul as a person with a very different view on immigration, more importantly his stance on the civil right of little babies to become American citizens, or in this case a lack thereof, I should add. Go ahead, click on the link and see for yourself:

I clearly recall when Rand Paul, then a senator candidate, was challenging the 14th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, which lead to many public statements by Rand Paul in which he referred to children born to undocumented aliens on American soil as “anchor babies”. I recall the moments when the “anchor baby” slur (although not deemed a slur at that time) poured through the television on a daily basis- like a sharp sound to my ear triggering a certain sense of unease every single time. I was at the time pregnant with my fourth child and concurrently in the midst of a legal battle which had landed in no other place than  the Board of Immigration Appeals, and I was therefore, because of my uncertain legal status, by many stigmatized as an “illegal”. This meant that the child within my womb might easily be subjected to the kind of hatred that so many unjustifiably have toward immigrants. How would I ever be able to look at my children knowing that I may be the very reason that any of them could easily be subjected to such hatred... how would I react if they were referred to as “anchor baby” at any point of their lives. Even more unsettling is the fact that a political candidate would seed such hatred among citizens of a country which has fought so hard to lay behind the bigotry from a few decades ago, where mothers were as equally uneased every time a white man would used the slur "oreo baby"...

I can testify that my little son who was born in America is nothing in the sense of the definition of an “anchor baby”. He is living a life as any normal toddler with his immediate American family in the United States while I, the mother, who by the many whom hold so much hatred toward immigrants, be considered as the manipulative mastermind of creating a baby only to use such baby as an anchor in order to stay in America, is currently thousands of miles away.

I am confident to clearly state, that my own child as well as the many children born to other parents in the United States whom are considered by others as “illegals”:  The thought that our children exists only for our own selfish reasons of being able to remain in the USA is non-existent; the ONLY thing which is anchored in the moment of the conception of such a child, are the two human beings, whereas either one or both are non-American, is the passion and love between the two…

In the year of 2012, thanks to relentless work by Jennifer Chenoweth and Mary Giovagnoli, the American Heritage Dictionary classified the word “anchor baby” as offensive, and is now in the same the same category of other despicable slurs such as “oreo” and another inconceivable slur which is more familiar to European readers such as “tysker barn”- all disparaging words targeting innocent children. I can only hope that the efforts by the two women will have a direct effect of stopping anyone, especially those in the political arena from using the word in any context- and that includes the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Rand Paul.

In the year of 2012, thanks to relentless work by Jennifer Chenoweth and Mary Giovagnoli, the American Heritage Dictionary classified the word “anchor baby” as offensive, and is now in the same the same category of other despicable slurs such as “oreo” and another inconceivable slur which is more familiar to European readers such as “tysker barn”- all disparaging words targeting innocent children. I can only hope that the efforts by the two women will have a direct effect of stopping anyone, especially those in the political arena from using the word in any context- and that includes the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Rand Paul.

I hope that anyone will agree that it is quite peculiar that a political figure can be so divisive on a particular subject; how is it possible for the same person to consider himself pro-immigration by stating in one speech that there is room for anyone who wants to live and work in the USA, yet wanting to deny their children the dignity of becoming American citizens if the parents at the time of their child’s birth have an unsatisfactory immigration status? I think the senator owes everyone within the American borders, as well as to us watching from afar, a logical explanation with regard to the polarized view he has presented us with throughout his political career. It would be the ethical thing to do...something in which, one would think, a person such as Rand Paul could comprehend, more so than most, considering that he has been privileged to work in the medical sector, a world where ethics is the primary force of which one work/live by.

Until an official clarification on his view regarding the denial of citizenship to innocent children has been presented to all of us I will remain skeptical that the senator is truly pro-immigration.

The last thing America needs is another political figure wearing two faces...

Kindest regards,

TheGreatDane

Ms. Kindergarten Cop!

Janet Napolitano

(This blog was originally posted by tgdindenmark1, 22 April, 2013)


In the wake of the recent death of England’s Iron Lady, which I join so many to view as a great loss to their nation, but whom have at the same time of the tragedy, reminded us of her enormous contribution to the realm of political history, I can think of no better time than now to show my respect by beginning this blog with my favorite Margaret Thatcher quote:

“If you want something said, ask a man…if you want something done, ask a woman.”

Around the world, we find alpha-females whom, on an everyday basis, seem to prove the statement of which these words reflect. One of those women is one of America’s own Iron Ladies: Ms. Janet Napolitano, known as the head of one of the largest (and seemingly one of the most complicated) U.S government departments: The Department of Homeland Security. Call her what you wish, and disagree all you want with some of the policies of which her department is run by- but anyone who will not agree with me should have their head examined, that it takes a person of steel to get up every morning, and like a BOSS delegates to a staff of more than 240,000 employees a number of impossible tasks, at the same time of being held accountable to taxpayers money in form of a budget of nothing less than 59 billion U.S dollars (FY 2013 Budget for DHS).

Throughout my years of research, I have watched numerous media segments of Ms. Napolitano, as I have done with mostly everyone involved with immigration issues. Whereas, others watching the same segments would probably concentrate on what is said, my primary focus is elsewhere: Simultaneously to listening to what is said, I observe how answers are articulated as well as the demeanor accompanying such answers. And with that being said: Time and time again, she [Janet Napolitano] has proved to wear a professional demeanor as well the elite wears Valentino. In fact, as talented as anyone can ever be, she handles statements coming from the mouths of the royal horses of the political stable of the United States of America with such grace whereas most of us would falter by rolling our eyes while questioning whether certain statements are blown out of another orifice other than their self-proclaimed royal mouths.

The former Attorney General of Arizona (then Arizona State governor) has proven to be a woman who gets things done, something of which a nomination in the year of 2005, by Time magazine, as one of the five best governors of the USA, reflects. Furthermore, she refuses to take the backseat in any event, something she proved by attending the 2000 Democratic National Convention only three weeks after having undergone a mastectomy.

I have decided to include a link to the organizational chart so you, the reader, can get a quick overview of the size of the Department of Homeland Security. Here is the link:

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs-orgchart.pdf

I hope where words may fail to create an understanding of how complicated this department is due to its enormous coverage of administrative areas, the organizational chart will provide a visual image necessary to comprehend the giant playground Ms. Napolitano is supervising, every.single.day…

And, as any other playground attendant, she has to act as the toughest Kindergarten Cop of them all, while having to deal with problem children, in addition to all the other tasks which falls into her lap. And no, by mentioning “problem children”, I am not talking about the 11.5 million undocumented aliens; neither am I referring to politicians whom, at times, resemble spoiled children with a distorted view of belonging to some sort of a special class of entitlement. Rather, I am referring to certain male employees who, while on assignment abroad decided to act like naughty school boys rather than respectable government officials with a primary focus on national security. For any of you with a decent memory will remember the troublemaker employees of the Secret Service while on duty in Colombia were caught with their pants down, and their wallets so tight that even Mr. Scrooge would have been envied of such stinginess! There is a provision of American law pertaining to “Theft of Services”, which defines anyone receiving services of which a person never intend to pay for is subject to criminal charges. Had the act of which the employees were accused of found place on American soil, and should the “service” from the prostitutes in which they received been legal to perform, they could have been charged with theft. As the Secret Service also falls under the Department of Homeland Security, Ms. Napolitano was presented with the honor of cleaning up the mess left behind by these 13 grown men…

So, is there a moral story to this? No. The reason I decided acknowledge Janet Napolitano is to remind all of us that in the midst of it all, and especially right now as we currently are seeing immigration reform in the USA, and while the whole world has been caught off-guard by bizarre events such as the Boston blast (yet another mess partly spilled into her lap), that for every rule and regulation, of which most who write seem to always raise an opinion of how it can be done differently, there are human beings who have to enforce such rules and regulations. They are rarely mentioned, and when they are, it appears to be in a negative tone. We must not forget that, while many of us share a frustration regarding the American immigration problems, the very individuals showing up for work every day in the field of immigration to solve the problems are not magicians, and no matter how much we sputter, the problem as a whole won’t be solved any faster.

I hope that, by portraying Ms. Napolitano for what I believe she is: an American Iron Lady able to stand strong in any administrative storm coming her way (while wearing the ultimate poker face, mind you); and doing so without compromising a human side which seems to be lost with others:

The ability to remain empathetic toward a large group of people who all have problems which are to be solved by her department. If you do not believe me, then I suggest that you visit various media sites, in particular C-SPAN and watch numerous segments where Ms. Napolitano discusses with senators the very issues surrounded immigration. Among such issues, her concern regarding the conditions of deportation detention centers and the quality of treatment of which the deportees receive while detained seem to be as genuine as any activist raising the same concern.

Furthermore, I have personal testimony of employees of the DHS: While struggling with my own immigration issues, I experienced nothing but professionalism by each and every agent who dealt with my case. I think that the positive aspects of any difficult and negatively perceived problem deserve public recognition. For any writer, analyst, politician, activist, legal counsel representing either side of immigration legal issues, as well as any immigrant out there who may at one point read this: I challenge you to publically state something positive regarding immigration and/or the individuals devoting countless hours to solve the problems therein. Only when we break down the barrier of the damaging “us against them” concept and start following the fundamental concept of which democracy was created, “rule by the people”, thereby realizing that a problem as complicated as U.S Immigration can only be solved when everyone works as a team with the same goal in mind. As for the Honorable Janet Napolitano, we can only hope that she, much like the late Margaret Thatcher, is paving the way for the next generation of iron ladies…

Kindest regards,

TheGreatDane

Meet Little Mr. N!

This blog was originally posted by tgdindenmark1, 18 April, 2013

Mr. N may be a little man, but his way to your heart is swift, and in the grandest way he melts it with his toddler charm. He is much like other little boys his age, or so I have been told. He proudly puts on his little shoes all by himself, although at times they end up on opposite feet. And, just like any other toddler, he is learning the way of life by trials and errors. “It’s mine” (or, more likely, “it’s mine!!!”) and “no” are some of the words of his newly acquired vocabulary which seem to be used with frequency, thereby letting the world know that he has intellectually acquired the ability stand his ground. He loves tow trucks, pancakes, and the family dog. Like so many other children, he goes to a daycare facility where he is being taught how to count, and to recognize the letters of the alphabet. He is also being taught the greatest lesson of them all, at least for a two-and-a-half year old: To share toys, snacks and the attention of the day care provider. In fact, at first glance into his little world of existence, there is nothing which differs from other little American boys his age. While looking a little closer you begin to see that his life has a different nuance than the rose-colored lives of his peers:

Little Mr. N started out sharing his mother’s womb with a twin. But life gives everyone surprises, and due to immense stress in his mother’s life, his twin was lost in what was perceived as a spontaneous miscarriage. A succenturiate placenta absent a fetus identified on an ultrasound image became a direct evidence of such. However, little Mr. N was a survivor and he fought for his will of life. And his mother, as she surprisingly found out about his existence despite the miscarriage, fought as furiously for his survival as himself. The following months, they forged a bond unimaginable, and as a team the two of them made it through the

months by which was perceived as a healthy pregnancy, all by themselves.

His father abandoned them both, although temporarily, as he called pass; the extreme circumstances in his mother’s life, in form of an impossible immigration legal battle, became too much for him to handle. When the time came for little Mr. N to enter the world, he was, despite the turmoil, welcomed in the most precious and peaceful way, surrounded by most of his family. But, it didn’t take long before life began to present little Mr. N with challenges. Only nine months old, not able to bottle feed yet, his one and only companion whom he had relied on for everything necessary in his life had to depart, as his mom agreed to a voluntary departure from the United States of America in order to end the immigration battle, which at the time seemed by his mother to be endless. Little Mr. N. was supposed to have departed as well, and was issued a ticket by the Dept. of Homeland Security; he became one of the youngest in the neighbourhood to have his very own passport, courtesy of the Danish government, as the little man is, in fact, dual citizen. But as the local courts aren’t well educated in immigration affairs, a local judge decided to stop little Mr. N from going away with his mum. His fate, therefore, took a sharp turn. He had to learn new ways of life with a new companion...his father.

The little toddler and his family seem to have found a way to manage, even though the

circumstances are not what anyone would call normal. When other children are kissed good night by the woman that they know as “mum”, little N has a different definition of the word . To him, “mum” is not a person- rather, she is a concept. To him, “mum” is why he gets to wave at a camera with his little hand and smile while everyone around him encourages him to do so because “mum” has to see how big he is becoming and how happy he is; “mum” is the strange voice on the telephone telling him how she loves him, and the face on the webcam which, most of the time, scrambles into a digital blur due to lack of proper connection- and, “mum” is the reason why he blows kisses into the video camera while showing off his trampoline moves...to him, ironically, “techno-mum” is the only mum he has ever known.

The reason I know so much about this little toddler is because little Mr. N is my son. I am the

strange voice on the telephone; I am the digital image…I am, what he has been told by others, but doesn’t understand, his absent mother. I am that mother who, because of the tiresome U.S

immigration bureaucracy, opted for a “voluntary departure”, in order to see my children being

relieved of the chaos deriving from the immigration issues of which I was not only surrounded but also entirely consumed by. I am the one whom experienced the ripple-effect of immigration issues leading to other legal problems in form of divorce and child custody issues- which combined, became the core root of financial problems. I am the person who, despite of being mentally able to handle the immense pressure of the stress, my body failed to pass the same test. I am the one whom will have to face my youngest son one day knowing that a life under normal circumstances would have, most likely, given him the gift of a twin.

As for my circumstances, with regards to immigration issues, there is no one to blame- it was a unique case of a massive cluster of unintended errors made by many, myself included. As ironic as it could possibly be, the very issues which I had become aware of by observing the lives of other immigrants, I have now been able to experience in my own life. I was given the shoes to walk the journey; and I have done so since by walking, running, crawling and sometimes crashing. I have fought with every emotion known to man in order to sustain. I know every emotion associated with adverse immigration status and the separation of families due to immigration policies...I am thankful that little Mr. N was too young to understand what the separation from his mother means, but do I have concerns that it will present negative issues in the future when he is able to comprehend the circumstances, just as his siblings comprehend our situation? Absolutely!

Some women experience in their life the agony of carrying an ugly purse, most likely bought on

impulse, thereafter being reminded every day of the poor choice until the ugly purse can be substituted by the purchase of another purse. I carry the agony as an ugly purse of uncertainty whether I made the right decision to depart voluntarily, leaving my children behind, as opposed to staying in the USA and keep on fighting the immigration battle all the way up the latter of justice. In comparison to the women with fashion faux-pas purchases, my choice does not leave me with an opportunity for a do-over; I get to carry the ugly purse of burdens indefinitely. I, as so many others opted to leave on a voluntary basis because it seems to be the best choice, in order to re-open the doors to America, eventually; others leave because they are demanded to do so, in form of deportation, in order to re-open the same doors. Either way, although we are presented with the same opportunity and the route to such opportunity differs, it still comes with a great price. It comes at the price of uncertainty of what will become of the future, and of what will become of those left behind. It comes at the price of temporary but enormous pain only known to those who have experienced great loss. While everything I ever loved faded into the horizon that day leaving the United States of America, the pain began to penetrate slowly but surely until it filled up all within...as if igniting a fire, blasting through one’s body singing every nerve, one by one, until it eventually disintegrates your soul, and leaving the body in a state of numbness. The pain may be short-lived, but the scars of the pain run deep. It has been almost two years since I departed, and I can still feel the pain every time I am reminded of the lost opportunities to kiss my youngest son’s tiny toes; every time I sense the sadness in my youngest teenage daughter’s voice when we have to end our telephone conversations. The thought that I may miss the opportunity to attend my oldest daughter’s wedding, just as I was unable to attend my son’s High School graduation. The journey has, without a doubt, changed my life, as my world has been turned upside-down and inside-out, leaving no possibility of returning to what was once the status quo. Having gone through this, I can truly say that I understand the millions of undocumented aliens living in the shadows, avoiding their turn to pay the price of the painful unknown. 

The reason I have decided to share this story is because I know there are so many others with similar stories. The deportees represent all nationalities, thus, deportation becomes a global phenomenon. Somehow, most stories are not heard, simply because no one asks to hear them. Although the issues of immigration and deportation are mentioned in the media everywhere around the world, the stories of the people who have lived through the process are far and few in-between. Whether anyone refuses to believe this to be reality, let me tell you: Not only has this been the reality for my family and I, but these are the realities of so many. So many “Mr. N” exist everywhere in the USA as there are thousands of American-born children in absence of one of their parents due to separation by deportation. 

Huffington Post claimed that in the year of 2013, 73000 parents had to leave behind children in America due to deportation. (For more information, please follow the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/25/parents-deportation_n_5531552.html)

I can testify, that immigration issues do tear families apart and damages done to the core family structure may eventually be beyond repair.

As the gang of eight is on the brink of reforming U.S Immigration, we should all hope for reform with the right intent, not solely for economic purposes; not because it will make the immigration flow charts look better in the following years, and not because it will make political history; rather it should be done because it may lead to more individuals with stable and productive lives free from fear of family separation and financial stress; free from discrimination and free from any further exploitation than what most of the individuals currently classified as immigrants have already been subjected to…

Our little family knows that sooner than later will come when all the frustration U.S immigration has brought upon us can come undone...little Mr. N will, eventually, be able to hug his mum rather than blowing kisses into a camera; he will be able to buy his ice cream cone together with the woman who gave him life, rather than going to the ice cream parlor with a parent-substitute, buying his cone with the money for which he has received via a Western Union wire transfer from a guilt-stricken mum...it is only a matter of time.

Kindest regards,
TheGreatDane