Patrick Keefe's "The Snakehead"

Reading Patrick Keefe's superb Sister Ping book, "The Snakehead," reminded me of how artful prose can tell a story with a descriptive depth and level of complexity that a mere film can never acheive.

It was a once in a lifetime experience to read a book that recounted a story that I thought I already knew everything about. After all, I spent 10 years making "Golden Venture," a documentary on much the same subject. Turns out there was a lot I didn't know that amazed me, and much of what I already knew, in the retelling, took on new power.

"The Snakehead" chronicles the rise and demise of Sister Ping, the Susan Boyle of international crime. Cheng Chui Ping appeared to be a frumpy grandma behind the counter of a discount store on E. Broadway, but was in fact the Godmother of Chinatown, the mastermind of a multi, multi million dollar business that profited from the transport of undocumented immigrants from China's Fujian Province.

Ping was actually a side player in the story of the Golden Venture, the freighter that ran aground off New York City in 1993 with 285 undocumented Chinese immigrants aboard. Only two of her clients were on the boat. Ping did, however, provide a loan to Ah Kay, the Fuk Ching gang leader who ran a profitable co-venture with Ping involving the off shore pick up off immigrants for delivery on shore. This loan was used to buy a decrepit tramp steamer in Singapore, the ship the eventually was renamed Golden Venture.

But for the New York media in particular, Sister Ping was the Dragon Lady behind the Golden Venture disaster. The Hong Kong police finally apprehended her in 2000, she was extradited to the US and put on trial in a NY federal court five years later, and sent to federal prison for 35 years. The great irony of the New York media muck fest during the Sister Ping trial is that the community she was accused of exploiting -- the new wave of Fujianese immigrants in Chinatown -- largely viewed her as a folk hero.

"The Snakehead" intertwines the tale of the Golden Venture with the story Sister Ping. The Golden Venture strand begins with the night of the grounding, then drops back to where it began, in Fujian Province and the immigrants who paid $35,000 each for passage to America. Sister Ping's story begins as news of the grounding reaches Ping, and then backtracks to the Sister Ping's early career and advances through Golden Venture and into the criminal investigation that led to her arrest.

Keefe's previous book, "Chatter," penetrated the world of electronic intelligence gathering, and Patrick writes particularly well when his characters are INS agents, cops and figures in the Asian underworld. The pulp in the book -- and I mean that as a compliment -- maintains high entertainment value, providing enough chuckles to make for a straight-through good read.

I first met Patrick when I was at the end of making "Golden Venture" and he was at the beginning of researching the New Yorker article that turned into the book. It was quite thrilling to encounter another human being who showed an interest in a topic I'd lived with for so long. I remember when he came to my old office on W. 72nd St. I felt like an obsessed stamp collector, who had spent years steaming envelopes with stamps from Andorra, suddenly given an opportunity to share my philatelic minutiae with another interested party.

"Golden Venture" the documentary told only the most abbreviated version of the Snakeheads behind the voyage. Sister Ping's trial and conviction took place just as we were completing post production. Tim Robbins, who was kind enough to do our narration, came into the studio for a few minutes to record the Sister Ping voice over we needed before we could lock picture.

I had always been ambivalent about the criminal aspect of the Golden Venture story. Beverly Church -- Golden Venture advocate and dear friend -- was always protective of her "Golden Venture boys" and was highly defensive about any media types who wanted to come in, interview Golden Venture passengers, and then focus on Snakeheads torturing immigrants with hot forks.

I agreed with Bev. What's more, most of the stories about teenage gangsters extorting monthly payments from immigrants working as indentured laborers in Chinatown sweat shops distorted the true nature of Fujianese immigration. In reality, Fujianese raise the money to pay the Snakeheads (the cost of passage more recently has been reported at about $70,000) by taking loans from extended family members. Most slip into America, find jobs in Chinese restaurants, work tirelessly for four or five years to pay off their loans, and then go into business for themselves.

But it's pretty hard to resist a story that has figures in it with names like "The Fat Man" and narrative strands like the Goldfish Case, which involved heroin stuffed into the bellies of dead ornamental goldfish

More on Keefe's terrific book in next week's "Open Border Central!"

Golden Venture's Legacy: The Pro Bono Net

Jim Luce blogs on Huffington about Pro Bono Net, a national network of lawyers working on pro bono cases that was a direct outgrowth of the Golden Venture. Luce reports:

With great foresight into emerging technologies, thought leader Mark O'Brien and co-founder Michael Hertz, who met while working on Golden Venture asylum cases at their law firms, saw a way ten years ago to prepare for this moment in time. Recognizing the potential for technology to transform access to justice, just as platforms such as match.com, monster.com, or even TurboTax were transforming other business processes, they launched Pro Bono Net.

With even more insight, the Soros (Open Society Institute) Foundation funded it. Today Pro Bono Net's reach extends into states covering a staggering 70% of the U.S. poverty population and their websites have a membership of over 51,000 lawyers.

Pro Bono Net is at the forefront of emerging technologies, and plans to stay on top. Public libraries are already gateways for the Internet-less to their platforms, and cell phones may be next.

The programs of Pro Bono Net are as diverse as its clients: in addition to its main platform probono.net, which exists for the legal community, it has LawHelp.org where those in need can find referrals to local legal aid and pro bono programs, information about their rights and tools for self help.

The crash and reverse migration

Seeing an article in the Houston Chronicle about undocumented Mexican immigrants returning home as US jobs have faded gets me to thinking -- as I have done often recently -- about the implications of the economic crisis for immigration. The NY Times also recently looked at this issue, as part of their excellent series about immigrants in America, focusing on Mexican immigrants struggling to hang on in a small Tennessee town.

It's a tough issue to come to terms with. It's tempting to point to the return of immigrants when the economy goes down as an example of how foreign workers benefit the economy. They come here when their labor is needed, and go home when it's not. This is the model of the "guest worker," better known in some European countries than it is here -- although there are examples of officially regulated US guest worker programs for immigrant farm workers. It would seem that even a vehement anti-immigration advocate could see the benefit of this supply-meets-demand phenomenon.

In the hot days of the immigration debates before the economic meltdown, those of us at Open Border Central were not arguing in favor of immigrants as guest workers. The guest worker concept entered the debate as Congress was seeking compromise legislation -- the temporary worker provision seemed like a callous, gutless political concept. But that was before sub-prime.

In those days before it became so popular to condemn capitalism and trample on the sacred memory of Milton Friedman, we Open Border bloggers would in fact have totally disparaged the guest worker notion. Let these people seeking economic freedom come here and work and join the fabric of our society. The cost of providing public service (education, health care, infrastructure) would be small compared to the increase in economic activity stimulated by hard working, low wage immigrants. And that is still true.

So let's be consistent. Let's not say: "see, they go back when there's a depression" as a new twist on our pro-immigrant position. Let's not be happy that immigrants are going home, saving money for hard pressed state budgets. Let's be consister, and say, it's a shame they're going home. If there were to stay, the recovery will come all the sooner, and will be all the more vigious and long-lived.

Marking an Anniversary

Last night I enjoyed screening "Golden Venture" for a group of high school-age kids at CityKids in Tribeca. The group is actually studying the politics of food -- an interesting, focused topic! And of course, "Golden Venture" is all about food. An epic political story, filled with suffering, stoicism and bravery, all centered around a group of 256 people who traveled across the world to make, sell or deliver food.

I've been busy working on my new film, a documentary about domestic violence, and haven't had a chance to update this blog recently. Watching sections of the movie again and talking with the students reminded me that we recently passed the 12th anniversary of the release of Golden Venture detainees from the York, PA County Jail and some other immigrant detention facilities around the country.

The York Daily Record carried an excellent piece about it, including a number of transcribed audio reminiscences from some of the York residents who were involved in helping and advocating for the Golden Venture detainees. .

Thavi Up for An Oscar

Thavisouk Phrasavath, who labored for many months on "Golden Venture," now stands on the verge of fame and glory with his Oscar nomination for Best Documentary. Thavi
co-directed, edited, wrote, narrated and stars in "Nerakhoon (Betrayal)," which is one of five films nominated in the category. "Nerakhoon" has been a huge hit critically and on the festival circuit. It's an artistic masterpiece, shot over 25 years. Basically, Thavi's story, the story of his family, and the story of the US relationship with Laos during and after the Vietnam War.

Thavi deserves the Oscar. I've seen most of the other films nominated -- including the two front runnerz, "Man on Wire" and the Herzog South Pole movie. While both of those two films are well done films, they don't compare to "Nerakhoon."

I don't mean to disparage another film maker's work, but I would be appalled if "Man on Wire" were to win. It's a nice film, but ultimately, it's a movie about a narcissistic publicity junkie and his small band of ass kissing sycophants, told with no irony or perspective. As you can see, I'm completely objective!

I'm proud to report that Thavi and I are working together again on a new film, "Power and Control: Domestic Violence in America." We've just launched a new web site: www.powerandcontrolfilm.com, which features a trailer and some short videos cut by Thavi.

Fortune Cooke Chronicles

Jennifer 8. Lee's new book on Chinese food is generating a lot of buzz and getting great reviews. I met Jennifer when "Golden Venture" (www.goldenventuremovie.com) premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2006. She covered the press conference given by the Golden Venture passengers who are still seeking permanent legal residence in the US and came along for a photo shoot with the passengers at a studio on the Lower East Side.

"Fortune Cookie Chronicles" is winning particularly high praise for weaving the story of the new wave of immigrants from Fujian Province together with a more light-hearted account of the role of Chinese food in American culinary culture.

Jennifer has a wonderful blog that links to excerpts from the book and the ever-growing pile of critical raves. The site links to Jennifer's New York Times story about a Fujianese family that ended up running a Chinese restaurant in Georgia (here) and to her Times story about the missing deliveryman case in the Bronx from a few years back (here).

The book is a powerful reminder of one of the tragic irony's of the Golden Venture story, and of immigrants bashing in general. The GoldenVenture passengers came here to make and deliver Chinese food. And for that many were put in jail for almost four years!

McCain Retreat on Immigration?

Stepping into the pre-Super Tuesday time machine, going back to that Republican debate in the Reagan Library in Simi Valley Jan. 31...is John McCain tacking to the right on immigration?

As Nancy Reagan secretly played footsie with Arnold and a group of illegal aliens applied Turtle Wax to the Gipper's Air Force One, the topic turned to immigration. McCain was asked if he would now support his own immigration reform legislation of 2006.

Unbelievably, McCain backed off on supporting a bill he himself co-sponsored! He was asked point blank if he would vote for the bill today, and his response was to evade the question by simply stating that the bill won't come up for a vote again because the idea is dead. He evaded the question several times with the same tactic.

Like the other candidates, his pre-programmed response was to focus on "border security." Said McCain: "We will secure the borders first when I am president of the United States. I know how to do that. I come from a border state, where we know about building walls, and vehicle barriers, and sensors, and all of the things necessary." He scored additional points with the Minuteman crowd with a specific, very sci fi reference to "tamper-proof biometric documents" that will solve everything.

I like McCain. One main reason is that he has taken a principled stand on immigration (and on waving the Confederate flag in South Carolina and -- even though I disagreed -- on The Surge).
Can you really blame him for being politically expedient on the immigration issue? He's still far more reasonable than either Romney or Huckabee (and Ron Paul ain't no Libertarian -- he's an extreme xenophobe on immigration). But what's going to happen if he's running against Hillary or Obama? Will he resist the temptation to go demagogic?

As I wrote here a couple of days ago, the Dems are showing signs of hope -- what with Obama's explicit endorsement of drivers licenses for illegals. Let's hope McCain doesn't turn into the next Tom Tancredo.

Oh, and by the way, about his cheek. Had been too lazy to Google it. It's not a war wound. It's not chewing tobacco. He isn't a genetically modified creature with a splice of chipmunk DNA. The cheek is the byproduct of a melanoma removal operation a few years back.

Full text of immigration portion of Jan. 31 "Temple of Reagan, Cleanest Air Force One
You Ever Saw" Republican Debate.

VANDEHEI: Obviously, we're here in California, where one-third of the population is Hispanic, Latino. Immigration has been a huge issue in this campaign from the beginning.

Governor Huckabee, Brian Berry (ph) of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, wants to know, "In order to curb illegal immigration, do you support making changes in the law that would give citizenship only to children who are born to parents who are legally in this country at the time the child is born?"

HUCKABEE: I think the Supreme Court has already ruled on that. The real issue is, that doesn't fix the problem.

HUCKABEE: What we've got to do is to have a secure border fence, something I have proposed that we do within 18 months of taking office.

If we don't have a secure fence and have just this open door that people can come in and out at will, we're never going to deal with this issue effectively and responsibly.

And today, many Americans are angry not that people want to come here -- and I've repeatedly said and I'm going to say it again -- people in this country I think are grateful to God they're in a land that people are trying to break into and not one they're trying to break out of.

So it's not that we're building a fence so we can keep our people in or keep people out, but that people who do come here would have to come legally.

And touching the issue of those born here is not the challenge. It's two things. It's first making sure that that fence is built, I think within 18 months. And the second thing is that we have a process where the people who are here would have to go to the back of the line and start over.

And it's not to be cruel. I want to make sure you understand. It's to make that everybody who is living in our boundaries has their head up and lives in the light, not the darkness, and doesn't run and hide every time they see a police car.

We owe it not just to the people who have waited in line a long time. We owe it to the people who do want to live here and work here, but create a system that is legal, that makes sense, and that actually protects our borders but protects the dignity and worth of every person.

VANDEHEI: Governor Romney, I interviewed you in New Hampshire a couple of weeks ago and we talked a little bit about illegal immigration. You've taken a very hard stance against illegal immigration. You said at the time that you felt that there's, for a lot of illegal immigrants who are here, under your plan, we could deport many of them within 90 days. How could that happen? How could we do it that quickly?

ROMNEY: I think you may be confusing me with somebody else, but perhaps not. Let me tell you what my plan is.

VANDEHEI: At the time -- I can just give you the quote if you like. You said that "many of those could be deported immediately," but that would allow slower deportation process for those with thought as quickly as 90 days.

ROMNEY: My plan is this, which is for those that have come here illegally and are here illegally today, no amnesty.

Now, how do people return home? Under the ideal setting, at least in my view, you say to those who have just come in recently, we're going to send you back home immediately, we're not going to let you stay here. You just go back home.

For those that have been here, let's say, five years, and have kids in school, you allow kids to complete the school year, you allow people to make their arrangements, and allow them to return back home.

Those that have been here a long time, with kids that have responsibilities here and so forth, you let stay enough time to organize their affairs and go home.

But the key is this: These individuals are free to get in line with everyone else that wants to become a permanent resident or citizen. But no special pathway, no special deal that says because you're here illegally, you get to stay here for the rest of your life.

And that's what I found to be so offensive with the Z visa, which was in the McCain-Kennedy bill. It said to all illegal aliens, unless you're a criminal, you're all allowed to stay here for $3,000 for the rest of your life. And that's a mistake.

In my view, let us have a fixed period of time -- 90 days for some, depending on their circumstances, others longer, to the end of the school year -- even longer potentially. Do it in a humane and compassionate way, but say to those who have come here legally, you must return home, you must get in line with everybody else that wants to come here.

There are millions throughout the world who want to come to this country legally. It's a wonderful privilege. But those that have come here illegally should not be given a better deal.

I was just at the swearing in of some 700 citizens just a day or two ago in Tampa, Florida, and it was a thrilling thing to see these folks coming out, shaking their hands. People who come here legally are a great source of vitality and strength for our country.

COOPER: Let's follow up...

ROMNEY: But illegal immigration, that's got to end.

COOPER: Janet Hook with the L.A. Times with a follow-up question.

(APPLAUSE)

HOOK: Senator McCain, let me just take the issue to you, because you obviously have been very involved in it. During this campaign, you, like your rivals, have been putting the first priority, heaviest emphasis on border security. But your original immigration proposal back in 2006 was much broader and included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were already here.

What I'm wondering is -- and you seem to be downplaying that part. At this point, if your original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, would you vote for it?

MCCAIN: It won't. It won't. That's why we went through the debate...

HOOK: But if it did?

MCCAIN: No, it would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate -- it won't. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever -- that proposal.

But, look, we're all in agreement as to what we need to do. Everybody knows it. We can fight some more about it, about who wanted this or who wanted that. But the fact is, we all know the American people want the border secured first.

MCCAIN: We will secure the borders first when I am president of the United States. I know how to do that. I come from a border state, where we know about building walls, and vehicle barriers, and sensors, and all of the things necessary.

I will have the border state governors certify the borders are secured. And then we will move onto the other aspects of this issue, probably as importantly as tamper-proof biometric documents, which then, unless an employer hires someone with those documents, that employer will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that will cause a lot of people to leave voluntarily.

There's 2 million people who are here who have committed crimes. They have to be rounded up and deported.

And we're all basically in agreement there are humanitarian situations. It varies with how long they've been here, et cetera, et cetera.

We are all committed to carrying out the mandate of the American people, which is a national security issue, which is securing the borders. That was part of the original proposal, but the American people didn't trust or have confidence in us that we would do it.

So we now know we have to secure the borders first, and that is what needs to be done. That's what I'll do as president of the United States.

COOPER: So I just want to confirm that you would not vote for your bill as it originally was?

MCCAIN: My bill will not be voted on; it will not be voted on. I will sit and work with Democrats and Republicans and with all people. And we will have the principals securing the borders first.

And then, if you want me to go through the description all over again, I would be glad to. We will secure the borders first. That's the responsibility and the priority of the American people.