AnimeSuki.com Forum

AnimeSuki Forum (http://forums.animesuki.com/index.php)
-   General Chat (http://forums.animesuki.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The U.S. Government Hard at Work (http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=1240)

Animaniac 2003-11-19 08:20

The U.S. Government Hard at Work
 
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...gepromo451-fea

Immigration crackdown shatters Muslims' lives


That program, which required those men to register with the federal government, is an example of how U.S. authorities increasingly are turning to tactics based not "on individualized suspicion, leads or tips" but instead rooted in "broad-based criteria that are inherently discriminatory, like what country you happened to be born in," said Michael Wishnie, a law professor at New York University who has studied the measures.

"The message to entire communities--Arabs, Muslims and South Asians--is that you are suspect," Wishnie said.

The crackdown has set off an exodus from tightknit Muslim communities in the U.S., from the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis of Chicago's Devon Avenue to the Arabs of such cities as Dearborn, Mich. Even lawful residents have fled, fearing they might be next.

Following the Sept. 11 attacks, many Americans would argue that the crackdown is an appropriate response: Why not try to make the nation safer, while fixing its porous immigration system, starting with people from countries where Muslim extremists live?

In fact, while three of the Sept. 11 hijackers had overstayed their visas, a sweeping, bipartisan congressional probe later cited shoddy intelligence work, not poor immigration enforcement, as being at the root of the nation's vulnerability that day.

A senior Justice Department official, responding to questions about the new immigration initiatives, said they emerged from a series of meetings following the attacks in which participants asked themselves two questions: "Are we doing everything we can to keep Americans safe? And are we using all of the tools at our disposal?"

While there is no evidence that the campaign has thwarted any terrorist plots, the government says it has led to the identification of a handful of men with connections to terrorist groups. Citing national security concerns, the government won't reveal their identities or alleged ties.

One of the architects of the policies said that, with limited resources, selecting men based on their foreign citizenship was logical. "We had to just use the very blunt instrument of nationality," said Kris Kobach, a former Justice Department appointee, who helped craft the program to register more than 83,000 men from Muslim countries who were in the U.S.

The government has targeted people by nationality during earlier times of crisis, most notably with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

Though the men now being singled out are not American citizens--and the U.S. always has afforded fewer rights to visitors--their treatment reflects the tension over civil liberties since Sept. 11. Like the debate over the USA Patriot Act, the immigration crackdown has underscored the difficulty of balancing national security with core American values such as justice and freedom.

Certainly, the government continues to enforce immigration laws against other nationalities. That was made abundantly clear last month when federal authorities raided 60 Wal-Marts and later accused the giant retailer of using illegal immigrants from Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

And the number of deported Mexicans, who make up about 69 percent of all illegal immigrants in the U.S., still dwarfs the number of deportees from Muslim countries.

Yet illegal immigrants from all countries removed in the first 12 months after Sept. 11 decreased by about 16 percent, to 148,619 from 177,452. Over the same period, the administration's dragnet swept up increasing numbers of men from two dozen Muslim countries. The number of Egyptians removed skyrocketed by 201 percent and Jordanians, 144 percent--even before the major initiatives focusing on such men began.

In sheer numbers, Pakistanis have been most affected, mainly because they are by far the biggest group of visitors to the U.S. from Muslim lands.

The impact can be seen in the names on the deportation hearing dockets of the nation's immigration courts. Since Sept. 11, "the demographics have totally changed," said Christopher Helt, an immigration attorney who practices in Chicago, Memphis and Atlanta.

"You went from Gonzalez to Khan. Now 90 percent of my clients are Muslim," Helt said.

Working for a future

The men aboard the Icelandair charter from upstate New York to Islamabad did not always hew to the letter of the nation's immigration laws. But many followed the spirit of the American experience, staking their families' futures on long hours of work on the fringes of this nation's economy.

Seated in the cabin was a 22-year-old New York City resident plucked from his bed in Queens who had just opened his own cell-phone store on the Upper West Side and thought he was legal until agents raided his family's home before dawn last winter.

A few rows away sat Mohammad Akbar, 48, who had befriended beat cops and other customers over coffee at the 7-Eleven where he worked in suburban Philadelphia. He submitted in April to the administration's "special registration" for men from Muslim countries, only to be shackled before the afternoon was out.

Not far from him was a supervisor of car-wash workers who was caught dozing in his car behind a Schaumburg office complex. Authorities detained him on a nearly 8-year-old deportation order. He's now jobless in Pakistan while the wife he left behind in a suburban apartment struggles to pay the bills.

At least a dozen of the 75 men on this flight likely would have been deported anyway because they were convicted of crimes, including drug offenses and assault.

But the vast majority of them were found to be in violation of civil immigration laws, such as remaining in the U.S. on an expired visa. Some spent half a year or more behind bars, wondering if they ever would be reunited with their families. Convinced they faced impossible odds, many finally surrendered their legal battles, unwilling to stay another day in jail.

A post-9/11 scramble

In the first chaotic weeks after the Sept. 11 suicide hijackings, investigators fanned out across the country in a haphazard, almost desperate scramble to stop what many Americans feared was an impending second wave of terrorism. Given the nation's shock, there was wide public support for such a hunt.

The government detained more than 1,000 people in the initial arrests, virtually all of them held for alleged immigration violations. They were overwhelmingly Arab or Muslim men, with the biggest percentage coming from Pakistan.

Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft gave the impression that the men were suspected terrorists and that their arrests were preventing new assaults.

But none of those men ever was charged with involvement in the attacks. And for most of them, there was no evidence that they were terrorists, according to a report by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine, the department's internal watchdog. Responding to that report, FBI officials asserted that they had identified four men, whom they declined to name, linked to terrorism or the hijackers.

Still, a precedent was set: The Justice Department would use the nation's immigration laws as the chief tool in its domestic war on terrorism.

The first of these initiatives, begun in January 2002, seemed logical enough: Go after the 300,000 people whom government records suggested were "absconders"-- those who remained in the U.S. despite orders to leave.

The program, called the "Absconder Apprehension Initiative," filtered its first targets by nationality, aiming only at 5,000 scofflaws from mostly Muslim nations where Al Qaeda was believed to have a presence.

Authorities identified these people by using immigration records, then searched for information about them in phone books, public records and commercial databases. With those leads, teams of federal agents went out to find them.

Like the men aboard the July charter to Islamabad, and others on the four flights before them, they were picked up at their homes or at the pizza parlors, cab stands, gas stations and construction sites where they worked.

To broaden the hunt, the Justice Department ordered that the names of the scofflaws be put into the criminal database used by police departments nationwide. That automatically drew state and local authorities into the enforcement of civil immigration laws, reversing a long-standing practice meant to avoid discouraging immigrants from reporting crimes against them.

While the search was on for the 5,000 pinpointed by nationality, the other the 300,000 absconders from all countries wandered free, and even grew to nearly 400,000 in the course of about 18 months, according to congressional testimony.

The Department of Homeland Security, which inherited responsibility for immigration in March, moved into a second phase of the program in June, identifying the most violent offenders who had outstanding deportation orders.

It had been a full year and a half since the absconder initiative was first outlined by the Justice Department.




Animaniac 2003-11-19 08:23

Bittersweet reunions


After landing in Islamabad, the first of the July deportees walked through the glass doors of Chaklala International Airport's arrival area into a crush of local reporters. Though largely unnoticed in the U.S., the men are front-page news in Pakistan.

A hundred ceiling fans stirred the hot air above them. Taxi drivers cheered American professional wrestling bouts blaring from television sets overhead as greeting parties smothered pilgrims from Mecca, Saudi Arabia, with kisses and necklaces of marigolds.

A smaller, more anxious cluster of boys and men met the deportees. One young man stood dressed in a white "New York, New York" T-shirt, complete with the Statue of Liberty and the World Trade Center. His brother had been living in Brooklyn, working at a chain store before he was detained.

Nearby, a teenager carried a cell phone to alert his mother the moment his older brother was home safely. It was the brother's string of jobs at Baltimore gas stations that had been the family's lifeline.

"[He] was our only hope," the young man said. "Now they're sending him back, so God knows what will happen."

The return to Pakistan for another man, Amir Shah, began five months earlier and 7,000 miles away, in a handicap parking space in Schaumburg.

It was just after 5 a.m. on Feb. 23 when a local police officer found Shah asleep inside the Pakistani's 1997 Chrysler Concorde. Shah, who oversaw car-wash crews, was parked behind his employer's office on Golf Road. He was waiting for his boss to arrive when the police officer noticed him, pulled up in a squad car and rousted Shah from his slumber.

The officer ran Shah's name in the National Crime Information Center database, commonly known as NCIC, and got a hit: Although Shah had not been charged with a crime, he was wanted on an immigration warrant for an outstanding deportation order, police records show.

"I have a nice job, am doing everything good, never doing any crime," Shah said of his life in Schaumburg during an interview in the guest room of his family's flat in Mandi Bahauddin, about three hours south of Islamabad.

He told the arresting officer that he knew he had remained in the U.S. illegally, but Shah believed his 1999 marriage in a New York mosque to Habeeba Nayeem, a green-card holder at the time who later became a U.S. citizen, would shield him from deportation.

Holders of green cards--the prized plastic card signifying its holder is a legal resident, though not a citizen of the U.S.--can sponsor spouses for their own cards. Although it is unclear whether Shah would have had a chance of winning approval, Nayeem delayed filing the paperwork.

She had long heard cautionary tales--including from customers at the Schaumburg hair salon where she works--about men marrying only to get legal residency. She wanted to make sure Shah's intentions were true.

To test him, Nayeem had decided she would wait to file the sponsorship papers; she wanted to see if he would try to hustle her to an immigration lawyer after their wedding.

He never did, passing her test. But time slipped away and she had not filed the paperwork before her husband was detained.

Now she blames herself for the result. "I feel guilty," Nayeem said, sitting in her living room in a working-class Schaumburg apartment complex, where women and young men in traditional Pakistani dress are a common sight. "I want to fight for him."

Shah's new life is a world apart from his old one.

Except for short spans of blacktop here and there, the last major stretch of roadway to Mandi Bahauddin is made of dirt and stone. Men swinging hammers at rock piles along the shoulder struggle to fill the many ruts. Cars, motorbikes and brightly decorated buses with passengers hanging from the sides narrowly miss each other as they race by in opposite directions.

Boys frequently interrupt the traffic, herding cows and goats across the road and into the Upper Jhelum Canal.

Inside the town, women wash clothes in roadside ditches brimming with brown water. The street in front of Shah's home, alongside an open sewer, is so narrow that even if it were here, the Chrysler Concorde he used to drive past Woodfield Mall wouldn't fit.

Nayeem visited for about a month shortly after Shah returned to Pakistan. Back in Schaumburg, she hopes the help of a legal-aid service eventually will return her husband to America.

Shah, who earned a degree in physics before he came to the U.S., still is without work. He is forced to rely on the help of his brothers, who occasionally give him money, according to Nayeem.

"It's not so easy there to get a job," she said. "It's a very big problem, hard time for him."

As for Nayeem, she struggles to get to her hairdresser job every day because she has diabetes and other ailments. Without Shah's income, she fights to pay the bills and the rent.

Words vs. deeds

During a Sept. 13, 2001, news conference in Washington, Ashcroft urged Americans not to "descend to the level of those who perpetrated Tuesday's violence by targeting individuals based on race, religion or national origin."

Yet the administration went on to launch a program centered on nationality that would register 83,310 men in the U.S. from predominantly Muslim countries. Told that it was their legal obligation, many complied, only to face deportation.

Ashcroft introduced the core of the program, the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, in June 2002. In doing so he described it as nothing more than carrying out a small piece of a 1996 law that asked the Justice Department to better track the arrivals and departures of every one of the estimated 35 million foreign visitors to the U.S. each year.

But Ashcroft also used his own authority to go much further than Congress had mandated. Tapping decades-old statutory provisions, his department created a separate registration program for men who already were in the U.S. as foreign visitors. Nationality would become the determining factor in deciding which of them would be required to comply.

If terrorists were living secretly in the U.S., the registration would put "people who are up to no good on notice," said the Justice Department official last week, special on condition of anonymity. They would have to "either come in and register, which they don't want to do, or they risk not complying and fear we're going to come and get them."

In introducing the registration program, the attorney general answered questions about possible discrimination against Muslims by saying that only foreigners from nations designated as state sponsors of terrorism would face a blanket edict to register.

Five months later, the Justice Department named its first official targets: men from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan and Syria, all Muslim countries on the State Department's terrorism list.

But over the next 10 weeks, the Justice Department revealed that the domestic registration list would grow to include all men who were foreign visitors from 19 other predominantly Muslim nations. Turkey and Uzbekistan were the only large Muslim countries not on the list. North Korea, a designated state sponsor of terrorism, was the only non-Muslim country added.

Under the edict, men would have to report to the federal government for photographs, fingerprinting and questioning.

Because some American Muslims endured taunts and even physical attacks after Sept. 11, some community leaders saw the registration as an opportunity to demonstrate the law-abiding nature of their countrymen. Sadruddin Noorani, a business owner and leader in Chicago's Pakistani community, hit the hustings last winter as the registration deadline approached.

He spoke on ethnic radio programs. He held weekly seminars, renting restaurants, community centers and hotel ballrooms. On Jan. 12, 2003, the day before registration began for Pakistanis, more than 700 people crowded into the Ramada Plaza O'Hare to hear Noorani and others repeat a mantra he wrote on a slip of paper he keeps in his wallet to this day.

"Willfully violating the law of the land by not registering," it reads, "you will face the consequences."

Hundreds of families with questions about their immigration status were torn: Should they register and risk deportation or ignore the call to register and hope no federal agents hunted them down?

Thousands chose to pack all they owned into trucks, vans and taxis and drive to Canada--hoping for refugee status.

Once the program was under way, some influential Democrats in Congress were furious that Ashcroft had claimed congressional authority for his actions but had not consulted them before initiating the registration.

In a letter to Ashcroft dated Dec. 23, 2002, three lawmakers on Capitol Hill's judiciary committees--Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Rep. John Conyers of Michigan--demanded answers. They said there were "grave doubts" about whether the program struck a proper balance between civil liberties and security.




Animaniac 2003-11-19 08:23

The program, they said, "appears to be a component of a second wave of roundups and detentions of Arab and Muslim males disguised as a perfunctory registration requirement."



The Justice Department made no substantial changes, denying the registration was discriminatory. Its lawyers have pointed to a legal principle, known as the plenary power doctrine, that gives the government broad authority to selectively enforce immigration laws with limited oversight from the courts.

One of the last corners of the law where such selective enforcement still is allowed, the plenary power doctrine was established by the Supreme Court at the end of the 19th Century in upholding the exclusion of Chinese immigrants from the U.S. after Congress deemed them "undesirable."

That doctrine often has insulated the government from claims that it is violating the Constitution's equal protection clause when it imposes different burdens among immigrant groups.



The domestic campaign, said the senior official at the Justice Department, has "put some effectiveness into the immigration law for at least a subset of visitors, and to that extent I think it's been valuable."

But that argument rings hollow in the Muslim enclaves of America, where community leaders such as Noorani warn that the unequal treatment of Muslim men inevitably will create a backlash.

Those deported through the campaign, he predicted, will say: "We were a good ambassador to this country. We worked hard. We paid our taxes. We committed no crimes. And they kicked us out."

Similar resentment can be heard in the hometowns of the men on the July Icelandair flight--sprawling urban centers such as Rawalpindi, Lahore and Karachi as well as villages in Pakistan's hinterlands.

"People in every class of Pakistani society think differently about the U.S.," Khurran Nazir, 23, an Islamabad street vendor, said when asked about the recent deportation of Pakistani men. "The U.S. does not like Muslims."

Of the roughly 83,000 who registered, the government moved to deport 13,740 for various immigration violations. Government officials point out that once the men registered, agents could not ignore alleged violations.

Many of the men are fighting their cases, but few can expect to succeed, according to lawyers who have run mass legal clinics for them.

In the end, many forced out of the U.S. will never appear in deportation statistics. Chiefly to save taxpayer money, the government says it has been encouraging the vast majority of men caught in the dragnet to accept what is known as voluntary departure--a sort of immigration plea bargain that effectively results in self-deportation.

Many already are gone.

A costly compliance

With a pencil-thin mustache and a jittery, lanky frame, Mohammad Akbar was anxious by nature.

But he also knew that he was in violation of immigration laws, thanks to a 1995 deportation order that he still was fighting. He worried that any infraction, even a parking ticket, would mean trouble.

So when he heard in the spring that the federal government was requiring registration of all men visiting from Pakistan, Akbar had to weigh the dangers of visiting the local Immigration and Naturalization Service office. He decided, finally, that he could not flout the law.

"I went because I'm scared--if they catch me without registration, they come arrest me," he said. "I have to follow the U.S. law. . . . They said to register."

Akbar arrived in America in November 1990. Not long after, he found work at a 7-Eleven on Gibbsboro Road in Lindenwold, N.J., eventually moving up to manager and earning $7.50 an hour.

Despite the modest wage, life was good. His customers, including local cops, had become a sort of second family. He even married one of the regulars, a Jersey native he got to know in long, late-night chats at the convenience store.

"We all know him--great guy," said Sgt. Douglas Reynolds of the Lindenwold police. "If he didn't see an officer for a while, he would ask how he was doing, just to make sure he was all right."

Akbar stepped into the INS office in Cherry Hill, N.J., on April 25. Things seemed to be going fine at first as he sat down across from an immigration agent. The agent was cordial, only jokingly asking if Akbar was a member of any fundamentalist Islamic groups or if he knew any terrorists.

"I don't know anybody" connected to such groups, Akbar recalled telling him. "I'm not like that."

But when the agent got to the matter of his 1995 deportation order, the tenor of the conversation shifted. "I'm sorry," he remembers the agent telling him. "You must go to jail."

Guards stepped into the interview room with shackles, Akbar said. They cuffed his hands and feet and led him away to the Monmouth County Jail as he pleaded with them.

"I told them: `I'm not a murderer. I invested money in the bank. I do work hard,' " he said. "But no mercy. There's no mercy."

Despite their differences, even Akbar's estranged wife, Tamika Lindsay, couldn't understand his treatment. "You're talking a man . . . whose only crime was his visa ran out," she said.

In late July, along a narrow concrete alley in the Pakistani town of Hazro, the brilliant blue doors of the Akbar family home swung open. Thirteen years after Mariyam Khursheed's youngest son left for America, there he stood.

She took her 48-year-old son's head in her hands, kissed his forehead and gave thanks to Allah. "I'm 82 years old and I'm sick," Akbar later recalled her telling him. "I thought I would never see you again in my life."

He was not returning to poverty. Generations of his family have made a good living in Hazro, which sits a couple of hours northwest of Islamabad along the ancient Grand Trunk Road, past donkey-drawn carts and marble strip mines.

His older brother Shamroze is a real estate broker. Before going to America, Akbar ran a small grocery store.

Sitting inside the cramped courtyard of the family's home, he decried how he was treated in America but said he held no ill will toward U.S. citizens.

"The American people didn't do this to me," he said. "It was the government."

Having managed during his time in the U.S. to put away about $20,000, Akbar said he hoped to use some of that to open a business in Hazro or perhaps Karachi.

His ultimate goal, though, remains the same: to return to the U.S.

"I know America better than my motherland because I live a long time there," he said.

"One day," his brother Shamroze added, "they will realize that they were wrong, and he will go back."

- - -

TRIBUNE FINDINGS

Since Sept. 11, 2001:

83,310: Number of foreign visitors from 24 predominantly Muslim nations who registered with the government after U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft required them to do so.*

13,740: Number of those 83,310 who were ordered into deportation proceedings.

0: Number who were publicly charged with terrorism, although officials say a few have terrorism connections.

*North Koreans also required to register.

- - -

Profiling illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, authorities have increasingly focused on nationality in immigration enforcement. Deportation orders have increased markedly for unauthorized immigrants from 24 predominantly Muslim countries while those from other nations face no extra scrutiny.

Increase in deportation orders higher for Muslim countries

Comparing the two-year period after Sept. 11, 2001, to the two-year period before:

2 percent of unauthorized immigrants are from 24 predominantly Muslim nations, which saw a +31.4% rise in deportation orders since Sept. 11

Unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. (Total: About 7 million)

98 percent of unauthorized immigrants are from other countries, which saw a +3.4% rise in deportation orders since Sept. 11

- - -

CHANGE IN NUMBER OF DEPORTATION ORDERS AFTER SEPT. 11

For 24 predominantly Muslim countries


NATION BEFORE AFTER INCREASE OVER% CHANGE Oct. 1, 1999, to Oct. 1, 2001, to PREVIOUS 2 YEARS Sept. 30, 2001 Sept. 30, 2003 Indonesia 631 1,852 1,221 193.5% Pakistan 1,842 2,686 844 45.8% Egypt 453 993 540 119.2% Jordan 411 741 330 80.3% Morocco 168 398 230 136.9% Iraq 220 381 161 73.2% Tunisia 54 212 158 292.6% Saudi Arabia 55 181 126 229.1% Lebanon 393 504 111 28.2% Sudan 202 309 107 53.0% Yemen 159 263 104 65.4% Syria 164 252 88 53.7% Eritrea 118 168 50 42.4% Afghanistan 145 194 49 33.8% U.A.E. 4 24 20 500.0% Algeria 138 153 15 10.9% Kuwait 59 64 5 8.5% Oman 2 6 4 200.0% Qatar 3 7 4 133.3% Bahrain 17 15 -2 -11.8% Libya 16 11 -5 -31.3% Iran 794 725 -69 -8.7% Bangladesh 1,085 618 -467 -43.0% Somalia 1,644 772 -872 -53.0% Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review Chicago Tribune/Valerie Cotsalas and Dionisio Munoz



Ashcroft is running around completely unchecked. It's things like these that show the true nature of the Bush administration but for some reason go unnoticed by major media outlets... This incredibly immoral and completely overlooks the fact that immigrants have contributed more than any other demographic.

Lst2touchdasky 2003-11-19 10:26

*cant go on* to much reading....

u&t 2003-11-19 10:28

What :o :o :o !!! OMG I'm so surprised!!

You mean the US is not only being nasty towards muslims living abroad but also those already living in the country?

Seriously, what rock have you been living under for the past 2 years? You guys tightened up general immigration rules quite a few notches after 911. If you come from the wrong country and have a funny last name you wont event get a visa anymore and even if your from a "friendly" european country you don't get in unless you have a new (easier to track, harder to forge) passport.

To be honest I don't even see what your govenment is doing wrong here. It's not even illegall. Sure it's a personal tragedy for those being deported but do you honestly think many people care if Mustafa at the dry-cleaners gets sent back to Pakistan or not? It's not like these guys you deport are going to give you a worse rep than you already have in their home countries.

Instead you should think some happy thoughts like:
* Arabs are at least not detained in concentration camps like all US Nipponese during WWII
* You can still change things by using your right to wote. Ha ha, just kidding ;)
* You can always move

boneyjellyfish 2003-11-19 12:10

Hmm... wasn't the new law made so illegal immigrants can't get driving licenses?

Anyway, if we don't have our illegal immigrants, who's going to run the McDonalds and Burger Kings?

kanazuchi 2003-11-19 12:41

Are all of these stories from the chicago tribune?? You should go research some more, I hate it when uneducated people try to make my country look bad...

JAppi 2003-11-19 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
What :o :o :o !!! OMG I'm so surprised!!

That's good I'm happy for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
You mean the US is not only being nasty towards muslims living abroad but also those already living in the country?

Ya, it's called racism. You don't see that in canada.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
Seriously, what rock have you been living under for the past 2 years? You guys tightened up general immigration rules quite a few notches after 911. If you come from the wrong country and have a funny last name you wont event get a visa anymore and even if your from a "friendly" european country you don't get in unless you have a new (easier to track, harder to forge) passport.

That doesn't mean it's right to refuse people simply because of where they come from. That's called racism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
To be honest I don't even see what your govenment is doing wrong here. It's not even illegall.

Actually, racism is illegal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
Sure it's a personal tragedy for those being deported

Yes it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
but do you honestly think many people care if Mustafa at the dry-cleaners gets sent back to Pakistan or not?

So you shouldn't care that your own government is being racist?

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
* Arabs are at least not detained in concentration camps like all US Nipponese during WWII

That was during a war. The US is not at war with anyone right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u&t
* You can always move

Yes it's really feasible to move just because the country is racist. That's a bullshit cough out excuse. It's just running away from your problems. The fact of the matter is that the United States has rather pathetic foreign policy. They need to get their act together and develop a decent foreign policy that doesn't involve being racist and supressing people who aren't them.

Mr. Bushido 2003-11-19 13:07

in case u didnt know:

all white countries are racists. the whites have been asshole racists since they first met different ppl
They started w/ the jews, then the turks, blacks, asians, hispanics, now muslims and other arab/persian race.

today certain ppl can get away with racism:
Jews cause they own everything. You dont believe me?? Theyre head in gov.
Whites: cause they still think they're better
blacks: cuz they were slaves they think they can make fun of everyone else, and the whites let them.

Its no surprise US is racist, same with Europe.
the only countries that are western and are generally nice to foriegners are: Canada, Australia, and MAYBE England.

Lambda 2003-11-19 13:51

This is one of a number of things that have been happening in America recently following 9/11 which have striking parallels with things that were happening in Germany in the early 1930s following the Reichstag fire.

Vulkar 2003-11-19 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoro
in case u didnt know:

all white countries are racists. the whites have been asshole racists since they first met different ppl
They started w/ the jews, then the turks, blacks, asians, hispanics, now muslims and other arab/persian race.

today certain ppl can get away with racism:
Jews cause they own everything. You dont believe me?? Theyre head in gov.
Whites: cause they still think they're better
blacks: cuz they were slaves they think they can make fun of everyone else, and the whites let them.

Its no surprise US is racist, same with Europe.
the only countries that are western and are generally nice to foriegners are: Canada, Australia, and MAYBE England.

Come on, no stereotyping please. I'm sure many people, including me, find this offensive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lambda
his is one of a number of things that have been happening in America recently following 9/11 which have striking parallels with things that were happening in Germany in the early 1930s following the Reichstag fire.

I agree. Truth is, I can hardly wait until election day. We need to get a new President who isn't so hungry to take away our personal rights and privacy. Also, it would be nice to have a President who understands foreign policy. I don't pay my taxes so that my government can topple 1 or 2 foreign governments a year whilst pissing off its NATO allies.

Dark_Voodoo 2003-11-19 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoro
in case u didnt know:

all white countries are racists. the whites have been asshole racists since they first met different ppl
They started w/ the jews, then the turks, blacks, asians, hispanics, now muslims and other arab/persian race.

today certain ppl can get away with racism:
Jews cause they own everything. You dont believe me?? Theyre head in gov.
Whites: cause they still think they're better
blacks: cuz they were slaves they think they can make fun of everyone else, and the whites let them.

Now thats a racist remark.

Just becuse whites have a history of opression through out history, dosent mean that every white person todayis a racist. What leads you to this assumption anyways?

Your the one that sounds like a racist by sterotyping different cultures in to such fixed roles.

Shii 2003-11-19 14:33

Attn Vulkar, Dark_Voodoo:
Don't Feed The Troll.

http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/pics/dnftt.jpg

Hunter 2003-11-19 15:19

There is racism everywhere, in every country and in all the people in the world, white people, black people, yellow, green, red, absolutely anybody can be racist.
That not mean everybody is.
And to say that the 'white' (damn I hate this term) western country are more racist than... well I don't know randomly Japan, China, Liberia, or any other country just mean that you don't know about what you speak.

The point isn't in the fact or not that there is racism in a country, indeed there is racist in US, like everywhere.
The point is there is a government which start to create racist laws, and that is serious.

dragonz20 2003-11-19 16:12

Hunter is right. Racism exists everywhere in all countries.

Now racism from the government is serious but it's not exactly a new thing. It has happened in practically EVERY country and it still does happen in some. Christians and non-Bhuddist worshippers in China were abused by the Chinese government for decades and still suffer as a 2nd class religion. Another example? Aboriginals in Australia.. Their mistreatment during these past decades are also well documented. And one can argue that for several decades, the Japanese (yes the same Japanese that make your favorite animes) were accused of being some of the most racist people when it came to business. Prior to these 10-20 years, the Japanese market was basically an unfair and closed market to foreigners. Companies in Japan spearheaded competition by forming monopolies (legal in Japan) and performing various business practices which would be considered highly illegal in other countries. The Japanese government also favored Japanese products by adding huge tariffs, weird business laws that penalized foreign companies for entering the japanese market and placing "burdens" on consumers who bough non-Japanese products. For example, if a japanese person bought a car from Ford or Europe, he was guaranteed to get audited. Combining all these practices made Japan an unbreakable market for foreigners to enter and a one-way trade relationship. It was only in these past two decades when other countries including the US decided they had enough of the unfair practice and slapped Japan with huge tariffs and basically even out the competition.

also to add to the original case:

1. the US is @ war with terrorism. Unfortunately for Muslims, a large portion of these terrorist come from these countries. Is this unfair? yes. but many things are unfair in life...
2. other countries do it too. it may be harder to acquire a US visa if you come from a country of high suspect (Muslim countries) but we're not the only countries who do it now. Australia and England and others have their own laws that make it harder for Arabs to come into their country.
2. the guy who was deported had an expired visa. he was LEGALLY deported. is it unfair? yeah. but there are more deplorable things to bitch about in other countries such as the mistreatment of women in Africa and Muslim countries or children/women trafficking in asian countries. at least we didn't whoop his ass with a baboo stick for an hour or two on his way out...

NoSanninWa 2003-11-19 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by kanazuchi
Are all of these stories from the chicago tribune?? You should go research some more, I hate it when uneducated people try to make my country look bad...

This has been going on for quite some time. I'm well informed about this without ever having read the Chicago Tribune.

I hate it when uneducated people make my country look bad by not having a clue what it is doing.

kanazuchi 2003-11-19 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAppi
That's good I'm happy for you.
Yes it's really feasible to move just because the country is racist. That's a bullshit cough out excuse. It's just running away from your problems. The fact of the matter is that the United States has rather pathetic foreign policy. They need to get their act together and develop a decent foreign policy that doesn't involve being racist and supressing people who aren't them.

Its suprising how much you know about americas policies! Do you live here or something? Look up racism in a dictionary, its not hatred of people because of where they are from, its hatred of people because of there RACE. Now to the point, yes there are racists in our country, but not everybody, ESPECIALY not in the government are racists. Our foriegn policy may not be the best, but it serves its purpose in protecting the CITIZENS of our country. We are not the police of the world, we deal with our own problems. If that involves cracking down on people doin illegal things and deporting them because they are not even citizens, then so be it. Oh, and if you can come up with a better foriegn policy that pleases everybody, then go ahead. But why the hell are you gonna cry about it when it has nothing to do with you and you can do nothing to help??

kanazuchi 2003-11-19 16:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoSanninWa
This has been going on for quite some time. I'm well informed about this without ever having read the Chicago Tribune.

I hate it when uneducated people make my country look bad by not having a clue what it is doing.

So what do you propose we do? Let every illegal immigrant just stay and do whatever they plaese? I guess this immigrant thing hits closer to home with me living in texas and being passed over for jobs because an illegal will do it for 4 dollars an hour. The US is doing nothing wrong. If you dont like how shit is run, then leave.

Gaara11 2003-11-19 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoro
in case u didnt know:

all white countries are racists. the whites have been asshole racists since they first met different ppl
They started w/ the jews, then the turks, blacks, asians, hispanics, now muslims and other arab/persian race.

today certain ppl can get away with racism:
Jews cause they own everything. You dont believe me?? Theyre head in gov.
Whites: cause they still think they're better
blacks: cuz they were slaves they think they can make fun of everyone else, and the whites let them.

Its no surprise US is racist, same with Europe.
the only countries that are western and are generally nice to foriegners are: Canada, Australia, and MAYBE England.

That's messed up Zoro. What country are u from?
Note: Everybody thinks that they are better than everybody else, period. Race doesn't matter. But when people get to know other people, its the relationship that makes them change their minds. :)

kanazuchi 2003-11-19 16:29

Hunter has a point, there are racists everywhere you go, but if you are saying that the US is creating racist laws, maybe you need to start riding the short bus, or just get completely out of this conversation because you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.