Post by Abu 'Ata on Apr 12, 2006 13:03:56 GMT -5
U.S. Immigration Policy Post September 11, 2001: There is only one alternative
Introduction
Following the horrific events of September 11, 2001, the U.S. government took various measures to strengthen its security, and control the entry of foreign nationals, especially Muslim majority countries (Parker and Fellner 2004). The alleged perpetrators of the horrific terrorist attack were foreign-born Muslim men. Nineteen Muslim men supposedly engineered and carried out the attacks of September 11, at least this is what was conveyed by the Bush administration, and reported by all major media outlets.
The media played and re-played video footage of the planes hitting the world trade towers and of Osama Bin Laden shooting a rifle dressed in Afghani or Arab clothes. Al Qaeda as a term for the “terrorist” organization supposedly ran by Osama Bin Laden was born. The country was devastated. Bush was observed crying doing a speech from the Whitehouse promising that retribution would come.
The Climate leads to tougher policies
The climate was set, thus we expected tough policies and measures would come, especially toward the Muslim community. Former attorney general John Ashcroft said, “Let the terrorists among us be warned. If you overstay your visa, even by one day, we will arrest you. If you violate a local law, you will be put in jail and kept in custody for as long as possible” (Parker and Fellner 2004: 3). This is exactly what Ashcroft went about doing in a McCarthyism fashion. In general, security policies in the United States have become stricter for both non-citizens and citizens. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) documents on its website in an article called “Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11 World ” how the U.S. took step after step to take civil liberties away from not on aliens, but U.S. American citizens as well.
In general, legislation has centered around preventing what Phillip Martin called “the 3 P’s: preventing terrorists from entering or remaining in the country, prosecuting those who commit terrorist acts or support terrorists, and taking steps to protect residents from terrorist threats” (Martin 2004). The Bush administration first act, with attorney general John Ashcroft leading the way, was to detain and hold over one thousand Muslim men while denying them right to counsel, and in general, their habeas corpus rights (which is a right to stand before a court and be tried for guilt or innocence) (Parker and Fellner 2004). These “special interest detainees” were held an average of 80 days (some even being held for 8 months) until the FBI cleared them of any terrorism links (Parker and Fellner). Essentially, they were presumed guilty first and innocent only when absolutely proven.
Muslim men were made to register and come in for special questioning procedures. This became known as the “special registration” (Engler and Sarkar 2003). The Department of Justice questioned and/or interrogated thousands of non-citizen Muslim men, some of which were charged with immigration violations that would have been ignored prior to September 11, 2001. It is now being revealed that some of those detained were subjected to Abu Ghaib type torture (Bernstein 2006). According to the NY Times, article by Nina Bernstein, the Muslim men detainees lawsuit “charges that the detainees’ confinement was arbitrary, illegally based on their religion or national origin, and that guards routinely terrorized them with aggressive dogs” (Bernstein 2006). The Bush administration overruled or ignored the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in not releasing information about the detainees (Parker and Fellner 2004). Therefore, their families as well as the public were left in the dark, not knowing their whereabouts, reasons for confinement, or physical or mental status.
The Major Policies/legislations/Actions
The first major law enacted was the USA Patriot Act, passed on October 23, 2001. The USA Patriot stands for (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. It further strengthened existing immigration laws. According to Professor Margaret Stock of the U.S. Military Academy, there were already tough laws on the book against potential immigrant terrorists before September 11, 2001. However, they were not enforced (Stock 2003). Examples are the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
The Patriot Act, a far sweeping policy, allows the government to electronically monitor, hold, aliens without charge, and check banking transactions for money-laundering (Martin 2004). The act gave the attorney general or deputy attorney general the authority to declare any alien (foreigner) a terrorist and hold him/her indefinitely (Greenya 2003). It allowed the sharing of personal information, such as medical records, bank accounts, mental health records, library and student records (ACLU Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11 World—A Chronology) of potential terrorists (any one said to be so, including U.S. citizens). All this can be done without the person’s knowledge thereof.
The second major law was the 2002 Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act; it tightened immigration from countries the State Department “considers sponsors of terrorism.” Aliens from these countries must undergo background checks. In addition, this act mandated that universities and colleges track foreign students by reporting any student that does not enroll within thirty days of registration (Greenya 2003). A ninety-five dollar fee for this tracking is assessed to the foreign student’s bill (Marin 2004). Before consular offices in Muslim and other foreign countries issue visas to applicants, they must get approval that these applicants are not on FBI databases as terrorists or potential terrorists (Martin 2004). The net effect of this act has been the reduction of foreign students in the U.S. universities and colleges.
The third major action that the U.S. government did after September 11, 2001 was the creation of the 180,000 employee Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on November 25, 2002. The DHS replaced the INS and incorporated many existing agencies. Among these are U.S. Citizenship and Immigration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection ,the United States Secret Service , Federal Law Enforcement Training Center , and the United States Coast Guard. The agencies specific to aliens are the Customs and Border Protection agency, which is responsible for inspecting arriving passengers at ports of entry, it also is responsible for patrolling between ports of entry (Martin 2004). The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is responsible for immigrant applications for naturalization and statuses. Finally, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is responsible for interior enforcement of immigration laws (Martin 2004).
In addition to these three major steps, a stricter Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) law was implemented on November 19, 2001 called the Aviation Security Law, which put airport security under federal control and allowed federal sky marshals onto flights (Bala 2002). The Bush Administration used its power to declare immigrants and Muslims as “enemy combatants” in their fight against “terrorism.” Thus, many actions were taking without the need to issue new policies. Racial profiling of Arabs and Muslims were allowed to be used by law enforces and intelligence agencies (ACLU 2002) to monitor, detain, or take off a flight. [/right]Summary
September 11, 2001 forced the U.S. government to choose between civil liberties for immigrants and Muslims and security, control, and dominance for its future. It chose the latter, and in general went on an offensive to stop perceived threats by terrorists and potential terrorists at home and around the world.
Bush emphatically made the point of who was a terrorist in his infamous state of the union speech when he said, “You are either with us or you are with the terrorists.” Bush mistakenly, although the truth has become manifest, spoke of the new war as a crusade. Despite the fact that immigrants contributed over 11 billion to the U.S. economy in 2000-01, a war was declared on immigrants, and specifically Muslim immigrants. Margaret D. Stocked stated that, “It would be a grave mistake for America to make a “war on immigrants” part of the “war on terrorism.” Nonetheless, this is precisely what such policies have reflected.
The major policies/laws enacted were the 2001 Patriot Act (It has since been renewed twice, the last one coming on March 9, 2006), the 2002 Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act, the Federal Aviation Security Law, and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (which replaced the INS). It is clear that the potential enemies or “terrorists” are Muslims; racial profiling is another non-policy action that was carried out by the U.S. government post September 11, 2001. The increased power of the executive branch (specifically the administrative part) is another result of September 11, 2001. Many civil liberty advocates and critical thinkers have pointed out that once rights are taken, they are seldom easily given back.
September 11, not only took us “back into the future,” an Orwellian 1984 one, but into a new foreign policy agenda for America very much the same as its domestic polices. That is pre-emptive strikes on any who are not with the Bush administration, and thus a potential terrorist. It is quite ironic that the U.S. nowadays is one of staunchest advocates for “freedom and democracy” around the world while at the same time being one of its biggest hurdles to international human rights, civil liberties (aliens and citizens), and right to habeas corpus, especially to those deemed potential threats or unfit.
What has become clear is that the Khilafah is the World Alternative
What has become clear is that the U.S. is not, and has never been, a State worthy of being a world super power that leads humanity. It does not give a care about human rights. Capitalism, its true creed, monopolizes wealth and resources, poisons the young with values that lead to greed or addiction, and seeks profit at the cost of life, civilization, and morality. The only viable alternative, and history has recorded it, is the Islaamic State. The Khilafah will melt any person who wants to become a part of it. It will give the person who accepts its creed dignity and true civilization. There will be no need for draconian laws that used to prevent the rise of a pure, just, and better alternative for the people, for the Khilafah State will be the living model of this.
The Islaamic State’s objective is to bring humanity to the light of Allah by living under his laws and systems. Thus, the Khilafah will accept the immigrants. Moreover, the immigrants will see Muslims living in peace, prosperity, and dignity. It will not be a façade as we find in the Western Nations, but the greatest that people hear about the State will be real. Committed-aware Muslims are already working to bring back this reality, the next stage is reality stage that will shake, shock, and bring peace to the world.
Abu'Atallah
References
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). (2002). Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11
World. Retrieved April
1, 2006 from (http://www.aclunc.org/911/chronology.html)
Bala, Gary G. (2002, May 16). September 11 Terrorist Attacks and U.S. Immigration
Law & Policy. Retrieved March 30, 2006, from
(http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/Terrorist.html)
Bernstein, N. (2006). 9/11 Detainees in New Jersey Say They were Abused with Dogs.
New York Times. Retrieved from (http://www.nytimes.com)
Engler, Mark and Saurav Sarkar. (2003). Ashroft’s Roundup. Progressive 64 (3) 24, 3.
Greenya, John. (2003, August) Immigration Law in Post-9/11 America. DC BAR
Retrieved March 30, 2006 from
(http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/washinton_lawyer/august_2003/immigration.cfm)
Martin, Phillip. 2004. International Migration and Terrorism: Prevention, Prosecution and
Protection. Presented at UC-CIIP Seminar, March 5-6, University of California at
Davis.
Parker, Alison and Jamie Fellner. 2004. Above the Law: Executive Power after
September 11 in the United States. World Report 2004. Retrieved on March 30,
2006 (http://hrw.org/wr2k4/8.htm#_Toc58744957)
Stock, Margaret D. (2003). United States Immigration Law in a World of Terror. The
Federalist Society. Retrieved on March 30, 2006, from (http://www.fed-soc.org/Publications/Terrorism/immigration.htm)
Introduction
Following the horrific events of September 11, 2001, the U.S. government took various measures to strengthen its security, and control the entry of foreign nationals, especially Muslim majority countries (Parker and Fellner 2004). The alleged perpetrators of the horrific terrorist attack were foreign-born Muslim men. Nineteen Muslim men supposedly engineered and carried out the attacks of September 11, at least this is what was conveyed by the Bush administration, and reported by all major media outlets.
The media played and re-played video footage of the planes hitting the world trade towers and of Osama Bin Laden shooting a rifle dressed in Afghani or Arab clothes. Al Qaeda as a term for the “terrorist” organization supposedly ran by Osama Bin Laden was born. The country was devastated. Bush was observed crying doing a speech from the Whitehouse promising that retribution would come.
The Climate leads to tougher policies
The climate was set, thus we expected tough policies and measures would come, especially toward the Muslim community. Former attorney general John Ashcroft said, “Let the terrorists among us be warned. If you overstay your visa, even by one day, we will arrest you. If you violate a local law, you will be put in jail and kept in custody for as long as possible” (Parker and Fellner 2004: 3). This is exactly what Ashcroft went about doing in a McCarthyism fashion. In general, security policies in the United States have become stricter for both non-citizens and citizens. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) documents on its website in an article called “Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11 World ” how the U.S. took step after step to take civil liberties away from not on aliens, but U.S. American citizens as well.
In general, legislation has centered around preventing what Phillip Martin called “the 3 P’s: preventing terrorists from entering or remaining in the country, prosecuting those who commit terrorist acts or support terrorists, and taking steps to protect residents from terrorist threats” (Martin 2004). The Bush administration first act, with attorney general John Ashcroft leading the way, was to detain and hold over one thousand Muslim men while denying them right to counsel, and in general, their habeas corpus rights (which is a right to stand before a court and be tried for guilt or innocence) (Parker and Fellner 2004). These “special interest detainees” were held an average of 80 days (some even being held for 8 months) until the FBI cleared them of any terrorism links (Parker and Fellner). Essentially, they were presumed guilty first and innocent only when absolutely proven.
Muslim men were made to register and come in for special questioning procedures. This became known as the “special registration” (Engler and Sarkar 2003). The Department of Justice questioned and/or interrogated thousands of non-citizen Muslim men, some of which were charged with immigration violations that would have been ignored prior to September 11, 2001. It is now being revealed that some of those detained were subjected to Abu Ghaib type torture (Bernstein 2006). According to the NY Times, article by Nina Bernstein, the Muslim men detainees lawsuit “charges that the detainees’ confinement was arbitrary, illegally based on their religion or national origin, and that guards routinely terrorized them with aggressive dogs” (Bernstein 2006). The Bush administration overruled or ignored the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in not releasing information about the detainees (Parker and Fellner 2004). Therefore, their families as well as the public were left in the dark, not knowing their whereabouts, reasons for confinement, or physical or mental status.
The Major Policies/legislations/Actions
The first major law enacted was the USA Patriot Act, passed on October 23, 2001. The USA Patriot stands for (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. It further strengthened existing immigration laws. According to Professor Margaret Stock of the U.S. Military Academy, there were already tough laws on the book against potential immigrant terrorists before September 11, 2001. However, they were not enforced (Stock 2003). Examples are the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
The Patriot Act, a far sweeping policy, allows the government to electronically monitor, hold, aliens without charge, and check banking transactions for money-laundering (Martin 2004). The act gave the attorney general or deputy attorney general the authority to declare any alien (foreigner) a terrorist and hold him/her indefinitely (Greenya 2003). It allowed the sharing of personal information, such as medical records, bank accounts, mental health records, library and student records (ACLU Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11 World—A Chronology) of potential terrorists (any one said to be so, including U.S. citizens). All this can be done without the person’s knowledge thereof.
The second major law was the 2002 Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act; it tightened immigration from countries the State Department “considers sponsors of terrorism.” Aliens from these countries must undergo background checks. In addition, this act mandated that universities and colleges track foreign students by reporting any student that does not enroll within thirty days of registration (Greenya 2003). A ninety-five dollar fee for this tracking is assessed to the foreign student’s bill (Marin 2004). Before consular offices in Muslim and other foreign countries issue visas to applicants, they must get approval that these applicants are not on FBI databases as terrorists or potential terrorists (Martin 2004). The net effect of this act has been the reduction of foreign students in the U.S. universities and colleges.
The third major action that the U.S. government did after September 11, 2001 was the creation of the 180,000 employee Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on November 25, 2002. The DHS replaced the INS and incorporated many existing agencies. Among these are U.S. Citizenship and Immigration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection ,the United States Secret Service , Federal Law Enforcement Training Center , and the United States Coast Guard. The agencies specific to aliens are the Customs and Border Protection agency, which is responsible for inspecting arriving passengers at ports of entry, it also is responsible for patrolling between ports of entry (Martin 2004). The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is responsible for immigrant applications for naturalization and statuses. Finally, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is responsible for interior enforcement of immigration laws (Martin 2004).
In addition to these three major steps, a stricter Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) law was implemented on November 19, 2001 called the Aviation Security Law, which put airport security under federal control and allowed federal sky marshals onto flights (Bala 2002). The Bush Administration used its power to declare immigrants and Muslims as “enemy combatants” in their fight against “terrorism.” Thus, many actions were taking without the need to issue new policies. Racial profiling of Arabs and Muslims were allowed to be used by law enforces and intelligence agencies (ACLU 2002) to monitor, detain, or take off a flight. [/right]Summary
September 11, 2001 forced the U.S. government to choose between civil liberties for immigrants and Muslims and security, control, and dominance for its future. It chose the latter, and in general went on an offensive to stop perceived threats by terrorists and potential terrorists at home and around the world.
Bush emphatically made the point of who was a terrorist in his infamous state of the union speech when he said, “You are either with us or you are with the terrorists.” Bush mistakenly, although the truth has become manifest, spoke of the new war as a crusade. Despite the fact that immigrants contributed over 11 billion to the U.S. economy in 2000-01, a war was declared on immigrants, and specifically Muslim immigrants. Margaret D. Stocked stated that, “It would be a grave mistake for America to make a “war on immigrants” part of the “war on terrorism.” Nonetheless, this is precisely what such policies have reflected.
The major policies/laws enacted were the 2001 Patriot Act (It has since been renewed twice, the last one coming on March 9, 2006), the 2002 Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act, the Federal Aviation Security Law, and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (which replaced the INS). It is clear that the potential enemies or “terrorists” are Muslims; racial profiling is another non-policy action that was carried out by the U.S. government post September 11, 2001. The increased power of the executive branch (specifically the administrative part) is another result of September 11, 2001. Many civil liberty advocates and critical thinkers have pointed out that once rights are taken, they are seldom easily given back.
September 11, not only took us “back into the future,” an Orwellian 1984 one, but into a new foreign policy agenda for America very much the same as its domestic polices. That is pre-emptive strikes on any who are not with the Bush administration, and thus a potential terrorist. It is quite ironic that the U.S. nowadays is one of staunchest advocates for “freedom and democracy” around the world while at the same time being one of its biggest hurdles to international human rights, civil liberties (aliens and citizens), and right to habeas corpus, especially to those deemed potential threats or unfit.
What has become clear is that the Khilafah is the World Alternative
What has become clear is that the U.S. is not, and has never been, a State worthy of being a world super power that leads humanity. It does not give a care about human rights. Capitalism, its true creed, monopolizes wealth and resources, poisons the young with values that lead to greed or addiction, and seeks profit at the cost of life, civilization, and morality. The only viable alternative, and history has recorded it, is the Islaamic State. The Khilafah will melt any person who wants to become a part of it. It will give the person who accepts its creed dignity and true civilization. There will be no need for draconian laws that used to prevent the rise of a pure, just, and better alternative for the people, for the Khilafah State will be the living model of this.
The Islaamic State’s objective is to bring humanity to the light of Allah by living under his laws and systems. Thus, the Khilafah will accept the immigrants. Moreover, the immigrants will see Muslims living in peace, prosperity, and dignity. It will not be a façade as we find in the Western Nations, but the greatest that people hear about the State will be real. Committed-aware Muslims are already working to bring back this reality, the next stage is reality stage that will shake, shock, and bring peace to the world.
Abu'Atallah
References
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). (2002). Civil Liberties in the Post 9/11
World. Retrieved April
1, 2006 from (http://www.aclunc.org/911/chronology.html)
Bala, Gary G. (2002, May 16). September 11 Terrorist Attacks and U.S. Immigration
Law & Policy. Retrieved March 30, 2006, from
(http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/Terrorist.html)
Bernstein, N. (2006). 9/11 Detainees in New Jersey Say They were Abused with Dogs.
New York Times. Retrieved from (http://www.nytimes.com)
Engler, Mark and Saurav Sarkar. (2003). Ashroft’s Roundup. Progressive 64 (3) 24, 3.
Greenya, John. (2003, August) Immigration Law in Post-9/11 America. DC BAR
Retrieved March 30, 2006 from
(http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/washinton_lawyer/august_2003/immigration.cfm)
Martin, Phillip. 2004. International Migration and Terrorism: Prevention, Prosecution and
Protection. Presented at UC-CIIP Seminar, March 5-6, University of California at
Davis.
Parker, Alison and Jamie Fellner. 2004. Above the Law: Executive Power after
September 11 in the United States. World Report 2004. Retrieved on March 30,
2006 (http://hrw.org/wr2k4/8.htm#_Toc58744957)
Stock, Margaret D. (2003). United States Immigration Law in a World of Terror. The
Federalist Society. Retrieved on March 30, 2006, from (http://www.fed-soc.org/Publications/Terrorism/immigration.htm)