Saudi and Pakistani Men Told To Register in the US

[Craig]

http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=21200

Saudis told to register in America

WASHINGTON, 18 December 2002 — Men in the United States who are from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan will be required to register with the government under a program intended to fingerprint and photograph those from countries considered high risk for terrorists.

The addition on Monday of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan brings to 20 the number of countries covered under the registration program, which has drawn sharp criticism from Muslim activist groups as heavy-handed and unlikely to identify any terrorists.

Both Pakistan and the Kingdom are considered US allies in the war on terror, but Bush administration officials have privately questioned their levels of cooperation.

The media in the US recently alleged that the Kingdom was doing a poor job of disrupting terrorist financing and some Saudis might have even inadvertently made payments to one of the Sept. 11 hijackers.

The latest registration notice affects males from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan who are 16 or older and entered the United States on or before Sept. 30, 2002. If they plan to stay in the United States into late February, they will have until Feb. 21, 2003, to register and provide documentation to the Immigration and Naturalization Service about their visit.

The announcement coincides with a deadline Monday for registration for a similar program affecting men from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Sudan and Syria.

Men from Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Eritrea, Lebanon, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen face a registration deadline of Jan. 10.

Those who fail to register can be deported. The program does not affect permanent residents, men with INS “green cards,” or naturalized citizens from those countries. Diplomats also are excluded, as are men seeking or already granted political asylum in the United States.

Women and children were excluded because their numbers would have made the program impossible to administer, Justice Department officials said.

[kitty]

OMG... it starts...

[BeTheReds]

These are not citizens of the USA. The terrorists come from or recieve funds from people from those nations. It makes perfect sense to me.Those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

[VV o n g B a]

Originally posted by BeTheReds@Dec 19 2002, 12:57 AM
These are not citizens of the USA.  The terrorists come from or recieve funds from people from those nations.  It makes perfect sense to me.Those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
"Those who would trade freedom for a little temporary security deserve neither freedom nor security." Ben Franklin.

thats you BTRs. i really can't believe u just said that. its akin to registering the jews before they were put in ghettos in germany. and if its okay to do this then why not register everything? let the government know exactly where u are, what u do, what your taste is in things, whats in your health and finacial records, what u look at when you're on the internet...

by your logic, those who aren't doing wrong have nothing to fear if this happened. yet u would be living in 1984 with big brother. if thats the way u feel, then move to myanmar/burma. u'd prolly feel pretty comfortable there.

[lethal]

I have to take BTR's side here. The people required to register aren't U.S. citizens or permanent residents, they're visa holders. These people are in the U.S. permissively with a specific purpose as stated in their visa. It isn't their right to enter and travel freely and work anywhere they wish, as it is for green card holders and citizens.

Now, an argument can be made that this is the first step down a slippery slope. If we allow this kind of tracking, the tracking and surveylance of all visa holders will follow, then followed by green card holders, because they aren't Americans either.

Where is the line drawn? Obviously citizens should be protected because this would probably be a violation of their 4th amendment rights. I'd argue that permanent residents should not be subject to this fingerprinting either because they have demonstrated their ties to America through the acquisition of the green card itself, but some people would disagree. Although I am hesitant to say its OK to register temporary visa holders, I think this should be allowed for the reasons stated in the first paragraph. I would argue that the manner in which it is being implemented is blatantly discriminatory. They should make all temporary visa holders from all nations register if they go this route, not just males from certain countries.

To distinguish from VVongBa's above argument, the Jews were German citizens and should not have been forced to register with their government under my argument.

[BeTheReds]

Yes, I don't think it is entirely fair that they are implementing it this way, but it would create a lot of paper work and confusion and miscommunication to do it for all private visa holders.

The solution then is to do it for people whos governments we dont have diplomatic ties with (i.e. North Korea) and for areas which have strong Anti-U.S. sentiment and have contributed significantly to terrorist efforts.

you have three options.

1. do nothing (no terrorists will be identified)
2. target specific countries (some terrorists, not all, will be identified)
3. target all temporary visa holders (shitloads of paperwork, time consuming, few if any terrorists will be caught in time.)

I'd pick #2...

[VV o n g B a]

i don't think that doing this will increase safety by much. in fact, i think this decreases safety in some ways. most of the middle easterners i know have come to the US for study and are by and large pro US. these are students who come, experience what life is like in the US for themselves, and go back home and tell their neighbors that we aren't all devils.

so what happens when this plan is put in place?

ppl get rejected b/c of bad information and/or their travel is delayed significantly. this breeds resentment and ppl that would have come will decide not to come even if they can. in fact this has already happened. with registration in place, regular ppl will be even less willing to come see the US for whatever reason. this erases a source of a moderating influence.

meanwhile, real terrorists who now realize the US is changing its rules to accomodate them will attack softer targets all around the world with more and more regularity. or else they will send ppl in that have little in their backgrounds that constitute grounds for rejection.

[VV o n g B a]

If people have "nothing to fear" from the govenment, why would they be doing this?

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,...3,56922,00.html (http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,56922,00.html)

02:00 AM Dec. 19, 2002 PT

Fearing that the Patriot Act will curtail Americans' civil rights, municipalities across the country are passing resolutions to repudiate the legislation and protect their residents from a perceived abuse of authority by the federal government.

On Tuesday, Oakland became the 20th municipality to pass a resolution barring its employees -- from police officer to librarian -- from collaborating with federal officials who may try to use their new power to investigate city residents.

Rushed through Congress a month after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Patriot Act fundamentally changes Americans' legal rights. Among other things, the act allows the government to secretly monitor political groups, seize library records and tap phone and Internet connections.

The federal government says the expanded powers are needed to prevent terrorist attacks; but critics say the legislation erodes freedoms protected by the Constitution. The Justice Department did not return calls for comment on this article.

A rallying point behind the recent groundswell has been the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, run by Massachusetts activist Nancy Talanian.

Her site includes a blueprint for communities that want to pass anti-Patriot Act resolutions, based on her successful lobbying efforts for such legislation in Northhampton, Massachusetts. The site has gotten over a million hits in the last six months, Talanian said.

Another group to vehemently oppose the act has been librarians. They are now required to divulge patrons' book-borrowing and Internet-surfing habits to federal investigators and are prohibited from making such requests public.

In retaliation, some librarians have called special meetings to educate their communities about the Patriot Act's implications. Others now routinely purge borrowing records and Internet caches. One former librarian devised a series of technically-legal signs to warn patrons of FBI snooping.

"We're Sorry!" states one. "Due to National Security concerns, we are unable to tell you if your Internet surfing habits, passwords and e-mail content are being monitored by federal agents; please act appropriately."

Jessamyn West said she doesn't necessarily expect libraries to use her signs, but she hopes that they'll get people talking.

"Hopefully, they'll make people more aware of what's going on," she said.

[Craig]

There's another interesting article in the BBC here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2589317.stm) about mass arrests in Southern California of 500-700 Islamic Men who tried to register.

[wylin]

screw em, maybe we can set up camps like in the movie "the siege" that would be an excellent idea to create internement camps like they did in WW2. Maybe even reuse the manzanar site. Intern the fuzzy bastards!

[BeTheReds]

The Patriot act and asking non citizens from hi risk countries to register with the government is totally different.

I am against the Patriot act because it takes citizens constitutional rights away.

AGAIN, these are not citizens, and yes, it is unlikely that we will catch any hi profile terrorists this way because it will make it that much harder for terrorists to enter the country.


Registering with the government that you are a foreign national from a hi risk country is completly different from the government watching its own citizens like big brother.

[VV o n g B a]

just because u're a citizen doesn't mean u aren't a traitor. it just means u've stayed in the US for the appropriate number of years and took a small test. its like a drivers license. i personally don't see the big difference between naturalized citizens and immigrants who've been here for several years.

u could justify watching your own citizens cuz of timothy mcveigh and the unabomber. whats the big deal? if citizens can cause terror, then they should be watched no? why focus only on foreigners if its been shown that citizens cause terror too? why shouldn't citizens have to register?

[BeTheReds]

Citizens should not have to register because it violates their constitutional rights and invades their privacy.

While I agree that most people who come to the USA are very open minded and most likely not terrorists, there will be a few people who will trickle in if you don't set up barriers like this. Again, registering with the government isn't such a horrible invasion of privacy. When I moved to Japan I and all other foreigners besides US military personel who intend to stay for more than 90 days had to get the Alien Registration Card, meaning we needed to show that we registered with the Japanese government. I certainly don't feel like my privacy has been invaded and if I don't commit any crimes, then I know I will not be in trouble. That's all.

This is a classic example of the actions of a few ruining it for the many. Why are there metal detectors in some schools? Because some children ruined it for their classmates. Why do saudis have to get registered? Because a few Saudis have strong strong anti-US sentiment and fund terrorists while the Saudi Government doesn't do enough to prevent it. I wouldn't be surprised if the south koreans have to register soon with all the anti-us sentiment over there.

[BeTheReds]

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 19 2002, 04:18 PM
There's another interesting article in the BBC here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2589317.stm) about mass arrests in Southern California of 500-700 Islamic Men who tried to register.
Actually that's pretty fucked up. For what reason were these people arrested? Fuckin INS...

But that doesnt change my opinion of this discussion.

[Arb Nam]

What is lacking here is prehaps perspective. There is a presumption of guilt in asking these men to register. The logic is that "If you are not doing anything criminal, you should not be afraid to register". Needless to say, this contradicts the very spirit of the justice system; for an individual to prove his innocence instead of the authorities to prove guilt.

The question that should be ask is, if the the freedom accorded to citizens be extended to these people. We ought to ask ourselves if in these trying times, did we manage to live and govern in the ideal of the founding father or have we given in to fear and paranoia. If we hold that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be unalienable rights of man, then the question of citizentry should not even arise. If the justice system is good enough for its citizen, then isn't is good enough for these people? Shouldn't the govenment trust its own justice system?

Times like these not only threatens the security of the nation, but tests it moral resolve as well. Churchill says it best "Americans can usually be count on to do the right thing - after they have exhausted all other avenues". Hopefully, we won't have to fumble too long.

[Arb Nam]

That was bloody heavy wasnt it? I was drunk.

[deez nuts]

Spend some time at Ground Zero after the second tower collaspse. Spend the next 48+ hrs of what seemed like an eternity for me in a triage treating people. All this and in the back of mind wondering if my best friend whom is also my cousin's husband made it in the tower collapse.


I'm all for it.

[VV o n g B a]

Originally posted by BeTheReds@Dec 20 2002, 12:18 AM
Actually that's pretty fucked up. For what reason were these people arrested? Fuckin INS...

But that doesnt change my opinion of this discussion.
in a perfect world yes, registering would not be a big deal because the information gathered would not be abused. but it is EXACTLY for reasons as listed above that people are hesistant and resist to registering and other means of intrusive surveillance... it is the POTENTIAL for abuse.

and as murphy's law says, anything that can go wrong will go wrong. the US government has shown that in the past it abuses its surveillance powers. why should non citizens not be afraid?

i would also have little to complain about if they registered all the people in the US. it is the fact that they single out a few ethnic groups thats really scary. they know now that they are targets.

[wylin]

Originally posted by Arb Nam@Dec 20 2002, 12:11 AM
What is lacking here is prehaps perspective. There is a presumption of guilt in asking these men to register. The logic is that "If you are not doing anything criminal, you should not be afraid to register". Needless to say, this contradicts the very spirit of the justice system; for an individual to prove his innocence instead of the authorities to prove guilt.

The question that should be ask is, if the the freedom accorded to citizens be extended to these people. We ought to ask ourselves if in these trying times, did we manage to live and govern in the ideal of the founding father or have we given in to fear and paranoia. If we hold that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be unalienable rights of man, then the question of citizentry should not even arise. If the justice system is good enough for its citizen, then isn't is good enough for these people? Shouldn't the govenment trust its own justice system?

Times like these not only threatens the security of the nation, but tests it moral resolve as well. Churchill says it best "Americans can usually be count on to do the right thing - after they have exhausted all other avenues". Hopefully, we won't have to fumble too long.
thats too bad tho, harsh times call for harsh actions. These people technically who were arrested in california are in breech of the law, and are in the united states illegally. Because they are here only as guests the government has the right to round them up like sheep and send em back where they came from. I'd be very receptive personally, to an arab registration act, that would allow us to accurately track and capture both naturalized arabs and foriegn nationals. Something like this would help aid law enforcement with tracking the movements of the enemy and their sipathsizers.

[VV o n g B a]

some of them were in breech of the law because the INS had a backlog and hadn't gotten to issuing them green cards and what not.

[MellowDrama]

I just can't wait til we round up all the "towelheads," "chinks," "beaners," and "darkies." Then things will really get cooking. :lol:

[MellowDrama]

GUYS! Interesting provision I just noticed!

http://www.ins.gov/graphics/lawenfor/speci....htm#callgroup2 (http://www.ins.gov/graphics/lawenfor/specialreg/index.htm#callgroup2)

Look, they added NORTH KOREA to the group!

Watch out yellow people, Uncle Sam is coming to get your ass too!

This is so fucking cool!! :lol:

[VV o n g B a]

paranoia starts to set in. :unsure:

[pfc beansprout]

Originally posted by Arb Nam@Dec 20 2002, 03:11 AM
What is lacking here is prehaps perspective. There is a presumption of guilt in asking these men to register. The logic is that "If you are not doing anything criminal, you should not be afraid to register". Needless to say, this contradicts the very spirit of the justice system; for an individual to prove his innocence instead of the authorities to prove guilt.

The question that should be ask is, if the the freedom accorded to citizens be extended to these people. We ought to ask ourselves if in these trying times, did we manage to live and govern in the ideal of the founding father or have we given in to fear and paranoia. If we hold that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be unalienable rights of man, then the question of citizentry should not even arise. If the justice system is good enough for its citizen, then isn't is good enough for these people? Shouldn't the govenment trust its own justice system?

Times like these not only threatens the security of the nation, but tests it moral resolve as well. Churchill says it best "Americans can usually be count on to do the right thing - after they have exhausted all other avenues". Hopefully, we won't have to fumble too long.
good shit..just wanted to give props... :nerd:

[Andrew]

Originally posted by Morientes@Dec 23 2002, 07:12 PM
I'm all for registering illegal citizens.
What's an illegal citizen?