Are the DoJ immigrant policies "racist"?

The DoJ policies, and the INS policies, at this point, are certainly increasingly discriminatory - though maybe the correct word isn't "racist" but rather "regionist" or "religionist" or...well...you get the idea. I take offense at the idea that a certain group of people are being singled out because they come from a certain country or hold a certain religious belief.

Is not America about freedom and democracy and equality? It seems to me that the government is moving further and furher from those ideals. And that is shameful. I don't know who said it, but it really is the idea that the government is taking steps to protect what is good in America by restricting those good things (sorry, I butchered that paraphrasing).

I would not want to raise a child in a country that is so discriminatory against any group, regadless of origin or beliefs. It is embarassing, at this point - I am ashamed of what the government is doing, in many cases (though not all - and I am not saying that all the government or military or whatever is bad, either).

I do agree that it appears that the U.S. government is drawing an obvious line between "us" and "them." And not just that whole "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists" crap, either. The government is saying "this group of people are 'different' and are therefore to be feared" and creating a shameful division. I do equate the current behavior of the DoJ and the INS and several other government branches with what was done to the American-Germans (to some extent) and to the American-Japanese (to a much greater extent) during World War II.

How would we feel if, when we travel abroad, other governments said "Well, you're from that war-mongering U.S., which is a threat to our way of life, and therefore while you're in our country you will be viewed as a suspected murderer/rapist/child-rapist/chicken-buggerer, etc"? (Sorry, needed to lighten-up for a moment.) But the point is that if we're going to start looking at people from the Middle East and other regions as threatening persons, then how long until we start looking at the Greeks (you know, they've some terrortist groups) and the Germans (yep, they've their terrorist groups, too) and, of course, the Japanese (Aum Shenriko, anyone?) and denying them the right to function as people and not as "threats" in the U.S. And how long until Americans and our country is viewed as no longer being free, but being under strict control of the government, with all behaviors and decisions and conversations and dialogues and travel being constantly monitored and evaluated?

Yes, I am taking this to an extreme, but that's the point I am trying to make - we're starting down a path that can only lead toward this extreme. We should be ashamed of what our government is doing in "our name" and for "our own good". And we should not tolerate these actions. I am ashamed of what the government is doing - and I am ashamed of what it must appear like to the rest of the world. And I am ashamed that our government thinks it needs to dicriminate to keep America and the world safe.

And how long until Americans and our country is viewed as no longer being free, but being under strict control of the government, with all behaviors and decisions and conversations and dialogues and travel being constantly monitored and evaluated?

I wonder how free the US immigration policies are perceived to be in the international community. The Japanese internments were disgraceful but it's different from immigration in the eyes of US constitutional law. Discrimination among US citizens or resident aliens is strictly scrutinized by the Supreme Court, whereas discrimination among non-citizens is allowable if it serves almost any conceivable state purpose. State purpose is liberally interpreted, especially in wartime.

Anyone remember the St. Louis? It was a boat of Jewish refugees that the US sent back to Europe in 1939.

But once you're in, you're in. Anyone care to comment on the civil rights of resident aliens in other countries? Not being sarky, I'm seriously asking.

They do this all the time. China is a great example.

Also - once you get that Green Card/citizenship, you're golden here in the states. The INS' current policy is to monitor all those who come here on short-term student and work visas, and to double-check those from certain nations associated with a higher than normal ratio of Islamic fanatics. Is it racist? Probably. But it could also be called 'racist' when the popo dispatch calls out a perp description that includes skin color. Where do you draw the line?

Assuming skin color of perp because a crime has been committed = racist.

I don't understand why it is difficult for people to understand this. (And yes it's a gross oversimplification of several factors which, if aligned differently, could allow you to assume things about the perp's background that have nothing to do with race/ethnicity/etc.)

I repeat that I do not understand why it is difficult for people to understand this. (I also repeat that I said in my original post that the fact that DoJ policy is racist has nothing to do with the debate over whether or not it is a good idea.)

I guess I have to agree with yr sentiment that it doesn't seem as if the obv ethnic difficulties can be helped. Some people felt the need to point out that 'Black Hawk Down' is all about shooting and killing a bunch of wild-eyed 'evil' black people - WTF, it's SOMALIA. It's not like they made it up. In this case WTF, it's ISLAMIC FANATICISM - it's not as if a dozen Duke Bros. clones hijacked those planes. Arrgh.

I wd agree more with the policy if they rounded up everybody with an outstanding visa etc., but mainly for the reason that no smart terrorist who can read the papers would bother coming into the states with a passport from a hotlist country (or show up to one of these ridiculous roundups for that matter). Perhaps the real question should be 'is the INS FUCKING DUMB or WHAT?'

Like hell. Every time I have stood behind a brown-skinned Green Card holder in the Immigrations line, I've witnessed at least a brief unpleasant interrogation.

Millar's "real question" and the question posed at the top of the thread ain't much different in my mind.

Mine either, Colin, but that's the beauty of different points of view; it allows you to argue with someone with whom you agree on a fundamental level but disagree on a semantic level!

Dan, what are you talking about here? Could you please be more specific?

The INS and Immigration Court have been ridiculous for a long time but it's usually too boring to get much news coverage.

Basically, INS should be enforcing EVERYONE'S visas, not just those of citizens of Islamic countries.