A Birthday party in Kuwait

Facebook is wonderful! It has its drawbacks…for sure. As an example, many of the applications are cheesy. For the most part, joining Facebook has been a positive experience and has allowed me to reconnect to old friends I haven’t heard from in years. One of the best things about Facebook has been connecting with Khalid’s sister in Kuwait. She has recently “friended” me on Facebook-- and since that day I have felt like a part of Khalid’s family.

Khalid has a special place in his heart for his sister and always speaks of her in glowing terms. He describes her as a generous, warm, caring woman: someone who would go to great lengths to help someone in need. I have spoken to her a few times over the telephone and I get the same impression. She has always treated me with respect, warmth and a welcoming spirit, despite the fact that she has never met me.

She has allowed me a glimpse into her life in Kuwait. I cannot describe in words what this has meant to Khalid and I. She has posted many pictures of her beautiful family. I especially love the pictures she posted of a family trip to Entertainment City in Kuwait: a large and brightly colored amusement park set within a lush and palm tree bespeckled landscape. These pictures showcase a lovely and elegant woman with a lively smile and a young son with an impish yet infectious grin.

Today she posted pictures of her daughter’s first birthday party. Khalid’s sister is wearing a beautiful royal purple outfit with dangling earrings and an intricate purple beaded necklace. (I always notice beaded necklaces because I design and make them myself) Her daughter is a lovely child, dressed in a shimmery gold dress with matching headband. Her attention is occupied by a large birthday cake with a large motif of Barbie encased on the frosting. In the corner is a closed pink flower candle that unfolds magically when lite.

Even though I love perusing these pictures I can’t help but feel a tinge of sadness. Khalid and I would love to be a part of his sister’s life. We want to spend time with her and her family. For now..that dream is regretfully on hold.

I make this promise to Khalid’s sister: I will do whatever I can to make it possible for you to see your brother again. Once this immigration nightmare is over we will travel together to Kuwait and spend some time with you and your family. Perhaps, in the not so distant future we can attend a birthday party in Kuwait.

A Stinkweed by any other name...

There is a significant amount of information available from newspapers, books, reporters and personal accounts of immigrants to justify characterizing Homeland Security as being a racist institution. Some writers and journalist use felicitous words such as nativism or prefer to defend xenophobic policies by proclaiming them as necessary in order to safeguard American lives, but despite being cloaked in misleading semantics these dubious actions are obviously rooted in centuries of sublimated racism.

To paraphrase a popular cliché: a stinkweed by any other name still smells as sour.

This post was inspired, in part, by a recent New York Times article posted on July 25, 2009 entitled: Racist Web Posts Traced to Homeland Security.

An article appeared in a local newspaper about the DHS raid of a migrant farm in Western New York that elicited a rash of racist commentary, some of which were traced in an investigation to Homeland Security computers.

This is not the first time Homeland Security and their employees have been accused of racism. In 2003, two African American women were terminated from their jobs and replaced by two white men. Subsequently they placed a lawsuit against the agency charging it with discrimination.

Indeed, when reviewing the hiring practices of Homeland Security it becomes clear that Caucasians are preferred over minorities. Over sixty percent of employees are Caucasian*

Creating a workforce comprised of mainly white employees indoctrinated into American exceptionalism, the supremacy of Western civilization, xenophobia-- and who are not familiar with the lifestyles and vulnerabilities of an immigrant population they have jurisdiction over can easily translate into callous and racist acts. When these ideologies are institutionalized it becomes easy to blur the line between safeguarding American interests and crossing over into dangerous territory and engaging in blatant expressions of racism.

One has to wonder how much desensitization must occur in a workplace to render racist actions as commonplace and benign.

One such instance occurred in 2007. A Homeland Security employee wore a blackface/prison costume with long dreadlocks to work for Halloween. He was awarded a prize by Julie Myers, Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. After a significant amount of criticism surfaced after posting pictures on an internet site , she later apologized to the National Association of African Americans in DHS for the incident, but not before damage was done to the agency’s already tarnished reputation.

It should come as no surprise that Homeland Security participates in racism. The Immigration and Naturalization Service-- once an independent agency (now incorporated into the larger division of Homeland Security)-- has a long history of racist policies and comments made by officials. The following quotes are from a former Western Regional Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in the 1980’s:

“Harold Ezell, was infamous for comments made about ‘illegal aliens’—that they should be ‘caught, skinned and fried.’ Senator Dennis DeConcini reportedly complained that Ezell used the term “wets”, apparently a shortened version of the pejorative term ‘wetbacks’, to refer to undocumented immigrants seeking to cross the Rio Grande.”*


There is presupposition towards discrimination and racism in an institution that is designed to function simultaneously as a public service agency that naturalizes the newest influx of mostly black/brown immigrants into American society and a militarized retribution unit that imprisons and deports the same group of immigrants. Militarization and public service do not make compatible bedfellows simply because they operate under different assumptions and aspire to dissimilar goals. One of the two must become dominant-- and it is obvious which one triumphed based on the large number of charges and lawsuits that have been filed against Homeland Security because of their aggressive and racists tactics.

The moral panic that ensued against Muslims after September 11th created ample opportunity to engage in government sanctioned racism. Despite the fact that the perpetrators were Arab Muslims, this racial profiling ensnared all black or brown minorities. This can be witnessed in the numerous workplace raids that target businesses that hire substantial numbers of minority workers. Unfortunately, many U.S. citizens, and green card holders have also been “mistakenly” lassoed in these raids and have been subjected to interrogations, detentions and sometimes even deportations simply based on the color of their skin. This posturing is also observable in the numbers of black and brown people who are detained and interrogated at airports.

Racism is also evident within the many rogue local police offices that enforce immigration law with Homeland Security’s blessings. Without provocation, many immigrants are pulled over in their cars by police officers and asked for documentation that proves they are in the country legally. Their only transgression is looking like an illegal alien: which normally requires being a black or brown minority. If they are unable to provide documentation they are locked up in jail cells. Such aggressive policies sanctioned infamously by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona are currently being investigated by the Department of Justice, but not until numerous abuses of power and rampant racial profiling have destroyed many immigrants lives.

We must stop concealing racist agendas under the pretense of national security. There is no evidence that indicates that immigrants, illegal or otherwise, commit more crimes than citizens. Many studies have showed the opposite to be true. We cannot hold entire groups of black and brown people accountable for the terrorist activities of a few degenerate individuals. Racism lives whether we label it xenophobia, nativism or ethnic cleansing.

To use another cliché in its original form: If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.



· (Source) http://www.citizenorange.com/orange/2008/02/photos-surface-of-ice-employee.html


Other sources:

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2009/07/26/20090726dhs-suit0726.html

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/67442/homeland_security_employee_wore_%22blackface%22_costume_at_work_all_day/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/nyregion/25immig.html?_r=2

http://www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/40069prs20090630.html

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/aug/18/me-land-law-amendment-targetsvestigesofracism/

A Clarification on my "memorials" of deportees

Recently, a reader contacted me about my blog post entitled Memorial #1: Ansar Mahmood. He was unhappy with a few things about my post: specifically the use of the word "memorial". In addition, he felt I was not doing Ansar justice by putting undue emphasis on his short residency in The U.S.

The entire note is as follows:

"hate to be pedantic... but those definitions are for 'memorial' as an adjective. You're using it as a noun. Mr Mahmood was shamefully treated. But you seem to be talking about him as if he were dead. As far as we know, he's alive and well and living in Pakistan. I just don't think you're doing him justice by talking of him as though his whole life were based on residency in the USA, and now all his promise and potential have been cruelly destroyed. They haven't - they're just happening somewhere else. The loss is America's, not his."

As to his first critique, regarding the use of the word “memorial” I will admit my mistake of using the incorrect "adjective" definition. However, there is nothing inherent within either definition that states the subject of the memorial has to be dead. In fact, the noun definition reflects more closely the actually purpose of the post: to remember the life of an immigrant that was unjustly treated. This is how the Miriam Webster online dictionary defines the noun of memorial:

“1: something that keeps remembrance alive: as a: monument b: something (as a speech or ceremony) that commemorates c: keepsake, memento”

I could have chosen to use the non-descript word of "remembrance" but that has no power behind it. Memorial is a "power word", it gets noticed: simply because it is normally associated with a death and/or a tragedy. Any writer worth his or her salt knows when to use a "power word" to get people's attention. All writers are manipulators of language: some are better at it than others.

In essence, the purpose of my post was to keep the memory of Ansar alive in the collective memory. There are thousands of immigrants being deported from America's shores yearly, each with their own unique story. Each year the numbers of deportations increase. Millions of taxpayer dollars are being funneled into this expensive "cleansing" and the American people have a right to know how this money is being used and to whom it is being used against. Unfortunately, most of these deportations are done secretly and only a handful of individual stories are known, written or talked about. Changes to immigration policy will only occur if people know something is wrong. Our immigration system is clearly broken!

I am attempting to take an abstract concept--deportation--and make it personal. Deportations do not happen to ideologies and concepts: they happen to individual people. Additionally, they do not happen just to the deportee, but to the family, friends and the community at large. To think otherwise is unrealistic. Any immigrant that comes to our country forges close relationships. Once a deported individual is sent away, those ties are oftentimes severed forever.

I never intended to imply that Mr. Mahmood was dead. But there are consequences inherent in becoming labeled a deportee. These consequences can result in actually physical death and/or-- what I refer to-- as "symbolic deaths." Bear with me, I assure you that I can explain.

There are serious ramifications of being deported --even once the person arrives in their country of origin. For instance, in countries like Pakistan, Haiti and many Middle Eastern countries once the individual is escorted off the plane by American DHS officials and handed over to the homeland authorities an even worse situation can unfold. In these countries, the deportee is oftentimes taken into custody, interrogated, abused and oftentimes thrown in prison.

In Haiti, for example, the majority of native deportees suffer from exposure, untreated medical conditions and starvation in Haitian prisons. Amnesty International has pleaded with American leaders to stop the unprecedented deportation of Haitian immigrants because of the gross human rights violations in the prisons there. For most Haitian deportees, being deported from America is a death sentence.

When Khalid is actually deported to India, the DHS officers will handcuff him and escort him off the plane and hand him over to Indian officials. These officials will look at Khalid's passport and see the word "deported" stamped on the first page. A likely scenario will play out in the following way: Khalid will be taken to a locked office within the airport and interrogated about the circumstances involving the deportation. Khalid will relate the long complicated story of his conviction, the fight through the immigration judicial system, his marriage to an American citizen and at the end of the struggle—being deported.

With any luck, maybe the officials will let Khalid go. Unfortunately, many Indian deportees find themselves rotting away in Indian prisons. These unlucky deportees are those who have no family ties in India and therefore no way to pay the extortion fee imposed on them by corrupt Indian officials.

Luckily, Khalid's brother should be in India at this time. His brother secured a 10 year VISA ( a VISA that allows unlimited entrance into the United States ) and commonly travels back and forth between India and the U.S. for training purposes. Hopefully, when Khalid is actually deported his brother will be in India and be able to travel to the prison, pay any fees required and Khalid will be allowed to accompany his brother to the safety of his home. Only then will Khalid be able to pick up the pieces of his life and start anew. For some Indian deportees the scenario is not so easy.

In conclusion, I was not trying to over-emphasize Mr. Mahmood's brief residency in the United States. I will not contradict the fact that many deportees can live happy, productive lives outside of American borders. People can live a good life in various countries all over the world. Despite myths propagated to the contrary, America does not corner the market on happiness, liberty and freedom. In fact, a recent study compared the relative happiness and contentment of citizens from various countries around the world, Americans ranked well behind individuals from Scandinavian countries. I will leave it to the reader to discern why, but it’s an interesting illumination none-the-less.

Ansar, like so many poor immigrants from unstable countries, wanted desperately to come here. He dreamed of arriving in this "land of opportunity". From his meager capital he obtained a green card and came to America. He secured employment and was even able to send some money back to his relatives. By all accounts, he thrived in his new environment and was content. It is not a stretch to say that his quality of life was significantly better here than in Pakistan.

That is why immigrants risk everything to come here. It is not my aim, in this particular post, to debate whether this naiveté and optimism is justified or whether it lives up to the hype. That is a subject for a subsequent post. It is only necessary to illuminate that America is the beacon of hope and prosperity for millions of downtrodden people across the globe.

Ansar came to America in the hopes of finding a better, more stable and productive life. However, when he was deported all this was destroyed. What he experienced was a "symbolic death" that is no less devastating. His hopes, aspirations, relationships and sense of security all “died” the day he was put on the plane to return him to Pakistan.

I do not believe that Ansar would take offense to my "memorial" I feel the only way that I can do justice to Ansar is to make sure that he is remembered. Indeed, the deportation of a good hardworking man like Ansar is a great loss to America. But to downplay the devastation of deportation is doing a gross injustice to the memory-- indeed to the living, breathing individual known as Ansar Mahmood-- and to the thousands of people whose lives are destroyed by deportation every year.

To think that Ansar, or any deportee, can return to his country carefree, unscathed, and simply pick up the where they left off is unadulterated ignorance. It doesn't work that way. I will continue to write about various deportees in my “memorials” to facilitate some empathy and understanding from a public who is largely unaware of their plight. I am giving voice to the voiceless.

There is a madness to my method…er...method to my madness.

A White wacko talks about racism

Hopefully the title got your attention!!

I've wanted to talk about racism in my blog for awhile, but I've been avoiding the issue for various reasons. One of those reasons is because talking about race is an uncomfortable subject. It’s nearly impossible for a black person to discuss race with a white person, without suffering the consequences of being labeled a whiner, or an overly sensitive black person with a chip on his/her shoulder.

It’s a tad bit easier for me, as a fellow Caucasian, to breech the subject with white people, simply because there is a certain amount of authenticity and authority vested to me by the dominant culture--that black/brown people generally aren’t allowed. In other words-- I can talk to white people about race and discrimination without fearing the backlash of a physical or verbal assault or, perhaps even social alienation. The worst that might happen is I’ll be labeled a wacko. Ah well…what else is new??

A substantial percentage of white people don't understand that black and brown people don’t talk about racism as an abstract concept like white people do. Rather, racism is a phenomenon that they live within every day of their lives. Racism is a defining element in their experiences and they cannot just simply dismiss and ignore it once they walk out of their African American studies class. I know this because I have seen racism played out firsthand since being with Khalid.

The current news story about the African-American professor, Henry Louis Gates, who was arrested in his own home, accused of burglary and then arrested on charges of disorderly conduct inspired me to plunge into the unsettled waters of racism. If you haven’t read or heard about it yet(unlikely), here’s a link:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/07/21/2009-07-21_charges_dropped_against_harvard_professor_henry_louis_gates_jr.html

I have heard most of the controversies surrounding this incident, and have become uncomfortable with how the media is trying to downplay and soften the significance of this event. In my opinion, this was racial profiling in its most blatant form. It is faulty logic to assume, that because the officer involved taught classes about racial profiling he could not possibly be guilty of racism. A wolf in sheep's clothing can still indulge a hankering for lamb chops.

Racial profiling is not some mythological creature that appears occasionally on the silver screen, it is a living entity that breathes behind our beloved flag of liberty. Normally, racism is not a conspicuous presence within our contemporary society: as it was in earlier eras -- and while it is no longer publically condoned it has slipped begrudgingly underground. Racial acts are commonly cloaked behind disparaging rhetoric and deflected by people who do not admit that marginalization and exploitation are necessary in an ever-expanding, super-capitalistic economy.

I will give an example: Khalid and I went to Chili’s Restaurant in Syracuse a few weeks ago. As I am relating this story please keep in mind the restaurant was not at all busy! The white waitress finally came by to greet us and gave us some menus. Her greeting consisted of a very begrudging welcome to Chili’s. She basically threw the menus at us and quickly departed. After another long absence she came back and took our order. We waited another half an hour before the cook brought out our plates of food. Personally, we did not see the waitress for the rest of the evening, despite the fact that she was very cordial and accommodating to the white couple behind us. In order to get the check, Khalid had to find another waitress and ask for the manger. It was small comfort that we ate for free that night.

A white couple would not have worried that the poor service was a result of their race. A white couple would have assumed the poor service was a result of being overworked or having a bad day. They would have paid their bill, left a small tip and gone on with the rest of their day. For minorities it is not that easy. Within the background always lies the possibility that the events that unfold within their lives are caused by racism. Is the rude woman who waited on me racist or is she just having a bad day? Is the police officer who pulled me over practicing racial profiling? Did I get incarcerated because of my race? Did my co-worker get the promotion because he’s white? The questions go on and on.

There are no easy answers and oftentimes no clear cut distinctions in contemporary American society about what is racist. There are always explanations and excuses to cover up racist agendas. The only thing that is certain: racism is not dead—nor is it sleeping.

Art as immigration reform activism

I Want You... Out of the country --at gunpoint!

Art has always been an important and integral part of my life. I can not remember a time when I haven't been inspired by a color, a story, or a particular image on t.v. or housed within the sanctified pages of a picture book. Beautiful things have never failed to capture my imagination.

When I was younger, I was under the impression that art had to be aesthetically pleasing, refined and pleasant to gaze at. It wasn't until I went to Buffalo State College in 1996 that my viewpoints changed slightly. I was majoring in Art Education and took a class with Professor Mary Wyrick. She was an inspiring teacher and challenged my notion that art had to be beautiful. Instead, she made me see that art was about expressing ideas-- first and foremost. A piece of artwork was able to transcend time and place and speak to people on multiple levels all at once. The artist, with a mere flick of a brush could express the same nuance that would take the writer volumes.

Although I realized that art was about ideas, I was still painfully ignorant about the power of art and its ability to challenge ingrained ideas and social mores. Until recently, I had never acknowledged this power. I took a class at Hamilton College last Fall semester entitled Feminist Visual Culture. Through viewing works by artists such as: Judy Chicago, Ghada Amer, Ana Mendieta, Cindy Sherman, Shirin Neshat, and Carolee Schneemann, I realized that art had the power, over time, to create subtle shifts in social consciousness.

Feminist art is not about being "pretty", "conforming" or "safe". Instead, much of it is meant to be "challenging", "controversial" and "activist". This is what makes it dynamic and a catalyst for social and political change. People can become complacent, comfortable and desensitized to their environment: even if that environment is stagnant, corrupt and unhealthy. It takes a shock to the system to get them to wake up.

With that goal in mind, I have started to design a series of art pieces centered around immigration reform. Eventually I will have enough works to show in an exhibit. The two pieces at the top of this page are part of this series. I cannot think of anything more controversial than using the iconic images of Uncle Sam and Lady Liberty to illustrate the irony and discrimination of contemporary U.S. immigration policies.

I hope my writings and artwork will inspire a change in someone's thinking regarding immigrants rights and the need for immigration reform-- and as a result-- changes will be made . This hope gives me power and optimism and sustains me throughout this whole ordeal. Without this hope there is nothing.

Parchment and deceit--Part 2

I started running even before my brain consciously registered the danger. Khalid grabbed my hand and pushed me in front of him. The sudden change in motion caused a momentary loss of balance and I almost fell over a log in the path ahead of me. I quickly regained my physical equilibrium but my emotional state was not as easy to redeem. Something was amiss. The ominous footsteps behind us had ceased. Everything in the courtyard was stagnant and silent. Trouble was close at hand.

Suddenly, darkness descended upon us and I looked towards the sky long enough to see the large silhouette of the dragon flying overhead. The dragon’s body nose-dived and appeared ready to swoop down upon us.

I motioned for Khalid to look up with a twitching hand. I heard an unintelligible exclamation coming from his mouth as he pushed me painfully through and underneath a large hedge of hydrangea bushes.

“We’ve got to get inside that castle” Khalid said, while shaking his head in frustration. “I have to get inside and find the emancipation chamber. That is where I will find the document that proves the King granted me asylum.”

Khalid is a from Caldonian: a small kingdom located in the farthest reaches of the Ander Mountains. Caldonians are feared by my people because they possess a rare ability. They are masters at interpreting body language and perceiving subtle shifts in vocal tones. This sensitivity allows them to uncover deceit and strong emotions.

As a result of their abilities, Caldonians were considered dangerous and a security risk. My home of Wyndsber has a long history of war, strife, and economic calamities-- so the act of scapegoating: blaming a particular group for the kingdom's woes--was not unusual.

About ten years ago the Wyndsber ruler at the time, a ruthless man by the name of King Burrik, made a proclamation that Caledonians were a menace to society and must leave the Kingdom immediately. They were given a choice: either leave voluntarily or be imprisoned and forcibly removed—or worse. Burrik’s propaganda machine worked tirelessly to convince the public that Caldonians were evil deviants that only used their abilities to harm people.

This harsh tactic was necessary because Burrik ignored normal protocol when The High King died. Rather than sending an emissary to fetch the rightful heir of the throne he seized it for himself. He claimed the actual heir had died in battle. The Caldonians in the court uncovered the corruption, verified that the rightful heir was alive and threatened to expose the deceit. Consequently, Burrik did not want his sins to be unveiled by the intrusiveness and inconvenience of any Caledonians so he decided to rid himself of this one small problem.

Subsequently, all Caledonians were publicly executed and a proclamation was issued that demanded all other Caldonians leave the kingdom immediately or face the same fate. Any Caldonians that did not leave: whether from illness, family attachments or compulsion, were detained and placed in prison. The prison conditions were so deplorable that many died of starvation or exposure. Any who survived were rounded up and either killed on the spot or deposited in the treacherous Ander Mountains to die there.

Summoned by the Caldonians, Cantis Nuray--the rightful heir to the throne-- came back from his travels and accused Burrik of seizing the throne without proper authority. Nuray insisted that he was the next in line and he should have been notified. A brutal battle ensued between Burrik’s supporters and Nuray’s. The battle lasted three months and it appeared that Buttrik’s army would be victorious, but suddenly, hundreds of soldier’s became ill and died on the battlefield. Only Nuray’s army was immune. By the end of the month only Burrik and a handful of followers remained. They quickly took shelter within the Obsidian Forest.

Cantis Nuray became Wyndsber’s new regent and a brief period of calm settled over the weary nation. Nuray was a fair and noble ruler and during his short reign peace and prosperity descended on the land. Although King Nuray could not completely overturn Burrik’s old proclamation banning Caldonians from Wyndsber he tried to lessen the effects. Burrik’s propaganda was successful and he had poisoned a substantial percentage of the populace against Caldonians. King Nuray knew that any sudden measure to allow mass migrations into Wyndsber would result in significant uprisings.

Instead, he decided to grant asylum to a few trusted Caldonians he had met and befriended while abroad. Having these Caldonians was helpful to Nuray in many ways. Imagine the advantages of having advisers who can perceive the deceit and manipulations of any enemies to the throne. Eventually, when the fear subsided, Nuray was planning on opening the borders between both kingdoms..

My husband was one of the few Caledonian advisers to King Nuray. He swore an oath before the King and three of his clerics to uphold the honor of the King and to keep all revelations secret. After the ceremony they presented Khalid with an official document that outlined his asylum status. This document was to be kept within the walls of the emancipation chamber and sealed in a vault. Only two keys for the vault were made, one for the King and one for the individual Caldonian.

Caldonians were advised to keep their nationality a secret-- but if a situation arose that revealed their identity, they could appeal to the King and verify their asylum status with the document. The clerics put a charm on the document and the Caledonian so that the asylum status was ensured even if the King Nuray died. No person could kill a Caldonian with asylum status without incurring death himself.

Or, at least that’s what my husband was told—indeed what he thought, until Burrik came back.

A Pleasant Diversion

Since I met Khalid in 2005, we have taken occasional short trips throughout New York State. Despite the precariousness of Khalid’s current immigration status and the obvious day to day angst we experience we have managed to enjoy life and take a few short excursions this summer.

Khalid says it’s important for us to have something to look forward to while in the midst of this immigration nightmare. Even though we never go anyplace fancy, and don’t spend a lot of money the benefits we accrue from these short trips are immeasurable. As a bonus, we get to explore the wonders of our own backyard. As R.E.M. sang in the 80's "Stand in the place where you live."

Until meeting Khalid, I never really knew how beautiful, interesting and unusual New York State is. There are many lovely and extraordinary places to explore, including The Genesee Country Village and Museum, Sonnenburg Gardens and The Farmer’s Museum.

One of the nicest places we’ve visited this summer is Sodus Point, New York. It is near Oswego and located right on Lake Ontario: one the most beautiful lakes in the world. Not that I am biased or anything. I had never heard of this village before meeting Khalid, and without him I may have never discovered what has become one of my favorite places.

Sodus Point consists of a quaint little village on Lake Ontario with wonderful cafes and beautiful vistas. There is a large park that consists of various eateries, beaches, a playground for children, and a large pier with a little lighthouse at the end. The walk to the lighthouse is very nice, however--if you go there beware of rogue waves that cascade over the pier walls and prepare for gusty winds!

While walking on the pier my eyes began to play tricks on me because the visual sensation was akin to being near the ocean. Lake Ontario is so large that you cannot see the other side of the shoreline. The water just fades into the horizon making it appear that you are near the sea and not just a mere lake.

After spending a significant time on the pier and witnessing Khalid’s meager luck at fishing we decided to take a jaunt to The Sodus Point Lighthouse which is located on 7606 N. Ontario Street. The gardens are immaculate and obviously well preened. Many weddings have taken place at this picturesque juncture, with arbors adorned with vines and flowers, mounds of hostas, lilies, and Russian sage all strategically placed in front of the beautiful backdrop of Lake Ontario.

In addition to the beach, pier and the lighthouse there are many beautiful houses in Sodus Point. One of my favorites is a pale yellow and pink Victorian painted lady. If I ever owned a Victorian house this would be the one. I absolutely love the colors and the location. I can see myself sipping pink lemonade on the attached covered gazebo and reading a book--or blogging! It's a nice dream...

There is a beautiful B&B in Sodus Point called The Carriage House. It is a short distance from the lighthouse. I plan on scheduling a stay there for Khalid and I during a weekend in early September. A few days of peace and relaxation will be wonderful and quite necessary before we have to travel to Albany in October!

Memorial #1: Ansar Mahmood

Ansar Mahmood in the Batavia Detention Facility

The Miriam-Webster online dictionary defines memorial as:

1 : serving to preserve remembrance : commemorative 2 : of or relating to memory

With this particular definition in mind I will periodically present the “memorials” of various people who have been deported by the U.S. government. Too often, the voices of these immigrants are quelled by the din of politics, concealment and flawed legalities. The only ones left to remember them are the family members and friends these immigrants have been forced to leave behind.

Memorials usually take place only when a death occurs. But in instances of deportation, holding a commemoration for these brave immigrants is appropriate—and even necessary. When a deportation takes place, the immigrant is ruthlessly ripped from the fabric of the American landscape—in silence and secrecy.

Such cruelty leaves a throbbing hole within the hearts of everyone involved. It is essential that these immigrants are not forgotten, because it is through the contemplation of memory and the awakening of regret that reclamation is facilitated.

The subject of my first memorial is an immigrant by the name of Ansar Mahmood. His story was well known in the Batavia detention facility when my husband was detained in 2004 and it was one of the first instances, other than my husband’s situation, in which I became aware of America’s war on immigrants.

Ansar was a young Pakistani who came to America as a result of winning a green card through an immigration “lottery”. The purpose of lotteries is to allow people from countries with low rates of immigration to come to the United States. The program randomly selects a few lucky winners from thousands of screened applicants who qualify for a green card.

Ansar worked hard as a pizza delivery man while he was in America and sent money regularly to his family back in Pakistan. Despite working many long hours and having little disposable income he was happy in his new homeland. He found the New York countryside to be beautiful and often took short trips to nearby picturesque destinations. Oftentimes, he took a camera along to take pictures of particularly beautiful scenes and send them back to his family in Pakistan.

It was on the recommendation of a customer that Ansar travelled to a reservoir and water treatment plant in the Hudson Valley. It was here that Ansar’s troubles began. On that day, the view was especially lovely as the sun shone brightly on the Catskill Mountains. He asked one of the guards if they could take a picture of him with the reservoir and the mountains behind him. The guard, taking note of Ansar’s accent, surmised that he was Muslim and labeled him as a possible terrorist. The guard notified the police who in turn notified immigration authorities.

He was interrogated by Federal officials who attempted to tie him to terrorist activities and accused him of plotting to poison public water supplies. After a lengthy interrogation, Federal officials had no evidence to back up their hasty allegations. However, in the aftermath of 9/11 and the resulting moral panic directed against Muslims, evidence was not necessary. They were determined to find something in Ansar’s background that warranted the deportation of a green card holder.

Officials found out that Ansar had helped a Pakistani couple find housing and obtain a car. Unbeknownst to Ansar, the couple had overstayed their VISA and was residing in the States illegally. Ansar was charged with harboring illegal aliens, which is a felony and a deportable offense.

I have no idea how they could assume that Ansar knew the couple was illegal. I know from experience that legal status is not something most immigrants are apt to disclose because they can result in stigmatization, shame and sometimes physical danger. But common sense was ignored in favor of only one goal: deporting Ansar by any means necessary.

Ansar tried to fight the deportation through the courts. He had many supporters and even a New York senator who supported him.

“It’s a disgrace,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, who lobbied on behalf of Mr. Mahmood. “Mahood wanted to be an ideal citizen, and he’s the kind of person America should embrace. There is no reason he should be deported.”(New York Times, August 14, 2004)

None of this made any difference. He was placed on a commercial plane with two INS officials and deported to Pakistan. None of Ansar’s friends or supporters were allowed to say good-bye.

In memory of Ansar Mahmood who was deported on August 12, 2004. May he find peace and understanding wherever he may find himself—because he did not find it in The United States of America.

Sources:

http://www.chathampeace.org/old%20index%20the%20first%20web%20page%20use%20as%20back%20up.htm

http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/41654/pizza_deliveryman_hopes_to_stay_in_us/

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/14/nyregion/man-arrested-over-photos-after-9-11-is-deported.html

Eisbrecher

EISBRECHER

My husband never ceases to amaze me. He is one of the most open-minded, easy-going and curious individuals I have ever met. He is never afraid to try new things, or listen to something different. One of the things that attracted me to him is his love of music...and not just any music but a lot of the same music I listen to. Which is nothing short of a miracle: and was a sign that we belong together-- because a substantial percentage of the music I like is obscure. Even when I was a teenager I dismissed the popular bubblegum pop of the 1980's for punk, goth, and industrial. I liked music with a strong bass line and a deep message--or at least unique or artsy. I ignored superficial musical groups that sang exclusively about sex, drugs or pick-up trucks.

I was elated and surprised when, during one of our first road trips together; I was perusing the musical selection on his i-pod and found songs by The Cure, New Order and Marillon! Only a handful of my friends have ever liked the same music I liked, and here was a man--coming from a foreign country half a world away--who liked the same tunes I did. When I inquired about his unusual musical tastes he only laughed and said, "yeah, I got into some of that music while I was in Kuwait and then even more when I was in college."

His answer caught me by surprise because I had not considered the possibility of alternative music being readily available in a country like Kuwait. My ignorance about the world had made me believe that this type of music would only be enjoyed by people in so-called "progressive" Western countries. I was quite happy to have been proven wrong--and that doesn't happen too often! (a-hem...meaning that I am not often happy about being proven wrong. I did not mean that I am seldom proven wrong. Unfortunately, being incorrect is something that happens to me almost daily. Welcome to the human condition!)

Even now, as a 41 year old, I am still "hip" and love to discover the latest musical groups and genres. (Of course using the term "hip" probably proves that I am not!) Recently I have discovered a love for Hindi and Bollywood music. Khalid was so surprised once day when he came home to find me grooving to some new Hindi song. He asked me if I understood any of the lyrics. I regretfully replied: "No. But you don't have to understand the lyrics in order to enjoy the music."

I am also a big fan of the Scandinavian/German symphonic rock scene. Symphonic rock can be described as a fusion between progressive metal and classical music. I realize that these seem like two incompatible musical styles but it actually works quite well. The arrangements are complex, intricate and much more unique then standard rock songs. There is a magical fusion within the symphonic genre because there exists a contrast between the aggressive "masculine" rhythm of the instruments and the beautiful female soprano vocals. Some of the best soprano voices can be heard within symphonic metal: including Liv Kristine of Leave's Eyes, Sharon Den Adel of Within Temptation, Charlotte Wessels of Delain, Sabine Edelsbacher of Edenbridge and Tarja Turunen, formally of the band Nightwish. Every time I listen to them I get shivers down my spine.

Luckily, most of these bands my husband appreciates as well. He likes a lot of songs by Within Temptation and Delain, and even some of the songs by Leave's Eyes. But I was surprised when he commented about a song I played by one of the new bands I discovered by the name of Eisbrecher.

What some people don't know (unless they are a new music fiend like I am) is that Germany is currently one of the most prolific areas for alternative rock music. The music scene has exploded there and many German musical groups are gaining large followings of fans all over the world. Some of them sing in English (like Edenbridge and Xandria) but some-- thankfully sing in their native tongue.

One such band is called Eisbrecher, which in English can be translated as "ice breaker" although I imagine, pronounced slightly differently--maybe "icebricker?" (Ok--well..I don't have to pronounce it correctly to appreciate it.) They are categorized as an industrial band with a hard edge, electronic sound and aggressive beat. Very danceable music..the kind you would hear in a trendy club. The male singer has one of the deepest Bass vocals I have ever heard.

I had played a few of their songs for Khalid and he expressed an liking for them and asked who the band was. I told him and he said he had never heard of them before.I explained that they were from Germany and had just stated to become popular in the States. He liked them so much that the next time I perused his i-pod, he had bought and downloaded some of their songs.

Just to be a wise guy I asked him "Do you understand any of the lyrics?"

He sheepishly smiled at me and replied "No. But you don't have to understand the words to appreciate the music."

Smart alec.....

Casting the first stone...and the second..and the third..

I like Barack Obama. I voted for him and watched the entire inauguration with tears in my eyes and hope within my heart: like millions of other Americans. But recently, I've become concerned about a reoccurring tendency of Obama to lecture other countries about human rights violations, injustice, and torture despite the fact that these vices are common and sanctioned within contemporary American politics. Normally, this wouldn't concern me because this is common political propaganda. But--somehow, all of this self-righteous posturing feels more problematic when coming from the mouth of Barack: a man whose idealistic underpinnings seem sincere. Honestly, before we start criticizing other countries for their intolerance, their injustice, their human rights violations we need to do some serious soul-searching right here at home.

All of this has arisen from the recent Presidential trip to Ghana and the resulting plethora of speech transcripts available on the Internet. I read the following which got my brain shifted into overdrive:

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/07/11/barack-obamas-speech-to-africa/

Although Barack was his usual articulate and pragmatic self, I feel there was one particular section that struck me as particularly vexing:

"You have the power to hold your leaders accountable, and to build institutions that serve the people."

Wow! How about holding our leaders accountable for their actions and start building institutions that serve the people here in the United States rather than intricate bureaucracies that pander to wealthy corporations? Once we have a handle on those noble aspirations then we can rightfully preach to other countries.

Additionally, our former high ideals and priorities as an egalitarian American "democracy" have been lost. Hope and empathy have been replaced by fear and hatred. This can be seen in the recent change in the allotment of national capital. Money that used to be spent on public services: including rehabilitation programs, education and training, financial assistance for low income individuals, and various social programs too numerous to mention, have now been redistributed into programs centered around militarization, security concerns, retribution and punishment. These programs include the ever expanding and profit-centered industrial prison complex, the immigration system that has abandoned any of the previous humanitarian concerns it once had in favor of the criminalization and the deportation of immigrants by the millions, and the oppressive, inefficient and secretive Department of Homeland Security.

How does the "possible" threat of public welfare via terrorism trump the "existing" threats of poverty, disease and marginalization that are a reality for a large percentage of the overall population?

In regards to injustice, I read the following article at the suggestion of one of my friends on Facebook. It is the most obvious example of American injustice I have recently come across. Coincidentally, the victim of this story is Eric Frimpong, a Ghana immigrant and former soccer star who has been accused and convicted of rape. Interestingly enough, he was convicted without ANY physical evidence. How is this possible? The most likely explanation involves the current wave of racism and xenophobia that has gripped the nation. Please read the following ESPN article:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?

One of the most poignant sections of the article were contained in the following quote:

“If his supporters could chime in now, they'd say that the kid in the prison garb has never spoken an unkind word or acted aggressively toward anyone. They would remind the court of the points made at trial: that his accuser was a woman with little memory of what happened that night because of a near-toxic blood alcohol level; that Frimpong's DNA wasn't found on the victim; that semen found on her underwear belonged to a jealous boyfriend, a white student who was never a suspect. They would argue that overzealous law enforcement was determined to nail a high-profile athlete, facts be damned, and that this was the Duke lacrosse case all over again -- except that the defendants in the Duke case were white men from affluent families with the means to navigate America's justice system, unlike Frimpong, who is poor and an immigrant.”

Injustice, torture and human rights violations happen right here in America. We cannot have an authentic dialogue with other nations about injustice, torture or human rights violations unless we actively seek to illuminate and correct transgressions within our own borders or jurisdiction. Until we acknowledge and stop the torture tactics we have used on prisoner's overseas, or immigrants housed unconstitutionally in detention centers across the nation we cannot lecture other nations on their brutalization. Until we identify injustice and racism within our own judicial system we have no right to condemn other culture's for their injustice. We cannot in good conscience express disdain for another nation's human rights violations until we cease militarized aggressions overseas or the systematic marginalization, torture or the denial of basic constitutional rights to immigrants on our shores.

Here is another quote from the article on Eric Frimpong. The speaker is the Caucasian surrogate mother who was sponsoring Eric's stay in America:

"Eric believed in our system," she says. "He believed justice would prevail."

My husband said exactly the same thing to me just before his 2nd circuit court hearing

Shame and hypocrisy

There are a number of English words that I hate. For obvious reasons, "deportation" is one of those words. I also dislike the words "racism", "misogyny", "war" and "access". I'm sure its obvious why I hate the first three words, However, you are probably stymied by the word "access". Why would someone hate the word access? It's quite simple , I use the word fifty times a week in my job at the library, and can never remember how to spell it. I wrote it three times in this paragraph and spelled it wrong all three times. Thank Heaven's for spell check!


But there's another word that tops my list for the most distasteful -- and that is "shame". Shame and I have an intimate relationship. There was a lot of emphasis on "perfection" in the household I grew up in. There was a clear and distinct "wrong way" to do something and a "right way". This affected every activity from talking to an elder, washing the dishes and mowing the lawn. Something was right or it was wrong. Grey areas did not exist. I was always left guessing as how to do things the "right" way. Some things were easy to figure out, such as: don't hit anyone, don't pull the cat's tail, don't touch the stove, etc. But the "indistincts"-- the situations that are predominantly detached from moral or safety considerations and can be approached in a myriad of creative ways--those are the situations that perplexed me and caused me to feel shame. It also didn't help that the correct ways were always in a state of flux.

On the other hand, my parents seemed to know the absolute correct way to handle these situations and oftentimes I got the impression that I handled them the wrong way. The idea that dominated my household was if one veered even slightly from the true and correct path than disaster was imminent.

I do not think that my household was unusual in this strive for perfection. The idea of perfection and piousness is intricately woven into the fabric of American life. Blame our Puritan beginnings if you need an explanation. However, there is an inherent contradiction to all this perfection seeking. Far too often, this perfection and righteousness is only reserved for certain segments of the population.The wealthy and powerful are exempt from these intrusive and stifling restriction as they are free to exploit, demean and oppress millions of people all over the world, while poor, working class and minority populations are forced to conform to a unrealistic conception of morality and perfection.

I witness my husband struggling to deal with the negative affects of shame because of the immigration nightmare he is immersed in. The excessive conviction, not being familiar with American laws, the time spent in detention, and the deportation mandate are all factors that have caused shame. My husband has dealt with this emotion in a positive manner and has never allowed himself to wallow in self-pity, place blame or get angry.

But shame can work in insidious ways within the human psyche and no mater how constructively you think you are handling it it can become unhealthy. Early on, my husband and I had adapted to this shame by withdrawing: withdrawing from family and friends-- in an attempt to mask it . If we don't talk about, don't admit what’s going on we can forget it. But, it doesn't work this way.

Both my husband and I are extremely private people. Not because we have something to hide, but because that is how we were brought up and how our brains are wired. We are both devote introverts and absolutely abhor being the center of attention. So, its quite ironic that we should both be at the apex of an immigration judicial case that has caused a certain amount of controversy and frustration for the U.S. government. I oftentimes catch myself thinking about how often our names have come up within the bolted doors of Homeland Security, a senator's office or even possibly the Oval office --and shudder. There resides nothing within my -- my husband's personality or lifestyle that should have elicited such attention. Regardless of whether we wanted it or not--deserved it or not, we have the attention of Homeland Security.

Eventually, I grew tired of being rendered mute, frozen in shame and decided to speak about it: at work, at immigration conferences, with friends and with anyone who would listen. I even got over my substantial fear of public speaking and starting talking about it in college classrooms and conferences. In the beginning; my goal was distinct: to educate people about the current wave of xenophobia that is sweeping the nation and obtain some help for my husband.

But recently it has shifted slightly. Although I still want to educate people and encourage people to support immigration reform; while also helping my husband, I also feel the necessity to silence the shame that hovers menacingly in the background of our lives.

According to the U.S. immigration judicial system, the night my husband was threatened in 1993 he should have collapsed passively to the asphalt and let the individuals who menacingly approached him hit and beat and perhaps even kill him. This, in their eyes, would have been the "correct" and "righteous" solution to my husband's situation. This is nonsense. The natural reaction of any human to a life threatening situation is self preservation and individuals thus threatened will find any way to survive.

But, according to the U.S. government, apparently minorities and immigrants aren't granted this right.

Should my husband feel ashamed about what he did that night. Shame...no not at all. Maybe regret...but not shame. He did what he needed to do in order to survive. Should the U.S. government feel shame regarding the horrible way they have treated my husband? Absolutely-- without hesitation-- and don't waste a minute.

By the way-- another English word I despise is the word "hypocrisy".

The Perfect Immigrant

My grandfather was an immigrant. His name was Garnet Higgins and he was an important man. Of course, important is a relative word. To be specific--he was an important man within the confines of the little town of Sauquoit, New York and the surrounding rural area. You see, he was the only doctor within miles who still made house calls. A doctor who made house calls well into the 1960's was a rarity, much like a precious jewel—hence the name Garnet. In addition, he was one of the few doctors who tended to the poor immigrants, farmers and disabled in the area; regularly accepting produce, eggs and the occasional chicken as "payment" for his services. As a young girl, my mother fondly remembers seeing stacks of food piled behind the pantry doors, given in appreciation for services my grandfather provided.

Even today, when I mention my grandfather’s name in a large group of elderly people there are inevitably some who remember him and speak of him fondly. Just by being his granddaughter my social prestige is elevated within any group that recalls his name. It is astounding to me, that 42 years after his death, people still remember him vividly and describe him as a kindhearted, respectful, unselfish and elegant gentleman.

But there was a dark side to my grandfather. Despite being a personable, kind, and a capable doctor, he was also an alcoholic. He never drank while he was working, but after a long day of taking care of anxious mothers, colicky babies, the abused, infirm and chronically ill, he would seek sanctuary within the walls of a local bar. Sometimes he would not come home to his wife and three daughters until late at night when everyone was asleep.

Why did he turn to alcohol? I have no clear answers. Obviously, it wasn't something the family was interested in exploring. Alcoholism, along with a host of other personal vices, is veiled behind the facade of polite society. Perhaps he was trying to blunt the dissatisfaction he felt for a career he had no passion for. His parents wanted him to go to medical school, but Garnet wanted to do something more creative. By all accounts, he was an accomplished classical pianist. He had dreams of touring the world and playing his beloved music in front of appreciative audiences, celebrities and world leaders. Unfortunately, his parents thought such an aspiration was impractical and coerced him into going to medical school in the United States.

Maybe he was unhappy in his home life. After taking care of numerous people in the community maybe it was just too much to come home and deal with the needs of a demanding wife and three young daughters. There are a million possible reasons for alcoholism.

Although my grandfather was a good man and a productive member of the community-- he was not perfect. No one is. Each of us have done reckless, stupid, immoral and hurtful things or had to make tough choices that go against the mores of society. However, within this contemporary rhetoric about immigration reform there is a lot of talk about what kind of immigrants deserve to become a part of American life. Unfortunately, this definition is a narrow one and not many immigrants—or even American citizens-- would fit into.

These "perfect immigrants" are illusory constructs. They do not exist. No immigrant is free of "complications". An immigrant's life is a series of vulnerabilities, hardships and marginalization. These are intensified if the immigrant has dark skin, speaks a different language, or comes from a non-European culture. In order to survive and provide for their families some immigrants are forced to make hard decisions that put them at odds with the law: laws that are unnecessarily harsh, oftentimes arbitrary and always contradictory. This includes immigrants who cross the border in order to make a living wage, are compelled to join their relatives in the States without inspection or asylum seekers who buy forged documents to enter the United States-- because if they used their own identities the government’s they are fleeing from would likely catch, imprison and kill them. All of these instances are considered crimes within the U.S. immigration judicial system and considered deportable offenses regardless of any mitigating circumstances.

Based on these stringent guidelines, it is quite possible that if my grandfather lived in today’s American society he would be considered an imperfect immigrant and would be deported. All the good he did as a physician, all the positive works he did in the community would be rendered irrelevant. Instead of being an important and intregal member of American society, he would have become disposable.

What all this means for us...

As a result of this legal labyrinth my husband is considered inadmissible which means he is unable to adjust his status to legal permanent resident. Even though he is not deportable based on the conviction, through the stealthy flick of a magic wand the immigration judge determined he was deportable based on his VISA overstay. That is what his deportation mandate says: "deportable due to overstay violation." He can't rectify his VISA overstay because he is inadmissible based on his "crime" (i.e attempt at self preservation) which is considered a "particularly serious crime". It goes around in a circle: overstay----particularly serious crime---denied asylum---inadmissible---can't adjust status--overstay, etc: with no way to get out of the loop.

I recently spoke to a reporter from California who was flabbergasted that he was being deported based on an overstay violation yet he was married to an American citizen. Apparently, she is familiar with a lot of Mexican immigrant cases in which the individuals had overstayed their VISA's but had been allowed to stay because they are married to U.S. citizens. I had no explanations for her, other than the circle metaphor I wrote about in the previous paragraph.

She kept asking if he had ever left the United States and tried to re-enter without inspection. I told her "no" at least three times. And then she couldn't believe that he was being deported based on overstay and not on the conviction. I explained to her that the one conviction of reckless endangerment is not a deportable offense. I told her I would be happy to send copies of official documents that corroborate what I was saying. At the end of the conversation she said that his case is unlike any she has ever encountered and that basically it was too complicated for her but she would pass the story onto a co-worker in New York.

The honest truth about Khalid's situation is it has not followed any predictable or standard format for immigration cases. I believe the reason for this is because he is Muslim and has dark skin. I have done enough research and read enough books to confirm my hypothesis. Despite the experiences of the reporter in California, there are numerous cases of Muslim men, married to American citizens, who have been deported based on overstay alone. Oftentimes, the man has not overstayed and is a legal permanent resident, or has a green card pending but is deported anyway. There is a documentary entitled Out of Status that outlines just such a case. If you can get it I recommend viewing it--it will knock your socks off.

Khalid was simply at the wrong place (U.S.) at the wrong time (2001)and was caught up in the moral panic that ensued against Muslims shortly after 9/11. Based on his name, where he came from and his religion--and not on who he actually was-- he was labelled as a possible terrorist. When Homeland Security found out otherwise it was too late. The damage had been done, too many mistakes had already been made and the case had gone too far for them to admit they were wrong. The cards were stacked against Khalid the first time he went before an immigration judge. Once he was deemed deportable it did not matter how much money Khalid spent or what his lawyers said or tried to undue, he would never be able to shake that horrible label.

As far as lawyers go, they have been impotent at best. I honestly don't think most immigration lawyers have the knowledge or appropriate experience to deal with a case as complex as Khalid's. We have been told different things from different lawyers on what Khalid's status as inadmissible means. Some have told us that he cannot file his waivers or the paperwork that would allow him to adjust his status to that of legal permanent resident here in the United States. Instead, he would have to travel to India and file the paperwork with the Indian consulate. Then the State department would have the option of denying it and making Khalid wait another 1-3 years.

Yet, another lawyer said that because Homeland Security misplaced his passports he does have the option of filing for an adjustment of status. But it would be a long shot. A better option would be to hire a lawyer to overturn the conviction. Of course, this would require excessive amounts of money, that honestly, we just don't have.

Another possibility; and by the way, this is not coming from a lawyer but rather a personal suspicion (not unreasonable in light of how difficult my husband's case has been): the State department could refuse to let him back in the country at all. This is despite the fact that he qualifies for a waiver stating he is eligible because it has been over 15 years since the conviction. Mercy, do the complications ever end???

The few positive aspects of all this include the following: Khalid came to the States legally, has a social security number, a work permit, has been paying taxes, plus he’s married to a U.S. citizen. This should work in our favor! Because of these factors he should not be barred from re-entering the normal 10-20 years undocumented immigrants normally are(immigrants who enter without papers and/or without inspection). But then again—his case has not followed standard procedures: so it is nearly impossible to predict what will happen.

So..what does this all mean for us? We are kept guessing at what our future holds. We cannot make plans to buy a house or have a family. We have to show up at Homeland Security at intervals of time, scheduled at their discretion. It could be monthly or every three months. We cannot go away on vacation outside of New York for more than 3 days without notifying Homeland Security. It's possible our phones are being monitored. We are living in a soft cage--but a cage none-the-less. In essence, what all this means is we cannot really plan our future because we don't know if we have one.

Khalid's Life: Part II

When Iraq invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990, Khalid’s family fled their home and left everything behind. Family members scattered to various countries seeking safety. One sister eventually went back to Kuwait after several years only to find the family’s home destroyed by heavy Iraqi artillery.

As a result of the war his father had lost his job and could no longer finance Khalid’s education. Consequently, Khalid was left without a homeland to return to and the grim prospect of dropping out of college to fend for himself as best he could. His father, fearing for his son’s safety, encouraged Khalid to stay in the United States, at least until there was a stable home to return to. That time never came.

In 1991 he moved from Oklahoma to Utica, New York. While in Utica, he obtained employment as a taxi driver. However, Khalid soon realized that working as a taxi driver in Utica in the early 1990’s was a hazardous profession. Many taxi drivers were assaulted and robbed and there was at least one documented fatality.
At 12:30 on a summer night in 1993, while filling out some paperwork in his cab, he was threatened by four individuals: individuals that Khalid felt meant him physical harm.

In order to defend himself he shot a gun into the air. Unfortunately, Khalid was only familiar with Oklahoma’s permissive gun laws and was not aware that New York state required guns to be registered. Regardless, his intention was never to hurt anyone; he merely wanted to scare them away. Indeed, no one was hurt, nor was any property damaged. The police report confirms that he was approached and harassed by a group of people-- two of whom had previous convictions. Ultimately, this information was disregarded but significance was attached to the firing of an unregistered gun.

He fully cooperated with the police but despite this he was arrested and taken into custody. When the District Attorney agreed to lower the charges to 3rd degree reckless endangerment, a minor infraction that did not result in jail time, but the presiding judge refused to take the plea. Thankfully, the gun violation was dropped but my husband was charged with 1st degree reckless endangerment. He served 4 months of his 6 month sentence due to good behavior.

After his release, Khalid was looking forward to putting the conviction behind him. Unfortunately, fate had other plans. After 9/11, fear seeped into the dark crevices in American’s psyches and secured its predatory talons into our quaking flesh. Consequently, many Americans concluded if a few extremists can be callous enough to take innocent lives, than by extension, all Muslims must be dangerous. Unfortunately, this is an assumption based on fear and ignorance and has been exploited by American leaders to expand their own Imperialistic agenda, and is not based on empirical fact.

In retribution, the United States government began a systematic and intense operative in removing Muslim and Arab immigrants from this country. Although many were in the United States illegally, the assault was also felt by legal immigrants and even U.S. citizens with Muslim and Arab backgrounds.

In 2001, my husband was unmarried, Muslim and had residential ties to Kuwait: one of the flagged countries suspected of housing terrorists. As a result of these factors and his electronic expertise, Khalid fit the profile the U.S. government implemented for identifying suspected terrorists.

After 2001, Khalid became immersed in a legal immigration nightmare. The judge presiding over Khalid’s original immigration case determined that he was deportable based on his one conviction of reckless endangerment. If reckless endangerment was considered an aggravated felony than the judge would have been correct. However, reckless endangerment is considered a crime of moral turpitude. In order for a crime of moral turpitude to be considered a deportable crime, the individual in question would have to commit one crime of moral turpitude within five years of arriving in the States or-- failing to qualify in that regards-- would need to commit two crimes of moral turpitude. My husband’s situation did not qualify as deportable based on these criteria.

Consequently, my husband remanded this decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals. The BIA agreed that the one crime of moral turpitude is not deportable. Additionally, they determined that he was eligible for asylum, a form of relief the immigration judge denied him-- unless his crime was considered a particularly serious crime. Subsequently, the immigration judge proclaimed that Khalid’s crime was a particularly serious crime and therefore, he was denied asylum and considered deportable.

Once again, Khalid appealed the decision to the BIA. They agreed it was a particularly serious crime, which denied him asylum, but did not concur deportability based on the conviction. Despite the BIA’s reluctance in issuing a deportation mandate, my husband was apprehended at his home in 2003 and deposited in a detention facility in Batavia New York. He languished in detention for over eight months, despite having legal papers, a valid passport and repeatedly imploring the detention officers to return him to India. During this unconstitutional imprisonment, Khalid lost his livelihood, his freedom and his house.

To digress to legal explanations, the usage of the term “particularly serious crime” is predominately an ambiguous designation. An unfortunate consequence of the 2nd circuit decision in my husband’s case is the ability of immigration judges to apply this designation to any conviction, even without evidence of violence, criminal intent or premeditation. Although this law could be applied to any immigrant, it was most often utilized against Muslims and Arabs.

Indeed, this tendency to single out this particular ethnic population continued in the passing of other security measures including the absconder apprehension initiative, and the Muslim immigrant registration process. The Migration Policy Institute conducted a survey of Muslims detained after 9/11 entitled: America’s Challenge: Domestic Security, Civil Liberties and National Unity after September 11th. They found the overall deportations of Muslims increased substantially in the years following the tragedy of 9/11.

Fears of deportations and the implementation of ethnic specific laws effectively alienated most Muslims from their communities and severely restricted their lives. The report explains in the following excerpt:

“As a general immigration enforcement measure, the absconder apprehension initiative is legitimate and important. However, after September 11 the government changed the character of the program to make it nationality-specific. This has marginal security benefits, while further equating national origin with dangerousness, although stepped-up absconder apprehension efforts are eventually to encompass all nationalities, this has not happened so far.”


There is no indication that any of the men who were deterred at detention centers were actually a menace to American society. The majority of detainees were non-violent, had family ties in the States and had been residents for a considerable amount of time. They do not fit the established profile of a real terrorist. As the report discusses:

“Most importantly, from our research it appears that the government’s major successes in apprehending terrorists have not come from post-September 11 detentions but from other efforts such as international intelligence initiatives, law enforcement cooperation, and information provided by arrests made abroad. A few noncitizens detained after September 11 have been characterized as terrorists, but the charges brought against them were actually for routine immigration violations or unrelated crimes.”

The actual result of these measures has not resulted in a safer country. Instead, we have created a society that is alienated, fragmented and unnecessarily fearful and distrustful of each other. Rather than safety, these legal statutes have resulted in instability and the eradication of numerous personal liberties. The Migration Policy Institute explains:

“The government’s use of immigration law as a primary means of fighting terrorism has substantially diminished civil liberties and stigmatized Arab- and Muslim-American communities in this country. These measures, which were primarily targeted at Muslims, have diminished the openness of U.S. society and eroded national unity.”

The problem with this stigmatization is that people operate under the illusion that it is easy to identify the enemy. The underlying assumption remains: If Muslims are inherently evil and are easy to identify, with their conspicuous facial hair and strange clothing; it will be easy to banish them from our country. Only then will we be safe. This sounds eerily familiar. In times of crises, many civilizations have implemented similar magical and dangerous thinking.

One does not need to go far back into America’s history to find such an example. Consider, for instance, the practice of sending thousands of Japanese-Americans to internment camps during World War II. Now, after years of reflection, most Americans would agree this was not the right thing to do. In fact, many Japanese interned were later awarded monetary compensation as a symbol of America’s regret.

We’ve deluded ourselves into thinking that evil dons a readily identifiable mask. Evil doers wear peculiar clothing and speak strange languages. We don’t want to admit that evil is elusive. We want comfort in an uncertain world so we concoct a fictional reality where we can identify “the other” as the cause of our suffering and uncertainty. As long as our attention is exclusively occupied by eradicating this evil then we don’t have to look at the reality before us. Evil dons many masks and unlike humans, it does not discriminate.

Khalid's Early Life

My husband does not speak often about his life before arriving in the United States. Although I shouldn't speak for him-- I surmise that life was rough for his family for various reasons. They were Indian immigrants residing in an alien Arabic landscape with different customs, language and religious observations. Even though they were Muslim (except for his mother who was Christian)I'm sure the interpretation of Islam was slightly different in India then in a traditional Arabic nation. Such circumstances can make a person--or family-- feel vulnerable, alone and anxious.

Additionally, Khalid expresses a certain amount of detachment from his Mother and Father--partly as a result of the forced separation and also based on his upbringing. His father was a stern man and believed in bringing his children up with a strict interpretation of Islam. Khalid was forced to don a professional, pious attitude at all times, even wearing a suit to school and attending prayer the required 5 times per day--every day.

His mother was a traditional Indian woman who probably had far too much to do; after taking care of six children and a husband-- then to focus too much attention exclusively on her 2nd oldest child.

Please understand--I am in no way expressing any disdain for Islam as a belief-system. Islam is a peace-loving religion and I have had the privilege of befriending many lovely Muslim people. I have respect for Islam as well as Christianity and Judaism--even though I choose to worship differently.

To get back to the main point...Khalid left India at the age of six and relocated with his family to Kuwait City, Kuwait. His father was a civil engineer who found ample employment in Kuwait as a result of the fledgling oil industry. With his father's new found success the family was able to afford a comfortable home, a large American made car and other small luxuries. Luxuries that would not have been obtainable in India

For an intelligent and academically-minded youngster like Khalid, the household was too chaotic for doing any sustained studying, so he would go next door to one of the empty company sponsored homes, sneak in and complete his homework in refreshing silence.

He showed an early aptitude for electronic tinkering. Khalid often relates the story of one of the first times he showed such an aptitude: an instance that got him into a lot of trouble with his father. Sometime in the early 1980's, when boom boxes were at their peak of popularity, his father proudly purchased an advanced specimen and presented it to his excited family. Khalid was completely mesmerized by the electronic device, so when his father was occupied elsewhere, Khalid took it--and dismantled it in an effort to figure out how it worked. Unfortunately, his electronic expertise was unrefined at this juncture and he was unable to put it back in working order. Obviously, his father was just a tad unhappy when he came home to see his precious music player in disarray.

When Khalid turned 18, he applied to various American universities for electrical engineering. Out of the three that accepted him, his father encouraged him to attend Oklahoma State University because the city had a cohesive and substantial Muslim community. He secured a student VISA and arrived in Oklahoma in 1987. After acclimating to the culture of an American university he obtained good grades and found a supportive community. He was planning on spending four years in the States and then upon securing his degree, return to Kuwait and exercise his new found skills. Unfortunately, due to various circumstances, that were completely out of his control, Khalid's plans went awry. More on this in a subsequent post.

A True-Blue American

Khalid and I spent a wonderful Fourth of July at Pierre and Donna's house, eating hot dogs and hamburgers, sipping homemade concord grape wine, socializing with great people and simply relaxing after a stressful week. We met a lovely couple, Lorraine and Lee, and Lorraine gave me advice on how to get my art shown in a gallery. She is a successful local artist and her work is shown in art venues across the state. Her genre is fabric art, and is comprised of a painted canvas background and intricate dimensional embroidery of various flowers. She gave me her business card and on the back of it was a copy of one of her pieces: a beautiful rose-colored hollyhock.

Later on, we drove to the Syracuse Fairgrounds to watch the fireworks. They were supposed to start at dusk but for some unfathomable reason did not commence until 9:50. It was unusually cold for a July evening in Central New York, 40 degrees to be exact-- and while I was sitting in a new-- not particularly comfortable transportable chair I berated myself for failing to grab a sweater or blanket on the way out this morning.

Shivering and rocking back and forth to keep myself warm I had ample time to chide myself for my stupidity. While I was watching the hoards of people barbecuing hot dogs, eating ice cream, waving magical sparklers in the air-- and listening to a mother scolding her child for wandering away,-- and doing all those things that are traditional for a July 4th celebration, I wondered what it takes in contemporary society to be considered a true blue, patriotic American and whether I could fit into that narrow definition.

It's easy to know how to be a true-blue American on the 4th of July. It's all spelled out for us. We BBQ, picnic, eat hot dogs and hamburgers, sip lemonade and basically gorge ourselves until the buttons on our shirts pop off. Then we gather our family and friends together and pile in trucks and drive to the best fireworks display in the area.

But when the smoke has dissipated from the ink hued sky, and the last blaze of fiery, reflected color has faded from the iris of a sleeping child; what does a true-blue American do?

Television does a good job of illustrating what is expected of us as it broadcasts American culture and the iconic American dream 24 hours a day; seven days a week. Commercials and the pandering of politicians tell us our most sacred duty as an American is to shop and keep quiet. Put everything on credit and bolster the sagging economy. Shop until you drop-- but don't ask too many questions and, most definitely, don't be critical of the government. We distract ourselves by buying new cars built with cheap parts, large elaborate homes constructed on sink holes--and buy the latest technological gadget at exorbitant prices. Do all this and more--put yourself into piles of critical debt-- but don't draw attention to corporate corruption and the political system that supports it.

And when everything inevitably goes down in flames and the economy is in shambles-- make sure that blame falls on the victims: the Americans who bought into the American dream that has turned into the American nightmare. Blame the poor people who wanted to provide a safe roof for their children, or the young man who borrowed money to keep his fragile business afloat as larger corporations invaded his territory and lured his customers away with promises of the good life for a cheap price. Blame the old people who have to choose between buying food, heat or costly medicine. By no means should you hold the greedy politicians or corporation's accountable. And even if you do, for Heaven's sake, be polite and obedient and don't talk about it.

Maybe I am a relic of the rebellion and social consciousness of the 1960's--after all--I was born in the late sixties and some of the "hippie" essence must have rubbed off on me. But I can't help but feel there is more to being a patriotic American than ascribing to consumerism, passivity or fervent individualism. Somehow, I feel less patriotic--less true-blue-- by admitting that.

When did greed become a trait to aspire to and how exactly did it become good for our economy? America is still predominately a Christian nation therefore I assume that greed is still considered one of the seven deadly sins. I ask this because I read a comment in a discussion group glorifying the virtue of greed and how it single handedly pushed this nation into greatness. Without greed, the argument went, this nation would never had become the superpower it is today. I disagree, I believe that it was ambition that forged this nation. But ambition, without foresight and restraint, becomes destructive and turns to greed.

Am I true-blue American? If I compare myself to some people's notion of what a true-blue American is, probably not. I have a strong tendency towards social and political criticism and don't mind letting my revolutionary thoughts known when the appropriate occasion arises. However, I also believe in community building, helping your neighbor, working for social justice and treating everyone, regardless of rank, color, or culture with dignity and respect. In my heart--that is being a true-blue, patriotic American.