Arabs in U.S. could be held, official warns

[Andrew1999]

Arabs in U.S. could be held, official warns

Rights unit member foresees detainment
July 20, 2002

BY NIRAJ WARIKOO
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

A member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission said in Detroit on Friday he could foresee a scenario in which the public would demand internment camps for ArabAmericans if Arab terrorists strike again in this country.

If there's a future terrorist attack in America "and they come from the same ethnic group that attacked the World Trade Center, you can forget about civil rights," commission member Peter Kirsanow said.

The reason, he said, is that "the public would be less concerned about any perceived erosion of civil liberties than they are about protecting their own lives."

Kirsanow, who was appointed to the commission last year by President George W. Bush, said after the session that he personally doesn't support such camps and the government would never envision them. He said he was merely saying public opinion would so strongly favor the idea that it would be difficult to prevent. There would be a "groundswell of opinion" for the detainment, he said.

The remarks came during a raucous commission hearing in Detroit in which Kirsanow and another conservative member, Jennifer Braceras, defended U.S. antiterrorism efforts after Sept. 11.

"They had their own political agenda," said Kary Moss, executive director of the Michigan chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, referring to Braceras and Kirsanow.

A White House spokesman said Friday night that he could not respond specifically to Kirsanow's comments without seeing a full transcript of them, but said that the possibility of Arab internment camps has never been discussed at the White House.

"The president has said repeatedly and often that this is not a war against Arabs or Islam, this is a war against terror," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said. "We have very close allies in the Arab world who are integral partners in the war against terrorism. . . . The president has said that ours is a war against evil and extremists and that the teachings of Islam are the teachings of peace and good."

Stanzel said that as of Friday he was "still looking into the matter" of Kirsanow's comments.

The seven-member commission, based in Washington, D.C., was at the Omni Hotel in Detroit for its monthly meeting, and heard testimony from Arab-American leaders who said the government abused civil rights following Sept. 11.

"It's becoming really ugly," said Imad Hamad, regional director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, during his testimony.

Hamad and others expressed concern about mass interviews of Arab men, secret immigration hearings and profiling of drivers and airplane passengers.

Kirsanow was unmoved, arguing that Arab and Muslim Americans should accept the country's new antiterrorism laws and complain less about infringements to their civil rights.

If there's another attack by Arabs on U.S. soil, "not too many people will be crying in their beer if there are more detentions, more stops, more profiling," Kirsanow said.

"There will be a groundswell of public opinion to banish civil rights. So the best thing we can do to preserve them is by keeping the country safe."

At one point during the hearing, Roland Hwang, a Lansing attorney, recalled how Japanese-Americans were interned during World War II and said this country needs to prevent that from happening again.

It was at this point that Kirsanow broached the possibility of a rising public sentiment for internment camps if the U.S. were attacked again.

Braceras, another Bush appointee, said:"There's no constitutional right not to be inconvenienced or even embarrassed."

Kirsanow, a Cleveland labor attorney, is the former head of the conservative Center for New Black Leadership.

After the meeting, Hamad said he felt insulted by some of the commission's remarks.

Braceras said she didn't intend to upset the Arab-American community of metro Detroit, the largest concentration in the United States. "I was trying to be a devil's advocate," she said.

This article is from the Detroit Free Press, the major Detroit newspaper.

[Giancarlo]

Unfornately that might be the case.... my country already is cracking down on illegal immigration and detains 4 out of 10 immigrants who arrive (legal or illegal) and deports most of them. So what is the big deal in the US? Some European countries are basically targetting immigrants for crimes already... like Spain on its harshness towards Moroccans.

[Saint Marcus]

my country already is cracking down on illegal immigration and detains 4 out of 10 immigrants who arrive (legal or illegal) and deports most of them

is Argentina doing that? I certainly know that no European nation is deporting people who are legal immigrants.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus


is Argentina doing that? I certainly know that no European nation is deporting people who are legal immigrants.

Spain is. The El Pais newspaper said that, also one of the most credible in the world.

[Lord Merciless]

If terrorist attacks piss off people to a certain degree, then anything can happen.

[DinoDoc]

Korematsu is still "valid" law is it not.

[Kropotkin]

Fez: Well, this is not the same thing, is it? This should be amoungst other things against the Arab-americans. It would be like putting basques into camps.

Lord Merciless: Yes, I think the killing of eleven muslim/arabs or arab-looking in the US since the attack on the 11/9 is a good example of that.

[Giancarlo]

We are going after Moroccans though for terrorism. They are being sent back to their country. And a recent report said that two Moroccan men were planning to blow up British ships (or was it american, probably British) off the straits of Gibraltar and Spain...

[Eli]

Another proof to the claim that if any other country but Israel had been suffering daily terror attacks they would've commited genocide years ago.

[Kropotkin]

How very nice of you.

[moomin]

In Sweden, we're much more civilized. It's just Kurd males who get punishments without trials here.

[Kropotkin]

And toblerone-eaters of cource!

[orange]

i personally wouldn't stand for it, that would definitely blow through the barrier of 'sit back and complain' and 'take action'

[Shadowstrike]

I think this would be a nice time to quote Ben Franklin's line on how "those who give up freedom for security will have neither".

[Ned]

Once I barely understood Roosevelt;s Japanese concentration camps and thought they were a mistake. I now am more understanding.

[Imran Siddiqui]

FASCIST!

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Once I barely understood Roosevelt;s Japanese concentration camps and thought they were a mistake. I now am more understanding.

I don't want any of them (persons of Arab ancestry) here. They are a dangerous element. There is no way to determine their loyalty. ... The danger of the Arab was, and is now-if they are permitted to come back-espionage and sabotage. It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen, he is still an Arab. American citizenship does not necessarily determine loyalty. ... But we must worry about the Arabs all the time until he is wiped off the map. Sabotage and espionage will make problems as long as he is allowed in this area. [/paraphrase]

[Felch]

My friend's dad was born in one of the Japanese Concentration Camps. His mother is Arab, although like many Arab-Americans she is a Christian, and it would be funny in a gallows humor sort of way if both of his parents ended up in American camps during different millenia.

[Bereta_Eder]

The average american arab citizen has no intention of blowing himself up, people, people.....

[notyoueither]

Why Imran?

When all of the men who flew planes into buildings were wandering around the United States prior to the attacks. When the latest catch in the war on terror happens to be a young man who grew up and was educated in Canada. When the enemy is within, something beyond wringing the hands and wishing it to go away may be required.

AFAIK, no Japanese in the United States ever fired a shot on behalf of Japan. That makes their detention somewhat... distasteful. It was largely done based on histeria.

However, in this case the enemies of the United States may very well be living next door to you. Are there no circumstances where you could imagine preventative detentions being beneficial to the peace and security of your country? Are there no circumstances where the US should detain people prior to an attack? Say based on associations, activities, or other indicators of likely threat.

BTW. The US is not alone in having detained people. Canada detained Japanese Canadians. Britain detained a lot of German immigrants... etc.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ned
Once I barely understood Roosevelt;s Japanese concentration camps and thought they were a mistake. I now am more understanding.

They weren't concentretion camps

And the Japanese had a fanatical loyalty to their empror like many Arabs have to their 'leaders', who manipulate their minds with a propaganda machine that would make Hitler proud.

Anyway, the detaining of Japanese was very unfortunate, as the vast, vast mjority were harmless Americans. It would also be unfortunate if the same happened to Arabs, though we are at war and must go through the natrual hystaria that comes with it (like japs in wwii, and the red scare of the cold war). Though i think it is very unlikely that anything like the japanese detention camps would happen to arabs due to the world response of today.

Kman

OT
This war sucks. We will never be able to win, because we will never be able to brake our enemies spirit, as the only way to do so would be 'inhumane' and, no thanks to global communications, we would be hated by the world. The only reason why we were able to overcome the Japs, whos 100 million homeland population pledged to fight for their emperor to the bitter end, was becaused we nuked them and killed 100s of thousands with seemingly ease (almost all civilians). Their spirit was destroyed. When Rome faced rebellion, it slaughtered men wemon and children, razed the region, and salted the earth so nothing would grow. You could be damn sure it would be a long time before that area rebelled again. Unfortunately, the US nolonger can utterly destroy our enemy who grows faster than we can hurt them, becuase it is 'uncivilized'. Though, in reality, nothing is more civilized than protecting ones own civilization from barbarians....

[Felch]

They were concentration camps on the Boer War model, but not on the Nazi model. They concentrated people, but they didn't kill them.

[Giancarlo]

Kramerman, The US will win, even if it requires nuclear weapons. The US might drop an atomic bomb over Baghdad and that might end this war.

[Imran Siddiqui]

nye:

To jail people simply because they are one 'ethnicity' is reprehensible and disgusting. It is racial profiling taken to the extreme.

WHO CARES is perhaps it 'might' save a life. So would jailing every single American & Canadian. Would you go to the jails first? After all the greatest causers of crime are white males.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The US might drop an atomic bomb over Baghdad and that might end this war.

That would simply START the real war.

[Bereta_Eder]

To jail people simply because they are one 'ethnicity' is reprehensible and disgusting. It is racial profiling taken to the extreme.

WHO CARES is perhaps it 'might' save a life. So would jailing every single American & Canadian. Would you go to the jails first? After all the greatest causers of crime are white males.

Imran

and I thought this was so obvious as the summer sun (in Greece)

[Imran Siddiqui]

It should be paiktis. It should be.

Ah, the summer sun... nice, isn't it?

[notyoueither]

Imran.

Jailing people simply for being Arab is not what I am advocating. Actually, I'm not advocating anything at all.

But, I am asking. Would it be resonable to detain people who contributed to a known terrorist sponsoring organization? Would it be resonable to detain the known associates of someone who is known to be involved with a terrorist group? Are there other circumstances where someone might be resonably detained prior to an overt hostile act?

Simply detaining people for where they were born, or worse, where their parents were born should not happen. I don't think that would happen, at least I hope not. However, there are other actions that support and condone these people in their attacks on the United States and her allies. Should such acts be grounds for detention under some extreme circumstances?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Then what are you arguing for? This whole ruckus started when Ned over there said that he didn't understand rounding up Japanese-Americans during WW2, and now because of 9/11 he does. I was saying Ned was a moron.

[KrazyHorse]

I thought we all already knew that.

EDIT: see my sig...