Give me your poor, your huddled masses...and I'll lock em up indefinitely

[Chewbacca]

I propose renaming the department of homeland security to the department of inhumane unjust irrational hysterical over-reaction.

Link

********************
Tibetan Nun's Path To Asylum

HOPEWELL, Va. (USA) -- Sonam always feared her devotion to Buddhism would land her behind bars in her native China. As it turns out, she is serving a long term in jail -- not in East Asia but in central Virginia.

The 30-year-old Buddhist nun, who grew up in a Tibetan village near the foot of Mount Everest, fled to the United States last August after family members had been tortured and friends jailed for their faith, she said. But when she arrived at Dulles International Airport and requested asylum, federal immigration officials detained her and placed her in the local jail in this small city outside Richmond.

Sonam, who is known by that one name, has been here ever since except for a brief visit last November to a court room in Arlington where a federal immigration judge granted her asylum. But even as she was hugging her attorney in celebration, the lawyer from the Department of Homeland Security announced that she was appealing the case.

Sonam was then shackled and returned to her cell, where she waits for her next court date, which is likely to be in the fall at the earliest, her attorney said.

Sonam is among thousands of asylum seekers who have fled persecution in their homelands only to be jailed in the United States, a new report by the New York-based Lawyers Committee for Human Rights shows.

By law, the Department of Homeland Security detains all asylum seekers who arrive without proper documents. But since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, federal immigration officials have also been denying parole to these immigrants and appealing rulings in their favor, a practice that can keep them locked up for years, according to the report, which monitored the department's activities for a year and details scores of cases, including Sonam's.

Homeland Security officials deny they are trying to keep asylum seekers behind bars, although they acknowledge that long incarcerations occur. They say they are reviewing their practices in response to the report and are tallying statistics on how many asylum seekers have been detained, refused parole or seen their cases appealed.

"Even a well-balanced policy can get out of kilter on an individual case because someone has exercised poor judgment," said Asa Hutchinson, the Homeland Security Department's undersecretary for border and transportation security.

At the same time, he and others say there is concern that a terrorist could slip into the country under the guise of an asylum request.

"People who come here may have no legitimate [reason]. They are here for economic reasons or for criminal reasons and have been trained to assert asylum," Hutchinson said.

"That requires us to be careful and . . . sometimes it makes people more skeptical of asylum cases than they should be."

Last week, during an interview at the Riverside Regional Jail, Sonam spoke of her journey to the United States that began with a desperate, eight-day walk to Nepal across snow-capped mountains and ended with her first ride on an airplane, which frightened her so much she couldn't look out the window.

Sonam Singeri, a Tibetan working for Radio Free Asia who has befriended Sonam, was at the interview to translate. As soon as Sonam walked into the visitors' room and saw Singeri, she collapsed into her arms and sobbed uncontrollably.

"It's so lonely. It's so hard. Why is this happening?" she cried out, Singeri said.

Sonam told a story of flight and fear. She said her father had been jailed in Tibet and tortured with electric shock. She described hiding from police patrols as she made her way across the Himalaya Mountains to Nepal, where she lived for three years.

But even there, she said, she worried about her safety. In May, the Nepalese government began to round up Tibetan refugees and send them back to China, where they were sure to face prison and torture, she said.

Even after asylum seekers such as Sonam have convinced immigration judges that they are bona fide and pose no threat, Homeland Security lawyers continue to press appeals in many cases, the Lawyers Committee report says.

"They are indefinitely detaining asylum seekers who have already been granted relief, who present no risk, who have often been tortured in their home countries," said Archi Pyati, who works in the Lawyers Committee's asylum program.

"We are sending a message that in the United States . . . we don't hope that asylum seekers find their way here because if they do they will find themselves in a very difficult situation and in prolonged detention."

Immigrants seeking asylum in this country must prove not only their identities but also that they are in danger in their native countries.

Sonam's case was appealed because she did not have enough documentation to back up her story, according to a brief filed by Homeland Security attorney Deborah Todd. The fact that Sonam lived in Nepal for three years indicated that she could have safely stayed there and did not need to come to the United States, Todd argued in her appeal.

Asked to comment, a spokesman for Homeland Security said the department does not talk about ongoing cases.

Sonam said she had no way to get identity documents in Nepal because the government does not recognize refugees from China. She feared that she would be deported to China along with other Tibetans who were being sent back at the time. So she sought a way to get to the United States.

Using the money she had made as a seamstress before she joined her monastery in Nepal, Sonam booked a flight through Calcutta to Dulles.

After she was jailed in Virginia, her attorney, who has taken the case pro bono, twice asked the Department of Homeland Security to release her from detention, arguing that Sonam poses no danger. But immigration officials denied both requests without much explanation, according to Sonam's attorney.

The hardest part of her life these days is that she cannot speak or understand the language of the inmates or guards. (She is also illiterate in her native Tibetan tongue). She has not been able to have a conversation with anyone since her hearing last November and wept as she recounted her seemingly endless days of silence and isolation in jail.

"I live in a prison but always in my mind, I hold onto a picture of his Holiness [the Dalai Lama] in my heart," she said. "This prison has become my monastery."

An hour into the interview, a guard tapped the window of the visitors' room. It was time to go.

Sonam shed a few more tears. It might be months before her next conversation. She hugged Singeri again and then followed the guard back to her part of the jail where she does not speak, cannot understand anyone and where she waits in her prison within a prison.

[Timber Loftis]

Bullshit. Asylum is only granted to non visa holders who show a likelihood of persecution in their home country. The gummint has every right to appeal it. Since 99% of asylum seekers get found to be unworthy and get shipped home, she should count herself lucky for passing the first and biggest hurdle. This story is the same as it would have been pre-9/11, I note, so this is not DHS/ Ashcroft fallout.

She'll be out soon and will have a quick in-road to US citizenship -- a good thing of course, since it's what she wanted.

For real detainee issues, I'm all game, but you should know more about immigration asylum cases before labelling this as wrong.

[Chewbacca]

The article conflicts with what you are saying T.L.

I will go by the 'wrong label' as thats what I interpret from the info based on the report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. I would assume that a group with a name like that are experts on asylum issues. That and you have provided nothing along the lines of substanial fact to inspire me to change my perception that this is wrong.

She'll be out soon? How do you define soon? Sure the governmet has the right to appeal it, but why not let her out in the process? Why not put her in the custody of some capable stable American Buddists who can teach her english and provided her with human companionship and insure she wont flee until the appeals process has been fufilled?

Sonam's current situation is wrong, very wrong.

What is really the B.S. here?

By law, the Department of Homeland Security detains all asylum seekers who arrive without proper documents. But since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, federal immigration officials have also been denying parole to these immigrants and appealing rulings in their favor, a practice that can keep them locked up for years, according to the report, which monitored the department's activities for a year and details scores of cases, including Sonam's.

Even after asylum seekers such as Sonam have convinced immigration judges that they are bona fide and pose no threat, Homeland Security lawyers continue to press appeals in many cases, the Lawyers Committee report says.

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Sad and disgusting, the entire situation.
Maybe they'll start fleeing to Canada, instead...

[Yorick]

I think detaining them is better than sending them back home - which is what they do to Australians without their papers in order - because they are persecuted at home and could die.

Conversely, they can't just let them in the country. Otherwise any Joe could walk up and say they were being persecuted, just to get in the country without going through the Visa process. The immigration laws would become a mockery.

I could for example claim I was from Uzbekistan and being persecuted for worshipping Uzis and marrying two women named Becky.

Are you going to just let me in the country?

Terrorism is very real. I for one am very glad when I see the machine gunned soldiers walk through subways en-masse and when I hear that the borders are being properly patrolled.

[Paladin2000]

That is pretty harsh...

1. Buddhist are not known for their *specialty* in suicide bombing and other terrorist activities.

2. Alternatively, they(US) should have some sort or concentration camp or closed community where the authority can keep a close eye on the refugees/asylum seekers.

Most country in Asia do employ #2 while the court decide the fate of the refugees (deport/accept). Which is a little more humane than all out jail sentences.

[Timber Loftis]

As I said, a good 99% of asylum seekers are turned away. Here's a reality check: if they are allowed out while their asylum hearing is pending they tend to DISAPPEAR into the country. When do we catch them? Often never.

In fact, the old INS practice of "deportation" meant telling the person "go home within 60 days" and letting them walk out the door. As you can guess, they don't tend to follow the court's order. You see these people back in the INS hearing rooms who have been illegally in the country for 4 or 5 years and keep getting told "go home."

That's rather silly. The correct practice should be lock them up until we're ready to SEND them home, don't you think?

"People who come here may have no legitimate [reason]. They are here for economic reasons or for criminal reasons and have been trained to assert asylum,"

See, that's the thing. Asylum is the last-ditch effort the illegal alien asserts. And, it's an incredibly hard test to meet -- most people can't prove that if they go home their government/society will be actively persecuting them. So, an "asylum seeker" is not a poor downtrodden sympathy-deserving individual 99.999% of the time, but rather "asylum seeker" almost always means "illegal alien trying for a hail mary at the end of the 4th quarter."

[Barry the Sprout]

Errr, is it just me or are you assuming that because its hard to prove it means that they're lying? Its equally plausible to assume the exact opposite of course.

[Skunk]

I don't think that it's a problem to detain asylum seekers while deliberating over their application as there is a danger of flight. That said, I can not see why a reasonable time limitation can not be put upon the process (as has been recently implemented in the UK).

Immigration and court officials should have a maximum of one year to check out a persons credentials - after that time, the applicant should be released from detention. At that point, they could either be electronically tagged or have their application automatically approved.

It ought to be possible to strike a balance between genuine security and immigration concerns and the need to act in a humane way to those fleeing persecution, shouldn't it?

[Timber Loftis]

I'm saying if 99% of them are going to be told "no" and "go home" (regardless of what test/rule is being used) then we have no business letting them go freely about the country, where they tend to simply disappear rather than actually pursue their asylum case. It's simple common sense. People should be allowed into the country before we let them into the country. A tautology, no?