I’d really like to ask again, what constitutes an appropriate immigration policy? Should travelers require a visa and/or passport?
If requiring a digital fingerprint and digital photograph is wrong, please tell me what would be considered right. How much scrutiny is acceptable at points of entry?
I guess a larger point of contention is the discrimination imposed toward travelers from varying countries. Should everyone be treated the same?
Your posts tend to be anti-American, seemingly on principle, yet when pressed, the best examples of how evil Americans are is that we fingerprint some VISA holders entering our country. There is a lot worse injustice in the world, yet you stick to complaining about fingerprints and soccer players. So what’s your problem with America really about?
Read the posts above then… my response to another response to yet another response…
Not to disturb your great love and praise for the Israeli Hospitality here, contrasting it with the Great Restrictivness of Other Nations. But do you believe honestly that Israel lets everyone cross the borders?
If yes: You must be completely unaware of the reality. In fact: only last week several female visitors were refused to cross the border. Belgian visitors who were refused because it was known that they were part of a group that had among others the plan to join the international protests aganst the Great Israel Apartheid Wall. If you think this is a First Unique Case then you may dream further. And then I refer here only to Western visitors. Do you have an idea what happens when someone coming from an Arab nations wants to visit Israel?
So I understand that you obviously believe that Israel should throw its borders wide open for everyone and actually does that in practice?
If not, then why do you try to criticize other nations who act with severe precaution whenever someone who was in Israel or who is Israely citizen wants to enter the country?
And then we don’t even talk about the restrictions set by the USA to distribute a Visa and the difficulties even those who have a Visa encounter. At daily base.
But: the MENA nations have in your opinion no right what so ever to be restrictive, no?
Can you explain how you come to such a strange hypocritical and utterly arrogant reasoning?
Do you by accident suffer from a form of Post-colonial Disease? Which isn’t that Post-Colonial at all any more since it showed that it is in this time of human history still able to provoke a new outbreak Colonial Disease. As is quite visible in Iraq for the whole world to see.
Is it that or what is it that make you reason like you obviously do.
Please be so kind to enlighten me, since I don’t see any reason why Israel wouldn’t have the right to set their own rules for Visa and/or entering the country, as I don’t see any reason why other nations, mine included, wouldn’t have that right.
Thank you.
Salaam. A
emac,
To answer (again) your question :
Yes.
If there are rules then they should be the same for everyone.
And going further on one of or former points of discussion:
It is just like I said:
As long as databases aren’t exchanged or acessible internationally, there is not much point in “scanning” people coming from nations that don’t share such information.
Or do you believe all these criminals are known by those nations who do entertain such contacts.
Salaam. A
I assure you I have no love or praise for Israeli Hospitality, but I do know they allow Canadians to travel there, as well as Canadians who have visited other MENA countries.
NO, I don’t believe for a second that they allow EVERYONE to cross their border, that would be stupid, no country allows EVERYONE to enter, where in my above posts did I ever imply that? What I did point out was that two MENA countries have explisit restrictions of ANYONE who has visited Israel.
I do not see it as unreasonable to refuse entry to people who’s soul purpose is to protest their government. Keep in mind that most MENA do not allow their own citizens to protest anything other than Israel and US policies. Would your country allow Canadian protesters to enter knowing they plan to stage anti-government demonstrations?
Again, I was very clear in pointing out that Syria and Lebanon ban people who have VISITED Israel. Notice the difference, Israel may block most MENA citizens, but do they have a policy of blocking anyone who visited?
No, I don’t believe that, so I’m not sure what you understand. Throwing open a border is a bit silly. In fact I was very clear in my OP that I disagree with that point entirely. I started this debate to discuss what a reasonable middle ground would look like. You have yet to provide anything other than criticism of the me, my country, the US, and Isreal. You are one of the few people on this board with significant experience in the Middle East and as such I find that very valuable. Lay off the generic anti-West setiments and start providing insite, please.
That’s exactly what I’m trying to discuss. Although I would prefer to focuss on all countries instead of just the US. I’d like to point out that you were the first person to post, and your post did nothing but bash the US.
No, not my opinion at all. I simply pointed out one very glaring failure in their imigration policy. I opened this debate to examin what sort of rights each country has and should employ.
I didn’t, you interperetted it as such.
I’m not even sure what that is but I assume you’re refering to my white anglo-saxon decent, which I think counts as a racial slur. Please refrain from such insults.
The US is a poor example of a colonial state. Was it colonialism when Iraq went in to Kewait or Iran?
Please read the orginal post again, including the last paragraph. I believe each country has the right to know who is entering their country. I also believe they have the right to refuse entry to know criminals, terrorists, or individuals whose intention is disruptive to the general society. That last sentence is where the real debate will flow. Is there a type of “group” that should be refused entry?
emac,
If I misunderstood your posting then may I ask you to be so kind to accept my apologies for that.
And my post was also adressed to some of the comments made by an other member.
And no, when I speak of “post colonial disease” I don’t refer to “anglo-saxon” decent. I refer to colonising nations and the patronising attitude which still occurs there every now and then, among politicians and citizens both.
And for your information: the country of my late mother had its place among those colonising nations and still didn’t come clean with that past at all.
As for the question as to why Iraq came to the decision to invade Kuwait and how this must be understood: That needs an other thread to be answered. I don’t see what it has to do with this discussion.
(As I don’t see what my nationality, or better said: the fact that I don’t give information about that, has to do with this discussion. But that isn’t exactly a new phenomenon to pop up during discussions on this message board).
And to answer your last question:
Every nation has not only the right, but even more the responsibility towards its citizens, to avoid the entrance of elements that can disrupt public order or cause danger of no matter which kind to the nation and/or its citizens.
Salaam. A
emac, there are a number of people on these boards who are worth debating. Then there are others.
This seems relevant to this discussion:
“AMERICA’S controversial foreign visitor screening program has nabbed 30 criminals in its first three days of operation, an official said yesterday.”
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8362534%5E401,00.html