FORTRESS EUROPE
“No, it’s not that they aren’t allowed to leave, the government aren’t keeping them here”, my father corrected me, as we filled the commute with the usual analysis on Iranian life, “it’s just that nowhere else will have them!”. It was over a year ago that I’d had this realisation, it came as such a surprise that I remember the exact square metre of road he said this. This sad reality shouldn’t have came as a shock to me, but I don’t hide it – I’m incredibly ignorant of immigration and VISA issues – and to all those that find me, call me or email me it comes as a shock too.
“Daveed, I want to buy a house in Cypress, maybe we’ll go live there”, my uncle perks up, something on the TV must have prompted him, “can I get a VISA?”, he gets there, “do you think they’ll give us a VISA? Can you find out?”. This is the latest idea, Cypress, the latest country and his latest expectation of me. I look up inquisitively when he gets to these questions, maybe I look like I’m thinking about it, I hope so. If he could tune into my mind he might hear this between the distortion – “what dear uncle gives you the impression that I – dressed in my jim-jams, sipping tea while trying to block out Turkish soaps – have the foggiest about immigration and VISAs”. I probably give a ‘hmmm’ at this point, then I sip, “never dear uncle have I ever personally* applied for a VISA or immigration, I’ve never even seen the form(s) and never made an inquiry about such things”. These things are not aired, partly through politeness and partly because he and all the others that come with their questions don’t want to hear the second reason why: that I mostly never need these things while traveling.
Maybe I’m tetchy due to help I gave in what became an unsuccessful application for a visitation VISA to Great Britain and the ongoing help in the – as yet – four year process of immigration to America, both of which seem to appear more like a sick joke. I’ll begin with the America gig, I’m still unsure with this one whether it’s legit – the papers and stamps seem official enough, provisionally it’s a green light, it’s just the, “your application is being processed, do not make any plans…” bit that baffles me, maybe it’s just the way the Americans put it, everything seems like a scam. “Can you call them”, my uncle asks, “can you check online”, he repeats. They’ve given him a handy user name and password, “your application is being processed”, do not make any plans…”, it says when I login with nearly a word-for-word copy of the letter, but it looks neat and makes my uncle feel that things are moving along. Just to confirm, I called, guided my way through the labyrinth of options, tapped in enormous strings of digits and finally got it, “your application number is ‘x’, we are now dealing with ‘y’, do not make any plans…”. I did some maths, “at the current rate dear uncle you’ll hear news in five years, so – don’t make any plans”.
The Brit gig was simply obscene and insulting as well as very expensive, remember, this is just for a two week holiday. I was drafted in for translation – not that my uncle can’t read English – more that, even by lawyer’s standards the paperwork contained an extra special weave of verbosity. My uncle had failed the initial application, having stumbled on the interrogation process, the poor feller mislocated a small town among other things, how silly of him to say north-west, it was clearly south-east. But the British aren’t too harsh, they give you the option to appeal, and at only twice the price of the initial process, roughly two month’s average wage. But it was failure again, this time my uncle couldn’t prove that all the land and property he owed around Iran had any value, deeds don’t mean dollars, oh how they wriggled out of that one. The re-appeal was available but the game could have gone on with the embassy raising the bar, inventing more English and taking further money. Unless the family were to leave a deposit, like my uncle himself, the embassy expected it would end up being an asylum case at the other end.
A colleague was rejected a visitation VISA for Canada the other day and another for America. In the Canadian case I was told that six people were successful in just over a hundred applications for that day, this is good business and psychological torture. I hear chants of freedom coming Eastwards, but they seem self-serving – as my father once enlightened me, the jail is imposed by those who chant the loudest.
*I have had two VISAs, one work related for America, but it was all taken care of for me and another for Lebanon, which was never used and also arranged for me, yet not entirely necessary due to me having a British passport, it was simply a time issue.
Join the Conversation
Visa applications to the US aren’t helped any by a government that often rallies its people with slogans like “Death to America!”
So you want to put an entire country into a category because of the actions of the few?
You need to pay close attention to who actually attends such rallies. In Bahrain you have no more than few hundreds in these rallies which are usually laughed at; yet you open the TV and you see it on CNN. “Thousands of Bahrainis rally against America!”
So, don’t fall for it. Usually these people come in very small numbers, portrayed as thousands or even hundreds of thousands in some cases. They’re not accurate, they don’t happen often, and they don’t represent the country.
When my family went to the U.S, they were detained and interrogated for something like 12 hours – with no food or water – in Boston. Knowing this, I never bothered applying. And I don’t feel as if I’m missing out on anything either. There’s no point in going someplace where I know I won’t be respected or accepted.
By the way David, it’s apparently very difficult for Iranians to get visas to Bahrain. This is due to Iran funding at least 24 Shiite organizations within Bahrain and us considering you a huge “external threat.” Pouyan, who blogged about his experience before, couldn’t even get a temporary visa to take a formal test. It also makes the process of Iranians visiting their families in Bahrain very difficult.
Yet… when I visited Tehran, my visa was ready within 5 minutes. The Canadian embassy gave me hell for my Iranian visa, insisted to know why I was there, who I met while I was there, for how long, or whether or not I overstayed my visa. So if I went through that by just having an Iranian VISA, can you imagine what I would go through if I had an Iranian passport?!
o you want to put an entire country into a category because of the actions of the few?
It’s not the actions of the few, but the actions of the Iranian govenment, so the answer is, of course, yes.
Finnpundit, I disagree with this logic entirely. This is like saying we shouldn’t give visas to American citizens because they attacked Iraq or funded dictatorships. So basically millions of people wouldn’t be able to enter the Arab world because of its government’s mistakes.
ALL governments make mistakes. You want to stop the whole world from traveling, then? You want us to lock you out, and have you lock us out, and have another country lock us all out simply because we all have different governments who make mistakes?
To be honest, I’m really sick of being treated like we’re a bunch of unworthy savages. This portrayel of us in the media needs to stop. There are millions and millions of Arabs, Iranians, and Muslims who come back and fourth from America, absolutely harmless people who don’t deserve to be lumped into the same category with their governments who by the way – don’t represent them, because for the most part not all of us have governments that were legitimately voted in by the people. I had no say whatsoever in my government’s position, for example – hence why you should never hold it against me.
And what part about actions of the few didn’t you understand? In a dictatorship, dictator is considered as “few”, otherwise it won’t be called a dictatorship. The government of Iran, from what I read or understand, don’t represent an average Iranian.
You might want to talk to actual Iranians or those who actually live there, like the members on this websites, and try not base your entire point of view on the TV box that you maybe using as your only source of news.
The government of Iran chose a path of hostility towards the US. The people of Iran have to face the consequences, whether political, social or economic. If they disagree with their government’s policy, then change it, using whatever means necessary and available. Or are they waiting for the US to do something about it?
As to passport and visa checks, I’m all for them, and expect my government to do its duty. Passport control can and should ask any question it wants to ask, without regard to politeness and sensitivity. That’s their job.
This is such a simplistic and outrageous statement which I think speaks plenty in itself. Not to be rude, but I don’t think it even deserves a response.
Let’s just say that I’m happy I never needed or wanted to visit the USA if that’s how unethical the process is, which is apparently being justified instead of condemned. Don’t get me wrong – the US is a great place whose people are very charitable, but I’m definitely not going to put myself through a very sick process of being humiliated just so I can get there. Lots of decent Americans condemn it, there are still many who justify the injustice and abuse.
Putting a bunch of kids (my cousins were 3 and 5) in an intimidating room without any contact – for more than 12 hours, without either food or water, ignoring their cries of fear… is a human rights abuse, no matter HOW you put it. Telling a grown old man (my father) to “shut the f*ck up unless talked to” while threatening to “kick his ass” is a highly disrespectful thing to do no matter what the situation is. Where are the ethics and morals of your servicemen?
My family was minding their own business, fully collaborating while going through this painful process, and yet being treated like a bunch of animals. If you justify this, then sorry, but you just lost my respect.
It’s disgusting, and falls under my definition of terrorism and humiliation.
Well what your family went through sounds excessive, yes. However, since 9/11, it’s not necessarily particular just to Arabs or Muslims. A Dutch friend of mine – white, non-Muslim – was put in handcuffs and manacles at JFK, went through an anal probe, etc., and eventually put on a plane back, because he had overstayed his tourist visa on an earlier visit.
The only time I’ve been hassled is when entering Britain. Twice I’ve been pulled out at random (I don’t know why), and my bags subjected to complete search.
Since then I’ve always made sure my passport has a picture of me in a suit and tie. I usually dress casually when traveling, but I’ve found that passport controls tend to treat you with more deference when they see you pictured like that. Sounds unfair, but so it goes.
There’s a difference however between abusing powers while being incredily over zealous/insulting, and running security checks while being decent.
I’m not saying it’s unfair that they run people through security checks.
I’m saying it’s unfair for some people to be humiliated and mistreated in the process just because these officers have the “OK” from the government to act the way they do. They represent their country. They need to learn how to be respectful. Harsh yet respectful. It’s possible, and it’s much less risky because no one would have to react if they are subjected to unnecessary violence (many people get pushed around, shoved into walls when talked to, etc.) These stories make me thank God that I don’t study in the US like most of my friends do.
They represent their country. They need to learn how to be respectful.
They represent the government mainly, not necessarily the country.
It’s possible, and it’s much less risky because no one would have to react if they are subjected to unnecessary violence (many people get pushed around, shoved into walls when talked to, etc.)
When asked question or ordered to do something by passport control you simply have to obey without question. You are a guest in their country, whichever it may be. It is not the time and place to make a socio-political point.
The harsh, sporadic tactics also add an element of uncertainty to anyone who would have criminal intentions in mind. These tactics, though, have hardly stemmed the flow of visitors to the US, who continue pouring in, regardless.
You just contradicted yourself.
You imply that the Iranian government represents the people, and since it chose to be hostile towards the US, that opinion largely represents the public too. Paraphrasing what you said, it was something like “if they don’t like it, they should change it” (which is much easier said than done, by the way. Most people who try get killed or imprisoned.)
So you can’t apply this theory to Iran and then apply a very different one to the US. You need to understand that Iranians aren’t represented by their governments.
If the US government doesn’t represent the country as a whole, than neither does the Iranian government. Simple as.
Yeah you just contradict yourself.
Finnpundit said:
Finnpundit said:
So when it happens in the US it’s one thing but when the exact same thing happen in Iran it’s another? Give me a break. At least Iranians live in a dictatorship, but you live in a so called democracy, yet do the same shit.
Unlike the savages in the West, people else where don’t like to resolve their issues with guns. People like to improve their situations through reforms and not revolutions. If you don’t know the reforms that are happening in Iran then you might want to find out and stop watching FOX or attending the local KKK meetings.
As for the statement that “obey the rules because you are their guests…”
Umm, how about, “treat me the way I should be treated because I’m human?”
Being a guest does not mean I’m a product of your country
Where I’m from, we have a policy against guest abuse. All decent nations should have this policy.
Apparently in the USA, guest abuse is average behavior, according to your implications. You call it “state rights” or “security,” I call it a human rights violation and unnecessary over zealous behavior. All the reason why I’m glad I’m not a visitor or a resident. If this is the way your servicemen treat people, and if this is the way you are going to justify it, then you shouldn’t expect good things to be said about your country.
This is just how it is.
We get mistreated, we complain. So it goes.
Esra’a:
You just contradicted yourself.
Uh, no. The words “mainly” and “not necessarily” are qualifiers which you chose to ignore.
Where I’m from, we have a policy against guest abuse. All decent nations should have this policy…. Apparently in the USA, this is average behavior.
Well there we go with blanket assumptions.
In any case, I think it’s more useful to think of countries as enemies first, and then identify areas of common interests. And we should never condone to one particular peoples’ definition of what decency is.
Perhaps, but they (security) are the first public face of America seen by people arriving from overseas, and it ain’t pretty.
What “elsewhere” are you talking about? Iraq? Lebanon? Somalia?
I hadn’t known Finnpundit was KKK, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. What else would one expect from a Western “savage”?
Finnpundit, you fail to see your own contradiction which we highlighted here several times.
Allow me to explain.
You said in your post that Iranians “mainly” represent the Iranian government, which isn’t true at all, yet you later said…
The Americans don’t “necessarily” represent the government.
Sorry, that is contradictory. There is no difference whatsoever between either statements – yet you play around with them by adding words like “mainly” and “necessarily.” BOTH nations aren’t directly responsible for their governments’ actions. Thus I agree with your 2nd statement and not your first.
Iranians have no say in current government relations. You of all people should know this. Do you see the citizens actively taking part in politics and foreign decisions? No. So in what way does it represent them?
Secondly, I wish you had finished reading the statement you used against me, where I later said “this is the implication you were making.” Keyword here being implication. In other words, this is how YOU choose to represent your country, this was your justification, hence my complaint.
As for the generalizations, please don’t let me start on the number of generalizations you made in this thread, starting with your very first comment that Iranians lead anti-USA rallies… the number of people who do this does not equal the vast majority of the Iranian population. Thus you shouldn’t jump to this hasty conclucion unless you wish to be presented with similar sweeping generalizations. Do you want me to say that just because certain Americans wrote hate articles or led hateful rallies, we should stop the whole nation from entering our countries? And our government or state security has the “right” to do whatever it wants to its “guests”? Would you approve of Americans being detained for hours, mistreated, humiliated, insulted? Wouldn’t you also complain and have 2nd thoughts about the country which did this?
You can’t continue to apply one theory to one nation and another to what you consider America’s “Enemy.” If Bahrain ever publicly stated “we hate America and declare war on it,” would you use that against me, and say “okay, don’t come to the USA!” I didn’t have a choice in my government’s position. It is simply there and I am forced to obey it. But it doesn’t represent me, not one bit. Governments, especially those that resemble dictatorships, do not represent the people at all. And if you will reply with, “if you dislike it, change it,” (with regards to Iran) maybe if you were in such a country, you can try this. And see how simplistic and impractical this statement is. Those who do “try” face executions, rape, and torture, so this is much easier for you to say this in the land of “Freedom” and “Liberty.” For us, it’s risking our entire lives. And not many are ready to do that.
You said in your post that Iranians “mainly†represent the Iranian government
I simply did not. Point to the actual quote, if you’d please.
I think you are letting your passions rule your rhetoric.
yet you play around with them by adding words like “mainly†and “necessarily.â€
That’s because there are exceptions to any rule. Qualifiers are used for that. Sometimes (note the qualifier “sometimes”)… Sometimes it’s useful to make generalized comments for the sake of brevity, in the hopes that the gist of an idea is conveyed. However, it’s wise to use qualifiers, for the sake of those who resist an idea in the first place, and play rhetorical games afterwards.
You can’t continue to apply one theory to one nation and another to what you consider America’s “Enemy.
Of course I can. An enemy is exactly the kind of entity where equivalence makes no sense. That’s why they’re enemies.
And like I said many times before, “if you dislike it, change it,†maybe if you were in Iran, you can try this. And see how hard it is.
My family was very much involved with “regime change”, back in Finland. We have first-hand knowledge of the difficulties, – and the commitments needed – for such endeavors. Finland is the success it is today because of the struggles against tyranny (of the Russians, then of the communists) our forefathers went through.
And Finland did it mostly alone, without pandering to pity from the rest of the world.
Please accept my apology Finnpundit, it was my fault with the initial misunderstanding! Throughout the thread I thought this is what you implied; I was mistaken. Sorry for the confusion.
No problem.
We are going to disagree on various topics; that’s only natural. But I try to be as clear as possible as much as brevity allows.
Also, I think I should mention that I’m not interested in converting anyone to my point-of-view. What I like to do is getting others, – especially in the non-western world – familiar with how westerners think, regardless of whether it pleases or not.
In other words, I’m not interested in making you angry on purpose. I’d simply like to offer you an insight into the thinking of someone with an alternative or opposing point-of-view.
I got carried away because it is a personal thing which happened to my family and I don’t really stay calm if people state that such guards have the right to abuse anyone in sight just because they feel like it. They could be less aggressive and insulting especially if the people in question are not posing a direct threat (their nationality was the only thing that led to suspicion.) I meet many Americans who not only justify this, but reply with things like “if you don’t like to be treated like that, stay out of America” instead of “that’s not right, it shouldn’t happen.” I realize how sensitive the US have gotten since 9/11 – that shouldn’t be taken advantage of. It would be insulting to the victims of that incident was being played with, and used as jusitifaction for any abuse or racism.
America has every right to act against external threats – but not when it means treating innocent people like animals. My mother doesn’t speak English, and was called stupid for it. This kind of behavior happens often to many of my friends who study in the US and love it there, dismissing this as just “airport behavior” which many people, especially Pakistanis, go through. Still it should be put to an end – where is the respect and professionalism? Is this really how America should be portrayed?
I think America is a great country just for the record, however much I disagree with its government’s policies or its mainstream media, I think it’s amazing that people can speak their minds yet still be able to roam around freely.
But it’s also worth noting how much these types of things harm the general picture we have of America. It’s not that we hate it, it’s not that we’re racists, these are personal things which happen to us and are hurtful, so they tend to toy with our opinions. 9/11 means America should be cautious. It doesn’t mean they get to treat others like 2nd class citizens whose rights can be eliminated whenever and however.
Esra’a,
America seems to have this talent for always putting her worst foot forward, always having her biggest idiots on center stage, and somehow speaking her loudest when she has both feet firmly in her mouth.
I’m really sorry your family had such an unpleasant experience.