Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Hmmm...let me see, she had entered before eight times, but technically had the wrong document.
Then she was stopped and learned she did not have the right visa.
In a court of law, ignorance is not a valid excuse.
I didn't know I ran him over.
I didn't know I drank that much and then drove.
I didn't know this drug was illegal.
I didn't know she was not of legal age.
I didn't know I had to pay for that.
And as for the Bush Amerika comment. Yeah, I am sure where ever you are from is much, much better. I guess you believe ignorance IS a excuse for
breaking the law. Well, I believe you just broke the Law of Reason with that comment.
Did you read the article? This is not a case of breaking a law and then claiming ignorance. This should have been handled as a paperwork
misunderstanding and she should have been treated with respect and offered the chance to fix it. She did nothing "criminal" and did not deserve to
be labeled as such. She also did not deserve to be handcuffed, denied something to drink or eat, or repeatedly strip-searched.
"...the I-Visa rule was enforced at the discretion of agents
When Smethurst’s editor, who planned to visit the United States on business, inquired about obtaining an I-Visa, she was told it would not be
. She is going to get one anyway."
How could this be be ignorance? If you were told by the police department that a drivers license wasn't necessary to drive, but then you were
arrested for not having one, would you consider it to be your fault? Wouldn't you expect to be given correct information by the people who are
supposed to know? And how can you justify an innocent person being given the classification of "criminal", for a technicality that is only enforced
at the discretion of the agents?
The questions they asked about her magazine and article make me think that this is more likely, an attempt to control the foreign press.
"What sort of stories did she write? What kind of magazine was New Idea? Where was it published? What was its circulation? Does it print
politically sensitive articles? When would her interview appear? Who would be reading it?
If they can document and track foreign journalists in the country, separately from tourists or other foreign workers, then monitor what they report,
the government can create profiles on all foreign journalists entering the US. They will be able to deny entry to anyone who may write unfavorable
articles about the US. How else will they be able to censor what is written overseas? If reporters who portray US activities or government
negatively start to be denied access into the country, their publishers will be more inclined to only print articles that show us in a positive
Also, this is not an just happening to foreigners. It is happening to US citizens as well.
Last September, the CBP at LAX detained the Australian-born wife of a U.S. Navy sailor for five days, while also briefly denying her infant
daughter food and medical attention.
A woman flying from New York to Florida was forced to drink three bottles of her own breast milk before being allowed to board a flight at JFK
They would not allow her to feed her 4 month old with them or pour them out. She said, "I asked them if I could just taste it; if I could just show
them how you would check a baby's bottle - that it was warm milk and everything. And they said, 'No,'" ordering her to "drink it all."
The nursing mom then offered to feed the milk to her baby as the guards looked on, but they refused.
I wish everyone would start taking these abuses more seriously. They may be few and far between now, but the more they are allowed to happen, without
consequence, the more this type of thing will become the rule instead of the exception to it.