Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Constant Reader who wrote (22816)	8/17/2001 5:42:23 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Another example of bias from the DNC House Organ (NYT): www.mediarsearch.org The New York Times on Wednesday blamed "a Republican-backed law" for making it too easy for the INS to deport illegal immigrants, even those in fear for their life back home. But as Andrew Sullivan pointed out on his Web site, the law in question passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate and was signed by President Clinton. On Special Report with Brit Hume on Thursday night FNC’s Hume picked up on Sullivan’s item. Sullivan, the former Editor of the New Republic, recounted in an August 15 posting: "UNCONSCIOUS MEDIA BIAS: Nice sentence in the New York Times today about the 1996 Immigration Act, one of the most disgraceful pieces of legislation in recent years: ‘Before passage of a Republican-backed law five years ago, only an immigration judge could order the deportation of someone who arrived without valid travel documents. Now an immigration officer can exercise that power, called expedited removal, on the spot, a move intended to cut down on fraud.’ Of course, this is accurate. But it is also accurate to point out that president Clinton signed the law and that it passed the Senate 97-3 and the House by 333 votes to 87. That looks pretty bipartisan to me. So why the completely arbitrary nailing of Republicans?" Good question. The Times story by Eric Schmitt, headlined, "When Asylum Requests Are Overlooked," began from Texas: "When Libardo Yepes, a soft-spoken Colombian cattle farmer, arrived at Miami International Airport last November with an invalid visa, seeking asylum, he told immigration officials that he feared for his life if he was returned to a country where rival factions had killed or kidnapped at least six of his relatives. But immigration officers deported him in less than 24 hours. Mr. Yepes fled Colombia again and, after a three-month journey by land and sea, he was seized by Border Patrol agents in Texas after he crossed the Rio Grande in an inner tube in May. For more than two months, Mr. Yepes was held at a federal detention center here as immigration officials sought to eject him for good. "Immigrant advocacy groups say that Mr. Yepes's story offers a troubling glimpse into how low-level immigration enforcement officers summarily deport tens of thousands of immigrants without proper papers every year. Among them, the advocates say, are many asylum seekers who are returned to dangerous situations without the hearings to which they are legally entitled for review of their claims of persecution. "‘I asked for protection because I was very afraid of going back to my country,’ Mr. Yepes said in an interview here in Spanish, translated by his lawyer, Ilyce Shugall, of the South Texas Pro Bono Asylum Representation Project. "Immigration officials in Miami dispute that assertion and say Mr. Yepes (pronounced yeh-pess) came to this country to find work. But in early August, Mr. Yepes was finally allowed to tell his story to a specially trained asylum officer here, who found his account credible, and his case has been referred to an immigration judge who will decide his fate in the next few weeks. On Aug. 13, he was released pending that hearing from the bleak high-security compound here that houses more than 600 detainees, many of them criminals, to a refugee shelter nearby. "Before passage of a Republican-backed law five years ago, only an immigration judge could order the deportation of someone who arrived without valid travel documents. Now, an immigration officer can exercise that power, called expedited removal, on the spot, a move intended to cut down on fraud...." To read the rest of the New York Times story, go to: nytimes.com For Sullivan’s Web page: andrewsullivan.com

To: Constant Reader who wrote (22816)	8/17/2001 6:12:06 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

CR, your quoted article actually had a dim ray of hope (soemthing that has been rare when we are talking about Zimbabwe) "Some recent events show that race and tribe mean less in Zimbabwe than ever before. Zimbabwe's opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change, is the largest interracial political party in Africa today. Even the two rival tribes that divided Zimbabwean politics for decades, the Shona and the Ndebele, have come together in the MDC. If the opposition is not cheated out of its expected victory in next year's presidential elections, Zimbabwe could be ruled by the most diverse and liberal coalition in Africa."