Dozens of Iranians and Iranian-Americans were held for hours at Washington State’s border with Canada over the weekend as the Department of Homeland Security ramped up security at border ports after Iran threatened to retaliate against the United States for the strike that killed its top military leader.
More than 60 of the travelers, many returning from work trips or vacations, were trying to come home to the United States on Saturday when agents at the Peace Arch Border Crossing in Blaine, Wash., held them for additional questioning about their political views and allegiances, according to advocacy groups and accounts from travelers.
Most of the travelers were released after the extra scrutiny, according to administration officials, although advocates said some were denied entry into the United States.
Masih Fouladi, an executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, said some were held in a waiting room and questioned for up to 10 hours. Later on Saturday night, when others who had just attended a concert in Canada by an Iranian pop star were trying to cross back into the United States, they were denied entry and told to come back later, Mr. Fouladi said.
When one family asked agents why they were being questioned, an officer told them, “This is a bad time to be an Iranian,” according to Mr. Fouladi, whose group has spoken to the travelers.
“These reports are extremely troubling and potentially constitute illegal detentions of United States citizens.”
quote:
The larger-scale detention of Iranians and Iranian-Americans seemed limited to Blaine on Sunday. Advocacy groups said they had not heard of similar incidents at airports and other ports of entry.
The travelers, some of whom asked that their full names not be published because of a fear of retaliation, said that after checking their documents, border officers would bring them inside the port to a room filled with other Iranians and Iranian-Americans.
Sepehr Ebrahimzadeh, 33, of Seattle said he was returning from Canada on Saturday afternoon with his girlfriend after they spent a week out of town for the holidays.
With his green card and a NEXUS pass that allows expedited processing, Mr. Ebrahimzadeh has not had any troubles at the border in recent years. When a border officer referred the couple for additional scrutiny, he suspected that it was because their vehicle was messy with winter sports gear.
He thought differently once he was inside the facility and noticed people of other backgrounds getting processed quickly, while the people of Iranian descent were left waiting for hours.
When agents questioned him, they asked about the countries Mr. Ebrahimzadeh had visited in the past five years, details about his family members and whether he had a military background.
They asked details about his father, who had performed military service before the Iranian Revolution. Mr. Ebrahimzadeh said agents did not question his girlfriend, Kathryn Teagarden, who does not have Iranian background.
Mr. Ebrahimzadeh said in an interview on Sunday that the experience had conjured up images of Japanese internment camps and left fears that the United States might prepare for war by rounding up anyone of Iranian descent.
“It’s not a pleasant thought, but it also doesn’t seem far-fetched,” he said.
The agency has in recent years rushed to aggressively question travelers at the border and airports after being surprised by major changes in national security policy, such as President Trump’s ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries.
The homeland security secretary at the time, John F. Kelly, told Congress in 2017 that the agency had rushed the rollout, and the Office of the Inspector General for Homeland Security found that agents were too aggressive in preventing passengers from boarding planes bound for the United States.
The travelers held at the Blaine port questioned whether the agency was repeating the same mistakes after Iran’s threat of a “forceful revenge” against the United States.
A woman from Kirkland, Wash., with United States citizenship said she had begun traveling home from Canada on Saturday morning after spending some time with family before her two young children were set to begin school again on Monday.
She said she got inside the border room for extra questioning a little after noon and ended up there for about six hours.
The agent who questioned her asked about her background, citizenship, military experience and details about her parents and siblings, including dates of birth and employment.
With her 5-year-old and 7-year-old also there, the woman said she could not bring herself to explain what was happening. She said she suggested to one of them that the reason they were getting extra scrutiny was because they had chocolate in their vehicle.
But she also went outside the facility to cry so they would not see how the situation was affecting her. It was not their fault, she added, that she was born in Iran.
Darian Vaziri, 21, said he and his family arrived at the border around 8 p.m. Saturday and were also placed under further scrutiny. He said his parents were born in Tehran, and the agents asked them about where they went to school, their family members, any military background and when they were last in Iran.
Mr. Vaziri said his parents, who live in Los Angeles, had been in the United States for four decades. They had come up to Seattle to visit family and had taken a day trip to Vancouver.
“My parents have been here for 40 years, legally, and they are still not being treated normally like everyone else,” Mr. Vaziri said.
1) And the political damage to the administration from doing this is precisely what? To Trump's base this is exactly what the government should be doing at present, and for many reasons. For some, I'm sure pure xenophobic joy is among the reasons. But for many, and I suspect this crosses over into parts of the political center, there are acceptable security reasons for some form of added scrutiny, even if "Iranian background" is a rather broad profile.
2) Exactly where do we draw the line between acceptable and appropriate added security measures and unacceptable and unethical racist treatment. My first thought is that if you've got this one completely worked out with a hard and fast answer, I'm guessing your answer is substantially ideological.
Posts: 12759 | Location: Williamsburg, VA | Registered: 19 July 2005
As an aside, let's say that an American journalist is captured and held hostage in Iran. Would this administration do anything at all to help out an "enemy of the people"?
Posts: 35428 | Location: West: North and South! | Registered: 20 April 2005
