Human rights advocates and organizers working on immigrants’ rights in the United States must take a broader approach in our advocacy, rather than solely focusing on the rights of people once they get here. As Donald Trump  and debates on the  intensify, there is no doubt as to the immense scale of the problem. Nearly 24 people are . About 66 million people around the world . The Middle East and North Africa region accounts for  than any other.  have been internally displaced, and over 4.8 million are refugees outside of Syria — around half of the country’s pre-war population. The Iraq conflict displaced 4.4 million people internally and created more than a quarter of a million refugees. Yemen’s civil war displaced 2.5 million people. In Libya, almost half a million people were forced to flee their homes.

To address the root causes of this massive forced migration from the Middle East, advocates need to understand the various facets of this issue, including the role of US foreign policy that creates conditions that impel people to flee their countries. But this aspect of the issue is often left out of mainstream media coverage and political rhetoric.

As of August 2016, the US had appropriated, spent or taken on than $3.6 trillion on the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria and on Homeland Security (2001 through fiscal year 2016). Add to this an estimated $65 billion in dedicated war spending that the Department of Defense and State Department requested for 2017, along with nearly $32 billion requested for the Department of Homeland Security in 2017, and estimated spending on veterans in future years. Total US spending on the wars will easily reach $4.8 trillion.

These wars often have a pretense of humanitarianism. When George W. Bush  in Afghanistan in 2001, he also : “The oppressed people of Afghanistan will know the generosity of America and our allies. As we strike military targets, we will also drop food, medicine and supplies to the starving and suffering men and women and children of Afghanistan.”

However, the military engagement that began as Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan is now the longest war in America’s history, producing a death toll of 111,000 people, plus 1.4 million refugees internally and 2.5 million externally. Rather than freeing people from the Taliban, the invasion of Iraq and the weakening of the state in both Afghanistan and Iraq exacerbated the mobilization of extremist groups, facilitating the growth of the Islamic State and other offshoots, whose violence has produced refugees in large numbers. Other Western actors, specifically the United Kingdom, also had a role to play by taking part in and actively supporting the US mission.

In Iraq in 2003, the US intervened with the purported goal of finding weapons of mass destruction. Yet the US invasion of Iraq catapulted the country into a civil war, leading to widespread internal displacement, as noted earlier, in addition to at least  deaths of Iraqi civilians (estimates reach as high as 199,000).

In Libya, on March 28, 2011, Barack Obama  that the US would pursue the formation of an international coalition to protect civilians from the security forces of Muammar Qaddafi. After Qaddafi was overthrown, the country  as tribal and rival militias feuded over power, leading in turn to mass displacement of the same civilians that the US was purporting to protect. The entirety of US military operations in Libya .

According to the ), the United States dropped more than 26,000 bombs on Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan in 2016 — an average of 72 per day. CFR also notes that these estimates are “undoubtedly low” considering the lack of reliable data that the fact that a single “strike” can include multiple bombs. These numbers also do not include bombs dropped by other actors who were either aligned with the US or against it.

What the Future Holds

Trump campaigned on keeping immigrants out while increasing defense spending, and quickly added $30 billion in military spending to the FY 2017 budget. His FY 2018 budget will add another $96.5 billion to the military budget.

Then, in April 2017, Trump announced airstrikes against Syria without congressional authorization, sending 59 cruise missiles into Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad’s latest chemical weapons usage against his own citizens. Yet, in apparent contradiction to this claim of defending Syrian citizens, Trump attempted to ban Syrian refugees from the US, a ban that is now partially in effect.

Trump’s pre-inaugural pronouncements regarding the Middle East also sounded a colonialist note, with  noting his repeated insistence “that the US should ‘’ in  and Libya after intervening there.” This rhetoric, along with ramping up of defense spending, means that we should expect more of the same, if not worse, in US policy toward the Middle East.

The Role of Human Rights Advocates

Our most important obligation is to create public awareness about the roots of forced migration as steeped in US foreign policy. We cannot and should not divorce this issue from broader discussions around immigrants’ rights. Rights activists and organizations should hold educational forums specifically on roots of forced migration and invite directly affected migrants and refugees to speak. Stakeholders should continue to discuss this issue in-depth in any forums about immigrants’ rights, as well as in congressional and state legislative advocacy.

We should also do our utmost to hold the US government accountable for its foreign policy decisions that have led to disastrous consequences for millions around the world — and try to prevent additional wars. This is not a theoretical proposition as the US government is once again sounding out a belligerent tone, this time toward Iran, North Korea and Venezuela. We must hold our congressional representatives accountable and demand that they stop funding the wars. Looking to our history, it was only through massive and sustained mobilization of the American public against the war in Vietnam that the US government was finally forced to end its disastrous military intervention there.

Citizens of other countries can also hold their governments accountable by demanding that they not participate in any form or lend tacit support to US wars. As just one example, other countries can refuse the US military the use of their land or air space.

As we have begun to do in Georgia in our fight to  through documenting and exposing the abuses, we must work closely with organizations such as  in tying immigrants’ rights with US foreign policy and addressing both issues in a more holistic manner. It is only through making these linkages and collectively fighting against an unjust US foreign policy and repressive immigration policy that we can have any hope of finally addressing the roots of forced migration.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: /

The post The US Role in Forced Migration from the Middle East appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Paul is a Nigerian asylum-seeker who was until recently detained at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia. (“Paul” is a pseudonym to protect his safety.)

Paul is 36 years old and was healthy before being taken into US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody. During the summer of 2016, Paul had experienced tooth pain and ultimately was brought to the dentist on August 10. At the dentist’s office, he requested to use the restroom. An ICE officer escorted him to the bathroom, tied his hands and feet to the toilet and wrapped a chain tightly around his waist.

While chained to the toilet, Paul explained to the officer that the chain was too tight for him to urinate because it was pushing into his bladder. In the 1990s, he had undergone bladder surgery. Paul recovered and no longer experienced any bladder related issues, but the doctor had cautioned him not to cause any additional injury to his bladder. He pleaded with the officer to loosen the chain around his body because it was physically impossible for him to relieve himself, and it was causing him a great deal of pain. The officer refused to loosen the chain and insisted that the restraints were necessary.

Paul is only one of scores of detained immigrants we interviewed over a one-year period for a recently-published report, . The report focuses on the conditions of two detention centers in the state of Georgia: the and the . This report was produced by , an Atlanta-based social justice organization, and in collaboration with several other organizations. It is an update to the report created in 2012 titled  that focused on detention facilities based in Georgia. Stewart and Irwin were also previously identified in national reports as .

As illustrated by Paul’s account, life at these facilities for detained immigrants is still .

Since the summer day in the bathroom, Paul consistently experienced intense pain and felt weak throughout his body. He also had urine leaking through the 20-year-old surgery scar. He continuously requested medical attention but did not receive timely care. When he was finally allowed to see doctors outside of the facility, they said that he needed surgery. The facility medical staff was fully aware of this; they attempted a surgery in October at a regional hospital, but it was unsuccessful, and the surgeon stated he must be brought to a specialist for surgery.

The medical staff dragged its feet for months, finally securing a specialist and scheduling the surgery for late March 2017. After months of advocacy and securing of pro bono legal representation, Paul was finally released on parole, immediately before surgery was scheduled to be performed. He was then able to have surgery, but left with the expense. He remains with a drainage tube in his bladder and requires a second, more involved surgery this summer.

As detailed in the report, the conditions in these detention facilities are deplorable and include threats of force-feeding for participation in hunger strikes, sexual abuse, lack of clean drinking water, lack of adequate access to legal materials or attorneys, and labor for just $1 per day. Additionally, detained immigrants are frequently served rotten and spoiled food with occasional foreign particles inside. The food served is not in sufficient quantities.

Further, detained immigrants at both facilities lack adequate medical care and mental health services are minimal. Some detained immigrants also complained of not receiving dietary accommodations for religious beliefs and practices or health concerns.

The use of solitary confinement is far too rampant. Several detained immigrants reported being put in segregation for expressing suicidal thoughts or as retaliation for complaining about detention conditions.

A released by ICE just this week reports that a young man at Stewart Detention Center named Jean Jimenez-Joseph appears to have killed himself.

As told by one immigrant we interviewed at Stewart: “I was put in segregation for four days because I was on a hunger strike. There were about twenty other Somali detainees in segregation for the hunger strike. In segregation, I could not see outside and did not know if it was day or night. I could see the other detainees through a small window. The guards will bring the phone through the window for a detainee to use. The bathroom is located outside of the cell. Detainees must request an officer to take them to the bathroom. They are handcuffed and brought to the bathroom.”

As Imprisoned Justice shows, the conditions at Stewart and Irwin are inhumane and fail to comply with basic due process or the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) own standards on how individuals should be treated. The remote location of these facilities further keeps detained immigrants away from their families and access to legal counsel. The primary recommendation of the report is to shut down Stewart and Irwin Detention Centers.

Stewart and Irwin are two of more than 200 detention facilities but in many ways exemplify the deepest flaws with the US immigration detention system which in October 2016 . Most detained immigrants are forced to navigate their cases without legal representation or enforceable standards.

The national context of immigration detention since the election of Donald J. Trump reveals an even darker future. On the heels of signed by the president on January 25 on immigration enforcement, DHS Secretary John F. Kelly issued . These policies vastly expand the administration’s enforcement priorities and also send the message that anyone in violation of immigration laws will be subject to arrest, detention and deportation.

Also worrisome are recent reports about the administration’s plan to and further expand the immigration detention industry. In fact, DHS has already that could further expand the number of available beds by 33,000. These would be on top of the 34,000 beds that Congress has mandated that ICE maintain through the .

Stewart and Irwin need to be shut down. But as long as the immigration detention quota and Trump’s mass deportation plans remain in place, immigrants will continue to be unnecessarily detained in deplorable conditions.

*[This article was originally published by .����

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: 

The post Detained in Georgia: A Living Nightmare appeared first on 51�Թ�.

“Do you have any prejudice against Muslims?” We heard the judge ask a set of questions to each potential juror. To this inquiry, one middle aged white woman said, “Yes.” Judge William Duffey Jr. asked her to elaborate. “I’m afraid of them. They want to hurt us.” A former law enforcement agent also answered yes to that question. Both were chosen to sit on the jury at Ehsanul “Shifa” Sadequee’s trial in August 2009.

Sadequee was convicted of four counts of conspiring and attempting to support terrorists and a foreign terrorist organization. He did not provide material support to terrorist groups. He did not commit any acts of violence. A few online conversations, translations of Islamic texts, a video recording of Washington, DC, landmarks and paintball trips in the Georgia woods were presented as evidence to prove the potential of intent to provide support to a terrorist-identified group. The maximum sentence was 60 years in federal prison. The jury took less than seven hours to find him guilty. The judge sentenced him to 17 years in federal prison and 30 years surveillance, once released.

Atlanta-based organizers packed the courthouse every day of the trial with intergenerational, multiracial and multi-faith community members, legal advocates and supporters. We made sure Sadequee’s sisters and mother were interviewed and quoted in as much mainstream media coverage as possible. We attempted to restore a sense of Sadequee’s humanity to the public, who witnessed this trial unfold in the newspapers and radio broadcasts in Atlanta. After Sadequee had endured three-and-a-half years of torturous solitary confinement before trial, we understood the lighter sentencing was a sad victory of sorts. But we had not won anything.

Several of us stood in the hallway when the jurors left their deliberation chambers. One of the women said, “I wish we could have given him the death penalty,” and then got in the elevator.

Sadequee is just one victim of preemptive prosecution, in which loose application of conspiracy or material support laws, or other, similar tactics, are used to target individuals before any real harm has been committed. After September 11, 2001, preemptive prosecution has been used to prosecute individuals whose beliefs, ideologies or religious affiliations raise concerns for the government. In the 15 years since the 9/11 attacks, the US government has used preemptive prosecution liberally to root out domestic, “homegrown” terrorism.

Sadequee and his co-defendant, Haris Ahmed, represent collateral damage in the protracted and ambiguous War on Terror. This case and others like it also represent a reconfiguration of legal frameworks to attack people of color, Muslims, immigrants and political dissenters based on prosecution before a crime is committed. We must understand and contend with these new legal frameworks in order to protect basic human rights and also to protect social movements’ capacity to oppose injustice.

USA PATRIOT ACT AFTER 9/11

The threat of terrorism has justified detention, incarceration and mass surveillance. Post-9/11, hundreds of Muslims, South Asians and Arab community members  in connection with the attacks. Eight men arrested on immigration charges, who were then detained as suspected terrorists, filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and their fellow detainees alleging they were held based solely on their religion, race, ethnicity and immigration status. These individuals were  whilst in detention and were deprived of sleep and contact with the outside world. Their right to was also violated. Not one of them was . Their lawsuit against Bush administration officials was .

The USA PATRIOT Act changed surveillance laws to make it easier for the US government to obtain personal information without checks and balances. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) can use Section 505A of the act to  such as phone records, computer records, credit history and banking information on the basis of National Security Letters (NSL), which are similar to subpoenas. The NSLs do not require judicial approval; therefore, no check is in place on how the FBI gathers and uses personal information. From 2003 until 2005, the FBI , from which there were only 53 reported criminal referrals to prosecutors.

The USA PATRIOT Act also allows for . Even under the sections of the USA PATRIOT Act that require judicial authorization, the act only requires that FBI agents specify that their request is related to a foreign intelligence investigation. This makes the judicial review requirement more of a formality than actual meaningful oversight.

These broad surveillance tactics have a direct impact on communities. The Muslim Community Association of Ann Arbor, for example, has  their members have become less active within the community, and that attendance has dropped at prayers. They and multiple other associations, such as the Islamic Center of Portland, have also  that the government could be using the PATRIOT Act to target their members for investigation, and said that this has inhibited the religious and political expression of their members.

The Attorney General guidelines in 2008 also authorized “domain management assessments” that allow the FBI to  by race and ethnicity, using crude stereotypes to hypothesize about the crimes they are believed to be������������ to commit.

PREEMPTIVE PROSECUTIONS

Alongside the rise in the government’s ability to monitor people, Muslims in America have seen a rise in preemptive prosecutions. After 9/11, the FBI  and convict them of conspiracy and material support on what a  says is weak evidence. The FBI also  by using paid agents provocateurs. The government further  for non-terrorism-related crimes that they would have otherwise not prioritized.

According to a report by Project SALAM, a legal advocacy group focusing on post-9/11 prosecutions of Muslims, “excessive security … questionable governmental ‘experts,’ mistranslations and mischaracterizations of the defendants’ words and other unfair tactics.” Out of the 399 terrorism prosecutions by the Department of Justice between 2001 and 2010, .

Once people are tried and convicted, they enter the prison system and experience the horrific conditions that have been deteriorating over the last several decades of the mass incarceration crisis. The Federal Bureau of Prisons , one in 2006 and one in 2008, used to isolate and segregate specific imprisoned individuals from the rest of the prison population. In 2010, , despite Muslims only representing 6% of the general federal prison population. Shortly after his conviction seven years ago, Sadequee was sent to a Communications Management Unit in a federal prison (he was finally moved earlier this year).

51�Թ� provides you deep and diverse insights for free. Remember that we still have to pay for servers, website maintenance and much more. So, to keep us free, fair and independent.

Political and economic incentives drive the effort to manufacture these crimes and establish legal frameworks for mass incarceration, even when, as in Sadequee’s case, there is little to no evidence of wrongdoing. In order to justify inordinate spending on the massive Homeland Security apparatus, over-surveillance is baseline and new suspects are constructed through preemptive prosecution strategies.

IMMIGRANTS

It’s not just preemptive prosecution: Since 9/11, the federal government has tightened the security apparatus on immigrants, too. In 2005, the US government . Operation Streamline subjects captured individuals who have crossed the border without authorization to  before they are deported. In 2002, prior to Operation Streamline, there were 11,000 prosecutions for unlawful entry and reentry, . Operation Streamline has had a , and .

The trials often involve ; a single proceeding may include anywhere from two dozen to over 100 individuals. , most of whom have no prior criminal record, but become criminalized as a result of this process and have a higher likelihood of future US prosecutions.

Between 2005 and 2012, the US government  in addition to those detained in the civil immigration system. This has been hugely profitable to the private prison industry, with just two private prison companies exceeding $1.4 billion in revenue from the federal government in 2011. The recent announcement by the Department of Justice on  is a positive step forward, but the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—founded a year after 9/11—which is in charge of civil detention of immigrants—. Indeed, . As per a recent announcement from DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, the DHS will be  as well.

Like the ongoing War on Drugs, which continues to disproportionately lock up black and Latino Americans, the War on Terror and the growing war on immigrants use tactics of isolation, surveillance and a false narrative of crime and justice to criminalize people of color. Incarceration, detention and deportation separate families and cultivate fear within communities. Fabricated notions about national security, exploited politically in the wake of 9/11, justify increased surveillance and tracking. Drug use is considered a crime rather than a public health issue; migration is considered illegal rather than a global pattern related to poverty, climate disasters, and wars and instability often instigated by Western powers; and practicing your faith (if that faith is Islam) is considered a threat to public safety.

Our legal system is being rewired to police symptoms of poverty, and even thought. This legal rewiring is racially biased and politically motivated to create frameworks that allow for broad abuses that can be applied to any ideology or social group.

In the current political climate, in which presidential candidates express explicit racial hostility, Islamophobia manifests as more than hateful language. In Georgia, for example, Muslims have been blocked from building .

The connections between the ways in which different communities are attacked offer opportunities for greater collaboration through shared experiences. Multi-racial organizing strategies bring together communities facing similar problems from a variety of perspectives and positions. The Barrio Defense Committee models in Latino and US-Mexico border communities organize to provide support, protection and communication through existing family structures, schools, churches and sports teams. These strategies can inform organizing efforts in black communities to address police checkpoints. Movements to address the impact of counterterrorism are successful when organizations collaborate as multiracial and multi-faith alliances.

SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

Fifteen years after 9/11 and 10 years after Sadequee was kidnapped off the streets in Bangladesh to be tried in US federal courts, social movements in the United States have an opportunity to reflect on the ways that counter-terrorism has altered the political landscape. The concern that crosses religion, race and ideology remains that in this era, “terrorism” can be legally defined and redefined to include anyone challenging police brutality, state policies or representatives of the state.

Less than a year ago, we entered a county courthouse in Georgia where a black woman was arrested on terrorist charges based on videos she posted online addressing police shootings of black people. The prosecution argued that the videos, which included angry statements against the police, aimed to galvanize viewers to violent action. Many, including Sadequee’s family, rallied to support her and to draw connections from the bloated War on Terror budget to the increase in preemptive targeting of those expressing dissent. If we allow these cases to be tried individually in the courts and in the media, we will lose a systemic battle for civil liberties and social freedom. When we make the connections across issues and communities, we can break the isolation and build a stronger long-haul movement for social justice.

Since the time of Sadequee’s trial, more and more Muslim families have organized despite the fear and stigma. Organizations are investigating patterns of preemptive prosecution, communities are aligning with people accused of “terrorism,” packing courthouses and using media outlets to ensure transparency and support.

Families and organizations have had to fight these cases one by one, with many losses to our community bonds and loved ones, but we are also learning from tactics of the War on Terror, the war on immigrants and the War on Drugs to resist surveillance, criminal detention and preemptive prosecution. We are crafting stronger strategies based on a more comprehensive analysis of the situation. Communities are called to speak up when we see preemptive prosecution in any form, to analyze complex and horrifying situations like the Orlando shooting before jumping to conclusions about Islam and to organize and learn across our differences.

We are organizing for immediate wins on the legislative and legal fronts, and we are building a world that protects all people against fear, hate and violence. When we come together, we are stronger.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:

The post US Government Used 9/11 to Criminalize People of Color appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Muslim- in Kennesaw, who had hoped to use space in a retail shopping center as a prayer center recently had to confront hateful and ignorant comments from some residents, accusing them of being “enemies” and “infiltrators.” Even though community members who had applied for the permit had agreed to parking and other restrictions, the Kennesaw City Council to issue a permit by a 4-1 vote. The city’s “retail only” excuse quickly fell apart, considering that the city council had granted a permit to a Pentecostal church in a retail center. This pointed to blatant discrimination.

Faced with the threat of litigation and a Department of Justice Civil Rights investigation, the Kennesaw City Council changed its decision. “We hope that this will end the issue of us being outsiders,” the spokesperson, , told the news media.

But this isn’t the first time that a community in metro has faced obstacles in building or expanding a mosque in recent years. Muslim-Americans in Lilburn and Alpharetta also encountered roadblocks. Local officials only backed down after a filing of lawsuits and by the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division.

This unfortunate pattern of discrimination is not unique to Georgia either. As an American Civil Liberties (ACLU)  of anti-Muslim activity shows, Muslims across the , from to , to to , have faced vandalism or other criminal acts targeting their places of worship or refusals by local officials to issue necessary zoning permits for the construction and expansion of mosques. And while the excuse often proffered is noise, traffic and parking, local officials or residents can hardly fool anyone that what actually lies behind such attitudes is bias toward Muslim-Americans.

Preventing Muslims or any other group from practicing their faith is un-American. Religious freedom is one of America’s most fundamental liberties and a central  upon which this country was founded.

Denying people of faith a permit to construct a place of worship because of their violates the law. Federal law protects the right to build a , , mosque or any other house of worship. In fact, in 2000, Congress recognized the need to protect religious freedom by passing legislation against religious discrimination in zoning regulations. The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), with overwhelming bipartisan support, prohibits local governments from using zoning regulations to substantially burden religious exercise or to discriminate against houses of worship. This law was passed to ensure that in the face of controversy, local governments do not play favorites with religious groups or prevent certain groups from practicing their religion.

© Shutterstock

The connection between land use and the fundamental right to practice one’s religion is crucial, as in the Joint Statement of Senators Hatch and Kennedy, RLUIPA’s co-sponsors: “The right to build, buy or rent such a space (for churches and synagogues) is an indispensable adjunct to the core First Amendment right to assemble for religious purposes.”

RLUIPA’s provisions apply to programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance and where local procedures permit the government to make “individualized assessments of the proposed uses for the property involved.”

Per RLUIPA, if a zoning decision imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a faith group, the city must show that the decision is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means to achieve that purpose. This federal law also requires local governments to treat houses of worship on equal footing with similar non-religious facilities. RLUIPA also mandates that different religious groups be treated equally by government.

This statute represents a Congressional attempt at providing a mechanism for enforcing the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. It does not, however, supersede the traditional remedies for free exercise violations available under the First Amendment. Municipalities can be held liable for monetary and injunctive relief as a result of their unconstitutional or illegal laws and policies that run to the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause.

In examining these claims, strict scrutiny applies where, as in Kennesaw, the burden on religion results from an individualized governmental assessment. Zoning decisions, by their nature, impose individual assessment regimes in that they involve case-by-case evaluations of the propriety of proposed activity against land use regulations. Courts have recognized the “vulnerability of religious institutions—especially those that are not affiliated with the mainstream Protestant sects or the Roman Catholic Church—to subtle forms of discrimination when, as in the case of the grant or denial of zoning variances, a state delegates essentially standardless discretion to nonprofessionals operating without procedural safeguards.”

In Kennesaw, given the fact that the city had already granted a permit to another religious institution in a retail center, and the fact that the mosque applicants had already agreed to a variety of measures to address any supposed concerns regarding parking and traffic, it was highly unlikely that the city would be able to meet the high standard of review. Kennesaw City Council  made the right calculation in changing their decision on granting a permit to the mosque; their position would stand no chance in court. It would have been much better, however, if they had acted in favor of religious liberty in the first place and not only when faced with the potential for litigation.

Our political leaders and the constituents they represent must be reminded that discrimination is a losing proposition and that adherence to the Constitution is not optional. We must ensure that those who have lived and worshipped peacefully in Georgia for decades have the right to continue to do so. “I would invite our neighbors to really come and visit us and be understanding who we are, what we are, what we do and if any hard feelings are there, that would hopefully remove any of that,” said Taufique. Rather than to giving in to politics of hate, it is time to accept this invitation.

*[This article was originally published by .]

51�Թ� is a nonprofit organization dedicated to informing and educating global citizens about the critical issues of our time. Please  to keep us going.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: ��/ /��

The post What’s the “Mosque Controversy” in Georgia? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Reports are mounting of a living nightmare in Lumpkin, Georgia, at Stewart, a 1,750-bed detention facility housing immigrants facing potential deportation. According to multiple interviews with detained immigrants at Stewart, they are dealing with in food, improper medical care, sweltering temperatures and, in many cases, no communication with staff due to no translators on site. The Corrections Corporation of America operates the facility for profit, adding fuel to an already roaring fire of opposition.

While US President Barack Obama’s expanded deportation relief is a welcome move, the truth is that without addressing immigration detention, immigrants will continue to suffer horrifying conditions in detention centers.

Current US legislation is read by some members of Congress to require that at least 34,000 immigrants be held in detention beds at all times at a cost of $2 billion annually. This would mean that tens of thousands of immigrants will continue to be detained every year, even if others are granted reprieve from deportation.

That’s why executive action by the president on deportations should be accompanied by closing inhumane facilities like Stewart and ending the bed quota once and for all. Alternatives to detention are effective, much less costly and far more humane than institutional detention.

Resistance inside Stewart has grown at the same time as external pressure to close the facility has mounted. This past summer, dozens of detained immigrants there participated in a hunger strike. When a group of detained immigrants organized to bring concerns forward, things got ugly. There was a facility-wide, 24-hour lockdown in response and participating units were shut down longer.  Pepper spray was reportedly used against hunger strikers.

This retaliatory desire to shut down opposition in the face of gross human rights concerns is unacceptable.

Reports are mounting of a living nightmare in Lumpkin, Georgia, at Stewart, a 1,750-bed detention facility housing immigrants facing potential deportation. According to multiple interviews with detained immigrants at Stewart, they are dealing with maggots in food, improper medical care, sweltering temperatures and, in many cases, no communication with staff due to no translators on site. 

Ismael, an immigrant detained at Stewart, had a stroke on March 9, and passed out in his unit. After being released from the hospital back into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), he received no further treatment, follow-up or even a lower bunk. After a second stroke a month later, the detention center allowed him pain pills for resulting headaches, but no treatment or rehabilitation. Finally, before even reaching his hearing, Ismael decided under duress to sign his deportation papers and leave behind his life in the US to avoid further suffering.

Alcides became a lawful permanent resident of the US in 1996. He proudly served his country in Iraq, and is now a disabled veteran and wheelchair-bound. At Stewart, he was made to stand, causing him severe pain, and he has since lost feeling in his legs altogether. He went three and a half weeks without showering due to lack of assistance. After use of pepper spray at the facility in response to the hunger strike, he suffered seizures and was not provided with the correct medication upon return to the facility from the hospital. He joined the hunger strike in an attempt to get access to his prescribed medication.

This treatment is inhumane, un-American and, do recall, it is also for profit.

In a 2012 by the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, we found that Stewart has consistently failed to provide basic medical care, hygienic conditions or edible and adequate food for those in detention. Detained men who spoke up suffered retaliation: a commonly used tactic was placing them in solitary. Stewart has been ranked by watchdogs like the Detention Watch Network as one of the facilities in the country.

Despite years of advocacy by detained immigrants, their family members and human rights organizations, conditions have worsened.

Hundreds of people from across the US recently converged at the gates of Stewart to once again call for the closure of this facility. The time has come for the Obama administration and ICE to shut Stewart down, and for this painful chapter in the American treatment of immigrants to close.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

/

The post A Living Nightmare for Detained Immigrants in Georgia appeared first on 51�Թ�.