The War on Drugs: Nonsense and Insensibilities
Posted May 14, 2007 on 3:18 pm | In the category Terrorism, Canada, U.S. Domestic Policy, Immigration | by JeffA short item in the NY Times today tells of a Canadian psychotherapist who was stopped at the border by U.S. immigration officials who searched his name on the Internet and learned that he had written in an academic journal about his experiences with psychedelic drugs in the 1960’s. The article continues:
He was asked by a border guard whether he was the author of the article and whether it was true. Yes, he replied. And yes.
Mr. Feldmar was held for four hours, fingerprinted and, after signing a statement conceding the long-ago drug use, sent home.
Mike Milne, a spokesman for the Customs and Border Protection agency in Seattle, said he could not discuss individual cases for reasons of privacy. But the law is clear, Mr. Milne said. People who have used drugs are not welcome here.
“If you are or have been a drug user,” he said, “that’s one of the many things that can make you inadmissible to the United States.”
Since the psychotherapist gave up drugs in 1974 he could hardly be deemed any more of a threat than – oh let’s say, the border guard who did a random and arbitrary internet search and added one more nail in the twin coffins of a sane immigration policy and an effective war on terror.
The good news is that this raises the possibility of extraditing known cocaine user George W. Bush to whoever would take him – maybe Iraq? Not Canada certainly.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
ok jeff, i have here on my desk an email from a ICE (God, what an acronymn)supervisor regarding a young border guard i complained about on our last trip ‘over the line’. this kid was using his ‘ASP’ as an instrument of inspection on a vehicle in front of me at the Oroville, Wa crossing. he was aggressively poking and prodding the back seat and cargo area of a 4 door pickup, as if he were killing rats or something. since i am in the business of searching vehicles and people for the us gov, i am somewhat familiar with proper technique, and this was not it. it was intimidating, frightening for the subject being inspected, and an improper use of what is for all intents and purposes, a weapon. anyway, long story short, the supervisor asked for the particulars which i gave him and he assured me he would dress down the individual. my point is this: i corresponded with him thru official gov channels, and used my title, etc. would he have responded to joe citizen in the same way? i regretfully say i doubt it. i have seen it. our problem (or one of them) is the lack of professionalisim in our civil service system - you know, the one that bush runs. bad training, poor screening of applicants, and inadequate follow-up on complaints and examples of unprofessional work ethics abounds. give me a solution please. i can’t think of one candidate who would overhaul this burdensome, cumbersome inefficient system and make it something worth writing home about, eh?
cole cordray
colecordray@msn.com
Comment by cole cordray — December 30, 2007 #
Alas, i have to agree with Cole Cordray on his two final points - It is very difficult to get the bureaucracy’s attention if you are only Joe Citizen (you know, the guy who pays your salary) and we would need a sea change to get action on making the bureaucracy more competent and committed to actual service. And I do not hear anyone of the candidates saying that it would be important to spend the resources needed to improve the quality/competence of government service. i suspect there are a lot of reasons for this including fear of taxes, the myth of the efficiency of the private sector, a commitment to large corporations, and the willingness of the American people to vote against their own interests.
Comment by jeff — December 30, 2007 #