Ignorance or a minor inconvenience?
The detention of the man speaking Tamil at at Seattle airport has been on my mind a lot -- perhaps because, as it concerns my own language, it hits pretty close to home.
But the big question here is, what is this incident an example of? Ignorance? Racism? Or simply a slight hassle faced by those who don't quite belong in this country at war with a shapeless, borderless enemy?
Some argue that the man was stopped because he was speaking the language of the Tamil Tigers, who have been labeled a terrorist group in the US. Others say that he should not have been speaking a foreign language in a country tense with the possibility of major attacks, particularly in an airport. And yet others rebuke those who protest this treatment for their unwillingness to put up with "minor inconveniences."
First of all, I very much doubt if the airport authorities recognized the language he was speaking as Tamil. Most South Asians barely recognize the language when they hear it. And the version of Tamil spoken by Sri Lankans is different enough that even those familiar with its more popular Indian version would not easily recognize it. So the argument that he was stopped for speaking the language of a terrorist group doesn't really hold much water.
Second, how can anyone expect someone in an AIRPORT, the port of entry and exit into a country, to not speak a foreign language? And clearly, they weren't stopping everyone speaking a foreign language, were they? How could they? How many Americans of Latin American descent speak nothing but Spanish in this country? How many people enter and exit the U.S. everyday speaking a myriad of "accepted" languages -- French, German, Russian, to name a few. Who detains them on the suspicion that they are terrorists because they speak a foreign language? And if they were stopped for no reason but this, would the authorities be able to live down the humiliation of doing so?
I would argue that this is more than simply a minor inconvenience. I agree that this is a country at war, and that every suspicion must be checked out. But such baseless profiling means that a man speaking about a school sporting rivalry in Tamil is detained, while another man plotting a bomb attack in French will be allowed to pass through, unless someone understands his conversation, and alerts authorities.
A minor inconvenience is when darker-skinned people, or those dressed a certain way are stopped at airports and subway stations to be questioned and to have their bags checked. It is racial profiling, but it is based on concrete fears that it was people who looked and dressed similarly who have created havoc and destruction in the past. Most of us have learned to accept this as part of life today. But detaining someone for speaking a language unfamiliar to the authorities is nothing but blatant ignorant racism. And it leaves a huge loophole for the real terrorists to slip through easily.
But the big question here is, what is this incident an example of? Ignorance? Racism? Or simply a slight hassle faced by those who don't quite belong in this country at war with a shapeless, borderless enemy?
Some argue that the man was stopped because he was speaking the language of the Tamil Tigers, who have been labeled a terrorist group in the US. Others say that he should not have been speaking a foreign language in a country tense with the possibility of major attacks, particularly in an airport. And yet others rebuke those who protest this treatment for their unwillingness to put up with "minor inconveniences."
First of all, I very much doubt if the airport authorities recognized the language he was speaking as Tamil. Most South Asians barely recognize the language when they hear it. And the version of Tamil spoken by Sri Lankans is different enough that even those familiar with its more popular Indian version would not easily recognize it. So the argument that he was stopped for speaking the language of a terrorist group doesn't really hold much water.
Second, how can anyone expect someone in an AIRPORT, the port of entry and exit into a country, to not speak a foreign language? And clearly, they weren't stopping everyone speaking a foreign language, were they? How could they? How many Americans of Latin American descent speak nothing but Spanish in this country? How many people enter and exit the U.S. everyday speaking a myriad of "accepted" languages -- French, German, Russian, to name a few. Who detains them on the suspicion that they are terrorists because they speak a foreign language? And if they were stopped for no reason but this, would the authorities be able to live down the humiliation of doing so?
I would argue that this is more than simply a minor inconvenience. I agree that this is a country at war, and that every suspicion must be checked out. But such baseless profiling means that a man speaking about a school sporting rivalry in Tamil is detained, while another man plotting a bomb attack in French will be allowed to pass through, unless someone understands his conversation, and alerts authorities.
A minor inconvenience is when darker-skinned people, or those dressed a certain way are stopped at airports and subway stations to be questioned and to have their bags checked. It is racial profiling, but it is based on concrete fears that it was people who looked and dressed similarly who have created havoc and destruction in the past. Most of us have learned to accept this as part of life today. But detaining someone for speaking a language unfamiliar to the authorities is nothing but blatant ignorant racism. And it leaves a huge loophole for the real terrorists to slip through easily.
posted by Anonymous at 1:08 PM
5 Comments:
I think we find it difficult to know how to behave right now... our fears creep in... and, yet, without fear, we lose our sense of alertness...
Hi, there. Off topic for this post...
My sister emailed me last night and wanted me to blog about the OJ Simpson book. I'm not too much for journalistic blogging, but I thought she was right. Now, you...I bet you'd have something intelligent and thoughtful to say about it.
Hello!
Glad you liked my Queen Victoria Post!
I read with interest the link about Newspapers dying out. For the last twenty years I have carried out the sales and marketing for a workshop for the blind and disabled and 75% of our business is making bright orange and yellow news paper delivery bags for the boys and girls to deliver newspapers with.
What with the Internet, youngsters not reading papers and less people having their papers home delivered I have noticeed the chnages in Newspaper Circulation.
Thanks for popping by my blog, I see that L.L has visited you too I like her blog).
Have a great weekend!
Kind Regards
Martin
Thanks for posting this. I hadn't heard the story because I am a practical news-o-phobe. But I was interested to read it--interested and dismayed. I think LL is right that we don't know how to behave--but you are right that this is still racism
A comparable event occurred in Europe last summer, when a planeload of holidaying brits refused to board unless two passengers were evicted from the flight, on grounds that they looked like terrorists. The airline complied and the two asian men were sent home on a different flight.
I'm not so sure whether these events are so uncommon - I think all of us have, at least once, thought about what some people were doing. For example four men got off at Sloane Square tube last night and looked round the platform. Now, this is not a station known for its architectural beauty, nor is there a good reason to get off there to wait for another train. Is it bad to think 'are they considering this as a place to bomb?'
But a poingnant question might be why ordinary persons are so alert in this way, today. Is the government creating this paranoia?
Post a Comment
<< Home