(Para leer en español, siga hasta la mitad.)
The United States of America means something different to every person. To many children growing up in Guatemala, it is this country of opportunity--opportunity to get the best education, opportunity to buy the latest technology at the lowest prices, opportunity to experience snow--which they will never be able to legally visit. In fact, this idea that the United States is unreachable legally is the reason that many don't bother trying to go legally.
To me, growing up in the United States, it obviously meant something quite different. It was a country of freedom and equality, innocent until proven guilty, everyone has an opportunity to succeed, and--maybe more than anything else--a melting pot of cultures. Through my life, I have heard of injustices done by the United States (some which have struck Guatemala quite hard), but I had never actually experienced an injustice by the United States until today.
Today, Edgar--the young man whom I have written about--was denied a visa to visit the United States.
If I may borrow a few lines from some well-written writers: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Wait, what? All men are created equal. The "Americans" were saying "We're equal to the British." So, if you don't mind, please tell me why a Guatemalan should be treated differently? As an American, I can travel to almost ANY country I want without having to apply for anything in advance. I simply have to buy a plane ticket and go. And the majority of countries that I actually do need to apply for something, it's a simple matter of informing the government of that country that I wish to go, and I'm granted the right to go there.
Now, forgive me because I've always done poorly with history, but I'm pretty sure there was some Monroe Doctrine written in the 1820s that basically told the rest of Europe to stay out of the Western Hemisphere, that their oppression wasn't wanted here. Does that give the United States the freedom to oppress these people? Oh, in case you're wondering what definition I'm using of "oppression," I'm pretty much pulling those "inalienable rights" from the paragraph above. Anyone (or any government) which does not allow people the rights "endowed by their Creator" to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is oppressive. What is happiness? To my friend Edgar, it was (is) to visit the United States, to see where I grew up, to meet my friends, and to attend the wedding of our friend Christina. That was (is) what he wanted (wants).
I would now like to present two conflicting legal ideas in the United States (again, forgive me as I didn't study law either): Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat and Immigration and Nationality Act section 214(b). Now, seeing as I doubt many of you have studied Latin or are familiar with INA 214(b), I'll give you a brief overview of each. You are all familiar with "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat" as "Innocent until proven guilty." INA 214(b) is as follows: "Every alien shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)." Or, as I read it, "Guilty of illegal immigration without any proof or fair trial." If you asked a jury--considering all "evidence" that was presented--Edgar could not be found guilty of this non-crime which he didn't and wouldn't commit.
In conjunction with this, I would like to address the $140 non-refundable application fee. That's completely ridiculous considering the US's completely discriminatory policy on giving visas.
So, to the United States of America, I only have this to say: Any faith I had left in you or your legal system has just failed. Any confidence I had in you has just been lost. What some immigration officer in the US Embassy in Guatemala did today has confirmed that the United States of America is an egotistical and racist country who one day is going to run into a lot of problems and not have anyone to turn to for help. Don't you get it? You "help" (interfere) with other countries and ignore your own people. And then when you do bother to pay attention to their needs, you have no clue what they want because the "ruling elite" of the United States is so out of touch with the common man. Fix yourself...please...for the good of everyone.
And, as a final note, I am proud to be an American, to be a member of a country where I am allowed to tell the government that it has serious problems with its policies at home and abroad, to be a member of a country which allows me to travel quite freely to countries where there are people much better than ourselves (as a country).
_____________________________________________________________________
Los EE.UU. significa algo diferente para cada persona. Para muchos niños, creciendo en Guatemala, es un pais de oportunidades--oportunidades para recibir la mejor de educacion, oportunidades para comprar la tecnologia de moda con los precios mas baratos, oportunidades para tocar la nieve--que nunca podran a visitar legalmente. En verdad, esta idea que ir a los EE.UU. legalmente no sera posible es la razon que muchos no intentan irse legal.
Para mi, creciendo en los EE.UU., es obviamente algo muy diferente. Era un pais de liberted y igualdad, innocente hasta demostrado culpable, todos tienen la oportunidad para triunfar, y--talvez mas que todo--una gran mezcla de culturas. Durante mi vida, he escuchado de injusticias hecho por los Estados Unidos (unas que han afectado a Guatemala mucho), pero nunca habia estado afectado personalmente por las injusticias de los Estados Unidos hasta el dia de hoy.
Hoy, los EE. UU. denego una visa visitante a Edgar, el joven de quien he escrito.
Si puedo prestar unas palabras de autores buenos: Sostenemos como evidentes por sí mismas dichas verdades: que todos los hombres son creados iguales; que son dotados por su creador de ciertos derechos inalienables; que entre estos están la vida, la libertad y la búsqueda de la felicidad. Espere, que? Todos los hombres son creados iguales. Los "estadounidenses" estaban diciendo "Somos iguales con los ingleses." Pues, si no le molesta, por favor explica a mi porque un guatemalteco debe estar tratado diferente? Como una estadounidensa, puedo viajar a casi qualquier pais que quiero sin solicitacion. Unicamente tengo que comprar un boleto de avion y ir. Y para la mayoria de los paises con quien necesito una solicitud, es solamente un aviso al gobierno de este pais que quiero visitarle, y me dan permiso.
Ahora tengo que pedir perdon porque la historia me costo, pero creo que habia algun "Monroe Doctrine" escrito en los 1820s que mas o menos dijo a todo europa que "alejense de el hemisfero oeste," que su opresión no era bienvenida aca. Eso dio la derecha a los Estados Unidos que pueden oprimir estas personas? Si quieren saber cual definicion de "opresión" que estoy usando, estoy halando los "derechos inalienables" del parafo anterior. Alguien (o cualquier gobierno) que no permite gente los derechos "dotados por su creador" que son "la vida, la libertad, y la búsqueda de la felicidad" es opresivo. Que es la felicidad? Para mi amigo Edgar, era (es) visitar a los Estados Unidos, ver donde yo creci, conocer a mis amigos, y asistir a la boda de nuestra amiga Christina. Eso era (es) lo que el queria (quiere).
Ahora quiero presentar dos ideas legales contrapuestos en los EE.UU. (otra vez, pido perdon porque no estudie derechos tampoco): Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat y Ley de Inmigración y Nacionalidad ("INA," en ingles) seccion 214(b). No creo que muchos de ustedes han estudiado latin ni conocen INA 214(b), entonces, les doy un resumen de cada uno. Creo que todo conocen a "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat" como "presunción de inocencia," un principio jurídico penal que establece la inocencia de la persona como regla. INA 214(b) es como asi: "Cada extranjero estara presumido ser inmigrante hasta establezca a la satisfecha del agente consular, en el momento de aplicacion de la visa, y los agentes inmigraciones, en el momento de admision, que tiene derecho para una visa no-inmigrante por seccion 101(a)(15)." O como yo lo leo, "culpable de inmigracion ilegal sin prueba o proceso justo." Si preguntaria un jurado--con toda la evidencia que era presentado--no puede establecer la culpa de Edgar para este no-delito que no ha cometido y no cometeria.
Juntamente con esto, quiero mencionar el $140 tasa de solicitud no-reembolosa. Eso es completamente ridiculo con la politica descriminatoria de los EE.UU. sobre la entrega de visas visitantes.
En conclusion, a los EE.UU., tengo solo esto que decir: El poco fe que todavia tenia en ti o tu sistema legal ahora ha fallado. La poca confianza que tenia en ti ahora has perdido. Lo que algun agente consular en la embajada de los EE.UU. en Guatemala hecho hoy ha confirmado que los Estados Unidos de America es un pais egoisto y racisto quien un dia va a encontrar muchos problemas y no tener nadie para ayudarles. No entiendes? Tu "ayudas" (interferes) a otros paises y no pones atencion a tu propia gente. Y cuando, por fin, pones atencion a sus necesidades, no tienes una idea que quieren porque el "elite en el poder" de los EE.UU. no conoce el hombre comun. Arreglarte...por favor...por lo bien de todos.
Y, como un punto final, estoy orgullosa para ser una estadounidensa, para ser una miembra de un pais donde tengo permiso a decir el gobierno que tiene problemas muy graves con sus politicos alla y aca, para ser miembra de un pais que me permita viajar con libertad a otros paises donde hay gente mucho mejor que nosotros (como un pais).
No comments:
Post a Comment