In " Close Encounters with US Immigration," Adnan R. Khan recounts his experience of being profiled for his skin color and ethnically distinct name when attempting to regain entry back into the USA. After having his car searched, notebook confiscated, questioned by the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and being made to feel like a criminal that needs to prove his innocence, Khan asks if this was really in the interest of protecting Americans. He concludes with austere contrast of crossing the Canadian border, which took only two questions in a few minutes. So the author's central idea behind this essay can be expressed best when he says, "When it was all over, I couldn't help but laugh as I drove back over the bridge, picturing my personal profile wasting kilobytes in an FBI database. I'd been grilled by three levels of American security and for what? Had America's national interest really been served?"(466).
Tags: Close encounters with US immigration, Adnan Khan and US immigration, Adnan Khan's close encounters with US immigration, Close encounters with US immigration by Adnan.R. khan, Adnan R. Khan
[...] Chavez is suggesting that other people should not be upset at being targeted based on race, and it is emotionally loaded, implying a rhetorical, it doesn't bother me, why should it bother In “Close Encounters with US Immigration,” Khan uses the expressive tone to show that he isn't provoking any incurrence against himself, and to put his emotions center stage. Also, in first person, the expressive aim here distributes the weight of Khan's beliefs in ascending order, as the essay builds momentum. [...]
[...] Racial profiling here smacks of almost a detention camp, close and personal to anyone not white, or white in another country. Rich in descriptive words, the phrasing here is dramatic, yet reserved with words like or “depressingly happy,” and implies his evaluation of a whole lifestyle shaped by profiling. Once again, here Khan does not outright condone or condemn racial profiling, but leaves the audience to judge if the scene he paints would be acceptable, applied to them. Being a Muslim, and an editor for a newspaper, plays a large role also, in how valid the judgment calls Khan makes are, or are not. [...]
[...] The way racial profiling is seen through the narration mode is more literary in “Close Encounters with US Immigration.” It is more entertaining and stresses the connotations of racial profiling in the image of the United States being a free country, and what a surprising contrast it is given America's mottos of “anyone can make it here.” There is a plot and setting which adds to the narration mode's effectiveness, and Khan paints pictures more vividly in the readers' minds of being at the border dealing with US immigration. [...]
[...] She relates this as a necessity for everyone's safety, implying that there must a basis for this profile with an analogy. The analogy she makes is if police knew from witnesses that a criminal was a six-foot-tall blonde male, but stopped females, short men, blacks or Latinos for questioning, they would be stupid. The bulk of this essay focuses on an incident with Walid Shater, an Arab-American secret service agent, who was taken off an airplane for questioning. Chavez relays that she, herself, has been profiled, but understands why she was “subjected to more scrutiny,” (for safety reasons). [...]
[...] Khan writes to persuade as well in his essay, “Close Encounters with US Immigration,” but it isn't to convince the audience to be blasé about intimidation based on skin color. His story is just that, a story with a beginning, middle and end. This is relevant to persuasion as it allows him time to show the development of his emotions, and incite sympathy in the reader. Being an editor of Maclean's, a business and political magazine, as well as a photojournalist would insinuate Khan has the ability to objectify a diversity of his experiences. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
