# data[].attributes.body
Almost Every Image in this board has a connection to Xenophobia, especially in today's world and to The Crucible. Some article are much of recent news or what our society has gone through.

# data[].attributes.body
The text from The Crucible relates to Xenophobia and fear since people like Abigail and Putnam decide to put blame on Tituba, a woman from Barbados. After being attacked, she fears everything, especially said Devil of what Rev. Hale says. When people put blame on a Foreigner, they tend to have irrational fear and become paranoid.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last week President Trump reaffirmed his travel ban on six Muslim countries. As a fig leaf, he also threw in North Korea and Venezuela - nations that are not majority Muslim but hardly founts of travel to America - trumpeting his resolve to foil terrorism.

This fools no one beyond his most fervent followers. Bereft of domestic successes, Trump seeks to assuage his base by embracing an "America First" policy drenched in xenophobia. In the past weeks, Trump has affirmed his indifference to democracy and people beyond our shores, embracing legislation that sharply limits legal immigration; entertaining a further choke hold on admitting immigrants; renouncing our commitment to humanitarian ideals abroad; and rejecting pleas to help refugees from war and bloodshed.

This is a tragedy for countless others - and for us. Without surcease, Trump is attacking that which defines America at its best: its identity as advocate for democracy and refuge for the oppressed.

Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson have now discarded democracy and human rights as pillars of American foreign policy. Such sentiments, they assert, impede America in pursuing its self-interest. Their message to the subjugated and endangered is stark: Unless it serves Trump's transactional worldview, their plight - no matter how miserable - does not concern us.

True, geopolitics are complex, and our historic fidelity to democratic and humanitarian principles has been decidedly mixed. But no president before Trump has rejected them outright. Repeatedly, he is most drawn to autocracy and autocrats, including the dictatorial and murderous Vladimir Putin - about whose interference in our own democracy Trumps remains silent.

There is one truth in Trump's ideas but several dangerous myths.

Blind to history and oblivious to strategy, Trump's myopic machismo endangers America's security. In a dangerous world our most willing and reliable allies have always been democracies that honor human rights: They have joined our military and diplomatic coalitions, shared intelligence in the struggle against terrorism, helped us subdue pandemics, and served as our closest trading partners.

In contrast, the violent extremism we fight together thrives where repression and corruption flourish. Uncritically supporting autocrats stokes anti-Americanism, squandering our moral capital and diminishing our influence on repressive regimes that breed aggression, instability, and human suffering. Our burgeoning global unpopularity does not evince Trump's strength, but his foolishness.

Nor does espousing human rights mean imposing American values. Throughout history, brave men and women have risked everything in the hope of securing those same rights. Nelson Mandela was not promoting America's agenda; he suffered imprisonment so that black South Africans would suffer no more. Our shame lies in how long we failed to support him.

We must not let Trump shame us now. Thus we must also defend another hallmark of our better selves: America's historic role as refuge for the endangered and oppressed.

Trump's renewed Muslim ban is a cynical effort to placate his base. Most appalling is his indefinite ban on refugees from Syria's slaughterhouse, a genocidal horror that condemns hundreds of thousands of civilians to death, hunger, trauma, and catastrophic injury. To all this Donald Trump's America has turned its back.

But not just on Muslims - or Syrians. As Trump regaled its General Assembly with threats to North Korea's leader, the United Nations continued imploring the world to shelter 1.2 million refugees from conflict and persecution. But Trump told the General Assembly that he wants to prevent refugees from resettling in the United States. He supports legislation to cut legal immigration by half, and proposes capping refugee admissions at 45,000 per year, a far cry from Barack Obama's goal of 110,000. Meanwhile Stephen Miller, Trump's chief adviser on immigration, is urging a ceiling of 15,000 - roughly half the number of refugees created each day - subordinating humanitarian urgency to Trump's nativist agenda.

This is morally inexcusable. Those whom Trump shuns include children bereft of family, and survivors of rape, torture, and religious persecution. Contrary to his assertions, our vetting program for refugees is stringent and safe.

Countries that shelter these refugees - severely straining their resources - include those, like Jordan, critical to regions where we deploy American troops and seek to counter terrorism. Our willingness to emulate them enhances our national security by affirming America's own humanitarian commitment. Beyond that, it is imperative to welcome those - including Muslims - who risked their lives to oppose terrorism and assist American efforts. Here compassion and self-interest converge.

Our openness to the oppressed tells the world that we are worthy of emulation, not enmity. Our strength derives not merely from those who are Americans by accident of birth, but from those who made a free and cherished choice. Trump's rhetoric notwithstanding, our economy grows with their help - as confirmed by a study from the Department of Health and Human Services that the administration rejected.

We cannot let him redefine the world's richest country by his poverty of spirit.

Richard North Patterson's column appears regularly in the Globe. His latest book is "Fever Swamp." Follow him on Twitter @RicPatterson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The dangerous path of Trump's xenophobia - The Boston Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last week President Trump reaffirmed his travel ban on six Muslim countries. As a fig leaf, he also threw in North Korea and Venezuela - nations that are not majority Muslim but hardly founts of travel to America - trumpeting his resolve to foil terrorism. This fools no one beyond his most fervent followers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald Trump is now effectively at war with undocumented migrants inside the US and those who attempt to cross the southern border without paperwork.

Advisers and analysts alike have long suggested that Trump ought to be taken "seriously but not literally", but Wednesday's two executive orders on immigration show that he is living up to the blustering rhetoric of the 2016 election trail.

It was a promise he made throughout an election campaign characterised by xenophobia, and one he has now underlined with a few flicks of the presidential pen.

Attention focused upon Trump's banner promise to erect a wall across an additional 1,200 miles of the US southern border - an order that will undoubtedly meet with stiff opposition when Congress is lobbied into funding the multibillion-dollar construction project that has, by Trump's homeland security secretary's own admission, limited effectiveness in deterring entry. There was also coverage of the aggressive declaration of intent to withdraw some funding to hundreds of sanctuary cities - those jurisdictions which offer protection to undocumented migrants - which will probably meet with vigorous legal opposition. However, Wednesday's orders went further and carried instantaneous repercussions through dramatic immigration policy reversals that have been somewhat overlooked in the flurry of executive action.

The US will now mandatorily detain any migrant that is caught crossing the border without documentation. Doing away with the era of so-called catch and release that allowed immigration authorities greater freedom to release those claiming asylum ahead of proceedings in immigration court, the order paves the way for a huge expansion of detention facilities at the southern border and is likely to have devastating humanitarian effects.

Nearly 60,000 unaccompanied minors and close to 80,000 families were apprehended at the border in 2016, the vast majority of whom came from countries in Central America plagued by violence.

Now these groups of migrants, who received a degree of flexibility under the Obama administration, will be kept in detention by order.

Advocates routinely report substandard medical care and poorly managed basic facilities in these centres, many of which are operated by for-profit security companies. Coupled with this, the order instructs the US justice department to assign immigration judges, who are already in short supply and heavily overburdened, to these centres.

This in effect makes it far more difficult for these vulnerable migrants, many of whom are likely to have claims for asylum, to reach independent legal counsel and will mean many more are likely to face deportation - perhaps in violation of America's legal obligations under the UN Refugee Convention.

Trump's orders also implement aggressive enforcement action inside the country, away from America's borders.

The president repeatedly claimed throughout the transition period he would deport between 2 million and 3 million undocumented migrants in the country who he claimed were serious criminals. That notion itself is a fallacy, as there are nowhere near that number of undocumented migrants with felony records in the US (researchers estimate the number is closer to 300,000).

Indeed, elements of Trump's second immigration order acknowledge that fantasy by essentially broadening the definition of serious criminality, giving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents a vast remit to target almost anyone within undocumented communities and perhaps even those holding visas as the order simply targets "removable aliens" - a broad, catchall term that could encompass non-citizens as well.

Not only will Ice agents be allowed to target immigrants with any sort of criminal conviction on their record whatsoever, from minor misdemeanours such as trespassing or vandalism to serious felonies, they will also be able to apprehend individuals who have simply been accused of crimes and subject to investigation.

But the order goes broader even than that, allowing Ice officers the ability to target people they assess to be a "risk to public safety or national security". The order offers no guidance at all on how such a broad definition could be applied, leaving it to the "judgment" of individual Ice agents.

Since 2014, the Obama administration had heavily cut back on deportations occurring within the interior of the country, implementing a program of " priority enforcement " that instructed Ice to focus on undocumented migrants picked up by local law enforcement and found to have serious felony convictions on their records.

That short-lived era of discretion is now over. As Trump pledges to significantly bolster the ranks of Ice agents and border patrol officers, he will effectively control a small army of enforcers empowered by a remit that is both harsh and broad.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US could face human rights crisis after Trump's xenophobic immigration orders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald Trump is now effectively at war with undocumented migrants inside the US and those who attempt to cross the southern border without paperwork. Advisers and analysts alike have long suggested that Trump ought to be taken "seriously but not literally", but Wednesday's two executive orders on immigration show that he is living up to the blustering rhetoric of the 2016 election trail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Poet Emma Lazarus wrote a poem titled "The New Colossus" in 1883 to help raise funds for the Statue of Liberty, which was completed three years later. The poem, often cited as representative of the U.S. approach to immigration, reads in part:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free ..."

But bigotry against even European American immigrants was rife at the time Lazarus wrote the poem, and immigration quotas based on racial hierarchies formally passed in 1924 and would remain in effect until 1965. Her poem represented an unrealized ideal - and, sadly, still does.

American Indians

When European nations began to colonize the Americas, they ran into a problem: The Americas were already populated. They dealt with this problem by enslaving and ultimately eliminating most of the indigenous population - reducing it by approximately 95% - and deporting the survivors to undeveloped ghettos that the government, without irony, referred to as "reservations."
These harsh policies could not have been justified if American Indians were treated like human beings. Colonists wrote that American Indians had no religions and no governments, that they practiced savage and sometimes physically impossible acts - that they, in short, acceptable victims of genocide. In the United States, this legacy of violent conquest remains largely ignored.

African Americans

Before 1965, the United States' few non-white immigrants often had to overcome considerable hurdles to settle here. But until 1808 (legally) and for years thereafter (illegally), the United States forcibly recruited and enslaved African people, thus turning them into involuntary immigrants.
You'd think that a country that had put so much brutal effort into bringing immigrant forced laborers here would at least welcome them when they'd arrived, but the popular view of Africans was that they were violent, amoral savages who could be made useful only if forced to conform to Christian and European traditions. Post- enslavement, African immigrants have been subjected to many of the same prejudices, and face many of the same stereotypes that existed two centuries ago.

English and Scottish Americans

Surely Anglos and Scots have never been subject to xenophobia? After all, the United States was originally an Anglo-American institution, wasn't it?
Well, yes and no. In the years leading up to the American Revolution, Britain began to be perceived as a villainous empire - and first-generation English immigrants were often viewed with hostility or suspicion. An anti-English sentiment was a significant factor in John Adams' defeat in the 1800 presidential election against the anti-English, pro-French candidate Thomas Jefferson. U.S. opposition to England and Scotland continued up to and including the American Civil War; it was only with the two world wars of the twentieth century that Anglo-U.S. relations finally warmed up.

Chinese Americans

Chinese American workers began to arrive in large numbers in the late 1840s and helped build many of the railroads that would form the backbone of the emerging U.S. economy. But by 1880 there were some 110,000 Chinese Americans in the country, and some white Americans didn't like the growing ethnic diversity.
Congress responded with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which stated that Chinese immigration "endangers the good order of certain localities" and would no longer be tolerated. Other responses ranged from bizarre local laws (such as California's tax on the hiring of Chinese American laborers) to outright violence (such as Oregon's Chinese Massacre of 1887, in which 31 Chinese Americans were murdered by an angry white mob).

German Americans

German Americans make up the largest identified ethnic group in the United States today but have historically been subjected to xenophobia as well - primarily during the two World Wars, as Germany and the United States were enemies in both.
During World War I, some states went so far as to make it illegal to speak German - a law that was actually enforced on a widespread basis in Montana, and that had a chilling effect on first-generation German American immigrants living elsewhere.
This anti-German sentiment bubbled up again during World War II when some 11,000 German Americans were detained indefinitely by executive order without trials or normal due process protections.

Indian Americans

Thousands of Indian Americans had become citizens when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923), holding that Indians are not white and therefore may not become U.S. citizens by immigration. Thind, an officer for U.S. Army during World War I, initially had his citizenship revoked but was able to quietly immigrate later. Other Indian Americans were not so lucky and lost both their citizenship and their land.

Italian Americans

In October 1890, New Orleans police chief David Hennessy lay dying from bullet wounds he received on his way home from work. Locals blamed Italian American immigrants, arguing that the "mafia" was responsible for the murder. Police duly arrested 19 immigrants, but had no real evidence against them; charges were dropped against ten of them, and the other nine were acquitted in March of 1891. The day after the acquittal, 11 of the accused were attacked by a white mob and murdered in the streets. Mafia stereotypes affect Italian Americans to this day.
Italy's status as an enemy in World War II was also problematic - leading to arrests, internments, and travel restrictions leveled against thousands of law-abiding Italian Americans.

Japanese Americans

No community was more significantly affected by the World War II "enemy alien" detentions than Japanese Americans. An estimated 110,000 were detained in internment camps during the war, detentions that the U.S. Supreme Court dubiously upheld in Hirabayashi v. the United States (1943) and Korematsu v. the United States (1944).
Prior to World War II, Japanese American immigration was most common in Hawaii and California. In California, in particular, some whites resented the presence of Japanese American farmers and other landowners - leading to the passage of the California Alien Land Law of 1913, which prohibited Japanese Americans from owning land.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Short History of Xenophobia in America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Poet Emma Lazarus wrote a poem titled "The New Colossus" in 1883 to help raise funds for the Statue of Liberty, which was completed three years later. The poem, often cited as representative of the U.S. approach to immigration, reads in part: "Give me your tired, your poor,Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free ..."

# data[].attributes.body
Pg. 44
TITUBA: "Mister Reverend, I never"
HALE: "When did you compact with the Devil?"
TITUBA: "I don‘t compact with no devil!"
PARRIS: "You will confess yourself or I will take you out and whip you to your death, Tituba!"
PUTNAM: "This woman must be hanged! She must be taken and hanged!" TITUBA: "No-no, don‘t hang Tituba. I tell him I don‘t desire to work for him, sir"

# data[].attributes.body
Pg. 43:
ABIGAIL: "I know not--she spoke Barbados"
HALE: "Did you feel any strangeness when she called him? A sudden cold wind, perhaps? A trembling below the ground?" ABIGAIL: "I didn‘t see no Devil!—(To Betty, frantically.) Betty, wake up, Betty! Betty!"

# data[].attributes.headline
Americans think that Patriotism means "Racism and Xenophobia"

# data[].attributes.subject
Americans think that Patriotism means "Racism and Xenophobia"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, patriotism took on many masks and many faces. For some it meant planting flags in their front yards and cherishing the rights we enjoy in this country. For others it took on a flawed and dangerous form. Violence against South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, and Arab Americans skyrocketed in the weeks and months after 9/11. New government policies painted our communities with suspicion and guilt. The notion that patriotism and racism are synonymous was used against us after 9/11, and the horror has lasted 16 years, flowing and ebbing under Presidents Bush and Obama. That notion has only increased in fury under the Trump administration.

I was in New York on 9/11, working downtown not too far from the attacks. In the days that followed I feared for my safety for the first time in my life: not from planes nose-diving from the sky, but from assaults on the subway or on the street. These fears were not misplaced. The first shots fired after the attacks were on September 15 in Mesa, Arizona, when Balbir Singh Sodhi, a Sikh gas station owner, was killed by Frank Silva Roque, a racist gunman who wanted to "go out and shoot some towel-heads." During his arrest Roque screamed, "I am a patriot! I stand for America all the way!" This is how he pledged allegiance to our flag.

Our communities experienced many ensuing acts of hate. In the first week after 9/11, 645 bias incidents nationwide were reported by media organizations. In the months that followed, our houses of worship were surveilled by the NYPD and other law-enforcement agencies, our rights were violated and our dignity stripped at airports, and our children were bullied in school and harassed on the Internet. Government policies such as the Patriot Act and the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System were implemented, the latter of which opened cases against 83,000 Muslims entering or living in the United States. The result of this vast ethnic profiling? Zero terrorism-related convictions.

Meanwhile, the body count in our communities has mounted. In 2012, a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, was attacked by a gunman who killed six people and wounded four others before taking his own life. In 2015, three young Arab students in North Carolina were murdered in their homes by their white-supremacist neighbor. In 2016, a Lebanese-American man was shot and killed on his own porch by a racist neighbor who had a documented history of anti-Arab hate. Related Article

In 2017, our communities are facing hate violence at levels that rival the aftermath of 9/11. The Trump administration-which is now implementing policies that mirror his bigoted rhetoric on the campaign trail-continues to roll out anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant policies that embolden hate groups to attack our communities. President Trump has test-fired several versions of the "Muslim ban," rescinded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, and strongly supported the RAISE Act that seeks to slash immigration by 50 percent in a decade, as well as implementing other destructive policies. Since the presidential election, South Asian Americans Leading Together has documented over 150 incidents of violence against those who identify or are perceived as Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, South Asian, Middle Eastern, or Arab American, already surpassing totals from the year leading up to the 2016 election. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, anti-Muslim hate groups grew by 197 percent in 2016, and, according to the FBI, anti-Muslim hate crimes increased by 67 percent in 2015.

In February two Indian-Americans were shot by a gunman screaming, "Get out of my country." Days later a Sikh man was shot on his driveway in Washington State by an assailant screaming, "Go back to your country." In August a Minnesota mosque was firebombed in what the governor rightly declared an "act of terrorism." In May, Jeremy Joseph Christian, a known white supremacist, harassed a Muslim passenger on a commuter train in Portland. When three men tried to intervene, Christian stabbed two of them to death. Reminiscent of Roque's racism in 2001, Christian proclaimed at his arraignment, "You call it terrorism; I call it patriotism!"

After these attacks, the president remains silent. His silence is a clear signal to the Roques and the Christians of the world that white supremacy and Islamophobia are not only admirable, they are patriotic.

Our communities know that the highest form of patriotism is dissent: We have lived it for 16 years. We've spoken out when we've seen injustice, and we've crowded airports to protest an unlawful "Muslim ban." We've stood united with those from all faiths, colors, and backgrounds, against racism and division in Charlottesville, Boston, Berkeley, and beyond. We've stared down ACT for America-the nation's largest anti-Muslim hate group-and forced them to cancel nationwide Islamophobic rallies originally scheduled for September 9.

The toxic patriotism that hate groups have practiced for 16 years has brought our diverse communities together, anchored in a patriotism of love, not fear. This September 11, I will remember that this is the true patriotism-working with our communities to protect each other, and in doing so, to form a more perfect union.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Too Many Americans Think Patriotism Means Racism and Xenophobia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, patriotism took on many masks and many faces. For some it meant planting flags in their front yards and cherishing the rights we enjoy in this country. For others it took on a flawed and dangerous form.