2 Lodi residents refused entry back into U.S.

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | August 26, 2006 | Demian Bulwa

[Mount Athos]

The federal government has barred two relatives of a Lodi man convicted of supporting terrorists from returning to the country after a lengthy stay in Pakistan, placing the U.S. citizens in an extraordinary legal limbo.

Muhammad Ismail, a 45-year-old naturalized citizen born in Pakistan, and his 18-year-old son, Jaber Ismail, who was born in the United States, have not been charged with a crime. However, they are the uncle and cousin of Hamid Hayat, a 23-year-old Lodi cherry packer who was convicted in April of supporting terrorists by attending a Pakistani training camp.

Federal authorities said Friday that the men, both Lodi residents, would not be allowed back into the country unless they agreed to FBI interrogations in Pakistan. An attorney representing the family said agents have asked whether the younger Ismail trained in terrorist camps in Pakistan.

The men and three relatives had been in Pakistan for more than four years and tried to return to the United States on April 21 as a federal jury in Sacramento deliberated Hayat's fate. But they were pulled aside during a layover in Hong Kong and told there was a problem with their passports, said Julia Harumi Mass, their attorney.

The father and son were forced to pay for a flight back to Islamabad because they were on the government's "no-fly" list, Mass said. Muhammad Ismail's wife, teenage daughter and younger son, who were not on the list, continued on to the United States.

Neither Muhammad nor Jaber Ismail holds dual Pakistani citizenship, Mass said.

"We haven't heard about this happening -- U.S. citizens being refused the right to return from abroad without any charges or any basis," said Mass, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.

[Tamar1973]

If you have a name like Muhammand, then go to a place like Pakistan for 4 years, and then refuse to answer some questions for the FBI, you should NEVER be allowed on US soil again, whether you were born here, naturalized, of whatever.

So Americans who are Muslim don't have 5th Ammendment rights?! That's unAmerican.

[The Cuban]

I agree with the ACLU's observation about this being a tricky legal question. But hey, maybe we are groing a spine in this country, so hey.

[SierraWasp]

Yeah, well neither you, nor Bob Barr got very far!!! You're both just way too radical. Now Bob Barr works for the ACLU and will probably get an ulcer, or have a stroke...

[ndt]

"...it had both cause and authority to place these people on the no fly list"

I am referring to being denied entry into the U.S.

[ndt]

"29 points here. I'm impressed."

OK, now you have peaked my curiosity. What are you referring to?

[SuziQ]

Gee maybe the wife who stayed behind is working....that happens.

Possibly, but if this man is SO devout as a Muslim that he would take his son to Pakistan for four years to study the Koran, I can't imagine him 'allowing' his wife to be out there in the world making a living for the family.

[SierraWasp]

"the U.S. Constitution is not America's suicide note to the world."

Thank you for repeating that priceless phrase!!!

[Tamar1973]

I believe that the searches at the airports are NOT random, as I have been told at airports.

The only time I remember getting any significant scrutiny from US Customs was when I returned from Thailand after a 6 week trip with ADRA (Adventist Development and Relief Agency) in 1992. Their dogs were sniffing me and my stuff as I was getting it off the conveyor and asking me lots of questions. I must have passed because I never heard from them again.

[ElCid89]

LOL. I plan on having a long, calm stress-free life. Thanks for the concern. If one of my blood relatives is found guilty of a crime, I'm guilty of the same thing? If I have said something that is indeed "way over the top" please feel free to point out the specifics and I am sure we can have an intelligent debate about the topic.

[Jubal Harshaw]

Guilt by association is a very real thing! In this case, it's even stronger... GUILT BY BLOOD RELATIVE!!!


"no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
I think that my point is clear. Feel free to ask for clarification if you don't understand.

[investigateworld]

RE: Huh? Yep, heard him say it myself.

No matter how this is spun, we have two guys who are on a 'no fly list'. How they got there is not spelled out. Apparently someone in a position to know thinks they are a threat. Sounds like they have a wonderful opportunity to get off the list ... unless these characters think their answers wouldn't be acceptable.

I suspect these guys know what the questions are and they believe the Fed's have something on them. Hence they called in the ACLU.

Remember, no one is forcing them to return to the USA.

[Tamar1973]

f they are already on the no-fly list, it would seem some due process has already occurred and this is not simply the work of one government servant.

There's no due process to get on the "do not fly list." You have to go through some kind of process to be taken off the list if you're on it by mistake.

[ndt]

"Thank you for repeating that priceless phrase!!!"

Actually that phrase is best characterized as seditious.

The Constitution is the document that creates our government. Not adhering to it until the bitter end is an act of rebellion against our government.

[ElCid89]

Touche! Point taken.

[ElCid89]

Just admiring your homepage, wondering where the questionnaire came from.

[ElCid89]

The government is clearly now profiling Adventists (sarc.).

[ndt]

"RE: Huh? Yep, heard him say it myself."

I'll assume that Rush said something about not flying? His choice is his choice, that has nothing to do with this case.

" No matter how this is spun, we have two guys who are on a 'no fly list'."

I'm not concerned with them being on the no fly list. I'm concerned with them being denied entry into the U.S. make them fly to Mexico I don't care.

" Remember, no one is forcing them to return to the USA."

They are CITIZENS they can return anytime they darn well feel like it.

[Kozak]

I am referring to being denied entry into the U.S.

I guess they are free to try and walk home then, and try to enter at a border crossing. But they apparently won't be flying.

[ndt]

"Just admiring your homepage, wondering where the questionnaire came from."

I made it up based on peoples reaction to my comments here.

The few replies I've gotten to it make me think it is pretty accurate. I would appreciate your input on how well you think it worked in your case. You can private message me so as not to disrupt the thread.