Posted on 08/26/2006 8:07:24 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
In the eyes of the Feds: Suspicious guys, suspicious behaviour. The Feds know a lot more that you won't read in this story.
I don't give a crap who they are...they better answer the Feds questions.
My Great Grandmother got a visit from the Feds after Pearl Harbor - she was a legal resident of Canadian citizenship. We weren't at war with Canada, but hey... we were at WAR. She had at that time lived here for over 30 years and raised five children - all legally born citizens of the US.
Funny, back then people just cooperated for the sake of our country's security. There was a lot more respect for those working in our government and the military who were trying to protect us.
Reading through this blog... I almost thought I was at DU instead of FR.
Every day. Customs agents can hold you at a foreign port at will, and do it frequently.
"And what prevents any of us from receiving the same treatment?"
Staying loyal, and trustworthy, and being careful who you associate with.
No. They were "profiling" a 20 year old college student who had spent 6 weeks in Thailand. They were probably concerned about the possibility I was smuggling heroin (golden triangle) into the USA, so they asked me a bunch of questions and had their dogs sniff many times over to make sure I was clean.
Bump what you said...
American citizens have the right to be treated like American citizens and that includes the 5th amendment. If we loose our amendment rights, we have lost America.
And that would seem to be a perfectly intelligent thing to do...nice to see Customs agents acting in an intelligent manner.
That was over 10 years ago. I don't know what it would be like now.
Congratulations. That gets right down to the core of things. People seem to forget that we have a Constitution. If we get away from the principles our country was founded upon, and the legal basis of our government, then how are we different from any other government?
Do you understand that we are at war?
Do you think that the same was not done in previous wars?
If we lose, you will have absolutely no rights - except the right to die like all infidels.
I suspect they fear the old slippery slope, and with good cause. But if one reads the US Constitution, it says gov't can't do certain things unless there is "Probable Cause".
I think in this case, the gov't has probable cause. They simply haven't chose to spell it all out.
I would be more emphatic should the border security measures were applied everywhere, but....
Well....I already told y'all about the once-over I received by US Customs in 1992, so I guess I've spilled all the beans worth spilling....oh, wait a minute, I have to confess....I own a few Bedouin/Jordanian galabayas I bought on Ebay. Do you think the majority of FReepers on this thread would demand that my name end up on the no-fly list? LOL!
I agree.
This is not a typical reaction to all who are returning to the US from Pakistan. It just happens that these are persons of interest, and the Feds do not feel compelled to tell the MSM why. This does not mean we all have to fear jackbooted agents breaking into our homes in the dead of night.
(After all, Janet Reno is no longer AG - but then again if we elect Hillary in '08 we can relive that special time).
Knee jerk reactions of the ACLU are not to be trusted. Since when did they ever defend ANYTHING that hinted of being AMERICAN?
I don't know how they can keep the 18 year old citizen from reentering without opening themselves up to a massive law suite.
As for the Resident Alien adult, he's toast and we can refuse his entry and strip his residency with ease.
Thank you for serving your country.
I do believe you are a bit hysterical on this subject. In the same way you carried out your orders in "the desert", others are carrying out their orders in service to our country by their work in Federal agencies. There really are people in these positions who love their country and the freedoms you love. Don't be so quick to smear them and their actions.
As to our southern border, I'm right with you there... it needs to be completely closed. (If that is what you meant).
I'd have shot the SOB's!
One would think so ... on the surface. But what type of suit? Criminal? Civil?
Does a person, regardless of nationality, have standing to instigate litigation in a US domestic court when they aren't present? Can litigation proceed if the litigant is legally incommunicado? Can litigation proceed if the litigant's counsel is legally denied access to their client?
How exactly is the federal government able to bar entry to a born citizen? Not that's I'm that sympathetic but I did not think the US could bar entrance to the country for citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.