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.

[ndt]

"That is "your" interpretation of the refusal "

If a citizen had to invoke their rights by amendment number, there would be about 80% walking around with no rights. Our rights are inalienable regardless of whether we even know they exist or not.

[Kozak]

one of the darkest chapters in American history in my opinion.

Your opinion, remember?

[ndt]

"That was my point. "

I get more than a "little" steamed when people are so quick to turn America into just another police state where the laws and the rights of the people are on a whim. Sorry if I jumped the gun.

[investigateworld]

You are somewhat correct, but they're refusing to answer questions. Does the 5th apply here? I can only guess.

But they are on a no fly list for some reason. No one mistrusts government more than me (see my profile) but in this case, the feds are doing what is correct.

A full blown trial in the USA would be expensive in terms of what undercover operatives, means and methods were used to develop info.

Heck if Rush Limbaugh can give up flying till a certain person is out of office, then these people who chose to live here can do a little sacrifice too.

[Jubal Harshaw]

I did at the time wish the president had requested a good old fashioned declaration of war just to prevent such legal hair splitting.

Me too. I wrote a brief essay on FR, at the time, asking for a declaration of war. One of the reasons I gave was to make it clear that things were temporarily different during the time of war. Like you, I foresaw that we might have problems like this.

Nevertheless, Congress did NOT declare war. That's just a fact. Can't change it by talking about it on FR. They authorized force, but DID NOT declare war.

Because Congress authorized the use of force, I'd be inclined to believe that, if these exact people were in a combat zone, that the executive has the authority to kill them. It does not appear, however, that the executive was granted the authority to block US citizens from returning to the USA. That's something that was not done even the past when war was actually declared (the Japanese / German / Italian exclusion zones did not bar American Citizens from living in the USA, only excluded them from certain zones).

To summarize:

1. we are not at war
2. even if we were at war, it's not clear that this action on the part of the feds would be legal (though there would likely be a much stronger argument to be made)
3. in any case, it appears that the executive branch overreached it's authority.

[ElCid89]

That's apparently not easily understood by people. I will not ever give up my rights as a US citizen. I will support and defent the Constitution. I agree that the people we are at war with are Muslims, and hence Muslims or people appearing to be of Arab descent should be screened more than others. That being said, NO faceless federal agent has the right to deprive me of my rights as an American. If these two did something, bar them from enter PERIOD. Keep them out. But if you take this article at face value, the fact these two are being refused the ability to come back to their homes is BS.

[ndt]

"Your opinion, remember?"

And I stated that as my opinion. The fact is that the internment of Japanese was based on an EO. Nothing like that exists in this case.

[Dov in Houston]

Okay


You win

Lets just pretend

I am a Federal Agent and I told the "suspects' that you are "being denied entry into the US based on a relatives conviction on terrorism chanrges and if you will agree to answer a few questions by the FBI we may relent"

And you say STFU or FOAD I am supposed to interprete that as they invoked the 5th ammendment rights

Nope

Ciao, Time to run

[SierraWasp]

"Since the ACLU is involved, don't ever let them back!"

What a wonderful "one-way street" we're on, trying to fight some kind of a "war," with one arm tied behind our backs and one blind eye, two left feet and really queer "rules of engagement" that mandates "warning shots" and dying for our country rather than Patton's mandate of makin the other poor SOB die for his country...

WAIT!!! Most of these cowards don't even have a country unless it was the US by accident of birth, or because we're a generous nation to a horrific fault!!!

I know you grasp all these power thoughts, but some of the others on this thread are totally majoring in the minors!!!

Me thinks they protest like Harry Ried, Nancy Pelosi, Teddy Kennedy, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Murtha and the rest of that pathetic Franco/Germanic croud of leftists!!!

Is the ACLU now sponsored by Libertarian members of FR??? What the help is going on here???

[SuziQ]

The men and three relatives had been in Pakistan for more than four years ...
Muhammad Ismail's wife, teenage daughter and younger son, who were not on the list, continued on to the United States.

I find this kind of odd. Just who is supporting the family while the breadwinner is gone for four years? Is he working in Pakistan and sending money back to his family? Wouldn't it be cheaper to all live together in Pakistan? The fact that they were gone for four years is just VEY suspicious to me, especially since the son is at the perfect age to have gone through a madrassa and become throughly immersed in the extreme Wahhabist cult.

[ElCid89]

Nice point system.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Timothy McVeigh was "an American citizen." I sure we had booted his ass out of the country before he did what he did. It's all part of "connecting the dots." If they attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan, they have no business in my country. American citizen or not. It doesn't matter. Regardless of what the aCLU would like us to believe, the U.S. Constitution is not America's suicide note to the world.

[Kozak]

in any case, it appears that the executive branch overreached it's authority.

In your opinion. My guess is the executive branch feels otherwise.

[ndt]

"You are somewhat correct, but they're refusing to answer questions. Does the 5th apply here? I can only guess."

Yes, it does. They no more have to answer the questions of the FBI than you do of a policeman or in front of a jury or judge. I would generally not recommend avoiding answering the questions as it will likely reinforce the suspicions of the officer (as clearly evidenced here). They still have the right to refuse however.

" But they are on a no fly list for some reason."

So are thousands of others. Muslims often do not use last names, that combined with there being a few very common Muslim names makes Muslim particularly vulnerable to being on the list by mistake. Even for you and me (assuming you have a European name) it is recommended thay you book your ticket with first, middle and last names in order to avoid being confused with someone else.

"A full blown trial in the USA would be expensive in terms of what undercover operatives, means and methods were used to develop info."

Nothing undercover about a S.F. Newspaper article.

" Heck if Rush Limbaugh can give up flying till a certain person is out of office, then these people who chose to live here can do a little sacrifice too."

Huh?

[ElCid89]

Gee maybe the wife who stayed behind is working....that happens. I've found a lot of new citizens to have very high work ethics and really want to get ahead, and do whatever's necessary to support their family, instead of collecting welfare/living off US govt. like a lot of Americans whose families have been here for generations.

[ndt]

"Nice point system."

Thank you, I try.

[SierraWasp]

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

You've gone way off the deep end with a completely emotional response to this situation that you don't even fully understand yet because you haven't even read the entire article and are in some kind of blind rage at your own government for nothing!!!

I do not trust my government either, as a general rule, but you're flippin clear out and goin way over the top!!! Take a deep breath and review the circumstances involved here before you stroke out or go into a grand mall siezure!!! Find out before you freak out!!! It will give you longer and a more pleasant life...

[ndt]

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

If the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact then it is worthless. It is the only thing that the President swears to protect.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

[Kozak]

The fact is that the internment of Japanese was based on an EO. Nothing like that exists in this case.

The fact is the Justice department feels it had both cause and authority to place these people on the no fly list. Since when does that take a presidential order?

[ElCid89]

29 points here. I'm impressed. We'll have to find something to argue about sometime.