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 ...
What a surprise.
Too Bad. Bloods thicker than water. And probably patriotism too.
Keep em out of the USofA
GOOD ! ! !
Semper Fi
Make these guys an offer they can't refuse:
"Bring me the head of Osama BinLaden"
Are you people insane? An agent of the executive branch of the federal government, deciding for himself, without a trial, or even an indictment, that US Citizens should be barred from the country? That's OK with you? Maybe these two are dangerous, but that's what we have a court system for. If these two have done something illegal, then they should be indicted and tried. If the government wants to coerce them into talking about any possible criminal activities in which they may have engaged, then this line comes into play : "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself?"
This is an absolutely outrageous overreach on the part of some federal agent, who should have been fired yesterday for this action.
Get ready to be trampled.
""""Are you people insane? An agent of the executive branch of the federal government, deciding for himself, without a trial, or even an indictment, that US Citizens should be barred from the country? That's OK with you? Maybe these two are dangerous, but that's what we have a court system for. If these two have done something illegal, then they should be indicted and tried. If the government wants to coerce them into talking about any possible criminal activities in which they may have engaged, then this line comes into play : "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself?"
This is an absolutely outrageous overreach on the part of some federal agent, who should have been fired yesterday for this action.""""
I agree, some fed barring US citizens from entry into the country is a very dangerous precedent. I can't believe he's doing this on his own. If there's a reason to suspect them of something they should be taken into custody and charged with something; otherwise, this agent whoever he/she is doesn't have a leg to stand on. Given that the admin. has even fined airlines for discriminating against Muslims, I can't believe higher-ups are allowing this to happen. Methinks there's a lot more to this story than is being reported.
Sorry, but natural born citizens can be detained and interviewed when they return from aboard. The degree of questioning depends on where you've been, what you did.
Then there is the small matter that they aren't on US soil.
Try to enter the US sometime while refusing to answer the questions of a customs agent.
We are not talking about detention. We are talking about being denied entry.
Question please
Are you related to any known terrorists ?
Just a question please and I seriously doubt you are however these two were and that makes more than probable cause to disallow re-entry. I am a Natural US Citizen (for generations) and if it is in the best interests of the USA to disallow me entry when I am returning from a foreign/anti american/islamic country
Than SO BE IT
"natural born citizens can be detained and interviewed when they return from aboard"
OK, I've briefly been looking for evidence of that assertion. It is my understanding that a US citizen DOES NOT have to answer any questions put to him by government agents in the course of a possible criminal investigation. The fifth amendment could not really be more clear on that issue. Do you have a citation from any court that allowed the feds to exclude a citizen from entry based on excersising his fifth amendment rights?
I agree.
Oh, cry me a river. Of COURSE the ACLU (All Criminals Love Us)is representing these people. And I guess the "basis" is that they're terror suspects. Good enough "basis" for you, ACLU?
Do we have a WOT, or do you think like the Demonicrats and the Clinton maladministration did, that we only have a Dept. of Criminal Justice process problem here???
What's it gonna be right here and now, El Cid???
They've done something to get on the no fly list. Could be as simple as being at the wrong place/wrong time. Their not being held in a custodial situation (locked up) simply want to re-enter the USA without answering all the questions. Doesn't work at any airport or P.O.E I've ever been through. One tells the nice lady what ever she wants to hear or go sit in a cell till the memory comes back.
Sorry, not buying. Being asked to answer some questions after a LONG period in an area known for it's ties to terror by relatives of an indicted terrorist seem to be reasonable precautions in time of war. We are at war remember?
There's always treason with its historical punishment.
No Sir I would not.
I would gladly allow the FBI to interrogate me. Answer all the questions asked and stay the course.
I have nothing to hide. And although at times we do not understand the workings of the American Legal system I have faith in it.
They were not offered Gitmo or detention they were asked to be interviewed and refused. Are they hiding something and if not answer a few questions and be done with it.
Nope Juries still in. Keep em out.
1. Only congress can declare war
2. Congress has not declared war
THEREFORE:
3. do I really have to spell this out?
Your presence is requested.
"Sorry, but natural born citizens can be detained and interviewed when they return from aboard. The degree of questioning depends on where you've been, what you did."
Yes, though I have never been detained myself, I have missionary friends who are occasionally asked to answer certain questions at entry points into the USA because, perhaps, of where they had traveled.
I believe that the searches at the airports are NOT random, as I have been told at airports. I believe that I am profiled by entries in my passport. I have been completely searched on 100% of my excursions outside of the USA in the past 6 years. I am a natural born US citizen, white, Vietnam era veteran. Now Christian missionary. But I have traveled in China, the Philippines and Russia. I believe the Philippines thing is actually the reason I get searched every single time.
Not trying to pick a fight here, but where does this U.S. citizen stuck in Pakistan go to adjudicate his rights, if he chooses to do so? A Pakistani court?
Perhaps they should take a boat? They can't FLY into the USA or anywhere inside the country.
The very first line of the article says they are relatives of someone CONVICTED in Lodi of helping terrorists!!! That's how they got on the "no fly" list I would suspect...
scram mohammed
Presidents Lincoln and Roosevelt thought otherwise and the USSC agreed.
They declared almost unanimously the nearly unlimited use of force!!! You are gittin all het up over nuthin!!!
If there were charges they would be in Gitmo or HCSD. There were "suspicions and reasons" and they declined to be interviewed.
No Charges=No Detention
And if you will not answer why you want in my house=GO AWAY
All they had to do was answer some interrogative questions.
The safety of America is at stake. Ask as many questions as you want
If 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. Don't forget the defense is free to say whatever they want but the government does not have the same luxury in, especially in national security cases, won't let out details even if they could. We're not getting the full story yet, nor should we at this time.
You've got to be bigot for pointing out such blatant facts.
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.