Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

2 Lodi residents refused entry back into U.S.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/26/LODI.TMP ^

Posted on 08/27/2006 4:59:42 PM PDT by tobyprissy

2 Lodi residents refused entry back into U.S.

Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, August 26, 2006

Jaber Ismail, 18, (right) is seen with his younger brothe...

* Printable Version * Email This Article

(08-26) 04:00 PDT Sacramento -- 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: War on Terror
KEYWORDS: hamidhayat; islamofascists; jaberismail; jihadinamerica; kalifornia; keepowt; koranimals; lodicell; muhammadismail; religionofpeace; sleepercells; soyesterday; terrorists; trop; watchlists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 08/27/2006 4:59:42 PM PDT by tobyprissy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy

About time we started doing this!


2 posted on 08/27/2006 5:01:10 PM PDT by Luigi Vasellini (What do you call 2 toddlers and some duct tape??........muslim body armor!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy
We dealt with this last night.

The bottom line is that they can fly to Canada and attempt (legal) entry from there. At worst, they will be detained by border patrol until answering the necessary questions. If they don't like answering questions prior to re-entry, they lose the right to re-entry, just like you or me or anyone else.

A country has the RIGHT to control what crosses the border, be it humans, Muslims, products, or electronic transmissions. That simply is the definition of a COUNTRY.

I don't care if they are citizens or not.
3 posted on 08/27/2006 5:06:09 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy
That's a shame.

dog,fleas,you know.

4 posted on 08/27/2006 5:07:23 PM PDT by mdittmar (May God watch over those who serve,and have served, to keep us free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luigi Vasellini

"About time we started doing this!"

You might feel differently if they were doing this to you.

Then again, REAL Americans would never leave the United States, would they?


5 posted on 08/27/2006 5:08:33 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Luigi Vasellini

What, pissing on our own citizens? How about giving them a revocation/deportation hearing first?


6 posted on 08/27/2006 5:10:11 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
You might feel differently if they were doing this to you.

Why would "they" do this to me?

7 posted on 08/27/2006 5:11:00 PM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

I know, the terrorists relatives took a "vacation" in Pakistan.


8 posted on 08/27/2006 5:12:19 PM PDT by Luigi Vasellini (What do you call 2 toddlers and some duct tape??........muslim body armor!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
Then again, REAL Americans would never leave the United States, would they?

To spend 4 years in a Pakistani terrorist training camp? I doubt it.
They may have had legal American papers, but I'd call them "infiltrators" and not Americans.

9 posted on 08/27/2006 5:12:24 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

I think muslims rights are lesser than us filthy infidels. In America they are the dhimmis and should be made aware of it! They started this war and we should end it.


10 posted on 08/27/2006 5:14:14 PM PDT by Luigi Vasellini (What do you call 2 toddlers and some duct tape??........muslim body armor!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Marine Inspector
I'll go ahead and post the most consice and correct answer from the previous 200+ reply thread:

I don't know how they can keep the 18 year old citizen from reentering without opening themselves up to a massive law suit.

As for the Resident Alien adult, he's toast and we can refuse his entry and strip his residency with ease.


11 posted on 08/27/2006 5:14:56 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Of course, I meant "concise."


12 posted on 08/27/2006 5:15:37 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy

Hayat later said that Ismail and another relative "didn't talk to me about going to camps or anything. But you know I'm sure they went to the camp ... 'cause they memorize the Holy Quran.


13 posted on 08/27/2006 5:17:05 PM PDT by Dov in Houston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

"I don't care if they are citizens or not."


Maybe you think YOU will get better treatment than these guys, huh? Think again. If the US Government can do this to one native-born citizen [the son] they can do it to you.

Once about 20 years ago, when I was coming back across the Tijuana border crossing with a bunch of Koreans - some naturilized, some green-card holders, after helping them build a Korean Presbyterian Church south of TJ, I was sitting in the back of the van when the call went out for everyone to hand their US Passports or green cards forward to the driver.

When we got to the crossing the driver handed all the documents to the border patrol officer.

It was dark, and the border patrol officer asked me from the front of the van why I had only a driver's licence, and not a passport. Well, this was about my tenth time crossing there. I had NEVER been told that my driver's license was inadequate before, and there was no law requiring me to have one. I was obviously native born.

I flippantly remarked that my driver's license was good enough because I was white. Flippant, but true. The only reason I was being questioned was because I was with a bunch of Koreans.

That was then. The rules have changed. Being a native born white boy is not going to give me a free pass any more. I am not too concerned about the government playing hardball with illegal aliens or vistors, or even green card citizens. But when the government starts barring citizens because they refused to submit to FBI questioning overseas, I am ready to draw the line.


Last time I looked, this site was called "Free Republic", not "Sheep Republic", and not "Slave Republic."



14 posted on 08/27/2006 5:21:01 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Because they can. If you let them. That's the way the real world works.


15 posted on 08/27/2006 5:22:11 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
"I don't know how they can keep the 18 year old citizen from reentering without opening themselves up to a massive law suit."

Since I don't know anyone who refuses to answer questions when returning from overseas, I'm not sure what right they have to re-enter (in this case).

But I do know that if they will answer the questions, they will be allowed back in. They may thrown in jail based on their answers, but they will be allowed back here.

If the case was some pervert coming back from Thailand instead of a Muzzie (hard to which is contrary to human existence, by the way), they would get the treatment.

In other words, no one is preventing re-entry, but they are preventing unconditonal re-entry - just as they would with me if I came back from Toronto.
16 posted on 08/27/2006 5:23:59 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

"As for the Resident Alien adult, he's toast and we can refuse his entry and strip his residency with ease."

I did not see a resident alien. I saw a naturalized citizen. There are ways to revoke citizenship of a naturalized citizen, but not as easy as yanking permanent residence privilege.


17 posted on 08/27/2006 5:24:16 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

Like I said, it was from the previous thread.


18 posted on 08/27/2006 5:26:07 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
"But when the government starts barring citizens because they refused to submit to FBI questioning overseas"

You miss the point. Regardless of how this article reads, these people can fly to Canada and attempt re-entry there. What our government didn't want to do is get stuck with these guys on US soil and have to pay $2,000 to send them back to Hong Kong. They will get in, if they decide they want to.

I have no fear for myself or you getting home. As to the passport - that was a bit rude, but we might as well get used to carrying passports whenever leaving the country - and you can blame these guys and their buddies for it.
19 posted on 08/27/2006 5:28:09 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy

"supporting terrorists by attending a Pakistani training camp"

Wouldn't that be more BEING a terrorist?


20 posted on 08/27/2006 5:29:20 PM PDT by observer5 (It's not a War on Terror - it's a WAR ON STUPIDITY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

"Since I don't know anyone who refuses to answer questions when returning from overseas, I'm not sure what right they have to re-enter (in this case)."

Uh, these guys are being forced to answer questions by the FBI, not the INS. I'll bet you also don't know anyone who was told to submit to interrogation from the FBI when returning from overseas. I doubt that the INS has blanket authority to question CITIZEN returnees on every subject under the sun, on pain of being refused admission if they do not answer.

And they are being forced to do it in a country where their rights are less than if they were in the United States - we know that the Fourth Amendment is not effective, possibly the Fifth is also not effective? Why doesn't the FBI wait to readmit them to the United States and then question them?


21 posted on 08/27/2006 5:31:04 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
Hey ... you miss the point of this story. These are dirty muslime animals, not citizens. Obviously these two went to Pakistan for terrorist training.

All muslimes ... citizens or not ... need to be rounded up and shipped out of the country PERIOD!

I you don't think this is a war with islam, your kidding yourself.
22 posted on 08/27/2006 5:32:41 PM PDT by MaDeuce (Do it to them, before they do it to you! (MaDuce = M2HB .50 BMG))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Since I don't know anyone who refuses to answer questions when returning from overseas, I'm not sure what right they have to re-enter (in this case).

This isn't a case of people refusing to answer questions when returning to the U.S. The two men are on the no-fly list, so they weren't allowed on the airplane to even GET to the U.S. when they tried to return here via Hong Kong. The airline told them when connecting in Hong Kong that they couldn't fly them here. They wouldn't be able to fly from New York to L.A., either.

That wouldn't necessarily stop them from being able to fly to Canada or Mexico and driving across the border, from taking a boat to get here, or perhaps even chartering a plane to get here.

Once on American soil, immigration officials would hopefully detain and extensively question the men about their terrorist ties and arrest them if warranted.
23 posted on 08/27/2006 5:34:33 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
You might feel differently if they were doing this to you.

For one thing, I do not spend my vacations at a terrorist training camp in Pakistan.

For another thing, my son WAS held up at the border for several hours because his (non-U.S.-national) wife's visa was expired.

Eventually they were allowed into the country because they have no terrorist connections.

24 posted on 08/27/2006 5:35:10 PM PDT by Alouette (Psalms of the Day: 18-22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
I realize what the article says, but I just don't buy it all.

I have no doubt that the FBI would meet them in Canada, if they went there. What this country is sick of doing and bringing back people who have been training as terrorists and then having to spend a fortune on them to keep this country safe (either sending them home or detaining them).

If these A-Holes will not answer questions, I do not care if they EVER step on US soil again. And I have ZERO fear, given my (relatively) honest lifestyle that this could EVER happen to me.

But I certainly do fear what these guys could do to my family and my country if they ever came in here after receiving 4 years of terrorist training in Pakistan (which is all that the FBI is trying to find out - for us).
25 posted on 08/27/2006 5:37:19 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: conservative in nyc

THANK YOU.

That's the whole point. They can come here, but not directly on an airplane. But their behavior certainly makes me wish they'd stay in some other country (the further, the better).


26 posted on 08/27/2006 5:38:56 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

9-11 happened.....all bets are off......go cry elsewhere....


27 posted on 08/27/2006 5:39:23 PM PDT by Duffboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Duffboy

"9-11 happened.....all bets are off......go cry elsewhere...."

Be easy (somewhat) on the guy. His slippery slope fear is well justified in many areas. He's still on our side, so it's best to bring these guys around. I get the "deal with it" response when I complain about our Texas Governor Rick Perry giving foreign companies effective control over our highway system (I'm told that I'm a socialist for not supporting it).

So I'm a bit sensitive here.


28 posted on 08/27/2006 5:58:10 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
Because they can. If you let them. That's the way the real world works.

Why would they pick on me?

29 posted on 08/27/2006 5:59:58 PM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

If an FBI guy wanted to interrogate you, say, just for practice, he could have you committing a Federal Offense - lying to an FBI agent -- in about five minutes. It is the simplest thing in the world. It would make absolutely no different who you were, or what you were, or how you had lived your life.

First he would make you nervous, if you were not already nervous. Then he would make you confused, then when you made a verbal slip, he would work you over on it, till you answered SOME question two different ways. Or he would go back and question you on some obscure point you made earlier, hoping you would answer it somewhat differently. Obviously, one of the ways would have to be false. Presto - you've lied to a Federal Officer, and it's off to jail you go.

Take, for example, your statement ""I do not spend my vacations at a terrorist training camp in Pakistan"

He might ask so, the training camp was in Afghanistan, then? Or are you saying you were not on "vacation". How DID you get the time to attend that terrorist camp, then? See, he could take that statement and show how it's consistent with an admission that you are a terrorist. Pretty nasty, huh? Not the least bit sporting. That's why the FBI wants to make sure you talk without a lawyer present. Because you will wind up admitting whatever words they want to put in your mouth.

I, too, have been held up at the border, because my wife [not yet a permanent resident or citizen at that point] needed to have her fully valid and regularly issued "advance parole" document further processed, which is normal procedure, but I was not aware that the further processing would be necessary. The processing took about 20 minutes, which was enough to cause us to miss our connection. Unlike your son and his wife, our papers were completely in order, but we were held up anyway.

This occurred in Toronto, which is where you clear immigration on flights coming in from Canada, and caused us to miss our connection, and have to spend the night in Toronto. I was kind of steamed, which made my interchange with the immigration official a bit testy at first, particulary when I started writing down names, because I did not know what other suprises might be in store for us, and I wanted a record of what happened.

At the end of the interview, when our paperwork was signed off, and I had calmed down, the officer asked me if I had any complaints. He asked this question three times, in three different ways. The reason, of course, is that we were being videotaped and audiotaped, and he was covering his posterior in case I complained later.


30 posted on 08/27/2006 6:00:37 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

Lodi is a known hotbed of Islamic jihad advocates. You think they should just be let in? Amazing.


31 posted on 08/27/2006 6:01:42 PM PDT by ladyinred (Leftists, the enemy within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BobL

"sending them home"

Uh, what the government is doing is PREVENTING them from coming home. They are citizens. The United States is their home. Unless they have done something to lose their citizenship, which difficult, albeit not impossible, to do. But that requires some due process.

Now, if as some suggest, they can fly to Canada, and come in by land, it's fine with me if the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the American Legion, Captain Jack, Billy, and the 101st Field Artillery Band are waiting to receive them, and have a chat about what they've been up to.


32 posted on 08/27/2006 6:09:39 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
The men are American citizens. Of course they should be allowed to return (if only to end up in a jail cell or under surveillance for suspicion of terrorist-related activities committed abroad). I don't think that's the real issue here, although the ACLU is doing a good job spinning things to make it sound like it is. The ACLU hates the no-fly list.

The real issue is whether these men should be able to FLY to get back here. They are on the no-fly list, and wouldn't be able to even fly from New York to Boston without convincing the FBI to get their names off the list, let alone across the Pacific. Since they are in Pakistan, it's a bit more difficult to DRIVE back to the U.S., but there are potential alternatives.
33 posted on 08/27/2006 6:14:03 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

That sounds reasonable, and replace "send them home" with "send them back". I'm just somewhat worked up about this.


34 posted on 08/27/2006 6:15:58 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: observer5

Hey now. A Pakistani training camp is kinda like a dude ranch for these people. Just 'cause you went to a dude ranch doesn't make you a cowboy. (/dripping sarcasm)


35 posted on 08/27/2006 6:17:50 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy

As I live and breathe!!!! You mean we're actually doing something right for a change???? Pinch me.


36 posted on 08/27/2006 6:27:33 PM PDT by hardworking (Give Hitlery a chance and help the pantsuit industry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

REAL Americans would not make trips to that part of the world, I don't care what the reason is!


37 posted on 08/27/2006 6:28:28 PM PDT by hardworking (Give Hitlery a chance and help the pantsuit industry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

Oh get off your high horse! It's about time the borders were as tight here as they have ALWAYS been in other countries. I had to HAND OVER my passport in Germany, years ago, and had no idea where they were taking it, or if I'd ever get it back. They don't mess around in other countries and it's time we stopped being such dim bulbs.


38 posted on 08/27/2006 6:31:09 PM PDT by hardworking (Give Hitlery a chance and help the pantsuit industry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hardworking
REAL Americans would not make trips to that part of the world, I don't care what the reason is!

I guess the guy on the right isn't a REAL American then:



There are valid business reasons to visit parts of the world some Freepers find unsavory. It's not a job I'd want, but this country is better off for those Americans who do it. Many Pakistani-Americans visit relatives there, too.
39 posted on 08/27/2006 6:36:15 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Luigi Vasellini

"In America they are the dhimmis and should be made aware of it!"

Reverse dhimmination?


40 posted on 08/27/2006 6:39:01 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tobyprissy
What the article fails to state is that these two men have been wanted for questioning by the FBI since April. They were contacted in May in Pakistan and refused to be questioned.

Upon returning to the US last April a cousin/nephew of these two men admitted attending a jihadist camp while in Pakistan for the last nine years. The uncle/brother of these two was just convicted for having lied to the FBI about financing his sons activities at the camp.

The maternal grandfather, Qari Saeed ur Rehman, founded the Jamia Islamia Madrassa in 1962 (and still runs it), is a leader in the Jamiat Ulema Islam Party (Assembly of Islamic Clergy). No that is not a US political party that is a Pakistani political party run by the Muslim clergy. Ideologically, JUI party is regarded as uncompromisingly rigid and insisting on the strict enforcement of traditional Islamic law. They established the largest number of madrasahs in Pakistan and are associated with the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

41 posted on 08/27/2006 7:24:06 PM PDT by Between the Lines (Be careful how you live your life, it may be the only gospel anyone reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux; BobL
doubt that the INS has blanket authority to question CITIZEN returnees on every subject under the sun, on pain of being refused admission if they do not answer.

We don't and it's very unlikely the FBI has that authority either.

What's the FBI going to do, if he arrives and refuses to speak with them? They can't deport him and neither can CBP.

Unless the FBI has enough to arrest the guy, there is not much they can do.

42 posted on 08/27/2006 10:19:38 PM PDT by Marine Inspector (Customs & Border Protection Officer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BobL
What our government didn't want to do is get stuck with these guys on US soil and have to pay $2,000 to send them back to Hong Kong.

Our government could not send the US citizen to Hong Kong, or any place else for that matter, even if they wanted too.

43 posted on 08/27/2006 10:20:58 PM PDT by Marine Inspector (Customs & Border Protection Officer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
The reason, of course, is that we were being videotaped and audiotaped, and he was covering his posterior in case I complained later.

LOL, sorry, that was not the case. We don't video record nor do we audiotape our interviews.

Also, you we not held up, only your wife was, you could have left at any time.

44 posted on 08/27/2006 10:25:57 PM PDT by Marine Inspector (Customs & Border Protection Officer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Marine Inspector

"LOL, sorry, that was not the case. We don't video record nor do we audiotape our interviews.

Also, you we not held up, only your wife was, you could have left at any time."

Well, I stand corrected. It certainly seemed like the inspector [not front line, we were in a private room] was speaking for an audience other than my wife and I, who were the only others in the room.

As for me being free to leave at any time, and leave my wife behind, I think what you mean was that I was under no LEGAL compulsion to remain. However, if I had left that would have resulted in a whole lot bigger problem than cooling my heels in Toronto for a night!



45 posted on 08/28/2006 10:40:06 AM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

"Why would they pick on me?"

What part of "because they can" do you not understand?

Bureacracies that are given power tend to exercise it. Bureacracies that are given unrestrained power tend to exercise it without restraint. That's how the world works.


46 posted on 08/28/2006 10:49:19 AM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
I don't know how they can keep the 18 year old citizen from reentering without opening themselves up to a massive law suit.

He's on the "no fly" list. He was barred from a flight to the US in Hong Kong. If he can make it to Canada or Mexico somehow, he's deal with his problems when he crosses the border.

47 posted on 08/28/2006 11:07:52 AM PDT by SJackson (The PilgrimsóDoing the jobs Native Americans wouldn't do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
But when the government starts barring citizens because they refused to submit to FBI questioning overseas, I am ready to draw the line.

As a matter of curiosity, are you opposed to the "no fly" list across the board, of simply Americans being listed?

48 posted on 08/28/2006 11:09:33 AM PDT by SJackson (The PilgrimsóDoing the jobs Native Americans wouldn't do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

"As a matter of curiosity, are you opposed to the "no fly" list across the board, of simply Americans being listed?"

Actually, I was not referring to the "no fly" provision, but the "no entry" provision.

The "no fly" criteria do seem rather mysterious, and mistakes have been made in identifying people whose names appear on it, as being someone else, but in principal I do not have a big problem with it as it applies to Americans or anyone else.

Some of the posters here have implied that the "barring" of entry to these two citizens is purely a result of their inability to board an aircraft to fly home. However, that is not what the article says. The article quotes Federal officials as saying that the two "will not be let back into the country" unless they answer questions. That is different from saying they will not be permitted to travel here by air. The "no fly" rule appears to be an ADDITIONAL impediment. Those who say that the article has the matter wrong have not stated the source of their purported superior knowledge of the matter. I have read the other thread on this topic, all 203 posts, and there was nothing there supporting this view.

Also, while I have heard of lots of people turned away from flights because they were on the "no fly" list, I have never heard of any who were offered the chance to board a later flight if they would only submit to questioning from the FBI. The cases I have heard they have just been turned down flat, no explanation, no reconsideration. So it is possible that even if these two American Citizens do answer the FBI's questions to their satisfaction, they STILL might not be allowed to come back by air.


49 posted on 08/28/2006 1:33:16 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux
Actually, I was not referring to the "no fly&" provision, but the "no entry" provision...The article quotes Federal officials as saying that the two "will not be let back into the country" unless they answer questions...The "no fly" rule appears to be an ADDITIONAL impediment. Those who say that the article has the matter wrong have not stated the source of their purported superior knowledge of the matter.

Not my interpritation, my impression from this and other articles is that this is a "no fly" issue, being recharacterized by posters and the media as "no entry". I doubt they have any basis to bar the US citizen based on an interview. Clearly they can immediately detain him if he makes it here.

I've heard of "no fly" horror stories, a few fixed quickly, Ted Kennedy comes to mind, but most causing missed flights and delays. I've only heard of misidentifications thought, I suspect it's tough to get off the list if you're suspected of terror connections. The only one who comes to mind is Cat Stevens, and he threatened but didn't bother with an appeal. I don't know that he was on the "no fly" list either, he may simply have been barred from entry.

50 posted on 08/28/2006 2:15:41 PM PDT by SJackson (The PilgrimsóDoing the jobs Native Americans wouldn't do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson