ACLU Wants Suspected Terrorists Allowed Back Into U.S.
Posted on August 29, 2006
From the NY Times we learn that once again the ACLU either doesn’t care or doesn’t have a brain when it comes to keeping the country safe. Whichever is the case they are actively undermining our security on a daily basis. This is just the latest example.
Federal authorities have prevented two relatives of a father and son convicted recently in a terrorism-related case from returning home to California from Pakistan unless they agree to be interviewed by the F.B.I.
It is unclear whether the men, Muhammad Ismail, 45, and his son Jaber, 18, have a direct connection to the terrorism case or if they have been caught up in circumstance.
The United States attorney’s office in Sacramento declined Monday to answer questions about the Ismails beyond confirming that the men had not been permitted to fly into the United States and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation wanted to question them.
The United States attorney, McGregor W. Scott, reiterated a comment he had made to The San Francisco Chronicle, which reported Saturday about the Ismails’ troubles.
“They’ve been given the opportunity to meet with the F.B.I. over there and answer a few questions, and they’ve declined to do that,” Mr. Scott said through a spokeswoman, Mary Wenger.
The Ismails live in Lodi, Calif., a small farming town south of Sacramento, where their relatives Umer Hayat and his son, Hamid, were arrested last summer as part of what federal prosecutors said was an investigation into terrorist links.
The Hayats are the only people to have been charged. Hamid Hayat, the nephew of Muhammad Ismail and the cousin of Jaber, was convicted in April of supporting terrorists by attending a training camp in Pakistan. Umer Hayat, in a deal reached with prosecutors after jurors deadlocked on terrorism charges, pleaded guilty in May to lying to the authorities about carrying $28,000 to Pakistan from California.
The Ismails discovered they were on the federal government’s no-fly list of people not allowed to enter the United States after they were refused permission to board a connecting flight in Hong Kong on April 21; they had been trying to return to California after several years in Pakistan, said Julia Harumi Mass of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California (in bold for a commenter who has a hard time reading), who is representing them.
Oh my! The Ismails just go on vacation to Pakistan for several years and all of the sudden end up on the terrorist watchlist? This must be some kind of discrimination right? Or perhaps it was because in an interview with FBI agents the self admitted terror supporting cousin Hayat informed them that his cousin Jaber Ismail had also attending a Pakistani training camp.
Hamid Hayat mentioned Jaber Ismail in a marathon F.B.I. interrogation before he was charged, according to transcripts. He said his cousin had attended a camp in the past couple of years, but he was not sure if it was the same one he had attended.
Surely we can not reasonably suspect that this was why the Ismails were in Pakistan! The ACLU, an organization claiming that they are for a “safe and free” America, have no doubt it is the right thing to do in allowing these men to come back to America. They seem to think that having a self professed terrorist point the finger at his cousin for attending terror camps in an FBI interview is not a good enough reason to take extra precautions before allowing him back into the U.S. I feel safer already having the ACLU comfort us in such a way, how about you?
Federal authorities are saying that the men will not be allowed back into the United States unless they agree to answer some questions subject to a polygraph test. Jaber has since met with authorities while his father refused completely. Jaber has now refused further interrogation without a lawyer and has declined to take a polygraph test.
Brother blog, Ban the ACLU says:
Now lets get one thing straight… this is not a case of profiling. The FBI received information that Jaber had attending a Pakistani Terrorist Training camp. Now here comes this young man trying to return to the United States after being in Pakistan for 4 years doing “religious study”. I applaud the FBI and Department of Homeland Security for denying him access to this country until he submits to a polygraph test to determine if he has indeed attending a terrorist training camp.
The ACLU on the other hand believes “They want to come home and have an absolute right to come home,” according to Julia Harumi Mass a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. An absolute right?? The term absolute right reflects rights that cannot be taken away, such as Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Religion. Suspected terrorists DO NOT have an absolute right to enter this country, even if they are US citizens!
So do these guys have something to hide? Did they attend a terrorist camp in Pakistan? Why refuse to submit to a polygraph test? Are they coming back to the U.S. with intentions of killing innocent people? Nobody knows the answers to these questions. But you can all feel safe and secure in allowing these guys back to the U.S. because the ACLU says they have an “absolute right”. Thank goodness we have the ACLU answering these tough calls and keeping America “safe and free”.
Seriously, when the inevitable day comes that someone the ACLU fought for to be here sets off a bomb killing thousands…..what kind of double sided talk will we hear from the ACLU? Don’t expect apologies.
» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
19 Responses to “ACLU Wants Suspected Terrorists Allowed Back Into U.S.”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Actually, they do have absolute rights. As citizens, the 5th ammendment very clearly states that “nor shall [he] be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” That means that if they don’t want to cooperate with law enforcement, they don’t have to. The 5th ammendment goes on to say “nor [shall he] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”. That means you can’t restrict his movements without a court order.
I’ll be quite honest in admitting that I don’t give a d$%^ about these people, but I care very much about my rights. The 5th ammendment applies to all private citizens (heck, probably to any legal resident) and is applicable in all situations. Let them come home. Investigate them as much as the law allows and then arrest them.
In summary, I’m not saying we should pretend we never met these guys. Keep an extremely close eye on them and please prosecute them if you can make a case. Just follow procedure and do it without trampling one of our most sacred rights.
“From the NY Times we learn that once again the ACLU either doesn’t care or doesn’t have a brain when it comes to keeping the country safe.”
False. The New York Times article that Jay linked to does not mention the ACLU. Not once.
Jay has yet to learn that every time he distorts the facts or posts a complete falsehood, he further damages his already tenuous credibility.
Meatbrain…I sure wish you would learn to read. Here is a quote from the New York Times article I linked.
In case you don’t know..A.C.L.U. is an abbreviation for the American Civil Liberties Union.
You’re quite right, Jay. My mistake.
Lets revisit the fun stuff…
ACLU Wants Suspected Terrorists Allowed Back Into U.S.
Why???
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2567/1329/320/frenchmuslim.3.jpg
“It’s just a natural fit for the ACLU…like wearing a French beret”. “Anyone who hates George Bush, Christians, and true ‘American Heritage’ as much as the ACLU does can’t be all bad”.
In an effort to curb the public awareness of the ACLU’s covenant with NAMBLA, child rapist and other sexual predators the ACLU has decided that a partnership with “terrorist” is the quickest path to a socialist God-less society.
“In bringing on-board these gifted suicide bombers we can literally blow-up Christians and their ideals; this will lead to less money wasted in the very expensive U.S. courts. What really sweetens the pie is we at the ACLU will now have a few extra bucks for purchasing child porn on the internet, it’s a Win-Win alliance.”
ACLU will welcome current al-Qaeda and/or other terrorist members as new VIP Gold members; they will receive the following: 1) a laminated ACLU membership gold leaf-like card and a French beret with the ACLU logo, 2) receive officially recognized residency in the State of California and automatically be registered as a democrat to vote in the upcoming primaries, 3) an autographed picture of Jane Fonda “aiding & abetting” a “hater” of the U.S.; note the enemy or seditionist represented in photo will be random and vary (Jane’s a courtesan and gets around) and we are sorry that the “evil doer” can not be chosen or requested, and 4) includes a free year’s subscription to either the ‘New Republic’ or the ‘New York Times’.
“Maybe now we at the ACLU will get the attention we deserve!”
Please help to identify the ACLU members in your neighborhood so they can be put on a watch-list for trying to destroy our great country. They usually hang out by school yards and look completely dumbfounded when asked to explain why the “Ten Commandments” are a bad thing.
Lets just say that they have a right to return to the US. They DO NOT have an automatic right to air transport.
So perhaps they can manage to get themselves to Canada and then drive back into the US where I suspect they would immediately be detained.
That is providing that the Canadians let them into their country. (Good luck making your connections through London too!!)
If that’s all there was to it, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Unfortunately, we have entered in an arrangement with Canada and Mexico to share our “no-fly” lists. I’ll post a source for this in a follow-up, but I don’t have it handy at the moment. The bottom line is that we are taking an active role in denying these men access to the whole continent, pending their waiver of their 5th ammendment rights. There is absolutely no way this is constitutional. Let the men come home. Then, prosecute them to the best of your abilities. Anything less is a disgrace to the idea we call “freedom”.
As promised, here is my source for the information on the no-fly lists. Now, I understand that no honest person would initially trust a blog title mostersandcritics.com, but I have searched for the term “Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America” and none of the results contradict there statements and all of them reinforce them to some degree.
Make up your own mind, but I find it very likely that we would pressure our neighbors to back us on this type of thing.
The airport services are private and not government and they can deny service to who they want. The federal government has the power to act in the common defense by creating a no fly list of those they suspect of terrorist links. They are just giving the two men a chance to take their names off that list which is not a violation of the Fifth Amendment.
The only question is does the government have the right to restrict their liberty by placing them on the no fly list without the due process of law.
If they have obtained a judges O.K. according to the Fourth Amendment then that would be enough. People are checked at customs all the time so I do not believe even that should be necessary.
Jeff, (#12)
That sounds like it’s their problem and they have created it for themselves, or at least their own relative contributed to the situation they are in now.
Like I said, nobody is stopping them from returning back to the US. We do not know all that is known about these two and they have been offered a way to clear themselves by talking to the FBI, which they have declined.
Do you really think it is wise to let these two on a plane? Just imagine if the 9/11 hijackers were arrested just before getting on the planes. The left (and ACLU) would be arguing that the knives found on these guys were no different than the thousands of other knives that were being let onto planes.
The main reason the US and Canada use our lists is because they had to agree in order to use our airspace.
I am surprised that the Paki Authorities have not arrested them, yet.
I don’t see this as any way related to the 5th amendment. No one is forcing them to testify at all, much less against themselves! They’re simply being required to TALK to the FBI. That’s all. It IS a crime to knowingly hide information about a crime — you can claim the 5th when you’re the suspect, but not when it’s someone else.
I don’t mean to be rude, but your interpretation is wrong. They are the suspects and anything they say to the FBI can and will be used against them. If you don’t believe it, read up on the Hamid Hayat case. He was convicted solely on his conversations with the FBI.
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Isn’t the real issue here whether the government can restrict a citizen’s right to travel without due process? If there is reasonable suspision that these people are dangerous, then why not make them present their case before a judge first?
Just because these folks are from the ACLU homeland of California does not mean that they are citizens…US naturalized or other. No one is restricting travel shy of a few questions that follow a logical reasonable conclusion that these folks probable should have their US travel impeded…to keep this country safe for all citizens.
They are certainly free to travel to France and hang with those losers.
das heize -
Exactly what is your definition of a citizen if it doesn’t include people born here or who have fulfilled the requirements established by Congress?
“An absolute right?? The term absolute right reflects rights that cannot be taken away, such as Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Religion. Suspected terrorists DO NOT have an absolute right to enter this country, even if they are US citizens!”
American citizens are allowed to be in this country. If they committed a crime, put them in jail. Otherwise, they’re free people.
“The airport services are private and not government and they can deny service to who they want. ”
No.
To expand on gfactor, airlines are considered “common carriers” and as such, can only deny service for the reasons listed in their “contract of carriage”.