My Husband's Father was Deported Yesterday

[diadromous mermaid 36]

You have offered plenty regarding what he may or may not have said, his intent to immigrate, if his documents& passport were indeed valid. Like others have said, it's very clear that Allousa and her family are getting legal support somewhere else. This situation could very well happen to anyone here and I'm pretty sure if it happened to you (God forbid) you may find yourself singing a different tune.

Maybe you believe that we shouldn't condemn the USA for treating an elderly man this way, but if we do that is OUR choice. From what we know, from Allousa and her family, he didn't pose any kind of threat and to be quie honest that is the only side I care about. She came here for support not for legal mumbo jumbo or for anyone here to point fingers at her FIL. I'm sure she is aware she will here that legal talk somewhere else, but it's different when that advice is solicited and comes from a professional.

Once again, and emphatically, let me spell it out again....I am not offering legal advice. I am offering facts as to when expedited removal is just, legal and within reason. And for your information, since you clearly missed the first time I indicated it, expedited removal is not simply due to someone being a perceived "threat" to the US. It can be a border agent's remedy to any one of a number of inadmissibility issues. Tens of thousands of aliens are refused entry to the US each year; some by virtue of their choice, are removed expeditiously; some, by virtue of misunderstanding their options, are defaulted to expedited removal because they refuse to surrender their application for entry. We don't know if this option was offered to Allousa's FIL, but to simply assume it wasn't is just as incorrect as the treatment you conclude was inappropriate. It could well be that he was offered to depart the USA, without ER, but didn't know what answer to give. How can any of us know right now?

Jumping to the conclusion that the US agents abused their authority is improper at this juncture, just as jumping to the conclusion that CBP wanted for Allousa's child to be in deplorable conditions, or that CBP chose that her FIL spent the night in jail rather than to take the flight back to Morrocco is improper. Why is it that you can't accept that it might have been for some other reason that the FIL was refused entry? Why is it that it is incomprehensible for you to consider that it could have been for a technicality? Why would you rather accuse the US of considering himn a threat to national security?

It may indeed have been a series of unfortunate coincidences. When I read the ouitrage, without consideration for the coincidences, this is the sort of "reverse discrimination" bothers me to read.

Then don't read it. I never said that I couldnt accept that maybe there were some other reasons for the FIL's removal. However, I am only here to offer my support to ALlousa and her family

Oh, another one-sided standard! If I write something you don't like, you feel entitled to accost me, insult me etc. If I read something I don't like. then I am not to read it. You don't grasp how it would be wise for you to practice what you preach,.eh?

[maggieNomar 0]

Keep in mind that his father is 70 and mother 65 and only his father speaks a very small amount of English.

Is it at all possible that your FIL misunderstood a line of questioning in secondary inspection, that precipitated the CBP agents to believe that he was misusing his visa?

Techically, this is expedited removal, rather than deportation, btw.

I don't see how anything her FIL could have said made him deserve that kind of treatment. There is no excuse for that kind of behavior. It is something I would expect of some other countries, but I would like to think we are better than that.

I'm not condoning any harsh punishment, but expedited removal is a privilege afforded border agents to remove aliens that they have reason to believe are either misusing a document, or have counterfeit documents, or are otherwise inadmissible. Placing an alien in detention is customary, albeit, I would not wish to spend the night in jail, I can't imagine being in jail for any reason would be pleasant. The issue here is to find out why the CBP thought her FIL was not entitled to enter. Once that information is ascertained, it may or may not shed light onto whether his treatment was out of ordinary.

I cannot even begin to fathom your line of thinking here. IF the FIL said something 'incriminating' why could the patrol officers not tell the son why his father was being deported? Of even more concern is since it was probably obvious that the FIL didn't speak good english, why not allow some translator to make sure he understood. There is NO reason for the treatment this poor man received. I don't know Allousa personally but I'm ready to spit nails over this whole thing. Utterly embarassed to be a citizen of a country that allows this nonsense. How in God's name do these people sleep with themselves at night??? I hope you are able to get some resolution Allousa. I know no amount of anything is going to make this go away, but at least knowing what happened that started the incident will give you some closure. Knowing that your FIL spent a night in jail for nothing....grrrrrrr.

I cannot "fathom" your willingness to jump to extremes without further information! Why would the CBP be obliged to inform the son of their actions? Is that a requirement? I believe that a translator was engaged, if I read the information offered properly. Whether the FIL understood the consequences of his choices (if any) or his answers doesn't simply rest on whether a translation was accurate. It could simply have been that he was unaware of what could render him inadmissible. Again, we don't know, but to jump to condemning the USA without specific facts is equally as irresponsible, in my opinion.

I believe you are offering quite of bit of speculation yourself without knowing exactly what happened either. If its ok for you to do that, then its ok for other members to express their outrage towards the situation as well. I'm not exactly sure why you are going to such great lenghs to defend the officers actions at this point. The fact is none of us really know what happened. But we are offering our support to Allousa and her family, which at this point is all we can do.

Diadr must be a cpb officer themself. Only one of their own could see any bit of rationale to this whole thing. Even IF the officer had due reason to not admit the FIL, why the pushing, bleeding, etc?

Then call me irresponsible. This is not the first time I 've heard of CBP acting like a holes. One of our own MENA girls, a USC for God's sake, was treated like a common criminal trying to get back into her own country after visiting her husband. You can protect them all you want with your words. While I'm sure most of them do their job of protecting our country, there are some who abuse authority.

[jpaula 20]

While it may be clinically presented, I think this info is very important. People are denied entry every day, often detained. When we say "how can they?" we should be prepared for the answer. The law gives them alot of leeway and if we are really horrified at the treatment of people like allousa's FIL, we have to be able to make a distinction between abuse of the law and bad laws. How do you protest the treatment? Do you have a case that it is unlawful? Or, do we have to stand up to change the laws themselves? That is a big strategic difference. Understanding what the law allows is critical to making that choice and also for the arguments we then make. The fact is that we can be angry at the treatment and still see that it could fall within the law. I personally feel that way about much of immigration law.

[♥JP♥ 5]

You have offered plenty regarding what he may or may not have said, his intent to immigrate, if his documents& passport were indeed valid. Like others have said, it's very clear that Allousa and her family are getting legal support somewhere else. This situation could very well happen to anyone here and I'm pretty sure if it happened to you (God forbid) you may find yourself singing a different tune.

Maybe you believe that we shouldn't condemn the USA for treating an elderly man this way, but if we do that is OUR choice. From what we know, from Allousa and her family, he didn't pose any kind of threat and to be quie honest that is the only side I care about. She came here for support not for legal mumbo jumbo or for anyone here to point fingers at her FIL. I'm sure she is aware she will here that legal talk somewhere else, but it's different when that advice is solicited and comes from a professional.

Once again, and emphatically, let me spell it out again....I am not offering legal advice. I am offering facts as to when expedited removal is just, legal and within reason. And for your information, since you clearly missed the first time I indicated it, expedited removal is not simply due to someone being a perceived "threat" to the US. It can be a border agent's remedy to any one of a number of inadmissibility issues. Tens of thousands of aliens are refused entry to the US each year; some by virtue of their choice, are removed expeditiously; some, by virtue of misunderstanding their options, are defaulted to expedited removal because they refuse to surrender their application for entry. We don't know if this option was offered to Allousa's FIL, but to simply assume it wasn't is just as incorrect as the treatment you conclude was inappropriate. It could well be that he was offered to depart the USA, without ER, but didn't know what answer to give. How can any of us know right now?

Jumping to the conclusion that the US agents abused their authority is improper at this juncture, just as jumping to the conclusion that CBP wanted for Allousa's child to be in deplorable conditions, or that CBP chose that her FIL spent the night in jail rather than to take the flight back to Morrocco is improper. Why is it that you can't accept that it might have been for some other reason that the FIL was refused entry? Why is it that it is incomprehensible for you to consider that it could have been for a technicality? Why would you rather accuse the US of considering himn a threat to national security?

It may indeed have been a series of unfortunate coincidences. When I read the ouitrage, without consideration for the coincidences, this is the sort of "reverse discrimination" bothers me to read.

Then don't read it. I never said that I couldnt accept that maybe there were some other reasons for the FIL's removal. However, I am only here to offer my support to ALlousa and her family

Oh, another one-sided standard! If I write something you don't like, you feel entitled to accost me, insult me etc. If I read something I don't like. then I am not to read it. You don't grasp how it would be wise for you to practice what you preach,.eh?

I'm pretty sure you are the one complaining about how much the responses in this thread are bothering you, simple solution, don't read it. My point to you is not regarding what you are saying but there is a time and place for it all. Allousa and her family are still very emotional and judging by her last post, I don't think she really cares to hear any of your advice at this point. Maybe she might want to hear it at one point, but right now she needs support. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand?

[brnidokiegurl 0]

Be a friend or let it end...

I see I am not being appreciated. Brnidokiegurl, I hope you can live up to your member message.

no prob for me i have been her friend on two different site for quite awhile

[rebeccajo 14]

I'm pretty sure you are the one complaining about how much the responses in this thread are bothering you, simple solution, don't read it. My point to you is not regarding what you are saying but there is a time and place for it all. Allousa and her family are still very emotional and judging by her last post, I don't think she really cares to hear any of your advice at this point. Maybe she might want to hear it at one point, but right now she needs support. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand?

I haven't seen any response from allousa since Diaddie furthered her explanation. So why don't we let her decide what she needs to hear and what she doesn't?

[RAKASA 0]

I'm pretty sure you are the one complaining about how much the responses in this thread are bothering you, simple solution, don't read it. My point to you is not regarding what you are saying but there is a time and place for it all. Allousa and her family are still very emotional and judging by her last post, I don't think she really cares to hear any of your advice at this point. Maybe she might want to hear it at one point, but right now she needs support. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand?

I haven't seen any response from allousa since Diaddie furthered her explanation. So why don't we let her decide what she needs to hear and what she doesn't?

From: Yesterday, 08:45 PM

The fact that this was their 4th time visiting, I have a hard time understanding what reason they could have come up with to deny him entry. Also, his mother was given entry and they filed for and were granted visas at the same time. Also, the documents they presented to German officials upon entry in were in order. Even the German officials were confused as to why his father was turned away!

I just wonder how you would feel about your father spending a night in jail in a foreign land where he didn't speak the language.

The issue here is also the complete abuse of their authority. Why was it necessary to keep us all detained for such a long period of time when there were no other people being interviewed? Why was it necessary to continually lie to us, yell at us and treat us so harshly? Why was it necessary to not even inform us why his father was being detained and then removed?

How can you deem this "ordinary" treatment???????

[rebeccajo 14]

N -

I saw that post. I'm speaking of since then - since Diaddie further clarified her position.

Do we operate under the assumption here that someone isn't allowed to reasonably explain what they meant? It looks to me like allousa asked Diaddie more questions and she has since answered them, but allousa has not been back.

'Support' doesn't mean raging at others while the OP is absent from the thread.

Edited July 13, 2008 by rebeccajo

[S and S 12]

N -

I saw that post. I'm speaking of since then - since Diaddie further clarified her position.

Do we operate under the assumption here that someone isn't allowed to reasonably explain what they meant? It looks to me like allousa asked Diaddie more questions and she has since answered them, but allousa has not been back.

'Support' doesn't mean raging at others while the OP is absent from the thread.

It also doesn't mean one member is allowed to tell other members how to feel. Which is exactly what Diaddie is doing. We have the right to feel outrage even if she does not.

[LaL 418]

Aww guys - let's take a step back here for a moment - DM offered some very insightful information. Perhaps not delivered in a coated fashion, but let's not discount the information that could be very helpful.

[nu7015 0]

I'm pretty sure you are the one complaining about how much the responses in this thread are bothering you, simple solution, don't read it. My point to you is not regarding what you are saying but there is a time and place for it all. Allousa and her family are still very emotional and judging by her last post, I don't think she really cares to hear any of your advice at this point. Maybe she might want to hear it at one point, but right now she needs support. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand?

I haven't seen any response from allousa since Diaddie furthered her explanation. So why don't we let her decide what she needs to hear and what she doesn't?

Who'd want to come back to this?

[rebeccajo 14]

Ladies -

I'm really shocked. Really. Surely you must realize that in order for allousa to deal with this situation, she needs to be armed to the teeth with information?

[Ban Hammer 13,110]

Aww guys - let's take a step back here for a moment - DM offered some very insightful information. Perhaps not delivered in a coated fashion, but let's not discount the information that could be very helpful.

while some here may not know vj's mermaid, she's a wealth of knowledge that many of us greatly appreciate.

[Sprailenes 47]

I am very very sorry this happened to you and hope the entire matter can and will be resolved.

[desert_fox 32]

Everyone can be as outraged as they want. I even think that it was rather cold without an explanation to anyone, but I think that they would have to have a reason.

This is the first thing that the OP needs to know, whether she will or not is another story. She has said nothing about previous overstays, something that was saif but mis-understood, etc., but I dont think they arbitrarily refuse entry from someone because they are from a certain part of the worls, especially after being interview by the Consulate that issued the visa.

The FIL needs to contact the Consulate and have them run his passport and try to get a reason, until then its all conjecture.