45 votes

First no-fly list case in history, witness can't make it because...

... She was just put on the no-fly list and prevented from boarding her flight to testify.

Malaysian PhD student, Rahinah Ibrahim, living with her 14 yr old daughter in Stanford, CA is to go to a conference in Malaysia that Stanford is holding. Recovering from surgery, she asks for a wheelchair to get to the gate at the San Francisco airport. When she gets to the ticket counter, she's told that she's on the no-fly list, and is handcuffed and detained for 2 hours, missing her flight. The FBI tells the airport to let her go, and she hears she is no longer on the no-fly list. She reschedules for the next day, shows up to the airport, but again they tell her she's on the no-fly list. But they let her board the flight anyway and she leaves for her school's conference.

After the conference, at the Malaysian airport, she tries to board her return flight to finish her PhD work at Stanford. She was told she couldn't board the flight, and DHS wanted authorities to arrest her. The Malaysian officials said "fuck the DHS" and didn't arrest her, but they didn't let her board either. She never returned to the US. Her daughter was born here and is a US citizen.

She submitted a request to clear her name from the list and was told they revoked her student visa too. Demolishing her professional goals. Stanford continued to work with her abroad, but she was severely limited in her professional abilities without the ability to travel to CA. This was in 2005.

Rahinah filed suit against the DHS with help from lawyers in CA, but the supposedly unbiased District Court said, "Fuck you!! You think you can sue the DHS?! You're a terrst!! [sic]. We don't care what you say, we won't do shit for you. DHS!! USA!! DHS!! USA!!" (Paraphrase). This was in 2006.

She appealed the dismissal with the help of pro-bono lawyers in the States. The appeals court ruled in 2008 that the district court had jurisdiction and remanded them to try the civil lawsuit.

Fast forward to today, and the District Court in SF is finally hearing the case. This marks the first case in history that a court is trying about the secretive no-fly list. This is a black eye on the reputation of the Judicial System that the unconstitutional no-fly list has been unchallenged for so long. Countless lives affected like Rahinah, many lives ruined.

Anyway, Rahinah can't show up to court because she can't get there, but her lawyers call as a witness her daughter to testify on her behalf. Her daughter, a natural-born US citizen, is now 22 and practices law in Malaysia. On the day of her testimony, she didn't show up to court.

Apparently, a subsidiary of the defendants (DHS), placed Rahinah's daughter on the no-fly list, preventing her from testifying in the trial. Oh the disgusting Irony. After nearly a decade of stress, hard work and government bullshit, all just to get off the no-fly list. She's rewarded with the whimsical press of a button in a secret room so that now her daughter is on the no-fly list too. If her daughter would like to challenge that, she's got a long road ahead.

When the judge asked DHS if this was true, they denied it and said the daughter was lying. Malaysian Airways backed up Rahinah's lawyers with a copy of the no-fly request from DHS, proving she was not allowed to board the flight because of DHS.

The trial is ongoing. And if everything goes just right, and the government doesn't cheat the trial, and the judge actually rules in Rahinah's favor, and the government doesn't appeal, or loses on appeal, the Best-Case scenario for Rahinah at this point is she gets her name taken off the list, and her daughter will possibly be able to challenge her own No-Fly listing in court.

Statists are responsible for this absolute travesty of human rights violations. This case is but one lottery winner who overcame extremely poor odds of getting these human rights violations heard in a courtroom. This is a violation of Rahinah's rights to freedom of speech by association, and her rights to due process. If you think she doesn't have those rights because she's not a US Citizen, well then you're an idiot! Since when did "human rights" become "American rights", you egotistical jerk. It's an exceptionalism farce. America is not exceptional or alone or even in the minority in recognizing human rights like due process, or freedom of speech or association, or trial by jury. The powers that be would like you to think this, so they can deprive us all of our rights in increments. It is impossible to take away the rights of a few, without taking away the rights of us all. If we think rights are just a US thing, for US citizens, then maybe it's not so bad without them, the rest of the world is without rights (FALSE).

Those that don't oppose the TSA or DHS, this is why some of us do. Some people are abused without possibility of repercussion, arbitration, mediation or justice. That is absolutely absurd as some sort of social order, it's disgusting.

Sources used:

Google:
Rahinah Ibrahim

Appeals court ruling:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/08/10...

Reporter for the case:
http://papersplease.org/wp/2013/12/02/witness-in-no-fly-tria...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
deacon's picture

You stated

you took the oath of office.
does this oath state that you will adhere/follow the const
and the laws contained within?

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon

Yes

It did state that.

"Attorney’s Oath
I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and counse1lo2r at law to the best of my knowledge and ability."

Here is a federal judge's oath:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/453

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

deacon's picture

I see

this is from the state of Cal.
so here is an example question.
would it or wouldn't it be a crime to deny the people
their 2nd amendment rights? meaning Cal says no more "assault rifles"
and seeing this kind of nullifies part of the const,doesn't this then,make it a fed crime as well?

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon

yes and no

to the extent that it is unconstitutional, yes, you are right. However, in the world of a judiciary that thinks the constitution does not mean what it says, and places emphasis on the "regulated" part of the 2nd over the "not infringe" part, what should be unconstitutional isn't and and therefore doing what YOU think should be unconstitutional isn't to the Supreme Court and ergo the rest o the nation's courts.

So, in upside down world that we really live in, it is "constitutional" to have gun regulations and gun control. Or so the courts think.

I don't agree with that, I'm a victim of it myself, but there ya go.

The US SUPREMES set the tone for the rest of the nation on this stuff. The States under current law, can provide MORE protection of civil liberties (2d included) but not less. So when you talk about gun control, you're talking about federal supreme court review of state regulations.

If your point is that every lawyer on every 2nd amendment case is violating the constitution if they practice in a state with gun control laws, okay, yes I see your point. But that isn't going to fly.

It is also correct that no constitutional right is absolute, and keep in mind that ANY gun control law on the books more than a couple of years has certainly been constitutionally tested by now. After all, prisons existed at the time of the Constitution, so "life liberty and pursuit of happiness" isn't even available as an absolute.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

deacon's picture

it is upside down world

I can agree with that statement.
Could the reason the const can and does violated be caused by
"it is the opinion of this court". Or a court somewhere set a
precedent,and this is being used in place of actual laws?
Could these points be why it won't fly anymore?

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon

Don't believe him Deacon

He's not from Kalifornia. Ask him to prove it, see what he does....

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

aww shucks

and you're not from San Diego either, and your name isn't "Ira"...

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

This is the problem with you...

I never said I was from San Diego and never said my name was "Ira"

Not that I care... Chicken!

Come out from your Chicken costume and tell us all what a kind of a cock you are, prove you're not a pig!

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

you did both

.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You assume much

must really suck to be your client.

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

ah the king of kiddie libertarianism

go find someone innocent and run up to them on the sidewalk with a camera yelling "bilderberg!" I'm gonna break my own rule here and put you on ignore you putz.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

The name calling FAKE libertarian speaks

and yet you wonder why nobody listens to you. Winning huh?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

...

You are an extremist and combative.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

...

you're a b.s. artist, a purveyor of pseudolegal pseudoknowledge, can't answer a simple question, are ignorant though opinionated on the topic of which you speak, and are whiny and combative.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

It's never ending. You can't read. Stop patronizing me.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

Look up patronizing in a dictionary

and you'll see that I'm being anything but patronizing towards you.

But until you got nasty, I was polite but questioning. You decided that instead of discussing merits, you would go ad hominem. So stop your whining.

Your position shifts yet again.

You started out saying that they should ask the judge to prove his oath, as if that will magically cause something to happen.

You then said it was a felony if the judge didn't do it.

You then said you were just talking about violations of the oath being a felony.

You then said you don't ask the judge, but you ask the state notary board or some other crap.

You're all over the place, and not ony are you wrong, but you lack character and are demonstrating dishonesty in this thread.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

You are not the least bit civil. Read my posts with more consideration. Your conclusions are false. My position is the same.

Upon demand.

How many times do you have to reply to my posts? Can you just block me instead? Why are you insistent on putting someone down for something you claim to know nothing about? Do you know everything or is that just your claim?

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

keepup the ad hominems

and I'll keep exposing your stupidity. Look, you're just wrong, you and I both know it. You can provide no cite to your claimed law, because it doesn't exist.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

Your are just berating me over and over. Your success should be more than enough but apparently your mother was overbearing. When someone asks you to leave them alone, you should just leave in peace. Your opinions have been noted. Move on.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

free edujumacaychun

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=9041

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

Keep changing your name. You are in dishonor.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

you are in bullpucky heaven

with that one. There is no legitimate legal concept of honor-dishonor.

I am only familiar with it because I have a hobby of debunking sovereign citizens.

It doesn't exist in our law, either statutory or common, and didn't exist in the English common law that our system came from either. It's an invention of dipwads in their mommy's basement.

My motto for you is therefore: If the basement fits, post from it!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

I requested for you to move on to another person. Your hobby is to harass other people. A honorable person would have moved on long ago. I never made the claim that I was a sovereign citizen. Your not debunking anything. It's insulting and not proper etiquette.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

eitquette? ROFL

so it's proper etiquette to hold one's self out as a legal expert when you're completely devoide of knowledge? It's proper etiquette to say others are incompetent, when you don't know them, because they disagree with you, or ask you questions? You just don't like bbeing caught with your pants down, and instead of admitting it, you get all whiny and play the victim.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

Your cause isn't noble. It's retarded to argue with people over the internet. It's proper to leave people alone who ask nicely. We are all not going to agree and acceptance is essential to happiness.

Find a better hobby. Collect postage stamps or something. What your doing equates to religious indoctrination. Just being belligerent doesn't prove anything.

When are you going to say something new? Spend more time with your wife and/or kids. Perhaps you can impart your immense wisdom.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

fish, meet barrel

I've got the fishblaster.

Hey, you decided to get nasty.

Once again, I started off just politely asking you questions. And even though you're wrong, you could actually learn something here, but nooooo....foolish pride on display, you can't admit it for a second...gotta keep trying to more vaguely state your position so you can claim some kind of refuge...

now you're resorting to "how dare I tell it like it is." Such a truth fanatic, arentcha?

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

I think you misunderstand my post and my intent. I'm not running away. I have spent plenty of time talking with you. What I am saying is, don't waste your time on bad company. Get some sunlight. Spend some time with the kids. Go where you are wanted. I don't seek your company. Don't seek mine.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

Okay, your intent isn't the most important thing here

You are posting disinfo. Whether you know it or not is secondary. I'm not seeking your company, I'm exposing disinfo frauds. It's Saturday and it's raining.

...And since when in the world of libertarianism is "etiquette" and "tone" more important than "right" and "truth?"

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

...

Prove it!

All rights reserved and no rights waived.

If the judge has a sense of justice and decency

If the judge has a sense of justice and decency, he'll find the DHS witnesses and government lawyers in contempt of court and jail all of them until the trial is concluded--however many years that takes.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.