Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Our government finds it necessary to protect Americans from academics who disagree with Bush.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Respected Academic Denied Entry into U.S.

By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet. Posted July 30, 2008.


Our government finds it necessary to protect Americans from academics who disagree with Bush.
Advertisement

It's not just "security walls" that can keep "aliens" from entering Fortress America.

The State Department has this thing they call "prudential revocation" of a foreigner's visa. Translating the bureaucratese into English, that means the government doesn't have to make a formal finding about why an "alien" is being denied entry. A "prudential revocation" means the governments thinks you might be ineligible for entry.

Case in point: Professor Adam Habib, a leading South African political scientist and Vice Chancellor at the University of Johannesburg, who also happens be a critic of Bush's misled crusade to maintain U.S. hegemony over Middle Eastern energy resources under the guise of ridding the world of "terrorism."

In October 2006, Habib, a Muslim, flew into New York City because he was invited to attend an academic symposium being held by the American Sociological Association (ASA). At the airport, he was detained for seven hours and questioned about his political beliefs before his visa was revoked. The professor was deported back to South Africa.

In the days following the deportation, the only answer Habib got was confirmation that, indeed, his visa had been revoked and -- oh, by the way, the visas of his wife and two kids, one of whom was conceived in America, had been revoked too.

Why would a highly esteemed academic be banned from the land of the free? A vague answer was sent to the U.S. Consulate General in Johannesburg later that month, according to the South Africa-based Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI).

The cited reason for revoking Habib's visa is a section of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act that says any 'alien' who has engaged in a terrorist activity, or who is believed to be a terrorist threat, can be denied entry.

The law also says that anyone who represents a foreign terrorist organization, or endorses terrorist views, can also be excluded. But, the convoluted denial did not explain how Habib supposedly violated the Act.

In November 2007, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of organizations that have invited Professor Habib to speak in the U.S., including the ASA, the American Association of University Professors, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Boston Coalition for Palestinian Rights.

The lawsuit -- still pending in federal court -- asks the court to prevent the government from excluding Habib, unless evidence is produced that substantiates the "terrorist" accusations.

"In one fell swoop, the U.S. government has stifled political debate in this country and maligned the reputation of a respected scholar without giving one shred of evidence to support its claims. It appears that Professor Habib is being excluded not because of his actions but because of his political views and associations," is how ACLU's National Security Project attorney Melissa Goodman puts it.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: war on terror, deportation, adam habib, visa

Sean Gonsalves is a syndicated columnist and news editor with the Cape Cod Times.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Let him in or arrest him
Posted by: edgar1 on Jul 31, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Habib is so bad, let him in and arrest him and try him w/evidence. If not, let him in and let him go home unmolested.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You kids today Posted by: EinMD
Oh how far we gave fallen
Posted by: the baron on Aug 1, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"writers and artists are invited to read from the works of thinkers banned in the U.S.A. because of their political beliefs."

This is just demeaning to the national conscious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh how far we gave fallen Posted by: jstepp590
saw it coming
Posted by: jstepp590 on Aug 1, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I saw this coming in the first (alleged) debate with Bush. Whenever he got hit with an idea he didn't like or someone disagreed with him he got this constipated look on his face. I could tell even then that he had this childish mentallity that if you didn't agree with him on one thing you were against him on everything. I pointed it out to my family and they laughed and didn't agree with me. They aren't laughing any more and a whole house full of die hard Republicans has been cast adrift. It's not that they aren't still Republicans, it's that the Republicans aren't any more.

Luckily for us, this is the 21st century. If the gestapo doesn't want them in the country then we should just bring them in by satellite. It won't be as good as having them in person to disagree and argue with but until the nazis in Washington are out of what little power they have left we may be stuck with it.

My stepfather was right. The reason our countries founders specifically made the constitution with a weak central power is as valid today but less adhered to in the past. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and a strong central government just makes it easier for the scum suckers to hijack our government and take over.

If we don't figure out how to take our government back legally and soon we will eventually have to take it back by force. History has proven time and again that this is the way of governments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Protecting the IDIOT from critics....
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Aug 5, 2008 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This country really has gone waayyy to far when we stifle voices from outside the country! Under Herr Fuher Bush there is no criticism, no dissent, no other opinion!

Maybe if he actually had a clue we might not be in trouble that we are in. On the other hand maybe if the country had a clue he wouldn't be in office in the first place!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At a certain point...
Posted by: wolfgangmo75 on Aug 14, 2008 4:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... America will become irrelevant. We are already losing our top thinkers and academics.

Many people are avoiding the US even for connecting flights. The top students are going to other countries universities.

Where the innovation happens is where the money will flow.

We have cut off our head. The body will not be far behind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]