Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
"Dirty Bomb" suspect a U.S citizen
TheEXone
Ranger
in Zocalo v2.0
As much as I support the fight against terrorism I am troubled by the fact that the president is prepared to take away a citizen's right to a trial, and declaring him an enemy combatant. Jose Padilla or Abdullah Al Mujahir was transfered under this pretext from the Justice Department to the DoD. This means he was not officialy charged, and is now under the control of the military. As dangerous as a person can be, you can't simply deny him the right evey other American has. What is to prevent the government from using this pretext in the future to hold someone they don't like. He has been held for over a month and not charged with anything, does that mean that anyone who is suspected of possibly commiting terrorism can be stripped of his citizenship?
Ashcroft claims that they have many sources that prove he has joined the enemy, but without a trial none of this can be confirmed?
Is the government going too far? is everyone now at risk? where do we draw the line?
I want to know what you guys think.
here is the full text of what Ashcroft said. [url="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54941,00.html"]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54941,00.html[/url]
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
Ashcroft claims that they have many sources that prove he has joined the enemy, but without a trial none of this can be confirmed?
Is the government going too far? is everyone now at risk? where do we draw the line?
I want to know what you guys think.
here is the full text of what Ashcroft said. [url="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54941,00.html"]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54941,00.html[/url]
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
Comments
Now, they complain when we have evidence against an [i]American Citizen[/i]!
Just goes to show you some people are never satisfied.
[b]It's great how this kind of 'CREDIBLE WARNING!!!!' or 'success' "conveniently" pops up as soon as the papers start to go back to focusing on bush knowing about the attacks prior.[/b][/quote]
At least he didn't go and bomb Iraq on the day it went to Congress.
So it's impossible that this could actually be credible warning. You know who gave them the information on this guy, right?
He's also being held because no doubt he has more info on his friends, so he should be interogated and placed in a high security naval brig in South Carolina.
He has not been put into the military tribunal system yet.
Don't you think even more of his cohorts would have gone underground for certain if the feds made a grand announcement about him being captured.
I agree while it is getting close to shady business, nothing the US or European goverments have done has been to much, yet.
If we simply went by what we feel is nessesary to get terrorists, if we did things ruthlesly and eficiently we would probably get the job done, but we would end up loosing what we claim to stand for. Due process is not a luxury its a right, people are forgetting that. It doesn't matter if you have a thousand witneses, and millions of peices of evidence a person is still inocent until proven guilty. Thats why we have a court system, to determine guilt and assign penalty. Lets try him for treason, for conspiracy to commit terrorims, but lets not diminish our rights by taking his away.
just remember we treat our enemys better then they would our soldiers.
As for the enemy combatant, perhaps it has been done before in a time of full scale war. But this isn't a full scale war, and Al Qaeda is not a country we have declared war against. They have been targeting us since the early 90s its only now we recognize them as an open enemy.
I don't agree with the we are at war argument, this "war" can last decades, and it has no clear and achievable objectives making it difficult to know if we've won. Are we prepared to give the government the right to do this for an indefinate amount of time?
I remember only a fews years ago the media would scrutinize and investigate everything the government said, now they take the government on its word. Most likely he is guilty of what he is acused of, but without a legal process how can we confirm it? How can we make sure the government won't make mistakes if we are not allowed to know whats going on. Letting the president declare anyone an enemy combatant and letting the military hold him is basicly saying that the government can't make mistakes. Thats why we have a legal system to determine someones guilt because we know people can be falsely accused. I'm not saying this guy is, but what about the next guy?
Preventing someone from going mad with the power of the presidency is just what our systems of checks and balances is all about. He does this and it starts looking suspicious, and he'll have no shortage of people on his butt for it. And, if he's tyrannical enough, people won't vote for him. Beauty of a democracy/republic.
If I understand correctly, presidents have always had this power. It wasn't granted to him by a Jar-Jar under mind control. It's only being used now because there's a good reason to.
As a combatant you are not tried by the military tribunal system, hell most of the time combatants are not tried at all, the are held for the duration of hostilities. As a combatant he has different sorts of rights and privledges, as those listed by the geneva convention.
Now if the Feds decide to try him they will remove him from combatant status and turn him over to the federal judicial system to try.
In the mean time he will be held at a secure location, probably with just him, the gaurds, and the Red Cross people serving coffee and donuts.
Lastly the US courts will probably back it, becaus it isnt the first time weve done something like this and it wont be the last, those who side with foreign organizations against the US government tend to be treated under different standards of "justice"
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 06-11-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 06-11-2002).]
I am also disturbed by this action. As citizens of the United States, we are entitled to a thing called "due process." However, a political administration willing to blatantly steal an election obviously has no qualms about stomping on a few constitutionally protected rights.
------------------
AnlaShok, Captain of the Gray Hand of Fate Squadron
Sidhe-1
Wielder of the Big Heavy Hammer of Obvious Truth
"FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!"
[b]He is an enemy to our country and should be treated as one.[/b][/quote]
Only problem I have is that we "know" this by assumption that our officials are correct. It's a frightening thought when you look back through history and find out the real score decades after the damage has been done, and there's no way to fix it.
How do we really know for sure? While I am no lover of anyone American or otherwise that would do the things he is accused of, it scares me to think of such power being weilded in our country where a citizen is supposedly innocent until proven guilty...
I don't like what I am seeing...
You piss of somebody powerful enough and you could easily be labeled an "enemy combatant".
------------------
[url="http://www.zmag.org"][i]Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.[/i][/url]
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a life time. But teach a man to BE a fish, and he can eat himself."
--Dennis Miller, Dennis Miller Live
[This message has been edited by Faylorn (edited 06-12-2002).]
As many have said traditionaly in times of war we have given presidents enormous powers to defeat the enemy. But things have changed because this isn't a normal war, we have no formal declaration, we have no specific country or force that we are fighting, and there are no clear requirments for ending the war. So if we allow the goverment these special powers we could in effect be giving them for the rest of our lives. I don't think people realize this war could take decades, much longer than any war we've ever fought, and stressing civil liberties for much longer than temporary emergencies set out by the constitution.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
I'll link to the latest issue of Disillusionment once I can get a copy.
------------------
[b]Sanfam[/b] - Pixel Pirates
[b][url="http://www.firstones.com/sanfam/guru.doc"]disillusionment[/b] v1.0[/url]; "We will have our day, we will have our future, and we will have our revolution."
Come and listen to the official shoutcast server of Firstones.com! It's Spootastic! [url="http://sanfam.dyndns.org:8000"]http://sanfam.dyndns.org:8000[/url]
"It is the year 2000. Where are the flying cars? I was Promised flying cars. I don't see any flying cars." -- Avery "Sisko" Brooks
[b]I suggest everyone here read the contents of my sig. It's got some relevant stuff.
I'll link to the latest issue of Disillusionment once I can get a copy.[/b][/quote]
I'm pretty disillusioned with the world not having flying cars, too [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/frown.gif[/img]
Howver I disagree with you on stoping the war on drugs, while its true making them illegal raises their price the effect on society if they were freely avialable would be devestating. Look at China before the opium wars, the consumption of Opium cased such a problem in people's lives that the goverment was forced to stop buying it from Britain.
Also I disagree with your assesment that the war on terror is just an exuse to make corporate america richer. Oil is a big factor in our foriegn policy, but by no means does it justfy going to war with the middle east. These countries pose a serious threat to everyone, if threy had their way every person on earth would be living under an Islamic radical government. The fact that countries like Iraq and afganistan can go against us proves we haven't as the artcle says "conquerd many nations", yes we have been suporting certain governments that have been friendly to the U.S(something which in many cases was wrong), but that does not mean we control them. Going to war against most of the middle east would not lead to the U.S conquering it. Yes we would have stable friendly governments, but that would be benificial to everyone. I don't think anyone thinks its good for people like Saddam to be in control of a platoon let alone an entire country.
I am troubled not by the war, but rather the policies being practiced in the U.S. and how that can leade to a loss of what we are about later down the road. If that were to happen then the things in your article about us conquering countries could in fact occur.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
One thing to the "dirty bomb" case: Even the FBI had to submit that they catched the guy in the "pre-planning phase". Now, what is that supposed to mean???
// sarcasm mode on
Beware you thoughts, guys (and gals). You could be a terrorist before you even know.
// sarcasm mode off
@TheEXone: Your question "where do we draw the line?" is most valid. *You* have to draw the line. No-one else can, and will do.
------------------
We are one. No matter the blood, no matter the skin, no matter the world, no matter the star. .. We are one.
No matter the pain, no matter the darkness, no matter the loss, no matter the fear. .. We are one.
- Alliance Preamble to the Declaration of Principles, The Paragon of Animals
Webmaster [url="http://www.Sprungtor.de"]www.Sprungtor.de[/url]
[b]Trouble is, Vertigo_1, it's not like anyone will get on his butt. A majority of Americans want guys like this packed far far away. Moreover, put this against the backdrop of the Anthrax scare where the same majority was all too willing to irradiate the mail even though cancer kills millions (more} annually - and the sanctity of our rights looks grim. Plato said it best: people are stupid - people in general anyway.
[/b][/quote]
Uh Faylorn, irradiating the mail isnt very likely to cause an increase in cancer rates, heck the only reason to worry about irradiated food is becaus people ingest it. People NORMALY dont go about ingesting their mail. Well, at least I dont.
And as for mailing of food products, I think thats technicly against postal regulations.
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 06-12-2002).]
[b]
One thing to the "dirty bomb" case: Even the FBI had to submit that they catched the guy in the "pre-planning phase". Now, what is that supposed to mean???
// sarcasm mode on
Beware you thoughts, guys (and gals). You could be a terrorist before you even know.
// sarcasm mode off
@TheEXone: Your question "where do we draw the line?" is most valid. *You* have to draw the line. No-one else can, and will do.
[/b][/quote]
Problem is with alot of this, as far as I know, several of the September 11th hijackers didnt actualy commit a crime untill the hijacking.
So basicly if you limit the applications of "consipiracy" charges then your stuck to prosecuting AFTER a criminal event took place in many of these cases, in which case its a moot point.
Does anybody have any suggestions about how to solve this issue?
I personaly think we cut israel loose and pull out of the middle east. Then we wait and see what happens
My bet is we still get hit by terrorist attacks. There are things going on here that nobody wants to talk about
And by the way, the origins of this problem were not created by american policies We were only in the area post 1940, the real origins are French and British, so why dont we bitch at them?
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 06-12-2002).]
[b]Moreover, put this against the backdrop of the Anthrax scare where the same majority was all too willing to irradiate the mail even though cancer kills millions (more} annually[/b][/quote]
Umm irradiation does not make things radioactive...and there is no proof at all that it causes cancer. [url="http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/foodirradiation.htm#whatis"]http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/foodirradiation.htm#whatis[/url]
Jake
Because there's no grounds for recourse - and the 'origins' of a great deal of the lesser developed world, an arena in which America has problems, is as a result of colonialism, and post-colonial development - in which case you have to look a lot further than simply trying to pin it down to either France or Britain.
They were both, certainly, major colonial players - but it's a rather extrapolated point to make, to blame the current situation upon them; especially those two nations alone.
The real complaints being voiced, with any degree of intent, are those stemming from the post-war world - the war broke colonialism's back, and I can't remember seeing a commentary that didn't suggest that America might have been relived at the loosening of Europe's grip on large sections of the globe. The simple fact is that the complaints that people are levelling at America, [i]do[/i] stem from American policies within the last 4 decades.
Whilst it might well be soothing to look for a suitable scapegoat, the only rational answer would be to take responsibility, and attempt to redress the issues - not pine them off on someone else; which would more likely simply exacerbate the problem.
People have issues with America, and it doesn't all simply stem from petty jealousy at your "superpower" status - remove your fingers from your ears, and work with the world on this one.
We remove our forces from the middle east, we cut our off our support of Israel.
we need to "work with the world"? give me some concrete policy examples that will aid in the middle eastern scenario
Whats going on IS scapegoating, even if the US pulled out, or if we hadnt been there at all the middle eastern nations would find themselves in the same situation they are in now.
The only way the concrete conditions of life are going to improve for the middle eastern and arab nations in general is if they do it themselves, and sharia law isnt the answer.
Of course, all the US goverment has to do is say the word "suspisious" and people swallow the garbage like it's a Sunday dinner. I mean 7 months? No charges? No calls? Seems a little unconstitutional to me.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
"Something is only impossible until it's not."
The comment on working with the world, was primarily the suggestion that America drops it's swagger on the world stage - your arrogance has cost you before, and is continuing to cost you. Listen to the greivances, don't simply brush them aside as the mumblings of some second-rate power. If you can't have the decency to do that, then why should we give you any respect? Colin Powell hit it on the head when he criticised Europe for it's negative stance on America - but why should we give you any respect?
And this is Europe - your closest ally, starting to lose it's patience. You're playing games with the world - you won't operate fairly on the markets; throw your sanctions around; meddle in the affairs of other nations; throw your UN voting block around like, somehow, you should be entitled to be outside of the boundaries placed on the rest of us; you play your stupid power games, throwing Kyoto down the drain simply to ease over your own vested interests...
... you know, the list goes on and on - and they're all honest grievances.
So, you can imagine why the fanatics of the Islamic world call America the 'satanic power' - to them you are. Blind hatred is born from honest complaint, and your policies have been more than enough to generate complaint.
Oh, you've actually given me a good example of the attitude that gets the world's back up - "and sharia law isnt the answer" - is that your call to make? You can't force your views on people.
This wasn't intended as an America-bashing post, though some might well like to preclude further debate by interpreting it as such, but the case is that America has a lot to answer for - exacerbated by the fact that the complaints are whitewashed by the apparent lack of accountability in certain areas of the US' foreign policy. Regardless of whether the problems have been brewing for decades, or are a creation of the present, responsibility needs to be taken by the current generation, and bandying the issue about is no way to answer it.
Because if a radical Islamic movement took power that was hostile to the west, you could see the entire area explode. Tell me what would happen if the flow of oil suddenly stoped from the middle east? the entire world economy would come to a hault. In time we could find alternatives, but initialy it would be devestating.
Why do we support Israel?
Hey I don't like alot of the things Israel has done in the past decades, and it probably was a stupid idea to create it in the middle of the Arab world, driving out millions of people. But guess what it happend and both the U.S and Europe supported it. The truth is that Israel has been surrounded by countries that want it destroyed from day one. If any of our countries were under that kind of pressure we would have been just as extreme in our responses. If the U.S would stop supporting Israel it would have no way of defending itself when the Arabs decide its time to "push them to the sea".
I'm really sick of Europeans complaing about the way the U.S operates in the world, when they do the same things. European governments subsidise their products just as much, if not more than the U.S leading to unfair prices on the open market and 3rd world nations unable to compete. Europes corporations exploit the 3rd world just as American ones do. And countries like Britain have continously helped the U.S in destabilizing governments and supporting anti communist dictators. Countries like Belgium had active imperial colonies up until the 70s. And guess what, sanctions don't work unless most countries sign off on them. So if Europe is so opposed to us "throwing our sanctions around" then why does it support them? Same thing for the the U.N voting of your governments are so opposed to our opressive policies, then why do you vote with us on nearly ever issue?
You see Europe is partly responsible for almost every anti-american greivance people like to point out. You reap the benifits of the economic world we help create, and then bitch at us when its politicaly convinient.
I agree we have to work with the world as partners, not subjects, that we must in order to stop terrorism also stop poverty. But its not right to cast all the blame on us, both the U.S and Europe must change for the world to be better off. I for one will dedicate my life to changing things, but I also expect my European counterparts to do the same.
Also it seems odd that Europe forgets that terrorists want them to pay just as much as America, that they see you as being part of our system and so also requiring Jihad. U.K officials stoped a plot to take out the Big Ben and other landmarks by Al Qaeda, and Islamic terrorist burned a bus full of french tourists in India. But of course it just America they hate.
I think the reason Europe is trying to stop the U.S from attacking Iraq is because they are afraid the ensuing conflict could spill over and affect Europeans.
"Oh, you've actually given me a good example of the attitude that gets the world's back up - "and sharia law isnt the answer" - is that your call to make? You can't force your views on people."
Thats a pretty bad argument considering history and the fight for freedom. Look at Afganistan, almost every person interviewd is happy the Taliban are gone, they have real hope for the first time in 20 years. This is because even though they are almost all Muslim, none of them want to be under tyranical laws. The thirst for freedom is ingrained in our spirit, and no matter your beliefs its always what you crave. Radical Islam takes people's rights away, and as people who cherish freedom we have an obligation to oppose it. You can't force your views on people, but with governments who control their media, and all forms of comunications its hard to know what people really beleive. The Taliban presented the picture that everyone was happy, and that they were the ideal Islamic country.We know now of course that wasn't true.
Finaly I think people are deluding themselves if they think Bin Laden or anyother terrorist gives a damm about the condition of the 3rd world or what we do to help or hurt it. Their motive is pure revenge, they see the U.S as a symbol of all the things that made their lives difficult and they want to make us pay for it. All they want is to go to heaven, and take as many of us as possible down with them. They could care less about helping the world, its about selfishness and how they are being glorious martyrs. Lets fix the world, but lets not give these people ligitimacy by saying they are fighting because they want to improve things.
I hope to get an article in for either 1.2 or 2.0. It should be neat, but I actually forgot what I was intending to write about. Darn!