Padilla indicted.

[EatSpam]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After being held for more than three years in custody, Jose Padilla has been charged with membership in a North American terrorist support cell and with conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim.

Linky

Now, what took so long? All of the cons, Dubya, etc, where arguing that this guy was a terrist and anti-freedumb... but 3 years to charge this guy? Crazy.

 

[conjur]

The only reason they're charging him is so he can't take his case to the SCOTUS.

Now, how long will they delay and string out the trial?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: conjur
The only reason they're charging him is so he can't take his case to the SCOTUS.

Now, how long will they delay and string out the trial?

If they have a case, this should have been over and done 2 years ago. I wonder why they're delaying.

Before you cons start bashing me as soft on terrar, if this guy is guilty, I want him convicted and sentenced.

 

[RightIsWrong]

If you notice.....there isn't a single mention of "dirty bomb". Heard somewhere that there isn't any mention of it in the idictment either.

Press release

Edit: More info about my above statement:

Padilla, arrested in Chicago in 2002, was initially described by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft as plotting with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network to detonate a ``dirty bomb'' in the U.S. Today's indictment didn't include that accusation or another plot to blow up apartment buildings previously described by Justice Department officials.

``The indictment alleges that Padilla traveled overseas to train as a terrorist with the intention of fighting in violent jihad,'' Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters in Washington. ``Those trained as terrorists engage in acts of physical violence such as murder, maiming, kidnapping and hostage-taking against innocent civilians.''

Source

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
If you notice.....there isn't a single mention of "dirty bomb". Heard somewhere that there isn't any mention of it in the idictment either.

Press release

Edit: More info about my above statement:

Padilla, arrested in Chicago in 2002, was initially described by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft as plotting with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network to detonate a ``dirty bomb'' in the U.S. Today's indictment didn't include that accusation or another plot to blow up apartment buildings previously described by Justice Department officials.

``The indictment alleges that Padilla traveled overseas to train as a terrorist with the intention of fighting in violent jihad,'' Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters in Washington. ``Those trained as terrorists engage in acts of physical violence such as murder, maiming, kidnapping and hostage-taking against innocent civilians.''

Source

Could the lack of use of "dirty bomb" mean they did not have enough tangible information to prove it? Understand, some people do refuse to bring charges when no crime was comitted or when the proof is not sufficient to continue with that line of prosecution.

 

[Genx87]

This will be an interesting case and could be a framework on how we prosecute terrorism in the future though our court system.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87
This will be an interesting case and could be a framework on how we prosecute terrorism in the future though our court system.

If it's the framework, it's going to take a LOOOONG time to prosecute the throngs of "terrorists" currently behind held.

3+ years per? Wow...what efficiency!!

 

[tommywishbone]

Padilla was going to build a chemical or radioactive bomb? You have got to be kidding. That idiot couldn't mix oxygen & hydrogen and get water! His main concern (according to "witnesses") was whether or not his truck would fit on the Brooklyn Bridge. That dufuss is a nobody. He belongs with the two guys from Sacramento, a few years ago, who were "planning" to blow up a huge propane tank, using a "giant shotgun" according to local police.

What's the next scare tactic... bombs in baby strollers?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genx87
This will be an interesting case and could be a framework on how we prosecute terrorism in the future though our court system.

If it's the framework, it's going to take a LOOOONG time to prosecute the throngs of "terrorists" currently behind held.

3+ years per? Wow...what efficiency!!

Are we planning on turning this into the walmart of courts? You want terrorists prosecuted and convicted or do you just want political points when we let one go and they ram a car bomb into a local shopping mall?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genx87
This will be an interesting case and could be a framework on how we prosecute terrorism in the future though our court system.

If it's the framework, it's going to take a LOOOONG time to prosecute the throngs of "terrorists" currently behind held.

3+ years per? Wow...what efficiency!!

Are we planning on turning this into the walmart of courts? You want terrorists prosecuted and convicted or do you just want political points when we let one go and they ram a car bomb into a local shopping mall?

Ah, falling back to your logical fallacies with your fear-mongering.


buh-bye.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
If you notice.....there isn't a single mention of "dirty bomb". Heard somewhere that there isn't any mention of it in the idictment either.

Press release

Edit: More info about my above statement:

Padilla, arrested in Chicago in 2002, was initially described by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft as plotting with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network to detonate a ``dirty bomb'' in the U.S. Today's indictment didn't include that accusation or another plot to blow up apartment buildings previously described by Justice Department officials.

``The indictment alleges that Padilla traveled overseas to train as a terrorist with the intention of fighting in violent jihad,'' Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters in Washington. ``Those trained as terrorists engage in acts of physical violence such as murder, maiming, kidnapping and hostage-taking against innocent civilians.''

Source

Could the lack of use of "dirty bomb" mean they did not have enough tangible information to prove it? Understand, some people do refuse to bring charges when no crime was comitted or when the proof is not sufficient to continue with that line of prosecution.

Heh. AS if they need "evidence" They just convicted a guy in an assasination plot against George Bush based on Saudi "confessions'....
Have you ever been interrogated using Saudi methods? I defy you to not say what ever it is they want you to say after several "sessions" with your "questioner"....
Having been through a military simulated interrogation training course, I can sort of imagine. Hint: It ain't fun.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genx87
This will be an interesting case and could be a framework on how we prosecute terrorism in the future though our court system.

If it's the framework, it's going to take a LOOOONG time to prosecute the throngs of "terrorists" currently behind held.

3+ years per? Wow...what efficiency!!

Are we planning on turning this into the walmart of courts? You want terrorists prosecuted and convicted or do you just want political points when we let one go and they ram a car bomb into a local shopping mall?

So why does it take 3 years to get an indictment? I might see 3 years for a trial, but 3 years just to press charges??

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
If you notice.....there isn't a single mention of "dirty bomb". Heard somewhere that there isn't any mention of it in the idictment either.

Press release

Edit: More info about my above statement:

Padilla, arrested in Chicago in 2002, was initially described by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft as plotting with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network to detonate a ``dirty bomb'' in the U.S. Today's indictment didn't include that accusation or another plot to blow up apartment buildings previously described by Justice Department officials.

``The indictment alleges that Padilla traveled overseas to train as a terrorist with the intention of fighting in violent jihad,'' Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters in Washington. ``Those trained as terrorists engage in acts of physical violence such as murder, maiming, kidnapping and hostage-taking against innocent civilians.''

Source

Could the lack of use of "dirty bomb" mean they did not have enough tangible information to prove it? Understand, some people do refuse to bring charges when no crime was comitted or when the proof is not sufficient to continue with that line of prosecution.

Then why did they arrest him in the first place or just not release him? If there was a lack of evidence, you are now insinuating that the Bush administration is picking up U.S. citizens without sufficient evidence and holding them for years before even charging them. I guess some people also throw the Constitution and Bill of Rights out the window also to make their agenda a reality.

Federal officials have captured a U.S. citizen with suspected ties to al Qaeda who allegedly planned to build and explode a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States, the Justice Department said Monday.

U.S. officials said Washington was the probable target of the plot. FBI Director Robert Mueller said the plot was in the "discussion stage" when the suspect, Abdullah Al Muhajir, was arrested. Mueller said the plot had not gone any further, to the knowledge of U.S. authorities.

Attorney General John Ashcroft said Al Muhajir -- who was born Jose Padilla -- was captured May 8 as he flew from Pakistan into O'Hare International Airport in Chicago, Illinois. Officials described the flight as a reconnaissance mission.

Officials said that when Al Muhajir arrived in Chicago, he declared having $8,000 but was found to have more than $10,000 in his possession.

In the weeks before he flew to Chicago, Al Muhajir was tracked flying between Pakistan, Egypt and Switzerland, officials said.

U.S. officials later said an "associate" of Al Muhajir had been arrested in Pakistan before May 8. It was not clear whether this was the "associate" Ashcroft referred to when he said Al Muhajir was working with someone in Pakistan on plans to build a dirty bomb.

A dirty bomb is a conventional bomb equipped with radioactive material designed to spread over a wide area.

Depending on the circumstances of the explosion, the number of deaths and injuries from a dirty bomb might not be substantially greater than from a conventional bomb explosion. But panic over radioactivity and evacuation measures could snarl a city, and the area struck would be off-limits for at least several months during cleanup efforts. (More on dirty bombs)

Ashcroft said Al Muhajir, 31, would be treated as an "enemy combatant" of the United States, a move that means he has fewer legal rights than an ordinary defendant in a criminal case.

President Bush signed off Sunday night on the decision to treat Al Muhajir as an enemy combatant, senior U.S. officials said, adding the government faced a Tuesday deadline to decide whether to charge Al Muhajir in the federal court system or turn him over to the Defense Department.

 

[conjur]

Well, fat lot of good DICK's love of torture has done.


Torture claims 'forced US to cut terror charges'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,1650418,00.html?gusrc=rss

The Bush administration decided not to charge Jose Padilla with planning to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in a US city because the evidence against him was extracted using torture on members of al-Qaida, it was claimed yesterday.

Mr Padilla, a US citizen who had been held for more than three years as an "enemy combatant" in a military prison in North Carolina, was indicted on Tuesday on the lesser charges of supporting terrorism abroad. After his arrest in 2002 the Brooklyn-born Muslim convert was also accused by the administration of planning to blow up apartment blocks in New York using natural gas.

The administration had used his case as evidence of the continued threat posed by al-Qaida inside America.

Yesterday's New York Times, quoting unnamed current and former government officials, said the main evidence of Mr Padilla's involvement in the plots against US cities had come from two captured al-Qaida leaders, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, believed to be the mastermind of the September 11 attacks, and Abu Zubaydah, a leading al-Qaida recruiter. But the officials told the newspaper Mr Padilla could not be charged with the bomb plots because neither of the al-Qaida leaders could be used as witnesses as they had been subjected to harsh questioning and could open up charges from defence lawyers that their earlier statements resulted from torture. Officials also feared that their testimony could expose classified information about the CIA prison system in which the men were thought to be held.

The CIA has never publicly acknowledged it is detaining Mr Mohammed and Mr Zubaydah. It is not known where they are being held. But it was reported last month the CIA was using secret detention centres in eastern Europe, possibly in Poland and Romania, for interrogations, thus beyond the reach of US law.

Internal reviews by the CIA have raised questions about the treatment and credibility of the two men. The New York Times said one review, completed in spring last year by the CIA inspector general, found that in the first months after his capture Mr Mohammed had suffered excessive use of "waterboarding", a technique involving near drowning which entails the detainee being strapped to a board and then submerged.

Announcing the charges against Mr Padilla on Tuesday, the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, repeatedly refused to answer questions on why none of the allegations involving attacks on the US had been included. "I am not going to talk about previous accusations and allegations that are outside the indictment," he said. However, the New York Times said the officials had emphasised that the government was not backing off its initial assertions about the seriousness of Mr Padilla's actions.

Mr Padilla was arrested at O'Hare airport in Chicago in 2002 after returning from Pakistan. President George Bush declared him an enemy combatant, and the administration resisted calls to charge and try him in civilian courts. His case became a cause célèbre, with human rights groups claiming it was an extreme example of how civil liberties had been brushed aside in pursuit of the war on terror.

Mr Padilla was handed over last week to the justice department for civilian proceedings, avoiding a potentially embarrassing supreme court showdown over how long the US government could hold one of its citizens in military custody without charges.

Torture has become an emotive issue around the world since prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib in Iraq was uncovered. A new law sponsored by Senator John McCain, a former Republican presidential candidate and a war hero who was tortured in Vietnam, would ban inhumane treatment and oblige all US agencies to abide by international law on torture. The draft law was approved by 90 votes to nine in the Senate earlier this month, but the House of Representatives has yet to give its support and Dick Cheney has launched an aggressive effort to modify the legislation to allow the CIA to be exempted - causing the Washington Post to label him "Vice President for Torture" in an editorial.

Just that "assassination" planned for the Propagandist which "confession" came as a result of torture by the Saudis.

Why don't they just forge some more evidence like the Niger documents? Save them the time and trouble of having to torture people for fake confesssions.

 

[Jhhnn]

We'll see where this goes, but I suspect it's a misdirection play. Padilla's habeas corpus appeals are advancing towards the SCOTUS, and they've already warned the Admin that it won't do to hold people indefinitely w/o charge... The only reason that the court could refuse to consider it before was an extreme technicality- they're trying to give the Admin some room to resolve the situation so that they won't have to order that Padilla either be charged or released.

When Padilla's appeal gets to the top, the Admin will show that he's been properly charged & etc- end of appeal. If he's not convicted, they'll just throw him back in the slammer as an enemy combatant- start over from square one- wash, rinse, repeat as often as necessary...

The same with Gitmo and anybody else they want to keep locked up... The Admin isn't playing straight about any of this Terrorist business, and I doubt they ever will. It'll be interesting to see what kind of admissible evidence they actually have, seeing as how they've been employing illegal methods all along- the poisoned fruit of the poisoned tree, and all that...

Regime change starts at home... at the polling place, and with contacting one's representatives, and with getting the truth out whenever possible.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
We'll see where this goes, but I suspect it's a misdirection play. Padilla's habeas corpus appeals are advancing towards the SCOTUS, and they've already warned the Admin that it won't do to hold people indefinitely w/o charge... The only reason that the court could refuse to consider it before was an extreme technicality- they're trying to give the Admin some room to resolve the situation so that they won't have to order that Padilla either be charged or released.

When Padilla's appeal gets to the top, the Admin will show that he's been properly charged & etc- end of appeal. If he's not convicted, they'll just throw him back in the slammer as an enemy combatant- start over from square one- wash, rinse, repeat as often as necessary...

I doubt the courts would put up with the second one if Padilla is aquited. Unless the government files new charges very quickly, I would quickly expect the courts to force the government to release him. There's a point where the court's patience would stop, and a stunt like that would definately qualify.

This definately doesn't mean I think the way the Padilla case has been handled to this point is at all acceptable.

 

[Jhhnn]

Maybe, Aegeon. But it's all an issue of time. Padilla has been held since May 8, 2002, so it'll be almost 4 years when his appeal gets before the SCOTUS, if not longer. And then the Admin can easily drag out legal proceedings for a few more years as they allegedly prosecute & appeal. Even if they lose, they have the material witness scam that can be run, and a return to the whole enemy combatant shell game... and they may find a friendly govt who'll charge and extradite Padilla for alleged crimes in another country...

No matter what, Padilla probably won't see daylight until after the Bush Admin is out of office, if ever...

Which is not to say that he's guilty or innocent of anything, just that our legal system is being dissed badly by the Admin, at this guy's expense. To be very honest, I seriously doubt that they cn make an admissible case against the guy at all, or they would have done so long ago. And that pretty much goes for the prisoners at Gitmo, too.

While the Admin's supporters are quick to hurl the "terrorist!" charge as justification for the Admin's behavior, that's really immaterial. It's not about who the accused are, or what they've allegedly done, but about the simple fact that we are a nation of laws, and that due process is the cornerstone of liberty and freedom for us all. Without that, we have no recourse against our own govt, no matter what they may choose to do in the name of the People. To allow denial of due process to anybody is to invite tyranny.

 

[jimkyser]

Originally posted by: Aegeon

I doubt the courts would put up with the second one if Padilla is aquited. Unless the government files new charges very quickly, I would quickly expect the courts to force the government to release him. There's a point where the court's patience would stop, and a stunt like that would definately qualify.

This definately doesn't mean I think the way the Padilla case has been handled to this point is at all acceptable.

Just remember that the lower courts have been ruling that he needed to be charged or released for over a year now. The Admin held them off as long as they could with bs excuses. They will do the same again. There is no way they want to be determined to have subverted the Constitution by the SCOTUS. We all know they have, but to have an actual ruling from the SCOTUS stating as much would be pretty detrimental to any public support these yahoos have left.

I am very glad he has finally been indicted. Now hopefully they will charge him and allow him full, unconditional access to a lawyer. I truly believe they are going to have a had time convicting him, though. If he hasn't signed a confession like the other guy they will need to depend on testimony from other 'enemy combatants' and the Admin doesn't want anyone to talk to the others. So they will need to depend on mostly 'he said' type evidence which may be inadmissible.

It's going to be a very interesting court case, I think.