Tuesday, May 4, 1999 Published at 13:26 GMT 14:26 UK

It’s clear the government has done a number of things wrong both in their treatment of Padilla and of the law. If that’s your point, you can make it without these kinds of distortions and exaggerations. If your point is that Padilla did nothing wrong, and that his (or anyone else’s) training at a jihadist camp in Afghanistan under the Taliban regime is of no account, well, that’s as ridiculous as the government’s position in this case.

You’re discussing something that happened 40 years ago, an event that there is serious disagreement over and that people interpret differently. Padilla is 2002 and this trial is now.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wor…..332586.stm

Could you supply evidence for this statement, please? Kosovo is currently under UN administration and occupied by Nato troops. The interim governmental structures, as far as I can tell from poking around a bit on the internet, are dominated by ethnic Albanians who are Muslim.

So evidence, please.

Dru at 76

Yes, nitpick, please

Ok, one more then; the Taliban didn’t actually turn on or attack the west; they refused to hand over their “guests” who did. Up ’til then they were happily counting their money (43 million from the US?), eradicating poppies and looking forward to doing business on a pipeline deal;they were probably amazed to find that their Pashtun code of hospitality landed them in the forefront of the “GWOT”.

BTW, thanks for this post; I haven’t kept up with the horrible details of the Padilla situation, this helps.

Our leaders have been workin hard to protect us by capturing terrorists. Padilla was as close as they can get. There are reportedly millions of Al Queda operatives in the world and our govt gets one nut case with a shoe bomb and a nut case who was gonna blow up apartment buildings with cooking stoves.
…

I think Bush can’t allow a proper fair trial because it would be a trial on Guantanamo Bay prison and on the Bush administration itself — and Dubya knows he would be found guilty while Padilla would go free.

No, I don’t think they’re bad at catching real terrorists. I think it’s quite possible Al Qaeda is only an arm of the Saudi government and is not our enemy. So, we have a serious desire to NOT capture bin Laden. That certainly explains a lot more than other theories, doesn’t it?

Of course, Al Qaeda could easily have had leaders friendly to us, but still populated by serious jihadists who were led to do terrorist things. Whether Atta & Co were really Al Qaeda or just free-lancers and whether they were seriously trying to ram the WTC or had another plan isn’t at all clear.

The only answer to these important questions is to study the 9/11 attack more and more until we really nail it down and know for a fact whether it was Al Qaeda who knocked down the towers and killed nearly 3000 people. And, on top of that we need to know whether that attack was directed to occur by only Al Qaeda or if their orders came from somewhere else (with relations to PNAC or elsewhere).

We can’t go on doing things and expect good results without knowing the basic facts upon which to base our activities. It’s insanity to keep killing without having thought this through. Fear and animal hatred will only last a while and when it’s spent then we may find ourselves to be nothing more than war criminals. We have to stop and reassess.

None of the Republican presidential candidates wants to stop if they can use the war to get elected. That’s plain scary.

Hillary and Barack say withdraw, but Hillary (at least) says withdrawal includes keeping about 20,000 troops there forever. That’s just lying to the public and I find it unacceptable. I don’t know Obama’s position on the permanent bases in Iraq.

Bush says he’s setting us up to never be able to leave Iraq until our destiny is achieved. Of course, he doesn’t say what that destiny is and he isn’t asking if we want to go along for that ride.

I wonder if Hillary and Obama are planning on that long occupation to avoid being called quitters or losers or traitors during a campaign. That would make them every bit as disgusting as the Republican candidates — using hawkish language on Iraq to get elected. How many kids have to die for them to be satisfied?

First we need to leave Iraq COMPLETELY.

Second, we need to take a rest and study 9/11 more thoroughly.

Third, we need to reset our foreign policy.

And, all the presidential candidates need to state their vision for the future of America, so we don’t all have to go on some unspecified ride to our ‘destiny’ without our consent.

kathleen at 90 (and others)

I’m unclear about what boycotting Israeli academics has to do with Jose Padilla.

I think the topic is “elephants in the room”

Here is another Elephant in the room “The U.S. Liberty”
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11042

http://rawstory.com/showoutart…..338347.htm

“Crime in Italy”(Niger Documents) these zealots with yellowcake all over their faces have been all over the MSM the last four years repeating unsubstantiated claims about Iran’s “alleged” nuclear weapons program. Most of these claims have gone unchallenged

El Baradei has been asking for years for the “inflammatory rhetoric on both sides to be turned down.

bu’waddoIno?

In the eco-vandalism cases the prosecution requested – and the Judge Aiken granted – “terrorism enhancements” after the jury’s verdict.

The TE’s exist in a universe free of the jury (of the defendants’ peers – or anyone) and orbiting around the Judge.

The US Attorney decides whether to call for terror “enhancements”.

Be grateful they can’t call for capital “enhancement”.

Thus far.

So they’re discretionary and post-verdict. And what are the TE’s for?

Judge says communique had message to government so she gets TE

Then judge says:

“Application of enhancement is not meant to label you as a terrorist.”

Savoie is the last sentenced of the eco-vandals who cooperated with prosecutors.

Four “non-cooperating” defendants reached plea agreements in which they accepted personal responsibility yet did not provide or agree ot provide info re others.

They have accepted their responsibility and admitted their guilt.

And Judge Aiken has it in for them:

Judge says next [non-cooperating] round of cases will be different and that these cases are intended to send a message that “it is the law of this country that we will not fight our battles using violence and violent means” Says that’s what country was based on.

Judge says she respects [Savoie’s] self-surrender and informing on other people and has no doubt her family will support her and that they will be sentenced right along with her and “that’s the level of empathy in this courtroom.”

Mourning in America