This debate appears to still be focusing on whether drones make key Pakistani elites separate themselves from us. There’s not one mention, however, of people like Faisal Shahzad–the Times Square bomber–who blame drones for their turn to terrorism.
|By: emptywheel Saturday June 4, 2011 7:53 am|
|By: emptywheel Saturday March 26, 2011 5:00 pm|
While FBI says it’d be nice if the folks holding the detainee consult with the lawyers in DC before delaying a suspect’s Miranda warning, they provide a great big invitation–”the agents on the scene who are interacting with the arrestee are in the best position to assess what questions are necessary to secure their safety and the safety of the public”–for them not to do so. And far be it for FBI Agents to refuse such a kind invitation!
|By: emptywheel Monday November 29, 2010 8:45 am|
Here’s one of my biggest concerns: that the quickness with which the government slaps a WMD charge on someone experimenting with explosives reflects its interest or disinterest in fully investigating that person’s goals and associates.
|By: David Dayen Tuesday October 5, 2010 5:41 pm|
In a terrorism trial held in a federal District Court in Manhattan, Faisal Shahzad, who attempted to set off a bomb in Times Square, was sentenced to life in prison for the crime. He did not get “a platform to express his hideous ideology,” nor was his trial either a target for global terrorism or a recruiting poster for Al Qaeda. It was just a trial, a perfectly ordinary trial where evidence was presented and the judge reached a fairly swift verdict.
|By: emptywheel Thursday September 9, 2010 4:20 pm|
Last week, the US put the Tehrek-i-Taliban Pakistan on its official terrorist lists and charged its leader, Hakimullah Mehsud, with something that was almost certainly not a crime. Oddly, though, DOJ did not charge Mehsud which actions they verbally alleged he committed that actually are a crime: conspiring with Faisal Shahzad in his attempted bombing of Times Square. I took from that that either DOJ knows Mehsud was not directly involved in the bombing (contrary to what they said publicly and Shahzad testified in court), or that they simply have no evidence of his involvement in spite of the reported cooperation of Faisal Shahzad.
Which is why I find it interesting that Pakistan has said it will charge (but apparently has not yet done so) three men in connection with the Times Square bombing.
|By: emptywheel Thursday September 2, 2010 1:30 pm|
The day after Obama declared victory (sort of) in Iraq, the Administration announced a whole package of sanctions against the Pakistani Taliban, Tehrik-e Taliban.
|By: emptywheel Wednesday May 19, 2010 6:30 pm|
Faisal Shahzad rather suddenly got arraigned and got a lawyer yesterday. Josh Gerstein noted that the arraignment happened on the 15th day since Shahzad’s arrest–the lower range of time the Obama Administration has floated for its changes to Miranda. But the LAT reports that Shahzad decided he no longer wanted to be questioned by interrogators.
|By: emptywheel Saturday May 15, 2010 11:30 am|
Charlie Savage has a story explaining what the Administration means when it says it wants to “modernize” Miranda warnings. As he explains, it’s not just or even primarily Miranda warnings that are the problem (according to the Administration), but rather the requirement that a person arrested without a warrant be brought to court promptly.
|By: emptywheel Sunday May 9, 2010 8:30 am|
The White House press made a bit of a todo over the fact that Eric Holder was finally allowed to go on a Sunday show today (he’s appearing on both ABC and NBC). Given all the somewhat bizarre claims from people like Rahm that Holder botches his public statements, it sort of makes you wonder what he’d have to agree to before he’d be allowed out without a minder.
|By: Josh Mull Friday May 7, 2010 10:50 am|
The alleged Times Square Bomber, Faisal Shahzad, has apparently claimed that the US drone strikes in Pakistan were part of his motivation to carry out the failed car bomb attack. This has brought on a serious, thought-provoking discussion by many in the foreign policy community on whether or not, or rather how exactly, the war in Afghanistan provides impetus for terrorist attacks against the United States and our allies. Since Shahzad brought it up, we should look at how the policy of drone strikes affects us personally.