http://www.intelwire.com/2004_06_01_dailybriefs.html Were people here aware that Jose Padilla confessed to planning and training for the remote detonation of natural gas explosions in apartment buildings in NY and elsewhere? This was reported on MSNBC this morning-- as a sidebar story to this AQ top operative that they have in custody somewhere. I thought he was an innocent, upstanding American citizen? Or do you think they tortured him in order to get him to make up this fairy story?
I think "accused" is a bit strong. There certainly was speculation that that might be what his mission was.
Please post where anyone said he was an innocent, upstanding American. I hope if he's guilty, he stays in custody. However, he is an American citizen, due the rights afforded all of us.
Im with RM95 on this. What are we gonna do, not have a trial for him? Suspend all his constitutional protections? If the guy confessed, he's going away or worse. Let the system play it out...and he'll be convicted.
When he became an enemy to the state, he effectively relinquished his status as a standing citizen...He rejected that by siding with evil...He should be purged.
according to who? you? remember when john adams defended, at trial, the redcoats involved in the boston massacre? why does john adams hate america?
Great point. I know our system has flaws, but in some ways it's incredible. We used our system when we went after the people who attacked the WTC the first time, and they are behind bars as I type. If Padilla confessed, then he could be tried by our legal system and end up the same way. If there is proof use it in the courts and let's punish the terrorists. If we don't have enough proof we should be getting what we need.
And where does this end? Who decides whether a person is an enemy of the US? The Patriot Act? Bush/Cheney? Next thing you know pot smokers will be considered enemies of the state and have all of their rights stripped from them. You've seen the ads. They already tried to label pot smokers as terrorists, or at least aiding terrorism. No thank you. I don't trust the government enough to make those decision. This is the same government that passed the Patriot Act without even reading it. There is a system in place for Americans. Even those who had a hand in Oklahoma got to go to trial.
You just compared a man plotting an attack against US citizens to pot smokers. Wow. You might want to stretch out before you reach so far like that. You might pull something.
No matter the crime he is accused of, he is due the same constitutional protections as pot smoking citizens of the US. BTW, this isn't much of a stretch considering that Ashcroft recently came out and suggested that ALL states enact "drugged while driving" laws that would drug test everyone who gets a ticket in this country and consider them intoxicated even if they only have metabolites in their system. IOW, someone who smoked pot could be busted THREE WEEKS TO A MONTH AFTER they smoked. Drug laws are inching ever closer to making drug users "enemy combatants," so the comparison was not NEARLY as hyperbolic as you make it seem.
You have no absolutely no clue what you are talking about. Have you been getting emails from friends of friends again? The issue as to whether the "enemy combatant" designation could be used to deny habeas corpus and court access -- even to non-US citizens -- was decided by the Supreme court back in June, with a rather vocal rebuke of the administration's position. It was front page news. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/politics/28CND-SCOT.html?hp Padilla's own case went back down the chain for procedural reasons, because he brought it in the 2nd circuit rather than the 4th, (which is r****ded but that's another issue) but under the rule of the first case, when he comes back up, considering that he, unlike the Guantanamo detainees, was a US citizen arrested on US soil, is almost certainly going to be entitled to as much, and probably more due process than they will.
It denies them any way of proving that they are not impaired. For three to four weeks after smoking pot or three to five days after using cocaine, the metabolites stay in the system. This means that even though someone is perfectly sober, they could be thrown in jail for being "drugged while driving." Looks like your S-T-R-E-T-C-H isn't nearly as long as you would like it to be. Additionally, the Supreme Court just struck down a common procedure with drug laws where judges could "enhance" sentences based on "facts" that were never proven before a jury. That clearly violated due process and was common procedure in drug crimes. There are many, including Ashcroft, who would deny due process to ALL drug "offenders" if they could get away with it, so again your S-T-R-E-T-C-H becomes a stretch.
