Freed Gitmo Detainee Rejoins Al-Qaeda, Attacks US

[Meadmaker]

The problem here is a lot of people are mixing several separate issues together into a big mess, and then using it to paint broad strokes, which is where people like me take issue with the arguments.

That's a fair observation, and I will admit that my arguments, for example, lack a certain legal sophistication.

However, I think the government of the United States under the Bush administration tried to play that sort of legal game a lot, and that's where we critics started having problems. Someone would say, "You can't treat POWs that way" and they would respond that they aren't POWs. "OK, then, you can't treat criminals that way", and they would respond they aren't criminals. No matter what anyone objected to, there was some reason why that particular legal standard somehow failed to apply...because they weren't US citizens, or they weren't on US territory, or they weren't regular army soldiers, or some were this sort of people and some were that sort or...well gosh it's just hard to figure out who was who and......whatever.

As was noted, the ICRC has had access to Gitmo. It has been that way since early 2002. If it's good enough for the ICRC, it's good enough for me.

Unfortunately, it isn't good enough for the ICRC. Publicly, the ICRC has been somewhat critical. That's highly unusual. They usually keep their opinions out of the press. In leaked documents, they have been extremely critical. I won't post a specific link, but if you google "international committee of the red cross" and "guantanomo bay", you can see plenty of information.

I trust the ICRC and, very simply, I always want my government to be considered acceptable by them. During the Bush years, that wasn't true. I hope that will change, and change quickly.

 

[WildCat]

I trust the ICRC and, very simply, I always want my government to be considered acceptable by them. During the Bush years, that wasn't true. I hope that will change, and change quickly.

And what concerns does the ICRC have with Gitmo currently?

 

[Meadmaker]

And what concerns does the ICRC have with Gitmo currently?

Good question. Don't know. They usually don't speak out about their concerns. We know of their most serious concerns only via leaks.

As of the week before the inauguration, I still heard defense attorneys talking about problems. I don't know about the ICRC. At any rate, I'm confident that within a year, the ICRC will be satisfied, even if they aren't today.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Substantiate that the source is biased, please? Was their source data fake? Was their methodology flawed? Was their conclusion and abstract not supported by the actual study? Details, please?

Not impressed with your response, and given your post election rant, your inability to parse partisan slant.

Not that big a deal, given that editorial slant used to be an openly discussed and admitted feature of the newspaper business, for years.

The pretense at objectivity does not fool me.

Sorry, been on the wrong end of the news asrseholes for too many years.

Had you not juxtaposed "skeptic" and that single link in the same sentence as though your source were in some way not slanted, I'd have made no remark at all.

DR

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Semantics.

Cells operating in multiple countries in touch through a distributed communication system trading members, expertise, guidance, resources and propoganda is an international organisation.

Please provide evidence that these cells are in touch through a distributed communication system. Please provide evidence that these cells are trading members, expertise, guidance, resources and "propoganda".

Before you try it, one news story saying that one guy who was formerly in one organisation is now in another is not sufficient evidence to show that this is happening often enough and in an organised enough fashion to talk sensibly about an "Al Qaeda network".

The Al Qaeda that existed at the time of the 9/11 attacks was arguably something worth mounting a war-like effort to root out. That Al Qaeda is history. Show us your evidence that anything comparable to the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda still exists.

 

[Texas]

Please provide evidence that these cells are in touch through a distributed communication system. Please provide evidence that these cells are trading members, expertise, guidance, resources and "propoganda".

Before you try it, one news story saying that one guy who was formerly in one organisation is now in another is not sufficient evidence to show that this is happening often enough and in an organised enough fashion to talk sensibly about an "Al Qaeda network".

The Al Qaeda that existed at the time of the 9/11 attacks was arguably something worth mounting a war-like effort to root out. That Al Qaeda is history. Show us your evidence that anything comparable to the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda still exists.

http://www.peterbergen.com/bergen/articles/details.aspx?id=341

 

[WildCat]

As of the week before the inauguration, I still heard defense attorneys talking about problems.

You will always hear defense attorneys talk about problems, that's their job.

Even in high-profile civilian criminal court cases the defense attorneys will complain that their clients have been railroaded, the jury tainted, evidence manipulated, witnesses coerced, etc etc. This will not change under Obama.

 

[Meadmaker]

You will always hear defense attorneys talk about problems, that's their job.

Good point.

 

[gtc]

http://www.peterbergen.com/bergen/articles/details.aspx?id=341

And
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6211

Militant Islam isn't some myth invented by Dick Cheney.

 

[gtc]

Show us your evidence that anything comparable to the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda still exists.

Did I say that the nature of Al Qaeda hasn't changed since September 2001?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

That's what happens when you throw innocent and guilty alike into Gitmo without proper evidence, it's going to be hard to sort them out later.

Very good point. If cops handled evidence improperly, or fudged on Miranda rights and let a criminal go free to commit the crime again, we don't blame the court that freed him, but the cop who decided not to follow the rules.

All 700 were captured on the battlefield engaged in military action against U.S. forces? My understanding was that only some of those there were captured in the manner you describe.

At least some of them were kidnapped from their homes by bounty hunters and turned over to U.S. forces.

For that matter, if I were taken that way and wrongly imprisoned by the U.S. for some years (totally disrupting my life), I just might be pissed off enough to join a terrorist organization myself.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Militant Islam isn't some myth invented by Dick Cheney.

How heinous the crimes are doesn't justify throwing out due process.

When a particularly horrible murder happens, you can't just grab anybody and claim he's guilty of the crime because the crime is heinous and makes most citizens frightened. You've got to follow the rules of due process and make your case against him.

 

[gtc]

How heinous the crimes are doesn't justify throwing out due process.

I'm not saying it does.

When a particularly horrible murder happens, you can't just grab anybody and claim he's guilty of the crime because the crime is heinous and makes most citizens frightened. You've got to follow the rules of due process and make your case against him.

The difficulty with analogies from criminal law is that criminal law doesn't cover most military conflicts for very good reasons.

 

[gumboot]

The Al Qaeda that existed at the time of the 9/11 attacks was arguably something worth mounting a war-like effort to root out. That Al Qaeda is history. Show us your evidence that anything comparable to the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda still exists.

If anything Al Qaeda is more of a threat now than ever. They used to be a quite closed-rank and rather small group located almost exclusively in one place. Since 9/11 every Islamic Terrorist on the planet has flocked to the Al Qaeda banner and formed alliances with them. Now Al Qaeda is a decentralised behemoth that exists in god-knows how many countries.

 

[DC]

If anything Al Qaeda is more of a threat now than ever. They used to be a quite closed-rank and rather small group located almost exclusively in one place. Since 9/11 every Islamic Terrorist on the planet has flocked to the Al Qaeda banner and formed alliances with them. Now Al Qaeda is a decentralised behemoth that exists in god-knows how many countries.

How do we know that?

I have more the impression that the Media and Politics is labeling every loud noise "Al Qaeda".

Its more like every resistance in the Middle east or that has some ties to Islam is labeled "Al Qaeda".

Terrorism is hyped by Politicans and the Media.

 

[gumboot]

How do we know that?

Because these terrorist groups are declaring themselves allied with Al Qaeda, and calling themselves things like "Al Qaeda in Iraq" or "The al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb".

Since 9/11 home-grown Al Qaeda cells have conducted attacks in the UK, Turkey, and Spain amongst others - all places they had never operated before.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Because these terrorist groups are declaring themselves allied with Al Qaeda, and calling themselves things like "Al Qaeda in Iraq" or "The al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb".

That's a semantic argument, not a factual one. I don't care what they call themselves, I care what they are.

Are they an organisation like the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda, with their own training grounds, established leadership, bomb-making expertise, communications between each cell and so on?

Since 9/11 home-grown Al Qaeda cells have conducted attacks in the UK, Turkey, and Spain amongst others - all places they had never operated before.

Home-grown terrorism can be handled perfectly satisfactorily by home-grown police and intelligence services. You no more need a "war" to deal with them than you needed a war to deal with Timothy McVeigh.

 

[gumboot]

Are they an organisation like the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda, with their own training grounds, established leadership, bomb-making expertise, communications between each cell and so on?

Yes. Not to mention comprehensive networks for funneling funds and manpower into their cause - a trademark of these sorts of terrorist groups.

I really don't understand why this is such a surprising concept. All of these terrorist groups have arisen out of a single common ideology, and the major players in promoting that ideology are all closely connected, so it stands to reason that the terrorist groups spawned from it are connected.

Home-grown terrorism can be handled perfectly satisfactorily by home-grown police and intelligence services. You no more need a "war" to deal with them than you needed a war to deal with Timothy McVeigh.

The real threat here is something that neither police nor the military are capable of dealing with. Frankly I have no idea what would be effective against this particular ideology.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Yes. Not to mention comprehensive networks for funneling funds and manpower into their cause - a trademark of these sorts of terrorist groups.

I really don't understand why this is such a surprising concept. All of these terrorist groups have arisen out of a single common ideology, and the major players in promoting that ideology are all closely connected, so it stands to reason that the terrorist groups spawned from it are connected.

You'll have no trouble providing evidence for these claims then?

The real threat here is something that neither police nor the military are capable of dealing with. Frankly I have no idea what would be effective against this particular ideology.

Regular old-fashioned police work seems to be keeping it under control, for a value of "under control" consistent with terrorism being far less of a threat to the average citizen's wellbeing than traffic accidents or doughnuts.

 

[Cylinder]

Home-grown terrorism can be handled perfectly satisfactorily by home-grown police and intelligence services. You no more need a "war" to deal with them than you needed a war to deal with Timothy McVeigh.

Of course, each situation presents its own set of circumstances. It seems pretty clear that the Leeds cell received significant assistance from within Pakistan. Its also a sure bet that the 7 July investigation did not restrict itself traditional law enforcement services. The difference between 7 July and 9-11 is the relative measure of cooperation from the host government. Had Musarraf told Blair to "get bent," the outcome well may had been very different.