• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Padilla again. Shoulda followed due process.

Was he? Your link provides no evidence to that affect, only an accusation by his defense attorneys.

I don't know and it doesn't really matter at this point (except to Padilla). The assertion is believable because of the circumstances of his treatment. It has been publicized, and will not go away.

What if he is guilty? He may be acquited due to the mistreatment he allegedly received. The public loses.

What if he is innocent of the charges? He may be acquited due to the mistreatment he allegedly received. His attorneys get filthy rich - at taxpayer expense.

What if he is found guilty in spite of being denied due process? Bin Laden wins.
 
There's one argument against this sort of treatment that I'm surprised I've never heard though.

I think everyone at this point agrees that the only way to stop terrorist attacks is to have good intelligence. I also think everyone agrees that good intelligence is dependant on the public giving notice to the police when they see something suspicious. Probably no one questions that for people to talk to the police, they have to trust the police. And it should be obvious that the most likely witnesses to something like preparations for an islamist terror plot, would be other muslims. Be it family, 'friends', neighbours, people going to the same mosque, etc.

Now, would you turn over your neighbour to the police if you saw something mildly suspect, if you know this could result in him getting abducted, held without trial for years, and quite possibly even tortured?
 

Back
Top Bottom