Jose Padilla convicted

Jose Padilla convicted (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

cyberdude611 -> Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 12:07:52 PM)
MIAMI - Jose Padilla was convicted of federal terrorism support charges Thursday after being held for 3 1/2 years as an enemy combatant in a case that came to symbolize the Bush administration's zeal to stop homegrown terror. Padilla, a U.S. citizen from Chicago, was once accused of being part of an al-Qaida plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the U.S., but those allegations were not part of his trial. Padilla, 36, and his foreign-born co-defendants, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, were convicted of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim people overseas, which carries a penalty of life in prison. All three were also convicted of two terrorism material support counts, which carry potential 15-year sentences each. Jurors deliberated a day and a half after a three-month trial. U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke set a Dec. 5 sentencing date. The three were accused of being part of a North American support cell that provided supplies, money and recruits to groups of Islamic extremists. The defense contended they were trying to help persecuted Muslims in war zones with relief and humanitarian aid. The White House thanked the jury for a "just" verdict. "We commend the jury for its work in this trial and thank it for upholding a core American principle of impartial justice for all," said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House. "Jose Padilla received a fair trial and a just verdict." Estela Lebron, Padilla's mother, said she felt "a little bit sad" at the verdict but expected her son's lawyers would appeal. "I don't know how they found Jose guilty. There was no evidence he was speaking in code," she said, referring to FBI wiretap intercepts in which Padilla was overheard talking to Hassoun. Padilla was first detained in 2002 because of much more sensational accusations. The Bush administration portrayed Padilla, a U.S. citizen and Muslim convert, as a committed terrorist who was part of an al-Qaida plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the U.S. The administration called his detention an important victory in the war against terrorism, not long after the Sept. 11 attacks. The charges brought in civilian court in Miami, however, were a pale shadow of those initial claims in part because Padilla was interrogated about the plot when he was held as an enemy combatant for 3 1/2 years in military custody with no lawyer present and was not read his Miranda rights. Padilla's attorneys fought for years to get his case into federal court, and he was finally added to the Miami terrorism support indictment in late 2005 just as the U.S. Supreme Court was poised to consider President Bush's authority to continue detaining him. Padilla had lived in South Florida in the 1990s and was supposedly recruited by Hassoun at a mosque to become a mujahedeen fighter. The key piece of physical evidence was a five-page form Padilla supposedly filled out in July 2000 to attend an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan, which would link the other two defendants as well to Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization. The form, recovered by the CIA in 2001 in Afghanistan, contains seven of Padilla's fingerprints and several other personal identifiers, such as his birthdate and his ability to speak Spanish, English and Arabic. "He provided himself to al-Qaida for training to learn to murder, kidnap and maim," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Frazier in closing arguments. Padilla's lawyers insisted the form was far from conclusive and denied that he was a "star recruit," as prosecutors claimed, of the North American support cell intending to become a terrorist. Padilla's attorneys said he traveled to Egypt in September 1998 to learn Islam more deeply and become fluent in Arabic. "His intent was to study, not to murder," said Padilla attorney Michael Caruso. Central to the investigation were some 300,000 FBI wiretap intercepts collected from 1993 to 2001, mainly involving Padilla's co-defendants Hassoun and Jayyousi and others. Most of the conversations were in Arabic and purportedly used code such as "tourism" and "football" for violent jihad or "zucchini" and "eggplant" instead of military weapons or ammunition. The bulk of these conversations and other evidence concerned efforts in the 1990s by Hassoun and Jayyousi, both 45, to assist Muslims in conflict zones such as Chechnya, Bosnia, Somalia, Afghanistan and Lebanon. Hassoun is a computer programmer of Palestinian descent who was born in Lebanon. Jayyousi is a civil engineer and public schools administrator who is a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Jordan. Jayyousi also ran an organization called American Worldwide Relief and published a newsletter called the Islam Report that provided details of battles and political issues in the Muslim world. "It wasn't a terrorist operation. It was a relief operation," said Jayyousi attorney William Swor. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070816/ap_on_re_us/padilla_terror_charges

Alumbrado -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 12:09:17 PM)
Scary shit

popeye1250 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 12:19:03 PM)
Ha, Ha, I wonder what all the Moonbats will say now. The Mafia uses codewords too, "Bananas" "Tomatoes", "Heads of Lettuce" Suuuuure, he went to an al qeada training camp to "study." I hope they have a nice deep dark hole for this POS in one of those "Supermax" prisons where he'll never see the light of day again.

EPGAH -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 1:14:23 PM)
Don't forget the legendary Pinkerton code: "Plums arrived with Nuts today!"--meaning Lincoln arrived safe and sound... http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843558,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Oddly, Pinkerton was "let go" from that detail soon after...You don't suppose he was insulted by that code? But seriously, how many buildings does Al-Quaida have to blow up in how many countries--Not just US--before even the most "politically correct" media-outlets admit they're terrorist scum?

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 3:50:41 PM)
Of course, there's no real EVIDENCE that Padilla was anything but a guy grabbed off the street, and held for 1300 days under torture without Counsel or Arraignment. Good thing the torture made him mentally incompetent to participate in his defense, but hey, there we are. Nothing but Politically Reliable Whores at the DOJ. Remember, BUSH GOT AWAY with tossing him in the cooler for 1300 days. Bush could toss YOU in solitary for 1300 days, too. First they came for the alleged terrorist sympathizers for a good old Commie Show Trial....

popeye1250 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 6:05:16 PM)
Yeah Farg, the govt must have "gotten to" someone on the jury eh?

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 7:55:29 PM)
Juries rubber stamp almost anything they put in front of them. This case has been discussed here before and it is sketchy at best. The guy is a U.S. citizen that was denied all of his substantive rights under the law for a REALLY long time. It should all fall apart on appeal because the guy was wrongly denied Habeas Corpus in contravention of all known Constitutional law. Seriously. But because we live in a post-Constitutional time, the conviction will most likely stand. BTW, there was no organization formerly known as Al Queda before the U.S. started talking about it. Now there's a small chance that some groups identify themselves as AQ because they immediately gain the cachet of being the group linked to numerous incidents reported by the U.S. government. I still believe that AQ is basically a bogeyman created by the U.S. government and certain key intelligence officers as a catch all description for a set of poorly and individually organized terrorist cells. If you buy into the existence of AQ just also accept that you are effectively drinking the Kool-aid served up by this wholly untrustworthy White House administration.

TheHeretic -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 8:04:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro If you buy into the existence of AQ just also accept that you are effectively drinking the Kool-aid served up by this wholly untrustworthy White House administration. Yep. 'Cause God knows, Sugar, there can't possibly be anything worse than a Republican. Comments like yours are going to be as useful as a "Loose Change' video when I go knocking on doors for Rudy Giuliani.

Petronius -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 8:18:48 PM)
Padilla's conviction certainly shoots down three claims by the Bush government: 1) that Padilla was not a standard-type of criminal; 2) that you could not get criminal convictions under the existing rules of evidence which thus required special imprisonment of the accused; 3) that any public trial would threaten national security. Now let's use the Padilla standard to really fight terrorism! No more K.K.K. No more neo-Nazis. No more people who defend bombing abortion clinics. No more people who attend terrorist "militia" training centers in the U.S. And we can thank the Republicans for bringing us the laws and prosecutions that make it all possible. But then I seem to recall that white rightwing Christians can do twice the stuff Padilla was convicted for, and their actions are called "freedom of speech" and "freedom of association."

TheHeretic -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 9:15:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petronius 2) that you could not get criminal convictions under the existing rules of evidence which thus required special imprisonment of the accused; 3) that any public trial would threaten national security. Gotta disagree with you, Petro. (Not sure if this was specific to me, or a general reply, but I'll give you my answer.) We simply got lucky with Al Qaeda records. It's like putting Capone away on tax evasion. From either a law enforcement, or military perspective, tactical and operational security have to be paramount with the kind of long term threat we face. We cannot afford to let the other side know what we know, or how we learned it. Neither can we build a case over years and take them down all at once. It's a war, one way or another, and that means you have to keep your secrets.

luckydog1 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 9:17:26 PM)
Sugar, so you include Barak Obama,Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards in your list of gulible Koolaid drinkers?? Petronius, you are displaying a basic logical error. That he also commited Standard Crimes does not in any way mean that he did not also do other acts. That he could not be charged with them in open civilian court, due to the fact that agents would have to be exposed as well as methods of intell gathering, still is a reality. That is why he only got lesser charges. I am not aware of any white right wing christians going to afghanistan to train in camps with Bin laden...

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 9:26:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Sugar, so you include Barak Obama,Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards in your list of gulible Koolaid drinkers?? Pretty much. They all suck and I am unlikely to vote for any of them. I guess it depends on what the final two or three shake out to be.

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 9:32:55 PM)
quote: It's a war, one way or another, and that means you have to keep your secrets. No, it IS NOT A WAR. ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR, AND THEY DIDN'T. Ask yourself why Bush was so afraid to HONESTLY go in front of Congress and ask for a proper Declaration, and instead chose to commit felony conspiracy and fraud. If it's so damn important, why did he have to lie? If it's so damn important, why don't HIS KIDS SERVE?

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 9:35:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Sugar, so you include Barak Obama,Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards in your list of gulible Koolaid drinkers?? Petronius, you are displaying a basic logical error. That he also commited Standard Crimes does not in any way mean that he did not also do other acts. That he could not be charged with them in open civilian court, due to the fact that agents would have to be exposed as well as methods of intell gathering, still is a reality. That is why he only got lesser charges. I am not aware of any white right wing christians going to afghanistan to train in camps with Bin laden... NOTHING can ever legitimize the denial of due process at all, much less for THIRTEEN HUNDRED DAYS in a supposed Constitutional Republic. Either the Constitution IS the Law of the Land, or it isn't. If it isn't then The USA is just all full of the worst hypocritical shit and NO-ONE should rise to its defense.

cyberdude611 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 11:21:19 PM)
Any lawyer skilled enough can manipulate the jury with circumstantial evidence. There have been studies done on the psychology of juries, and they found that the jury always tends to side with the government at first. And the jury only tends to side with the defense when the defense provides evidence that proves innocence. Which is NOT how our system is supposed to work. In our system, it is supposed to work the other way. You are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty. But people have this philosophy that if the police arrested you, you must have done something wrong. People like to live the fantasy that their government is perfect. That the police don't screw up. That the district attorney is telling the truth. And this is obviously a true observation of how people view defendents. Whenever the police arrest someone, most people believe that person must be guilty. We like to think that the government works and doesn't make mistakes. It goes the other way to. Look at OJ. Piles of evidence including DNA. But the jury aquitted him. Why? Racism. Plain and simple. The jury was more angry that the LA Cops used a racial slur than OJ's murderous rampage. And they allowed OJ's lawyers to trivilize DNA evidence.

Estring -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 11:40:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Any lawyer skilled enough can manipulate the jury with circumstantial evidence. There have been studies done on the psychology of juries, and they found that the jury always tends to side with the government at first. And the jury only tends to side with the defense when the defense provides evidence that proves innocence. Which is NOT how our system is supposed to work. In our system, it is supposed to work the other way. You are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty. But people have this philosophy that if the police arrested you, you must have done something wrong. People like to live the fantasy that their government is perfect. That the police don't screw up. That the district attorney is telling the truth. And this is obviously a true observation of how people view defendents. Whenever the police arrest someone, most people believe that person must be guilty. We like to think that the government works and doesn't make mistakes. It goes the other way to. Look at OJ. Piles of evidence including DNA. But the jury aquitted him. Why? Racism. Plain and simple. The jury was more angry that the LA Cops used a racial slur than OJ's murderous rampage. And they allowed OJ's lawyers to trivilize DNA evidence. Which is all the more reason that people like Padilla shouldn't be tried in civilian courts.

luckydog1 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/16/2007 11:51:21 PM)
Cyberdude, you are missing the point I am trying to make. Under Civilian due process (there are other legal systems in place in the USA and mentioned in the Constitution. Millitary Justice is one, Admiralty law is another.) Due Process (Under civilian law)means you get the right to confront and question your accusers and wittnesses against you, and the nature of all evidence against you can be questioned in Open court. For someone whose witnesses are CIA agnets and foriegn assets, this can't happen. They can't take the stand and be identified. Methods of gathering intell can't be revealed openly, with out exposing agents and compromising systems and methods. Congress is supposed to have oversight of all of this and they generally do with select commitees of Senators with clearence. These kinds of cases could never be placed in front of a Jury. Only a jury of people with security clearences. Bush and the rep congress attempted 2x to set up a tribunal system, but neither has passed constitutional muster. It is a huge clusterfuck. So Padilla will just get sentanced for lower crimes. He is in jail where he should be, but we do need to set up a system for dealing with these issues. Farg his case got before a judge long before 1300 days.

UtopianRanger -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 2:16:21 AM)
quote: BTW, there was no organization formerly known as Al Queda before the U.S. started talking about it. Now there's a small chance that some groups identify themselves as AQ because they immediately gain the cachet of being the group linked to numerous incidents reported by the U.S. government. I still believe that AQ is basically a bogeyman created by the U.S. government and certain key intelligence officers as a catch all description for a set of poorly and individually organized terrorist cells. If you buy into the existence of AQ just also accept that you are effectively drinking the Kool-aid served up by this wholly untrustworthy White House administration. Ah yes......High in the mountains of the ominous border region of Afghanistan /Pakistan there exists a mythical cave with a battery-powered laptop--and a corrugated, plastic milk crate that can be used as a chair-- that's being used to plot the destruction of America because a six-foot-six dude with a long, scraggly beard and filthy, dirty pajamas ''doesn't like our freedoms.'' What a wonderful, scary fairy tale [:D] - R

Petronius -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 4:33:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Petronius 2) that you could not get criminal convictions under the existing rules of evidence which thus required special imprisonment of the accused; 3) that any public trial would threaten national security. Gotta disagree with you, Petro. (Not sure if this was specific to me, or a general reply, but I'll give you my answer.) We simply got lucky with Al Qaeda records. It's like putting Capone away on tax evasion. Isn't it more than a tad bizarre that after a conviction under the existing rules of evidence that did not threaten national security somebody claims, as I undertand the word "disagree" that the person either was not convicted, the trial did threaten national security, or both? quote: From either a law enforcement, or military perspective, tactical and operational security have to be paramount with the kind of long term threat we face. We cannot afford to let the other side know what we know, or how we learned it. Neither can we build a case over years and take them down all at once. It's a war, one way or another, and that means you have to keep your secrets. Luckily we still live in a republic where neither law enforcement nor the military perspective is the ultimate determing factor in governmental action. The rule of law and freedom is paramount and neither police officer or soldier can yet use their "perspective" to enforce their political views. The core lie today isn't the claim that we are in a "war on terrorism" from a legal perspective; loads of people point out, correctly, that only Congress can declare war, and they haven't. The core lie is that the "war on terrorism" is on terrorism, as white rightwing and largely Christian groups go unpunished in the US and often support the government. Then, with the Bush government recruiting lawyers from the ultra-Christian law schools, it seems that a number of terrorists who support the abortion clinic bombers are actually in law enforcement. That's not a "law enforcement" perspective I want to see playing a role in this country, war or no war, terrorism or no terrorism.

Petronius -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:24:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Petronius, you are displaying a basic logical error. That he also committed Standard Crimes does not in any way mean that he did not also do other acts. From a legal perspective, of course Padilla's conviction doesn't mean he did not commit other crimes; the presumption of innocence, legally, means that he did not. From a logical perspective, Padilla's conviction doesn't mean that he isn't a space alien or Osama's older brother; Occam's Razor and the notion that "he who asserts must prove" deals with those things. But so what, to either? The possibility of other crimes, or the possibility of anything else, doesn't shore up the Bush's governments failed contentions, as the Padilla conviction proves. quote: That he could not be charged with them in open civilian court, due to the fact that agents would have to be exposed as well as methods of intell gathering, still is a reality. That is why he only got lesser charges. Increasingly we see how dangerously delusional supporters of Bush's propaganda have become. Not only does luckydog1 get messages from beyond objective reality, he informs us of their content. And insists that he has the real truth. In times past, people would be careful to conceal these things; today they, like lunckydog1, rush to reveal it, as he did when he claims to know why Padilla "only got lesser charges." We see the same public flaunting of delusions with luckydog1's claim he knows that proving Bush's contention would have meant that "agents would have to be exposed." I'm somewhat amused that other similar (but not identical) delusional people have similarly informed me that he could not have been prosecuted because the evidence was obtained through torture and had nothing to do with exposing agents. quote: I am not aware of any white right wing christians going to afghanistan to train in camps with Bin laden... Today's delusions are often driven by some intense emotional flooding of issues that are often imaginary, and even, if true, utterly irrelevant to anything of substance. We see that here with luckydog1's statement about Afghanistan and Bin Laden. The laws under which Padilla was convicted have nothing to do with either. Had Padilla trained in Iran or with Hussein, luckydog1 wouldn't be demanding that Padilla be acquitted since only training in Afghanistan with Bin Laden is illegal. What is the meaning? Is it the white Christian right wing militias trained in Utah, but not Afghanistan, so we shouldn't prosecute them as terrorists? That the right wing Christian terrorists blew up abortion clinics in the U.S. but not Afghanistan so we should let them go? That the people who blew up the Oklahoma Federal Building were supporters of William Pierce's neo-Nazi National Alliance not Bin Laden so they were unfairly convicted? That the Klansmen who killed Black children in a church bombing didn't cut off heads on TV so they're not terrorists? I continue to find that the people most interested in not fighting a real "war on terrorism" aren't the dreaded "hate-America liberals" or the "Islamo-fascists." They're the supporters of the Bush government.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875