It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

I can play the "RELEVANTLY quote the founding father's game".

I was responding to the post above mine.

Your quote appears to be Mr Adams telling people to cherish freedom over wealth (which obviously is now mostly the opposite - see Bush taxcuts, see Bush educational reforms, see Bush social security reforms).



Just because his bomb didn't go off doesn't mean he didn't try to strike a blow in the war.


HE DIDN'T HAVE A BOMB! He was apparently PLANNING to build one.

Crimes of thought and crimes of intent are not crimes.



Actually it was the tranquility of servitude but I guess I shouldn't have expected you to read the whole thing. And crimes of intent are CERTAINLY crimes.

Conspiracy to commit...

He wasn't sitting at home, or even on the plane thinking "gee, I hate the government, wouldn't it be keen to blow up this plane to prove a point and impress my new friends?"

No, he had the necessary ingredients to actually blow up the plane. And the intent.




posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Marid:

Actually it was the tranquility of servitude but I guess I shouldn't have expected you to read the whole thing


LOL read your quote again.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than
the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your
counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May
your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were
our countrymen!"


If you love money more than liberty, or if you love the TRANQUILITY OF SERVITUDE MORE THAN FREEDOM , get away from me."

You are the one who is espousing the tranquility of servitude (blind trust in your government). You are the one who is crouching down and licking the hands that feed you!

Thanks for the laugh!


No, he had the necessary ingredients to actually blow up the plane. And the intent.


Do you have a link that shows that Padilla was arrested with the ingredients, or is it made up? I was under the impression he was arrested in the US at an airport, but enlighten me.

jako



[edit on 14-6-2005 by Jakomo]



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 04:35 PM
link   
I stand by the quote meaning you have to be prepared to fight in order to maintain your freedoms. YMMV on that one. Your vision is so focused that it doesn't really matter what is said there, and I am sure you feel the same about me.

Next up, I will give a really big D'oH! I am a bit of an idiot on this and am confusing Richard Reid and Jose Padilla. I'll cede that issue. However...

Jose Padilla was actively pursuing materials, again in a time of war, to carry out an attack. It is still a crime and a national security issue and his intent was a military attack.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Marid Auran:

Jose Padilla was actively pursuing materials, again in a time of war, to carry out an attack. It is still a crime and a national security issue and his intent was a military attack.


Okay, how does that differ from a bunch of guys in Michigan who don't trust the government and figure they should arm themselves and make some sort of "weekend militia" and train in weapons?

Hmm?

That you say a crime of INTENT is a crime shows to me that you are actually more suited to living in a totalitarian regime than a democratic one.

If you SAY you intend to do harm to your country, you can be arrested for it? If you just SAY it? You know how people change their minds all the time and sometimes say something in the heat of the moment?

So, again, to reiterate, do you believe it is okay to arrest someone and deny them access to a lawyer for 3 years because of something they APPARENTLY intend to do?

Jako



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   
OK, if ex-gang member Padilla is found guilty of receiving Al-Qaida training to build & detonate a dirty bomb or plotting to blow up apartment buildings here than death or a minimum life sentence w/o parole should be served like in the case of Richard Reid. The disturbing thing here is the mysterious DELAY going on. They nabbed him on May 8 ,2002 and after 3 years they have yet to try this case? The procrastination gives me the impression this is being used as a test of possible challenges & recourses our legal system can mount when a US citizen is declared an enemy combatant and detained indefinitely without due process. So while the Supreme Court & 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals continue to play ping-pong with arguments, a precedent is quietly being established.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Marid Auran:

Jose Padilla was actively pursuing materials, again in a
That you say a crime of INTENT is a crime shows to me that you are actually more suited to living in a totalitarian regime than a democratic one.

If you SAY you intend to do harm to your country, you can be arrested for it? If you just SAY it? You know how people change their minds all the time and sometimes say something in the heat of the moment?

So, again, to reiterate, do you believe it is okay to arrest someone and deny them access to a lawyer for 3 years because of something they APPARENTLY intend to do?

Jako


Intent is absolutely a crime. If someone goes out to buy a gun to shoot someone would you rather wait until they have commited the crime? There are some things that you shouldn't say.

If a kid in school says he is going to make a pipe bomb and bring it to school and blow up his home room, should we wait until he has done it?



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Marid:

Intent is absolutely a crime. If someone goes out to buy a gun to shoot someone would you rather wait until they have commited the crime? There are some things that you shouldn't say.

If a kid in school says he is going to make a pipe bomb and bring it to school and blow up his home room, should we wait until he has done it?


Um, neither is a crime.

You ever notice how whenever the cops are arranging a sting, they usually WAIT FOR THE HAND-OFF or whatever is going down before moving in?

That's because INTENT is not enough to convict. You actually have to commit the crime, not just say you are going to do it. If you are clearly intent on causing harm then you can be picked up and charged with, say, uttering death threats.

The key here is that you can be CHARGED.

Jose Padilla is NOT charged with anything for the last 3 years, he is languishing in a miltary brig in Carolina.

I KNOW this is not difficult to understand. It's not like Richard Reid who was lighting his shoe on fire.... Mr. Padilla is associated with some bad men and might well have received training to attack the USA.

SO if this is now illegal (guilt by association), you can wad up your Constitution and throw it out the window.


jako



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 12:28 AM
link   
What are you serious intent is definitely a crime and you can be charged for it. If I go out and get legal bomb materials and tell the police I intend to blow up the school you think they will tell me "ok son we’ll wait until you do it or until we find a bomb to charge you''.?



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marid Audran
But back on to this excellent topic, Padilla chose sides in a war. His mission failed and he was captured as a result. It isn't the matter of a civilian crime that he is being held for. He is being held as a combatant. Just because his bomb didn't go off doesn't mean he didn't try to strike a blow in the war.

Are you a government official with inside knowledge? I don't think so. Noone has given any real evidence he indeed chose the side of Al Qaeda, or that he had a "bomb which didn't go off". That latter statement isn't supported by any publicly released info which indicates you are just providing false information to this board, probably because you feel it is your patriotic duty to mimic like a parrot every accusation or insinuation your government makes.



Originally posted by WestPoint23
If I go out and get legal bomb materials and tell the police I intend to blow up the school you think they will tell me "ok son we’ll wait until you do it or until we find a bomb to charge you''.?

In any case, if they do decide to hold you or convict you, they'd at least give evidence that you have legal bomb materials, a training to make them and/or sufficient evidence and witnesses of your intent. None of that has been provided in the case of Padilla. All that there is are some statements to the press. Yoy'd better hope noone ever comes after you, because all that seems to suffice to hold you indefinitely is a press release saying you were up to terrorist stuff.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   
That’s pretty naive to think that the American government is holding him just because of a press release. And to say we are just following what are government is saying or not saying is bogus too. We are proud Americans but we are very diverse with what we really agree on it’s a free country here we have a lot of different opinions here good and bad, not just an idea some one from a foreign country reads in his or her paper. The press in other countries are very one sided on the US and its policies



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by finnman68
That’s pretty naive to think that the American government is holding him just because of a press release.

I didn't say that they are holding him because of a press release, I am saying a press release by the government is all that seems to suffice to silence everybody. I am not that mistrusting yet that I think they just hold him for the sake of it or because "he knows something", but I do think that it is possible they have only vague clues on him.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 07:10 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure they are holding him for something thats a sure thing our government doesnt just go out and pick some one at random to hold for a case like this. I don't know why they havent let out all that they know about this guy, who knows maybe its something they ar trying to get other people on you never know but its something ad I think the Info will come out soon



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 07:19 AM
link   
As the US has already release 200 detainees from Guantanamo, I tend to think that although there may be some clue(s), guilt is not an absolute certainty.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Simmon: you maybe right on a lot of the Gitmo people, but i still think the Government would not hold this guy just on a suspicion that he might commit a crime. if that were the case there would be a lot more people in jail right now. have a little bit of faith. I think the government really wants to protect America and its citizen. with Gitmo they let a lot of those guy go because they did not feel that they would or could harm anyone else. the rest I believe are still to much a threat



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Any reason why I would get a warning from Ngydan on this thread?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Any reason why I would get a warning from Ngydan on this thread?



Disagreeing with the neo-cons?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Difficult to say, by becoming a terrorist and working for a foreign army its arguable that he gave up his citizenship, but that woudl be predicated on him actually being guilty. Obviously, a case like this can't be handled in regular courts and by regular civilian means, but just as obviously he can't just be thrown away like a foreign detainee. Very tricky situation, I certianly don't have any answer.


Remember he has only been accused of that. He has never been tried and convicted of being a terrorist or working for a foreign army. Innocent until proven guilty. Until he is convicted he is simply an American being held without being tried. He is an American being denied rights GUARANTEED to him by the constitution and bill of rights. It is not an option. He is entitled to those protections as an American. Once he is convicted and he loses many of those rights then all bets are off but until such time he is innocent.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join