It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Take freedom of speech and other personal liberties — including protections against cruel and unusual punishment, right to face your accuser, and right to trial by jury — and throw them right out the window. All for the crime of uploading a YouTube.
That is what a 24 year old Virginia man, Jubair Ahmad, faces as the feds charge him with providing support for terrorism for allegedly uploading a propaganda video. The crime comes with the dubious distinction that the accused are treated as if they are actually terrorists or as the U.S. government labels them “enemies combatants”. With the declaration of being an enemy combatant the rights and protections engraved into the Constitution with the full force of our founding father’s very own flesh and blood are instantly nullified.
Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli
reply to post by MidnightTide
The feebs didn't just sweep this guy up because they don't like one of his YouTube videos. They say he had trained with LeT, he was still in communication with them, and he made a propaganda video for them. If true, it's an open and shut case. He will at least be deported.
The "enemy combatant" thing, as far as I can tell, was invented by Infowars.
A northern Virginia electrician was sentenced 12 years in prison Friday for producing an online propaganda video at the behest of a militant Pakistani group designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. Jubair Ahmad, 24, of Woodbridge pleaded guilty in December in U.S. District Court to providing material support to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistani organization that was blamed for the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai that killed 166 people
Under normal circumstances, Mizer argued, Ahmad's advocacy for Lashkar would be constitutionally protected free speech. The only reason it's criminal is because he produced it at Lashkar's request, in consultation with Saeed.
“Although he conducted his jihad with a computer rather than an AK-47, Ahmad’s criminal actions were nonetheless designed to support LeT’s mission of waging violent jihad against those they consider to be the enemies of Islam,” prosecutors Neil Hammerstrom and John Gibbs wrote.