Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

From Gitmo to Miranda, With Love
From Sea to Shining Sea ^ | 8/10/08 | Purple Mountains

Posted on 08/10/2008 9:58:37 AM PDT by PurpleMountains

Recently the Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 decision, extended constitutional rights to enemy aliens captured on the battlefield and held outside the United States. As a result of this case, Guantanamo Bay detainees now have more rights than do prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention. This has never before been the policy of the United States, nor has the court ever before granted such rights to those detained outside of U.S. jurisdiction. The activities of a released prisoner, Abdullah Saleh Al-Ajmi, discussed in the following report written by the sister of the pilot killed on Flight 77 on 9/11, will become all too common if Congress and the President are not able to work out procedures to counter this abysmal decision:

(Excerpt) Read more at forthegrandchildren.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans; Politics
KEYWORDS: 200808; abdullahalajmi; abdullahsalehalajmi; alajmi; boumediene; debraburlingame; enemycombatant; gitmo; guantanamo; judiciary; justicekennedy; kennedy; mueller; robertmueller; scotus; thomaswilner; tomwilner; wilner

1 posted on 08/10/2008 9:58:37 AM PDT by PurpleMountains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

So we released a guy who we knew to be a highly dangerous terrorist/extremist, who blows up himself and others, and we keep Osama’s driver in prison, as “the worst of the worst,” a man that even hand picked military officers say is no real danger and should be released in six months. Does this make any sense to anyone?


2 posted on 08/10/2008 10:21:58 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

Do you agree that we should allow other countries to hold American citizens in prison for years on end with no rights to know what crime they have committed or to know any of the evidence against them?


3 posted on 08/10/2008 10:35:22 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

If they are captured on the battlefield fighting for an Islamic terrorist organization, yes, please.


4 posted on 08/10/2008 10:49:26 AM PDT by PurpleMountains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

Do you agree that we should allow other countries to hold American citizens in prison for years on end with no rights to know what crime they have committed or to know any of the evidence against them?

We did. They were called POW’s


5 posted on 08/10/2008 10:50:50 AM PDT by gunner03 ("03" Mustang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gunner03

“We did. They were called POW’s”

You didn’t really answer my question. Would you feel comfortable if someone in your family were picked up while on vacation in Europe and held in a Serbian jail for six years with detention to continue indefinitely, and the only explanation you got was that it was he was being held under the auspices of the Serbian war on terror? Later you found on that the person who turned him in was paid a bounty for turning in a “terrorist.”


6 posted on 08/10/2008 11:25:05 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

“If they are captured on the battlefield fighting for an Islamic terrorist organization, yes, please..”

Certainly. But only a small percentage were captured by American troops on the battlefield. The situation the Court is trying to avoid is one cited in oral argument. One of the Gitmo detainees had spent years in jail before his lawyer found out that he was being held because of his association with a “known terrorist.” At his hearing, he was told the terrorist’s name, to which he responded that he didn’t know he was a terrorist. The military court responded that his associate was indeed a terrorist because he had blown himself up in a suicide attack that had killed several people. Armed with this new information, his attorney tracked down the man in his home country, where he was still very much alive, leading an ordinary life. Affidavits from the mayor of his town and other government officials led to the accused’s release shortly thereafter.


7 posted on 08/10/2008 11:36:48 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

“If they are captured on the battlefield fighting for an Islamic terrorist organization, yes, please..”

Certainly. But only a small percentage were captured by American troops on the battlefield. The situation the Court is trying to avoid is one cited in oral argument. One of the Gitmo detainees had spent years in jail before his lawyer found out that he was being held because of his association with a “known terrorist.” At his hearing, he was told the terrorist’s name, to which he responded that he didn’t know the man was a terrorist. The military court responded that his associate was indeed a terrorist because he had blown himself up in a suicide attack that had killed several people. Armed with this new information, his attorney tracked down the alleged terrorist in his home country, where he was still very much alive, leading an ordinary life. Affidavits from the mayor of his town and other government officials led to the accused’s release shortly thereafter.


8 posted on 08/10/2008 11:39:35 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

You practically answer your own loaded question. The man was released. I trust the military commissions to deal with the problem, and I am perfectly willing to err on the side of safety for the American people in the context of Islamic terrorism. I heard many of the same arguments about Padilla, who was, for a while, a cause celebre of the left, but turned out to be a thug and a terrorist.


9 posted on 08/10/2008 11:46:03 AM PDT by PurpleMountains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

“The man was released.”

Yes, he was released because he had a hearing where he learned the evidence against him, exactly what the Gitmo detainees were asking for and what the Hamdi decision grants. Before the courts and congress intervened, none of the detainees had any rights to a hearing of any kind, no rights to even learn what they were charged with.

“I am perfectly willing to err on the side of safety for the American people in the context of Islamic terrorism.”

It doesn’t make any of us safer to lock up people who had nothing to do with terrorism.


10 posted on 08/10/2008 11:58:32 AM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

The Hamdi decision concerns an American citizen. We are talking here about Boumediene, who was not an American. You previously cited a case of as American taken in Serbia. Americans travelling in foreign countries are subject to the laws and justice of that country.


11 posted on 08/10/2008 12:15:25 PM PDT by PurpleMountains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

Also the tone of your comments indicates an unwillingness to face the fact that we are at war, and the rules are different. If you are one of those who likes to pretend that this is not a war, and that the Islamic butchers can be handled by our criminal justice system, don’t bother commenting on my posts.


12 posted on 08/10/2008 12:27:16 PM PDT by PurpleMountains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

Being in a war and being on vacation is two different things. Do you really think they were on vacation? They were picked up as enemy combatants. My cousin,a member of Rommels Africa Corps, was picked up in North Africa and spent the rest of the war in a POW camp here in the US. The American side of the family understood that, as well as the German side. By the way,they all had to work throughout the US.


13 posted on 08/10/2008 1:45:39 PM PDT by gunner03 ("03" Mustang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains

“Also the tone of your comments indicates an unwillingness to face the fact that we are at war, and the rules are different”

Your comment indicates an unwilllngness to face the fact that the constitution must be followed, war or not. If you were old enough to remember, you’d know we got through the cold war without surrendering our liberties, even though we faced a formidable enemy armed with nuclear weapons who had sworn “We will bury you.” Americans must be as brave today as the generations before who faced formidable threats, but who refused to surrender the freedom that makes this country the world’s beacon of liberty.


14 posted on 08/10/2008 10:11:22 PM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gunner03

“Being in a war and being on vacation is two different things. Do you really think they were on vacation? They were picked up as enemy combatants.”

I’ve got no problem with people captured on the battlefield fighting, but U.S. troops captured only about 5% of the “enemy combatants.”


15 posted on 08/10/2008 10:22:22 PM PDT by vanishing liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vanishing liberty

Ibrahim Sen: Held in Guantanamo Bay from February 2002 until November 8, 2003. Released to Turkey because U.S. officials reportedly could not find strong evidence tying him to al Qaeda. Has since been arrested twice in Turkey and charged with leading an al Qaeda cell.

Abdullah Mahsud (above): Freed to Pakistan in March 2004. Later that year, he ‘kidnapped two Chinese engineers and claimed responsibility for an Islamabad hotel bombing’, according to a report by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency. Blew himself up in 2007 after being accused of orchestrating a suicide attack which killed 31.
Abdallah Salih al Ajmi: Freed to Kuwait in 2005. Three years later he blew himself up in the Iraqi city of Mosul, killing seven people.

Ibrahim Qosi (above): Freed in 2012 to Sudan. Two years later, became a leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and has been featured in the terror group’s videos. The group has a at least three other senior members who were in Guantanamo and freed. It has taken credit for a string of international terror attacks, including the Charlie Hebdo shooting in 2015 and the attempted Christmas Day ‘underwear’ bombing in 2009.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4085516/Twenty-two-Guantanamo-detainees-freed-days-Obama-plans-mass-transfer-fanatics-threatened-bomb-behead-Americans


16 posted on 06/30/2018 3:00:33 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PurpleMountains
2008 : (AL AJNI, A CATCH-AND-RELEASE FORMER DETAINEE FROM GITMO, THANKS TO ATTNY THOMAS WILNER A FRIEND OF THE FBI'S ROBRT MUELLER, COMMITS SUICIDE ATTACK THAT KILLS ....--- See ATTNY HUSTLER, BLEEDINGHEARTATTACK, CATCH AND RELEASE) al Ajni’s lawyer was Thomas Wilner, a friend of Robert Mueller who’s going after Trump. In 2008, Abdullah Saleh al-Ajmi, who had been unleashed from Guantanamo Bay, carried out a suicide bombing in Iraq. Al-Ajmi had been represented by Thomas Wilner who was being paid by the Kuwaiti government. Wilner was a pal of Robert Mueller. And when the families were having dinner together, Mueller got up and said, “I want to toast Tom Wilner. He’s doing just what an American lawyer should do.” “I don’t know what he was doing from inside the government. I’d like to find out,” Wilner mused. We know some of what Mueller was doing. The same official who paved the way for raiding the president’s lawyer, who illegally seized material from the Trump transition team and whose case is based in no small part on illegal eavesdropping, fought alongside Comey against surveilling terrorists. Materials involving the Muslim Brotherhood were purged. Toward the dawn of the second Obama term, Mueller met with CAIR and other Islamist groups and a green curtain fell over national security.——— From 9/11 to Spygate: The National Security Deep State, Front Page ^ | June 14, 2018 | Daniel Greenfield 247 posted on ‎6‎/‎30‎/‎2018‎ ‎4‎:‎52‎:‎36‎ ‎AM by piasa | To 25 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
17 posted on 06/30/2018 3:07:21 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson