American Taliban Captured [Archive]

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 01:32 PM

They got him. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100307/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest)

KARACHI, Pakistan – The American-born spokesman for al-Qaida has been arrested by Pakistani intelligence officers in the southern city of Karachi, two officers and a government official said Sunday, the same day Adam Gadahn appeared in a video urging U.S. Muslims to attack their own country.
The arrest of Gadahn is a major victory in the U.S.-led battle against al-Qaida and will be taken as a sign that Pakistan, criticized in the past for being an untrustworthy ally, is cooperating more fully with Washington. It follows the recent detentions of several Afghan Taliban commanders in Karachi, including the movement's No. 2 commander.

Gadahn has appeared in more than half a dozen al-Qaida videos, taunting and threatening the West and calling for its destruction. A U.S. court charged Gadahn with treason in 2006, making him the first American to face such a charge in more than 50 years.

Okay, I'm all for his capture, but I am very uneasy about this yoyo being charged with Treason. His actions may have been treasonous, but this makes him a martyr, and that's the last thing we need.

The Central Scrutinizer

7th March 2010, 01:51 PM

They got him. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100307/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest)

Okay, I'm all for his capture, but I am very uneasy about this yoyo being charged with Treason. His actions may have been treasonous, but this makes him a martyr, and that's the last thing we need.

What would you charge him with?

rwguinn

7th March 2010, 02:07 PM

The Central Scrutinizer

7th March 2010, 02:10 PM

If publicly urging attacks on your own country, publicly supporting people who want to attack your own country, and providing moral support for such people is not treason, then 1. nothing is, or 2. you're Jane Fonda

Did Jane Fonda call for attacks on America?

geni

7th March 2010, 02:24 PM

Skeptical Greg

7th March 2010, 02:29 PM

Is there any reason to believe that is the case here ?

dafydd

7th March 2010, 02:33 PM

Did Jane Fonda call for attacks on America?

As far as I can remember,no.

ravdin

7th March 2010, 02:34 PM

Okay, I'm all for his capture, but I am very uneasy about this yoyo being charged with Treason. His actions may have been treasonous, but this makes him a martyr, and that's the last thing we need.

I don't know the legal definition of a "traitor", so I'm also not sure if Gadahn should be charged as such. If he was in the military, FBI, CIA, or any other government branch I could see it. But AFAIK he's never been entrusted with any responsibility by the American government. Labeling this clown as a traitor makes him seem much more important than he really is.

Skeptical Greg

7th March 2010, 02:39 PM

I don't know the legal definition of a "traitor",
In the U.S."

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

WIKI is your friend ..

What should we charge him with if not treason ?
Wearing a silly hat ?

rwguinn

7th March 2010, 02:40 PM

Treason is the kind of charge you don't want to encorage goverments to get too comfortable about using.
The worlod ends tomorrow, because I agree with you there.

rwguinn

7th March 2010, 02:44 PM

Did Jane Fonda call for attacks on America?
I used "and" in my post because the idiot in question did all 3, any one of which qualifies. calling for attacks is not required-see below

As far as I can remember,no.
Not required-see below

In the U.S."

Quote:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

WIKI is your friend ..

What should we charge him with if not treason ?
Wearing a silly hat ?

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 02:54 PM

Geni pretty much answered it for me. No, his silly hat simply made him look silly, as did is asinine outbursts, and while he did provide material support for Al Quaeda, charging him with treason seems to assign him greater authority than he has ever held. He's more assclown than anything else.

My thought would be that if he's to be tried for treason, commute the sentence to life, and leave him someplace like Marion Penitentiary to rot for the remainder of his existence, forgotten by as many as possible.

Skeptical Greg

7th March 2010, 03:21 PM

.....leave him someplace like Marion Penitentiary to rot for the remainder of his existence, forgotten by as many as possible.

You forgot the part about
" ....periodically publish pictures of him wearing the latest from Victoria's Secret ... ":D

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 04:09 PM

You forgot the part about
" ....periodically publish pictures of him wearing the latest from Victoria's Secret ... ":D

Damn. I just KNEW I'd forgotten something. :D:p

(You're one sick individual, you know that? I like that.)

shuize

7th March 2010, 04:27 PM

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 04:35 PM

If he's willing to cough up intel on his Al Queda buddies, I say give him 20 years without parole like they did with John Walker Lindh. Otherwise, shove him up against a wall and shoot him in Pakistan and save everyone the trouble of a media circus.

I agree with the sentiment, but how would that prevent a media circus? Consider what's happened to Che Guevara over the years: He's a franchise industry, in spite of the fact that he was directly responsible for the deaths of many of Fidel Castro's political opponents. Consider further that in that part of the world, shooting him is regarded as a heroic departure.

Consider the alternative: Lock him away and forget him. You lock out the bulk of the media, show him for the whiny little **** he is, and once he's in prison, you say as little as possible about him. You might release the menu for the night once in a while, (Pork roast with mashed potatoes and gravy, for example), but beyond that, after about five years, he is reduced to nothing. He becomes a nullity, more worthless by the day. Eventually, even his Jewish Grandfather would likely forget he ever darkened his door, which in that man's case, might be a blessing for his miserable grandson's monumental disloyalty to both his family and his country.

rwguinn

7th March 2010, 05:40 PM

oops...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/07/world/main6275953.shtml?tag=stack

Now, CBS News' Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad writes that earlier reports the detained individual was Gadahn proved false. According to a Pakistan security official who spoke with CBS News on condition of anonymity, the arrested individual is in fact "a Taliban militant leader who is known as Abu Yahya."

The official said evidence compiled from an interrogation of the suspect and information exchanged with U.S. officials verified the man's identify.

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 05:45 PM

oops...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/07/world/main6275953.shtml?tag=stack

Big one. Too bad, though. It would have been nice to lock his sorry @$$ up.

Puppycow

7th March 2010, 10:32 PM

It seems they did catch an American Taliban, but a different one.

Regarding whether Adam Gadahn's actions qualify as treason, hell yes!

It's a textbook definition of the word.

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 11:10 PM

It seems they did catch an American Taliban, but a different one.

Regarding whether Adam Gadahn's actions qualify as treason, hell yes!

It's a textbook definition of the word.

Link for the story. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100308/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest)

Puppycow

7th March 2010, 11:18 PM

Treason is the kind of charge you don't want to encorage goverments to get too comfortable about using.

I think you are correct. I wouldn't want it used against Jane Fonda for example. And the US hadn't charged anyone with treason in 50 years. So I don't think one can say they are overusing it.

Gadahn, the first American to face treason charges in more than 50 years, has appeared in more than half a dozen al-Qaida videos, taunting the West and calling for its destruction. The video that surfaced Sunday showed him urging American Muslims to attack their own country.

He has been on the FBI's most wanted list since 2004 and there is a $1 million reward for information leading to his arrest. He was charged with treason in 2006 and faces the death penalty if convicted. He was also charged with two counts of providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Bill Thompson

7th March 2010, 11:18 PM

They got him. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100307/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest)

"Two Pakistani officers and a government official said Sunday... "

Maybe they have not. It could be any gringo. They all look the same to them. I know from some experience.

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 11:24 PM

"Two Pakistani officers and a government official said Sunday... "

Maybe they have not. It could be any gringo. They all look the same to them. I know from some experience.

Perhaps. Right now, it appears they have an American. Frankly, I would just as soon see him brought back here and locked away, forgotten. Too bad that Johnny Lindh will eventually be released.

Bill Thompson

7th March 2010, 11:27 PM

Perhaps. Right now, it appears they have an American. Frankly, I would just as soon see him brought back here and locked away, forgotten. Too bad that Johnny Lindh will eventually be released.

I would prefer to see him stay in Pakistan and let their justice system deal with him. We would be way too soft on him, I think.

BaaBaa

7th March 2010, 11:31 PM

I thought this thread was about this:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/04/texas-taliban/
"Christian Hate Group ‘Repent Amarillo’ Terrorizes Texas Town, Harassing Gays, Liberals, And Other ‘Sinners’"

Roadtoad

7th March 2010, 11:33 PM

Covered in another thread, but thanks for the reminder.

GreNME

8th March 2010, 12:20 AM

What would you charge him with?

If publicly urging attacks on your own country, publicly supporting people who want to attack your own country, and providing moral support for such people is not treason, then 1. nothing is, or 2. you're Jane Fonda

What should we charge him with if not treason ?
Wearing a silly hat ?

It seems they did catch an American Taliban, but a different one.

Regarding whether Adam Gadahn's actions qualify as treason, hell yes!

It's a textbook definition of the word.

Should John Walker Lindh have been tried for treason?

Undesired Walrus

8th March 2010, 06:08 AM

There is a big difference between AQ and the Taliban. This man is AQ.

Undesired Walrus

8th March 2010, 06:11 AM

I would prefer to see him stay in Pakistan and let their justice system deal with him. We would be way too soft on him, I think.

Would you 'prefer' to have their justice system in the US?

Matthew Best

8th March 2010, 06:15 AM

Gadahn, the first American to face treason charges in more than 50 years, has appeared in more than half a dozen al-Qaida videos, taunting the West and calling for its destruction. The video that surfaced Sunday showed him urging American Muslims to attack their own country.

He has been on the FBI's most wanted list since 2004 and there is a $1 million reward for information leading to his arrest. He was charged with treason in 2006 and faces the death penalty if convicted. He was also charged with two counts of providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Blimey! And I'd never even heard of him before, or seen a single one of these videos.

Maybe I should pay more attention.

The Central Scrutinizer

8th March 2010, 06:53 AM

It seems they did catch an American Taliban, but a different one.

Yes. We actually caught the American Idol Taliban.

Alferd_Packer

8th March 2010, 07:02 AM

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

So, unless you have two witnesses to an over tact, you are out of luck charging someone with treason. I'm not sure making a video fals under that category as it may be protected by the first amendment,

ravdin

8th March 2010, 08:29 AM

Update: the American militant who was picked up is not Gadahn.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest

drkitten

8th March 2010, 08:38 AM

So, unless you have two witnesses to an over tact, you are out of luck charging someone with treason. I'm not sure making a video fals under that category as it may be protected by the first amendment,

The video itself is treasonous; two witnesses can easily testify to the existence of the video.

GreNME

8th March 2010, 08:50 AM

There is a big difference between AQ and the Taliban. This man is AQ.

Oh, do explain. Or by "big difference" do you mean "AQ flew planes into buildings, Taliban only pointed and laughed (and housed and fed and protected etc)" as the basic distinguishing factor? I'm trying to figure out why Lindh, who was captured fighting US troops (though apparently not 'technically' so) should be considered any different just because of which fundie club his name gets attached to.

Beerina

8th March 2010, 09:51 AM

Did Jane Fonda call for attacks on America?

As far as I can remember,no.

Potato, potahto. How would you classify posing for a picture in an anti-aircraft gun with a helmet on, smiling, as if you were shooting down, oh, I don't know, take a guess...

geni

8th March 2010, 10:40 AM

Blimey! And I'd never even heard of him before, or seen a single one of these videos.

Maybe I should pay more attention.

Eh only reason I know of his existence is he is where wikipedia got it's Mullah Dadullah pics from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dadullah

TraneWreck

8th March 2010, 11:05 AM

drkitten

8th March 2010, 11:31 AM

Well, we can add "treason" to the list that includes "terrorism" and "torture" as words that the hysterical right has tossed about with such reckless abandon that they no longer have any constructive meaning (perhaps they can be salvaged in a legal context).

I think this is somewhat over the top.

No, scratch that. I think this is ludicrously over the top.

Treason has a well-established legal definition that explicitly includes giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and it's not at all unreasonable to say that making PR videos for someone is a form of aid.

TraneWreck

8th March 2010, 11:33 AM

Treason has a well-established legal definition that explicitly includes giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and it's not at all unreasonable to say that making PR videos for someone is a form of aid.

Torture had a well-established legal definition with actual prosecutions of people engaged in the exact behavior that became de facto permissible.

Edit: and by the way, I agree with you that if the great white hope is ever actually captured, he should be charged with treason. Of course then we'd actually have to have a trial...

Roadtoad

8th March 2010, 11:33 AM

Well, we can add "treason" to the list that includes "terrorism" and "torture" as words that the hysterical right has tossed about with such reckless abandon that they no longer have any constructive meaning (perhaps they can be salvaged in a legal context).

Somehow the Ft. Hood guy is a terrorist but the IRS kamikaze attack isn't.

Jane Fonda and all liberals are treasonous (http://www.amazon.com/Treason-Liberal-Treachery-Cold-Terrorism/dp/1400050308), but it's cool to circumvent long standing national and international law as long as you're legitimately pissing you pants over scary bearded men in caves. The Yoo memos tell us that it isn't torture unless it feels like your organs are failing, at least you can kind of argue that if you misread a statute about medicare...

Words, who needs em?

Well, some of us are rather fond of them.

And while I see your point regarding the Fort Hood coward as opposed to the IRS coward, the reality is that both were terrorists. Period. The goal was to inflict psychological harm.

And, no, it's NOT okay to circumvent the Geneva Convention, international law, or long standing tradition. It's just plain wrong.

And so is Gadahn. He's provided aid and comfort to the enemy, and his actions have been documented. Not much question that his actions amount to outright treason. Not Ann Coulter's version of it, but the real deal.

Just so you know: Some of us of a more conservative bent are far from hysterical. Some of us actually think your word should be your bond, and your actions should match your declarations. Some of us think it's wise to defend the nation, but in doing so, we should honor what the Founding Fathers had to say about international entanglements, and limited government.

I guess I'm just funny that way.

Roadtoad

8th March 2010, 11:35 AM

Torture had a well-established legal definition with actual prosecutions of people engaged in the exact behavior that became de facto permissible.

With whom?

TraneWreck

8th March 2010, 11:53 AM

With whom?

The world, the United States.

In 1983 Texas Sheriff James Parker and his deputies were convicted and sentenced to 10 years for water-boarding suspects to obtain convictions. There were court martials in 1903 and 1968 that dealt with waterboarding, and Japanese soldiers were prosecuted for the same after WWII.

I've heard folks complain that the Japanese cases should be distinguished because they did worse things in addition to waterboarding. Nevertheless, it was listed as a charge against them. If someone were charged with rape, murder, and theft under $500. Theft wouldn't be permissible because rape and murder were worse.

TraneWreck

8th March 2010, 11:55 AM

Just so you know: Some of us of a more conservative bent are far from hysterical. Some of us actually think your word should be your bond, and your actions should match your declarations. Some of us think it's wise to defend the nation, but in doing so, we should honor what the Founding Fathers had to say about international entanglements, and limited government.

I guess I'm just funny that way.

Yes, that's why I specified the hysterical right. Incidently, there's a big, loud, hsyterical left. See anti-vaccination/alt med nonsense.

I probably wasn't specific enough in my attacks.

Bill Thompson

8th March 2010, 12:07 PM

I heard that the guy is not even an american. He is a brit.

rockinkt

8th March 2010, 12:29 PM

I heard that the guy is not even an american. He is a brit.

That's a shooting offense right there...:D

dudalb

8th March 2010, 01:18 PM

It seems they did catch an American Taliban, but a different one.

Regarding whether Adam Gadahn's actions qualify as treason, hell yes!

It's a textbook definition of the word.

Yeah, Gadahn's rants are a textbook example of treason. I agree the charge should not be made very often, but it seems pretty damn clear cut here.
He was guilty of treason the same way that Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw Haw were during the Second World War..although only Haw Haw was executed. IMHO if he is captured the Governement will not ask for the death penalty but a prison sentence. Treason is punishable by death, but nothing requires the government to seek it. There are degrees, just as there are in any crime.

dudalb

8th March 2010, 01:20 PM

Torture had a well-established legal definition with actual prosecutions of people engaged in the exact behavior that became de facto permissible.

Edit: and by the way, I agree with you that if the great white hope is ever actually captured, he should be charged with treason. Of course then we'd actually have to have a trial...

You seem to be very sympathic with Gadanh.

Roadtoad

8th March 2010, 01:33 PM

You seem to be very sympathic with Gadanh.

Actually, I don't think he is. Why do you say this?

TraneWreck

8th March 2010, 01:35 PM

You seem to be very sympathic with Gadanh.

Yeah, could you clarify before I respond, please? Is it the idea of the trial that makes me sympathetic?

GreNME

8th March 2010, 03:48 PM

You seem to be very sympathic with Gadanh.

Are you being serious here?

Puppycow

8th March 2010, 09:46 PM

A day since initial reports and it's still not clear who has been captured.

Some Pakistani sources (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/07/heart-ache-not-gadahn/) are still insisting that it's Gadahn.

Polaris

25th March 2010, 12:47 PM

What would you charge him with?

About 500,000 volts.

Marduk

25th March 2010, 12:58 PM

Should John Walker Lindh have been tried for treason?

He fought for the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, as he wasn't a native Afghan and as the Northern Alliance isn't America I would ask
on what grounds did he do anything traitorous ?

Taarkin

25th March 2010, 01:41 PM

How does the law define "enemy" wrt treason?

Aepervius

25th March 2010, 01:43 PM

What would you charge him with?

Terrorism.

That is enough of a charge as far as I can tell.

Taarkin

25th March 2010, 02:03 PM

geni

25th March 2010, 02:58 PM

He was guilty of treason the same way that Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw Haw were during the Second World War

Assuming by Lord Haw Haw you mean William Joyce then on a technicality and some seriously questionable evidence. He's not a good example of how a goverment should use treason charges. Apart from anything else he abandoned his american citizenship for german before america entered the war.

INRM

25th March 2010, 05:59 PM

Why not just charge him with Treason? He gave aid and comfort to the enemy...

GreNME

25th March 2010, 06:17 PM

He fought for the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, as he wasn't a native Afghan and as the Northern Alliance isn't America I would ask
on what grounds did he do anything traitorous ?

I was initially going by memory, but after verifying with this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh#Capture_and_interrogation), your description falls a bit short of what actually happened. Dude copped to first working for bin Laden (in Ansar) and later to belonging to al Qaeda, as well as also being involved in the Mazar e Sharif prison break that resulted in Americans dying-- sure, he may not have pulled any triggers himself, but stating that his behavior couldn't be construed as traitorous is mistaken given what we know to have happened. The reason he was eventually plea-bargained down is because his lawyer and parents did a good job of humanizing him to the public with media appearances (pleas), and Lindh himself eventually agreed to cooperate with US intelligence in exchange for avoiding some of his laundry list of charges (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh#Trial).