Originally posted by murrowI thought people were either With America or Against America. The former don't get tortured, presumably.
Wrong: you could also be a suspected criminal, but innocent. Maybe you meant "suspected criminal"? It's relevant in this case, of course, as all charges against BM were dropped. (Or, of course, you could be unlawfully detained.)
Originally posted by zeeblebothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spy#Risks
you're the lawyer, you tell us.
captured as uniformed combatants or as non-uniformed?
Risks
The risks of espionage vary. A spy breaking the host country's laws may be deported, imprisoned, or even executed. A spy breaking his/her own country's laws can be imprisoned for espionage or/and treason, or even executed, as the Rosenbergs were. For example, when Aldrich Ames handed a stack of dossiers of CIA agents in the Eastern Bloc to his KGB-officer "handler", the KGB "rolled up" several networks, and at least ten people were secretly shot. When Ames was arrested by the FBI, he faced life in prison; his contact, who had diplomatic immunity, was declared persona non grata and taken to the airport. Ames's wife was threatened with life imprisonment if her husband did not cooperate; he did, and she was given a five-year sentence. Hugh Francis Redmond, a CIA officer in China, spent nineteen years in a Chinese prison for espionage—and died there—as he was operating without diplomatic cover and immunity.
Originally posted by murrowso being at an airport makes him immune to capture?
Well, in this case, BM was arrested in Pakistan at the airport. I hardly think "captured" is the right word.
You consider him a "combatant", I take it? Based on what?
In any event, no-one that I know of has suggested he has ever been "uniformed". Is that what you consider the crucial difference to be?
Originally posted by murrowOriginally posted by zeeblebot
Well, in this case, BM was arrested in Pakistan at the airport. I hardly think "captured" is the right word.
You consider him a "combatant", I take it? Based on what?
In any event, no-one that I know of has suggested he has ever been "uniformed". Is that what you consider the crucial difference to be?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binyam_Mohamed#Combatant_Status_Review
A Summary of Evidence memo was prepared for the tribunal and the detainee, listing the alleged facts that led to his detention as an "enemy combatant". His memo accused him of the following: [32]
a. The detainee is associated with al Qaida or the Taliban.
1. The detainee is ########## who lived in the United States from 1992 to 1994, and in London, United Kingdom, until he departed for Pakistan in 2001.
2. The detainee arrived in Islamabad, Pakistan, in June 2001, and traveled to the al Faruq training camp in Afghanistan, to receive paramilitary training.
3. At the al Faruq camp, the detainee received 40 days of training in light arms handling, explosives, and principles of topography.
4. The detainee was taught to falsify documents, and received instruction from a senior al Qaida operative on how to encode telephone numbers before passing them to another individual.
5. The detainee proposed, to senior-al Qaida leaders, the idea of attacking subway trains in the United States.
6. The detainee was extracted from Afghanistan to Karachi, Pakistan, where he received explosives and remote-controlled-detonator training from an al Qaida operative.
7. The detainee met with an al Qaida operative and was directed to travel to the United States to assist in terrorist operations.
8. The detainee attempted to leave Pakistan for the United States but was detained and interrogated by Pakistani authorities, revealing his membership in al Qaida, the identities of Mujahidins he knew, and his plan to use a "dirty bomb" to carry out a terrorist attack in the United States.
Although Binyam Mohammed did not attend his Tribunal, notes from one of the Personal Representative's meetings with him were published.[2] According to that Personal Representative "BM" agreed that the first four allegations were true.
"Detainee admitted items 3A1-4 on the UNCLASS summary of evidence, but stated he went for training to fight in Chechnya, which was not illegal. The detainee stated that the other items were rubbish or made under duress."
Originally posted by zeeblebotYou've pasted that before.
Originally posted by zeeblebot
[b]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binyam_Mohamed#Combatant_Status_Review
A Summary of Evidence memo was prepared for the tribunal and the detainee, listing the alleged facts that led to his detention as an "enemy combatant". His memo accused him of the following: [32]
a. The detainee is associated with al ...[text shortened]... legal. The detainee stated that the other items were rubbish or made under duress."[/b]
I take it you mean that you think BM is/was a terrorist?
He was never convicted of anything - all charges were dropped and he was released.
With all that "evidence" why do you think that was?
Originally posted by zeeblebotOf course not. What I meant was, I think a word like "detained"/"arrested" rather than "captured" better describes what must have happened. Captured sounds like he's running through the jungle with a gun, rather than waiting at passport control.
so being at an airport makes him immune to capture?
You gonna answer my question?
1 edit
Originally posted by murrowwhen the charges were dismissed in Oct 2008, against Binyam M and others, the chief prosecutor made it clear that it was for the purpose of filing new charges.
You've pasted that before.
I take it you mean that you think BM is/was a terrorist?
He was never convicted of anything - all charges were dropped and he was released.
With all that "evidence" why do you think that was?
charges were similarly dismissed against another prisoner in May 2008, and the new charges in his case were filed in Nov 2008, 8 months later. (wiki Mohammed al Qahtani)
in Binyam M's case, the Obama administration returned him to the UK in Feb 2009, 4 months after charges were dropped. maybe they did it because of the torture. i didn't find anything that said why.
there was a plea bargain, one (or the) provision of which is that Binyam M agrees never to travel to the US.
none of this indicates exoneration.