|
||||||||||||||
Posted on 06/11/2002 7:06:16 AM PDT by MississippiMan
'Dirty Bomb' Suspect Not Cooperating, Wolfowitz Says
Tue Jun 11, 8:39 AM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A suspected American al Qaeda operative accused of plotting a radioactive "dirty bomb" attack on the United States has not yet given authorities information on his associates, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said on Tuesday.
|
||||||||||||||||
"He came into this country with the intention, by various means, not just the dirty bomb idea, of killing hundreds and maybe thousands of Americans," he said on CBS' "The Early Show."
Detained by the FBI ( news - web sites) in Chicago on May 8, al Muhajir was declared an "enemy combatant" by President Bush ( news - web sites) over the weekend and transferred to a naval brig in South Carolina.
But Wolfowitz said the former gang member had not provided information to investigators.
"To the best of my knowledge he hasn't cooperated at all so far," Wolfowitz said on NBC's "Today Show."
"He clearly had associates and one of the things we want to ask him about is who those associates were and how we can track them down," he added on CBS.
Wolfowitz said it was clear to investigators, however, that al Muhajir had had "a great deal of contact" with the al Qaeda network of Saudi exile Osama bin Laden ( news - web sites), and that "he was clearly taking a great deal of instruction."
Authorities said on Monday al Muhajir had trained with al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan ( news - web sites) and was in the planning stages of launching a so-called dirty bomb attack, which combines a conventional bomb with radioactive material, somewhere in the United States.
Washington blames bin Laden's network for the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington that killed about 3,000 people.
Wolfowitz said al Muhajir apparently planned to get radioactive material for the bomb from somewhere within the United States.
"This man actually thought he could get them from places like university labs," he said. "I have no idea how difficult that would be but there is nuclear material around in a lot places."
The New York-born Jose Padilla, 31. who changed his name to Abdullah al Muhajir, was being held by the Defense Department as an "enemy combatant," which under the rules of war allows him to be held until the end of the conflict and questioned without an attorney present.
Civil rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union ( news - web sites) have criticized the detention and said he should be tried in U.S. court.
"What we're about here is preventing," Wolfowitz said. "Preventing him from doing further acts, preventing those about whom he may have knowledge from doing further acts."
If authorities decide to prosecute al Muhajir he will be transferred back to civil courts, Wolfowitz said.
Yaser Esam Hamdi, an American-born Saudi national detained in Afghanistan, is a second U.S. citizen known to be held by the Defense Department.
John Walker Lindh, another American captured while fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan, is facing trail in a federal court in Virginia. He is in the custody of the Justice Department ( news - web sites).
Wolfowitz spoke from a spot outside the Pentagon ( news - web sites) where one of the hijacked airliners crashed Sept. 11, to note that workers had almost completed reconstruction efforts.
Poised to lay the final piece of limestone, he said officials planned to also place a time capsule to honor those killed in the attack.
"It's also a way of honoring the incredible determination and resolve of the workers who put this building back together so quickly," he said on CBS.
"I think its symbolic of the resolve of the American people to prevail over people like Abdullah al Muhajir."
If the feds had anything at all they would get the information out there. Consider this absurd statement:
He clearly had associates and one of the things we want to ask him about is who those associates were and how we can track them down," [Wolfowitz] added on CBS.
How can you claim he "clearly has associates" when you have admitted you don't know who they are or where they are?
I'll bring along my little friend.
Indeed! He should no longer be allowed to be called an American citizen. He gave up that right when he took up arms against us.
How do we really know what this guy's history and capabilities are? I'm sure we can rely on the mainstream media to give us all the details.....
Exactly right. So far what they appear to have on him are "thought crimes."
Are you asserting that the Feds would reveal the majority -- or even 25% -- of the information that points to this man's guilt in the major media?
Please define "thought crimes".
Please produce a citation that he is accused of "thought crimes" as per your definition.
They would have to have actual information to do that. Since they don't have any credible information they haven't released it. So far they've simply claimed that he conspired to build a dirty bomb but have no such dirty bomb and don't even know who he allegedly conspired with by Paul Wolfowitz's explicit admission.
In other words, he hadn't done anything illegal. He is alleged to have an "intent" to commit a crime. He wasn't caught with bomb-making equipment or in the act of committing a crime. Wolfowitz says that his arrest is "prevention from committing further acts yet he isn't arrested or charged with any act. Thus we must assume that he believes that his thoughts were actually "acts." Thought crimes.
And because there was a slight misapplication of RICO laws to protest groups destroying property, this is going to lead to protesters being held indefinitely without trial.
On what authority do you assert that they do not have credible information? Are you intimately involved with the prosecution of this case? Please identify the law enforcement agency you have recently joined, and how you come to have been placed in charge of all of this sensitive evidential information.
You assert that they have no credible information and therefore are not releasing it. You are committing the Fallacy of Distraction known as the False Dilemma, although instead of providing two options, you merely provide one. I present another option: They know much more than they are revealing. This is a common attribute of most criminal investigations. It is done to a) Prevent the case from being compromised, b) Prevent the prospective juries from being colored by opinion and inadmissible fact, and c) To apprehend additional conspirators.
How do you know this to be true? You must be working on this exact case. Are you FBI, CIA, or NSA now?
What makes you think that Wolfowitz is giving you the straight story?
Negative. I cannot speak to Wolfowitz's credibility one way or the other.
Please answer the questions I have posed to you.
Then why do you insist on defending it yet at the same time asking why I believe him? If he's not telling the truth, he's making the FBI look awfully stupid.
If you step back an admire history you may notice that any government action or power that a person can justify because it is directed at a group or offense that that person despises will eventually fall into the hands of that persons rivals. At which time the power is directed towards him.
There will be Democrats in the White House again eventually. Any action that we condone toward homegrown Islamic terrorists WILL eventually be directed at disfavored American citizens such as gun owners, churchgoers, homeschoolers, etc.
Never let a government have any power that you are not comfortable with your worst enemy having.
As someone else posted some weeks ago:
Just know this: There are people in this country that would willingly surrender liberty in order to impose their sensibilities on others. Some day the "other side" will be in power and they'll lament the day that liberty was surrendered.
I cannot speak to the FBI's appearance of stupidity, positively or negatively.
I am not defending any person or agency. I am pointing out the very serious holes in your logic.
Next time it will be Hillary arresting FR people for subversion. That is why I insist they play within the system they have created.
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.
