Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ilaine who wrote (40363)	8/27/2002 6:01:24 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (2) of 281500

"The allegations against Padilla, if true, are that he intended to assist Al Qaeda in deploying a dirty bomb within the United States. That is both mens rea and actus reus. Further, he formed the specific intent after 9/11, and was aware that Congress authorized the use of force against Al Qaeda and those who assist it. These are the major distinctions between the men's cases. I can surmise that they are being treated differently for other reasons, as well. Padilla probably knows much more about Al Qaeda's present intentions and configuration than Lindh did. Lindh was a foot soldier, a grunt who carried a rifle. He was not engaged in planning a terrorist act in the US. Further, Lindh is the type of guy who would roll over easily, while Padilla is a hard case." He's never been charged. No evidence has been presented. How do you know all this? Oh and he has no lawyer.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next