Printable View
At last a strong message has been sent , the free world strikes back .
After years of looking like idiots and throwing the rule of law out the window we finally have a result .
They managed to convict a terrorist at the heart of the attacks against the west:birthday2:
Well they managed in strange circumstances to convict on some charges a bloke who drove a car in Afghanistan .
You know. I swear I saw Bin-Liner driving a taxi in Halifax. True.:embarassed:
Just so everyone knows exactly what's going on.
ahh thanks, was completely in the dark here...
Well i know in my terrorist organisation i would have one of the top guys driving, its not something you can have any regular guy doing, hatred of the US and terrorist training is a must.... of course he must have been a terrorist, what self respecting afghani would work for a bad guy for £99 a month unless he was a terrorist..... im sure theres plenty of other jobs he could done for such a wage.... like.... errm... warlord.... or..... high ranking goverment official, but he obviously choose to ignore such obvious opportunitys so he could destroy the west by driving osama round...
The defence said the case was "guilt by association".
ohh well thats ok then, guilt by association... lets get the sobs that trained aq up next
So....
A taxi driver who picks up and drives a criminal(which he is bound to do by law, btw) is now a criminal too?
Good lord. :wall:
EDIT: This thing reminds me of "The enemy within" by Jan Guillou, btw.
Breaking news indeed. Progress!
You mean you have to put up with his books in Norway as well? It's spreading like a cancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Thats not exactly the situation in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Why not? All he was doing was driving a bad guy around... So why shouldn't another guy who is driving a different bad guy around be jailed?Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Actually it is. He was payed 200$ a month to drive Bin Laden around, this was a lot of money for someone like him. There is no proof he was commited to Islamic terrorism, nor any proof he comitted acts of violence, he was simply guilty by association. They even went as far as saying he was a conspirator behind the 9/11 attacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
He was not "legally bound" to drive a terrorist around, so your logical leap didn't quite make it. :trytofly:
This isn't really anything new. If you're employed by a criminal, you may be subject to litigation. There are lessons to be learned here somewhere....
He wasn't convicted on that charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish
No he was not, but he was being payed a hefty sum to just drive around.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Do you honestly think life is a fair sentence for him?
He was payed 200$ a month to drive Bin Laden around, this was a lot of money for someone like him.
Exactly my point! Almost any afghani would have liked that job, even extreme idealogical differences wouldn't stop most people for that amount of money, and to just drive him around... if i was in a county as poor as afghanastan and i was offered that kind of money i drive almost anyone round....
Edit: is it just because he was his driver or was there other stuff on him ?
But he was charged with it. I think that's a large leap to accuse a car driver of being a conspirator behind 9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenring
Sets a good example. Don't deal with terrorists, no matter how much money they're throwing around.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish
And don't worry, this will be knocked down on appeal.
If Blair or Bush where ever charged with war crimes could we charge thier drivers to ?
what of milosovic's driver or saddams driver ? have they been charged for thier heinous crime of being the driver to a criminal ?
And most importantly i guess is there any evidence other than the fact he was Osama's driver?
Sets a good example? The man is a car driver, there is no evidence supporting he engaged in any terrorist activity, he was being payed to drive, not bomb Kabul.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
I hope this will be knocked down on appeal, that's setting a good example
If Bin Laden offered you $1 Million a week to drive for him, would you? Or would you have some moral qualms?
And yes Griz, it's been done before. Many low level, ancillary Germans were charged with all sorts of crimes after WW2. It just depends on how vengeful your captors are, and Americans are still pretty vengeful for knocking down our buildings. Thats the risk Mr. Hamden took for $200 a week.
FYIQuote:
He was convicted of five counts of providing material support for terrorism, specifically that his personal services to al-Qaida included driving and acting as a bodyguard for a man he knew to be the leader of an international terrorist organization.
If Bin Laden offered me 1$ million a week and I was living in a poor country, with nothing good ahead for me, I would take it. Vengeance clouds logic. This is in no way logical to give a driver life imprisonment because he got good money for driving Osama around.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Should the average German soldier have been charged for the Holocaust?
Should we bring America to war crime trials because we have funded terrorists, dictators and insurgents?
It just depends on how vengeful your captors are, and Americans are still pretty vengeful for knocking down our buildings.
Yeah france were pretty vengeful after world war 1, i believe it was TSM who called them stupid and immature for thier petty vengefulness, it was stupid and immature but kind of an understandable anger, this applies here also....
If Bin Laden offered you $1 Million a week to drive for him, would you? Or would you have some moral qualms?
If i was an Afghani (presumably at least fairly poor, most probably very poor) family to feed, 9-11 hasn't happened yet, sure i would, i may have some moral qualms but people and countries all over the world are happy to recieve dirty money, the west was perfectly happy to supply saddam even though he was obviously a tryanical dictator and to this day were happy to take money, oil or whatever we need off bad guys, so maybe all the adminstrations involved should recieve thier life sentences...
Another thing is how much could this guy have known about osama, there are plenty of goverments and people who happily deal with and work for guys they know do terrible things, but remember this guy was his driver pre 9/11 i knew nothing of osama pre 9/11 i doubt many ordinary westerners did, this is in the west where we can read and write and have a huge variety of sources to get information from, this guy most likely a poverty stricken afghani before driving for osama probably can't read or write, probably knew very little of what osama did, and as a paid driver was not there to question his boss but to get him from A to B, this is all very disturbing to me....
Many low level, ancillary Germans were charged with all sorts of crimes after WW2.
I would not have supported some low level german who drove hitler around being given a life sentence without more evidence than he was his driver, that would just be cruel and wrong then, and it is cruel and wrong now...
Should we bring America to war crime trials because we have funded terrorists, dictators and insurgents?
When Britian was still suffering IRA bombing campaigns america was happily funding thier terrorists around the world, would it be fair if all drivers who drove presidents that supported terrorists be given life sentences ?
Im sure there are plenty of vengeful people left in britian from people they killed and buildings they blew up, so that makes it ok right ?
ohh sure it was a well paid job but you'll think twice before being a driver for someone who works with terrorists again.... a message must be sent out
would you be ok with that panzer ?
Point of order, since this has been mentioned several times in the thread. The driver is not an Afghan, he is Yemeni. Like most of AQ and the Talies, he is Arabic, not indigenous. Not saying that makes him guilty or innocent of the charges, but he likely did know the company he kept.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Was he blind? Didn't he know what is doing Bin Laden? I remind you that Osama did not start 9th Sept.... If criminal hire you to help him when commiting crimes - you are criminal too.
I'm afraid it's not as black and white as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by KrooK
Well, being Osama's driver, one would expect not. ~;pQuote:
Originally Posted by KrooK
Excuse me, but 9/11 occurred on the 9th of November. :book:Quote:
I remind you that Osama did not start 9th Sept
Fish & Griz -
A) I'm surprised that both of you would be so willing to work for a terrorist, financial difficulties or not. Apart from the leering eye of the ever watchful Predator Drone, one must make some very objectionable moral compromises to justify working for such a man. I'm not sure your assumptions about the man's financial status or motives are correct, either.
B) Moral equivalencies seldom make good arguments. Trying to compare working for the vast expanse that is the US Federal Government to personally driving around a man whose immediate goals, and the goals of his organization, consisted entirely of plotting and executing terrorist attacks against civilians just doesn't work.
This man made several unfortunate choices that led him to be made into an example. They were his choices to make, though.
Nothing really new here. A bodyguard/driver of a vile and evil man has been forced to pay for the crimes of the man he chose to protect.
You are judged by the friends and acquiantances you choose to associate yourself with. Their acts and their character reflect on your own. Choose your friends/bosses wisely, it's an old addage but should never be forgotten.
Is life a fair sentence? Hell, he even said he was in it for the money.
So a good portion of US administration should go to jail for giving weapons to Saddam? Guilty by association. If I've learned something from Tribesy here, that's when to say "bollox!"...Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTex
So, a guy who worked for enemy n° 1 of the US gets sentenced by a US court and they expect the international community to believe that this was a "fair trial"?Quote:
Originally Posted by The article
Is the White House trying to tell me that there isn't even the slightest air of this court being biased?
Did they ever hear about in propria causa nemo iudex (no person can judge a case in which he or she is a party)?
They could at least have had the decency to let him be judged by an international court, like the International Criminal Court (but therefore, the US should ratify its founding treaty...). Than I might have been willing to believe that the guy was been given a fair trial.