Bin Laden and US law

[NousDefionsDoc]

I'll move this to Terrorism later - right now I want maximum exposure.

Question is: If we capture Bin Laden and bring him to the US to stand trial, what can we convict him of? Hell, what can we charge him with for that matter?

And save the, "It'll never happen!" and "They've got orders!" and all that.

[Warrior-Mentor]

Recognizing I'm no lawyer, perhaps these would fit the bill...

-- Usama bin Laden, leader of the terrorist organization Al-Qaida, is
charged in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the U.S.
embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. These
attacks resulted in the deaths of more than 200 people, including 12
American citizens, and injuries to more than 4,000 individuals, among
whom were Muslims. A summary of the facts of this terrorist act can be
found on the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's internet web site:
www.fbi.gov/majcases/eastafrica.summary.htm

-- As a result of extensive criminal investigation, and working
closely with Kenya, Tanzania, and other nations, the U.S. Government
has indicted or filed criminal complaints against bin Laden and 16 of
his associates for their involvement in the two bombings and other
terrorist crimes. The U.S. indictment detailing the charges against
bin Laden can be found on the internet web site of the U.S. Federal
Bureau of Investigation:

Here's the link to the full story:
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2000/12/irp-001205-afgzss2.htm

These wouldn't be bad either...

Conspiracy to commit mass murder.

Conspiracy to commit acts of terror.

JM

[Airbornelawyer]

Inter alia,

Conspiracy to Commit Acts of Terrorism Transcending National Boundaries
(18 U.S.C. §§ 2332b(a)(2) & (c))

Conspiracy to Commit Aircraft Piracy
(49 U.S.C. §§ 46502(a)(1)(A) and (a)(2)(B))

Conspiracy to Destroy Aircraft
(18 U.S.C. §§ 32(a)(7) & 34)

Conspiracy to Use Weapons of Mass Destruction
(18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a))

Conspiracy to Murder United States Employees
(18 U.S.C. §§ 1114 & 1117)

Conspiracy to Destroy Property
(18 U.S.C. §§ 844(f), (i), (n))

Conspiracy to Attack Defense Utilities of the United States
(18 U.S.C. § 2155(b))

[Roguish Lawyer]

We should not try him. We should just kill him and bury his ass in a puddle of pig blood.

[Airbornelawyer]

By the way, Bin Laden was already indicted on the last item on that list, back in 1998. Quite effective, that was.

The others are what Zacharias Moussaoui was indicted on.

[dedeppm]

According to the FBI posters, UBL is wanted for "Murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States; conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals outside the United States; attack on a federal facility resulting in death."

As we saw in the moussaoui case, all the prosecution has to do is convince the jury that at least one death occurred due to actions taken by the defendant. Of course, he'll probably be guilty of all kinds of other crimes from money laundering and fraud to piracy to crimes against humanity.

While this is slightly off-topic, I did hear an interesting theory regarding his potential sentencing. To avoid allowing him to be seen as a martyr, simply throw him away to a supermax prison to live out the rest of his life in solitary. I want him dead as much as everyone else here, but this does seem to be an interesting idea. IIRC, it was very important for the Iraqi people to see Saddam checked for lice, etc. It did a lot to take away his aura of power and invincibility by showing he was just a man, and a dirty one at that.

Maybe a similar treatment of bin Laden could ensure that his mystique gets taken down a notch. He won't appear to be such a hero anymore living out his days in an orange jumpsuit. It's kind of a moot point, though, as it would be politically impossible to not execute him.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Right AL, that's what I was thinking - conspiracy. Isn't conspiracy very difficult to prove, especially given we have KIAd a lot of his initial leadership team?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Bin Laden has never murdered anybody by his own hand. I also doubt he's ever given a direct order to do so.

RL - what'd I say?

[Sdiver]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Bin Laden has never murdered anybody by his own hand. I also doubt he's ever given a direct order to do so.

But yet don't we blame Hitler for killing over 6 million Jews. But I seem to remember he never gave an order to do so. I thought it was two other Nazi officers that came up with the "Final Solution".

So if we were to have captured Hitler, could we have tried him for the Holocaust, or just that he invaded Poland and started WW II ??

[NousDefionsDoc]

I don't know. But Bin Laden is not the leader of a country with a standing Army.

[NousDefionsDoc]

http://www.asil.org/ilib/ilib0411.htm

HEY! I'm serious here damin it!

[Smokin Joe]

Screw detention, extradition, trials, imprisionment, and everything else that goes along with his prosectution. Smoke his ass as soon as he is found, don't give him the chance to surrender, then have some no name local state, "yes, I killed him". Confrim his DNA call it done.....convicted!

Convicted...for what charge you ask? I don't care, how about J-walking or conspiracy to commit J-walking or some other chicken shit charge. Either way i doesn't matter to me as long as he is D-E-D dead.

[Ambush Master]

As I've stated before, kill him and don't say a word about it. Just load the body into an aircraft, fly it out over the ocean and feed the fish!!! No martyr, just disappeared!!!

[Slantwire]

As I've stated before, kill him and don't say a word about it. Just load the body into an aircraft, fly it out over the ocean and feed the fish!!! No martyr, just disappeared!!!

Which course would be worst / best?

1. Public due process with trial, imprison him, and look soft
2. Public due process with trial, execute him, and have him as a martyr
3. Public "killed while resisting capture," have him as a martyr
4. "Disappear" him, and have years of rumored sightings and faked messages making him out to be some elusive, uncatchable survivor?

Opinions? :munchin

[TFM]

I could not fathom an American soldier being able to refrain from blowing this man's head off. If he saw a court room I'd be amazed and upset. He needs to see treatment similar to the Saddam boys. That was a pretty picture.:D

[Airbornelawyer]

Right AL, that's what I was thinking - conspiracy. Isn't conspiracy very difficult to prove, especially given we have KIAd a lot of his initial leadership team?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Bin Laden has never murdered anybody by his own hand. I also doubt he's ever given a direct order to do so.

RL - what'd I say?
I do not think conspiracy would be difficult to prove. There is an extensive body of evidence - bin Laden's audio and videotapes, al-Qa'ida's "official" statements, testimony of captured AQ members, etc. - as to the existence of the conspiracy. There is extensive evidence of the overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy (and some Federal statutes don't require an overt act anyway).

[Peregrino]

Which course would be worst / best?

1. Public due process with trial, imprison him, and look soft
2. Public due process with trial, execute him, and have him as a martyr
3. Public "killed while resisting capture," have him as a martyr
4. "Disappear" him, and have years of rumored sightings and faked messages making him out to be some elusive, uncatchable survivor?

Opinions? :munchin

And there you have the crux of the problem. We are fighting a war of ideas with both hands tied behind our backs. The "moral high ground" is essential when dealing with our society/culture and irrelevant to our adversaries. Until we can take the initiative away from the terrorists and their mouthpieces anything we do will probably be counterproductive. Personally I prefer Option 4 - ambiguity is opportunity (if we're willing to exploit it). And to get back on track - the conspiracy charges (if proven) are sufficient. People died, conspiracy is complicity, therefore he's guilty of Murder One. Don't we wish the real world were that cut and dried? Peregrino

[Goggles Pizano]

Why would we entertain a trial at all? If we do not approach this on a level our enemy understands then, as Peregrino aptly put, we lose a huge opportunity to gain initiative with regard to fear in the muslim community. Kill him, then humiliate his carcass in the most un-Islamic way (place it on display) ensuring that there are no virgins awaiting him and he spends his days looking for allah in western imposed purgatory.

[Peregrino]

Why would we entertain a trial at all? If we do not approach this on a level our enemy understands then, as Peregrino aptly put, we lose a huge opportunity to gain initiative with regard to fear in the muslim community. Kill him, then humiliate his carcass in the most un-Islamic way (place it on display) ensuring that there are no virgins awaiting him and he spends his days looking for allah in western imposed purgatory.


Drowning Bin Laden in lard and burying his stinking carcass wrapped in a pig skin is a simplistic approach that would ignite a worldwide firestorm. Welcome to 4th/5th Generation Warfare. We can't do what you're suggesting without compromising our legitimacy with our own populace. The American people (and those western societies who are along for the ride) will not tolerate it - period, end of discussion.

This war is all about hearts and minds. The strategic terrain (COG) is the American living room. If we can't educate and motivate the American people to support the armed conflict (which is truly nothing more than a necessary delaying tactic) then we have lost. We can fight the islamists to a standstill on the tactical terrain (the Middle East/Islamic states - the Uma) and hold them there until their society changes internally (a slim chance) or we can withdraw, give them the victory and the next French style riots will start in Detroit.

In order for the West to "win" (defined as a secure state without the threat of Islamist expansion/terrorism and progressive Islamic states with social/economic opportunities for their citizens participating as cooperative partners in world affairs) Islam has to change. We need to be prepared for a long fight - cultures take time to reform. The moderates/progressives have to displace/discredit the conservatives/recidivists. That's why I favor Option Four - it buys time for the required internal change without providing a focus for active/effective resistance to coalesce on.

I don't see any middle ground. This will be/has been going on for generations. Of course all we have to do to to get out of it (until they finish consolidating their position in the ME and move the jihad to America) is elect Shrillery in 2008. My .02 - Peregrino

[vsvo]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Bin Laden has never murdered anybody by his own hand. I also doubt he's ever given a direct order to do so.

With respect to the conspiracy, I don't think this matters. In general, once the agreement is proven, and some step (overt act) shown to be taken in furtherance of the conspiracy, an actor is on the hook for all the actions of his co-conspirators.

Depending on the statute and jurisdiction, an agreement can be proven indirectly, since a conspiracy is by its nature secret. Likewise, sometimes the mere act of making the agreement is enough to satisfy the overt act requirement. The collusive, secretive nature of conspiracies is viewed as such a threat to peaceful law and order that the bar to convict is relatively low compared to other inchoate crimes.

At common law, the aim of the conspiracy didn't even have to be a crime. Another example, LTC Oliver North was charged with conspiring to violate the Boland Amendment, which did not even specify criminal sanctions.

[Goggles Pizano]

Of course all we have to do to to get out of it (until they finish consolidating their position in the ME and move the jihad to America) is elect Shrillery in 2008. My .02 - Peregrino

I'd rather stick pencils in my eyes than see that broad as POTUS! I understand your point, and agree with you. Now I ask you this: How do we alter a religious approach even after discrediting/displacing those who exist purely for hate? Does that not encourage the jihadi's argument that the west must be exterminated, or brought to the heel of Islam?

[Peregrino]

I'd rather stick pencils in my eyes than see that broad as POTUS! I understand your point, and agree with you. Now I ask you this: How do we alter a religious approach even after discrediting/displacing those who exist purely for hate? Does that not encourage the jihadi's argument that the west must be exterminated, or brought to the heel of Islam?

What was that line from the Koran? Oh - Convert, Enslave, or Kill! It took the rise of the Protestant Reformation (relative moderates) and generations of sectarian violence (still not finished) to curb the worst abuses of Catholicism (strict conservatives) and allow the growth of secular/representative governments in Europe. (Of course the backlash to feudalism and the "divine right of kings" did give us Marx and socialism.) (GROSSLY SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF HISTORY - DON"T CRUCIFY ME :p ) The key is universal literacy and secular education. People have to know that alternatives exist before they can strive for them. That's why COIN programs have to include a civic action component heavy on education and exposure to the rest of the world. Look at what a simple TV with a choice of channels (not controlled by the local govt/religion) in the local coffee house can accomplish. FWIW - Peregrino

[Goggles Pizano]

Roger that. It would seem then that we are on the right path however long and agonizingly slow that haul may be. Crucifixion averted! LOL :D

[phalanx50]

I once heard it suggested that we give him a sex change and send him back to live in Iraq as a woman.


jake

[NousDefionsDoc]

Al,
I've been thinking about it. I think conspiracy is going to be harder than we think. Won't they have to have witnesses? Who's going to come forward?

[Warrior-Mentor]

Lobotomy anyone?

Not you NDD....for Bin Laden...leave him loose wandering as a mindless, drooling idiot...eliminates the martyr factor.

[Roguish Lawyer]

Lobotomy anyone?

Mine fixed me right up!

[Airbornelawyer]

Al,
I've been thinking about it. I think conspiracy is going to be harder than we think. Won't they have to have witnesses? Who's going to come forward?
You don't necessarily need witnesses. There is lots of other evidence, including but not limited to bin Laden's own public statements.

However, among AQ leaders, planners, financiers and middlemen, we do have in custody Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Hambali (aka Riduan Isamuddin), Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, Abu Issa al–Hindi, Ibn Al-Shaykh al-Libi, Abdul Rahim al-Sharqawi (aka Riyadh the facilitator), Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, Mustafa al-Hawsawi (aka al-Hisawi), Ali Abdul Aziz Ali (aka Ammar al Baluchi), Waleed Mohammed bin Attash, Hassan bin Attash, Adil al-Jazeeri, Hassan Ghul, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, and Abu Faraj al-Libi, among others.

[Warrior-Mentor]

You don't necessarily need witnesses. There is lots of other evidence, including but not limited to bin Laden's own public statements.

However, among AQ leaders, planners, financiers and middlemen, we do have in custody Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Hambali (aka Riduan Isamuddin), Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, Abu Issa al–Hindi, Ibn Al-Shaykh al-Libi, Abdul Rahim al-Sharqawi (aka Riyadh the facilitator), Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, Mustafa al-Hawsawi (aka al-Hisawi), Ali Abdul Aziz Ali (aka Ammar al Baluchi), Waleed Mohammed bin Attash, Hassan bin Attash, Adil al-Jazeeri, Hassan Ghul, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, and Abu Faraj al-Libi, among others.

Are you assuming they'll testify? How do you get them to talk when they're already willing to die?

[Airbornelawyer]

Are you assuming they'll testify? How do you get them to talk when they're already willing to die?
Did you follow Moussaoui's sentencing testimony, or the Saddam Hussein trial for that matter? Many of these people are eager to talk. They are convinced of their righteousness and believe they can win converts. Also, several have been cooperating with interrogators already.

[Warrior-Mentor]

Did you follow Moussaoui's sentencing testimony, or the Saddam Hussein trial for that matter? Many of these people are eager to talk. They are convinced of their righteousness and believe they can win converts. Also, several have been cooperating with interrogators already.

Both were chest pounding. I didn't see any of them "rat" anyone else out...

[groundup]

Are you assuming they'll testify? How do you get them to talk when they're already willing to die?
I am sure they talk(ed).

[Airbornelawyer]

Much of the intelligence we have gathered which has allowed rolling up other terrorist cells came from AQ principals who have talked.