home

Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 05:07:10 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The parents of Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, jailed on terrorism charges in the U.S. (TChris outlines the case here and here and here)after his return from custody in Saudi Arabia where he claims he was tortured, are protesting the Justice Department's insistence that they sign a S.A.M. before being allowed to meet with him.

Had Lynne Stewart not signed a S.A.M., she might not be convicted and awaiting sentencing today. Civil Liberties expert Elaine Cassell writes:

....these restrictions are known as Special Administrative Measures (SAMs). Pursuant to regulations enacted in 1996, these restrictions can be placed on a federal prisoner's communications or contacts with the outside world -including visitors, and the media -- when the government believes "that there is a substantial risk that a prisoner's communications or contacts with persons could result in death or serious bodily injury to persons, or substantial damage to property that would entail the risk of death or serious bodily injury to persons."

The SAMs prohibited Stewart from having any contact with her client that the Department of Justice deemed to be outside the scope of "legal representation" and prohibited Rahman from having contact with anyone outside prison walls except his wife. The SAMs specifically restricted his access to the media.

Stewart agreed to the SAMs - having little choice, as it was the only way she could visit her client. What Stewart did not know what that after she signed the SAMs, the government began surveillance of her visits, first under the 1994 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant targeting her client, and then under specific regulations that allowed them to target her.

What kind of statements are examples of possible coded messages? How about this one (from the Times article above)

"If the family says he told them, 'The sky is clear, but it may rain tomorrow,' that could be a message to terrorists," the [Justice Department]official said. "They can go out and talk to the media about their son, his innocence, whatever they want, but they have to agree not to convey anything directly from him that could be construed as a message."

Abu Ali's father is resisting signing the SAM:

I will not sign any papers," Omar Abu Ali, the suspect's father, said Thursday after a court hearing in a lawsuit the family has brought against the United States government. "They're not allowing us to see him - we haven't seen him for three years, we fought this long to get him back, and we deserve to see him."

< Kansas Seeks Files on Abortion Patients | When a Jihad is Not a Jihad >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms | 24 comments (24 topical)
    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 03:54:04 AM EST
    Police state tactics. Constitutional right? What constitutional rights?

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 03:55:34 AM EST
    We have to get these people out of power. Election reform should be a priority. I don't believe these people can stay in power if the people are allowed to vote and the votes are counted and recounted.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 04:11:58 AM EST
    Election reform? You mean recounting the votes until you get the result you want. Election reform, my ass. We had an election and you simply can't live with the fact your side lost.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 05:25:43 AM EST
    So, his parents are protesting his confinement terms. Maybe they should have been protesting his terrorist activities, and then they might not have had to worry about any confinement terms.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 06:24:17 AM EST
    Posted by at February 25, 2005 06:18 AM Four years ago 3,000 of our citizens were murdered by like minded jihadist. Is it a stretch on our government's side to suspect that someone exhibiting carbon copy traits might - just might - be considering similar actions? Those who perished that awful day were not Republicans, not Democrats, but Americans. Have you forgotten the events of that God Awful day? Or were you at sleep somewhere. Fine; let's for arguement's sake state that our government should not persecute this individual, and let him pursue his life's goals as he pleases. What if he ends up committing a terrorist act against us? Will you be the first one to accuse the current administration of negligence, or like I've heard so much in this Blog "TREASON" for being asleep at the wheel? We - the whole of our nation - is at war against Global Jihad; a war that came to us that beautiful September morn'.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 06:30:25 AM EST
    What terrorist activities? It seems the best the government has is talking about shooting or blowing up the president, which is far as I know is not even a crime. Threatening the president is, but saying "I'd like to shoot or blow up the president" to a friend is not even a threat, it's not even a plan, and it's hearsay anyway, and probably extracted under torture. If it was, Clinton could have had thousands of right-wing idiots locked up during his presidency.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#9)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 07:17:14 AM EST
    The WTC attack killed more than only american citzens. There were people from 30 different countries in those buildings. You don't see those countries invading, detaining illegally and just plain killing "furriner's over it.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 07:32:35 AM EST
    To anon who answered Boquisucio: Absolutely awesome, dude! Your reply deserves greater circulation. Why doesn't this Administration use the same tools on these groups of traitors? Why do they hate America so?

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 07:34:09 AM EST
    Posted by at February 25, 2005 07:56 AM Persecute was used intentionally. Persecute from Latin: Follow Through; to afflict or distress. If Mr. Abu Ali is trully a Jihadist, he must be afflicted and distressed. For that is exactly what they did to us back on Sept 2001. That is the ugly truth of war. One that must be carried forth not with relish, but grim determination. On Civil Liberties and the Extreme Right elements in our society, I am 110% in agreement with you. The atrocities commited against our citizens by The KKK et alii, have no grounding nor justification. We must agressively persecute the murderers of those innocents in Okla. City. If we as a free society are to survive, those hate filled groups must be disarticulated and rendered irrelevant. However, we must be morally consistent on our righteous anger. To those who murdered 3,000 of our citizens four years ago must likewise be persecuted to the end. To castigate the Fascist in our society and give a free pass at the Jihadist on the other, would be morally dishonest. In regards to your last statement: We could have him on a plane to Egypt or Saudi Arabia tomorrow. I'm sure after 20 months of torture he would confess to something. Terry Nichols probably still knows things he isn't telling, let's torture him too.... Please spareme the hyperbolic jump in logic.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 07:46:50 AM EST
    Fine; let's for arguement's sake state that our government should not persecute this individual, and let him pursue his life's goals as he pleases. What if he ends up committing a terrorist act against us? Will you be the first one to accuse the current administration of negligence, or like I've heard so much in this Blog "TREASON" for being asleep at the wheel? I particularly like how you used the term "persecute" rather than "prosecute". Boquisucio: Since you seem willing to throw civil liberties out the window for any muslim who might harbor ill-will to this country, let me ask you a question. As you may recall, the second worst terrorist attack on American soil was carried out by White Christian Americans who were closely connected with far-right organizations like Christian Identity, the Aryan Nation, and the Ku Klux Klan. All these organizations, to some degree or another, refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the Federal Government which they consider irredeemably corrupted by the "Mud People", (anyone not of Western European origin) Jews, and the United Nations. They spend their lives waiting for the perfect moment to trigger a race war and install a white Christian Nation, which would presumably involve the extermination or expellation of all non-whites. These groups are obviously as dangerous as the Islamic Jihadists and have a long history of terrorism. In the case of the Klan they were the defacto government of a good part of this country for about 80 years where they ruled in a reign of terror. There were almost 5000 documented lynchings in this country between 1880 and 1965, and countless legal lynchings of minorities where blacks were executed or imprisoned for long terms on trumped up charges. Entire black towns were burned to the ground to drive the residents out of the county. The crimes went on and on with no fear of punishment. Should we treat these groups the same way as we are treating Al Qaeda? David Duke is in jail in Louisiana right now. We could have him on a plane to Egypt or Saudi Arabia tomorrow. I'm sure after 20 months of torture he would confess to something. Terry Nichols probably still knows things he isn't telling, let's torture him too.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 07:47:49 AM EST
    Deuce - Can you live with the fact your side is sending people to Saudi Arabia to be tortured?

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 08:36:48 AM EST
    In regards to your last statement: We could have him on a plane to Egypt or Saudi Arabia tomorrow. I'm sure after 20 months of torture he would confess to something. Terry Nichols probably still knows things he isn't telling, let's torture him too.... Please spareme the hyperbolic jump in logic. It's not a hyperbolic jump in logic. From all evidence in the case we are looking at, we have a moderately radically conservative muslim student who went to Saudi Arabia to study. In Saudi Arabia he was arrested in a roundup of students after a bombing that killed westerners. The Saudis apparently decided he had nothing to do with any terrorist group and wanted to let him go (which says to me that the only reason he was arrested in the first place was that he was an American--the Saudis just love blaming westerners for defects in their own society). At this point the Americans stepped in and said, "wait a minute, hold this guy for us, we think he is a terrorist." The Saudis, ever accomodating, and never caring much about things like evidence, due process, civil rights, or rule of law anyway, said what the heck and proceeded to hold this guy for 20 months. During that time he claims he was tortured, which no one denies, and has apparently been implicitly been admitted to by the FBI (comments by FBI agents that he didn't have fingernails anymore). Only when his parents sued the government for his release and the government tried to argue that the legal basis for holding him was secret did they finally bring him back to the states and charge him. And the best they can come up with is that he apparently discussed with a friend vague plans to kill the president. Whether they could shoot him or blow up his car. And apparently the person he discussed these "plans" with is now dead. If this is what constitutes a crime in this country then we are all in danger of losing the freedoms this country stands for. I posited my question because I hoped by pointing to the extreme right in this country you would realize how ridiculous your position is. My best friend's brother moved to Colorado several years ago and fell in with Christian Identity. He holds some pretty scary opinions and has quite an arsenal. But he is not actively plotting to hurt anyone, and as long as all he is doing is ranting and complaining about the government he is entitled to his opinions. I disagree with practically every word that comes out of his mouth but he doesn't belong in jail. That is what this country is about, the right of people to have repellant opinions as long as they do not cross the line to antisocial actions.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:41:47 AM EST
    insulting comment deleted

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:47:04 AM EST
    Attention- Lefties on this board. Please continue to go overboard defending Ali, who, while you have no idea, may very well have been an Al-Queda agent here in the US. Go nuts, of course he's innocent, the government is out of control again, etc. Do it loud, do it publicly... Attention- Righties on this board. Please continue to go overboard condemning Ali, while you have no idea, may very well been a completely innocent if somewhat radical, young man here in the U.S. Of course he's guilty--he's an arab, his parents are Saudi, and he went to college in Saudi Arabia. The government is perfectly justified in locking him up in a foreign country that is known for its gross violations of human rights--and hostility to christians--for almost two years without charges or access to a lawyer. Just don't go running to the ACLU when a couple years from now after some right wing group out of Idaho blows up a federal building the government decides that allowing a bunch of rednecks to run around the woods plotting race wars really isn't a good idea and starts treating homeschoolers like they are treating Ali.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:48:43 AM EST
    while you have no idea
    Either do you. In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty. Nothing has been proven in this case yet. I think you confuse "left wingers" love of freedom and American ideals with terrorist sympathy.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:48:44 AM EST
    It wasn't that insulting--more ignorant than anything.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:55:07 AM EST
    And what's up with the board? Somebody says something you people don't agree with around here and the comment gets deleted? I thought this was the free speech crowd (although I really knew it was the "selective" free speech crowd). Typical left wing hypocrites. Free speech is good if it's the speech we want to hear....

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:57:44 AM EST
    MB, this is not a board. This is not a free speech zone, there are commenting rules. Number one is no personal insults, no name calling and no profanity. Number two is no chatterers and no hijacking of threads. Please visit another blog. You won't like it here.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 10:59:57 AM EST
    Frederer, it would be much appreciated if you would please keep your comments shorter. Bandwidth is expensive. Thanks.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 11:00:00 AM EST
    MB, this is not a board. This is not a free speech zone, there are commenting rules. Number one is no personal insults, no name calling and no profanity. Please....I was so not out of line. Even your fellow board members would agree. Accept dissenting opinions. What's wrong with you?

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 11:03:57 AM EST
    We accept dissenting opinions that are expressed without rancor and hostility. You are crossing the line. You are also limited to four comments a day.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 11:06:27 AM EST
    Sorry, I'm just really angry about this.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 12:01:25 PM EST
    Freder, Your rambles on the high and mighty though shall not afflict is fine and dandy. But my central question remains unanswered. Obviously you are happy to hammer our homegrown fascists, but why are you so prone to giving a pass at equally violent jihadists? Do a morality gut check, and get back to me will you.

    Re: Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms (none / 0) (#24)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 07:50:06 PM EST
    Cassel has a good article, trying to make stew from thin broth. However, she does explain that Stewart was not zealously defending the terrorist in a trial. There were no trials. As I said. She was merely facilitating his communication with terrorists, which she had undertaken not to do. That she committed no terrorist act, nor that none can be laid at the door of the communication are not relevant. She lied about the agreement, and, as we know, she thinks violence against capitalist systems is good, so the lack of violence resulting from her help must have been a disappointment. It's the thought that counts, especially in conspiracies. She is a thoroughly vile piece of work who favored Stalin and Mao, and now signed on with the worst murderers in sight. BTW, Timothy McVeigh was not a member of any homegrown fake-religious terrorist group, however much you like to bash Christians. Jeez. Can't you get it straight. This nonsense does not fool anybody, which means you get nowhere, and it makes you look bad, which means there is a downside with no offsetting upside. I told TL in one communication that I felt I was providing a service. I keep telling you that you're not fooling anybody and so you might modify your moonbattery to a level possibly credible to the terminally clueless. But I guess I've failed.

    Abu Ali's Parents Protest Confinement Terms | 24 comments (24 topical)