4 ms·
At this point, I think we both understand each others' positions for the most part. I just have two final questions for you, if you'll indulge me. Do you beli
by notdonspaulding 12y ago
At this point, I think we both understand each others' positions for the most part. I just have two final questions for you, if you'll indulge me.
Do you believe, given the person described in the article, that Sami Osmakac is either unwilling or unable to kill someone in the name of Islam?
Do you believe that this article proves that the federal government acted in bad faith in investigating and prosecuting him?
- dalke 12y agoI agree with your statement on mutual understanding. I don't believe the first question is relevant. Rather, thousands, if not millions of Americans will kill, or send others to kill, in the name of their god. We hear this in the popular press often, when people say that we need troops active in the Middle East to fight on God's side. Or when Bush, quoted by Chirac when Bush was trying to convince France to be in the Iraq war, said "This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins". That doesn't mean we prosecute people for being willing to do something. We do prosecute them (sometimes) for doing so, or for planning/conspiring to do so. Yes, I believe the federal government prosecution acted in bad faith in the following: > These transcripts were never supposed to be revealed in their entirety. The government argued that their release could harm the U.S. government by revealing “law enforcement investigative strategy and methods.” U.S. Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli not only sealed the transcripts, but also placed them under a protective order. Based on what was given, this information did not need to be classified and contained potentially mitigating information.