Exactly who is a terrorist?

Marwan Jabour, a Palestinian, spent more than two years in CIA custody, mostly in Afghanistan, during which time he said he was stripped naked, chained to walls, bound into painful “stress positions,” sleep deprived and relentlessly interrogated. He told his story to reporters at the Washington Post, relating his arrest and incarceration in “black sites,” a system of secret CIA detainment centers in countries around the world.
Upon Jabour’s arrest, a U.S. official described him as “a committed jihadist and a hard-core terrorist who was intent on doing harm to innocent people, including Americans.”
The CIA released Jabour on June 30, 2006, just after the Supreme Court rejected the U.S. government’s assertion that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to prisoners such as Jabour. The article states that there is no U.S. government record available that shows Jabour was ever detained.
Congress must take a stand for human rights to ensure that American operatives don’t add more terror to the war on terror.
Posted by Patrice Hein

56 Comments

  1. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:12 am | Permalink

    So – let me get this right…a guy who admits he willingly aided AlQaeda and trained in Jihadist camps was detained and some liberals are DEFENDING HIM???

    Anything for a story that bolsters emotions AGAINST allegiance to one’s country….sheesh….how low have we sunk?

    How does the Left justify holding up Ameica’s enemy as some poor misunderstood chap? He claims he was ‘naked with two blankets.’ lol If he had blankets to wrap around him – was he really naked? That’s like saying I’m naked UNDER my clothes…

    Here is a quote from the article describing his treatment:

    [terrorist quote]…”About six weeks into his stay, he was issued a pair of pants. Later he was given a T-shirt, then shoes, a Koran and finally a mattress. Jabour said prison conditions slowly improved: Air conditioning was installed; a library was built and stocked with books in Arabic, Urdu and English. Well-behaved detainees were rewarded with movie nights, in which such Hollywood blockbusters as “Titanic” were screened. A deputy director of the facility taught Jabour how to play chess and gave him pencils and paper. Jabour used to draw pictures of trees and grass, which he hung in his windowless cell.

    Jabour recalled with fondness the prison director, a man named Charlie. “He told me, ‘Marwan, we need information — if you cooperate, that is good.’ I told him I wasn’t hiding anything and was not a dangerous man. He told me that they didn’t want to use force but would if they had to. I told him I wouldn’t lie to him.”

    Jabour began to receive better food, including pizza and Snickers and Kit-Kat bars.”[end terrorist quote]

    Can you believe our tax dollars are going to buy these guys pizza, Snickers and Kit Kat bars? It appears the only abuse came from Palestian guards, and he was only chained while the house was being turned into a quasi-holding facility. His treatment by Americans sounds pretty darned good.

  2. Posted March 12, 2007 at 7:54 am | Permalink

    Definitely sounds like some Liberal ACLU types were there to help him back to the terrorist world.

    I wonder if these same so-called do gooder people would have done the same thing to Nazi prisoners of war during WWII.

  3. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    They probably would have, Khan. I can’t figure out why some folks fall so easy into a self-loathing frame of mind.

    They have some deep-seated emotional need to undermine the nation that feeds, clothes and houses them, and they feel justified in trashing our citizens and those who protect us – in order to uphold a piece of trash like the terrorist giving the interview.

    Our Founders are rolling in their graves…..

  4. .morg
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    ” undermine the nation that feeds, clothes and houses them,”

    Are u some kind of commie? I feed clothe and house myself. I don’t recall the republican party leaving a food basket on my doorstep. Paying my property taxes or anything else for that matter.

  5. TRACY
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    DOT, I sent ya’ an email at the address you got with your name here.

  6. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 8:46 am | Permalink

    Don’t be obtuse, morg.

    You could work just as hard in a third world country, or under a dictator, and you would have NOTHING.

    This country GIVES you the opportunity via our laws and the Constitution.

    You OWE your allegiance to this country.

    Why, would ANYONE take the side of the enemy of their country, unless that enemy could provide them with more than they currently have?

    Would you be better off under Al Qeada?

  7. .morg
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    gs,Al Qeada would have about as much luck here as were having in Bagdad. How many armoured divisons do they have? Ships? fighter aircraft? What are there 30k-40k total in AQ.? Hows that work out 300 million divided by 40k. Thats one terrorist for 7500 of us.I did my 4 years for uncle sam. I’ll call it even. Don’t like my attitude sorry.

  8. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    Well, morg, they did pretty well on 9-11, didn’t they? They not only took out nearly 3000 of our citizens, but they crippled our entire economy, they spread fear in the hearts of our people, and they started a war in the Middle East.

    Using YOUR figures comparing Al Qaeda to our population, and using 9-11 as an example of the fatalities they can effect, that makes one terrorists capable (in theory) of killing 158 Americans.

    So – if there are only 30,000 Al Qaeda, then the risk of death, should they find their way to our shores stands at 471,000 American deaths.

    That sounds like a lot to me.

    Tell me again how they’re hamless…..?

  9. writerdog
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    To paraphrase a cadet from west Point that was interviewed in Kopell’s “War of our children’s children”.“The fight is not against terrorism it is for the American soul! Torture, denying right and due process serves only to aid the enemy. If we say that since we are fighting a different kind of enemy, we are allowed to undermine the moral fabric of this nation. The enemy has successes in tearing down the United States, the world will see we only pay lip service to our principals”.

  10. .morg
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    19 guys and they are dead gs.Yes it was a spectacular hit.Yes alot of innocent people died.

    We were spending 400 billion a year on defense, right? How did that work out? Didn’t stop anything. Our borders are porous, if they wanted to come they would. About 8000 illegal aliens walk in everyday.They could easily be terrorists.

    If you want to worry please do. Were doing a wonderful job of grinding down our military. Couple that with the amount of cash we have to borrow. How long do you think we can keep this up.

  11. hon_jr
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    What self-righteous idiots. This is no admitted terrorist. This is a man, a human being, who was wrongfully detained, mistreated, and who barely escaped not ever getting released, since there is no publicly available record of his arrest.

    Where are the REAL patriots? This country was founded by patriots who fought the kinds of crimes Bush & Co. are committing. Whatever happened to Habeas Corpus? Basic human rights, that Americans have fought and died for over centuries, and for which the Revolutionary War was fought, are being trampled on or discarded completely, by King George W.

    Patriots, rise up! Fight the loyalist redcoats like GSh#$@%^ and Republi-Genghis-Khan ! If you truly believed in our country, you’d fight for this man’s HUMAN rights, terrorist or not! Justice can be achieved without inhumanity.

  12. Posted March 12, 2007 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    GS, IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HAPPENED ON 9/11! Those associated with Al Qaeda who are NOW in Iraq were attracted there by Bush’s occupation of that country.

    People with your attitude, your easily-convinced mind, and your tactics are much more frightening to me than the innocents dying in the Middle East.

    Are you a terrorist, GS?

  13. Posted March 12, 2007 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    But shit man, with a name like “Marwan Jabour” he’s guilty.

    Marwan was the terrorist’s name in 24 a couple of seasons ago. And that pussy offed himself.

  14. J R
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    Guilty because of his name?

    Oh yeah, that’s the America I wanna live in.

    This is shameful.

  15. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    “…that Americans have fought and died for over centuries, and for which the Revolutionary War was fought, are being trampled on or discarded completely, by King George W.”

    Pretty serious charges. Even impeachable. How’s that coming?

  16. Posted March 12, 2007 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    AND….I’ll bet Marwan is a HOMOPHOBE!!!!

  17. Posted March 12, 2007 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    Linda the link below shows how the name Al Qaeda has evolved. In different countries they were called different things. They had a history in Iraq long before the Iraq war. Terrorists don’t need a reason to be they are terrorists because they hate – you and me – anyone who is not one of them. This fact is continually overlooked by peaceniks. We didn’t create terrorism, we are not strengthening it but defending ourselves.

    The leftist view in our nation is to roll over and play dumb and hope they won’t hurt us to much.

    Our children are the real victims. We are teaching them that the US is the real culprit. In the 60’s a well know communist leader said ” I can conquer the US without firing a shot. Just give me one generation of your children” We are doing just that with this attitude. Just my humble opinion.

  18. HardTruth
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Tim McVeigh was a terrorist. Coulter worshiped him.

  19. .morg
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    “Our children are the real victims. We are teaching them that the US is the real culprit.”

    I never have understood this. What is it we are teaching them. Who is teaching this. Please site examples.

  20. Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    You can get anything you want at Alice’s Restaurant . . .

  21. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    That was horrible. If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.

  22. Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    Coulter “worshipped” McVeigh? Really? If so, she was quite wrong on that account.

  23. Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    WSC–

    I can’t tell if .morg is singing or not.

    If he is, he’s singing very quietly . . .

  24. J R
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    ksgrm

    My kid is more threatened by people who think like you than he is by any “scary terrorist”. You can BET I teach him that.

  25. Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

    I feel sorry for your kid, JR.

  26. Posted March 12, 2007 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    ksgrm: “Linda the link below shows how the name Al Qaeda has evolved. Linda the link below shows how the name Al Qaeda has evolved.

    The leftist view in our nation is to roll over and play dumb and hope they won’t hurt us to much.”—————

    You didn’t post a link, but that’s fine. I guess someone who is able to decide what the view of many people might be and further decide many people are ALL alike might post a link I don’t have time to read anyway. I’m busy singing.

    Man came in said, “All rise.” We all stood up,

  27. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    heheheheheheheh linda!

  28. Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    Hardtruth: I just don’t think this is true about Ann Coulter. I do think that she made one of her lame jokes about ‘to bad he didn’t blow up the NY Times building’ or something to that effect. I could be wrong. Can you show me where this is substanstiated.

  29. Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda_in_Iraq

    Sorry about the link Linda. WHile you are singing try not to drink the kool-aid. I’m not telling anybody what to think I would challenge anyone to educate themselves to the real truth and not let the media shape their thoughts. Anyone who things Bush created terrorists has been living in a bubble for the last 20 years and is a real threat to freedom.

  30. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Ann Coulter said that the ONLY problem she had with Timothy McVeigh is that he did not attack the NYTimes building.

    In other words, she had no problem with domestic terrorists.

  31. Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    things should be thinks.Grm

  32. Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

    WS, granted that was a dumb tasteless jokes. But I am offended every time Bill Maher opens his mouth so I guess everyone is entitled to free speech.

  33. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

    The exact quote for those that would accuse us of making it up….

    “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.”

    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/ann_coulter.html

  34. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    I don’t recall Bill Maher suggesting that someone rent a Ryder truck, fill it with fertilizer and park in front of the Fox News building.

  35. Posted March 12, 2007 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    ‘We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it’s not cowardly.’

    WS This quote from Bill Maher offended me much more that the quote from Ann Coulter. To imply that is somehow worthy of respect to kill thousands of people is very offensive to me. This was cowardice of the worse kind. IMHO

  36. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    LInda – I know the 911 attackers were not associated with Iraq. But, you would admit Al Qaeda IS our enemy, right? If so – why not continue to fight them now that we’ve got them in Iraq? Since we’re already there, and all.

    JR – Nobody said the guy was guilty because of his name.

    But the man DID admit to training in Jihadist Camps AND he admitted to aiding Al Qaeda. That, alone makes him worth detaining.

  37. J R
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    Read again GSheridan

    “SOB” said the guy must be guilty because of his name.

    That is what my post addressed.

    ksgrm

    Context.

    Maher was pointing out that terrorists have the strength of conviction to die for their cause. You might not LIKE that cause. But this does not diminish the fact that they are willing to die for it.

    This brings us to the underlying question of who is a terrorist.

    If they are serving US interests we call them ‘feedom fighters”. If they are against US interests we call them terrorists.

    Maybe we should stop encouraging terrorism for ANY cause. Even our own.

  38. HardTruth
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    The alQ’s we are fighting in Iraq are the new ones we have created. There are many more alQ’s today than there were four years ago.

    MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

  39. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

    Well, his name obviously isn’t a measure of his guilt – but his actions are….or at the least they are cause to detain him.

    That was what happened. He was detained and questioned.

    Except for the Palestinian Guards, the man was treated MORE than reasonably.

    I can’t figure out why the media would try to use his incarceration as a slam against the US, when the man admitted being in cahoots with terrorism.

    Who’s side is the media on, anwyay?

  40. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    HardTruth, we didn’t create ANY terrorists.

    That’s like saying we create murderers just because we catch some and lock them up.

    A person has to have a specific mindset to devote his life to killing children and innocents. It the parents who raise those children to think it is an honor to die while slaughtering innocents that create terrorism – not the folks who are fighting against it.

  41. Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

    Terrorists are those who feel that they are absolutely right. They have no respect for life, theirs or anyone else’s. One of the problems with Bush’s Iraq policy is that he didn’t realize this early on. When the enemy thinks nothing of hiding weapon hordes, armed terrorists, etc… in hospitals, orphanages, schools, private homes… it’s hard to beat them when they put a bullseye on those most vulnerable.

    To me real cowardice is when you hide behind the skirt of women and children – the weakest parts of their society. This is an extension of what happened in the WTC bombing. Their enemy was not the passengers on those planes. So what they did exposed them for what they have always been – cowards. IMHO

  42. GSheridan
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Yes, ksgrm, they are the lowest form of coward alive. They target the most innocent among us. They refuse to wear a uniform and identify themselves, and they hide in homes where many children live in an attempt to keep their sorry asses from being caught.

    They are truly despicable.

    And this guy complains after he got a library, Snickers bars, and a Koran.

    ….sheesh….

  43. J R
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    Perspective ksgrm

    Some of the actions of Colonial Americans in the Revolutionary war are very similar to what you describe.

    You do KNOW that our own CIA trained and assisted Osama bin Laden right? He just sorta went rogue.

    I don’t think we’ve got a right to impugn terrorism as long as we are subsidizing it.

  44. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

    More news to make the Libs sad.

    “The security crackdown has seen a decline in execution-style killings, random shootings and rocket attacks,…”

  45. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    “I don’t think we’ve got a right to impugn terrorism as long as we are subsidizing it.”

    jr, you are a fine example of the Libs. Keep it up!

  46. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    We were all for terrorism when the Contras were trying to overthrow the democratically elected government of Nicaragua. If we are all about democracy and eliminating terrorism, why the hypocrisy?

  47. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

    ws = Marxist lover

  48. Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

    ws=neomarxist

  49. Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    I will be the first to say that our government in totality does not make much sense .

    They impose high taxes on tobacco products, label it as a health hazard, prohibit it from being used in public places, and then file huge lawsuits because someone dies from using it.

    Don’t get me wrong. My father died from lung disease because he had smoked since age 8. I am not for encouraging tobacco use. Just pointing out that our government when viewed from a distance doesn’t make a great deal of sense.

    We have in the past subsidized some real sleaze bags but we have to look forward. We can’t repair the past but we have to prepare for the future.

    This by the way is another reason I don’t want to put the government in charge of my health care.

    They are incapable of running an efficient program. The overhead is to high.

  50. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    So I can see that the whole “invade Iraq to spread democracy theme” was total bullshit, according to Fleet and SOB.

    The people of Nicaragua elect a left wing government and the Republicans decide that it isn’t good enough, so we encourage Nicaraguan to commit treason against their fellow countrymen?

    Hmmmmm……

    Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican.

  51. AaronS
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

    I understand the strong feelings on this topic about terrorism and our enemies, but I would like to put forward a thought. There is nothing wrong with loving the homeland and staunchly defending her. It is what has been done for millions of years and it has kept countries free and prosperous.

    But times are begining to change and humans are accepting that they are not just here for pleasure but that they might make a difference in the lives of their fellow man.

    Who drew the lines that divide our world into separate countries and who said one life was worth more than another because of the land they dwell in? Are you basing your justification upon the Bible or other holy book? Because there are many holy books all with different ideas about who is the most valuable.

    You have a bond with countrymen because they live within your borders, but all of mankind live within the earth’s borders. I have a hard time thinking God would support some of His children in the killing of His other children.

    It is not treason to want all our brothers to live in peace. Not if we view the Earth as our home.

  52. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    “I have a hard time thinking God would support some of His children in the killing of His other children.”

    The Bible is full of it. Kumbaya.

  53. WSClark
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    “The Bible is full of it.”

    …. and that makes it okay, Fleet? The Bible says that killing the Phoenicians is justified and now we justify killing Nicaraguans, Iraqis and Palestinians for that reason?

  54. HardTruth
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    Fleet is one of those who would justify genocide of “inferior peoples” to make living space for the Master Race because Joshua did the same.

  55. fleettwood
    Posted March 12, 2007 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    I was only pointing out the fallacy of aaron’s statement.

  56. Posted March 12, 2007 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

    Aaron how would you decide who should live and who should die? To the victor has always gone the spoils. When we were attacked on 911 I realized that we could no longer go on thinking that because we were a super power we would be left alone. I have people I love who will live on this continent long after I am gone. How do I tell them that I didn’t think freedom was important enough to fight for? Do we just give the keys to the terrorists?

    I’m just not sure how we could do any less that fight to keep the freedoms that others have died to protect.

    Has our government done things in the past that were not entirely honorable? They sure have. Does the end justify the means? That is the hard question we all have to answer.

    I think we have to fight on, to do less would go against the fight our forefather put up on our behalf. May those who come behind find us faithful.