|You are in: Talking Point|
Wednesday, 19 June, 2002, 09:18 GMT 10:18 UK
How should the US treat terrorist suspects?
BBC correspondent Paul Reynolds answered your questions about the "dirty bomb" plot and its implications in a live forum.
The American citizen accused of plotting a dirty bomb attack in the US has challenged the legality of his detention.
Abdullah al-Muhajir is being held as an enemy combatant and can be imprisoned without any case being brought against him until the end of America's declared war on terrorism.
His lawyer has filed a petition questioning the legal basis for his detention, saying it is unconstitutional.
Our correspondent says civil rights groups are accusing the US of changing Mr al-Muhajir's status simply in order to detain him indefinitely without bringing a charge.
It is not the first time that the Bush administration has been criticised for its handling of terrorist suspects.
Human rights groups were also critical of the treatment of al-Qaeda suspects being held in a military camp in Guantanamo Bay.
What do you think of the US authorities' treatment of terrorist suspects?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
I came to the USA because I felt, even as an immigrant, I had all the rights as a human being which my own country "may" not have provided. However, things have changed now and changed more significantly than most people are aware of.
Both the CIA and FBI have been eating up billions of our tax money. Had they been responsible and done their job properly, the USA would have been a much safer place.
Whatever the US does with its "terrorist suspects" will be scrutinised by all other countries, especially developing countries. As I see it, the issue is how to reconcile "human rights" with "detention without trial".
I've heard some people say that ideals have no place in war - meaning civil liberties can be ignored to protect the people. Personally, I think that it is during war that we need our ideals the most or we will loose everything that we are trying to protect. Therefore, I have to say that this man should be given a trial or released - not to protect his civil liberties, but to protect ours.
The United States won't be able to convince many nations that it follows the "rule of law" if it acts on the laws arbitrarily. As a free society, the citizens should be concerned when the government suspends citizens' protections without giving an adequate explanation for the reasons behind it. There are still thousands of people in the US held in custody without proper judicial representation. I have a problem with the US changing "the rules" like they're doing; it only breeds resentment and mistrust, and I fear that these tactics will only come back to haunt us later.
The US Government has produced no evidence that an actual dirty bomb existed or was in the process of being made. All we have is President Bush saying this guy is very bad indeed and needs to be locked up.
If people will be locked up for having the instruments of mass destruction, then why not arrest those with fertilizer or chemicals?
Sorry to say, many of you are grossly misinformed about American civil rights. As a political activist, I have spoken out against my government frequently, yet I have never been threatened with detention or other retribution. The key difference in Padilla's case is that he is a member of an organization that has demonstrated its intention to kill as many Americans as possible. This has nothing to do with dissent, and EVERYTHING to do with the graveyard that used to be the World Trade Centre.
Ronnie Smith, Scotland
Suspected terrorist. Is this to say that they are suspected of a crime. Surely if we honestly believe that they are guilty then let's call these people convicted.
I wonder if the depleted uranium used in armaments during the Gulf war, causing cancer and related diseases in Iraq do not come under the dirty bomb category? Detaining someone without evidence reflects the hawkish, siege mentality of American Government.
Very convenient that the US foil a terror plot a few weeks after being accused that they could have prevented the 11 September incidents. Only a few know for sure how serious this threat was.
How did they manage to catch this guy? Was he parading around the airport concourse wearing a sandwich board advertising his intentions? If not then the US crime prevention agencies must be on a roll. Maybe Bush should forget about his Department of Homeland Security brainstorm (which sounds like a Hollywood B-movie creation) and concentrate instead on improving the efficiency of existing agencies.
Well we have seen how the US works in justice: throw enough mud and hope some of it sticks and if it doesn't, arrest and detain the suspect anyway. Civil liberties in both the US and the UK have been thrown to the wind for the "war on terror".
Knowing the avowed agenda of al-Qaeda, releasing these people back into society or risking their release on any legal grounds would be tantamount to committing an act of terrorism ourselves.
Gareth C, UK
It doesn't matter what his status is. Until guilt or innocence can be proven 100%, he needs locking up in a maximum security establishment.
It is exactly this "Do as we say, not as we do" attitude that has caused some people to feel that their only redress to US policy is to commit terrorist attacks. Holding a man without charge will only inflame the situation and ultimately break up the so-called coalition.
To Mark USA, if your country is at war why has it not been officially declared by congress? Its a scam - investigate your history guys.
The American government does not recognise human rights when its activities are violating them. Innocent until proven guilty has been replaced by the concept "Guilty unless the government says otherwise." Like it not, after 11 September, the US has become a totalitarian state. It chooses any definition for POW as it sees fit. Similar methods were used by the likes of Stalin and Hitler. The only difference is it is carried out with the help of patriotic American media machines.
12 Jun 02 | Americas
10 Jun 02 | Americas
04 Jun 02 | Americas
30 May 02 | Americas
03 Jun 02 | Americas
17 May 02 | Americas
Top Talking Point stories now:
Links to more Talking Point stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
Links to more Talking Point stories
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy