US Special Forces Raids in Somalia & Libya

[Minskaya]

By some accounts, Abu Anas al Libi had retired and was living a peaceful life in Tripoli with his family. Supposedly he was tired of traveling around with his family from one clandestine location to another. He was snatched from a car just after returning from a mosque.

The expectation is that he'll be tried in Federal court in NY. That's bad news for the agencies that would like to pick his brain clean. A defendant in Federal court has 5th Amendment and Miranda rights which will make it hard to to interrogate him. There was some speculation that he might be shipped off to Gitmo where there is no legal limits on what he can be asked or how often he can be interrogated.

From what I understand, al Libi was whisked to a US warship and interrogated. Was he Mirandized? I wonder how this facet will play out in a civilian court.

[JAD_333]

From what I understand, al Libi was whisked to a US warship and interrogated. Was he Mirandized? I wonder how this facet will play out in a civilian court.

Minnie:

I think they can interrogate him about AQ etc. and not read him his rights, so long as the information they get isn't used against him in court. A lot of information they could get out of him isn't necessary to prosecute him on the embassy bombing charge. The fact that he was already under indictment for his part in the bombing, says the prosecution believes it probably has enough evidence to win a conviction. At least, the grand jury that indicted him thought so. In short, there is no law says you have to read the accused his rights to question him. Not too tricky, is it?

[dave lukins]

Does the 5th apply to Terrorist?

[desertswo]

Does the 5th apply to Terrorist?

It does, should you choose to prosecute them. The thing I learned in my five years of counter-terror activity is that things like the USA PATRIOT Act, etc., are not so much geared toward gaining convictions, but rather "actionable intelligence." There's all kinds of reasons why that's problematic and having the NSA boroscoping one's sphincter doesn't help, but the bottom line is "no mushroom clouds over lower Manahattan"; period.

[Parihaka]

By some accounts, Abu Anas al Libi had retired and was living a peaceful life in Tripoli with his family. Supposedly he was tired of traveling around with his family from one clandestine location to another. He was snatched from a car just after returning from a mosque.

The expectation is that he'll be tried in Federal court in NY. That's bad news for the agencies that would like to pick his brain clean. A defendant in Federal court has 5th Amendment and Miranda rights which will make it hard to to interrogate him. There was some speculation that he might be shipped off to Gitmo where there is no legal limits on what he can be asked or how often he can be interrogated.

Depends how long before he's handed over. At the monument I believe he's being 'held lawfully in an undisclosed location' ?

[JAD_333]

Depends how long before he's handed over. At the monument I believe he's being 'held lawfully in an undisclosed location' ?

I think his rights come into play even when in military custody. But as I said before they can interrogate him without reading him his rights so long as the info he gives them won't be used in court. No doubt he is a potential fountain of info on AQ, much of which the prosecution probably doesn't need to convict him.

[Minskaya]

al Libi is aboard the USS San Antonio which is normally attached to the multi-national anti-piracy naval force off Somalia. Just a few weeks ago she off-loaded Marines at Aqaba and then docked at the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat.

Minnie:

I think they can interrogate him about AQ etc. and not read him his rights, so long as the information they get isn't used against him in court. A lot of information they could get out of him isn't necessary to prosecute him on the embassy bombing charge. The fact that he was already under indictment for his part in the bombing, says the prosecution believes it probably has enough evidence to win a conviction. At least, the grand jury that indicted him thought so. In short, there is no law says you have to read the accused his rights to question him. Not too tricky, is it?

The legal problem is not the embassy bombings per se, but the tainted potential for indictments/prosecutions of previously unknowns for unrelated crimes or conspiracies revealed during this interrogation.

[JAD_333]

The legal problem is not the embassy bombings per se, but the tainted potential for indictments/prosecutions of previously unknowns for unrelated crimes or conspiracies revealed during this interrogation.

Minnie:

I don't think there's a legal problem. Think of any damning info we might get from him as leads. Informer testimony is admissible in court. Miranda only applies to self-incrimination, not to incrimination of others. Those others will have their Miranda rights read to them, but those who give testimony against others don't need Miranda rights. They need bodyguards. :)

[ajhax]

And now the so called revolutionaries have retaliated.

BBC News - Libyan PM Ali Zeidan seized by armed men

[Doktor]

I am curious, how are these raids justified wrt international law and conventions?

Is there some sort of UNSC Resolution or a treaty between US and Libya and/or Somalia?

Edit: Just to make sure we are on the same page, I know US laws don't have prohibitions for such raids, tho IIRC they should be done with FBI involvement.

[Stitch]

It does, should you choose to prosecute them. The thing I learned in my five years of counter-terror activity is that things like the USA PATRIOT Act, etc., are not so much geared toward gaining convictions, but rather "actionable intelligence." There's all kinds of reasons why that's problematic and having the NSA boroscoping one's sphincter doesn't help, but the bottom line is "no mushroom clouds over lower Manahattan"; period.

One of the few things I've learned in my study of past US counter-terror strategies is the almost diametrically-opposed philosophies of intelligence-gathering between the CIA/NSA and the FBI. As you said, the pure intelligence agencies (CIA/DIA/NSA) are MUCH more interested in "actionable intelligence" in order to prevent a terrorist act; the FBI is (and always has been) much more interested in building a case against any potential or actual terrorists in order to prosecute them. Over the last decade plus, the CIA/NSA and the FBI have butted heads more than once over which philosophy is more important; one of the biggest sticking points has been the sharing of "actionable intelligence" that the FBI would rather not give to the CIA/NSA which could later be used for law-enforcement purposes (i.e.: prosecution), rather than taking pre-emptive action against a known or potential threat.

[Minskaya]

al-Libi arrived at the Stewart AFB outside of New York City yesterday and is expected to be arraigned today. The decision to remove him from the USS San Antonio was made when he refused food and water and he was diagnosed as suffering from chronic hepatitis.

[Minskaya]

Through an interpreter in the New York federal courtroom of Judge Lewis Kaplan, Abu Anas al Libi said that he understood the charges against him and plead not guilty. Judge Kaplan ordered al Libi held without bail, appointed attorney David Patton as his legal counsel, and ordered medical care. Courtroom reporters said the 49 year old al Libi appeared to be around 15 years older.

[Dreadnought]

Wait till the US gets done with him. He'll be much older.

[Doktor]

Wait till the US gets done with him. He'll be much older.

Actually, from now on, his health and life span can only get better.

He will get 3 meals a day, regular sleep, top notch healthcare (to what he is used to anyway), stress will reduce, he doesn't have to hide, etc, etc.