Al-Suri, a top al Qaeda operative, is wanted as a ringleader in the 2004 Madrid Bombing. So how come when we arrested him, we put him into a safe house and refused to turn him over to Spain to prosecute? Is he, too, related to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia?
2007-07-10 08:36:49 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The nice neocon sheep want sources. Okay, how about this story from CBS News today:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/02/terror/main1569399.shtml
2007-07-10 09:10:08 · update #1
Mr. Hyzx: There's a world of difference between co-opting Baathist leaders to run the country and ignoring the request of a nation --Spain-- with which we have a treaty of Friendship, Commerce & Navigation that we produce a wanted criminal whom we have "in custody." The fact that we're not turning over al-Suri stinks even more (though with the same aroma) as commuting Scooter's sentence.
2007-07-10 13:07:09 · update #2
The Saudi Elite are an important part of Bush's base.
Unfortunately, Saudi Arabia is the epicenter of radical Islam.
2007-07-10 08:58:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It isn't. This story has a very big "MAY" be detaining this guy... it doesn't say it IS detaining this guy, and in the world of espionage you don't get direct information about the enemies activities from your allies. There is a lot of covert activity that might not be publicly revealed for years. I doubt very much this fellow is at a Caribean resort unless you consider the detention center at Guantanamo Bay to be one, which is probably where he is, and they are trying to extract information from him. This is a "messy" business - i.e., spying on terrorists - so sometimes what you think should happen doesn't - at least not in the public eye.
2007-07-10 09:45:02 · answer #2 · answered by Paul Hxyz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We tend to do that with folks we believe can provide us with information. Remember, Spain is no longer our allie in the war on global terrorism. They have, in fact, capitulated to the Al-Suri's of the world. Why would we hand over a source of intelligence and informtion over to them?
2007-07-10 08:41:54 · answer #3 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
poster above: the ACLU had nothing to do with the case. It was an international dispute. The US government made the decision, specifically the white house.
Now try answering the question honestly.
2007-07-10 08:41:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm, that's news to me that we're protecting this guy and putting him up in a safe house. Now, I know you've got sources to back this up, don't you?
2007-07-10 08:42:02 · answer #5 · answered by ks 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ask you liberal politicians sense they are the ones doing the protecting. Aren't you happy you are one of them?
2007-07-10 09:53:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
it is not USA protecting al Qaeda, Its ACLU!
I would like to see your sources!
2007-07-10 08:39:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Ah, another conspiracy theorist. Won't you guys give it up?
2007-07-10 08:48:58 · answer #8 · answered by plezurgui 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋