Lawyers for the Terrorists

I note at Larvatus Prodeo that their understanding of the War on Terror is all about legal interpretations of obscure points of law. The war to them is being fought in the courts but the innocents being killed and the military and Intelligence organizations trying to stop these deaths are fighting in a different theatre. Every time a terrorist is caught these lawyers cue up in their thousands to do their best to defeat the efforts of those doing the actual fighting. It’s as if they are defending Jihad Jacks right to change the world through force. Why? From The Age

In an interview, Thomas said he did not like al-Qaeda’s methods but said he trained with them for jihad (holy war) and “to make America change its ways”. This could be done only by force, Thomas had said. He said he had been at close quarters with al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and had been told that bin Laden wanted an Australian to work for him in Australia locating military installations. Thomas said he had been told to return to Australia to work and create a cover. He said he had heard of a plan to bring down a jet with the Pakistani president on board and a plan to break a detainee out of Guantanamo Bay. He had been given $US3500 and an air ticket home to Australia. Thomas had falsified his passport to make it appear he had not been in Pakistan before the attacks of September 11, 2001, Ms Morrish said. He had been arrested trying to leave Pakistan in January 2003 with a falsified passport.

I don’t see the problem. If he admits to the above then lock him up. But the lawyers want him free claiming evidence;

…. was allegedly based almost entirely on evidence extracted under torture in a lawless Pakistani military prison without the presence of a lawyer.

Torture has been so devalued over the period of the waging of this war that every interview in CSI Miami and/or New York could be classified as ‘evidence extracted under torture’ let alone the antics of the police in old shows like Homicide. As I understand it, the quote from The Age wasn’t extracted under ‘torture’ in Pakistan by some S&M Specialist; it is a record of interviews conducted by Australian agents. Defence say Jihad wasn’t acting voluntarily;

Jihad Jack’s senior counsel,Lex Lasry, QC, said an interview conducted while Thomas was held in custody in Pakistan in March 2003 should not have been allowed into his Supreme Court trial. He said Thomas was not acting voluntarily when he gave the interview and he had no access to a lawyer, in breach of the Commonwealth Crimes Act.

Commonwealth DPP says he was;

Wendy Abraham, QC, for the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, said Australian Federal Police agents tried to get a lawyer for Thomas but were thwarted by Pakistani authorities. She told the Court of Appeal that police informed Thomas he had a right to a lawyer but one could not be provided. He was given a choice about whether to take part, Ms Abraham said.

He agreed to the interview …he admitted his involvement with al-Qaeda. Good enough for me.