Hoot said:
There is no evidence that our previous civil liberties, before the Patriot Act, posed a barrier to the tracking of potential terrorists.
Instead of throwing the problem back in our face, and asking us whether we've personally experienced discrimination, why don't those of you on the right tell us why we need this act?
<<<continued from above>>>
Another important tool we have in the fight against terrorists is our criminal justice system. Many of the Department’s prosecutorial efforts are familiar to you. There was Zacarias Moussaoui, who admitted his role in a plot to crash airplanes into prominent buildings in the United States - and that he was selected for this operation by Usama bin Laden. A penalty phase trial to determine his punishment will begin with jury selection in February. You will also recall Richard Reid, frequently referred to as the “shoe bomber,” who planned to detonate explosives on an airplane, and was sentenced to life imprisonment in Boston. And there was John Walker Lindh, the so-called “American Taliban,” who has been sentenced to twenty years in federal prison for joining the Taliban’s fight against the U.S.-led liberation of Afghanistan.
But those are just a few of our early, high-profile prosecutions. You may not have heard as much about some other, recent successes we have had in fighting the War on Terror. It is hardly the case - as some have sought to suggest - that we’ve disrupted only a handful of terrorist plots since 9/11. Far from it. I want to share a few with you this evening a few examples as a reminder that the threat is real - and the need for Americans to stay vigilant remains vital.
Just last week, on November 23rd, the Department of Justice obtained a conviction here in New York of Uzair Paracha, who was charged with providing material support to al Qaeda. Paracha was part of an operation to help an al Qaeda operative obtain documents to re-enter the United States to commit what Paracha believed was a planned chemical attack on the United States. Authorities who arrested Paracha found an al Qaeda associate’s driver’s license, social security card, and bankcard in the place where Paracha was staying. Paracha also had agreed to hold al Qaeda funds in a business where he worked until al Qaeda needed them for its operations.
Another verdict in recent days involved Ahmed Omar Abu Ali. Abu Ali was a resident of Falls Church, Virginia, a suburb of our nation’s capital, who received training in weapons, explosives, and document forgery from al Qaeda while in Saudi Arabia. When police searched Abu Ali’s home, they found tapes in Arabic promoting jihad and the killing of Jews, materials praising the 9/11 attacks and condemning U.S. military action in Afghanistan, and a book written by al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri advocating the violent destruction of democracy. The operations planned by Abu Ali and his co-conspirators included a plot to assassinate President Bush using either multiple snipers or a suicide bomb, as well as a plot to conduct 9/11-style attacks with planes flying from other countries to the United States. Abu Ali faces up to life in prison for his crimes.
Earlier this year, a jury in the Eastern District of New York convicted two Yemeni citizens, Mohammed Ali Hasan Al-Moayad and Mohsen Zayed. Al-Moayad was the imam of a large mosque and Zayed was his assistant. Together they collected money through the al Farook mosque in Brooklyn and distributed it to al Qaeda and Hamas in order to help train, equip, and arm jihad terrorists. The government made its case against the pair with the assistance of our German colleagues, who worked alongside the FBI in an undercover operation and traveled to Brooklyn to testify about al-Moayad’s and Zayed’s actions. The evidence at trial demonstrated that, during conversations with undercover officials, al-Moayad boasted that he had helped funnel some $20 million to Usama bin Laden and millions more to Hamas. On July 28 of this year, al Moayad was sentenced to 75 years in prison; Zayed was sentenced to 45 years.
In April of this year, the Department obtained the conviction of Ali Al-Timimi, part of what has been referred to as the Northern Virginia Jihad Network, a group of nearly a dozen individuals who attended the Dar al-Arqam Islamic Center just outside Washington D.C. The group participated in paramilitary training with the encouragement of Al-Timimi, a popular spiritual leader at the Islamic Center. During a meeting held after the 9/11 attacks, Al-Timimi encouraged his followers to go to Pakistan to receive additional military training and then join the fight against American troops in Afghanistan. Several made it to Pakistan where they received military-style training at violent jihad camps.
One of Al-Timini’s followers was later found in Gaithersburg, Maryland in possession of an AK-47 rifle and a copy of “The Terrorist’s Handbook,” containing instructions on how to manufacture and use explosives and chemicals as weapons.
I could go on with many more examples of our successful efforts to prevent terrorist attacks here at home.
These stories speak for themselves: The threat to our nation and our way of life remains very real. The terrorists are constant and unrelenting. Their plans are cunning, and their methods cold-blooded. As difficult as the task is, we must continue to bring the battle to our enemies every day - and do so on each and every front available to us.
On the most basic level, these cases - and others - highlight both the extent of our success and the reality of the continuing threat. They show that we’re doing the right thing…and doing it to great effect.
***
Notwithstanding our many prosecution successes, there are some challenges associated with prosecuting - and I use that word both broadly and narrowly - the War on Terror.
Terrorism cases are difficult to investigate and prosecute. These matters are both local and global in scope, impact intelligence community sources and methods, and implicate sensitive diplomatic relationships. From evidentiary issues relating to the chain of custody, to the availability of witnesses, to video linked depositions of foreign witnesses, significant hurdles unique to terrorism cases present real difficulties. That is one of the reasons why the government has utilized all the authorities at its disposal to address the new situations presented by the war on terrorism.
One such authority is the ability of the military to detain enemy combatants.
Justice O’Connor, writing for the Supreme Court in the Hamdi case, reaffirmed both the importance and the legality of the military’s long-established authority to detain enemy combatants captured on the battlefield during the course of hostilities, even if they are American citizens, to prevent them from returning to the battlefield and taking up arms against America once again. Justice O’Connor recognized, too, that it is consistent with our Constitution and the traditional laws of war that, quote, “a citizen, no less than an alien, can be part of or supporting forces hostile to the United States” and therefore be subject to detention during the course of hostilities.
Enemy combatants are held lawfully and for preventive reasons to protect America’s soldiers and America’s citizens. It would defy every past practice of war, not to mention common sense and sound policy, to release back into battle those whom we capture fighting against us.
Even so, the Department of Defense provides enemy combatant detainees privileges the likes of which no nation in history has ever afforded its enemies. The Supreme Court indicated that the government must provide some process, and the Department of Defense has. With Combatant Status Review Tribunals at Guantanamo, for instance, each detainee is entitled to a hearing, to present evidence that he believes might support his release, and to receive the assistance of a military officer in presenting his case. And a parole-type process called an Administrative Review Board provides persons established to be enemy combatants a chance, once a year, to be heard and released, even while a conflict is going on.
We can be proud of the procedural protections the Department of Defense has afforded our Nation’s enemies, but we cannot discount the danger these detainees continue to pose to us and to our servicemen fighting abroad. Of the hundreds of detainees released from Guantanamo based on a determination that they posed only a low risk to this country, the Defense Department has reported that at least ten have returned to take up arms against the United States.
It’s a further reminder that if we do not constantly engage the terrorists, I am convinced the terrorists will once again successfully bring the battle to our shores.
***
In addition to prosecuting terrorist in court and incapacitating enemy combatants, the Administration works to uphold the Rule of Law, protect the personal liberties and rights promised by our Constitution, and promote justice around the world. This obligation itself forms yet another front in the War on Terrorism - winning the hearts and minds of freedom loving people everywhere.
If we are to rally even more countries to our cause, we must continue to show the world that we are worthy of its trust. We must show that, while our enemies would kill innocent fellow Muslims celebrating a wedding in a hotel in Jordan, we are committed to respecting and honoring the innate value of all human life.
***
<<<continued below>>>