NationStates Jolt Archive

A man in Sweden who was angry with his daughter's husband has been charged with libel for telling the FBI that the son-in-law had links to al-Qaeda, Swedish media reported on Friday.

The man, who admitted sending the email, said he did not think the US authorities would stupid enough to believe him.

The 40-year-old son-in-law and his wife were in the process of divorcing when the husband had to travel to the United States for business.

The wife didn't want him to travel since she was sick and wanted him to help care for their children, regional daily Sydsvenska Dagbladet said without disclosing the couple's names.

When the husband refused to stay home, his father-in-law wrote an email to the FBI saying the son-in-law had links to al-Qaeda in Sweden and that he was travelling to the US to meet his contacts.

He provided information on the flight number and date of arrival in the US.

The son-in-law was arrested upon landing in Florida. He was placed in handcuffs, interrogated and placed in a cell for 11 hours before being put on a flight back to Europe, the paper said.

The FBI contacted Swedish intelligence agency Saepo, which discovered that the email tipping off the FBI had been sent from the father-in-law's computer.

The father-in-law has been charged with aggravated libel.

He has admitted sending the email, but said he didn't think "the authorities were so stupid that they would believe anything. But apparently they are."

He said he "couldn't help the US authorities' paranoid reaction".

I'm all for national security but arresting someone with 11 hours with absolutely no evidence but an email? Hell, I have some people I dont like, I should go to a public computer in a library and shoot the FBI an email about their connections to Al-Qaeda.

Ah yes,I can FEEL your increasing awareness about the incompitance of the US government. Your journey to the Libertarian side is almost complete!

I'm all for national security but arresting someone with 11 hours with absolutely no evidence but an email? Hell, I have some people I dont like, I should go to a public computer in a library and shoot the FBI an email about their connections to Al-Qaeda.

Personally I would like my government to take all threats seriously, it's better to be safe than sorry. If someone tips you off on a possible Al Queda operative, then damn right I want them to look into it. The person who is at fault here isn't the FBI, CIA, or Saepo, it's the Father in law fault.

The only person or group who seems to be in the wrong is the father-in-law, as, honestly, can the FBI afford to not take such information seriously? What happens if it isn't just a family spat, and is actually an honest to god terrorist? Can you imagine the Congressional inquiries on the matter?

Can you imagine the Congressional inquiries on the matter?

It would be a nightmare....

He has admitted sending the email, but said he didn't think "the authorities were so stupid that they would believe anything. But apparently they are."
Apparently being a self-righteous prick about refusing to admit that you were wrong is a Swedish thing.

The man was held for only 11 hours, considering the specific nature of the tip-off I'd say the FBI response was in due course.

if i were going to arrest someone because of an email, i would have at least took a background check on this person. i bet the guy who was arrested was non-muslim and had nothing to do with islam

Apparently being a self-righteous prick about refusing to admit that you were wrong is a Swedish thing.


It´s a very important part of our culture. :D

If he didn't expect the FBI to do anything, why did he send the email?

Hmmm, I wonder who I could anonymously accuse of Hoffa's murder if I have details on them like what make and model of car they're driving, the license plate number, their name, and their destination? Oh the power....playing law enforcement like puppets...

It´s a very important part of our culture. :D

Lek inte med utlänningarna. Förutom att vara åh, så lätt, så vet du hur förvirrade de blir och det behöver inte de stackars liven. Empatisera och löjla istället. :)

It's ridiculous that someone could fire off an angry email and have a person detained for 'only 11 hours'. Eleven freaking hours? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous, when there is no other evidence to go on.

As for not thinking that US authorities would be stupid enough...well that is just willful blindness on the part of the father-in-law.

It makes me think that the FBI are desperate to appear to be doing SOMETHING, and following any sort of lead at all might just be a moral booster.

It's ridiculous that someone could fire off an angry email and have a person detained for 'only 11 hours'. Eleven freaking hours? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous, when there is no other evidence to go on.

Foreigners in the USA have virtually no rights (seeing as the ones they tenuously have can be arbitrarily taken away and they can be denied habeas corpus to argue that they shouldn't be), so "ridiculous" was passed a long time ago. The really stupid person here is the one who took a trip to such a place as the USA.

If he didn't expect the FBI to do anything, why did he send the email?

Good point.

if i were going to arrest someone because of an email, i would have at least took a background check on this person. i bet the guy who was arrested was non-muslim and had nothing to do with islam

If he did, odds would be he STILL wouldn't be a terrorist, only in this case they'd likely ship him off to Gitmo and make his life a living hell due to sheer bigotry.

The man, who admitted sending the email, said he did not think the US authorities would stupid enough to believe him.

I lol'd.

As anyone who has travelled to the US in the past few years will know it's quite obvious that they've gone a bit crazy with national security, but in this case I can't see how anyone is to blame except the father who e-mailed them.

If he had been telling the truth and his son-in-law actually did have links to Al-Qaeda, and the e-mail had been ignored and an attack had taken place as a result the FBI would get blamed for not stopping it. Now they're getting blamed for taking it seriously? Yes, eleven hours is a long time, but an e-mail with specific details on the person and flight is evidence, even if it isn't much. If someone linked to a terrorist organisation really did have a change of heart and send an e-mail such as that to them, they would have to take it seriously. The person may have no other way of contacting them in time. It's not like the son-in-law was actually charged, the jailing was more of a precaution than anything. The fact that he got released well under a day later seems to show that it didn't take the FBI long to become absolutely certain that he was innocent. It looks more like the father-in-law was stupid for thinking that nothing would happen.

This post comes across as far more pro-American than anything I've said in years..

As anyone who has travelled to the US in the past few years will know it's quite obvious that they've gone a bit crazy with national security, but in this case I can't see how anyone is to blame except the father who e-mailed them.

If he had been telling the truth and his son-in-law actually did have links to Al-Qaeda, and the e-mail had been ignored and an attack had taken place as a result the FBI would get blamed for not stopping it. Now they're getting blamed for taking it seriously? Yes, eleven hours is a long time, but an e-mail with specific details on the person and flight is evidence, even if it isn't much. If someone linked to a terrorist organisation really did have a change of heart and send an e-mail such as that to them, they would have to take it seriously. The person may have no other way of contacting them in time. It's not like the son-in-law was actually charged, the jailing was more of a precaution than anything. The fact that he got released well under a day later seems to show that it didn't take the FBI long to become absolutely certain that he was innocent. It looks more like the father-in-law was stupid for thinking that nothing would happen.

This post comes across as far more pro-American than anything I've said in years..

I agree, but the fact remains the guy must be compensated - not by the FBI, but by the father in law. He must pay him all damages - the loss of the deal if there was one, the moral damage for the spectacle that he suffered through in the airport, and so on, up to and including punitive damages. I don't care if the old fart has to sell a kidney!

I can't believe that the FBI acted on only one piece of hearsay evidence.
Haven't they heard of a thing called reasonable doubt?

I can't believe that the FBI acted on only one piece of hearsay evidence.
Haven't they heard of a thing called reasonable doubt?

Reasonable doubt is for courts. What they did here inconvenienced the guy severely, but they did it based on some very specific information. The one at fault here is the father in law.

I agree, but the fact remains the guy must be compensated - not by the FBI, but by the father in law. He must pay him all damages - the loss of the deal if there was one, the moral damage for the spectacle that he suffered through in the airport, and so on, up to and including punitive damages. I don't care if the old fart has to sell a kidney!

Oh, how little you know of the Swedish justice system, its general discouragement of litigiousness and the very modest (we're talking generally in the area of €1000-€2000) amounts awarded in punitive damages. No, what this person has to fear are fines and imprisonment, which will probably sting much, much more.

Oh, how little you know of the Swedish justice system, its general discouragement of litigiousness and the very modest (we're talking generally in the area of €1000-€2000) amounts awarded in punitive damages. No, what this person has to fear are fines and imprisonment, which will probably sting much, much more.

In that case, the guy has the moral, albeit not legal, right to rob the man's house and take away all he lost. Can this case at least be taken into account when the custody issues arise?

In that case, the guy has the moral, if not legal, right to rob the man's house and take away all he lost.

If he wishes to be and an idiot and get prosecuted himself, then yes, he could do that. Or, he could present the criminal court with his demonstrable airfare expenses and demand to have those reimbursed as part of the judgement. Just 'cause he can't sue the man in order to make money off of this doesn't mean he can't have reasonable restitution.

Can this case at least be taken into account when the custody issues arise?

The woman's father's actions are not hers. Unless she somehow instructed the father do to this or became complicit in some other way, it is irrelevant to her.

Colour me surprised. Not that this happened, oh no. Surprised that more people haven't been taking advantage of the 'ZOMG TERRORISTS' paranoia in America.

If he wishes to be and an idiot and get prosecuted himself, then yes, he could do that. Or, he could present the criminal court with his demonstrable airfare expenses and demand to have those reimbursed as part of the judgement. Just 'cause he can't sue the man in order to make money off of this doesn't mean he can't have reasonable restitution.



The woman's father's actions are not hers. Unless she somehow instructed the father do to this or became complicit in some other way, it is irrelevant to her.

Well, will the courts include the fear of being sent to Gitmo? The loss of the money that the business trip was going to earn him? Etc?

Also, I'm aware that the woman's father's actions are not hers, but maybe something like a restraining order to keep him from seeing his grandchildren, on the grounds that he's clearly insane. And yes, in this case such a restraining order would only have the revenge function as far as I'm concerned. To make him suffer.

Well, will the courts include the fear of being sent to Gitmo? The loss of the money that the business trip was going to earn him? Etc?

If he can prove the costs incurred him, they will consider them and when it comes to the part about his "sveda och värk" ("pain and anguish") as its called in Swedish, they can most certainly consider that he had more than probable cause to fear greatly the actions of the USA government, but as I mentioned even with that the damages afforded for it would be very modest as the Swedish court system is loathed to become something people can use to make money off of - suing not for costs incurred (such as the plane tickets or the lost business opportunity), but for some nebulous "emotional distress" and hope to cash in. As I said, he can probably not expect that part to be over €4000, but most probably in the range of €2000.

Also, I'm aware that the woman's father's actions are not hers, but maybe something like a restraining order to keep him from seeing his grandchildren, on the grounds that he's clearly insane. And yes, in this case such a restraining order would only have the revenge function as far as I'm concerned. To make him suffer.

The man would have to request it and the wife (if she has co-custody, which she no doubt has) not oppose it, but unless the grandfather has proved a danger to the children it would probably not be granted.

Jeez, and I thought my parents' divorce was nasty...at least their families didn't involve the FBI.

Although if they had gotten divorced after 9/11, they undoubtedly would have, and it would be one of my family members in the newspaper for this.

Man fingers 'al-Qaeda' son-in-law to FBI

The 40-year-old son-in-law and his wife were in the process of divorcing when the husband had to travel to the US for business.

The wife didn't want him to travel since she was sick and wanted him to help care for their children, regional daily Sydvenska Dagbladt said without disclosing the couple's names.

When the husband refused to stay home, his father-in-law wrote an email to the FBI saying the son-in-law had links to al-Qaeda in Sweden and was traveling to the US to meet his contacts.

He provided information on the flight number and date of arrival in the US.

The son-in-law was arrested upon landing in Florida.

He was placed in handcuffs, interrogated and placed in a cell for 11 hours before being put on a flight back to Europe, the paper said.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22694982-5005961,00.html
Sources: Yahoo/AFP/Herald/Occ/ News.com.au

aww man.. this is what divorces are made of..

I do not quite understand the role of this FBI thing in that silly country where this is happenning.

Is it something like the SS (Schutzstaffel) in Hitler's Nazi Germany?

If you by some ill chance happen to dwell in that forsaken corner of the planet where the FBI operates, kindly elucidate.

I do not quite understand the role of this FBI thing in that silly country where this is happenning.

Is it something like the SS (Schutzstaffel) in Hitler's Nazi Germany?

If you by some ill chance happen to dwell in that forsaken corner of the planet where the FBI operates, kindly elucidate.

I was born and have been living in the United States 21 years, my parents much longer. I am by no means a blind patriot, our government is horribly corrupt and I believe HOmeland Security to be a move toward that one day possibly. BUT

In personal experience neither me nor my parents have had any known encounters with the FBI or anyone, neither have most of the people I know been subjected to any kind of surveillance.

In Germany, the daily life of a citizen regularly came into contact with the Gestapo and what I would call the military-police state forces. They actively watched, and observed.

The daily life of a United States citizen does not bring them into contact with a state military-police force, or the FBI. And the police to citizen ratio is VERY small compared to that too. Not to leave out electronic surveillance, but even then it is not often done actively to too many people.

Compared to Britain where public surveillance is becoming increasingly common but still does not equal the level of Nazi Germany, I would say that the US cannot presently be compared to Nazi Germany.

I do not quite understand the role of this FBI thing in that silly country where this is happenning.

Is it something like the SS (Schutzstaffel) in Hitler's Nazi Germany?

If you by some ill chance happen to dwell in that forsaken corner of the planet where the FBI operates, kindly elucidate.The White House -record breaking- stupidity has transcended most of the US organs..

you can see all over the place... FEMA, the Army, the Airports, the dept of Education, the Judges, the Attorneys, the Pundits.. etc etc

Bush has turned the War on terror (and by ricochet the FBI /DHS) in something like a Mickey Mouse operation + the power of the Gestapo + the insight of the Spanish inquisition.

Sources: Yahoo/AFP/Herald/Occ/ News.com.au

aww man.. this is what divorces are made of..

There was already a thread on this, either yesterday or the day before.

ETA: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=542240

Looks like the father-in-laws plan may have backfired. He's been charged in Sweden and could get as much as two years for defamation. linky (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071102/ap_on_fe_st/sweden_al_qaida_hoax;_ylt=A0WTUee2VSxH_J0ANAcsQE4F)

I can't believe that the FBI acted on only one piece of hearsay evidence.
Haven't they heard of a thing called reasonable doubt?

Any call to the police reporting a crime or crime in progress is supposed to be taken seriously, even if the report's a fake. I would imagine the FBI here has to operate under the same parameters.

I do not quite understand the role of this FBI thing in that silly country where this is happenning.

Is it something like the SS (Schutzstaffel) in Hitler's Nazi Germany?

If you by some ill chance happen to dwell in that forsaken corner of the planet where the FBI operates, kindly elucidate.
It's not even close.

The FBI, or Federal Bureau of Investigation, is simply a federal level police department of sorts. It handles federal crimes and such investigations. Nothing to worry about.

The closest the United States has to the Schutzstaffel is the CIA, or Central Intelligence Agency, and they're far tamer...not even close. There has been some recent extremely distasteful activity by the CIA, but it's not being accepted by the American populace and we WILL have those activities stopped.

Snip.

There must be something the man can do to wreak revenge... o_O

There must be something the man can do to wreak revenge... o_O

Email the CIA?

Though I personally think 2000 euros for 11 hours is a very reasonable compensation

Originally posted by Conservative Morality
Ah yes,I can FEEL your increasing awareness about the incompitance of the US government. Your journey to the Libertarian side is almost complete!

I can FEEL your dissent! It gives you focus... makes you...STRONGER...

It's not even close.

The FBI, or Federal Bureau of Investigation, is simply a federal level police department of sorts. It handles federal crimes and such investigations. Nothing to worry about.

The closest the United States has to the Schutzstaffel is the CIA, or Central Intelligence Agency, and they're far tamer...not even close.

I wouldn't be so sure...Sure the US law enforcement and intelligence agencies don't usually oppress US citizens arbitrarily but they can and do hold other people in inhumane conditions for arbitrarily long without legal protection.



Btw. while searching for this newsbit I came across this story:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=1c3c2036-bc39-40a9-a244-9d08aa4a5425&k=50351

He not only confessed in detail to both CSIS and the FBI, he also signed a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice in which he agreed to plead guilty and co-operate with FBI agents.

He is now being held at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, apparently angry that he is facing a sentence estimated at more than 20 years. SIRC's concerns revolve around the role CSIS officers played in his surrender.
..
..
On May 3, 2002, a small plane landed at Toronto's island airport. On board were several U.S. officials offering Mr. Jabarah leniency if he would co-operate. Without consulting a lawyer, he signed the papers and boarded the plane to New York.

U.S. officials say they learned valuable information from their interviews with Mr. Jabarah. Within months of his arrest, the U.S. captured his two bosses, Khalid Sheikh Mohamad, the planner of 9/11, and Hambali, planner of the 2002 Bali bombings.

He has admitted sending the email, but said he didn't think "the authorities were so stupid that they would believe anything. But apparently they are."

It's the American government, of course they're that stupid.

I wouldn't be so sure...Sure the US law enforcement and intelligence agencies don't usually oppress US citizens arbitrarily but they can and do hold other people in inhumane conditions for arbitrarily long without legal protection.



Btw. while searching for this newsbit I came across this story:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=1c3c2036-bc39-40a9-a244-9d08aa4a5425&k=50351


I'm aware of that. It's not something I tolerate and I am doing my best to work with others similarly minded to get it to stop.

But these activities are rare at best...certainly the FBI and the CIA are not like the Schuztstaffel and the Gestapo. If they were, our society wouldn't be as free as it is.

if i were going to arrest someone because of an email, i would have at least took a background check on this person. i bet the guy who was arrested was non-muslim and had nothing to do with islam

Mm, right. Do you remember John Walker Lindh, Richard Colvin Reid, José Padilla?

I agree, but the fact remains the guy must be compensated - not by the FBI, but by the father in law. He must pay him all damages - the loss of the deal if there was one, the moral damage for the spectacle that he suffered through in the airport, and so on, up to and including punitive damages. I don't care if the old fart has to sell a kidney!

Agreed. He willingly and maliciously made trouble for his son-in-law, wasted the time of Swedish and American authorities, and then has the gall to say, "I didn't think anything would happen." That's the sort of defense I expect from an elementary school child.

Looks like the father-in-laws plan may have backfired. He's been charged in Sweden and could get as much as two years for defamation. linky (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071102/ap_on_fe_st/sweden_al_qaida_hoax;_ylt=A0WTUee2VSxH_J0ANAcsQE4F)

Good.

There must be something the man can do to wreak revenge... o_O

Why? It seems the Swedish justice system has it well in hand. He's being held responsible for his actions.

Or do you think he should be whipped in the public square, and hanged thereafter?

I do not quite understand the role of this FBI thing in that silly country where this is happenning.

Is it something like the SS (Schutzstaffel) in Hitler's Nazi Germany?

If you by some ill chance happen to dwell in that forsaken corner of the planet where the FBI operates, kindly elucidate.

Google.

inside brackets = not original Quote(FBI/Gestapo compared to Britain) Compared to Britain where public surveillance is becoming increasingly common ...London CCTV ?

IMO London is the Mecca of street surveillance (not like tapping into personal mail or phones).. and I would say it makes-up for the uniformed Police not wearing guns.

There must be something the man can do to wreak revenge... o_O
It's a difference in punitive philosophies. Our large settlements are not, as it has turned out to be regarded, as giant 'paydays' to plaintiffs but rather to be punatives to the defendants. It is why settlements against corporations are so large. If a settlement of negligence against a company was $1,000 then negligence could be factored in. In fact, it has-the big to-do about the Pinto was not that it was dangerous, it was that Ford knew it was dangerous and had calculated that the lawsuits would be cheaper than a recall.

The problem is that in rewarding the large sum to the plaintiffs it has been regarded as a 'payday.' This is kind of a 50/50 thing, in that there are in fact people who view litigation as a payday and negligent parties play up this perception to turn opinion away from litigation-They don't even defend negligence anymore, just counter accuse greed even though greed is often how they found themselves in the defendant's box.

It seems that the Swedish system, from my limited understanding from what Fass is saying, approaches this problem by only allowing for compensation to be for concrete losses and instead applies the punitive action criminally instead of 'civilly' (in the awarding of moneys to another private party). So you can seek to punish, literally, someone rather than punish by levying a huge settlement. In this way suit cannot be brought simply because you think it might make you some coin but rather because you think you've actually been done wrong and someone needs to be punished.
Apparently being a self-righteous prick about refusing to admit that you were wrong is a Swedish thing.

Zing!

There must be something the man can do to wreak revenge... o_O

The Justice System is not there to exact revenge, but justice. If he wants his pound of flesh, he'll have to cut it himself.

Blood is thicker than water right? Yeah in hindsight you could all say "Oh sure I would tell the authorities if my (brother/sister/father/mother/uncle/dog etc etc) was doing illegal things" but would you really? Even I would hesitate to turn in my own family, and if the father was willing to turn in his son-in-law should be reasonable enough to investigate. They made the mistake of believing rather than the bigger one of potentially not. Well I say good for them for being on the alert.

if i were going to arrest someone because of an email, i would have at least took a background check on this person. i bet the guy who was arrested was non-muslim and had nothing to do with islam

Yes, because all terrorists are and look Islamic, and run around shouting ALLAH AKBAH all the time, dressed in white robes and turbans. While I'm sure that's a very comforting thought, it doesn't quite work in the real world. Do you think all burglars wear stripey shirts and Lone Ranger masks, carrying bags marked 'SWAG'? As other posters have said, you can't take risks with terrorism, a few false positives spending a few hours in a cell is better than even one false negative slipping through and blowing up a building.

I'm all for national security but arresting someone with 11 hours with absolutely no evidence but an email? Hell, I have some people I dont like, I should go to a public computer in a library and shoot the FBI an email about their connections to Al-Qaeda.

Warning, Patriot!

Your post on the internet forum forums.jolt.co.uk contains the terroristic phrase 'shoot the FBI'. Please cable-tie your arms and legs for our convenience and prepare yourself for a cavity search, our operatives will be with you shortly.

Love and kisses,
The Government.

The Justice System is not there to exact revenge, but justice. If he wants his pound of flesh, he'll have to cut it himself.

Can't he contact the Revenge System? :D