Heads up

Moderators: DrVolin, Elvis, Jeff

Heads up

Postby sunny » Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:08 am

Newsweek will be putting up an article tomorrow night (Saturday) on it's online edition that alleges the Bush Admin conducted a warrantless physical search of the residence and office of an attorney for a terrorism suspect. Monday's print edition will also carry the article.<br><br>Let's see if the Bush cultists (former black helicopter fearin' anti gubmint militia members) can stomach <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>this</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> one. <br>Probably so, since the guys client was a "terra" suspect. But hey, why let a little thang like a trial and a verdict stop your jingoistic wet dreams? <br><br>(Heard about it on Olberman. Hey man, keep up the good work!)<br><br>-<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>edited for punctuation</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sunny@rigorousintuition>sunny</A> at: 3/18/06 12:09 am<br></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Heads up

Postby sunny » Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:36 pm

Here is the article, from US News and World Report<br><br>(<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>my</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> bad, not Olberman's)<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060327/27fbi.htm">www.usnews.com/usnews/new.../27fbi.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Heads up

Postby NewKid » Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:42 am

constitutional law scholars finally get a clue:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>At some point, one has to stop giving the White House the benefit of the doubt about its desire to stay within the law. It's increasingly clear that we no longer have simply a good faith disagreement about the scope of Presidential power, one in which the President's lawyers somehow wind up making one implausible legal argument after another. Rather, it's a fairly deliberate strategy of concentrating power in the Executive regardless of its legality or constitutionality. In this Administration, the Bill of Rights and the rule of law are strictly optional.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-administration-claims-authority.html" target="top">balkin.blogspot.com/2006/03/bush-administration-claims-authority.html</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br>Oh, and here's how they define "terrorism related activities"<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/the_fake_war_on.html" target="top">leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/the_fake_war_on.html</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
NewKid
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Heads up

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:20 am

Thanks sunny<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://eclectech.co.uk/b3ta/drawbutterfly.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32085
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Heads up

Postby sunny » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:56 am

Aww, shucks. *blushing* Thanks, slad!<br><br><br><br><br><br>Btw, how in the <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>heck</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> do you post images like that? Can't even post a photo. <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Heads up

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:25 pm

right click on a picture<br>a box will come up<br>left click on properties<br>highlight the address - like this one<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://eclectech.co.uk/b3ta/drawbutterfly.gif">eclectech.co.uk/b3ta/drawbutterfly.gif</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>see the image box to the left here?<br>click that and put the address there and hit ok<br>the picture address should show up here<br><br>try it let me know if you have trouble. I'll be leaving for awhile <br>but I'll check on ya later<br><br><br>SLaD <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32085
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Heads up

Postby sunny » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:48 pm

Thank youu, thank youuuuu!<!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://http://www.bartcop.com/jimmy75-hand1.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br><br><br><br><br>(hope this works!) <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Heads up

Postby sunny » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:42 am

<br>The company that publishes the Oregonian newspaper in Portland has filed a motion in U.S. District Court in Oregon to unseal documents in a pending case that alleges the Bush administration illegally intercepted international phone conversations between the codirector of an Islamic charity and his two lawyers in the United States.<br><br>In a motion filed Friday, lawyers for the Oregonian Publishing Co. argued that it is in the public interest to know the contents of documents that could prove the existence of a potentially illegal domestic spying program.<br><br>"This appears to be the first case in which documents have been filed with the court demonstrating the National Security Agency's practice of wiretapping private conversations," said Charles F. Hinkle, a lawyer for the publishing company. "We are not interested in the content of the attorney-client communications. We are interested in what the government did."<br><br>The Justice Department, which has alleged that the Ashland, Ore.-based al-Haramain Islamic Foundation Inc., has terrorist links to al Qaeda, told lawyers involved in the case that it will oppose any attempts to unseal documents and will ask the court to bar the company from intervening in the case.<br><br>Thomas Nelson, the lawyer for al-Haramain in this case, submitted the documents in February as part of a lawsuit filed against the administration alleging that the NSA illegally wiretapped conversations between the codirector of the charity, Soliman al-Buthe, and his former American lawyers and then used the intelligence to target the charity. Nelson says an abundance of caution prompted him to ask the judge to review the material under seal.<br><br>"It does contain sensitive information," Nelson told U.S. News. "I think it's better to play things cautiously and that's exactly what we did."<br><br>In March 2000, al-Buthe left the country with $130,000 in travelers checks that was donated for Chechen refugees. In February 2004, the feds froze the foundation's assets. The NSA, Nelson says, intercepted calls between al-Buthe and his lawyers between February and April 2004.<br><br>The complaint states that the government used the intercepted information against the charity, resulting in the designation of the charity and al-Buthe in September 2004 as terrorists. Then in February 2005, both were indicted for illegally taking the money out of the country. A federal judge last September dropped the case against the charity but preserved the government's right to bring criminal charges against the organization in the future. Nelson points out that there has been no terrorism indictment against the charity or al-Buthe, who remains a fugitive.<br><br>The documents, Hinkle wrote, "may contain evidence of arguably unlawful conduct on the part of the U.S. government against U.S. citizens."<br><br>There is a "broad and legitimate public interest" in the contents of the documents, Hinkle wrote, asserting the right of the press and public to have access to them. Hinkle further argues that because Nelson did not indicate that the documents are classified, they are not protected by laws shielding classified information from disclosure in criminal cases.<br><br>Nelson says that he is agnostic about the Oregonian's motion. "We are neutral whether it's unsealed or not," Nelson says. "To the extent there are any attorney-client communications in the sealed documents, we want them redacted."<br><br>As reported in U.S. News this week, Nelson and his family and colleagues believe that on numerous occasions, the government may have searched his premises without a proper warrant, though the U.S. attorney in Oregon has assured the lawyer that the FBI would not conduct a search without consent or a court order. The NSA has declined to provide Nelson any information.<br><br>Hinkle says the Oregonian and the public deserve full disclosure.<br><br>"If the government carried out an illegal and unconstitutional program," he said, "then we think it's very important that the public know about that. "<br><br> <br> <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)


Return to Bush Family

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests