They finally charged him

[The Fishing Geek]

Conspiracy charges for Mr. Hawash.

I still think that they shouldn't be able to hold a person that long without charges.

[Hogmaster]

Says nothing about a bail hearing...

[reeldick]

These are trying times.
We should not forget things have changed significantly since 9/11.
Not everyone is our friend.

[TheRogue]

When we start doing things to our CITIZENS that go against the constitution and the American way of life....then Osama and his ilk have already won.

TR

[Cool Texan]

TR, will you still say that if they prove that he is guilty of all charges?

Lets all agree to wait for all of the facts to come out.

[Mojo]

Reeldick,
I agree, but not everyone is our enemy either...

[TheRogue]

Yes, I will say that if he is proven guilty of all charges!! And if he is innocent? He's spent serious solitary jailtime for what?

He's a US citizen, as far as I know. We built this country on the premise that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Definitely sounds serious enough that bail would need to be denied anyway, though. Doesn't mean he should be denied a hearing.

At least a judge was finally let in on this, albeit "several" weeks into it.

TR

[Boedy]

Yea let him out I'm sure he has a plane to catch.

[TheRogue]

Boedy....never said let him out, just said let him have the "due process" as is guaranteed a citizen of the United States by the laws of this country!!!

[Cool Texan]

Sounds like he is getting due process to me.

[Stratocaster]

Under law they have the right to hold him as a material witness, may not like it but thats the law. They have been doing this well before 9/11 and will continue to do so.

[Boedy]

The terrorist love due process lets them operate with impunity in this country most of the time. We are so concerned with the rights of terrorists in this country and being "PC" that we are forced to react to their actions rather then prevent them from acting in the first place. I for one and glad that the law enforcement community now has a free hand in dealing with those who would due us harm.

[ 04-28-2003, 03:36 PM: Message edited by: Boedy ]

[True]

Boedy, was it a good thing that we locked up all of those Japanese-Americans during WWII? Was there "due process" there?

True

[Cool Texan]

The truth shall set you free...or lock you up. Time will tell.

[TheRogue]

In the not-so-distant past, there was an administration who was very "anti-gun". Many of the policy makers in that administration pushed for many new laws against guns, including national gun owner registration and tracking, etc.

Let's say there's another one of these type of administrations running the country. Since the "war on terror" will last forever, significant far-reaching powers wielded by the president will still be in place. The "antis" decide that anyone owning more than, say, 3 firearms is "worthy of suspicion". Only someone wanted to do bad deeds could want that many guns, right? And we've allowed the definition of "terrorism" to be so broad that it can be used to fit almost any situation.

Tell me Boedy, I suspect you own a few firearms...would you like to spend a few months in jail without legal representation or charges because "someone" thinks you may represent a terrorist threat?

BTW, the Portland mullah that was dragged off to jail a while back for having all these terrorist connections? What happened there? Oh, yeah, I forgot. Ended up all they charged him with was SS card forgery. Which is to me pretty bad, by the way, it's easy enough to become a citizen in these country the legal way.

Just trying to get people to see "beyond the box"

TR

[Straydog]

Well said TR!
The shortsightedness of the general population is amazing at times.

[ 04-29-2003, 06:56 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[CAGEY]

Sometimes our judicial system is required to do things that the general population does not understand the why of it. Our system survives on the "innocent until proven guilty" and although not perfect it is still the best system in the world. He was never charged, but he was a strong suspect in participating in terrorist activities. Hence he was held for the sole purpose of investigating further to ascertain his innocence or his guilt. Apparently there is enough evidence gathered that he has now been charged. He will receive his day in court just as the system says he will. It will be up to a jury to determin his guilt. I look at it this way. If he is innocent he has spent a few day's locked away. If he is guilty his being locked away may have prevented you or i or our family and friends from being blown to pieces. Small price to pay i say.

God Bless America

[GutshotApe]

Originally posted by Straydog:
The shortsightedness of the general population is amazing at times.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Yes, it is amazing how shortsighted some people can be...for instance, many seem to have forgotten about the 1979 Iran Embassy hostages, the Beirut Marine Barracks attack, the PanAm bombing in Lockerby Scotland, other aircraft piracy & bombings, the 1993 WTC bombing, and unbelievable as it seems, the 9/11/01 WTC and Pentagon attacks that killed 3,000 Americans.

These shortsighted people apparently believe that since nothing has happened lately, to them, that we can just go back to business as usual...that we are somehow immune from further attacks...that there aren't millions of people - radical Islamicists - who want to see us all dead and our society and community destroyed. Thousands of radical terrorists have dedicated their lives to that end...and there is no question there are more than just a few embedded in our society, waiting for orders or the urge to act.

Unfortunately, this war against terrorism is far from won...we are going to be faced with the threat for years to come. There will be more attacks.

So, I don't get too worked up about people like "Mike" Hawash...he's from the mid-east...he has sent radical terrorist groups large sums of money...now he has been charged with crimes.

Let me know when "the Government" locks up significant numbers of citizens for indeterminate periods.....and then releases quietly them without charges.

[Snapset]

There is an opposition in all things. Freedom vs. Responsibility. The un-fettered liberties we espouse are opposed by the danger they create when malevolent individuals act irresponsibly. Because of their irresponsible acts, OUR government curtails the freedom of all people.
As OUR government curtails more freedoms, people act with less responsibility. It becomes a vicious circle that can spiral into a totalitarian regime, if enough power is stripped from the people through loss of liberties, or civil war and revolution, if the people maintain their power.

IMO the solution is in responsible behavior. We must punish those who would damage our freedoms as swiftly and powerfully as possible, so that the incentive to act irresponsibly is gone. Where possible, we must also be sure that we are not the source of injustice which would also provide incentive to damage us.

[TheRogue]

We sometimes forget.

The hardest form of government is a democracy. It takes much more work to make one operate efficiently and fairly than any other form of government.

TR

[Cohodependent]

There is no such thing as "innocent until proven guilty" in this country any more. I think the way that the feds have handeled this is plain wrong. Our government can snach any of us. The same goes for the guys that they have down in Cuba. I strongly feel that it is wrong the way they have handled that. Where in our constitution does it say it is ok to lock up and torture enemy combatants? We would never stand for it with our own troops. They are hoping that we will forget that those Afganies are there.

[Cool Texan]

If the charges against him are true, then he would have posed a flight risk had nothing been done while the gubment formalized its evidence against him. Therefore, throw him in clink till they're ready to roll.

As for "torture", I assume you have proof to that claim....right?

[Boedy]

My question to you guys is how you would hope to stop a terrorist without some loss of your perceived liberties. This man has been charged and from what I have seen and read he is not some innocent bystander they picked up on the street because he looked Arab.

First of let me say that when they start herding people into camps because they are or look Arab then I will stand with you and denounce them. But that is not what is happing here they are locking up people like this guy who did everything he could to join Al Queda and kill Americans. You don’t have the “right” in the constitution as far as I can see to plan out an attack and kill people, you don’t have the “right” to fund and give aid to persons who would kill innocent Americans or who want to destroy this country.

I mean come on who are we talking about here? This guy was running around China with a bunch of known wanna be terrorist trying to get into Afghanistan so he could become a terrorist to. You feel he got a bum deal cause they left him in jail for 30 days before charging him well to bad for him, don’t go trying to join Al Queda and I think you would stand a fair chance at not getting thrown into the slammer. If they lock up someone so they can PREVENT a crime then more power to them. If the have a greater ability to investigate people and more tools to do it then fine they are acting to prevent the deaths of Americans and should be granted the freedom that they need so they can have a chance to stop them before they can carry out the attacks.

No one is being snatched in the middle of the night or being disappeared because some one thinks that they might be a terrorist so give me a break with all this due process stuff. The people we hold now are a threat to us and all be it the government may not have all the evidence ( that they can disclose) to charge or convict them currently I am sure that they have some very valid reasons to think that this person is a risk to all of us. You can’t just react to this kind of threat you have to hunt it down and kill it before it can strike again. 3000 Americans died on 9-11 and I am willing to do what is necessary to make sure it doesn’t happen again what are you willing to do? .

[ 04-29-2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Boedy ]

[Joe Schwab]

Here we go again! "They" are torturing innocent combatants in Cuba? Where are you getting your news? From Baghdad Bob?

Let's go back to pre 9/11 and suppose the FBI caught all those hijackers before they got on the planes. I firmly believe there would be those out there screaming for their release because the FBI had not disclosed the evidence against them. Trust your government just once instead of placing confidence in someone who gave money to terrorist causes, traveled abroad on some lame excuse of selling software to China while linking up with other suspected terrorists. Doesn't any of this raise your suspicion or are you just plain anti gov.? I cannot understand why people prefer to trust suspected terrorists and not our own law enforcement. If you think the government is going to court without solid evidence in this climate, guess again. Long before 9/11 it was known that terrorists trained by Bin Laden would enter this country, entrench themselves as "good" citizens and wait for their opportunity.

Of course the same ones believed Saddam Hussein and call Bush a liar. Go figure!

[corrirod]

Capt. Hook, Boedy, ditto.

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[Birdnest]

Here, here... [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

We are not talking about an old Japanese shop keeper sweeping his sidewalk that was tossed into a Nesei (sp?) camp.

Capt Hook and Boedy stepped up and hit back to back dingers.

Birdnest

[ 04-30-2003, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Birdnest ]

[Snapset]

I gotta call BS when I see it. The United States of America is not a "Terrorist" state. If it were, you would already be in prison, strung up on a rack, or dead. Get real, J. Slay.

[ 04-30-2003, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: Snapset ]

[Freighter Bait]

Any victims out there? Anybody care to compare victims rights against those of the accused? It's a fine line between justice and what's right. If it turns out he is a victim, then let him join a support group, and get full benefit of what rights a victim has.

[corrirod]

J.Slay,

Perhaps you know of a better government somewhere else, please do tell?

Why shouldn't there be photo radar on every stop sign? Why not every street? Why do you care if they look in your home without you knowing? Perhaps you have something to hide? I know most of the people that COMPLAIN about photo radar are usually the ones that got caught. I may someday get caught too, but if I do I'll accept it because I did something wrong.

Chalk up another one who thinks "the government" is out to get us.

[J.Slay]

I agree that we need to work on preventing terrorists and criminals from getting into our country in the first place. I am all for harsher immigration requirements for sure. The fact that Al Queda memebers were able to go to US flight schools is scary, obviously. I don't agree with where the tactics of the government are going as far as invasions of privacy are concerned. More and more photo radar on our streets, night vision and the ability to look into people's homes, holding people for "supposed" threats without arresting them, government seizures of people's property. Big brother is getting absurd. The conservatives of this country just scare me where they are going. Not sure how far this can go before we need to restructure our government and change it from a democracy to a fascist state. A spade needs to be called a spade.

Our own governemnt is and has been one of the biggest "terrorists" the world knows, yet we are afraid to put them on the same level as the people we want to bring to justice. We think way too highly of ourselves.

[Hoosier Daddy]

[ 05-01-2003, 08:57 AM: Message edited by: Hoosier Daddy ]

[Bait O' Eggs]

I heard on the radio today that he plead guilty to what ever he was charged with.

The radio made it sound like he took the guilty charge now to get 10 years in jail, to save a jury maybe giving him a lot worse after a trial.

[BrionLutz]

BoE,

I heard on the radio today that he plead guilty to what ever he was charged with.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Just to clarify, they dropped all charges but one, to which he pleads guilty and agrees to cooperate. Total possible sentence 7 years, likely no jail time.

That kind of plea bargain says they had a weak case but they had something on him, if he spent every dime his family had he might win a jury trial or he might not.

Unless you are rich and don't have a family, you would take the plea bargain.

Brion

[DanS]

Why do you care if they look in your home without you knowing?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Because we're AMERICANS and our government doesn't do that without probable cause.

Head to China, let their government babysit every facet of your life......then you'll feel all snuggly warm and SAFE.

The government can look in my freaking house without cause when I run out of ammo.

[Stratocaster]

Just to clarify, they dropped all charges but one, to which he pleads guilty and agrees to cooperate.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">AKA, rollin his buddies. Hes going to testify against all of them. Dosent mean they had a weak case.

[Cool Texan]

Brion, you ASSUME they had a weak case. Sounds like they had a pretty good case if he would plead to it and turn in some friends of his. If he had no connections, he wouldnt have anything to offer.

[Joe Schwab]

Brion, Anyone familiar with law enforcement knows the first one to rat gets the best deal. That is just the way it is. Plea bargaining ensures that all the rest of them get their due. If you think that means the gov. had a weak case you are sadly mistaken. It means we are all saving thousands in tax dollars to prosecute these miscreants.

It still amazes me that people are ready to believe the criminals and doubt the enforcers. You have no idea what it takes to get a case to the federal courts.

Really bad people do not run around in terrorist costumes yelling "I am a terrorist". They blend into the population and attempt to fool those who are sometimes easily fooled.

"7 years, no jail time"? Wanna bet?



[ 08-06-2003, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: Capt. Hook ]

[BrionLutz]

Cool Texan,

...you ASSUME they had a weak case. Sounds like they had a pretty good case if he would plead to it and turn in some friends of his.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Just the facts ma'am. I just noted the facts. They dropped all the charges but one and that was the least serious .

The Bush Jr. admin is under tremendous pressure to prove any of its accusations have any basis in fact. If they had evidence in this case, they would want to prove it.

Just the opposite has happened. They've backed off insuring he will get little or no jail time. Not much of a "terrorist" case if it has less consequence than a burglarly.

Brion

[Joe Schwab]

Brion, I can't help but reply to your all assuming position on this issue. On an unrelated case some 20 years ago involving Native American Fishing violations, 16 people were charged with 100 plus serious violations.

After plea bargaining to save untold amounts of time and money, 5 went to Federal Court trial charged with 3 violations apiece. Upon conviction they received 5 years in the Federal Pen each. This was and probably still is the most harsh sentence ever handed down on a violation of this sort.

They could have been convicted on any one of the 100 plus violations. That is the way the system works. Do you really want each and every charge taken to court?

Just trying to explain how the system works.

[BrionLutz]

Capt. Hook,

Anyone familiar with law enforcement knows the first one to rat gets the best deal.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">No more CourtTV for you &lt;grin&gt;.

Plea bargaining ensures that all the rest of them get their due.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Not really...it's a tool that is used day in, day out in something like 90% of the cases to cut court time and costs. You can pretty much tell by the deal who had the strong case.

In this particular case, the highest profile "terrorist" has all but one, the least, charge dropped. Not much of "terrorist threat" when you get less time than a cat burglar.

I'm sure if the Bush Jr admin had a real terrorist case, they'd make it. Dropping all the charges but one is certainly a political and legal setback for Ashcroft.

Brion

[Joe Schwab]

Court TV? Brion, I have spent thirty years in law enforcement. You're assumptions are just that. George Bush has more important things to do than worry about some two-bit terrorist.

No Brion, a setback would be a lost case. this one is just beginning to unfold.

[BrionLutz]

Capt. Hook,

George Bush has more important things to do than worry about some two-bit terrorist.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think you've hit on the essential contradiction with "two bit terrorist". Even the Ashcroft Dept. of Justice doesn't claim any of these folks committed any act of terrorism so they are not even "terrorists".

In any legal bargaining, you get the best deal you can based on the strength or weakness of your case.

In Hawash's case, the government dropped all the charges but one and that the least consequentinal (we are talking cat burglar status) indicating a very weak case.

Ashcroft has been losing all the "terrorism" cases for lack of evidence. He could have used a "win", being forced to drop all charges in a high profile case is a loss for him.

Brion

[Cool Texan]

Brion, you have the nicest mustache on iFish.

[Stratocaster]

In any legal bargaining, you get the best deal you can based on the strength or weakness of your case

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Or, your going to testify against all your buddies. Not based on the strength or weakness of his case. He has the most to offer the prosecution is probably why hes getting the deal.

[ 08-06-2003, 08:38 PM: Message edited by: fisherdan ]

[Joe Schwab]

Love your logic Brion. Sure glad you are not a prosecutor.

Let's see, according to you, a two bit terrorist is a potentially innocent person who by pleading guilty to a crime has embarrassed John Ashcroft and the entire Bush regime. Wow! These people are really showing us up aren't they? I had no idea they were so devious. &lt;snort&gt;

[Thumper]

Brion --- You have a really nice moustache.

[BrionLutz]

Capt. Hook

Let's see, according to you, a two bit terrorist is a potentially innocent person who by pleading guilty to a crime has embarrassed John Ashcroft and the entire Bush regime.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think you are missing the key points.

1. There are no charges of terrorism two bit or otherwise.

2. When this case started it was touted by Ashcroft as a breakthrough on the war on terrorism.

3. Ashcroft has been embarrased by this case since the final charges do not involve terrorism.

4. Specific to Hawash, all charges but one had to be dropped.

These people are really showing us up aren't they?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">They are showing that

1. That Ashcroft's hyping this as "terrorism" was wrong.

2. That these people did not plan any acts of terrorism in the US.

3. That they did not actually engage in any act against the US.

4. That the anti-civil rights Patriot Act was totally irrelevant.

I had no idea they were so devious.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think we knew Ashcroft was this deviious when he lied about his past actions at his confirmation hearing...but that's another story, though one could argue this case is clear indication of why Ashcroft is a danger.

Brion

[manchu49]

lutz is up to his usual.....as for 7 years equaling not time....ha....in the FEDERAL system you DO 85% of the TIME....no good time or garbage like that that turns a 30 month sentence in to a 9 month sentence. i'm with capt. hook......they also dropped charges for that traitor john walker lindh....does that mean that they had a weak case ...NOT....it just means that in exchange for info he get a deal......that's reality.


i'm back......lot of people in jail.

[Thumper]

"This agreement will require him to serve at least seven years in federal prison" (Federal Judge Robert Jones)

Had it perfectly right again, eh Brion?

[Straydog]

So, let me get this right.

Those so anxious to discredit Brion, althgouh you like his mustache :grin: , are saying this guy is indeed a terrorist and real bad guy and the Patriot act did it's job yadda, yadda, yadda.

If we assume you are right, what the heck are we doing giving him only 7 years?!?!?!? Why are we not locking him up for good?? Heck, many of the folks imprisoned in Florida will have 7 years in before we even decide if they have committed a crime or not?
:whazzup:
Seems like a pretty weak sentence for such an "evil doer".......... How we gonna crack the "axis of evil" this way?


[ 08-07-2003, 06:34 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[FISH HAWK]

How hard is it for some of you to cope with the fact he was gulity. Its all the bleeding heart liberals that are destroying the fabric of society. Some Americans have an easy time not remembering the past(9/11). Terrorism cant not be tolerated in any fashion.
Just my .02

Matt

[ 08-07-2003, 07:51 AM: Message edited by: FISH HAWK ]

[Hogmaster]

Decide for yourselves...

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...2581697431.xml

[GutshotApe]

Originally posted by Straydog:
.........what the heck are we doing giving him only 7 years?!?!?!? Why are we not locking him up for good??.........Seems like a pretty weak sentence for such an "evil doer".......... How we gonna crack the "axis of evil" this way?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well SDoggie, summary, on-the-spot execution seemed a little too severe to some...and giving "Mike" a pass seemed a little too lienient. So, after he squeals enough to convict his accomplices, he'll do 7 years in the federal slammer. By then we'll either have eliminated the Islamic terrorist threat...or we will all be turbaned, bearded men and burkha-clad women praising Allah and storming the gates of Hollywood (not a bad idea no matter how the terrorism war turns out ).

[Cool Texan]

I'm not a prosecuting attorney, nor are many others on here...but...I would guess that they dropped all charges but one so that they could give him a lesser sentence in exchange for his testimony. Its called a "Plea Bargain". Wouldn't be much of a bargain if they booked him on ALL charges and gave him a life sentence in exchange for testimony against others.

Lock him up I say. I'm sure the neighbors in general population will welcome him with open arms.

[Straydog]

Originally posted by GutshotApe:
By then we'll either have eliminated the Islamic terrorist threat...or we will all be turbaned, bearded men and burkha-clad women praising Allah and storming the gates of Hollywood (not a bad idea no matter how the terrorism war turns out ).

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">PPssst..... wanna buy a $300,000 sheep pasture in Klamath??? :grin:

[ 08-07-2003, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Killertraylor]

What, Straydog? Your best argument in support of this guy is "he's not that evil because he only got 7 years?" Yeah - he's a real angel. The article posted by Hogmaster sums it all up for me. Why can't you guys get over the fact he's guilty and no injustice was done here? I guess in your world, the rights we give Taliban are more important than the innocent American lives they take. What a disgrace to the families of those who lost their lives because of spineless terrorists.

[BrionLutz]

Fishhawk,

How hard is it for some of you to cope with the fact he was gulity.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well he did do a plea bargain. We know that's not quite the same as being guilty. It can mean you don't have $1M to fight the gov't and you want to provide for your family even if it means you go to jail on charges you could beat with a good defense.

Not guility of terrorism which is what Ashcroft touted when he travled to Portland to announce a breakthrough in the "War on US Civil Rights...oops Terrorism".

Terrorism turns out not to be a factor in the case.

Patriot Act turns out not to be as factor in the case.

These guys are accused of attempting to travel to Pakistan to attempt to travel to Afghanistan to attempt to "help" the Taliban.

No terrorism and four steps removed from doing anything illegal no matter what they copped a plea to.

Remember, prior to 911, Ashcroft was they guy who cut the FBI anti-terrorism budget as "unnecessary".

Some Americans have an easy time not remembering the past(9/11).

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">It's a shame Bush Jr is one of those Americans not remembering 911. Iraq didn't attack the US. Bin Laden did. We go on Amber Alert once a week due to threats from Bin Laden . Perhaps we should have 150,000 US soldiers in Pakistan chasing Bin Laden.

Sometimes the American thing to do is not get hysterical and keep our eye on the ball and not get distracted by right wing ideologues promoting anti-American "solutions" and then come up with "show trials" that are irrelevant to US security.

Brion

[Straydog]

Originally posted by Killertraylor:
What, Straydog? Your best argument in support of this guy is "he's not that evil because he only got 7 years?" Yeah - he's a real angel. The article posted by Hogmaster sums it all up for me. Why can't you guys get over the fact he's guilty and no injustice was done here? I guess in your world, the rights we give Taliban are more important than the innocent American lives they take. What a disgrace to the families of those who lost their lives because of spineless terrorists.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I am not supporting this guy nor am I claiming he is innocent.

What I am saying is if his crime is such that it was ok to hold him without due process and if he is such a key element of the terrorists world, why is he only getting 7 years and why were his other accusations dropped? Ratting on the others or not, it would seem to me that if he is part of the terrorists world to the degree we have been told, 7 years is but a slap on the wrist.

Again, I don't doubt at this point that he is guilty. I do question the degree of threat that he really posed or poses of 7 years is all he is going to get.

[ 08-07-2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Cool Texan]

Originally posted by BrionLutz:
Hogmaster,

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica"> Why do you not accept this, Brion?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I do. I just see it for what it is... no terrorism, no acts against the US. though it looks like they were "prepared" to do something...whatever that means...sounds like "Minority Report" and pre-crime.

36 months in jail in a plea bargain with all charges but one, the least serious, dropped.

Pretty slim pickens for the "War on Terrorism" touted by Ashcroft when he came to Portland.

"He admitted it"

Not exactly...he copped a plea for a short jail sentence in Federal minimum security prison. Heck, he'll serve less time than Ken Lay of Enron.

Not exactly anything to do with US security. It's almost like Ashcroft was lucky to even get that minimum plea. If the guy had the bucks for a lawyer, looks like he'd beat it.

This was one of Ashcroft's "high profile" terrorism cases. Notice no terrorism involved? Notice none of Ashcroft's "terrorism" cases can survive a jury trial?

Brion </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">[img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

[Straydog]

CT said:

[img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Why do you make posts like this yet jump into other threads and ask for less childish replies, a kinder gentler LIG and keeping things above the belt?

Is there not some double standard or hyprocisy being displayed?

[ 08-07-2003, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]