Are we at war – or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

When the Justice Department sets up a task force to wage war on a crime organization like the Mafia or MS-13, no U.S. official has a right to shoot Mafia or gang members on sight. No one has a right to bomb their homes. No one has a right to regard the possible death of their wives and children in an attack as acceptable collateral damage.

Cherie Cullen/ Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates met with Sgt. Kimberly D. Munley at a hospital in Ft. Hood, Texas, on Tuesday.

Not to take anything away from Sgt. Munley, who is indeed a hero, more information each day is coming to light. From the NYTimes, we have this eyewitness account of the actions of Munley’s fellow officer that day:

The witness, who asked not to be identified, said Major Hasan wheeled on Sergeant Munley as she rounded the corner of a building and shot her, putting her on the ground. Then Major Hasan turned his back on her and started putting another magazine into his semiautomatic pistol.

It was at that moment that Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, a veteran police officer, rounded another corner of the building, found Major Hasan fumbling with his weapon and shot him.

How the authorities came to issue the original version of the story, which made Sergeant Munley a national hero for several days and obscured Sergeant Todd’s role, remains unclear. (Military officials also said for several hours after the shooting that Major Hasan had been killed, although he had survived.)

Six days after the deadly shooting rampage at a center where soldiers were preparing for deployment, the military has yet to put out a full account of what happened.

At a news conference outside the post on Wednesday, Lt. Col. John Rossi refused to take questions about who shot Major Hasan or why the initial reports said it had been Sergeant Munley rather than Sergeant Todd.

“These questions are specific to the investigation and I am not going to address that,” Colonel Rossi said.

Public affairs officials also declined to make Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the post, available for questions. It was Mr. Medley, who oversees the post’s civilian police and fire departments, who gave the first account of how Sergeant Munley stopped the gunman.

On Tuesday night, Lt. Col. Lee Packnett, of the Army’s Office of the Chief of Public Affairs at the Pentagon, declined to say whether it was Sergeant Todd who had shot Major Hasan. “It could have been, but the final outcome will be determined by the results of the ballistics tests.”

In an interview on Wednesday, Sergeant Todd’s wife, Lisa, said he had asked the Army to protect his identity in the immediate aftermath of the shootings. Her husband did not consider himself to be the real hero of the day, she said. “They were in this together,” she said.

Neither Sergeant Todd nor Sergeant Munley were made available by the military for this article, but on Wednesday on the “Oprah Winfrey Show,” they offered their first public comments on the shooting. They did not give a detailed chronology of what happened, nor did they say who had fired and hit the suspect.

Both are members of the civilian police force at Fort Hood. Sergeant Todd said on the talk show that he and Sergeant Munley had arrived at the Soldier Readiness Processing Center in separate squad vehicles about the same time.

Sergeant Todd acknowledged that he had played a major role in bringing the violence to an end. He said that he had fired at the suspect, kicked his weapon away and placed him in handcuffs. It was the first time in his 25 years in law enforcement and the military, Sergeant Todd said, that he had used his weapon.

“I just relied back on my training,” Sergeant Todd said. “We’re trained to shoot until there is no longer a threat. And once he was laying down on his back, his weapon just fell into his hand and I’m, like, ‘O.K., now’s the time to rush him and secure him.’ ”

~~~

He said he was walking in a roadway between the main building, known as the Sportsdome, and five smaller buildings. Major Hasan was headed toward the main building, the witness said, when Sergeant Munley came around the corner of a smaller building. Major Hasan wheeled on her and shot her several times, the witness said. It was unclear whether she squeezed off a shot or not, but she fell over backward, disabled with wounds in her legs and one of her wrists, the witness said.

Major Hasan then turned his back on her and began to shove another magazine into his pistol. He did not appear wounded, the witness said. A few seconds later, Sergeant Todd came around another corner of the same building. He raised his weapon and fired several times at Major Hasan, who pitched over backward and stopped moving.

“He shot her, turned away from her and was reloading, when he was shot,” said the witness, who was nearby.

On the Winfrey show, Sergeant Munley, 35, said the incident was confusing and chaotic. “There were many people outside pointing to where this individual was apparently located,” she said. “When I got out of my vehicle and ran up the hill, that’s when it started getting bad and we started encountering fire.”

Sergeant Todd, 42, is a native of California who spent most of his adult life as a military police officer in the Army. He left the military police after 25 years to join the civilian force at Fort Hood. Like most members of the military, he has moved around a lot, serving at four bases in the United States and two in Germany.

Ms. Todd said her husband did not seem upset in the wake of shooting Major Hasan.

“He say’s he’s O.K.,” she said. “And I have to take him at his word.”

Thank you Sgt. Todd!

I think it speaks volumes to his character, not only in his actions that day, but in his inaction after that day, in not seeking the limelight and the pats on the back. A true hero.

Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times
Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, of the Killeen Police Department, was outside the visitors center at Fort Hood on Thursday morning.

Soldiers present were also heroes, of course, with reports of shielding others from the danger as well as treating the wounded.

The petite police officer, who stands 5 feet 2 inches tall, said she was hit by three bullets. One struck the knuckle of her right hand; one passed through her right knee, then hit her left leg; and one pierced the femoral artery in her left thigh.

“I knew from the amount of blood and the color of the blood that was coming out” of the thigh wound that it was gravely serious, Munley said, sitting in a wheelchair with a blanket spread over her legs.

The soldiers who ran to help her knew it, too; even as she urged them to get pressure on the wound, they were fashioning a tourniquet.

Bleeding stanched, Munley immediately entered what “Today” hosts Ann Curry and Meredith Viera — themselves working mothers — dubbed “Mommy Mode.” She located her cellphone and arranged for someone to pick up her 2-year-old daughter (an older daughter, age 12, presumably gets home from school on her own).

“So the balancing act of motherhood and being a police officer did not end, even at that moment, for you,” said Curry.

“Absolutely not,” Munley said, smiling slightly. “It never does.”

Having your femoral artery cut is a life-threatening matter, and thanks to the training of our soldiers and law enforcement and the quick-action decisions they made that day, we can be grateful that more lives were not lost last Thursday.

A first responder during the Fort Hood shooting renders honors after aiding his fellow soldiers, November 5, 2009.
REUTERS/US Army III Corps/Handout

“See – we have a problem,” Matthews said. “How do we know when someone like Hasan is going to make his move and do we know he’s an Islamist until he’s made his move? He makes a phone call or whatever, according to Reuters right now. Apparently he tried to contact al Qaeda. Is that the point at which you say, ‘This guy is dangerous?’ That’s not a crime to call up al Qaeda, is it? Is it? I mean, where do you stop the guy?”

I love it how Dr. Jasser is trying to get a word in, and the host just goes on and on….and on with his blathering ramble. Just unbelievable to watch this news guy tie himself up in knots, trying to rationalize and come to terms with the fact that Islam played an influential role in Nidal Hassan’s murderous act of terrorism, and all the signs for taking preemptive action were present, yet ignored for fear of being branded racist/bigoted/intolerant/discriminating/etc. Thank you PC!

Here are 34 Clues for Chris Matthews:

1. At the shooting, Hasan first bowed his head in prayer and then shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) as he shot over 50 soldiers in a calm and measured manner.

2. Store video the morning of the shooting shows Hasan wearing a traditional Muslim WHITE robe and hat. He had began wearing Arabic/Muslim-style clothing in recent weeks.

3. Hasan handed out Qurans to his neighbors a few days before and the day of the shooting, including giving a Quran to his neighbor at 9 am the day of the shooting, telling her, “I’m going to do good work for God” before leaving for the base. Here is the AP photograph taken on Friday, Nov 6 in Killeen, Texas showing the Quran and the business card that Hasan gave to his neighbor the day of the shooting.

4. A recent convert to Islam described how he frequently prayed with Hasan at the town mosque after Hasan was deployed to Fort Hood in July. They last worshipped together at predawn prayers on the day of the massacre when Hasan “appeared relaxed and not in any way troubled or nervous.”

5. Hasan told the convert that the ‘war on terror’ was really a war against Islam. Hasan also expressed anti-Jewish sentiments and defended suicide bombings.

6. During dinner the night before the shooting, Hasan felt he should not go to Afghanistan, that he was supposed to quit. “In the Koran, it says you are not supposed to have alliances with Jews or Christians, and if you are killed in the military fighting against Muslims, you will go to hell.”

7. Hasan’s deceased parents were Palestinians immigrants from the West Bank/Jordan. Hasan’s father was 16 years old when he immigrated to America and later operated a bar and grill in Roanoke, VA.

8. On a form Hasan filled out at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Maryland, he gave his nationality not as “American” but as “Palestinian.” Yet he was born in Arlington, Virginia on 8 Sep 1970. (See Allegiance in a Time of Globalization, DOD PERSEREC, Dec 2008)

9. Hasan has family in the Middle East, including a grandfather, uncle and cousins which he and they would visit each other.

10. Hasan’s cousin in the Palestinian city of Ramallah, Mohammad Munif Abdallah Hasan, said the Army major had wanted to leave the military because he felt disrespected over his religion.

11. His cousin said: “If he had killed one or two, I could say that he was defending himself. I could say that there could have been a problem between two sides which led to the use of weapons.”

12. Hasan visited websites espousing radical Islamist ideas.

13. Hasan made these kinds of statements to coworkers: Muslims have the right to rise up against the U.S. military. Muslims have a right to stand up against the aggressors. He spoke favorably about people who strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square.

14. Hasan gave a presentation to military masters degree students in which he argued the war on terrorism was a war against Islam. This was in an environmental health class at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, MD. When challenged about what does his topic has to do with environmental health, Hasan became agitated, sweaty, nervous and emotional.

15. Hasan “made himself a lightning rod by making his extreme views known to everyone.”

16. Hasan was “put on probation early in his postgraduate work” and was “disciplined for proselytizing about his Muslim faith with patients and colleagues.”

17. Hasan was a “very devout” member of and daily visitor to the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Md. Attended prayers at least once a day, seven days a week. (See Saudi Publications On Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques. Important reading for security professionals)

18. A friend who also attended the mosque said, “He was my role model when it came to the Islam life. He was so devout. He would come to the early morning prayers — even in the summer when it began at 4 am or 5 am, the early prayers I wouldn’t go to, he would be there.”

19. Hasan wrote “Allah” on his door in Silver Spring, MD according to his neighbor.

20. Hasan wrote an internet posting defending suicide bombers: “…..Suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory…..”

21. At the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, MD, he asked for feedback about a talk he had prepared for his Army supervisors on the role of Muslims in the military. Hasan argued that if military duties contradicted a soldier’s religion, the soldier should be released from duty.

22. After 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Hasan seemed to grow more disenchanted with his duties. “He did not talk war or politics, but he did tell me once the war started that what he worried most about was having to fight against other Muslims. He did not feel it was right.”—Friend at Muslim community center

23. Hasan attended two matchmaking events at his Muslim community center to find a “good Muslim woman” for his wife but he “had too many conditions” for his match . He wanted a very religious wife who adheres to the Quran, wore the hijab and prayed five times a day. First preference was an Arab woman followed by someone of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi descent.

24. Hasan avoided contact with his female coworkers. Refused to be photographed for an office Christmas photo since women were in the photo.

25. Hasan worshiped at the Texas mosque each day at 6 am, and often prayed there five times a day, especially during the holy month of Ramadan. (See Saudi Publications On Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques)

26. Hasan had been mentoring an 18-year old Catholic man on the ways of Islam. Only once during their 12 meetings did Hasan NOT talk about religion. Hasan told this man that Muslims shouldn’t be in the U.S. military, because obviously Muslims shouldn’t kill Muslims. He told him not to join the Army.

27. At the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, Hasan told his fellow military master degree students, “I’m a Muslim first and an American second.” (See Allegiance in a Time of Globalization, DOD PERSEREC, Dec 2008)

28. Hasan gave an hour-long talk on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC. He said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats. That non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire.

29. Fellow doctors have recounted how they were repeatedly harangued by Hasan about Islam.

30. During a conversation with a leader of the Texas mosque he attended, Hasan seemed obsessed with the question of what to tell Muslim soliders about fighting fellow Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.

31. Hasan attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists.

32. This mosque was led by radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki said to be a ‘spiritual adviser’ to three of the hijackers who attacked America on 9/11. al-Awlaki was born in the US but now lives in Yemen. He is an al-Qaeda supporter who targets US Muslims with radical online lectures on Islam.

33. Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas.

34. Today (9 November 09), al-Awlaki wrote on his blog a post titled, “Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing.”

“Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people.
…..Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former.
The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right — rather the duty — to fight against American tyranny.
Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.
Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment……May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Ameen.”

Among the reader comments to his post:

• “May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act.”
• “That’s the first thing that came to my mind, may Allah reward this man for his bravery. Allah has enlightened him with his duty unlike the hypocrites of this age and time. May he be accepted as a shaheed.”
• “May Allah give brother Nidal ease and may Allah give pain to the enemies.”

34 “clues”, probably more to come.

Incidentally, Zuhdi Jasser, who considers himself a devout Muslim, believes in the virtues of profiling:

If more Muslims had the same pro-active attitude as AIFD, rabidly attacking Islamism and political Islam rather than being apologists and deniers for it and playing the victim card, it would go a long way to quelling some of the anti-Islam sentiments. Instead, those Muslims who fear a backlash only encourage such backlash to occur every time they make excuses for Islamic terror and deny that their faith has any role to play in this.

Kimberly Munley:

The hero cop who ended the bloody rampage at Fort Hood by pumping four bullets into the crazed gunman even though she was wounded is known for her toughness, friends say.

Before relocating to Texas, civilian police Sgt. Kimberly Munley spent about five years as a cop in North Carolina where she forged a reputation as a no-nonsense officer.

“I’d like to say I’m surprised, but I’m really not,” said close friend Drew Peterson, 27.

“She was born and bread to be a police officer. If you were ever to be in a fight, she’d be the first person to stand up next to you and back you up. She’s a tough cookie.”

Munley’s toughness and grace under pressure were on display Thursday when she and her partner responded within three minutes of reported gunfire, said Army Lt. Gen. Bob Cone.

Munley, who had been trained in active-response tactics, rushed into the building and confronted the shooter as he was turning a corner, Cone said.

“It was an amazing and an aggressive performance by this police officer,” Cone said.

Munley could not be reached Friday. In a posting on her Twitter page, she wrote: “I live a good life….a hard one, but I go to sleep peacefully @ night knowing that I may have made a difference in someone’s life.”

Munley was only a few feet from Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan when she opened fire.

Wounded in the exchange of bullets, the 34-year-old Munley was reported in stable condition at a local hospital.

The diminutive Munley – she stands 5-foot-4 and weighs about 120 pounds – served as a cop in Wrightsville Beach, N.C., before she moved to Texas to enlist in the military, friends said.

She is married with two daughters and is no longer in the armed forces.

“She’s the happiest, sweetest, most fun-loving girl you’d ever want to be friends with – and never want to cross,” Peterson said.

The hero cop spent Thursday night phoning fellow officers to let them know she was fine and to find out about casualties in the attack – the deadliest ever on a military base in the U.S., Cone said.

Cone said Munley’s aggressive response training taught her that “if you act aggressively to take out a shooter you will have less fatalities.”

“She walked up and engaged him,” he said. He praised her as “one of our most impressive young police officers.”

Twelve members of America’s troops are dead, and at least another 31 have been wounded. These 42 soldiers and their comrades were preparing for deployment to the front. This is major calamity, not just because it occurred on American soil, but this crime was committed, it appears, by one some of their own, on an American base. The shock to hundreds of individuals comprising the related families will last a lifetime.

The priority for the Commander In Chief, IMHO, would be to bypass any planned speech and immediately fly to Austin, Texas, act like a Commander In Chief, go to the site of the shootings, meet with senior staff, assess the situation and events that led to the shootings, speak to the troops, particularly the injured, demonstrate concern and take action based on the findings of your assessment. Such actions should include addressing the families of the fallen and the injured. Assure the American people that their military bases and the security of the bases are not compromised and all possible measures will be taken to tighten what already has been established to safeguard the safety of soldiers.

Once satisfied that orders have been issued on all potential fronts of the follow-up, fly back to the White House, and get on with the addressing the challenges of the Nation.

Would you have remained in Washington, and while giving a speech, mentioned the killings in a “by the way,” addendum? Perhaps not.

Crossposted from The Pacific Gate Post

ABC News:

At least seven people have been killed and at least 12 wounded in a mass shooting at a Texas military base by what officials believe was carried out by two gunmen.
Fort Hood shooting, map.
Seven soldiers are reported to be dead and at least 12 wounded in a shooting at Fort Hood, Texas.

One gunman is reported to be in custody and a search is on for a second shooter, officials said.

The shooting took place at Fort Hood in Texas, the largest U.S. military installation in the world.

The massacre is said to have taken place at a soldier readiness processiong center where young recruits would be taken to be inducted into the military.

Latest report I’m hearing is on a 3rd shooter.

Possible terrorist attack?

Not much time to blog, so readers are welcomed to build upon this thread (other authors feel free to update and build up this post).

UPDATE @ 2:20pm PST

Check the comments below for realtime updates but the latest is that the shooter is Major Malik Nadal Hasan… a Muslim. 12 dead

Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base by what officials believe was possibly carried out by an Army officer.

The suspected gunman was identified as Major Malik Nadal Hasan. He was killed and two other suspects have been apprehended, Lt. Robert W. Cone said.

The gunman used two handguns, Cone said. He wasn’t sure if the shooter reloaded the weapons during the attack.

UPDATE @ 2:35pm PST

Check out Obama giving shout-outs prior to addressing the shooting…..unbelievable:

UPDATE @ 2:55pm PST

The suspected gunman in the Fort Hood shooting has been identified as Major Malik Nadal Hasan. He was killed and two other suspects have been apprehended, according to Army Spokesman Lt. Robert W. Cone.

There are unconfirmed reports that Major Hasan was a convert to Islam and originally from Virginia. He was reportedly scheduled to deploy to either Iraq or Afghanistan and was unhappy about it.

Then what about the other two suspects? One individual going nuts this does not sound like.

Cheering at the death of our soldiers?

UPDATE @ 3:10pm PST

A defense official speaking on condition of anonymity to the AP says Hasan was a mental health professional — an Army psychologist or psychiatrist.

So true:

You know when it’ll be perfectly PC to speculate about Hasan? When cops find one of Glenn Beck’s books on his bookshelf

UPDATE @ 3:20pm PST

Metroplex Adventist Hospital received seven of the victims. One was under distress in route to the hospital and was later pronounced dead. Two are currently in surgery, one of which is an EMS paramedic. Four have been stabilized. Two were transferred to Scott & White Memorial Hospital in Temple and two have been transferred to Seton in Round Rock.

Shooter?

Another possible Hasan.

UPDATE @ 3:35pm PST

Source tells Air Force Times that Hasan was a psychiatrist recently reassigned from Walter Reed to Darnall Army Medical Center @Fort Hood.

News Channel 25’s Natasha Chen has learned the suspected shooter Maj. Malik Hasan had “Allah” keyed into his car last week. He reported it as a hate crime.

per Drudge:

Obama’s Pet-Goat Moment

UPDATE @ 3:45pm PST

The general said there were “eyewitness accounts of more than one shooter,” and the others were tracked to an adjacent facility.

UPDATE @ 4:00pm PST

From This ain’t Hell, his ORB:

UPDATE @ 2:00am PST, 11/06/09

This appears to be his blog, according to CNN

And a good article by Amy S. Rosenberg from Philly.com… about Hill and his movie:

Tigre Hill has only released the trailer to his film, The Barrel of a Gun, but already Mumia Inc. has begun mobilizing against him.

At 57th and Christian Streets, over an offering of rice and beans and salad prepared by her grandchildren, Pam Africa labels Hill an attack dog, the second coming of
Wilson Goode, and says his film will be a racist “hit piece” against Mumia Abu-Jamal.

In Germany, writer and academic Michael Schiffman spent 5,600 words aimed at debunking the 3 1/2-minute trailer in a piece that circulated widely online. Schiffman wrote that the case made in Hill’s film, at least as indicated by the trailer, “will be built on sand.”

On death row, meanwhile, former radio newsman Mumia Abu-Jamal, 55, is as close as he’s ever been to a final judgment on his original death sentence for the 1981 killing of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. The U.S. Supreme Court in April rejected a last appeal for a new trial. A petition by the Philadelphia district attorney demanding reinstatement of Abu-Jamal’s death penalty, which was thrown out by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, is pending.

But over convenience-store coffee, sitting in the backyard of his childhood home in Wynnefield where he still lives and where his film is being edited in a room upstairs, Hill is taking it all in stride in his trademark Ben Roethlisberger jersey.

He’s laid-back, naturally friendly, and comfortable in taking on the sacred cows of black political, cultural and social-justice power structures, and he’s knocking down a few assumptions himself as an African American with a love of George W. Bush and a Philly kid who roots for the Pittsburgh Steelers.

~~~

His Mumia thesis is provocative: that placed in the context of prior acts by the Black Panthers, the history of political revolutionaries, various influences on Abu-Jamal’s thinking, police killings in other cities that eerily presage Faulkner’s, statements and actions Jamal had made before that night, the idea that Abu-Jamal may have set out to deliberately kill a police officer becomes chillingly plausible.

~~~

Always intrigued by the case, Hill was hooked. He says he understands the impulse to defend Abu-Jamal, to see him as a victim of larger forces, especially viewed through the lens of police brutality. “You see the way his story has been manipulated,” he said. “People take him on as a hero like Che Guevara and other freedom fighters.”

Hill says his goal was not so much to take the story out of its global gauze wrap and expose it as a straightforward Philadelphia homicide, but to place it in its larger context.

Hill believes Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther and MOVE supporter, was influenced by prior violence by those groups against police. The film cites tactics used by the Chicago 7 and Panther activists Bobby Seale and Huey Newton to address police brutality – in part by provoking violent encounters.

“I believe Mumia and his brother [William Cooke] had it out for cops in the area,” Hill said. “You’re talking about 13th and Locust, a seedy area. [Cooke is] driving down the street in a beat-up car, tag hanging; it’s no shock that he gets stopped. He starts a scuffle with the officer. Mumia comes running across the street. Why was he there? That’s the million-dollar question.”

William Cooke has never spoken publicly about the Faulkner killing. Hill said he had located Cooke in North Philadelphia but decided against pursuing an interview.

Joseph McGill, the trial prosecutor who has been vilified globally, says he welcomes Hill’s analysis. McGill never established a motive, but believes the encounter between Faulkner and Mumia was set up as a political or revolutionary act.

“That’s why I am very anxious to see this film,” said McGill. “I was aware at the time of Jamal’s affiliation with MOVE, aware of Bobby Seale Chicago 7 tactics. I was not aware of the really in-depth history regarding all of the movements.”

“I have confidence in Tigre’s analysis and his really authentic research,” he said. “I’ve often stated that the further you get from Philadelphia, the less clear the entire case becomes.”

The movie is set to come out on the anniversary of the killing, December 9th.

Well it was today….with little media fanfare, unlike the Duke case which fit the particular narrative our media wants to present:

A Knox County jury today put torture-slaying alleged ringleader Lemaricus Davidson on the path to death.

With a sweeping set of guilty verdicts on all murder counts, the five-woman, seven-man jury set the stage for the state’s bid Thursday to seek Davidson’s life as punishment for the January 2007 deaths of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom.

“The people of Knox County are the ones who took care of our kids today,” said Deena Christian, mother of Channon Christian.

“We finally have the justice our kids deserve,” said Mary Newsom, mother of Chris Newsom.

Jurors also found Davidson, 28, guilty of the kidnapping and robbery of the couple, rejecting defense claims the pair went willingly to Davidson’s Chipman Street house.

They also deemed him guilty of multiple rapes of Christian, 21. They were unable to conclude whether Davidson raped Newsom, 23, and instead returned lesser verdicts of facilitation of Newsom’s rape.

Never did hear Sharpton or Jackson come out in disgust about these murders….wonder why?

UPDATE

The punishment is death:

The jury of five women and seven men deliberated about four hours before returning its decision this afternoon to a packed courtroom.

“The punishment is death,” the jury foreman said.

The victims’ families gasped at the verdict, but Davidson showed no reaction. Criminal Court Judge Richard Baumgartner admonished those in the courtroom to control any outburst.

“The murder was especially heinous, atrocious and cruel,” the foreman said, reading from the verdict form.

Most honest reaction in the blogosphere so far comes from Ace:

But don’t worry. He’ll become a poet on death row and soon Paris will declare him an honorary citizen.

Via ABC News:

A pharmacy college graduate made a defiant appearance in federal court Wednesday, hours after being charged with conspiring with two other men in a terror plot to kill two prominent U.S. politicians and carry out a holy war by attacking shoppers in U.S. malls and American troops in Iraq.

Authorities say the men’s plans — in which they used code words like “peanut butter and jelly” for fighting in Somalia and “culinary school” for terrorist camps — were thwarted in part when they could not find training and were unable to buy automatic weapons, authorities said.

Tarek Mehanna, 27, was arrested Wednesday morning at his parents’ home in Sudbury, an upscale suburb 20 miles west of Boston, and appeared for a brief hearing later in the day. When ordered by the judge to stand to hear the charge against him, he refused. He finally did stand — tossing his chair loudly to the floor — only after his father urged him to do so.

“This really, really is a show,” his father, Ahmed Mehanna, said afterward.

Uh…no. That would be balloon boy and his father. This is different…

When asked if he believed the charges against his son, he said, “No, definitely not.”

Ah, yes… he’s such a good boy, his family claimed when he was arrested last year:

Like clockwork, Mehanna’s family defends him as a nice boy who just completed his graduate work to become a pharmacist. What his family may or may not know is that Mehanna goes by the online handle “Abu Sayaba” and runs the “Iskandari” website which is devoted to promoting the Salafi ideology.

This is like the 4th or 5th terror plot that’s been disrupted in the past month and made public, isn’t it?

While al Qaeda traditionally goes for the big and spectacular, just think what a series of smaller-scale terror attacks could achieve from terror cells and jihadist-wannabe, driven by Islamic hate, regardless of whether or not they are affiliated with al Qaeda. Malls, movie theaters, dance clubs, schools, buses…any public setting where people converge.

Prosecutors say Tarek Mehanna worked with two men from 2001 to May 2008 on the conspiracy to “kill, kidnap, maim or injure” soldiers and two politicians who were members of the executive branch but are no longer in office. Authorities refused to identify the politicians.

Mehanna — a graduate of the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy in Boston, where his father is a professor — conspired with Ahmad Abousamra, who authorities say is now in Syria, and an unnamed man, who is cooperating in the investigation, according to authorities.

The three men often discussed their desire to participate in “violent jihad against American interests” and talked about “their desire to die on the battlefield,” prosecutors said. But when they were unable to join terror groups in Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan, they found inspiration in the Washington-area sniper shootings and turned their interests to domestic terror pursuits while they plotted the attack on shopping malls, authorities said.

~~~

Loucks said the men justified attacks because U.S. civilians pay taxes to support the U.S. government and because they are “nonbelievers.”

~~~

Court documents filed by the government say that in 2002 or 2003, Abousamra became frustrated after repeatedly being rejected to join terror groups in Pakistan — first Lashkar e Tayyiba, then the Taliban.

“Because Abousamra was an Arab (not Pakistani) the LeT camp would not accept him, and because of Abousamra’s lack of experience, the Taliban camp would not accept him,” FBI Special Agent Heidi Williams wrote in the affidavit.

Mehanna and Abousamra traveled to Yemen in 2004 in an attempt to join a terrorist training camp.

It’s a tough life being a successful terrorist-wannabe-wahhabi.

Mehanna allegedly told a friend, the third conspirator who is now cooperating with authorities, that their trip was a failure because they were unable to reach people affiliated with the camps. The men, who had allegedly received tips on whom to meet from a person identified in court documents as “Individual A,” said half the people they wanted to see were on “hajj,” referring to the pilgrimage to Mecca in Islam, and half were in jail.

“They traveled all over the country looking for the people Individual A told them to meet,” authorities allege in the criminal complaint.

Abousamra was rejected by a terror group when he sought training in Iraq because he was American, authorities said.

The men later decided they were not going to be able to get terror training in Pakistan and “began exploring other options, including terrorist acts in the United States,” the affidavit said.

Mehanna, a U.S. citizen, was arrested in November and charged with lying to the FBI in December 2006 when asked the whereabouts of Daniel Maldonado, who is now serving a 10-year prison sentence for training with al-Qaida to overthrow the Somali government.

Mehanna told the FBI that Maldonado was living in Egypt and working for a Web site. But authorities said Maldonado had called Mehanna from Somalia urging him to join him in “training for jihad.”

Authorities said Wednesday that Mehanna and his conspirators had contacted Maldonado about getting automatic weapons for their planned mall attacks.

Carney, who represented Mehanna in the previous case, said at the time: “If this is the FBI’s idea of a terrorist, they are using a net that is designed to catch minnows instead of sharks.”

After his arrest, Mehanna developed a cult following among Muslim civil rights groups and Web sites that believed Mehanna was wrongly arrested. Web sites like the London-based cageprisoners.com…, a human rights group that advocates for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other detainees as part of the U.S. war on terror, asked supporters to write Mehanna in prison to keep up his spirits.

The site MuslimMatters.org… asked supporters to pray for his release and published a letter they said Mehanna wrote from prison.

In the letter, Mehanna thanked supporters and said he was being treated well.

“I can only think of the countless imprisoned Muslims in the jails of tyrants around the globe and hope that if it is not Allah’s Decree to free them in the near future, that they taste the sweetness that Allah has placed them in prison to taste,” Mehanna wrote.

He signed the letter, “Your brother in the green jumpsuit.”

So long as Muslim groups act as apologists and defenders of these failed martyrs and deride religious-ethnic-nationality profiling, the Patriot Act, NSA surveillance programs, and oppose and mischaracterize U.S. foreign policy and our military efforts, they will only do themselves more harm than good; and only enable, encourage, and foster more home-grown Islamic terrorists.

On the 25th, thousands of protesters (possibly millions according to some online accounts) descended upon Pittsburgh, PA to demonstrate for various causes at the G20 Summit. It was the second day of marching. There were socialists, anarchists, and environmentalists; everyone from veteran protesters who were marching in the 60s to wide-eyed college kids drawn by the idealism and excitement. Some were there to protest peacefully while others were there to cause violence and property damage.

One man, who has yet to reveal his real name, caused over $20,000 of damage singlehandedly by smashing between 12-15 shop windows during the march.

To contain such instigators, and to keep demonstrators on the marching path, the Pittsburgh Police Department was dispatched in full riot gear. For a currently unknown reason, violence broke out. Both sides claim that the other acted first. As seen in the video link below there were helicopters with floodlights, APCs with loudspeakers and sound cannons, tear gas, rubber bullets, ballistic beanbags, and German Shepherds (as seen in another video taken on site.) Police did not hold back when attempting to disperse crowds and used all legal force at their disposal. They were caught off guard in February, they wouldn’t be caught off guard now. There was general chaos in the city and it spilled over into a university campus and involved innocent bystanders.

In some YouTube videos, sizable crowds of college kids can be seen running for safety away from police.

This video gives an excellent sense of the police crackdown from a student’s point of view.

From this perspective it may seem that we live in a fascist state that oppresses those who speak out against government policies. However, a closer examination of the organizers of the march reveals the truth behind the violence and subsequent propaganda.

On Twitter an energetic young woman tweeted a link to a video which seems to show police oppressing peaceful protesters who are simply acting under the 1st amendment.

See the video here.

A closer look reveals that the man with the megaphone who is spontaneously spouting libertarian rhetoric on a spur of the moment feeling is actually a grizzled revolutionary with a track record of arrests and public disruption. This man is Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange.org… This group was founded on the premise that the terrorists attacks of 9/11/01 and the resulting collapse of the World Trade Center in New York City was planned and administered by the U.S. government. The group’s activities since then have been focused on disrupting police organizations and organizing garish protests. Rudkowski himself has been arrested for disruption in New York and Los Angeles. The website brags of such accomplishments. This organization largely contributed to disruption in the city.

Another Anarchist who was largely responsible for organizing the riot from Twitter was Mike Gogulski of nostate.com. A self-described, “Future stateless person,” Gogulski is an unabashed anarchist who no longer lives or works in the U.S. but has vowed to overthrow the current system of society. Through Twitter on his cellphone he was able to coordinate fellow protesters’ movements by tweeting where police officers were, where they were going, and what they were planning to do. Anyone who wanted to see these tweets just had to look at a feed entitled “#resistg20.” (There was also a more open feed entitled “#g20″ where many points of view were expressed.)

What are we to think then? Are we to dismiss this as the act of a fringe group of radical revolutionists who have no real power? No.

A group like this is never powerless because of their ability to organize with startling speed and efficiency. Also, such groups have the ability to infiltrate lumbering, overstuffed bureaucracies such as the U.S. Government and institute policy behind an OZ like curtain of secrecy. The Communist Party had a lot of success doing this between the 1920s and 1950s. (Read “Witness” by Whittaker Chambers to gain some perspective.)

So is this proof of a fascist/communist/socialist revolution? No.

Whenever you see protesters in the streets calling for an end to the excesses of capitalism or demanding the downsizing of government you’re seeing a nation’s desperate cry for help, but not in the way you might think.

The election of Barrack Obama inspired millions of people to have faith in government and to expect corporate waste to end. This clearly hasn’t happened. Instead we’ve seen the government get into bed with corporations such as GM. This one act of buying out and running GM realizes two of the greatest fears that Americans have. The election of Barrack Obama to the White House didn’t unify the nation as has been claimed. It raised the hopes of millions only to make government waste and corporate abuses of power worse.

Basically, Americans are feeling control of their lives and of their country being taken from them and they are scared. People are doing drastic things in the hope of regaining their control. Some are calling for the drastic overhaul of healthcare while others attend violent rallies like the one in Pittsburgh. This is one factor contributing to a larger problem.

A feeling of helplessness and despair about our roles in the world is at the heart of radicalism and unrest in this country, regardless of political leanings or socioeconomic status. Americans and the people of the world don’t want partisan domination of government. People don’t like either party! They want the freedom to control their own lives and have their voices heard.

This one problem of disenfranchisement is very complex by itself as it encompasses spiritual, economic, physical, political, and intellectual facets which each have been significantly complicated over the past century. (I’ll address each of those in subsequent posts.)

Next Week: How Twitter and Social Networking are Making Mass Media obsolete.

Related Material: “An Open Letter to G20 Protesters”

Crossposted from Peter Lajoie: A Cutting Edge Perspective

NYTimes:

WASHINGTON — As Congress prepares to consider extending crucial provisions of the USA Patriot Act, civil liberties groups and some Democratic lawmakers are gearing up to press for sweeping changes to surveillance laws.

Both the House and the Senate are set to hold their first committee hearings this week on whether to reauthorize three sections of the Patriot Act that expire at the end of this year. The provisions expanded the power of the F.B.I. to seize records and to eavesdrop on phone calls in the course of a counterterrorism investigation.

Is this really an “expansion” of power? Or a matter of updating existing powers in order for the F.B.I. to effectively do its job of protecting American lives in wake of 21st century technological advancements?

Laying down a marker ahead of those hearings, a group of senators who support greater privacy protections filed a bill on Thursday that would impose new safeguards on the Patriot Act while tightening restrictions on other surveillance policies. The measure is co-sponsored by nine Democrats and an independent.

The Judicious Use of Surveillance Tools In Counterterrorism Efforts (JUSTICE- ain’t that cute?) Act is being introduced by U.S. Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Jon Tester (D-MT), Tom Udall (D-NM), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT- who might as well carry a “D” by his name).

“Every single member of Congress wants to give our law enforcement and intelligence officials the tools they need to keep Americans safe,” Mr. Feingold said in a statement when filing the bill. “But with the Patriot Act up for reauthorization, we should take this opportunity to fix the flaws in our surveillance laws once and for all.”

Really?! Feingold (and every single member of Congress) wants to give our FBI and CIA the tools they need to keep Americans safe? Is that what he wanted in Oct. 2001 when he alone opposed the Patriot Act? If he had a chance to vote against the entire Patriot Act today, would he do so? 8 years following the events of 9/11, and we have not experienced another such terror attack. How has the Patriot Act not contributed to that success?

One of the witnesses Democrats have invited to testify at both hearings is Suzanne E. Spaulding, who has worked for lawmakers of both parties as a former top staffer on the House and Senate Intelligence committees.

I love when it’s always pointed out that she’s “worked for lawmakers of both parties”, as if that gives her credentials of being down the middle/bipartisan. But on this issue, she has always aligned herself against the Bush Administration on the Patriot Act, FISA, NSA surveillance program.

Mrs. Spaulding said she would urge Congress to tighten restrictions on when the F.B.I. could use the Patriot Act powers.

The rapid build-up of domestic intelligence authorities after the Sept. 11 attacks, she said, had overlooked “important safeguards,” which has resulted “in a greater likelihood at a minimum of the government mistakenly intruding into the privacy of innocent Americans, and at worst having a greater capability of abusing these authorities.”

Still, she acknowledged, the public record contains scant evidence that the F.B.I. has abused its powers under the three expiring Patriot Act sections.

Yet Spaulding and others of her mindset continue to fear-monger a characterization of “abuses”, “spying on AMERICANS (not terrorists)”, “civil rights intrusion”. That’s how they define this.

Republicans invited Kenneth L. Wainstein, a former assistant attorney general for national security for the Bush administration, to testify at both Patriot Act hearings.

“We have to be careful not to limit these tools to the point that they are no longer useful in fast-moving threat investigations,” Mr. Wainstein said. “There is an important place for oversight of national security tools, and that oversight is being exercised by Congress and by the federal judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

The first such provision allows investigators to get “roving wiretap” court orders authorizing them to follow a target who switches phone numbers or phone companies, rather than having to apply for a new warrant each time.

From 2004 to 2009, the Federal Bureau of Investigation applied for such an order about 140 times, Robert S. Mueller, the F.B.I. director, said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week.

The second such provision allows the F.B.I. to get a court order to seize “any tangible things” deemed relevant to a terrorism investigation — like a business’s customer records, a diary or a computer.

From 2004 to 2009, the bureau used that authority more than 250 times, Mr. Mueller said.

The final provision set to expire is called the “lone wolf” provision. It allows the F.B.I. to get a court order to wiretap a terrorism suspect who is not connected to any foreign terrorist group or foreign government.

Mr. Mueller said this authority had never been used, but the bureau still wanted Congress to extend it.

I wonder if Dennis Kucinich sees that last fact as a reason for scrapping it. 5 years after the enactment of the Patriot Act, the number of searches conducted at libraries under the business records provision was just one, prompting Kucinich to say: “If they haven’t used it, they shouldn’t have any problems with our efforts to get it repealed.”

As Ron Kessler points out, “That was like saying that because a policeman had never used his gun, it should be taken away.” [pg 65, The Terrorist Watch]

Kucinich, btw, was on a FOX morning news show this weekend, crying foul over the timing of arrests made last week to foil a terror plot in NYC, in close proximity of the upcoming debate on the Patriot Act. That accusation is a bit akin to Nancy Pelosi’s smear of the CIA. However, who would engage in political timing and advocacy? Why, the national security-averse NYTimes in 2005:

Before yesterday’s vote, opponents of the legislation rallied around a front page article in Thursday’s New York Times that reported Mr. Bush had secretly lifted certain limits on spying inside the United States. After more than a year holding the story, the paper decided to run it on the day of the Patriot Act vote.

The rhetoric of the Senators who are introducing the JUSTICE Act is one of striking balance between giving law enforcement and intell officials the tools they need on the one hand; while protecting American civil liberties on the other. But are Americans really in danger of being targeted for civil rights abuses and violations under the current Patriot Act?

Many of the proposals under discussion involve small wording shifts whose impact can be difficult to understand, in part because the statutes are extremely technical and some govern technology that is classified.

But in general, civil libertarians and some Democrats have called for changes that would require stronger evidence of meaningful links between a terrorism suspect and the person whom investigators are targeting.

In the same way, some are proposing to use any Patriot Act extension bill to tighten when the F.B.I. may use “national security letters” — administrative subpoenas that allow counterterrorism agents to seize business records without obtaining permission from a judge. Agents use the device tens of thousands of times each year.

The Patriot Act section that expanded the F.B.I.’s power to issue those letters is not expiring, but they have become particularly controversial because the Justice Department’s inspector general issued two reports finding that F.B.I. agents frequently misused the device to obtain bank, credit card and telephone records.

National security letters are similar to grand jury subpoenas, issued in international terrorism and espionage investigations.

Ronald Kessler, The Terrorist Watch, has some things to say regarding this matter, Pg 73-5:

As it turns out, the actual number of national security letters issued by the FBI each year averages around 50,000. While that number may sound like a lot, an investigation of one suspected terrorist may entail issuance of hundreds of national security letters to track down data from each bank account, credit card, cell phone, telephone, e-mail, and Internet account he may have used over time.

~~~

In a later audit, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine found minor deficiencies associated with 22 of the 293 national security letters he examined from 2003 to 2005. In some cases, the letters were issued after the authorized investigation period, or an agent had accidentally transposed the digits in a telephone number of a person under investigation.

In about half the cases, the problems were not the fault of the FBI: According to Fine’s report, recipients of the letters sometimes turned over more information than requested or provided information about the wrong phone number. These problems never should have been lumped in with FBI violations.

Mueller brought that up with Fine, who insisted he was right to do so.

Mueller says the reason the FBI did not keep proper track of requests for national security letters is that no separate system had been set up to keep track of them.

~~~

By the time the report came out, Mueller had already taken twelve steps to correct the problems,

~~~

Fine specifically found that the FBI had not intentionally violated any rules. He determined that, with the exception of situations where the recipient made an error, the FBI in most cases had obtained information to which it was, in fact, entitled. He noted the tremendous workload of FBI agents trying to stop the next attack. And he concluded that NSLs have contributed significantly to the FBI’s counterterrorism efforts.

The news accounts either ignored or downplayed these findings. Instead, they played up the story as a massive intrusion into people’s personal lives, suggesting NSLs had something to do with monitoring calls rather than simply obtaining subscriber information associated with telephone numbers and e-mail addresses or obtaining financial records.

The F.B.I and the C.I.A. are not interested in “spying” upon ordinary Americans. They are interested in being able to do their jobs and to do them well, which involves protecting their loved ones and ordinary Americans.

Whose rights were being violated more, those whose phones were tapped by court order or those who died in the 9/11 attacks?
- Ron Kessler, The Terrorist Watch, pg 64

JUSTICE Act 2009 fact sheet:

The Judicious Use of Surveillance Tools In Counterterrorism Efforts (JUSTICE) Act would reform the USA PATRIOT Act, the FISA Amendments Act and other surveillance authorities to protect the constitutional rights of Americans while ensuring the government has the powers it needs to fight terrorism and collect intelligence.

Title I – Reasonable Safeguards to Protect the Privacy of Americans’ Records

Sections 101-106 – National Security Letters

The bill rewrites the National Security Letter (NSL) statutes to ensure the FBI can obtain basic information without a court order, but also adds reasonable safeguards to ensure NSLs are only used to obtain records of people who have some connection to terrorism or espionage, and to provide meaningful, constitutionally sound judicial review of NSLs and associated gag orders.

Section 107 – Section 215 Orders

The bill would reauthorize the use of Section 215 business records orders under FISA, but with additional checks and balances to ensure these orders are only used to obtain records of people who have some connection to terrorism or espionage, and to provide meaningful, constitutionally sound judicial review of Section 215 orders and associated gag orders.

Title II – Reasonable Safeguards to Protect the Privacy of Americans’ Homes

Section 201 – “Sneak & Peek” Searches

The bill would retain the Patriot Act’s authorization of “sneak and peek” criminal searches but eliminate the overbroad catch-all provision that allows these secret searches in virtually any criminal case. It would shorten the presumptive time limits for notification, and create a statutory exclusionary rule.

Title III – Reasonable Safeguards to Protect the Privacy of Americans’ Communications

Section 301 – FISA Roving Wiretaps

The bill would reauthorize roving FISA wiretaps, but eliminate the possibility of “John Doe” roving wiretaps that identify neither the person nor the phone to be wiretapped. It would require agents to ascertain the presence of the target of a roving wiretap before beginning surveillance.

Section 302 – Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices

The bill would retain the Patriot Act’s expansion of the FISA and criminal pen/trap authorities to cover electronic communications, but would allow pen/traps to be used only to obtain information about people who have some connection to terrorism or espionage. It would impose additional procedural safeguards to serve as a check on these authorities.

Section 303 – Telecommunications Immunity

The bill would repeal the retroactive immunity provision in the FISA Amendments Act.

Section 304 – Bulk Collection

The bill retains the new warrantless authorities in the FISA Amendments Act but would prevent the government from using that law to conduct “bulk collection” of the contents of communications, including all communications between the United States and the rest of the world.

Section 305 – Reverse Targeting

The bill would ensure that the overseas warrantless collection authorities of the FISA Amendments Act are not used as a pretext to target Americans in the U.S.

Section 306 – Use of Unlawfully Obtained Information

The bill would limit the government’s use of information about Americans obtained under FISA Amendments Act procedures that the FISA Court later determines to be unlawful, while giving the court flexibility to allow such information to be used in appropriate cases.

Section 307 – Protections for International Communications of Americans

The bill would amend the FISA Amendments Act to create safeguards for communications not related to terrorism that the government knows have one end in the United States.

Section 308 – Computer Trespass

The bill would guard against abuse of a warrantless surveillance authority in the Patriot Act that allows computer owners who are subject to denial of service attacks or other episodes of hacking to give the government permission to monitor trespassers on their systems.

Title IV – Improvements to Further Congressional and Judicial Oversight

Section 401 – FISA Public Reporting

The bill would require limited additional public reporting on the use of FISA.

Section 402 – Use of FISA Evidence

The bill would apply the Classified Information Procedures Act to the use of FISA evidence in criminal cases, and allow the use of protective orders and other security measures in civil cases, to ensure that courts have discretion to allow litigants access to information where appropriate while still protecting sensitive information.

Section 403 – Nationwide Court Orders

The bill would permit a recipient of a nationwide court order to challenge it either in the district where it was issued or in the district where the recipient is located.

Title V – Improvements to Further Effective, Focused Investigations

Section 501 – Domestic Terrorism

The Patriot Act’s overbroad definition of domestic terrorism could cover acts of civil disobedience by political organizations. The bill would limit the qualifying offenses for domestic terrorism to those that constitute a federal crime of terrorism.

Section 502 – Material Support

The bill would amend the overly broad criminal definition of material support for terrorism by specifying that a person must know or intend the support provided will be used for terrorist activity.

Coming on the heels of Cheney’s FOX News Sunday interview, in which the former Vice President leveled criticism toward the current President that he is increasing America’s vulnerability to terrorism, is an interview by Jake Tapper with the president’s National Security Adviser, Gen. Jim Jones (Ret.). Jones claims that under the Obama Administration, we have been more successful in putting terrorists out of business and in improving international relations:

“This type of radical fundamentalism or terrorism is a threat not only to the United States but to the global community,” Jones said. “The world is coming together on this matter now that President Obama has taken the leadership on it and is approaching it in a slightly different way – actually a radically different way – to discuss things with other rulers to enhance the working relationships with law enforcement agencies – both national and international.”

Jones said that “we are seeing results that indicate more captures, more deaths of radical leaders and a kind of a global coming-together by the fact that this is a threat to not only the United States but to the world at-large and the world is moving toward doing something about it.”

The former Marine General didn’t provide any specific numbers to back up his claim, but he said “there is an increasing trend and I think we seen that in different parts of the world over the last few months for sure.” He added that he was not “making a tally sheet saying we are killing more people, capturing more people than they did — that is not the issue.”

But the numbers are going up, he said. “The numbers of high value targets that we are successfully reaching out to or identifying through good intelligence” from both the CIA and intelligence agencies from US allies has made the difference, he said. “We have better human intelligence; we know where the terrorists are moving. Because of the dialogue and the tone of the dialogue between us and our friends and allies…the trend line against terrorism is positive, and that’s what we want. If we have a positive trend line we have a safer country.”

All this was going on under the Bush Administration. The Obama Administration is an inheritor of those successes, including cooperation amongst foreign nations in the GWoRIT.

Many of the tools and policies put in place in waging the Overseas Contingency Operations are Bush era creations, which President Obama has kept in place in his continuation of “Bush’s War(s)”.

Steve Schippert writes:

Someone is going to point to Pakistan to help him out here, where Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud was finally introduced to the working end of a Hellfire missile.

That’s a load of garbage the instant anyone attempts to take that easy way out. The cooperation within Pakistan has got jack to do with President Obama’s suddenly deft foreign policy prowess nor his wild popularity with global media and resulting coverage – which is to be astutely distinguished from wild popularity among world leaders. Pakistan’s cooperation was being lined up mostly by the Taliban itself, which made its insurgency against the government of Pakistan so bold that the Pakistanis could push it off no longer. They simply had to deal, and have been for the better part of the year.

Predator drone attacks? Those began under President Bush and continue on under President Obama. Under Musharraf and during the Bush tenure, Pakistani authorities handed over to us, Abu Zubaydah and KSM. How have relations improved under Obama’s watch?

The GWoRIT has not been waged ONLY militarily and ONLY in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s been waged globally, with kills and captures of leaders and operatives happening all the time, in 102 different countries, in cooperation with our CIA and FBI and our military. This all happened under President Bush.

Cowboy diplomacy and “go-it-alone” unilateralism? “You’re either with us, or with the terrorists”? America’s standing harmed; we’re hated all over the world….spin and the stuff of talking point mantra myth-perceptions.

“There is no military solution.”

So sick of this strawman! When had the Bush Administration ever claimed its solution to fighting terrorism was strictly a military one? When was its approach to Iraq and Afghanistan ever strictly a military solution?!

Reaching out to the Muslim community? Not exclusively unique to President Obama.

Closing Gitmo? Really?!? Please wake me when it actually happens.

The War in Iraq? President Obama rode in on the coattails of the surge success he opposed and is merely surfing the waves of SOFA, signed under President Bush.

The War in Afghanistan? He’s acting more like Bush, than not.

NSA warrantless wiretaps much criticized under Bush continue under Obama (partial list of plots averted under Bush)….Rendition programs begun under Clinton, leaked under Bush (which did harm our relations by embarrassing allies implicated in cooperation with the Bush Administration on the GWoRIT- but that’s thanks to the NYTimes, USAToday, and WaPo. We just can’t be trusted with keeping secrets), continue under Obama….

Officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. says this is no longer America and the First Amendment no longer applies. Unfrakkin’believable!

Hat tip Caleb Howe

A few weeks later, when the distraction had faded and poll numbers were sagging again, the Obama Admin tried to suggest that “torture” had been going on without the informed consent of Congress. The problem there was that Congress HAD been informed, and CIA Director Leon Panetta was compelled to release documents showing that Congress had been informed. This put the Speaker of the House in an awkward position, and she handled it poorly.

She tried the torture-distraction-tactic as well by claiming that there were other CIA programs that were illegal, that she had no knowledge of, and that were criminal. Again, CIA Director Panetta was forced to reveal that no, the programs she referred to were not illegal. He tried to claim that it was just a miscommunication and misunderstanding on the Speaker’s part, but she had lost face, argued she understood perfectly, and Panetta had to fall on his sword by claiming he’d screwed up and falsely reported the existence of these illegal programs.

Well, it’s that time of year again. The President and the Democrats’ Congress have sagging approval ratings, SO!!!!!!! Let’s talk torture! Obama’s Department of Justice has re-reviewed some of the already investigated allegations of torture, and decided to re-open some of the cases that had been closed. Will the torture-distraction-tactic work again? Probably not.

There are multiple problems with investigating closed cases from a previous Administration, but the core problem is that there is no statute of limitations on how far back such allegations can be re-opened and re-investigated. Using the exact same argument that’s being used to re-open these allegations of “torture,” the DOJ may be required to pursue standing orders, techniques, and policies that pre-date the Bush Administration. Moreover, if they are re-opening past allegations of “torture”, then when the same or similar tactics and techniques are used today by the Obama Administration, then the DOJ is even more compelled than usual to investigate the Obama Administration OR face a Special Prosecutor. The latter is not likely if Democrats hold control of Congress, but that’s not likely either. If Republicans take even one House of Congress in 14 months, then they very well could have a case for impeachment on their hands-impeachment of President Obama on charges that he authorized the same or similar “torture” and extraordinary rendition of prisoners to other countries FOR torture as did his predecessors Bush and Clinton.

More specifically, if the Obama DOJ investigates the Bush Admin for conducting extraordinary renditions (sending prisoners to other countries so the other country can torture them on our behalf), then the Obama Admin will have to explain why IT TOO is even now conducting extraordinary renditions. It will have to explain why the CIA Director, Leon Panetta, claims to have personally arranged renditions himself when he was President Clinton’s Chief of Staff. President Clinton’s Counterterrorism Czar, Richard Clarke, will have to testify to the extraordinary renditions he admits he personally authorized.

Many on the left will find vigor and woohoo in the idea of possibly prosecuting anyone who had anything to do with the Bush Administration. This is ALWAYS an effective way for Team Obama and the Democrats’ Congresss to refire their base.
Good luck with that this time though. While falling poll numbers are partially the result of an increasingly apathetic and frustrated base, the real problem is the independent-minded swing voter who was promised good things in 2006, and again in 2008, and has yet to see any of the big promises fulfilled.

Besides, Bush and Cheney are surely protected, and just going after them or anyone in their administration open’s a Pandora’s Box of problems for Obama and the Democrats. It’s not like some Republican Congressman from Podunk, USA isn’t going to go on TV and immediately ask pundits, “Why just go after people who did this in the Bush Administration? Why not go after those in the Clinton and Obama Administrations who are doing it even today?”

This problem is made worse by the very real possibility that Republicans will take one or both Houses of Congress next year, and they will steer the investigations towards THEIR political ends rather than towards Obama’s.

Democrats’ face:
Losing Congress for the same reasons they took Congress in 2006
If they lose Congress, Obama becomes a lame duck and goodbye CHANGE

Say it with me,

President Biden, please raise your right and and repeat after me.
Do you solemnly swear…..

UPDATE:
Recall earlier that I said the DOJ would have to appoint a special prosecutor. They’re doing it. Now, if Repubs re-take at least one House of Congress, and this Special Prosecutor hasn’t made a case there can be almost NO DOUBT that Republicans will demand/force the investigation to re-examine Clinton and Obama records on rendition and torture (read the link, and see that some Repubs are already pointing the fingers at Dems as well).

This is a political doomsday bomb in the making if not quelled soon. Obama has GOT to stop letting Rahm Emanuel play politics w national security. It only re-ignites the DNC base for a few days, and each time this little game has been played by the Obama Admin, the Dems have been seriously wounded by the consequences.

Getty Images

Well, well, well….today’s the day we head over at the White House, where everybody knows their names:

President Obama will welcome a well-known scholar and the police officer who arrested him to the White House on Thursday, in an effort to put to an end the racially charged controversy caused by the arrest near Harvard University earlier this month.

Obama, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge, Mass., police are scheduled to gather over beers at a picnic table outside the Oval Office, joined by their families. The White House hopes the meeting will transform a public relations misstep for the nation’s first African American president into a “teachable moment” for improving the nation’s race relations.

Obama invited the two men to the White House on Friday, the same day he publicly expressed regret for saying July 22 at a nationally televised news conference that Cambridge police had “acted stupidly” by arresting Gates at his home. The remark ignited a backlash from conservative commentators and law enforcement officials, who accused Obama of speaking rashly and being anti-police.

That controversy caught the White House by surprise, and initially the president, a friend of Gates’s, stuck by his words. But as objections continued to build, Obama discussed it briefly with friends while at his Chicago home on Thursday, a White House official said. Later, he also discussed the issue with his wife — who was said to be as outraged by the arrest as he was — before deciding to step back from his original stand. Obama told reporters that both Crowley and Gates, who reportedly berated the officer, overreacted.

~~~

While Obama has recalibrated his original statement, several civil rights activists say his instincts were nonetheless correct. “Unfortunately his comments were misunderstood or less than clear,” said John Payton, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “But I have not heard anyone who disagrees with the following statement: What happened in Skip Gates’s house should not have happened. It’s his home.”

~~~

The informal meeting, where White House officials said Obama will drink a Bud Light, Crowley a Blue Moon and Gates a Red Stripe, will not attempt to address larger racial issues in more than a symbolic way.

“I hope what is essentially a photo op will trigger a broader policy response,” said Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Council on Civil Rights. “And it’s Congress’s role to take that on.”

~~~

Even as the two men agreed to meet again at the White House, Gates has remained consistent in his position that, when he was arrested July 16 for disorderly conduct (a charge that was later dropped), racial profiling occurred. And Crowley has remained consistent in his position that it did not.

I heard Gates Jr. still thinks he is owed an apology. Just him?

Here’s a thought: Get the three of these men punch drunk….then let’s see what really comes out of them. That would make for an “honest” conversation.

What do you think/predict should happen?