[MikeD]

And by the way, treason has only been successfully upheld a handful of times in the history of the country.

Conspiracy to commit murder is probably a more realistic charge, still substantiated by his training (and potential 'membership' in AQ, for lack of a better term, IF that is proved in trial). Although I'm not sure if such conspiracy is proveable without a specific named target. There are also numerous laws about acts of public violence and terrorism, in which his AQ associations, substantiated by his willing participation in AQ training, would potentially involve him in conspiracy to commit.

We'll see how the lawyers sort it out. But this isn't a case of arresting someone for checking a book on Wahabism out from the local library, or speaking out vehemently against American policies in the middle east. It's far more than that. When you involve guns and military training, we're no longer talking about 'thought police.' It's 'reality police' time.

 

[Damn True]

And by the way, treason has only been successfully upheld a handful of times in the history of the country.

Conspiracy to commit murder is probably a more realistic charge, still substantiated by his training (and potential 'membership' in AQ, for lack of a better term, IF that is proved in trial). Although I'm not sure if such conspiracy is proveable without a specific named target. There are also numerous laws about acts of public violence and terrorism, in which his AQ associations, substantiated by his willing participation in AQ training, would potentially involve him in conspiracy to commit.

We'll see how the lawyers sort it out. But this isn't a case of arresting someone for checking a book on Wahabism out from the local library, or speaking out vehemently against American policies in the middle east. It's far more than that. When you involve guns and military training, we're no longer talking about 'thought police.' It's 'reality police' time.

Exactly. I s'pose this will be treated in a similar fasion as the AQ guys they arrested and convicted in upstate NY.

 

[pnj]

weren't these guys on the no fly list?

how does one get on that list and if they were, why were they allowed to fly?

 

[Damn True]

weren't these guys on the no fly list?

how does one get on that list and if they were, why were they allowed to fly?

That is how he was caught. He was detained overseas when he tried to board a flight into the US.
I haven't heard how he got out. Perhaps he wasn't on the no-fly when he left.

 

[Silver]

They should have waited until they actually did something. These guys will end up with a short term for the same thing Martha Stewart did, and they will end up as heroes to their cause. As of now, they haven't really done anything that militia kooks do all the time.

Now, the bigger question (perhaps for another thread) is why are there still al-Qaeda camps in Pakistan, which is supposed to be one of our staunchest allies in the war on terror?

 

[MikeD]

These guys will end up with a short term for the same thing Martha Stewart did

What, baking incredibly delicious spice-herb muffin balls??

MD

which is supposed to be one of our staunchest allies in the war on terror?

aaaahhahhahahahahahhahhhaaaahaahaaaha..heh..ha...*whew*, sorry.

Now tell me the one about the Saudis, too...that one always makes me laugh.

MD

 

[Toshi]

As of right now, I believe the two are only being held on charges that they lied to law enforcement officials.

indeed.

Terror allegations disappear from court filing

who is playing the fool now?

 

[Damn True]

Now, the bigger question (perhaps for another thread) is why are there still al-Qaeda camps in Pakistan, which is supposed to be one of our staunchest allies in the war on terror?

Excellent point.

 

[Damn True]

indeed.

Terror allegations disappear from court filing

who is playing the fool now?

Yes they removed the statements regarding specific targets. However the fact remains that the guy did attend an AQ training camp. That in itself is a punishable offense.

 

[MikeD]

indeed.

who is playing the fool now?

Hey, like I said multiple times, all my posts and the opinions therein were contingent on there being substantiation for the allegations in the affradavit... NONE of us, on any side of this argument, know the actual evidence presented against them for any charges, just what the G was telling us. Dismissing the charges outright as false is just as bad as instant condemnation.

Looks like some shoddy police work and/or sensationalizing on the G's part. Not good for the case...

MD

 

[reflux]

Yes they removed the statements regarding specific targets. However the fact remains that the guy did attend an AQ training camp. That in itself is a punishable offense.

How so? I need a little clarification on exactly what the charge would be. Please.

 

[MikeD]

How so? I need a little clarification on exactly what the charge would be. Please.

Here's a possibility: conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries. IF, as I said before, the prosecution can prove that in attending this training, he was joining in a larger conspiracy by Al-Queada to harm the US Gov't or the population at large. Frankly, doesn't seem that hard to prove...you voluntarily go to boot camp at your own expense, you're 1) aligning yourself with their cause and being indoctrinated into the conspiracy and 2) providing aid to the conspiracy financially and through your potential material and personal support in the future.

Edit: By the way, Al Queada calls for a death sentence on anyone who serves with the US military, not to mention any other Americans it can kill, so it's not like this is a one-sided thing here. I'd say our process is a little more civilized, frankly, involving some sort of due process and rule of law. Say what you will...Patriot Act and all, we haven't simply shot them in the back of the head and moved on. There might be (are, depending on your perspective) things about the US legal system which aren't right, especially at the moment, and need fixing...but these guys are getting a chance to defend themselves in court.

Definition of the charge is below, and it's only an example...but I think it's a good fit for exemplary purposes. The Al-Queada plan, as publicly stated, indeed calls for acts of terrorism transcending national borders. Join this plan and you're part of a conspiracy to commit these acts.

From US Code, TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2332b
--------------
§ 2332b. Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries

Release date: 2004-08-06

(a) Prohibited Acts.—
(1) Offenses.— Whoever, involving conduct transcending national boundaries and in a circumstance described in subsection (b)—
(A) kills, kidnaps, maims, commits an assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or assaults with a dangerous weapon any person within the United States; or
(B) creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;
in violation of the laws of any State, or the United States, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c).
(2) Treatment of threats, attempts and conspiracies.— Whoever threatens to commit an offense under paragraph (1), or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished under subsection (c).
(b) Jurisdictional Bases.—
(1) Circumstances.— The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are—
(A) the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;
(B) the offense obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce, or would have so obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate or foreign commerce if the offense had been consummated;
(C) the victim, or intended victim, is the United States Government, a member of the uniformed services, or any official, officer, employee, or agent of the legislative, executive, or judicial branches, or of any department or agency, of the United States;
(D) the structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property is, in whole or in part, owned, possessed, or leased to the United States, or any department or agency of the United States;
(E) the offense is committed in the territorial sea (including the airspace above and the seabed and subsoil below, and artificial islands and fixed structures erected thereon) of the United States; or
(F) the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
(2) Co-conspirators and accessories after the fact.— Jurisdiction shall exist over all principals and co-conspirators of an offense under this section, and accessories after the fact to any offense under this section, if at least one of the circumstances described in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) is applicable to at least one offender.
(c) Penalties.—
(1) Penalties.— Whoever violates this section shall be punished—
(A) for a killing, or if death results to any person from any other conduct prohibited by this section, by death, or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;
(B) for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;
(C) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than 35 years;
(D) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than 30 years;
(E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;
(F) for attempting or conspiring to commit an offense, for any term of years up to the maximum punishment that would have applied had the offense been completed; and
(G) for threatening to commit an offense under this section, by imprisonment for not more than 10 years.
(2) Consecutive sentence.— Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court shall not place on probation any person convicted of a violation of this section; nor shall the term of imprisonment imposed under this section run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment.
(d) Proof Requirements.— The following shall apply to prosecutions under this section:
(1) Knowledge.— The prosecution is not required to prove knowledge by any defendant of a jurisdictional base alleged in the indictment.
(2) State law.— In a prosecution under this section that is based upon the adoption of State law, only the elements of the offense under State law, and not any provisions pertaining to criminal procedure or evidence, are adopted.
(e) Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.— There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction—
(1) over any offense under subsection (a), including any threat, attempt, or conspiracy to commit such offense; and
(2) over conduct which, under section 3, renders any person an accessory after the fact to an offense under subsection (a).
(f) Investigative Authority.— In addition to any other investigative authority with respect to violations of this title, the Attorney General shall have primary investigative responsibility for all Federal crimes of terrorism, and any violation of section 351 (e), 844 (e), 844 (f)(1), 956 (b), 1361, 1366 (b), 1366 (c), 1751 (e), 2152, or 2156 of this title, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall assist the Attorney General at the request of the Attorney General. Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with the authority of the United States Secret Service under section 3056.
(g) Definitions.— As used in this section—
(1) the term “conduct transcending national boundaries” means conduct occurring outside of the United States in addition to the conduct occurring in the United States;
(2) the term “facility of interstate or foreign commerce” has the meaning given that term in section 1958 (b)(2);
(3) the term “serious bodily injury” has the meaning given that term in section 1365 (g)(3); [1]
(4) the term “territorial sea of the United States” means all waters extending seaward to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States, determined in accordance with international law; and
(5) the term “Federal crime of terrorism” means an offense that—
(A) is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
(B) is a violation of—
(i) section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), 37 (relating to violence at international airports), 81 (relating to arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), 175 or 175b (relating to biological weapons), 229 (relating to chemical weapons), subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) of section 351 (relating to congressional, cabinet, and Supreme Court assassination and kidnaping), 831 (relating to nuclear materials), 842(m) or (n) (relating to plastic explosives), 844(f)(2) or (3) (relating to arson and bombing of Government property risking or causing death), 844(i) (relating to arson and bombing of property used in interstate commerce), 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a Federal facility with a dangerous weapon), 956(a)(1) (relating to conspiracy to murder, kidnap, or maim persons abroad), 1030(a)(1) (relating to protection of computers), 1030(a)(5)(A)(i) resulting in damage as defined in 1030(a)(5)(B)(ii) through (v) (relating to protection of computers), 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the United States), 1116 (relating to murder or manslaughter of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), 1203 (relating to hostage taking), 1362 (relating to destruction of communication lines, stations, or systems), 1363 (relating to injury to buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States), 1366(a) (relating to destruction of an energy facility), 1751(a), (b), (c), or (d) (relating to Presidential and Presidential staff assassination and kidnaping), 1992 (relating to wrecking trains), 1993 (relating to terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against mass transportation systems), 2155 (relating to destruction of national defense materials, premises, or utilities), 2280 (relating to violence against maritime navigation), 2281 (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), 2332 (relating to certain homicides and other violence against United States nationals occurring outside of the United States), 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass destruction), 2332b (relating to acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries), 2332f (relating to bombing of public places and facilities), 2339 (relating to harboring terrorists), 2339A (relating to providing material support to terrorists), 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorist organizations), 2339C (relating to financing of terrorism,[2] or 2340A (relating to torture) of this title;
(ii) section 236 (relating to sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284); or
(iii) section 46502 (relating to aircraft piracy), the second sentence of section 46504 (relating to assault on a flight crew with a dangerous weapon), section 46505 (b)(3) or (c) (relating to explosive or incendiary devices, or endangerment of human life by means of weapons, on aircraft), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved (relating to application of certain criminal laws to acts on aircraft), or section 60123 (b) (relating to destruction of interstate gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facility) of title 49.
----------

 

[Changleen]

http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/news/shownews.jsp?content=w061157A

Few convictions on U.S. terror charges, statistics count lesser crimes

NEW YORK (AP) - The vast majority of convictions the U.S. administration cites as victories in the legal front of its anti-terror campaign are not related to national security, the Washington Post reported Sunday.

On Thursday, President George W. Bush urged renewal of the USA Patriot Act and boasted of the government's success in prosecuting terrorists.

Flanked by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Bush said "federal terrorism investigations have resulted in charges against more than 400 suspects and more than half of those charged have been convicted," the Post said.

Those statistics have been used repeatedly by Bush and other administration officials, including Gonzales and his predecessor, John Ashcroft, to characterize the government's efforts against terrorism.

But the numbers are misleading at best, the Post said.

An analysis of the U.S. Justice Department's own list of terrorism prosecutions by the Post showed 39 people - not 200, as officials have implied - were convicted of crimes related to terrorism or national security.

Most of the others were convicted of relatively minor crimes, such as making false statements and violating immigration law, and had nothing to do with terrorism, the Post analysis shows. For the entire list, the median sentence was just 11 months.

Taken as a whole, the data indicate the government's effort to identify terrorists in the United States has been less successful than authorities have often suggested. The statistics provide little support for the contention authorities have discovered and prosecuted hundreds of terrorists. Except for a small number of well-known cases - such as truck driver Iyman Faris, who sought to take down the Brooklyn Bridge - few of those arrested appear to have been involved in active plots inside the United States, the Post said.

Among all the people charged as a result of terrorism investigations in the three years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, The Post found no demonstrated connection to terrorism or terrorist groups for 180 of them.

Just one in nine individuals on the list had an alleged connection to the al-Qaida terrorist network and only 14 people convicted of terrorism-related crimes - including Faris and convicted Sept. 11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui - have clear links to the group, the Post said. Many more cases involve Colombian drug cartels, supporters of the Palestinian cause, Rwandan war criminals or others with no apparent ties to al Qaeda or its leader, Osama bin Laden.

But a large number of people appear to have been swept into U.S. counter-terrorism investigations by chance - through anonymous tips, suspicious circumstances or bad luck - and have remained classified as terrorism defendants years after being cleared of connections to extremist groups, the Post said.

For example, the prosecution of 20 men, most of them Iraqis, in a Pennsylvania truck-licensing scam accounts for about 10 per cent of individuals convicted - even though the entire group was publicly absolved of ties to terrorism in 2001.

"For so many of these cases, there seems to be much less substance to them than we first assume or have first been told," Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert who heads the Washington office of Rand Corp., a think-tank that conducts national-security research, told the Post.

"There's an inherent deterrent effect in cracking down on any illicit activity. But the challenge is not exaggerating what they were up to - not portraying them as super-terrorists when they're really the low end of the food chain."

U.S. Justice Department officials said they have not sought to exaggerate the importance or suspected associations of those prosecuted in connection with terrorism probes and they argue the list provides only a partial view of their efforts.

Officials said all the individuals were first put on the list because of a suspected connection or allegation related to terrorism. Last week, they also said the department had tightened the requirements for including a case on the terrorism list.

Barry Sabin, chief of the department's counter-terrorism section, said prosecutors frequently turn to lesser charges when they are not confident they can prove crimes such as committing or supporting terrorism. Many defendants also have been prosecuted for relatively minor crimes in exchange for information that is not public but has proven valuable in other terrorism investigations, he told the Post.

"A person could not have been put on this list if there was not a concern about national security, at least initially," he said.

"Are all these people an ongoing threat presently? Arguably not...We are not trying to overstate or understate what we're doing. You don't want to put language or a label on people that is inconsistent with what they have done," the Post quoted him saying.

You can see why one is sceptical.

 

[genpowell71]

Here's a possibility: conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries. IF, as I said before, the prosecution can prove that in attending this training, he was joining in a larger conspiracy by Al-Queada to harm the US Gov't or the population at large. Frankly, doesn't seem that hard to prove...you voluntarily go to boot camp at your own expense, you're 1) aligning yourself with their cause and being indoctrinated into the conspiracy and 2) providing aid to the conspiracy financially and through your potential material and personal support in the future.

Edit: By the way, Al Queada calls for a death sentence on anyone who serves with the US military, not to mention any other Americans it can kill, so it's not like this is a one-sided thing here. I'd say our process is a little more civilized, frankly, involving some sort of due process and rule of law. Say what you will...Patriot Act and all, we haven't simply shot them in the back of the head and moved on. There might be (are, depending on your perspective) things about the US legal system which aren't right, especially at the moment, and need fixing...but these guys are getting a chance to defend themselves in court.

Definition of the charge is below, and it's only an example...but I think it's a good fit for exemplary purposes. The Al-Queada plan, as publicly stated, indeed calls for acts of terrorism transcending national borders. Join this plan and you're part of a conspiracy to commit these acts.

From US Code, TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2332b
--------------
§ 2332b. Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries

Release date: 2004-08-06

(a) Prohibited Acts.—
(1) Offenses.— Whoever, involving conduct transcending national boundaries and in a circumstance described in subsection (b)—
(A) kills, kidnaps, maims, commits an assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or assaults with a dangerous weapon any person within the United States; or
(B) creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;
in violation of the laws of any State, or the United States, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c).
(2) Treatment of threats, attempts and conspiracies.— Whoever threatens to commit an offense under paragraph (1), or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished under subsection (c).
(b) Jurisdictional Bases.—
(1) Circumstances.— The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are—
(A) the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;
(B) the offense obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce, or would have so obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate or foreign commerce if the offense had been consummated;
(C) the victim, or intended victim, is the United States Government, a member of the uniformed services, or any official, officer, employee, or agent of the legislative, executive, or judicial branches, or of any department or agency, of the United States;
(D) the structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property is, in whole or in part, owned, possessed, or leased to the United States, or any department or agency of the United States;
(E) the offense is committed in the territorial sea (including the airspace above and the seabed and subsoil below, and artificial islands and fixed structures erected thereon) of the United States; or
(F) the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
(2) Co-conspirators and accessories after the fact.— Jurisdiction shall exist over all principals and co-conspirators of an offense under this section, and accessories after the fact to any offense under this section, if at least one of the circumstances described in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) is applicable to at least one offender.
(c) Penalties.—
(1) Penalties.— Whoever violates this section shall be punished—
(A) for a killing, or if death results to any person from any other conduct prohibited by this section, by death, or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;
(B) for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;
(C) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than 35 years;
(D) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than 30 years;
(E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;
(F) for attempting or conspiring to commit an offense, for any term of years up to the maximum punishment that would have applied had the offense been completed; and
(G) for threatening to commit an offense under this section, by imprisonment for not more than 10 years.
(2) Consecutive sentence.— Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court shall not place on probation any person convicted of a violation of this section; nor shall the term of imprisonment imposed under this section run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment.
(d) Proof Requirements.— The following shall apply to prosecutions under this section:
(1) Knowledge.— The prosecution is not required to prove knowledge by any defendant of a jurisdictional base alleged in the indictment.
(2) State law.— In a prosecution under this section that is based upon the adoption of State law, only the elements of the offense under State law, and not any provisions pertaining to criminal procedure or evidence, are adopted.
(e) Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.— There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction—
(1) over any offense under subsection (a), including any threat, attempt, or conspiracy to commit such offense; and
(2) over conduct which, under section 3, renders any person an accessory after the fact to an offense under subsection (a).
(f) Investigative Authority.— In addition to any other investigative authority with respect to violations of this title, the Attorney General shall have primary investigative responsibility for all Federal crimes of terrorism, and any violation of section 351 (e), 844 (e), 844 (f)(1), 956 (b), 1361, 1366 (b), 1366 (c), 1751 (e), 2152, or 2156 of this title, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall assist the Attorney General at the request of the Attorney General. Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with the authority of the United States Secret Service under section 3056.
(g) Definitions.— As used in this section—
(1) the term “conduct transcending national boundaries” means conduct occurring outside of the United States in addition to the conduct occurring in the United States;
(2) the term “facility of interstate or foreign commerce” has the meaning given that term in section 1958 (b)(2);
(3) the term “serious bodily injury” has the meaning given that term in section 1365 (g)(3); [1]
(4) the term “territorial sea of the United States” means all waters extending seaward to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States, determined in accordance with international law; and
(5) the term “Federal crime of terrorism” means an offense that—
(A) is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
(B) is a violation of—
(i) section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), 37 (relating to violence at international airports), 81 (relating to arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), 175 or 175b (relating to biological weapons), 229 (relating to chemical weapons), subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) of section 351 (relating to congressional, cabinet, and Supreme Court assassination and kidnaping), 831 (relating to nuclear materials), 842(m) or (n) (relating to plastic explosives), 844(f)(2) or (3) (relating to arson and bombing of Government property risking or causing death), 844(i) (relating to arson and bombing of property used in interstate commerce), 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a Federal facility with a dangerous weapon), 956(a)(1) (relating to conspiracy to murder, kidnap, or maim persons abroad), 1030(a)(1) (relating to protection of computers), 1030(a)(5)(A)(i) resulting in damage as defined in 1030(a)(5)(B)(ii) through (v) (relating to protection of computers), 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the United States), 1116 (relating to murder or manslaughter of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), 1203 (relating to hostage taking), 1362 (relating to destruction of communication lines, stations, or systems), 1363 (relating to injury to buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States), 1366(a) (relating to destruction of an energy facility), 1751(a), (b), (c), or (d) (relating to Presidential and Presidential staff assassination and kidnaping), 1992 (relating to wrecking trains), 1993 (relating to terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against...----------

I bet that took a long time to type huh? It was so long that ridemonkey made me shorten it by 311 charecters.

Pesonally, I think that the government is pushing this as a way to keep the Patriot act. None of us knows what the charges are. Who cares. The fact remains that I cant fault them for atleast trying to keep us safe from the bad guys. If they actually did go train with al queda then they need to meet the same fate that Frodo Baggins met in the movie Sin City.

 

[dhtahoe]

Best quote heard in awhile. "I love my country, but I fear my government". A "lost memo" from an FBI investigator was released this week. The memo contained infomation TELLING the White House that a KNOWN HIJACKING SUSPECT was headed towards the U.S. The suspect ended up being one of the pilots that hijacked one of the 9/11 planes. They knew he was coming, and let it happen. Lost memo my ass!!!

 

[genpowell71]

Best quote heard in awhile. "I love my country, but I fear my government". A "lost memo" from an FBI investigator was released this week. The memo contained infomation TELLING the White House that a KNOWN HIJACKING SUSPECT was headed towards the U.S. The suspect ended up being one of the pilots that hijacked one of the 9/11 planes. They knew he was coming, and let it happen. Lost memo my ass!!!

Thats old news big man. I read an article about that about 2 years ago in Kosovo.

 

[springfield1911]

Changleen:

Would you like us to buy a one way ticket to _____(fill in the blank with desired destination) to attend an Al Queda training camp and shoot a few rounds at the pic of our president? You'll fit right in.

In fact, I'm sure there is a turban waiting for you at this very moment...