By M.R. KROPKO, Associated Press Writer
40 minutes ago[/i]
[/align][/align]A federal grand jury has indicted three Ohio men on terrorism charges alleging they plotted to kill U.S. and coalition military personnel in Iraq and other countries.
The three men were arrested over the weekend and were to be arraigned in federal courts in Cleveland and Toledo on Tuesday afternoon, said Assistant U.S. Attorney David Bauer.
According to the indictment unsealed Monday, the three suspects recruited others to train for a violent holy war against the United States and its allies in Iraq. The indictment says they traveled together to a shooting range to practice shooting guns and studied how to make explosives.
The indictment alleges that one of the men, Mohammad Zaki Amawi, twice threatened to kill or inflict bodily harm against President Bush while speaking with others.
Prosecutors say the plot began in November 2004.
Amawi is a citizen of Jordan and the U.S. The others are Marwan Othman El-Hindi, a U.S. citizen born in Jordan; and Wassim I. Mazloum, who came to the U.S. from Lebanon in 2000. Mazloum operated a car business in Toledo with his brother.
That is the most recent hot news here in Ohio. IF, and I mean if, their capture is linked to the controversial wiretapping practices, it will likely shut some folks up.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
I agree about not sacrificing liberties. However, considering the ongoing arguments by common folks and legal scholars alike about Bush's actions, I am not yet convinced thatthey are a gross violation. If it can be proved otherwise, then crack down hard on him. In the meantime, I am keeping an open mind on the isse until due process occurs. But, apart from that, if it could be proven that his wiretapping helped to nail those guys, I stand by my statement that it will quiet some of the critics.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
Two of the three indicted are not "U.S. persons". FISA seems like a non-issue in this instance.
However, it's a reminder that threats do exist in the U.S., and that domestic anti-terrorism efforts produce results. The way some on the left side of the aisle have spoken, you'd think that all wiretapping and surveillance performed under the Bush adminstration is illegal.
Remember? Bush had nothing to do with the fact that we haven't been attacked here since 9/11, right?
I have heard some legal experts judge that the president's bypassing FISA is NOT illegal. I don't know if these experts are correct or what their rationale is. I can't even identify these experts. I'm going by what one of the talking heads on FOX said last night, a man who I have observed in the past seems level headed and dependable. Simply . . . in my view it mayNOT be an open and shut case that the FISA bypass wiretapping is illegal.
One question I wonder about is why the president chooses to bypass FISA? I personally don't think GW Bush wakes up in the morning and asks "What civil liberties can I abuse today? What new powers can I arrogate to myself in defiance of the US Constitution?" I would like to hear a rationale from the administration for why FISA needs to be bypassed, maybe because the information is too readily leaked through porous Washington DC beauracracy? Maybe this question has been posed and answered already. Does anyone here know the answer?
Frankly, I just can't get too worked up about wiretapping phone lines from foreign hot beds of terrorism to locations in the United States. Sorry if I don't have a refined enough appreciation for the right to privacy (I forget where this is enshrined in the constitution) and the process of slow wearing down of the right to privacy. I'm more concerned with the inadvertant exposure of my private information -- credit card information, medical history, childrens's school records, financial information -- by bunglers than by deliberate surgical intrusions of the government into a limited, selected set of international phone calls. There have been a lot more people whose private information -- millions, in a couple of broadly reported incidents in 2005 I believe -- was released by this kind of bungling. Let's also remember, "lawful intercept" has been around so long that there is a technical engineering term or buzzword for it (CALEA: Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act passed 1994, a US law granting law enforcement agencies the ability to wiretap newer digital networks and requiring both wireline and wireless common carriers to enable such wiretapping equipment) and all telecom equipment (switches, routers) are required by law to support this capability.
On the other hand, while I lay out my argument with as much force and weight as I can . . . I flat out don't know for sure. Don't take my word for it. Don't let me do your thinking for you. Think for yourself. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm keeping an open mind for the time being.
Right, No Need For Domestic Surveillance
