http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/noi/index
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/nationofislam/index
#
OFF THREAD TOPIC:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-nation-of-islam17-2009dec17,0,2859532.story
“Homeland Security rescinds Nation of Islam intelligence analysis”
SNIPPET: “The Department of Homeland Security withdraws a 2007 analysis after deciding it broke rules on information collection.”
By Sebastian Rotella
December 17, 2009
#
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/16/AR2009121604096.html
washingtonpost.com > Nation > National Security News
“Documents show DHS improperly spied on Nation of Islam in 2007”
By Spencer S. Hsu and Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 17, 2009
SNIPPET: “The intelligence gathering violated domestic spying rules because analysts took longer than 180 days to determine whether the U.S-based group or its American members posed a terrorist threat. Analysts also disseminated their report too broadly, according to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group.
The disclosure was included in hundreds of heavily redacted pages released by the Justice Department as part of long-standing FOIA lawsuits about the government’s policies on terrorist surveillance, detention and treatment since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. It marks the latest case of inappropriate domestic spying under rules that were expanded after the terror attacks to give intelligence agencies more latitude.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/newblackpanthers/index
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/blackpanthers/index
#
OFF THREAD TOPIC:
blog:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/199671
“Wolf Turns Up the Heat on Black Panther Case”
JENNIFER RUBIN - 12.17.2009 - 3:58 PM
SNIPPET: “Rep. Frank Wolf turned up the heat on the Justice Department yesterday, introducing a Resolution of Inquiry that recounts the degree to which the Justice Department has stonewalled on efforts to find out why a serious case of voter intimidation was dismissed. Wolf wants the attorney general to hand over to the House all information relating to the dismissal of the case United States v. New Black Panther Party, the egregious voter-intimidation case that was captured on videotape. “
#
Note: Contact Info and phone number removed by me.
Note: The following text is a quote:
http://wolf.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=34&parentid=6§iontree=6,34&itemid=1500
Wolf Continues to Push for Answers on Voter Intimidation Case
Thursday December 17, 2009
WOLF CONTINUES TO PUSH FOR ANSWERS ON VOTER INTIMIDATION CASE
Washington, D.C. - As part of his ongoing effort to get answers as to why the Justice Department dismissed a voter intimidation case in Philadelphia involving members of the New Black Panther Party, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-10th) today announced that he has introduced a measure that would require the House Judiciary Committee to deal with the issue.
Wolf also announced that he had language inserted in the annual spending bill that funds the Justice Department requiring that its Office of Professional Responsibility provide the results of the investigation it is conducting surrounding the dismissal the case to the House Appropriations Committee. Wolf, the top Republican on the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations subcommittee, and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, requested the investigation earlier this year.
Wolf introduced a Resolution of Inquiry on Wednesday and it has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Under House rules, committees must take action on resolutions of inquiry within 14 legislative days. Wolf’s resolution directs the U.S. attorney general to provide Congress will “all information” relating to the decision to dismiss the case. The committee must vote the resolution up or down.
Wolf has written the attorney general six times seeking answers and has yet to receive a response from him. He also has written DOJ’s inspector general seeking answers.
“I regret that Congress must resort to oversight resolutions as a means to receive information about the dismissal of this case, but the Congress and the American people have a right to know why this case was not prosecuted,” Wolf said in a statement introducing the measure.
Below is Wolf’s complete statement:
“I rise today to introduce a Resolution of Inquiry directing the attorney general to transmit to the House all information relating to the decision to dismiss an important voter intimidation case, United States v. New Black Panther Party. The case sought to enforce Voting Rights Act statutes against members of the New Black Panther Party that threatened Philadelphia voters — both verbally and physically — last year.
“This case was inexplicably dismissed earlier this year — over the ardent objections of the career attorneys overseeing the case as well as the department’s own appeal office.
“I regret that Congress must resort to oversight resolutions as a means to receive information about the dismissal of this case, but the Congress and the American people have a right to know why this case was not prosecuted.
“As ranking Republican member of the House Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittee that funds the Justice Department, I take oversight of the department very seriously.
“I also strongly support voting rights protections. In 1981, I was the only member — Republican or Democrat — of the Virginia delegation in the House to vote for the Voting Rights Act and was harshly criticized by the editorial page of the Richmond Times Dispatch, and when I supported its reauthorization in 2006, I was criticized again by editorial pages.
“Time and again over the last year, the department has stonewalled any effort to learn about the decision to dismiss this case. I have written Attorney General Holder on six occasions asking for an explanation for the dismissal of this case. To date, I have received no response from him.
“I wrote the DOJ inspector general to request a review of this decision. He deferred to the Office of Professional Responsibility - which reports directly to the attorney general. I have written the Office of Professional Responsibility seeking information on its investigation. The Office has refused to share any information.
“In fact, the only response I have received - from a legislative affairs staffer - was woefully incomplete and - in places - inaccurate.
“Two months ago, I met with House Judiciary Chairman Conyers to ask for his assistance in obtaining this information, but he has yet to take any action. This is a shameful failure to provide necessary congressional oversight.
“It is not only Congress that is being stonewalled by the attorney general. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has repeatedly sought this same information, in fulfillment of its statutory responsibility to ensure the enforcement of civil rights law.
“After being similarly rebuffed, the commission filed subpoenas with the department for this information as well as to interview the career attorneys that handled the case.
“However, we understand that the attorney general has instructed his department to ignore these subpoenas. The nation’s chief law enforcement officer is forcing these career attorneys to choose between complying with the law and complying with the attorney general’s obstruction.
“At least one of the attorneys has been compelled to obtain private counsel.
“I urge the House Judiciary Committee to report this resolution out favorably and to demand that the attorney general answer the questions surrounding this case. The career attorneys and Appellate Division within the department sought to demonstrate the federal government’s commitment to protecting voting rights by vigorously prosecuting any individual or group that seeks to undermine this right.
“This House must not turn a blind eye to the attorney general’s obstruction. He has an obligation to answer the legitimate questions of the House and the Civil Rights Commission. It is imperative that we protect the right of all Americans to vote — the sacrosanct and inalienable right of any democracy.”