Posted on 05/24/2010 5:46:49 PM PDT by jveritas
In his most recent interview with an Al Qaeda media outlet terrorist “Anwar Al Awlaki” the US born Al Qaeda terrorist said that he stopped his communications when he read in the Washington Post that he is being tracked by US intelligence. He said that once he stopped his communications he left the area in Yemen where he was hiding and then this area was bombed by US airstrikes.
He also said that both terrorists “Nidal Hassan” who killed 13 of our troops at Fort Hood and “Omar Farouk Abd Al Moutaleb” who had the failed terrorist attack on the Delta Detroit plane on Christmas Day 2009 were his students and that he is honored and proud that they were his students.
In his interview he called for every muslim serving in the US military to imitate what terrorist “Nidal Hassan” did and kill US soldiers.
He said that he is very proud of his role to incite violence against Americans.
The text of his video interview with “Al Malahem” which the media outlet of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula can be found on this link below which is from “al falojah” terrorist forum. It is in Arabic.
http://alfaloja.ws/vb/showthread.php?t=117974
Below is the translation of terrorist Anwar Al Awlaki statement regarding the Washington Post article:
Beginning of the translation
Question from “Malahem” Al Qaeda media: The Americans are saying that after Nidal Hassan attack they tighten the noose around your neck, they closed your website on the internet and now you are being chased, is that true?
Answer from terrorist Al Awlaki: Yes they closed this website after Nidal Hassan attack, I wrote on the website an article approving of what Nidal Hassan did and then after that they closed the website. After that I read an article in the Washington Post that they are monitoring my communications so I was forced to stop these communications and left the area and then after that the American bombardment occurred.
End of the translation
But no article of the Bill of Rights has been changed or repealed. Some states refused to ratify the Constitution unless it contained such a bill of rights, although enough relented on the promise of one to get the Constitution adopted.
Yeah, I realize that, but it doesn't mean (technically speaking) that it can't be done. It very well can be done -- if -- the people choose to do so through the Amendment process.
Mind you..., I'm not personally saying that I want to do that -- what I am saying is that if people think that the newspapers are doing something that they should not do -- then -- the only recourse you really have (that is the only recourse that is "absolute" and can "stop" this "dead in its tracks") is to change the Constitution and make it so they can't do that anymore.
I hope you understand... :-)
In other words, those who "uphold the Constitution" as something valid and worthwhile and to be left alone -- can't then "legitimately" gripe about a "freedom" that the press has (through that same Constitution) when they don't like how that freedom is used by that press. That's what you get, with "freedom of the press."
Yep, at least in an absolute sense. I still say that exposing and were possible prosecuting the leakers to the full extent of the law, with treason charges possible since their actions resulted in aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, would cut down on the frequency of the leaks. A whole lot better than putting a few reporters in jail.
True... but I'm also reminded here... when someone starts going after leakers "bigtime" (if someone gets really serious about it) -- then this sort of thing always creates a "backlash" against the people who do this.
Think of Nixon and the plumbers ... LOL ...
The White House Plumbers, sometimes simply called the Plumbers, were a covert White House Special Investigations Unit established July 24, 1971 during the presidency of Richard Nixon. Its task was to stop the leaking of classified information to the news media. Its members branched into illegal activities working for the Committee to Re-elect the President, including the Watergate break-ins and the ensuing Watergate scandal.
Another example of the kind of "bad press" and "backlash" you get -- even when it's perfectly right and you're well within your legal rights -- is Apple (the computer company). They are known for keeping a real tight hold on all their company trade secrets (and rightfully so) while a lot of other companies may even leak out secrets ahead of time and some employees do it (at other companies) and it's just accepted that it will happen.
But, at Apple, they actually "go after" people in the company who do that, and they set up "stings" and put out "false information" so that when it shows up, they know who it came from.
That has earned Apple (and Steve Jobs) a "Nazi title" ... LOL ... being that strict on their trade secrets and not wanting to have them leaked.
SO..., even when you're perfectly right and you have legal recourse -- many times this sort of thing "backfires" against the people who pursue it (i.e., "pursue legal redress against leakers").
“emails obtained by an FBI task force...were not forwarded to the military” (at Fort Hood)
Once again failure of interagency communication may have caused unnecessary deaths. I thought that the Homeland Security department was supposed to solve this.
the "plumbers" were back channel and purposefully deniable. Not really office government types.
You seem to assume that every problem must have a government solution. Some small number do. Most do not.
You seem to assume that every problem must have a government solution. Some small number do. Most do not.
If you're talking about "government/military secrets" -- then yes, I'm thinking the government would have something to do with that ... :-)
Bump to your post no. 11.
And they do, they can prosecute the leakers, who signed and swore they would not divulge the information under penalty of law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.