The Dallas News today has a long story touching infiltration in the context of some old Muslim Brotherhood document.
Trial papers detail plan to seize U.S.: Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover plot emerges in Holy Land case.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-brotherhood_17met.ART0.State.Edition2.41fe33d.html
“A transcript of a Brotherhood orientation meeting recorded in the early 1980s includes discussions of the need for “securing the group” from infiltration by “Zionism, Masonry ... the CIA, FBI, etc. so that we find out if they are monitoring us” and “how can we get rid of them.”
Tehe. Those pesky Masons — always infiltrating the islamist groups plotting to take over America by sending a small car filled with Shriner clowns to get in under the radar.
I mistakenly used the word “militant” in describing Professor Boyle’s clients.
I have no idea who his clients are and whether they are militant.
He has done a lot of very worthwhile human rights work.
I only know, from his description, that the FBI in 2004 wanted him, he says, to inform on clients he described as Arab and Muslim.
While he has been associated with the Palestinian Liberation Organization since 1987, and sought the indictment of President Bush Sr. in 1991 relating to the starvation of Iraqi children, and had a recent representation relating to a massacre in Bosnia, I have no information that he represents any bad guys.
He should be commended for his human rights advocacy and I ask only that he not muddle up true crime analysis by a failure of due diligence — such as his failure to distinguish between ISU and USDA in Ames, or the suggestion that the ISU was an “Ames index” (such as was the phrase by the fellow who interviewed Hauer recently). (In contrast, the Keim lab maintains an “Ames index”).
Moreover, if anyone suggests that the ISU had the Ames strain, they should articulate their reasoning for thinking it did, given that the Ames strain came from a cow in Texas.
Any attorney who lacks the time to do a due diligence should not go out of his way to advocate on the issue — whether pro bono or not, and whether in advocating for militants or non-militants. Politics has no role in true crime analysis.
As for Sherwood, no publicist should advocate on behalf of a client without disclosing the identity of the client. It was bad enough that he was casting him self in countless articles as a freelance journalist who just happened to be quoting Francis as an expert, when actually they were working together as allies in an attempt to impeach Bush.
TrebleRebel is MI6.
Perhaps Debat is Mossad.
Ed and I are just bad-ass do-gooder bounty hunters.