Monday, August 25, 2008

What did the Bush Administration do with Aafia Siddiqui and her three children?

An American Story:

The disappearance and torture of Aafia Siddiqui at the hands of the U.S. government is also the story of a country that has lost its soul.

To lend your voice to helping with this case, see "CONTACT INFO" in red text, below.

Aafia Siddiqui is but one of many human beings over the past 7 years who have been labeled as terrorists, then covertly 'disappeared' into a secret system of prisons, where they are systematically tortured by the agents of the Bush Administration -- a government that can no longer lay claim to being quite human. Aafia's story is particularly disturbing because, in 2003, along with Aafia, 'disappeared' her three young children, aged 7 years, 5 years and 6 months of age.

Massive protests have been waged in Pakistan, demanding the release of Afia Siddiqui and her children.

To those uninitiated with the torture practices (and the laws, or lack thereof, regarding torturing, including the torture of children) used by our government -- whether at our own hands, or at the hands of those with whom we contract to carry out this torture -- this story can perhaps be read with a comfortable detachment. To those of us who have studied the methods used by our government, and have read the stories of those who have -- and who have not survived -- the story of Aafia and her three children is unbearably haunting.

We cannot add more to her story than has already been published. We can, however, provide links to those stories. We can also add our voices to those who proclaim her innocence. After all, we live in a country where a person's innocence is presumed, until they have proved otherwise. Or, at least, we once did. The Bush Administration has removed this right for any human deemed a terrorist suspect. For this reason, until our government restores the right of due process to "terrorist suspects" we, at the canarypapers, have taken the stance that our government must be presumed guilty, until proven otherwise.

And, lest any of us think we're safe from those hands that would secretly imprison and torture innocent human beings, please know that, just by virture of our researching Aafia Siddiqui's story, we at the canarypapers could legally be deemed terrorist sympathisers or even terrorist suspects. Fact is, our reading habits likely long ago placed us among the hundreds of thousands of Americans already on the FBI's terrorist watch list. The Bush Administration would like us to believe that such truths belong to the realm of conspiracy theorists. Which leaves us but two choices: shall we resign ourselves to blind complacency or be banished to the minions of the conspiracy theorists? We choose the latter.

Were there nothing to hide, our government would not work in secrecy, would not hold suspects for years in secret prisons, torturing them to extract evidence, while denying their existence or, alternately, claiming the secrecy as 'necessary' to their investigation. Were there nothing to hide, our government would not discredit those who, in seeking the truth, ask questions of our government's secret activities. Were our government not committing war crimes, there would be nothing to hide. We, at the canarypapers, join those who demand answers to the many questions about Aafia Siddiqui and her children. We hope that others will read her story and add their voices to the call for the truth.



Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at (800) 828-0498

HOW TO: If you would like to help with this case, you can call your Senator/Representative via the above number to express your concern for the welfare of Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakastani prisoner being held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn, NY. When you call the number, above you will reach a general operator. Ask, by name, for the office of your Senator/Representative. Once connected, you will either be able to leave a voice mail or leave your message with an assistant. (Alternately, you could locate email addresses for your representatives and/or phone their local offices. Snail mail may be too slow, due to the urgency of Aafia's needs).

Five primary issues of importance to mention in your calls regarding the case of Aafia Siddiqui (pronounced: OFF-ia Sa-DEEK-ia) :

(1) She is in need medical care. According to her attorney, Aafia Siddiqui's condition has grown critical. As of Tuesday, August 26, her condition was deteriorating, and her attorney is urging that she be admitted to a hospital,

(2) that Aafia Siddiqui's 12-year old son (who is legally a U.S. citizen, and is said to be in U.S. custody in Afghanistan) be returned to the U.S., to the care of his uncle, in Texas,

(3) that an investigation be started immediately to determine the whereabouts of her other two children, now aged 9 years and 5 years of age,

(4) that Ms. Siddiqui be afforded the right of habeas corpus and be allowed unencumbered access to her attorneys, including the ability to have legal counsel without being strip-searched beforehand, and

(5) that an independent investigation be conducted to determine exactly where Aafoa Siddiqui has been for the past 5 years, and the role of the U.S. and Pakistani ISI in this case, as has been alleged by human right groups.


LINK: Asian Human Rights Commission: URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

The Asia Human Rights Commission (AHRC) site at the above link has an Urgent Appeal Program, where you can direct letters (select from a pre-written letter, or customize/draft your own letter) to President George Bush and various officials in Afghanistan and Pakistan, urging them to immediately release Dr. Afia Siddiqui and her 12-year old child. The governments of Pakistan and the U.S. are also urged to reveal the whereabouts of her other two children. (The AHRC has written separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for intervention in this case.)



The links, below, are listed in approx. chronological order, beginning with the April 2003 announcements of Aafia Siddiqui's arrest (later denied by U.S. & Pakastani authorities) and ending with the July 2008 announcement of her arrest after her 5-year disappearance, during which time Aafia alleges she was imprisoned and subjected to horrendous torture and repeated rape at the hands of Pakastani and/or U.S. authorities while imprisoned at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan. As certain news articles have a way of 'disappearing' we have cut and paste the 2003 reports of her arrest:


AP (Associated Press) article excerpt, April 22. 2003: Woman sought for ties to al-Qaida in custody in Pakistan Dateline: WASHINGTON A former Boston woman sought by the FBI for questioning about possible ties to the al-Qaida terror network is in custody in Pakistan, U.S. law enforcement officials said Tuesday.
Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Aafia Siddiqui, 31, was detained by Pakistani authorities in the past few days and was being interrogated at an undisclosed location. She originally is from Pakistan. The FBI in March put out a global alert for Siddiqui, who has a biology degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and wrote a doctoral thesis on neurological sciences at Brandeis University in 2001. She also visited the Maryland suburbs near ...

USA Today: Pakistani woman in custody unlikely the one sought
WASHINGTON (AP) — After initial optimism Tuesday, U.S. law enforcement officials backed off claims that Pakistan had detained a former Boston woman wanted by the FBI for questioning about possible links to al-Qaeda. Two federal law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, initially said 31-year-old Aafia Siddiqui recently was taken into custody by Pakistani authorities. Pakistani officials never confirmed the arrest and later the U.S. officials amended their earlier statements, saying new information from the Pakistani government made it "doubtful" she was in custody. It was not clear whether a different woman had been arrested or if the initial information was wrong or misconstrued by U.S. officials. There had been several reports out of Pakistan prior to Tuesday claiming Siddiqui had been detained, but all turned out to be untrue. The U.S. officials said that while earlier reports never were given much credibility by federal authorities, Tuesday's information at first appeared legitimate. The FBI in March put out a global alert for Siddiqui, who has a biology degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and wrote a doctoral thesis on neurological sciences at Brandeis University in 2001. She also visited the Maryland suburbs near Washington in December or January, officials say. Authorities have not charged that Siddiqui is a member of al-Qaeda but believe she could be a "fixer," someone with knowledge of the United States who can support and help get things done for other operatives. She is not charged with any crime in the United States. The FBI also is seeking to question Siddiqui's estranged husband, Dr. Mohammed Khan. His whereabouts are unknown. Alerts for Siddiqui and Khan followed the FBI's announcement last month of a worldwide search for Adnan El Shukrijumah, a 27-year-old Saudi native nicknamed "Jafar the Pilot." He lived for a number of years in South Florida and authorities believe he is an al-Qaeda operative who may have been planning new attacks. His family denies any terrorist ties and he has not been located.

UPI (United Press International) article excerpt, 4/22/2003: Report: First woman al-Qaida suspect detained: A woman with suspected links to al-Qaida has been arrested in Pakistan, NBC News reported Tuesday, although Pakistani officials said they didn't know of any such arrest. Aafia Siddiqui, a former Boston resident, is wanted for questioning by the FBI. Her mother, Ismat Siddiqui, said her daughter disappeared from her hiding place in Karachi 10 days ago. She said that FBI and Pakistani officials she contacted told her that they had no information about their daughter's whereabouts. Pakistan's Interior Secretary Tasneem Noorani told United Press International that Pakistani authorities were not aware of ...


Boston Magazine, October 2004: Who's Afraid of Aafia Siddiqui? She went to MIT and Brandeis, married a Brigham and Women's physician, made her home in Boston, cared for her children, and raised money for charities. Aafia Siddiqui was a normal woman living a normal American life. Until the FBI called her a terror.
Daily Times (Pakistan) Nov. 1, 2004: The strange story of Aafia Siddiqui


CommonDreams: 9/22/2006 Boston Globe article: Fate of Some CIA Detainees Still Unknown -- Missing Boston woman among them, kin say.


Asian Human Rights Commission: URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME (This human rights appeal was issued July 24, 2008. The publicity and outcry from this and other appeals is said to have prompted the FBI's recent "discovery" and arrest of Aafia Siddiqui). This site includes a YouTube video of Al Jeezera news report on this case, which includes testimony by Aafia Siddiqui's family.

US Dept. of Justice: Aafia Siddiqui Arrested for Attempting to Kill United States Officers in Afghanistan

FBI Bulletein on Aafia Siddiqui: Wanted/Seeking Information/In Custody

The Hindu: The mystery of Aafia Siddiqui A diamond-smuggling Al Qaeda operative or an innocent Pakistani woman whose only crime was her Islamic identity and her headscarf?

Asian Human Rights Commission's August 4, 2004 article on Aafia's 'reappearance,' as her arrest is announced by U.S. and Pakastani authorities): PAKISTAN: FBI is responsible for disappearances, illegal detention and torture. The American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), initially admitted that they had arrested Dr. Afia and then later denied it. Now, due to the coverage of the UA both in Pakistan and internationally, the FBI has now announced that “Dr. Afia Siddiqui is alive, she is in Afghanistan but she is injured”. No further details have been provided and the AHRC is especially concerned about the three children who were also abducted along with her. It is reported that after receiving hundreds of responses to the UA initiated by the AHRC, the American and Pakistani authorities were compelled to issue information of the whereabouts of Afia Siddiqui who had been missing for five years after being arrested by the Pakistani Intelligence Agency..... Hoover, the FBI, and Aafia Siddiqui. (British journalist Yvonne Ridley's account of the story.) Ms. Ridley began investigating Aafia Siddiqui after hearing reports of a female prisoner, called Prisoner 650 at Afghanistan’s Bagram prison. According to reports, the Prisoner 650 had been tortured to the point where she has lost her mind. Britain’s Lord Nazeer Ahmed, (of the House of Lords), asked questions in the House about the condition of Prisoner 650 who, according to him is physically tortured and continuously raped by the officers at prison. Lord Nazeer has also submitted that Prisoner 650 has no separate toilet facilities and has to attend to her bathing and movements in full view of the other. In the course of Yvonne Ridley's investigation, she came to call Prisoner 650 "the gray lady of Bagram." As Ridley explained, “I call her the ‘grey lady’ because she is almost a ghost, a spectre whose cries and screams continues to haunt those who heard her.” Ridley's investigation added to the outcry which is said to have prompted Aafia's release and simultaneous "discovery" by U.S. and Pakastani authorities in July 2008).

LA Times: Siddiqui arrest brings attention to the 'disappeared' issue in Pakistan

Times Online UK: Female 'terror' scientist Aafia Siddiqui facing US court after extradition Aafia Siddiqui appears in US court, denied bail

Free Aafia Siddiqui & Children

Asian Human Rights Commission: URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME: The US Congress must investigate Dr. Afia's case (This human rights appeal was issued August 8, 2008, after Aafia was brought to the U.S. and her allegations and condition became better known).

Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific: (series of three August 2008 articles on Aafia Siddiqui's case)

Reuters: Pakistani accused of U.S. troop attack gets doctor (Reuters report on Aafia Siddiqui -- a prisoner in U.S. care -- as she finally receives medical care, 4 weeks after being shot in the abdomen).

YouTube, August 8, 2008: Protest in Pakistan includes Aafia Siddiqui's sister. Protesters' signs include one reading, "Can a 6-month old baby be a terrorist?"

YouTube, August 8, 2008: ABC propaganda news report, which makes the "official" case that Aafia Siddiqui is a terrorist, calling her "a female bin Laden," with the CIA deeming this "the most significant capture in 5 years," along with the ludicrous, inflammatory and totally unsubstantiated charges including one that she was "told by leaders to have lots of babies; raise little jihadists." No attempt is made to substantiate these charges but, rather, a jubilantly shocking account is given of her case, with no attempt to fake concern or even make mention of the fate of 2 of Siddiqui's children, aged 6 months and 5 years of age when they disappeared with their mother in 2003.

YouTube, August 12, 2008: Press Conference in Islamabad on the legal and human rights issues, along with the many unanswered questions in the Aafia Siddiqui case.

YouTube, August 12, 2008: Protest for Dr Aafia Saddiqui/Speech by Yvonne Ridley


Associated Press of Pakistan (August 26, 2008): Lawyer demands Dr Aafia’s shifting to hospital for urgent treatment

Washington Post (August 26, 2008): Afghan Officials Detain American Boy, U.S. Says Mother Held by U.S. as Al-Qaeda Suspect

UPI: Al-Qaida suspect's U.S. son held


Links to Human Rights Reports that Discuss/Detail U.S. Involvement in Secret Detention, Renditions and Torture:

Amnesty International (pdf file): United States - Below the radar: Secret flights to torture and ‘disappearance’

Amnesty International (pdf file) Off the Record: U.S. Responsibility for Enforced Disappearances in the “War on Terror” There are 3 mentions of Aafia Siddiqui in this report

Amnesty International (pdf file): Pakistan: Human rights ignored in the "war on terror" In this report, Aafia Siddiqui is #33 on the list of "individuals about whom there is some evidence of secret detention by the United States and whose fate and whereabouts" were listed as unknown at the time of the report.

Human Rights First (pdf file): Still Missing: Gaps in the U.S. State Department Human Rights Reports on Secret Detentions and Renditions

Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe (pdf file): Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights: Alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states


We will add more links as time allows, particuarly links to assist with any activism to help ensure that Ms. Siddiqui is afforded the dignity of human rights and due process. A hearing is scheduled for September 3rd, so the timing is urgent. Please feel free to do your own research and to do whatever you can to help her.


Saturday, August 23, 2008

Joe Biden: Will He Rip John McCain's Face Off and Restore Truth, Justice and the American Way?

It's pretty bad when the best you can hope for in a VP candidate is that he will rip John McCain's face off. Today, that's about as audacious as we dare hope, having nearly lost all hope of seeing real integrity restored to American politics. Sure, we'll cast our vote for Obama-Biden, even if they, themselves, seem to have lost -- if ever they owned -- the integrity and chutzpah, to state, outright, that the emperor and his entire entourage are stark-raving naked.

As is, it seems that both Obama and Biden tow the main line, the main line being a veritable sewer pipe full of lies, misinformation and innuendo spit out by Bush-Cheney, then sanctified by the media. And it is this raw sewage that forms the "truths" upon which America's domestic and foreign policy is built. This was most recently evidenced in Biden's statement on the Georgia-Russia conflict, when he said, "The war that began in Georgia is no longer about that country alone. It has become a question of whether and how the West will stand up for the rights of free people throughout the region."

Superman couldn't have said it better himself. No need to extrapolate on the not-so-subtle nuances of the situation -- nuances which, in another time, would have been called by name: the truth.

American politicians, on both sides, have lost their bearings and have taken with them the American people. Our politicians have been reduced -- willingly, it seems, even as they've been bribed and blackmailed, too -- into playing understudies to the real truthsayers on the world stage, reading from a playbook written by swaggering warmongers and disreputable liars & cheats. Biden's assessment of the Russia-Georgia conflict more or less echoed Obama's words, which more or less echoed the words of Condi, Bush and McCain. Nowhere in the dialogue-proper of American politics can we hope to hear the truth: "What in the hell is the U.S. doing in the first place, by funding, arming and prodding Georgia to go to war with South Ossetia and, by extension, Russia?"

With few exceptions, truth has evaporated from our polical landscape to the extent that truth, itself, has become so audacious that it offends the sensibilities to even acknowledge that such audacities could be true. But they are. And to ensure that no one speaks these truths, the Bush Administration has effectively, by design, disgraced truth by relegating it to the minions of the conspiracy theorists.

Last February (sometime after Edwards bowed out, yet months before discovering that Edwards was a liar and a hypocrite)we pinned our hopes onto the Obama campaign to forge a renaissance of truthfulness. Then we watched as, molecule by molecule, it evaporated, sort of like a shallow mud puddle on hot summer pavement. At first, we made concessions on his behalf: "He's doing what he has to do to get elected," we told ourselves. "The media will fry him if he doesn't give the appearance of moderating on this particular position."

But at some point, after staring overlong into that non-descript residual of dust on the pavement, we had to acknowledge the truth that Americans don't really want truth, and especially if it takes more than 5 words to convey that truth. What the American attention span best responds to is a dummied down, black and white, right vs. wrong version of the truth -- something that can be condensed into a sound-byte, emblazed below the talking heads on CNN -- a mantra that be quickly transcribed into email missives: freedom fries, the war on terror, the axis of evil, weapons of mass destruction, Barrack Hussein Obama, evil empire, surge success, I'm proud of my country, g.d. America, stay the course, chickens coming home to roost, pledge of allegiance, flag pin, elitist liberal ....

Our politicians more closely resemble the protaganists in dime store novels than the statesmen who forged, then held together our Constitution and our country for over 200 years. But, apparently, this is what the majority of Americans want in their leaders.

After all, it was "they" who voted Bush into office -- not once, but twice. And it is "they" who know, but simply don't care, that the war in Iraq that has killed upwards of 100,00 innocent Iraq citizens was waged on an elaborately designed facade of lies, so that we could steal Iraq's oil. It is "they" who slather their bumpers in American flags and who rabidly salivate over a one-inch flag pin, yet couldn't care less that our Constitution and Bill of Rights have been decimated. It is "they" who have gladly surrendered our economy, our jobs, our homes, our health, our Constitutional rights, our environment, our children's and our grandchildren's futures over to a band of theives.

It is, therefore, "we" who are out of step with America.

Still.... We haven't entirely abandoned all hope. Our hope, today, is that Joe Biden -- in his infamy for speaking before thinking -- will do the right thing and rip John McCain's face off. You never know. The trend could catch on: it may once again be fashionable for politicians to be so outraged by the b.s. and lies that they will state, outright, for all the world to hear, that the emperor and his entire entourage are stark raving mad. It happened to Nixon in the 1970s. It could happen again.

For this reason, and this reason alone, we are glad to see Biden on the ticket, instead of, say, Jack Reed -- an infinitely more qualified politician, who would never have made the cut with Americans: he's too honest, he's intellectual, he's thoughtful, he's solidly grounded in foreign policy and diplomacy, he's well-respected on Capitol Hill and, besides, it would have been only a matter of time before the media took note of his height, or perhaps they would have sleuthed out that he drinks lemon in his tea, or perhaps he was the best in his class at West Point -- something terribly terrible to entirely disqualify him for the office of vice-presidency.

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Why Are the FBI and Attorney General Mukasey in Cahoots with Barney Fife?

Earlier this week, while America's attention was fixated on the Olympics, John Edwards' love child, and the Georgia-Russia war (necessarily in that order) this tidbit quietly slipped into the headlines: FBI to get freer rein to look for terrorism suspects. Herein, Attorney General Michael Mukasey announced that the FBI and the Department of Justice have formed a brand new front in the war on homegrown terror. Working with the existing Joint Terrorism Task Force, this new effort will borrow what little is left of our constitutional rights, and hand them to the care of, say, your local Barney Fife.

Reading the above-mentioned article, it takes a little doing to get to the facts, because -- if there's one thing this administration does well, it's cloaking outrageous truths in the most innocuous language possible. It takes either a skilled translator or a patient researcher to glean facts from the language of this administration -- seeded as it is with vague euphemisms and benign jargon.

Here is one example, pertinent to the article. The word 'agent' was repeatedly used, in reference to those specific individuals, who will be empowered with violating our constitutional rights, while tracking terrorists. While the term 'agent' is nothing new, the word drew our attention after its ninth mention in the article. Just to be sure, we decided to check on the official meaning of the word, 'agent' with specific regard to our government's work in tracking terrorists.

The answers can be found in White House press releases from 2001-2008, along with various documents from the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the Department of Justice. As it turns out, until 2005, the word 'agent' referred to only federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement officials. Beginning in 2005, however, the language morphed to federal, state, local, tribal and private sector officials. Just to be sure, we decided to check on the official meaning of the term, 'private sector.'

Are You a Terrorist? Only Your Hairdresser Knows for Sure

Turns out, a 'private sector' agent can be most anyone. All that's needed is a keen eye for spotting terrorists and the opportunity to spot them. Is your neighbor a computer specialist? A department store security guard? A meter maid? A city sanitation worker? A private eye? A sheriff's deputy? A dog catcher? A beautician? An unemployed mama's boy? An ex-con? A murderer? He or she may have a keen eye for spotting terrorists.

Or maybe you, yourself, have a keen eye for spotting terrorists. If so, the FBI will pay you royally to work as an informant. How about your co-worker? Your ex-spouse? Your ex-spouse's lover? Any of these people have a grudge against you? They could become a paid informant. What about your meter reader, the cable guy, the garbage man, the clerk at city hall? Have any neo-Nazi friends? Know anyone who needs a few extra bucks? If so, they can become a paid informant and finger you to a keen-eyed official, who has the authority to deem you a terrorist suspect, then launch an investigation -- tapping your phone, monitoring your computer and cable TV habits, and physically spying on you. You may even get to be the focus of a real live sting operation! Naturally, there are many in this country who wouldn't feel the least bit threatened to investigated as a terrorist suspect, because they know they're not terrorists and, besides, as President Bush often reminds us, eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

Are You Sure You're Not a Terrorist?

So you think the FBI could never accuse you of being a terrorist? Before taking that leap of faith, it'd be good -- just to be sure -- to make sure you know the offical definition of a 'terrorist suspect.' (<---- our apologies for the source, but this was the clearest copy we could find on the fly).

You May Be A Terrorist, and Not Even Know It

The reality is, just because *you* know that you're not a terrorist suspect, doesn't mean that *they* will also know. For instance, if you write a letter-to-the-editor speaking out against cruelty to animals, or in defense of free speech or environmental issues, or if you are a vegan, or a peace activist, or a protester, or have a bumper sticker related to any of these issues, the FBI (via local law enforcement or a tip from a keen informant) may deem you a domestic or homegrown terrorist. Alternately, your name (and the names of your friends & associates) may be entered into the FBI's terrorist database. Do you wear certain ethnic clothing, or associate with certain ethnicities, or are you a black activist, or do you resemble one, or are you a Muslim, or do you resemble a Muslim? You may be a terrorist suspect.

Do you have fingerprints? You may be a terrorist suspect.

And what if you're some (or none) of the above, yet get stopped for a speeding ticket by the local Barney Fife....? Are you wearing bulky clothing? Did you forget your driver's license? Are you alone and nervous? You may be a terrorist suspect.

Of course, the Bush Administration has been using these tactics for years now. But as the FBI, the CIA and Department of Justice reach further into our lives, who's to say any one of us couldn't be shoe-horned into their profile? We, here at the canarypapers, are free-thinkers. We disagree with nearly everything. We especially disagree with everything the Bush Administration has ever done. So I guess you could say we're defenders of the Constitution. We certainly make enough references to it in our rantings on the Bush-Cheney regime. We're vegans too, which is another strike against us but, fortunately, we're too anti-social (woops) to attend vegan potluck dinners. Of course Zeus -- darn him to heck -- insists on using his nickname, which is another strike against him and, by association, me.

We'd like to think that justice would prevail if our viewpoints were ever used as evidence to accuse us of heinous crimes we didn't commit. Better still, we'd like to think we live in a country where something like this could never happen. But the truth is, justice doesn't always prevail.

"If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They'll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government." --Dwight D. Eisenhower

The power to arbitrarily brand people as terrorist suspects is serious business. It becomes dangerous business when placed in the hands of the wrong person, even if that person happens to be the Attorney General of the United States. This sort of power belongs in corrupt dictatorships, not democratic societies.

This would be a good time to call and/or write your state representatives and any other member of Congress inclined to respond to such issues. Protest this dangerous intrusion into our constitutional rights. Tell your representative you are AGAINST implementing Attorney General Mukasey's 5 new guidlines to transform the FBI/Department of Justice anti-terrorism unit into an elite national security organization, as announced on August 13th.

Tell 'em Checkpoint Chickie sent you.