Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ThirdEye who wrote (52619)	12/16/2005 5:32:18 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 360961

Say ahhhh. That looks like a bad ache your'a sport'n.

To: ThirdEye who wrote (52619)	12/16/2005 5:34:33 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360961

Abramoff Partner to Cooperate in Wire-Fraud Probe (Update1) By Michael Forsythe and Mort Lucoff Dec. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Lobbyist Jack Abramoff's former business partner pleaded guilty in a wire-fraud case involving a Florida casino ship company and said he's willing to testify against Abramoff. Adam Kidan faces up to 10 years in prison and a $500,000 fine after pleading guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and one count of wire fraud. He becomes the second former Abramoff associate in a month to agree to cooperate with investigators. Michael Scanlon agreed on Nov. 21 to aid a separate Justice Department probe in Washington involving $80 million in fees the two men got from Indian-tribe clients. Kidan ``is prepared to testify against anyone whom the government calls him for,'' including Abramoff, Joseph Conway, a lawyer for Kidan, said after the hearing in a Miami court. Kidan, 41, and Abramoff, 46, were indicted in August on six counts of wire fraud and conspiracy in connection with their $147.5 million purchase of SunCruz Casino Ltd. in 2000. Both pleaded not guilty that month, and Abramoff faces a trial in January. Kidan's sentencing is scheduled for March 1, according to U.S. District Judge Paul Huck. Neal Sonnett, a lawyer representing Abramoff in the Florida case, said he was preparing for Abramoff's January trial and had no further comment. Sonnett said he may seek an extension of the Jan. 9 scheduled trial date, without providing specifics. `More Ammunition' The plea agreement ``provides more ammunition for the prosecutors as they prepare for trial,'' said Kenneth Gross, a former head of enforcement at the Federal Election Commission who's now a lawyer specializing in campaign finance. ``It sounds like the house of cards is beginning to fall, but we won't know for sure until the trial.'' Both the Florida and Washington cases involving Abramoff may ensnare U.S. lawmakers. Representative Robert Ney of Ohio, the chairman of the House Administration Committee, entered statements into the Congressional Record in 2000 supporting the takeover of SunCruz by Abramoff and Kidan. Scanlon, a public relations executive and one-time spokesman for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, pleaded guilty last month to conspiring to bribe Ney in the Washington case. Ney denied any wrongdoing. False Information Prosecutors allege that Abramoff and Kidan provided false information on a loan application and used a counterfeit document to mislead lenders. Ney, on Scanlon's suggestion, entered two statements into the Congressional Record supporting their purchase of SunCruz and criticizing its then-owner, Gus Boulis. Boulis was shot dead in 2001. Three men were arrested in September on murder charges for Boulis' killing and are awaiting trial, the Associated Press reported. ``Mr. Speaker, how SunCruz Casinos and Gus Boulis conduct themselves with regard to Florida laws is very unnerving,'' Ney said in a March 30, 2000, statement in the Congressional Record. ``I don't want to see the actions of one bad apple in Florida, or anywhere else to affect the business aspect of this industry or hurt any innocent casino patron in our country.'' Ney said today he had no knowledge of Kidan's dealings with SunCruz at the time the statements were made. ``I had no way of knowing of the nature of Mr. Kidan's dealing with Sun Cruz as described in the court papers today,'' Ney said in an e-mailed statement. ``If Mr. Kidan conspired to commit crimes with others, I have no knowledge of that and I was certainly never part of any criminal activity.'' bloomberg.com

To: ThirdEye who wrote (52619)	12/16/2005 5:47:06 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 360961

An Incredible Day in America Martin Garbus 12.16.2005 Today, for two separate reasons, has been an incredible day in America. First, the United States has legitimized torture and secondly, the President has admitted to an impeachable offense. First, the media has been totally misled on the alleged Bush-McCain agreement on torture. McCain capitulated. It is not a defeat for Bush. It is a win for Cheney. Torture is not banned or in any way impeded. Under the compromise, anyone charged with torture can defend himself if a "reasonable" person could have concluded they were following a lawful order. That defense "loophole" totally corrodes the ban. It is the CIA, or the torturing agency, who will decide what a "reasonable" person could have concluded. Can you imagine those agencies in the interrogation business torturing on their own in trying to decide what is reasonable or what is not? What is not "reasonable" if the interrogator (wrongfully or rightfully) believes he has a ticking-bomb situation? Will a CIA or military officer issue a narrow order if he knows his interrogator believes, in this case, torture will work? The Bush-McCain torture compromise legitimizes torture. It is the first time that has happened in this country. Not in the two World Wars, Korea, the Cold War or Vietnam did the government ever seek or get the power this bill gives them. The worst part of it is that most of the media missed it and got it wrong. Secondly, the President in authorizing surveillance without seeking a court order has committed a crime. The Federal Communications Act criminalizes surveillance without a warrant. It is an impeachable offense. This was also totally missed by the media. huffingtonpost.com