Florida Doctor Convicted in Terrorism Case
A Florida doctor was convicted Monday of providing material support to terrorists by agreeing to treat injured al-Qaida fighters so they could return to Iraq to battle American[] [forces].
Dr. Rafiq Abdus Sabir, 52, was convicted in federal court in Manhattan after a three-week trial that featured testimony by him and Ali Soufan, an FBI agent who posed as an al-Qaida recruiter in a sting operation that led to four [terrorism] arrests.
That's the sort of case that should help with the placement of various aspects of the GWOT -- e.g., increased use of FISA warrants, Patriot Act, warrantless surveillance, etc. -- into their rightful perspectives.
Unless, of course, you're literally on drugs.
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Justice, Law, War On Terror
Comments (19)
stepping on a dead bug...ba... (Below threshold)1. Posted by nogo postal | May 21, 2007 6:52 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
stepping on a dead bug...back in 2004 when Kerry waved the white flag and said terrorists need to be pursued...we took care of that...
1. Posted by nogo postal | May 21, 2007 6:52 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 18:52
2. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 7:31 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Doncha just love this spin put on the story by the AP:
The verdict came after jurors heard audio tapes of a May 2005 ceremony in a Bronx apartment in which Sabir and his best friend, Tariq Shah, a martial arts expert and jazz musician, pledged loyalty to al-Qaida and, the government alleged, Osama bin Laden
He's "alleged" to have pledged loyalty?
It was on tape, he pled quilty! Asshats!
The question to be asked now is just who is watching those "supporters" he told to remain strong?
2. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 7:31 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 19:31
3. Posted by wavemaker | May 21, 2007 8:24 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
nogo, care to speak more clearly?
3. Posted by wavemaker | May 21, 2007 8:24 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 20:24
4. Posted by BarneyG2000 | May 21, 2007 8:47 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
warrantless surveillance?
Jayson, I must have missed that part of the operation. Please point out to us the domestic to international call made and intercepted by the NSA?
This was a sting operation, you know good old fashion police work. The kind of stuff that works just fine without the Patriot Act.
4. Posted by BarneyG2000 | May 21, 2007 8:47 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 20:47
5. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 8:56 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
increased use of FISA warrants, Patriot Act, warrantless surveillance, etc. -- into their rightful perspectives.
Yep, it sure does. It demonstrates that they are unnecessary and almost completely useless for stopping terrorism. Did you think they were involved in this case?
5. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 8:56 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 20:56
6. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 9:00 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
BarneyGRUBBLE:
Please point out to us the domestic to international call made and intercepted by the NSA?
Can you point to the reverse?
Why ask a question you or the author of the post can't possibly answer without having been in court?
Oh, wait I know.
You ain't got nothing else.
6. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 9:00 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 21:00
7. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 9:48 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
LOL! So, marc, in the absence of any evidence or even mere suggestion that the NSA was involved in this operation, your position is that it's reasonable to assume that it was, and it's up to those not inventing new facts to insert into the story to point to evidence that it wasn't. Is that really your position?
Well, I say that this story should help with the placement of talking undercover tigers into their rightful perspectives. And since you haven't been in court, then you have no basis for disputing that. And if you do, then it's because you ain't got nothing else. Either that or you're literally on drugs.
This is pure comedy gold.
7. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 9:48 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 21:48
8. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 10:00 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ah... excuse me!
I didn't inject ANY refs to the NSA if you're looking for potential drug use point your misguided accusatory finger as BarneyGRUUBLE ("warrantless surveillance?").
Not to mention you quoting the author and his ref to the NSA program.
Ever think of trying the fiction genre of the book writing trade?
8. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 10:00 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 22:00
9. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 10:20 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Warrantless surveillance" was suggested by the author. It was an assertion that, when challenged, you defended. You can read it up above... c'mon, give it a try.
On the topic of book writing genres, perhaps you should try "revisionist history".
9. Posted by Brian | May 21, 2007 10:20 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 22:20
10. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 10:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
when challenged, you defended.
OK, let's assumne I'm dumb as a box of Kerry for pres. bumper stickers, (and I KNOW you believe that) but for arguments sake quote the passage where I defended the author or the NSA?
10. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 10:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 22:27
11. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 11:26 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Still waiting.........Brian
11. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 11:26 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 23:26
12. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 11:52 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Still waiting Brian.
Give up? Can't find that quote yet?
Well, it's not like I don't have some sympathy for your situation. Here go debate Boozy Suzy.
Maybe you will have better luck winning something over there.
But my cash is on Suzy.
12. Posted by marc | May 21, 2007 11:52 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 21, 2007 23:52
13. Posted by jhow66 | May 22, 2007 12:36 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Poor wittle wefties can't stand it when something good for the country works. Boo hoo they are stepping on our toes.
13. Posted by jhow66 | May 22, 2007 12:36 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 00:36
14. Posted by Denise | May 22, 2007 12:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
And the idiots at Democrat Underground are cheering for the other side;
Eric J in MN (1000+ posts) Tue May-22-07 12:02 AM
Original message
FBI entraps doctor.
An undercover FBI agent got a Florida doctor to agree to treat Al Qaeda fighters who came to the US.
Now the doctor will going to prison instead of curing the sick in Florida.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x936354
14. Posted by Denise | May 22, 2007 12:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 00:58
15. Posted by Brian | May 22, 2007 1:09 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Sorry I didn't stick around to watch you waiting for me, marc. But here you go...
"warrantless surveillance" = NSA. Or don't you pay attention?
15. Posted by Brian | May 22, 2007 1:09 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 01:09
16. Posted by marc | May 22, 2007 2:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Someone isn't "paying attention."
However you didn't provide anything close to a quote authored by me that "defended" anything in the authors post. You failed, miserably.
Go back and see Boozy Suzie, you've already proven to be an easy opponent here, maybe you can compete with her.
16. Posted by marc | May 22, 2007 2:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 02:00
17. Posted by Brian | May 22, 2007 4:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh, grow up. Do you have nothing but resorting to word games?
You and Bush are a lot alike. You just declare victory with no substance to back it up, and hope that no one is paying attention to the facts. Although in your case, the facts are recorded up above.
17. Posted by Brian | May 22, 2007 4:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 04:01
18. Posted by marc | May 22, 2007 5:56 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Still flailing away?
Where's my quote, you damn sure haven't provided it?
Such a simple task to support your accusation I support the NSA and the evidence you claim is in this thread.
Yet you can't give a simple quote. Come on big guy they "are recorded up above."
Amazing, and you think I should grow up?
18. Posted by marc | May 22, 2007 5:56 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 05:56
19. Posted by Dirk | May 22, 2007 6:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Holy Crap! DU erased that thread you posted. It must have been pretty vile considering all the "I hope Cheney is killed by a suicide bomber" threads they leave up.
19. Posted by Dirk | May 22, 2007 6:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 22, 2007 06:24