I ran across this articl and I think it pretty well sums up what a lot of people are thinking and feeling.
ORIGINAL ARTICE HERE
Mr. President, where is the passion?
By Neal Gabler
December 20, 2009
WELL, THAT was fast. Though past presidential candidates were elected with a larger percentage of votes, it is fair to say that no modern president reached office with a greater outpouring of sentiment, enthusiasm, and passion than Barack Obama. Supporters felt this was a landmark election, not only because Obama was African-American but also because he promised a different kind of presidency. They actually believed he would make good on his campaign slogan. Finally, change that would matter.
It didn’t take long for the disillusion to set in, especially among those on the left who had been Obama’s most ardent admirers. Where they had expected a full-throttle presidency, undoing what George W. Bush had done, what they got instead is a timorous one. In 1988, Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis pronounced that the election was not about ideology but about competence. Now we have the presidency that Dukakis promised. It is cautious, deliberative, reasonable, experienced, not terribly ideological and entirely competent - very different from George W. Bush’s government of ideologues, cronies, and hacks.
But there is one big thing that the administration lacks: passion. It is hard to remember a presidency that was as passionless as this one is - a presidency that puts down no markers, draws no lines in the sand, makes no stand. That, even more than the compromises themselves, may be what really riles Obama’s old supporters. It is that he doesn’t seem tortured by the compromise. Simply put, Obama seems to be missing the passion gene...CONTINUED
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
AND THE FBI DOES IT AGAIN!
http://www.ocregister.com/news/monteilh-226317-says-fbi.html
Informant tells of role in FBI probes
By SALVADOR HERNANDEZ
2009-12-30 08:54:40
Since he was a teen, Craig Monteilh has pretended to be someone he wasn't – Russian, Muslim, a white supremacist.
It was a skill he learned early, says Monteilh, a 47-year-old Irvine man who, according to court records, provided information to the FBI.
He learned to gain people's trust – even while pretending to be someone else. It's a skill that FBI agents and police officers helped him hone, he says. It's a skill that he sharpened in his role as an informant in several investigations.
First recruited by narcotics investigators in late 2003, Monteilh says he gained the trust of law enforcement officials by giving information on bank robberies, murder-for-hire investigations and cases involving white-supremacist gangs.
His role as an informant in state prison provided early training, says Monteilh, who is African American, but light-skinned. After being arrested for grand theft in 2002, he was sentenced to state prisons in Tehachapi and Chino. There, he pretended to be Caucasian to blend in with white supremacists.
Six years later, he would be involved in the case of Ahmadullah Sais Niazi, a Tustin man arrested on suspicion of lying on immigration forms about ties to terrorist organizations. Monteilh's name and picture would appear in several news reports. In a court hearing, an FBI agent says that Niazi was recorded in a conversation calling Osama bin Laden "an angel" and that an informant had been behind the recording.
Days later, Monteilh emerged as that informant.
The revelation raised questions about the FBI's tactics. Muslim leaders said the bureau was planting informants who were inciting violent and jihadist conversations. Since then, relations between Muslim organizations and the FBI have soured, leaders say.
Meanwhile, the FBI has repeated that it does not profile suspects, and while it has refused to comment on specific allegations, Monteilh's role or investigative techniques, a spokeswoman has said the FBI has followed criminal leads when investigations lead them there.
In multiple interviews with The Orange County Register, Monteilh detailed cases on which he worked with federal investigators and how he went from informing on inmates he befriended in prison to being involved with counter-terrorism.
FROM THE BEGINNING
"What do you answer when someone asks you: 'What are you?'" Monteilh says he was asked as a teenager by his father. He sometimes told classmates he was white or another ethnicity in order to be accepted.
"It depends on who is asking," Monteilh replied.
It was a point of contention between him and his father, Monteilh says, but it was a pattern he would repeat in life.
"I knew I could be anything, and it sounds strange, but it's true," he says.
After being sent to prison in 2002, Monteilh says, he associated with white supremacist groups for protection and convenience: "I played along with it because I wanted to affiliate with that protection bracket. It put me in a certain stature, so it was wise for me to affiliate."
After he was released, Monteilh maintained his contacts, exchanging letters with some of the inmates.
"Bro, you have no idea how good it was to get this letter from you," wrote one inmate in June 27, 2003. "I know you were and are a man of your word. As I told you, I'm usually a good judge of character."
The two exchanged at least a dozen letters and the inmate asked him to collect money from criminal associates in the Los Angeles area – which Monteilh did.
But months later, Monteilh says he was contacted in a gym by investigators with the Westminster Police Department, members of the regional narcotics task force. Monteilh talked to them about the people he met in prison and he made his choice – he became an informant.
He told authorities of shipments, pickups and drug transactions, Monteilh says.
But his former friend from Tehachapi prison would prove vital in sensitive investigations, he says.
In 2005, the inmate told Monteilh he was looking to rob a bank, and Monteilh in turn told his FBI contact. When the former inmate attempted to rob a bank in South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa, authorities were waiting for him.
"It was that case that my handler's supervisor thought: 'This guy can get information,'" he says.
In his role as an informant, Monteilh says, he was at first paid for each piece of information. Then it was a monthly payment. From 2003 to 2006, Monteilh claims, he made $72,000 to $144,000, income he got as an informant but listed on tax returns as being earned as a fitness instructor.
By July 2006, Monteilh says, he was working as an informant for the Orange County Joint Terrorism Task Force, pretending to be a man named Farouk al-Aziz. In that role, Monteilh says, he was instructed to infiltrate local mosques and gain the trust of local religious leaders.
BACK IN PRISON
He continued in that role until 2007, he says, when he was arrested on suspicion of grand theft in a case involving steroids – a case Monteilh maintains was related to a case he worked as an informant. While in jail, Monteilh continued to provide information to the FBI, he says.
"She knew, wherever I was, I would keep my ears open," Monteilh says.
That was the case with a man named Voicu Gheorghe Gruia, Monteilh says, a man arrested in 2007, who was charged with more than 50 counts of identity theft. Gruia was accused of using machines known as "skimmers" to copy sensitive credit card and debit card information from unsuspecting victims, then using the information to steal money from their accounts.
Monteilh met Gruia in Men's Central Jail, he says, and was asked by his FBI handler to find the "skimmers" that were alleged to have been used in Gruia's operation. According to court records, Gruia was held in lieu of $1 million bail, but had to prove the money was collected by legitimate means before being released.
In January 2008, Gruia is alleged to have contacted his wife and told her he met someone in prison who told him he could get him released, according to court records. In exchange, the other prisoner asked for a "skimmer." But when Gruia's wife, and an associate, drove to pick up the equipment on Jan. 28, 2008, they were arrested by local police and an agent with the FBI.
Jack Whitaker, a Tustin attorney who is now defending Gruia in a federal case, says an informant was involved in his client's case, though the identity that person remained unknown. Monteilh asserts that it was him.
When asked why he's decided to come forward about his involvement in criminal investigations, Monteilh does not deny he has an ax to grind. After admitting that he gave federal authorities information on people who attended local mosques, he has received threatening phone calls and been physically threatened.
Monteilh says he had an unwritten agreement with the FBI to receive a lump sum at the end of his work with them – which the agency reneged on. He filed a $10 million claim against the agency alleging that his civil liberties were violated – a claim that was denied by the agency. He and his attorney plan to file a lawsuit against the FBI.
Informant tells of role in FBI probes
By SALVADOR HERNANDEZ
2009-12-30 08:54:40
Since he was a teen, Craig Monteilh has pretended to be someone he wasn't – Russian, Muslim, a white supremacist.
It was a skill he learned early, says Monteilh, a 47-year-old Irvine man who, according to court records, provided information to the FBI.
He learned to gain people's trust – even while pretending to be someone else. It's a skill that FBI agents and police officers helped him hone, he says. It's a skill that he sharpened in his role as an informant in several investigations.
First recruited by narcotics investigators in late 2003, Monteilh says he gained the trust of law enforcement officials by giving information on bank robberies, murder-for-hire investigations and cases involving white-supremacist gangs.
His role as an informant in state prison provided early training, says Monteilh, who is African American, but light-skinned. After being arrested for grand theft in 2002, he was sentenced to state prisons in Tehachapi and Chino. There, he pretended to be Caucasian to blend in with white supremacists.
Six years later, he would be involved in the case of Ahmadullah Sais Niazi, a Tustin man arrested on suspicion of lying on immigration forms about ties to terrorist organizations. Monteilh's name and picture would appear in several news reports. In a court hearing, an FBI agent says that Niazi was recorded in a conversation calling Osama bin Laden "an angel" and that an informant had been behind the recording.
Days later, Monteilh emerged as that informant.
The revelation raised questions about the FBI's tactics. Muslim leaders said the bureau was planting informants who were inciting violent and jihadist conversations. Since then, relations between Muslim organizations and the FBI have soured, leaders say.
Meanwhile, the FBI has repeated that it does not profile suspects, and while it has refused to comment on specific allegations, Monteilh's role or investigative techniques, a spokeswoman has said the FBI has followed criminal leads when investigations lead them there.
In multiple interviews with The Orange County Register, Monteilh detailed cases on which he worked with federal investigators and how he went from informing on inmates he befriended in prison to being involved with counter-terrorism.
FROM THE BEGINNING
"What do you answer when someone asks you: 'What are you?'" Monteilh says he was asked as a teenager by his father. He sometimes told classmates he was white or another ethnicity in order to be accepted.
"It depends on who is asking," Monteilh replied.
It was a point of contention between him and his father, Monteilh says, but it was a pattern he would repeat in life.
"I knew I could be anything, and it sounds strange, but it's true," he says.
After being sent to prison in 2002, Monteilh says, he associated with white supremacist groups for protection and convenience: "I played along with it because I wanted to affiliate with that protection bracket. It put me in a certain stature, so it was wise for me to affiliate."
After he was released, Monteilh maintained his contacts, exchanging letters with some of the inmates.
"Bro, you have no idea how good it was to get this letter from you," wrote one inmate in June 27, 2003. "I know you were and are a man of your word. As I told you, I'm usually a good judge of character."
The two exchanged at least a dozen letters and the inmate asked him to collect money from criminal associates in the Los Angeles area – which Monteilh did.
But months later, Monteilh says he was contacted in a gym by investigators with the Westminster Police Department, members of the regional narcotics task force. Monteilh talked to them about the people he met in prison and he made his choice – he became an informant.
He told authorities of shipments, pickups and drug transactions, Monteilh says.
But his former friend from Tehachapi prison would prove vital in sensitive investigations, he says.
In 2005, the inmate told Monteilh he was looking to rob a bank, and Monteilh in turn told his FBI contact. When the former inmate attempted to rob a bank in South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa, authorities were waiting for him.
"It was that case that my handler's supervisor thought: 'This guy can get information,'" he says.
In his role as an informant, Monteilh says, he was at first paid for each piece of information. Then it was a monthly payment. From 2003 to 2006, Monteilh claims, he made $72,000 to $144,000, income he got as an informant but listed on tax returns as being earned as a fitness instructor.
By July 2006, Monteilh says, he was working as an informant for the Orange County Joint Terrorism Task Force, pretending to be a man named Farouk al-Aziz. In that role, Monteilh says, he was instructed to infiltrate local mosques and gain the trust of local religious leaders.
BACK IN PRISON
He continued in that role until 2007, he says, when he was arrested on suspicion of grand theft in a case involving steroids – a case Monteilh maintains was related to a case he worked as an informant. While in jail, Monteilh continued to provide information to the FBI, he says.
"She knew, wherever I was, I would keep my ears open," Monteilh says.
That was the case with a man named Voicu Gheorghe Gruia, Monteilh says, a man arrested in 2007, who was charged with more than 50 counts of identity theft. Gruia was accused of using machines known as "skimmers" to copy sensitive credit card and debit card information from unsuspecting victims, then using the information to steal money from their accounts.
Monteilh met Gruia in Men's Central Jail, he says, and was asked by his FBI handler to find the "skimmers" that were alleged to have been used in Gruia's operation. According to court records, Gruia was held in lieu of $1 million bail, but had to prove the money was collected by legitimate means before being released.
In January 2008, Gruia is alleged to have contacted his wife and told her he met someone in prison who told him he could get him released, according to court records. In exchange, the other prisoner asked for a "skimmer." But when Gruia's wife, and an associate, drove to pick up the equipment on Jan. 28, 2008, they were arrested by local police and an agent with the FBI.
Jack Whitaker, a Tustin attorney who is now defending Gruia in a federal case, says an informant was involved in his client's case, though the identity that person remained unknown. Monteilh asserts that it was him.
When asked why he's decided to come forward about his involvement in criminal investigations, Monteilh does not deny he has an ax to grind. After admitting that he gave federal authorities information on people who attended local mosques, he has received threatening phone calls and been physically threatened.
Monteilh says he had an unwritten agreement with the FBI to receive a lump sum at the end of his work with them – which the agency reneged on. He filed a $10 million claim against the agency alleging that his civil liberties were violated – a claim that was denied by the agency. He and his attorney plan to file a lawsuit against the FBI.
Monday, December 28, 2009
THE BIG ZERO
CROSS POSTED FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES
Op-Ed Columnist
The Big Zero
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Maybe we knew, at some unconscious, instinctive level, that it would be an era best forgotten. Whatever the reason, we got through the first decade of the new millennium without ever agreeing on what to call it. The aughts? The naughties? Whatever. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking the millennium didn’t begin until 2001. Do we really care?)
But from an economic point of view, I’d suggest that we call the decade past the Big Zero. It was a decade in which nothing good happened, and none of the optimistic things we were supposed to believe turned out to be true.
It was a decade with basically zero job creation. O.K., the headline employment number for December 2009 will be slightly higher than that for December 1999, but only slightly. And private-sector employment has actually declined — the first decade on record in which that happened.
It was a decade with zero economic gains for the typical family. Actually, even at the height of the alleged “Bush boom,” in 2007, median household income adjusted for inflation was lower than it had been in 1999. And you know what happened next.
It was a decade of zero gains for homeowners, even if they bought early: right now housing prices, adjusted for inflation, are roughly back to where they were at the beginning of the decade. And for those who bought in the decade’s middle years — when all the serious people ridiculed warnings that housing prices made no sense, that we were in the middle of a gigantic bubble — well, I feel your pain. Almost a quarter of all mortgages in America, and 45 percent of mortgages in Florida, are underwater, with owners owing more than their houses are worth.
Last and least for most Americans — but a big deal for retirement accounts, not to mention the talking heads on financial TV — it was a decade of zero gains for stocks, even without taking inflation into account. Remember the excitement when the Dow first topped 10,000, and best-selling books like “Dow 36,000” predicted that the good times would just keep rolling? Well, that was back in 1999. Last week the market closed at 10,520.
So there was a whole lot of nothing going on in measures of economic progress or success. Funny how that happened.
For as the decade began, there was an overwhelming sense of economic triumphalism in America’s business and political establishments, a belief that we — more than anyone else in the world — knew what we were doing.
Let me quote from a speech that Lawrence Summers, then deputy Treasury secretary (and now the Obama administration’s top economist), gave in 1999. “If you ask why the American financial system succeeds,” he said, “at least my reading of the history would be that there is no innovation more important than that of generally accepted accounting principles: it means that every investor gets to see information presented on a comparable basis; that there is discipline on company managements in the way they report and monitor their activities.” And he went on to declare that there is “an ongoing process that really is what makes our capital market work and work as stably as it does.”
So here’s what Mr. Summers — and, to be fair, just about everyone in a policy-making position at the time — believed in 1999: America has honest corporate accounting; this lets investors make good decisions, and also forces management to behave responsibly; and the result is a stable, well-functioning financial system.
What percentage of all this turned out to be true? Zero.
What was truly impressive about the decade past, however, was our unwillingness, as a nation, to learn from our mistakes.
Even as the dot-com bubble deflated, credulous bankers and investors began inflating a new bubble in housing. Even after famous, admired companies like Enron and WorldCom were revealed to have been Potemkin corporations with facades built out of creative accounting, analysts and investors believed banks’ claims about their own financial strength and bought into the hype about investments they didn’t understand. Even after triggering a global economic collapse, and having to be rescued at taxpayers’ expense, bankers wasted no time going right back to the culture of giant bonuses and excessive leverage.
Then there are the politicians. Even now, it’s hard to get Democrats, President Obama included, to deliver a full-throated critique of the practices that got us into the mess we’re in. And as for the Republicans: now that their policies of tax cuts and deregulation have led us into an economic quagmire, their prescription for recovery is — tax cuts and deregulation.
So let’s bid a not at all fond farewell to the Big Zero — the decade in which we achieved nothing and learned nothing. Will the next decade be better? Stay tuned. Oh, and happy New Year.
Op-Ed Columnist
The Big Zero
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Maybe we knew, at some unconscious, instinctive level, that it would be an era best forgotten. Whatever the reason, we got through the first decade of the new millennium without ever agreeing on what to call it. The aughts? The naughties? Whatever. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking the millennium didn’t begin until 2001. Do we really care?)
But from an economic point of view, I’d suggest that we call the decade past the Big Zero. It was a decade in which nothing good happened, and none of the optimistic things we were supposed to believe turned out to be true.
It was a decade with basically zero job creation. O.K., the headline employment number for December 2009 will be slightly higher than that for December 1999, but only slightly. And private-sector employment has actually declined — the first decade on record in which that happened.
It was a decade with zero economic gains for the typical family. Actually, even at the height of the alleged “Bush boom,” in 2007, median household income adjusted for inflation was lower than it had been in 1999. And you know what happened next.
It was a decade of zero gains for homeowners, even if they bought early: right now housing prices, adjusted for inflation, are roughly back to where they were at the beginning of the decade. And for those who bought in the decade’s middle years — when all the serious people ridiculed warnings that housing prices made no sense, that we were in the middle of a gigantic bubble — well, I feel your pain. Almost a quarter of all mortgages in America, and 45 percent of mortgages in Florida, are underwater, with owners owing more than their houses are worth.
Last and least for most Americans — but a big deal for retirement accounts, not to mention the talking heads on financial TV — it was a decade of zero gains for stocks, even without taking inflation into account. Remember the excitement when the Dow first topped 10,000, and best-selling books like “Dow 36,000” predicted that the good times would just keep rolling? Well, that was back in 1999. Last week the market closed at 10,520.
So there was a whole lot of nothing going on in measures of economic progress or success. Funny how that happened.
For as the decade began, there was an overwhelming sense of economic triumphalism in America’s business and political establishments, a belief that we — more than anyone else in the world — knew what we were doing.
Let me quote from a speech that Lawrence Summers, then deputy Treasury secretary (and now the Obama administration’s top economist), gave in 1999. “If you ask why the American financial system succeeds,” he said, “at least my reading of the history would be that there is no innovation more important than that of generally accepted accounting principles: it means that every investor gets to see information presented on a comparable basis; that there is discipline on company managements in the way they report and monitor their activities.” And he went on to declare that there is “an ongoing process that really is what makes our capital market work and work as stably as it does.”
So here’s what Mr. Summers — and, to be fair, just about everyone in a policy-making position at the time — believed in 1999: America has honest corporate accounting; this lets investors make good decisions, and also forces management to behave responsibly; and the result is a stable, well-functioning financial system.
What percentage of all this turned out to be true? Zero.
What was truly impressive about the decade past, however, was our unwillingness, as a nation, to learn from our mistakes.
Even as the dot-com bubble deflated, credulous bankers and investors began inflating a new bubble in housing. Even after famous, admired companies like Enron and WorldCom were revealed to have been Potemkin corporations with facades built out of creative accounting, analysts and investors believed banks’ claims about their own financial strength and bought into the hype about investments they didn’t understand. Even after triggering a global economic collapse, and having to be rescued at taxpayers’ expense, bankers wasted no time going right back to the culture of giant bonuses and excessive leverage.
Then there are the politicians. Even now, it’s hard to get Democrats, President Obama included, to deliver a full-throated critique of the practices that got us into the mess we’re in. And as for the Republicans: now that their policies of tax cuts and deregulation have led us into an economic quagmire, their prescription for recovery is — tax cuts and deregulation.
So let’s bid a not at all fond farewell to the Big Zero — the decade in which we achieved nothing and learned nothing. Will the next decade be better? Stay tuned. Oh, and happy New Year.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Lessons In Life
Check out this SlideShare Presentation:
Lessons In Life
View more presentations from bianucdenn.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
25 STATES EMPTY THEIR UNEMPLOYMENT FUNDS
FROM CROOKS AND LIARS
So Far, 25 States Have Emptied Their Unemployment Funds
By Susie Madrak
You have to love how utterly shameless these Republican oligarchs are. In the middle of a massive recession, a Republican governor is complaining about "Rolls Royce" unemployment benefits in Indiana. By "Rolls Royce," I assume he means anyone who's getting enough money to pay for heat is living too damned high on the hog.
Maximum weekly unemployment benefit in Indiana: $360.
But that's not even news, is it? That the party that so happily poured billions of untracked dollars down the memory hole in Iraq is suddenly so thrifty when it comes to us cannot be a shock to any sentient being:
The recession's jobless toll is draining unemployment-compensation funds so fast that according to federal projections, 40 state programs will go broke within two years and need $90 billion in loans to keep issuing the benefit checks.
The shortfalls are putting pressure on governments to either raise taxes or shrink the aid payments.
Debates over the state benefit programs have erupted in South Carolina, Nevada, Kansas, Vermont and Indiana. And the budget gaps are expected to spread and become more acute in the coming year, compelling legislators in many states to reconsider their operations.
Currently, 25 states have run out of unemployment money and have borrowed $24 billion from the federal government to cover the gaps. By 2011, according to Department of Labor estimates, 40 state funds will have been emptied by the jobless tsunami.
"There's immense pressure, and it's got to be faced," said Indiana state Rep. David Niezgodski (D), a sponsor of a bill that addressed the gaps in Indiana's unemployment program. "Our system was absolutely broke."
The Indiana legislation protected the aid checks, Niezgodski said, but it came after a give-and-take this spring in which Gov. Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. (R) said the state had been providing "Rolls-Royce benefits" and several thousand union workers countered by protesting proposed cuts at the state capitol. In January, the legislature is slated to consider a bill to delay the proposed tax increases intended to refill the fund.
So Far, 25 States Have Emptied Their Unemployment Funds
By Susie Madrak
You have to love how utterly shameless these Republican oligarchs are. In the middle of a massive recession, a Republican governor is complaining about "Rolls Royce" unemployment benefits in Indiana. By "Rolls Royce," I assume he means anyone who's getting enough money to pay for heat is living too damned high on the hog.
Maximum weekly unemployment benefit in Indiana: $360.
But that's not even news, is it? That the party that so happily poured billions of untracked dollars down the memory hole in Iraq is suddenly so thrifty when it comes to us cannot be a shock to any sentient being:
The recession's jobless toll is draining unemployment-compensation funds so fast that according to federal projections, 40 state programs will go broke within two years and need $90 billion in loans to keep issuing the benefit checks.
The shortfalls are putting pressure on governments to either raise taxes or shrink the aid payments.
Debates over the state benefit programs have erupted in South Carolina, Nevada, Kansas, Vermont and Indiana. And the budget gaps are expected to spread and become more acute in the coming year, compelling legislators in many states to reconsider their operations.
Currently, 25 states have run out of unemployment money and have borrowed $24 billion from the federal government to cover the gaps. By 2011, according to Department of Labor estimates, 40 state funds will have been emptied by the jobless tsunami.
"There's immense pressure, and it's got to be faced," said Indiana state Rep. David Niezgodski (D), a sponsor of a bill that addressed the gaps in Indiana's unemployment program. "Our system was absolutely broke."
The Indiana legislation protected the aid checks, Niezgodski said, but it came after a give-and-take this spring in which Gov. Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. (R) said the state had been providing "Rolls-Royce benefits" and several thousand union workers countered by protesting proposed cuts at the state capitol. In January, the legislature is slated to consider a bill to delay the proposed tax increases intended to refill the fund.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
COLD SHOT 12/20/09 @ 7:00 EASTERN
Sunday, December 20. 2009, a new Cold Shot will broadcast live at 7:00 Eastern Time. The number to call is (347) 857-3972. TOPICS OF DISCUSSION TO INCLUDE:
The use of paid informants by the federal government to incite violent acts and entrap. Is this an abuse of power and an infringement upon your rights, or just a necessary evil indicative of the times?
- Are the claims made by Hal Turner factual?
- Bill White - the trial, and Freedom of speech advocates.
- The no defense strategy - good, bad or arrogant?
- What do the recent events mean for the White Nationalist Movement?
Phone lines will open at 7:20 EASTERN TIME.
REMEMBER TO BE CIVIL - ALL CIVIL COMMENTS WILL BE AIRED. ALL OTHERS WILL BE CUT OFF. I GIVE EVERYONE A LOT OF LATITUDE - SO PLEASE DON'T ABUSE THAT. DISAGREEMENT IS GREAT - RUDE & CRUDE BEHAVIOR, HOWEVER, BRINGS NOTHING TO THE TABLE.
Friday, December 18, 2009
BILL WHITE GUILTY
From Roanoke.comA federal jury has found William A. White guilty on four counts and not guilty on three counts.
The jury found White guilty of: threatening Jennifer Petsche, a Citibank employee in Kansas City, Mo.; intimidating several residents of a Virginia Beach apartment complex with the intent to prevent their testimony in a housing discrimination case; threatening Kathleen Kerr, an administrator at the University of Delaware; and threatening Richard Warman, a human rights lawyer from Canada.
The three counts that resulted in acquittals were: threatening Petsche, the bank employee, with the intent to extort; threatening Leonard Pitts, a nationally syndicated columnist in Bowie, Md.; and threatening Charles Tyson, the former mayor of South Harrison Township, N.J.
White faces a maximum of 40 years in prison on the four convictions. The lawyers involved are given 10 days to file post-verdict motions and to note appeals. After that, White will be sentenced.
UPDATE ON BILL WHITE
BILL WHITE HAS BEEN FOUND GUILTY ON 4 COUNTS AND NOT GUILTY ON 3. DETAILS SOON
TRIAL UPDATE
DAY 8
uh...oh For Bill
FROM LAURENCE HAMMACK
HERE WE GO AGAIN...ACCORDING TO HAMMACK:
UPDATE: 12:30
THE CASE HAS GONE TO THE JURY. WE WILL POST THE JURY INSTRUCTIONS AS SOON AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE.
FROM LAURENCE HAMMACK
uh...oh For Bill
FROM LAURENCE HAMMACK
A federal jury has indicated that it has questions about definition of a threat in the case of neo-Nazi William A. White.
"We are struggling with the aspect" of how a reasonable person should interpret a statement to be a threat, the foreman of the jury said after the panel was brought into the courtroom to ask a question.
The jury asked that the legal definition of a threat be read to them. After Judge James Turk read an instruction that took several minutes to recite, the jury asked for a written copy and resumed deliberations at 2:20.
Here are the jury's instructions for true threat definition:
For you to find the defendant guilty of each count, you must find that the communication it issued in that count contains true threat. The First Amendment does not protect true threat.
Whether a communication in fact contains a true threat, is determined in accordance with the interpretation of a reasonable recipient familiar with the context of the communication.
The government does not have to prove that the defendant subjectively intended for the recipientsunderstand the communication as a threat. The speaker need not have intended to carry out the threat or have the ability to carry out the threat. The government does not have to prove that the person who received the threat was actually placed in fear of harm.
On the other hand, a statement does not become a true threat simply because it instills fear in the listener. You may, however, consider the reaction of any recipient in determining whether a reasonable person would consider the message a true threat.
A true threat is a serious expression of an intent to injure the person of another or to commit an act of unlawful violence against a particular individual or a group. A true threat is a serious threat as opposed to mere idle or careless talk, exaggeration or something said in a joking matter.
A true threat is more than mere political hyperbole or vehement caustic and unpleasantly sharp political attacks or crude offensive and abusive methods of stating political opposition. Identifying and providing personal information on a Web site standing alone, while it may be offensive or disturbing to those listed, is protected by the First Amendment. The mere advocacy of the use of force or violence does not remove speech from the protection of the First Amendment. To be a true threat the communication does not need to be directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action.
You may find that a particular statement is a true threat if you find that the statement was made under such circumstances that an ordinary reasonable person who was familiar with the context of the communication would interpret it as an expression of an intent to injure the recipient or injure another person.
HERE WE GO AGAIN...ACCORDING TO HAMMACK:
A federal jury has indicated that it has questions about definition of a threat in the case of neo-Nazi William A. White.
"We are strugging with the aspect" of how a reasonable person should interpret a statement to be a threat, the foreman of the jury said after the panel was brought into the courtroom to ask a question.
The jury asked that the legal definition of a threat be read to them. After Judge James Turk read an instruction that took several minutes to recite, the jury asked for a written copy and resumed deliberations at 2:20.
UPDATE: 12:30
THE CASE HAS GONE TO THE JURY. WE WILL POST THE JURY INSTRUCTIONS AS SOON AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE.
FROM LAURENCE HAMMACK
William A. White "is not on trial for using the word n----r. He is not on trial for his politcal views."
With those words, the attorney for the neo-Nazi leader implored a jury today to set his client's racist and inflamatory statements aside in a careful anaylsis of the law.
White made no direct threats against the seven people he badgered with e-mails and online postings, David Damico told the jury in his closing statements.
"Where is the evidence that Mr. White has ever done anything violent to anybody, ever?" Damico asked the jury.
"Be an American, even if it makes your blood boil, and acquit Bill White."
With those words to the jury, David Damico ended his closing statement on behalf of neo-Nazi leader William A. White, who is seeking the protection of the First Amendment against charges of making threats.
At 12:05, prosecutor John Richmond began making his rebuttal closing arguments.
That was the last sentence of the closing argument made by the prosecution this morning. After their usual mid-morning break, the jury will hear the argument made by the defense. They will then be presented with legal instructions read to them by Judge James Turk and sent into deliberations where they will decide Bill White's fate."Defendant White does not get the last word. You all do. And that word is guilty."
Sending a jury to decide a case on Friday is generally not a good idea. In this case, after 8 days of testimony, legal wranglings, and courtroom presentations, the jury is certainly looking forward to a weekend away. Additionally, that area is under a winter storm advisory - so you can bet they want to go home. How this will all shape up is anyone's guess at this point.
IF YOU HAVEN'T VOTED IN OUR POLL - IT'S ON THE RIGHT AT THE TOP!
Thursday, December 17, 2009
UPDATE ON BILL WHITE TRIAL
VOTE IN THE POLL TO THE RIGHT
UPDATE THREADDAY 7: 12/17/09
The jury in the trial for Bill White has been sent home to allow the attorney's the rest of the day for working on closing arguments and legal instructions that will be read to the jury when they return at 9:00 tomorrow morning.
In what has become the norm in trials against high-profile neo-Nazi's, the defense filed a motion to dismiss the charges after the prosecution presented its case. Judge James Turk had refused before the trial, reserving the right to do so after hearing the prosecutions evidence. He, once again, refused to dismiss, and is sending the case to the jury.
In what has also become the questionable and curious norm of courtroom proceedings in trials of this nature, the defense rested presenting no evidence, testimony, or witnesses. One must wonder at the wisdom of such a move.
When the jury returns tomorrow they will be given their instructions and sent to deliberate with only the testimony against William White to consider.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
UPDATES
THE PROSECUTION RESTS
The jury was sent home and the defense will begin tomorrow. Defense attorney says it may only take a day to present his case but longer if White testifies. They are unsure about him testifying at this point - which probably means that Bill wants to and the defense is trying to dissuade him.
DAY 6
This morning brought the Director of Campus Security at the University of Deleware to the stand. Apparently, after reading about a diversity program at the University, Bill White decided once again to insert himself into the situation and threaten the Director of Residence Life. He telephoned her office and spoke with her secretary.
Idenifying himself as Bill White, the commander of a neo-Nazi group. When told that Kathleen Kerr was not available he instructed her to give Kerr the following message, according to the secretary's testimony:
“Just tell her that people who think the way she thinks, we hunt down and shoot.”
White then published the home addresses and telephone numbers of both Kerr and the university president on his website. The Director of Security was immediately summoned to the presidents office, something he says never happens unless it is a major emergency situation.
Kerr's secretary said that White's voice chilled her and was cold and "dead sounding."
DAY 5
UPDATE: 6:00 EST
After a full day of testimony, court adjourned at 5:00. The prosecution is nearing the end of its' case unless they decide to call more witnesses in an effort to demonstrate a pattern of actions by White.
It is expected that Kathleen Kerr, a university administrator, will provide testimony tomorrow. At that point, should the prosectuion believe that it has met its' burden of proof, they may rest. In any event, it looks like they will do so by Thursday at the latest.
More...tomorrow.
In the event that you haven't read the indictment, or want to again, here is a link.
UPDATE: 3:00 EST
"Unfortunately, the days when white men would simply burn the local newspaper and run n----r officials out with tar and feathers are past. However, your incidents give me hope that perhaps we shall see them again." (Bill White email to Charles Tyson)
Following the four hour testimony of Richard Warman, the stand was taken by Charles Tyson, the former Mayor of South Harrison Township in New Jersey.
In 2007, someone defaced Mr. Tyson's campaign signe with racist slurs. The Township offered a reward for information regarding the vandals. That didn't sit well with Bill White. Late one evening he called Mr. Tyson's home. When Tyson's wife answered the phone, the caller identified himself as White who then said that no black man should govern whites, and that he was going to put a Nazi sign in his front yard.
White then followed up with an e-mail. "Unfortunately, the days when white men would simply burn the local newspaper and run n----r officials out with tar and feathers are past. However, your incidents give me hope that perhaps we shall see them again."
Tyson testified that after receiving the call and the email he was "petrified."
As the trial continues it becomes evident that threats made by White were not just isolated incidents. His reign of terror reached far and wide and knew no bounds. One has wonder as all of this unfolds what effect this is having on a jury of twelve. Are they outraged and alarmed by the nature and scope of the threats? Or is this now turning into overkill? The prosecution is taking a big risk here. In the end, the payoff could be big - or disaterous for those seeking a guilty verdict. It will be interesting, however.
Just who is the defense going to put on the stand? Will Bill White, himself, grace the court with his testimony? Perhaps there will be those among his following who will be called.
Today Canadian Civil Rights attorney, Richard Warman took the stand in the trial of Bill White. Throughout his testimony he used strong words to convey to the jury what the threats that Bill White made towards he and his family meant and that he believed that his life was endangered.
“This is publishing a call for my murder, and by extension the murder of my family, to the world,” he told the jury in U.S. District Court in Roanoke.
After the home of a civil rights activist was fire-bombed, White made the call in a chatroom for someone to do it to Warman. White went on later to publish an article entitled "Kill Richard Warman," and to publish his home address and phone number.
Warman said he was terrified. “Any time somebody is calling for your home to be firebombed … there’s a good chance that people are going to die,” Warman told the jury.
This testimony is coming from a pretty tough guy who on cross-examination admitted that he "enjoyed mixing it up with white supremacists." Apparently, the defense believes that the fact that Mr. Warman likes his work, and likes the way that the laws work in Canada, somehow diminishes the vile and visious nature of the threats made against him.
Monday, December 14, 2009
BILL WHITE UPDATES...
UPDATE: 3:00
She was so frightened after reading his letter that she packed her things and fled. That was the tesitmony of Tiese Mitchell on the stand this afternoon.
Mitchell was one of several African-American tenants in a dispute with a white landlord and who were targeted by Bill White's relentless intimidation tactics.
The letter, after a rant about blacks on welfare, stated, “You may get one over on your landlord this time, and you may not. But know that the white community has noticed you, and we know that you are and will never be anything more than a dirty parasite – and that our patience with you and the government that coddles you runs thin.”
Mitchell said that the language and the tone of the letter, as well as the knowledged that White knew where she lived, caused her to leave her home with her two small children and run to a relative.
The letter was addresse to: “Whiny Section 8 Nigger.”
As we await new information from the trial, WSLS has put out this update:
Douglas Hantske, a member of the National Alliance, a neo-Nazi group unfriendly toward Bill White, took the stand for the prosecution this morning. Hantske testified that he had delivered racist fliers in the neighborhood of Leonard Pitts after seeing his address posted on White's website.
Bill White’s trial is underway- three days down and almost three weeks expected to go.
There are still some witnesses we could possibly hear from, including a University of Delaware professor who directed a training program for the school a couple years ago.
According to the indictment, White allegedly told the professor’s secretary he would hunt the professors down and that anyone who views racism the way she does should be shot.
White allegedly claimed the university forced students to think all white people are racist. Then he allegedly posted the professor’s home address online.
Also, there’s a collective group of people from Virginia Beach. About two years ago, they accused their landlord of discrimination and according to the indictment, White allegedly wrote letters back to them standing up for their landlord.
Another run-in with White involved a lawyer from outside the U.S. Three years ago, a Canadian lawyer shut down White’s Canadian-based web site. Since then, the indictment says White wrote an article on overthrow.com, allegedly writing to kill the man.
We’re not sure when we will hear from these possible witnesses over the week. But when everyone has finished testifying, the jury needs to decide if White is guilty of the crimes he’s charged with-not his views.
Apparently, the prosecution is attempting to establish that racists and white supremacists not only read Bill's website, but utilized information posted there, hence furthering the idea that the probability of violence or harm could befall White's victims.
Agent Church also relayed a conversation he had with White before bringing formal charges in which White had tried to convince him that what he wrote was meant to be political satire and nothing more. White claimed he didn't intend for anyone to get hurt and that he was "simply mocking" the people with whom he disagreed on matters of race.
More as the morning break ends.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
ANOTHER FIASCO...
Tampa Bay Online
NEW PORT RICHEY - A murder trial rife with controversy and surprise produced another twist Friday night:
A hung jury.
Despite almost 10 hours of deliberations, the dozen jurors could not reach a unanimous verdict in the case of self-professed neo-Nazi John Ditullio Jr.
The vote: 10-2 in favor of not guilty.
Circuit Judge Michael Andrews declared a mistrial and dismissed the Pasco County jury just before 11 p.m.
Ditullio, 23, took a deep breath and smiled slightly.
"I'm disappointed, but at the same time we'll come back and do it again," defense attorney Bjorn Brunvand said. "Hopefully, this time it'll be 12-0, and they'll recognize that he's innocent of this charge."
A hearing is scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Monday to discuss a possible retrial date.
Ditullio remains charged with first-degree murder in Kristofer King's death and attempted murder in the wounding of Patricia Wells. He could be given a death sentence if convicted.
King's mother, Charlene Bricken, declined to comment as she left the courthouse. Wells left the courthouse an hour before Andrews declared the mistrial.
At the time of the March 23, 2006, slaying, Ditullio was a recruit of the American Nazis, a neo-Nazi group that congregated at a compound in Griffin Park.
Wells lived next door to the compound with her son, Brandon Wininger. Wininger wasn't home on the night of the attacks, but his friend King had gone to the home to use a computer.
Prosecutors argued that Ditullio donned a gas mask and entered Wells' mobile home after midnight. He slashed Wells' face and turned the knife on King, who was trying to escape, authorities said. King, 17, died of knife wounds to the head. Wells escaped and ran for help.
Prosecutors said Wells was attacked because she associated with a black man and King was stabbed because he was gay. They said Ditullio was trying to impress the American Nazis enough to gain admission into the group.
A former group member testified for the prosecution that Ditullio was responsible for the crimes.
The defense acknowledged Ditullio's association with the group, but Ditullio testified that he didn't commit the crimes and was set up by the other members.
The defense advanced the theory that Shawn Plott, another American Nazi now listed as a fugitive, was the attacker.
An eleventh-hour defense witness, Samantha Troupe, testified that she lived in the compound before the group scattered after the stabbings. She said Plott told her a year later that he was responsible for the crimes.
NOT TO BE UPSTAGED BY BILL WHITE...
On the Family of Hal Turner blog today, it is promised that a scathing article will appear in the Sunday edition of the largest Brazilian newspaper which is hosted by the New York Times.
According to the report, Brazil is pretty pissed off at the U.S. of A. for sending spy Turner into their country unannounced even though he supposedly uncovered a plot to sell military goods to Iraqi's who were fighting against the United States.
Of course, the "family of Hal Turner" isn't too happy either and promises to put a few more nails in the program that of deception, lies, and entrapment that Hal so dutifully participated in for our federal law-enforcers. According to the blog...
Now that the case against Hal has resulted in a mistrial, with a jury deadlocked 9 not guilty to 3 guilty, even more details of Hal Turner's intelligence operations for the FBI are likely to come out. As we will soon see with Brazil, the scandals and fallout from such revelations will have an effect on the US Government.Now, Hal Turner is a real sleaze - there's no doubt about that. And he has created havoc for a lot of decent people. However, finding out that he did so at the behest of our very own government really does rancor me. Consequently, any pressure that can be put on those who employ such tactics is going to be met with appreciation by me. But, you know, Hal shares in this, as well. He didn't have to go there but he did and he relished in it and made a lot of moola off of you and me.
We, Hal's family can tell you, there is a lot that will come out. It wasn't just Brazil where Hal had overseas dealings. In fact, Hal had dealings with officials from Great Britain, the British National Party and even members of the European Parliament -- all as part of his role with the FBI.
In addition, Hal performed work for an agent - who will be publicly named - from the Central Intelligence Agency; and was tasked by CIA to do something that would ultimately affect the outcome of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon 19 months later!
Yes, things are going to get pretty dicey when Hal's trial starts anew on March 1 in Brooklyn. Just remember that none of this had to come out if it wasn't for the U.S. Attorneys office in Chicago who are misrepresenting an opinion as a threat and who are too arrogant to admit they made a mistake or to let go.
On the other hand, if I were Hal, I would be keeping a very low profile. Outing CIA agents and international intelligence operations has gotten people six-feet deep in the mud if you know what I mean.
Instead, in the typical bragadoccio style that we have all come to recognize as classic Hal, his "family's" blog continues to run its' mouth to the few people who monitor it. Want to guess who keeps the closest tabs on that screed?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
UPDATE THREAD
December 11, 2009 - Day 3
UPDATE: 5:00 EST
Leonard Pitts concluded his afternoon of testimony denying that he had been trying to "stir things up" with is article.
"My job is not to worry about getting people to read my column," Pitts testified. "My job is to write the best column that I can ... and after that it’s out of my hands."
He was followed to the stand by his 19 year old daughter who testified about the fear she experienced after her father had become the victim of White's threats.
Court was dismissed for the weekend with the prosecution resuming its' case at 9:00 on Monday morning.
UPDATE: 2:45 EST
ALEX LINDER SAYS HE'S TESTIFYING VIA TELECONFERENCE TODAY AT 1:30 EST
So...why does Linder not have to appear?
"Consider this," White wrote. "As I'm sure, being in the collection business and having the attitude about it that you do, that you often make people upset. Lord knows that drawing too much publicity and making people upset is what did in Joan Lefkow."
UPDATE THREAD
UPDATE: 5:00 EST
Leonard Pitts concluded his afternoon of testimony denying that he had been trying to "stir things up" with is article.
"My job is not to worry about getting people to read my column," Pitts testified. "My job is to write the best column that I can ... and after that it’s out of my hands."
He was followed to the stand by his 19 year old daughter who testified about the fear she experienced after her father had become the victim of White's threats.
Court was dismissed for the weekend with the prosecution resuming its' case at 9:00 on Monday morning.
UPDATE: 2:45 EST
"You and your fellow black filth are quickly loosing ground, and I look forward to the rapidly approaching day when whites once again rise up and slaughter and enslave your ugly race to the last man, woman and child," White wrote.
"Itz coming."
Pulitzer Prize winning columnist, Leonard Pitts, took the stand in the Roanoke courtroom today to testify about the threats he received from the self-appointed leader of the American National Socialist Worker's Party. During his testimony, Pitts said that he "felt violated" when Bill White threatened him and posted his personal address and phone number on his website. ""He is essentially inviting them and daring them to commit violence," Pitts testified.
UPDATE: 2:10 EST
According to Alex Linder who testified via teleconference:Back from testifying via videoconference. It was no more than 15 minutes, pro-forma questions verifying I own the forum and keep the records, Bill's user names, that kind of thing. White's lawyer Damico cross-examined. He basically asked whether admins/mods could go in and change posts, which of course they technically can. Nothing really in dispute as far as I could see.
I should say also that the subpoena demanded I produce IPs for Bill's user names, which I did.
ALEX LINDER SAYS HE'S TESTIFYING VIA TELECONFERENCE TODAY AT 1:30 EST
So...why does Linder not have to appear?
"Consider this," White wrote. "As I'm sure, being in the collection business and having the attitude about it that you do, that you often make people upset. Lord knows that drawing too much publicity and making people upset is what did in Joan Lefkow."
Dave Wilson of the Miami Herald took the stand this morning and recounted his contact with Bill White after White posted the personal contact information of Leonard Pitts, the Pulitzer Prize winning columnist. When Wilson asked White to remove the information his respose was:
"We have no intention of removing Mr. Pitts' personal information. Frankly, if some loony took the info and killed him, I wouldn't shed a tear."
"That also goes for your whole newsroom."
There is a good possibility that Leonard Pitts will take the stand today.
UPDATE THREAD
WORD OF CAUTION...
ONLY DISCUSSION CONCERNING BILL WHITE AND THE TRIAL WILL BE ACCEPTED IN THIS THREAD. ALL OFF-TOPIC MEANDERINGS WILL BE DELETED.
By Scott Leamon
WSLS10 Reporter
Published: December 10, 2009
Updated: December 10, 2009
The departmental manager of Citi Group’s collection wing in Kansas City, Kansas told a federal jury this morning an e-mail from Roanoke Neo Nazi Bill White to one of her employees was “downright scary.“
Rachel Dixon said White had written one of her employees in March 2007 during a dispute about a line of credit.
The government is alleging White threatened the employee and extorted Citi Group using the email, which linked to a series of newspaper and other articles on the 2005 slayings of two family members of Chicago judge Joan Lefkow.
Dixon described the employee as “very emotional” after receiving White’s email and a voice message left on her home phone number.
A phone number, along with several addresses, White published on his former website, overthrow.com.
Dixon said the employee’s productivity fell significantly after the email.
A Citi internal investigator took the stand next, explaining to the jury how he investigated the email and turned his findings over to the Kansas City, Kansas branch office of the FBI.
The investigator said White called Citi’s Kansas City, Kansas location 46 times during a three hour period on March 21, 2007.
The investigator also told the jury he was familiar with the white supremacist movement after getting into a shoot-out with an avowed Neo Nazi while he was a cop in Wisconsin.
UPDATE: 11:15 EST - "Bill White did some ugly things," Ray Ferris told the jury. "Bill White did some obnoxious things. Bill White did some things that would really upset me. But that's not the test."
The test, Ferris said, is whether White's nasty comments and racial slurs -- made to people across the country in e-mails and online -- were actually threats. If not, they were covered by the First Amendment.
"Rude? Yes. Obnoxious? Yes. Bad taste? Yes. Illegal? I would suggest not," Ferris told the jury.
After opening statements this morning, the jury began to hear testimony.
Prosecutors said their witnesses will describe how terrified they became afer discovering the e-mails they received from White were actually from the so-called commander of a Roanoke-based white supremacy group.
Opening arguments in the Bill White trial began this morning in front of an all white jury. Laurence Hammack of Roanoke.com reports:
Yesterday it became evident just how sensitive the entire race issue promises to be in this proceeding as an all-white jury was seated. In what took all day, the selection process narrowed the field first from 66 to 38 qualified jurors, only two of which were African-American. Those two were eventually stricken by the defense.A newspaper columnist, a university administrator. A small-town mayor, a bank employee, a human rights lawyer, a group of apartment tenants.
"What do these people have in common?" federal prosecutor Cindy Chung asked a jury this morning.
"Absolutely nothing. They were not related to each other ... except for the defendant, Bill White. Bill White sought out these complete strangers and targeted them with a series of threats and intimidation," she said.
Justice Department Attorney, John Richmond, objected and Judge James Turk asked for an explanation from defense attorney, Ray Ferris:
Ferris said that he and co-counsel David Damico had decided their best strategy for seating a jury in White's case would be to select conservatives over liberals.
In a detailed questionnaire, one of the black panelists had listed President Obama as one of the people she admired most. Ferris said that factored into their decision, not because Obama is black, but because he is liberal.
Another reason for striking the juror, Ferris said, was because she had previously served on a jury that convicted a defendant, calling it a positive experience.
As for the second black juror excluded by the defense, Ferris noted that the man, an employee of a cable television station, reported that he often dealt with dissatisfied customers. That was a concern for the defense because one of the charges against White alleges that he threatened and tried to extort a bank employee whose service he was unhappy with.
Ferris also cited the man's equivocating responses to questions about whether he would be influenced by the word n----- in testimony. White frequently used the racial slur in online posts that will be a key part of the prosecution's case.
"I had a very strong feeling that he couldn't put race aside in this case," Ferris said of the juror.
After finding that the reasons for striking both prospective jurors were acceptable, Turk denied a motion from Richmond to have them returned to the panel.
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
MOVEMENT DRAMATICS...
You have to give the White Nationalist Movement a little credit for the drama it produces. Violence, in-fighting, treachery, spying, deception, costumes, and a little side-splitting comedy all combine to make for great hard-copy and amusement.
Two of the movement's leading men have been bringing us some courtroom melodrama of late as well as some tragic tales from the crypt.
Interestingly, Hal Turner, whose recent trial ended with a hung jury and the promise of a new date with the judge in March, declared that he was not really part of the movement, after all. In fact, he was working with the FBI to incite violence and mayhem and to land those nasty little Nazi's in jail.
On the other hand, Bill White, whose latest trial starts today in Roanoke, VA, paints himself as a beleaguered, tortured, and falsely imprisoned martyr for the cause.
Of course, they both have their own versions of life behind bars and what led to their arrest.
White is banking on his comrades standing behind him in his time of need. All two of them. You see, what Bill doesn't understand is that while Hal Turner has become as welcome as the plague among those he called friends, Bill has achieved pariah status after he pretty much screwed over everyone of any import in his small little corner of the world.
But, being the showman that he is, he just knows that he can achieve star status once again. Hoping to gather his supporters in his time of need, Bill has been busy sending out letters - long, hand-written letters - in hopes that someone will notice him once again.
Up until recently, the only person who really paid much attention to anything Bill had to say was federal informant Frazier Glenn Miller who just couldn't wait to publish Bill's words on VNN. A couple of days ago, Alex Linder, another agent provocateur, decided to bite. Linder published one of White's amplified harangues. As usual, everyone is to responsible for his current predicament but himself. Of course, it just all lends itself well to the production.
After reading this script, one of the players named, stepped forward and sent a response to Daryle Lamont Jenkins over at One People's Project. Michael Burks, a former member and regional director for White's ANSWP group, has taken issue with many of the accusations made, as have I. The letter, in it's entirety is posted below with some of Burk's and my responses.
NOVEMBER 16, 2009NICHOLS: As we have seen with folks like David Gletty and Hal Turner, infiltration is an easy task. However, whether or not Bill White was "set ip" has not yet been shown. The fact that charges were dismissed in Chicago simply indicates that the case wasn't strong enough to go to trial.
Alex:
I'm sending you this because, while I have shared the story of my arrest and detention with several newspapers, I have not given the full story to anyone who may be willing to publish it in an uncensored form. I thought you may have that intent - you are certainly the most widely read of those who might.
I have seen very little of the press surrounding my case, but am aware what the government has said about me. The truth, which is that the government has attempted to infiltrate and use the American National Socialist Workers Party as a terrorist organization, repeatedly failed to set me up, and, in failing, decided to arrest me and brutalize me into confessing to crimes I didn't commit. Such is the new 'kwa.
BURKS: I was never part of any anti-racist group. Even as I type this I am not working with anyone. If there was a government task force, this is news to me.
In early 2007, a government task force was erected in Washington to prosecute me, probably in response to my publishing of Eric Hunt's statement on the kidnapping of Elie Wiesel. By mid-2007, no later than July, Michael Burks, my Midwestern Regional Director, was working in the employ of an as-yet unnamed private anti-racist group, deliberately disrupting my activities and alienating other members of the group. Two others with similar agendas -- Justin Boyer and Tim Bland -- I was able to identify; Burks clung on right about to the end.
In September 2007, the government began active disruption of my activities in response to the Jena 6 campaign. The first effort to frame me came with the staged "hate crime" in October of that year.NICHOLS: This is typical Bill White bullshit. No one solicited anyone to attack Bill. No one planned for him to get into that fracas, His paranoia is showing and he wants to point the finger at someone. He has accused me and Citizens Against Hate of all sorts of things for years. The NAACP there wouldn't not have gotten involved in anything that sleazy nor would CAH.This is just Bill White trying to involve everyone else in his mess of his own making.
The group Citizens Against Hate, working with the Roanoke NAACP, solicited a local crack dealer and pimp to attack me while driving down the street. Whether or not the FBI and DOJ were in on planning that attack is unclear. However, they were behind the "deal" offered me by the Commonwealth of Virginia to drop all charges against both of us. I demanded trial, and, as reported in the paper, the crack dealer was convicted and I was acquitted. Had I accepted the deal to drop all state changes, DOJ lawyers were in the courtroom waiting to charge me with "hate crimes" that they knew to be fraudulent. I dodged that bullet.
BRUKS: Wow, tons of lies here. I was not a “star witness”. I, along with Phil Anderson and others were called to Chicago no different than we were for Roanoke. They only talked to me about a letter filled with lies that Bill had sent me; nothing more. I was not then, and not now, a federal informer. If so, I am still waiting on that nice check from Uncle Sam.
In response, in January 2008, a phony civil suit was brought against me to use civil process to try to fish out criminal evidence. A series of bogus subpoenas, all eventually quashed or modified by the courts, were filed against me to attempt to gain access to my computers, and two acts of bogus criminal complaints were sworn out against me in Norfolk, Virginia, for allegedly "threatening" lawyers involved in prosecution of "civil rights" cases. As reported in the "Stellman opinion" [Ed - not sure if Stellman or Stillman] (In Re: William A. White ED Va 2008) [Ed - again, not entirely sure here - 'ED'], those complaints were dismissed as protected speech.
But here is where the investigation began in earnest.
Mike Burks, Dan Jones, Phil Anderson, Robert Campbell and probably others unknown were first approached by FBI agents in late March and early April 2008, just prior to our Chicago dinner. By no later than that time, Burks, who was to be the star witness against me in Chicago, became a formal federal informer. Robert Campbell, who did not become an informer, was approached by two agents who told him they knew I was not committing crimes but wanted me to be, and was further told he'd be paid a large sum of money and "set up for life" if he would commit or aid an FBI agent in committing a violent act of domestic terrorism and frame me for it. When he threatened to turn this information over to me, the FBI told him he'd be physically harmed if he shared his story. And so the tone was set for this investigation.
NICHOLS: In fairness, there is a difference between a coerced informant and a paid informant. Whether Mike or others gave up any information or not is unknown. However, as you can see, Bill is doing the same thing he has always done - padding his own self-importance while tearing down and outing anyone he perceives as being his enemy. He has done it to every group he has ever been with.
From April 2008 through October 2008, Michael Burks and others recorded my phone calls, sidestepping the wiretap law. I was approached by at least seven individuals on the government payroll who asked me to commit crimes with them. One posed as a fellow just out of the army, said he "had weapons and people" and "was ready to go" to commit a terrorist act in the Seattle area. I told him never to talk to me again. Another pretended to be an investor, "Michael Klein," who DIP-funded [Ed - not sure 'DIP' is right] Chapter 11 estates. He had me going until he suggested I do an illegal insider trade involving a partnership owned by an offshore corporation I would control. I told him that was illegal and to never call me again. In fact, during my case in Chicago, the government tried to "lose" dozens of hours of tape of me telling people I didn't want to commit crimes.BURKS: I never recorded a single call, the FBI did through Skype. I have always used dial up and therefore, never had Skype.
NICHOLS: How does Michael Burks know that the FBI used Skype to record Bill's telephone calls and what does not having Skype and using dial-up have to do with this situation?
There is also a stack of witness reports from me consisting of FBI agents banging on my door and being told I didn't want to speak to them, and reports of agents following my car, six inches from the back bumper, trying to push me off the road and force me to talk to them -- once while my then eight-month-old daughter was riding in the back seat. That agent recorded himself saying he didn't care if babies died because he was going to "get" me.NICHOLS: Matt Hale, et.al. would certainly like to hear Bill be able to substantiate this claim. White had better hope that he can produce that "former employee" of Durkin's. Of course we are all well aware that Bill White had no "investigative staff." It certainly seems that all this time spent in jail hasn't taught him anything about much of anything. I'm certain that these exaggerations aren't lost on anyone within the movement. We're right back to business as usual with Bill White.
So, with this background, we come to my arrest, torture, detention and eventual acquittal in Chicago, and the case that is now being dismissed in Roanoke.
In September 2008, I announced my intent to publish the now infamous "Kill This Nigger?" magazine, which included an article on Mark Hoffman, a tainted juror and jury foreman in the Matt Hale trial. If you've seen the online version of the magazine, you'll know the cover article was on the need the Jewish media had to incite "white supremacists" to assassinate Obama to complete his deification, not a screed inviting violence. We now know though, through discovery, that a member of Obama's campaign staff contacted Patrick Fitzgerald, the US Attorney for Chicago, to demand my arrest.
The more substantial reason for my arrest, though, was my article exposing the fact the US Attorney's Office in Chicago, in cooperation with [Matt] Hale's attorney, Thomas Durkin, fixed the jury by placing Hoffman, the homosexual Jew with the black boyfriend, on it. While in Chicago, my investigative staff spoke to a former employee of Durkin who confirmed that Durkin threw the case and worked with Fitzgerald to railroad Hale.
BURKS: Bill almost told the truth here. Actually Bill sent me a letter from jail basically trying to coach me in what to recall during certain phone calls. The date he gave in the letter of a phone call never took place with me. I was at a playoff baseball game with my dad on that date. That is exactly what I told the DA and FBI in Chicago. I never bragged online. I only admitted that calls were recorded of Bill. Again, I never recorded a single call. The FBI did.
To stop publication of the magazine, I was arrested October 17, 2008, on a trumped-up warrant of solicitation of a violent felony against a federal juror. On two occasions prior to my arrest, the FBI had, via Michael Burks, tape recorded me instructing Phil Anderson to find out why the FBI felt someone was going to harm Mr. Hoffman and stop them. The FBI tried to lose these tapes, and on March 19, 2009, actually gave us a witness statement by Michael Burks stating he "did not remember being present" for phone conversations he recorded. Had Burks not bragged up and down the internet, the government may never have admitted them, but in July 2009, the US Attorney's Office finally admitted to the tapes, saying they had been "lost" because they were made by "another jurisdiction."
NICHOLS: For someone who claims to have been being held under so many restrictions, Bill White was able to get a lot of communication out of that jail cell. Anyone else notice that?
So the government arrested me for soliciting a violent felony while having private tapes of me saying I did not want anyone harmed and asking people to stop any effort to do so.
In this last memo, they stated they "had not reviewed" the tapes, and thus "did not know" if they contained exculpatory evidence.NICHOLS: I don't doubt that Bill was subjected to some nasty interrogation after the phony bomb plot had placed him under suspicion. That would be the status quo for those thought to be terrorists, domestic or foreign, during that time.
But my arrest was the start, not the end, of the investigation.
After my arrest, the government told the world I was a "serial killer," and told the Deputies at the Roanoke City Jail I was a "domestic terrorist." Claiming they had been informed of a plot to "bomb" the Poff Federal Building, I was subjected to coercive interrogation techniques a la Guantanamo Bay. For six days, until just after my second bond hearing, in the Roanoke City Jail I was kept in a tiny room under a bright light 24 hours a day, was denied phone calls, hygiene, visits and sleep (via efforts to wake me every hour) while I was interrogated periodically by US marshals about crimes I knew nothing about. Eventually, those statements will be made public - I implicated no one and confessed to nothing, despite a near-total psychic collapse. (Try not sleeping for six days - it's not good.)
NICHOLS: Well...I don't know how to break it to Mr. White, but Obama didn't take office until January of 2009. The measures that he was held under during that time came directly from the Bush Administration. These were virtually the same Special Administrative Measures that Matt Hale was incarcerated under until just recently.
It was in this condition I was [indeciph. - dragged?] before the world to testify at my show trial detention hearing, October 22, 2008.
And while I was moved to a segregation unit, I was continually abused from the day of my arrest until December 29, 2008, in an effort to break me and make me both confess to crimes I didn't commit and cooperate against other white activists being targeted by "Operation Hopeful Eagle," the Obama administration's ongoing effort to break the "white supremacist" movement.
BURKS: Dan Jones did admit to me he sent a noose to the NAACP leader in Lima Ohio. As for other hate crimes committed, I am not aware of any. DNA evidence also proved Jones guilty of this crime for those who are curious.
On arrival in Chicago, I was kept five days in a filthy unheated cell, without sheets and with one torn blanket and some ragged clothes, while temperatures went to 30 below. I spent two days in a cell flooded with human excrement. Until December 29, I was almost entirely denied visits and phone calls and kept in strict isolation as a "terrorist." And, I was told if I didn't cooperate and plea, I would face that the rest of my life, as Hale has.
The only trouble the government had is that my charge only carried ten years, but they originally concocted a sentencing scheme of soliciting murder in furtherance of domestic terrorism - which carries a life sentence (level 43 category VI plus 15 levels [?] of enhancement). To "fix" this, they threw at me this second indictment, which I now face in Roanoke. The charges here are mostly low-level, but had I had a guideline of "life" in Chicago, I could've been given the maximum on all of them.
Really, what the government expected to happen is for my arrest to frighten other ANSWP activists into confessing various criminal conspiracies before the Roanoke Grand Jury. While Dan Jones was frightened into becoming another informer (his "freebillwhite.com" website has been an FBI front), no one confessed any conspiracies. So, rather than walk away from this investigation, the government pulled out "cold cases" they had previously decided did not merit prosecution, and threw them at me. Some of them have not even been fully investigated, and, just a week ago, the government was denied a continuance they requested to "finish investigating" some of the cases.
And so I sit here in jail, detained 13 months for crimes I didn't commit, and acts that are not crimes.NICHOLS: And, ya know what is really interesting here is that with Bill White and Hal Turner shut away from a computer, the internet has been a much calmer place to be. I haven't recieved any death threats since Bill was locked up and I have a feeling that the folks in Roanoke have slept a lot better.
Don't get me wrong. I don't want to see anyone put away on trumped up charges or jacked up just because our federal law-enforcement agencies don't like them. In Bill's case, however, a lot of people were frightened and intimidated and suffered greatly by his actions both in and out of the movement. Hence...karma's gonna getcha. I'm just not very long on sympathy for this man.
NICHOLS: Interestingly enough, Mike Burks's didn't respond to this statement.Perhaps he felt that it shouldn't be dignified with a response. I see it as Bill attempting to pull another person into the morass that he created and, once again, looking for someone else to point the finger at rather than taking responsibility.
A few other interesting points that have come out of the discovery and evidence in this case:
Mike Burks is the one who suggested to me the "Lynch the Jena 6" campaign. Apparently, this was done because the organization paying him -- almost surely the Southern Poverty Law Center -- felt there had not been enough authentic "white supremacist" opposition to them.
NICHOLS: Maureen Mazzola is pretty commonly known as someone used by the FBI to recruit infiltrators and "moles." If she did, in fact, falsify anything against Bill - especially anything damaging - then Phil Anderson will be able to testify to that on the witness stand, right?
Shortly after my arrest, Maureen Mazzola, an agent of the FBI, interviewed Phil Anderson, the former ANSWP Illinois leader, and falsified a witness statement from him in an effort to use it as "relevant conduct" in case of a plea agreement. Among things she did is claim I had been involved in "over 150" crimes against federal officials and "civil rights" activists, and edit Phil's words - he said I called him to find out if anyone was planning to harm Hoffman and stop them; she wrote I called him to find out if anyone was going to harm Hoffman as I wanted. And so on. We have asked criminal obstruction charges be brought against her and she is, to my understanding, now under investigation.
NICHOLS: Let me see...that was after Obama took office, right?
Now, after December 29, the government's attitude changed towards me, somewhat. I was allowed in general population, given 300 minutes a month of phone calls and regular visits, and told if I'd plea and cooperate I could be released almost immediately. Without cooperation, the government came down from a guideline of life to 30 months. I still refused, and was frequently harassed and targeted by staff, but was not again abused as I had been with the exception of two periods, once timed with the removal of my tainted judge, and once timed with the dismissal of my case, when I spent a week under investigation in solitary confinement for imagined offenses.
NICHOLS: Of course! The Mahon's were set up! Never mind that they have been under investigation for over a decade for whatever role they played in the OKC bombing and other nefarious acts! Sure...Bill, they were set up. They were, after all, such stand-up individuals. This kind of support and thinking is precisely what is going to get Bill White's ass in even more shit.
In June of 2009, after the Holocaust museum shootings, a round up of white activists occurred, and that was when I heard, during an NPR broadcast, an FBI agent discussing "Operation Hopeful Eagle."
Apparently, the Obama administration has decided to "take control" of the "white supremacist" movement by bribing white leaders to cooperate with the FBI and arresting those who won't. While I was in Chicago, Hal Turner and David and Dennis Mahon were brought in. Hal has admitted to being an informer - it was his reason given for release on bond at his Chicago hearing. Still, he and the Mahons were being held in the same punishment and isolation wing I'd been in. I am told Hal is cooperating and now free. The Mahons were apparently set up by a pretty girl who, at first, pretended to be broken down on the side of the road, then drug them into a conspiracy to bomb her "boyfriend's" house.
BURKS: Bill’s wife was very involved with the ANSWP. She took notes at the ANSWP first annual Yearly Meeting and also wore with pride, the ANSWP Nazi uniform.
I am also aware Dan Jones was arrested in September and was released afterwards on bond. He is currently working for the FBI - since his release he has approached and tried to set up Robert Campbell, Chris Drake and my wife (who has almost never had any political involvement in anything).
NICHOLS: There is absolutely no...zero...zilch evidence that Dan Jones has tried to set anyone up since his arrest. Again...Bill White pulls things out of thin air and makes shit up as he goes along. That's one of the many reasons that he is not to be trusted.
There have probably been other arrests as well I'm unaware of, and there have been minor arrests, such as the recent conviction of Elisha Strom for distributing criticisms of the Botetourt [sp?] County Vice Squad.BURKS:I never pretended to be Bill White. When I called people I always told them my real name and who I was. As for Leonard Pitts, most calls to him were done by Michael Downs and Dan Jones if I recall correctly. I don’t even remember calling Pitts even once due to the morons from VNN openly bragging about pranking him.
So now I sit, four months after my case was dismissed July 21st, and two months after my most recent (and third) release order, as the Fourth Circuit has ruled that apparent innocence is not sufficient reason to grant bond. Dec 2nd we will have a hearing to dismiss my charges and, if the judge wishes to hear additional evidence before dismissal, trial will begin around Dec 9th.
I cannot discuss the current discovery in detail, but I can say that we know all of the Roanoke cases are "cold cases" the FBI decided not to prosecute, and were resurrected in retaliation for my acquittal in Norfolk. In one case, we have a statement from the "victim" saying they were not "threatened" and they did not want me prosecuted. In another, the phone calls I'm alleged to have made were made by Mike Burks, imitating me. In the Leonard Pitts case, the FBI Agent, David Church, testified in open court Oct 19th, 20008, that I had nothing to do with any "threats." I just spent the afternoon receiving documents showing one of the cases was closed at the request of the victim and because it did not constitute a crime in May 2007 - but was resurrected by a call from the DOJ more than a year later, when the Norfolk case went down in flames.
NICHOLS: So...you DID "call people" at the behest of Bill White? Apparently he DOES have some influence over his people, then?
It’s clear to me what Bill is doing here. I truly believe he thinks his luck of winning court cases is over with. So he has to make himself out to be innocent. Bill truly believes if found guilty, he will be the next David Lane or Bob Matthews; in his mind probably the next Hitler. Truth be told, I don’t think enough people like Bill enough to even care what happens to him.
NICHOLS: It's not that they like him very much or care what happens to him. It's about this whole free speech issue. As to him believing he is that important, he has always thought that and he wants to be assured that he has a support base in all of this. That's why he wanted the letter published. That...and he hopes to put his "enemies" in the crosshairs.
BURKS: If you read Bill’s letter closely you see he is blaming everyone but himself. Everyone is out to get him. The FBI and DA are liars and anyone who quit the ANSWP or white power movement are now “informers”. I can’t speak for Dan Jones, Tim Bland or Justin Boyer. They may or may not be informers. And to be honest, I don’t care. I am not. My life has been good. I have not cared a thing about the white power movement. I have dedicated my time on my family, girlfriend, friends, work and hobbies.
The last time I even spoke to the FBI was around four months ago when they called me. They asked me some questions and I answered them. I am not going to say more because I am not sure if this would hurt their case and to be fair, I am not sure if it would hurt Bill’s case. Even though he is a scum bag liar, he does deserve a fair trial like anyone else.
No matter what, Bill changes his stories. First he blamed Justin Boyer, Tim Bland and Mike Blevins for his legal troubles. Now I am the more popular choice along with Dan Jones. Who will he blame next? Phil Anderson? Santa Clause? Or Mr. Potato Head? The man never seems to amaze me. No one has ever gone to jail because Mike Burks informed on them. People went to jail for their own actions.
Use common sense people. Bill owned his own websites. He posted the threats on Overthrow. Not me, not Dan Jones and not some Jew who was out to “get him”. Bill clearly said to “kill Richard Warman” on both his radio show and Overthrow website. No one else made those comments, only Bill himself. But I guess he will blame me or Dan Jones for this too. Or maybe it was Tim Bland’s fault.
If you are new to the white power movement or a fence sitter, please take my advice – get out while you are ahead. Liars like Bill White are everywhere in the white power movement. These people do not care about white people, more less anything else important in life. Enjoy life. Hate is not enjoyable. Trust me, I spent years hating people and for what? The last year of my life away from this crap has been the best I can recall in many years.
After reading Bill’s myths, I made a decision. Next year I will be forming a Pro-Jewish/Christian organization to fight against and to educate against racism. Kentucky alone has many problems and I can’t sit back anymore and do nothing. I quit the racist world but that proves nothing. It’s time I do the right thing and speak out daily against racism and hatred. That will be the next chapter of my life.
I expect more threats. I expect more online slander. My comeback is simple, bring it on. No Nazi, KKK member or other racist will scare me off. I am back. And it feels good -
Shalom to all,
Michael Burks
So, Alex, I hope some of this is helpful to your readers. The government spent years trying to entrap me, and when I refused to commit a crime, had me arrested on charges they knew were bogus, and then lied to the press to railroad me into detention, where I was systematically brutalized over several months and told the only way out was to "confess" to those crimes I did not commit, and then cooperate and entrap other whites.NICHOLS: While I don't put much past the government, what really put Bill White in jail was his ego. He had to feed it. He had to beat on his chest. He had to be the biggest and the baddest and the most fierce. In short, his oneupmanship did him in. Whether he is acquited or convicted, he has no one else to blame for his current situation. Unfortunately, he hasn't grown up one damned bit through it all. It's the nature of the disability - he is disturbed and has been since he was a child. Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder are not "curable" and you don't grow out of them. You just keep being an asshole until someone pulls the plug and puts you where you need to be.
Those who have cooperated have gotten bond, but because I "show no remorse," as the government put it in their brief to the 4th Circuit, I am held without bond, because the "appearance of innocence" is not sufficient reason to keep me out of jail.
NICHOLS: He should also give thanks for the support of his parents who he has walked all over for years but who still show up when the chips are down. And...regardless of how you feel about his wife, she has been there, as well.
The [? - ihna] has come, and this kind of repression is what black communism looks like.
If you can make any of this information public, I'd appreciate it. I should be out and done in a few weeks, but white people need to know this stuff is happening now.
Sincerely,
Bill White
P.S.: I can no longer blame people like Glenn Miller or David Duke who have pled guilty out of fear of the federal government. Nor can I blame those who cooperate out of fear. Under torture, or threat of torture, admitting crimes you didn't commit and confessing to whatever is wanted is not irrational. But those who lie out of malice or for money are very low in my book - and most of the informers on my case were of the latter sort.
I am just fortunate to have had two excellent legal teams and a lot of personal support from so many people. Without them and their hard investigative work, I may have been railroaded for life before a fixed Chicago judge and convicted of these lies.
As to Michael Burks...I hope you are sincere in your recent determination to leave the movement. You'll have to forgive me if I'm a little hard on you or more than a little skeptical. You have dabbled in and out of both camps for a very long time and I realize that leaving the scene is a very difficult thing. But, your girlfriend, it seems, gives good advice. So...here's wishing you well.
What has become very obvious to me throughout the Turner situation and now the Bill White situation is that Hal Turner wanted people locked up and put away - for a price. He enjoyed working for the Feds and loved the fame and, yes, the fortune that it brought. Bill on the other hand, wants the notoriety, but he isn't going to be happy until someone is killed. Even from his jail cell he's plotting his next move. How many people have to get caught up in this mess before it's all over?
Bill White is no one's friend. And he damned sure ain't no nice guy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)