ping

BTT!

WOW - you go Ted. Fight for what you know is right - you have to know there are millions of patriotic Americans standing with you. And thank you for going forward with Barbara's book - we await her words with anticipation.

You can pre-order her book, The Final Days: The Last Desperate Abuse of Power by the Clinton White House , here

I will be one of the first in line at the bookstore to purchase her book. Ted is right, her voice should not be silenced by the terrorists, in fact, more the reason that book needed to be published.

U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson recounts Barbara Olson?s final words from Flight 77 and discusses both his controversial backing of an anti-terrorism bill and his wife's posthumous screed about the Clintons

What a jerk Isikoff is. He just couldn't refrain from mocking the dead, given that the dead was someone who was very effective at laying out for Americans exactly how despicable the Clintons were and are.

Amid his personal grief, Olson also has made another decision that could raise questions from some quarters. After consulting with his late wife's closest friends, he has given the greenlight to Regnery, the conservative publishing house, to proceed with plans to publish the manuscript Barbara Olson finished just before her death. Like her first book, Hell to Pay, the new tome entitled The Final Days: The Last Desperate Abuse of Power by the Clinton White House is a fierce attack on Bill and Hillary Clinton.

When people write, they are creating something they want to bring into the world. It must have taken an enormous effort for Barbara to have written both of those books, there is no way she would not want them published.

In the interest of "national unity," I can see holding off on partisan attacks such as this book. But the Clintons hold some of the responsibility for the terror, they allowed the terrorists to operate in the US, they allowed to CIA to be crippled, it was their FBI chief that didn't pursue the fundamentalists in the US hard enough. But it was in the interests of "national unity" that Bush kept Freeh on, rather than pressuring him to hit the road.

Barbara Olson is dead in part because of attempts at "national unity" that included traitors. We cannot unite with traitors, abusers, the corrupt--we need to expose them and drive them out. And that is what Barbara tried to do.

Thanks for the link! I pre-ordered the book a couple days before the bombings. I'm glad to hear that they are pushing forward with it's release. The other day, the book was at #21 on Amazon's list. Pretty cool.

Buy this book.

...."plotting a terrorism act such as another hijacking but lacks the proof needed to bring charges in court. 'What are we going to do if we can't convict them?' he asks, noting that even Supreme Court liberals have agreed that national security concerns should be taken into account in such circumstances."

I think Ashcroft has an obligation to make the broad proposals he has made. This is war. We should go as far as we CAN go to protect the nation. If the proposals are not constitutional then the Supreme Court will provide the proper check.

indefinite detention of suspected terrorists

I think thats the point of a lot of contention.

Perhaps it needs to be more carefully defined. Who wants a terrorist to get off scot free? Not I.

But we have to think about what this means to future interpreters, future administers. For the here and now under the present circumstances, we know what it is for. It is obvious what it is referring to. But what about in the future? Our founding Fathers were able to think into the future when they penned our Constitution. We need to do the same to safeguard our OWN Rights as citizens.

Who is a "suspected" terrorist in ten years? Maybe an environmentalist tree hugger? Maybe an abortion clinic protestor? Maybe someone who just off the cuff complains about, mm say, the Clinton Administration. In that case, half of Free Republic and the U.S. in general would be "suspeted". The word "suspected" leaves a lot to be desired. I think thats why so many people are concerned.

Without an official Declaration of War, our hands are tied. I really feel for Mr. Olsen and it's a loss for us all. But his emotions are too tied to this right now, a LOt of people's are. Got to think clearly. Got to be clear minded. Thats all I'm saying.

Consider the debate over indefinite detention of illegal aliens the Justice Department is seeking to deport. In the current case, he says, the policy makes sense if the United States has evidence that a deportable alien might have been involved in plotting a terrorism act such as another hijacking but lacks the proof needed to bring charges in court.

I believe you could address this.

This is war. We should go as far as we CAN go to protect the nation.

No "War Declaration" has been made by Congress who is the only legal body able to do so.

Wow, eleven sensible reality based posts in a row. Where are all the usual idiots who seem to infest FR nowadays?

I'm a bit frightful over all the anti terrorism measures the govt. has to undertake at this point but hey, it IS a war. AND after all it is WE who are the govt. and if ever the enemy is subdued it is up to us to again unrestrict our society. Beside's I'm no longer afraid of the Feds. They have ceased to eat their own children and are now focused on a REAL enemy.

Partisan attacks from the dems are popping up all over the place in the form of leaks.

"Where are all the usual idiots who seem to infest FR nowadays?"

Guess they're taking a break. Since JR stuck a dagger into the heart of free speach here at FR, many resonable people have wandered off the reservation.

but the wording does limit it to aliens.

Thanks so much!!

exactly!