+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 02/23/2018 07:06 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  1.576 Visits   3 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
01/17/2008 05:44 AM ID: 67709 Permalink   

Former Republican Congressman Indicted in Terrorism Conspiracy


Mark Siljander, who served Michigan as a Republican representative, has been indicted for working for a fundraising organization that allegedly sent $130,000 to an al-Qaida supporter in Afghanistan. He was also a Reagan appointee to the U.N.

Siljander, who was a Congressman from 1981 to 1987, has been charged with conspiracy, money laundering and obstruction of justice among 42 counts. He was allegedly paid $50,000 by the Islamic American Relief Agency for lobbying services.

IARA stole the money from the U.S. Agency for International Development. Siljander was paid to lobby senators on behalf of IARA. An assistant attorney general said the charges paint "a troubling picture" of conspiracy.

    WebReporter: l´anglais Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  A good start!  
May this be the first of many.
  by: chaos goblyn   01/17/2008 07:49 AM     
  I remember hearing about these allegations  
... totally forgotten by most people, including myself- the connections between lobbyists and congress must be severed!

  by: theironboard     01/17/2008 09:27 AM     
  wait a minute  
he's actually getting a trial? i thought we send terror suspects to gitmo because they're dangerous and don't deserve the same rights? surely it should make no difference that he's a white guy from michigan.
  by: ManilaRyce     01/17/2008 09:39 AM     
What universe do you live in? Don't you know rich white suburban males are exempt from suffering?

I do hope Obama gets elected, if only to break the cycle of racist elitism that is inherent in the federal system.

You make a very good point. Why isn't this @#$#!!hole going to Gitmo for a relaxing waterboard treatment? Is it because his friends are on the committees and subcommittees that established Gitmo in the first place? Are these Congressmen mad? They WANT a revolution, it seems!
  by: theironboard     01/17/2008 09:45 AM     
  Public Enemy # 1?

Here's his 'current' employer.
  by: theironboard     01/17/2008 09:58 AM     
He's a US citizen. In turn, he is afforded the same rights as any other US citizen.
The guys in Gitmo aren't citizens and are not entitled to the rights of such.
  by: CArnold     01/17/2008 10:01 AM     
"I do hope Obama gets elected"

Not meaning to get personal but, since you're putting your political opinion on the World Wide Web, I don't think that your personal presidential endorsement is a private issue. That said; I'm curious enough to ask...

Why would you vote for Obama?

There is no right or wrong answer to this question. I'm just curious as to the Obama phenomena and why/how you’re affected by it.
  by: CArnold     01/17/2008 10:08 AM     
"He's a US citizen. In turn, he is afforded the same rights as any other US citizen."

Ever heard of Jose Padilla?
  by: ManilaRyce     01/17/2008 10:39 AM     
"Ever heard of Jose Padilla?"

Yes. Because he is a US citizen, he was given due process. He was incarcerated in a military brig in South Carolina and he had access to the US courts. He was tried and convicted in the US court system.
  by: CArnold     01/17/2008 10:53 AM     
Was Padilla not deprived of due process for several years, only eventually being granted habeas corpus at the president's objection? Your ability to skim entirely over anything contrary to your beliefs is almost admirable. Tell me, do you get those history books from a special storefront or order them directly from the Bush administration?
  by: ManilaRyce     01/17/2008 11:13 AM     
Exactly, Padilla's case is the reason this man isnt being denied any of those things.
I realise you think because he is white, an exception should be made, but the law disagrees
  by: AnsweringQuestions     01/17/2008 11:30 AM     
I was wondering when you'd jump in to defend your boyfriend. I love how you've turned my criticism of the unequal treatment of terror suspects into a "kill whitey" remark. I recall similar strawmen being lit in the "Straight Bouncer at Gay Bar Wins Discrimination Case" story. You two were meant for each other.
  by: ManilaRyce     01/17/2008 11:55 AM     
Wow, awesome response, your well thought out arguement trumps mine.
You even managed to throw some homophobia in there, impressive.

Perhaps you can explain why you think the law shouldnt apply to this man then?
If my guess is wrong

Shouldnt be to difficult.
  by: AnsweringQuestions     01/17/2008 12:23 PM     
Calm down, little guy.
In previous threads, you whined, cried, and belly-ached about how I would allegedly rough-house you and make you feel bullied with my posts. In fact, you characterized my posts with the following…
“…he's killing shortnews by lowering the level of discourse in nearly every story. he drags intelligent people down with him, and drives away users looking for lively discussion.”

As I review the posts within this thread, your posts are the only ones that would fit the description quoted above. The irony is overwhelming. Can you say “hypocrite”?

My response to you, then, is applicable today:
“…when you feel yourself losing the argument you tend to resort to personal attacks and insults. Whether you do it out of frustration or anger, I’m not sure, but it only serves in the “lowering the level of discourse in nearly every story.”
If you can’t refrain from reaching into your bag of insults, just overlook my posts or, better yet, don’t respond.”

Thanks, once more, for lending further credence to my observations. I knew you wouldn’t let me down.

“Was Padilla not deprived of due process for several years, only eventually being granted habeas corpus at the president's objection?”
No. Once again, you need to do more research and get your information correct.
“On September 9, 2005, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that President Bush does indeed have the authority to detain Padilla without charges, in an opinion written by judge J. Michael Luttig. In the ruling, Luttig cited the joint resolution by Congress authorizing military action following the September 11, 2001 attacks, as well as the June 2004 ruling concerning Yaser Hamdi.”

“Tell me, do you get those history books from a special storefront or order them directly from the Bush administration?”
Neither. It’s a little something called “reading and comprehension”. You should try it sometime. :)
  by: CArnold     01/17/2008 07:01 PM     
He wouldn't be waterboarded anyway since they don't have sparkling water as an option.
  by: TaraB     01/17/2008 07:17 PM     
  Link resubmittal...  
The original Wikipedia link needs the ending ")" in the address. I was able to link to the same article with a different address:

Manila's rants and whiny commentary (as was quoted above) can be found here:
  by: CArnold     01/17/2008 07:17 PM     
  @Carnold, and a general comment  
CA: Remember, when you point a finger, three point back at you. And your thumb sort of points at the ground in front of you, depending on your pointing style.

In general: I do sort of feel bad for this guy. If you look up Siljander's biography, he went from protesting a reading from the Quran at a Prayer Breakfast to trying to show Christians and Muslims their common ground. I think it's entirely plausible that he really thought he was helping Christian-Islamic relations in his work, and was deceived by the IARA.
  by: l´anglais     01/18/2008 05:35 AM     
"Remember, when you point a finger, three point back at you."

Not sure how this affects me.
I don't recall getting on my soapbox and whining about people being mean and nasty to poor little ole' me... and then turn around and participate in the very behavior I was crying and complaining about.

In fact, the only thing I've condemned others for on this site is: 1) purposely proliferating false information, 2) Name-calling, 3) Hypocritical allegations of actions that are perpetrated by the accuser (see above) and 4) Shouting down or excessive nastiness to others for displaying a different opinion.

If you're saying that I'm a hypocrite for pointing out Manilla's hypocracy, then I invite you to show me how and where.
  by: CArnold     01/18/2008 06:06 AM     
Well, you did seem to take what amounts to an accusation that you only skim rebuttals, that you buy into Bush propoganda, and that you and AQ make quite the team, and turn it into an excuse to dredge up flame wars of the past. Really, though, I was just using a bit of humor to try to deflate a flame war in the making.

Also noticed that you never got a response to your question about why you'd support Obama, so I'll take a stab at it:

* He has experience as a community organizer, meaning lots of one-on-one interaction with real people and not just fellow rich guys at the country club. There's a lot of value in that. Also, in community organizing, you have to become skilled in finding common ground to build coalitions, which is far better than the politics of divisiveness that have ruled this country ever since the War on Clinton began.

* He has lived all over the world. Even when politicians visit foreign countries, they're staying in the poshest hotels, meeting only the "important" people, and in reality see very little of what that country is really like. Thus he's had a unique opportunity to compare life in other countries with life in America, and I can't think of a better way to make someone appreciate both the great things about the U.S. and the people who may be affected by your foreign policy.

* He advocates a sensible health care plan that could really work.

* He values others' opinions and seems like a guy who will listen and learn about all sides of an issue, rather than adhering to rigid ideology and ignoring those who don't agree with him.

* He has a positive message, that America can be once again put on the path to greatness, rather than trying to win fear votes by saying he's the only candidate who can protect us from terrorism, etc.

* This:
  by: l´anglais     01/18/2008 08:22 PM     
I also can't help but think that it would have a tremendous effect on race relations in America if the U.S. elected a black president. I think it would send a great message to the black community that the halls of power in the U.S., which traditionally have been white, believe that a black person is qualified for the job. Obama is obviously qualified, so if his race is not a barrier, that would show how far our country has come.
  by: l´anglais     01/18/2008 08:28 PM     
Thanks for your input on Obama.
As I said, I'm not looking for any right/wrong answer. At this point in the game, all opinions and views (in re to presidential candidates) are on the table. It's a matter of following and supporting the person whose ideals best represent your own.

Just wanted to hear a few reasons why some are taken by Obama. Thanks, again, for your input.
  by: CArnold     01/22/2008 09:56 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: