You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Mayor Baker’ category.
This is post number 2000.
The only real significance is it is 150 posts more than where Tommywonk stopped exactly one year and fifteen days ago…
If some future historian looks back, I can only guess they may kindly make some note of the quality of thought that underlies these efforts, but my guess, is no one will ever notice…
Irregardless, as long as the urge to put thoughts down for others continues, we will go on. As usual, with no goal, no direction, and no ulterior motive. Probably upon reflection, my biggest surprise, right here, right now … is that I still enjoy it so much, and can’t wait to jot my thoughts down, click the button, and send them off to where ever cyberspace and the vast internet ocean, lets them drift….
For each of you who have become regular over the years, … thank you friend…
Delaware Liberal has the link. Here is Governor Markell’s offer to the Occupy Movement and why that offer was unacceptable, even to the most reasonable…
The event area shall be to the north of the Interstate 95 overpass bordered by the north bank of the Brandywine River and North Park Drive and may extend northwest from the storm water culvert to the area adjacent to the ñrst dam up river. Please see attached map.
In this location the only people seeing this encampment would be those living in the upscale apartments. It would be invisible to the rest of the world.
Imagine the former Mayor Baker going to the city, hat in hand, asking to protest the fact that Wilmington’s population was being treated unfairly because they were not white, and a ahort, pot bellied official, strode out of his Lincoln with Longhorn’s attached to the front, and with a horn blast the echoed the “charge” theme played at high school football games, says, ” Sure, we’ve got the perfect place for you… Go 5 miles out of town, take a left by the country store, go ten miles along that road, till you pass the last farmhouse, and there, in the forest, you’ll see a split in the road, take the left one and go six more miles and you will see a clearing left by the logging operation years ago, and you, can have your demonstration right there. I’ll write the permit right now….
The message from the Markell administration was equally insulting. Sure, have your little camping trip out where no one can see you…
The Tea Party got the Mall in DC. Occupy Delaware gets a spot accessible only by an apartment complex driveway.
Totally unacceptable.
Moving on.
Permittee may not congregate, solicit the public, display signs, or distribute materials outside of the above mentioned designated area.
Really? For a protest, you are limiting their right to protest? Are you serious? Did you have limitations of Markell signs, those white plastic ones scattered across the entire state back during the summer and fall of 2008?
Right click on Picture for full image.
“Sure, you can run for governor, but you won’t be allowed to hand out any campaign literature or post signs, unless it is in your own front yard?”
C’mon… You call that a fair offer? These people are protesting everything that’s gone wrong because Republicans took over in 2000! And you’re going to hide them up a cul de sac? Seriously?
Did you forget that if Republicans had lost that election, there never would have been a derivative driven financial crises? Our National Debt would have been “paid in full” as of 2008? We’d wouldn’t be discussing cuts to the budget; we’d be debating upon which project to invest our Federal Funds for the next year?
So the permit was rather insulting. It did not meet the Constitutional muster required by the state to allow a peaceful protest. The tents are their protest.
In fact, “Occupy Boise”, a Tea Party State if there ever was one, is having no trouble putting their protesters in a conspicuous spot. And we know Idaho.
Listen to this:
She was pleased with the meeting. “As long as they can keep control of their participants as they move forward, I think everything will be fine,” said Luna.
Gunderson said the cities where protesters have clashed with public officials have garnered the most news coverage. But Boise is taking its cue from places where things have been more amiable, including Philadelphia.
If anything can be done in Philadelphia, it certainly can be accomplished in Delaware.
Courtesy of Tim Riley
Two days ago the Supreme Court heard the case of Delaware vrs New Jersey. How does a Supreme Court Justice choose between the First State, and the Garden State…..
If one bases it on seniority, then as the First State, Delaware has priority. On the other hand should one go with “one person-one vote” then with more than ten times the number of Delawareans, New Jersey wins.
As to which way it will go, mums the word. Samuel Alito, the newest judge, hails from the Trenton area of New Jersey….will that make a difference?
The real question that needs to be answered is whether laws made well over 200 years ago, should by now be accepted at face value and do they even need be discussed at all? For whatever happens in this case can have profound consequences and create a precedence for many states to change their boundaries at will….Prime example: Ohio like New Jersey, owns the river bank of the western side of the Ohio River, but not the river itself…..That boundary too, was also settled in colonial times.
The Justices appeared to be quite interested in this case. So did quite a few spectators who wanted to see the Supreme Court actually do what the Constitution set it up to do: settle a dispute between the states…..
Chief Justice Roberts framed a question that put everything in perspective.
If two people walked out to the end of a pier extending out from the shores of New Jersey, and one of them was murdered, which state prosecutes the crime.
Should it be in Delaware, where the crime actually occurred, or New Jersey from whence the criminal came. One has only to consider Elkton , Maryland to resolve this matter.
If someone walks from Stone Gate Apartments, robs the State Line Liquor Store of some New Castle Brown Ale, and returns to his Delawarean home to watch the Cowboys beat Green Bay,….the crime was in Maryland; all would agree. After all, what difference should it make to the law, as to whether water does or does not cover the ground? Maryland’s laws apply above ground. Likewise Delaware’s laws should equally apply to sub-aqueous territory as well.
But in 1905 Delaware allowed New Jersey natives to build docks that extended past the low water mark into Delaware’s territory. Precedent? Not hardly……
My nice neighbors mow a foot or two across my line as a courtesy each time they do their lawn. We return the favor, but not as often. If any controversy over a boundary were to occur, we would simply pull the deed, and follow suit. No matter what actions had transpired, the deed still stands….should ownership eventually change, the deed is permanent: it still stands…..
In this case, the Deed gives Delaware rights up to the low water mark on the New Jersey shore. This is no little dock we are talking about. The monstrosity to be built, would seriously impact Delaware’s Coastal Protection Act. Dredging alone would create an environmental hazard.
Safety is a secondary consideration. According to this anti-terrorist organization, one LNG ship has the explosive power of 55 Hiroshima type nuclear bombs. Goodbye Mayor Baker!
Common sense precludes Delaware should win….However surprises happen. We could wake up to find that Delaware has been joined to New Jersey by Executive Order and the whole issue becomes moot.
If Delaware does not win, it can only mean one thing.
I should have argued the case instead of David Frederick.
Ever since Google was complicit in working with the Chinese, I have been watching it’s characterization of my site. We all know the formula for how the links are ranked, but occasionally some bizarre things happen upon that page.
For example when I have come out hard against certain of our public officials, holding them accountable for things as I should, the links, locations and descriptions, that have been consistent for months, suddenly are different. If one wanted to presume, he could comment that those links shown were an attempt to embarrass me or more likely, dissuade someone from looking further. Now those of you who read me, know this can hardly bother me. I can embarrass myself without help….. easily…..
But tonight Google was acting strangely on several sites within our blogsphere. The search would go nowhere. Of course the sites were available; one could easily click them from another location. And on Google, other non pertinent sites came up immediately, but for some reason some (the ones I wanted) were disconnected.
I am most concerned because Delaware Liberal, one whose site I visit a lot, has disappeared from Google. Well not completely , but their standard location…. spot 3 down from the top of page one…… is gone. Instead, you may find an archived version that says “Howard Dean Kicks Ass” posted on 11/15/2006 in the location of what used to be Delaware Liberal.Net’s prime spot……
Other search engines are not affected. On those Delaware Liberal Net ranks at the top.
Back to the inconsistencies on my list, My featured cached post comparing the treatment bestowed on Paris Hilton, versus the pardon received by Scooter Libby, has temporarily replaced my post of Biden, which has remained in that spot for a long time. Yet my statistics do not show a single hit on that topic. So based on Google’s formula, why would it change? This happened once before, and 2 days later, again no hits were involved, reality reemerged.
Don’t know how many of you check your Google page , but seriously, I think now would be a good time to start. Those of you who do not poke around in areas where officials become uneasy, probably have little to worry about.
But if your Google page is being changed, for whatever reasons, at least you will be aware of it…….
Tommywonk, WGMD, and the News Journal all have stories regarding the Blue Waster Wind deal. There are positive notes.
Based on the term sheet
we can expect the following.
300 MW each hour, enough to power all the homes in Delaware.
No increase , for the next 25 years, over what we are now paying for electricity. By the way oil hit $ 80 a barrel today, pushing up coal and gas! But will it affect Delaware’s electricity rates? Not with wind power, it won’t!
Wind power guaranteed to be on line in either 6 3/4 or 7 years.
Construction costs of 1.5 billion directly infused into the local economy.
Increased aesthetics and fishing habitats to the Rehoboth/Dewey Beach area.
Transmission upgrades included in cost. No additional charges for Delaware consumers.
Finally. A business dedicated to full compliance with Federal, State, and Local environmental requirements.
But there are storm clouds of doubt and uncertainty surrounding both Delmarva’s and Connectiv’s commitment to this grand project, completion of which would elevate Delaware to be the “First State” in renewable energy.
They are focused on the lack of transparency of Delmarva’s calculations. Delmarva wishes to make up stuff, and not have to show how it came about with the figures it did. Can you imagine if Bush last night had said: ” No American has died in Iraq, and not one dollar of taxpayer money has been spent in Iraq. Therefore we will continue on plan.” That is exactly what Delmarva wants to be allowed to do……….
make stuff up……….
Furthermore, Delmarva wants to charge penalties to Blue Water Wind based solely on the stuff it makes up. Both Blue Water Wind and NRG have consulted among themselves and independently determined that penalties will not be necessary. They can perform well within the criteria. But Delmarva wants to charge them anyway should it ever arbitrarily decide it needs some extra cash………Likewise,
while Bluewater attempted to have similar dialog with Connectiv on this and other issues related to the proper coordination between the wind park and the back up facility, Connectiv declined to enter into a confidentiality agreement related to any such discussions and no dialog was possible.
As has often been my experience in business, when someone gets antsy about poking through their records, it usually means they are stealing. In government, when public officials get antsy about the opening of committees and hearings to public scrutiny, it usually means they are stealing. So why, might we ask, should Connectiv pattern the same behavior and not enter a confidentiality agreement Blue Water Wind, unless they have some dark secret they cannot afford to see the light or day? This should send up a red flag of outrage for all citizens. Is another Enron brewing at Connectiv?
Outstanding issues that may or may not block the forward momentum.
1) The first issue is the consequence of the delay caused by the impending lawsuits sponsored by Delmarva and Connectiv.
Delmarva has taken the position that it must retain its appeal rights ( and therefore it would not discontinue its appeal of the State Agencies prior order authorizing these negotiations), and that it does not control its affiliated company Connectiv and should therefore retain the right to terminate and/or collect delay damages.
In other word if Delmarva/Connectiv purposefully slows down the process, it is entitled to receive the delay penalties owed to it on behalf of the BlueWater Wind investors. As was dryly noted: “such a provision presents a serious concern to Blue Water investors..”
2) Delmarva seeks termination rights in the event of a consolidation triggered by accounting rules FASB Interpretation #46. Under these rules, if Delmarva is the primary beneficiary of Blue Water Wind, Delmarva may be required to consolidate Blue Water Wind. To prevent this, Blue Water has offered to modify the agreement so as to eliminate the consolidation, in lieu of termination rights. So far Delmarva has refused. Again, as is dryly noted, Delmarva’s termination could again cost Blue Water’s investors millions of dollars.
3) Finally Delmarva has adamantly insisted upon the right to veto any change of control (not to be unreasonably withheld) at Bluewater , for any time over the next 25 years, regardless of the level of ownership at which the change of control takes place. This of course gives Delmarva the option to block deals resulting in tens of Billions of dollars which may not have any relationship to the wind farm. (Delmarva has adamantly refused to accept the same restrictions upon itself). Obviously the Blue Water Investors are uneasy about this clause as well. Bluewater has proposed several compromise solutions, all of which have been rejected by Delmarva.
Obviously Delmarva is unhappy to find itself in the position of supplying Delaware with cheap energy. They would much rather see households paying $8oo a month for electricity, than say $80.
But with proper public pressure these deals could still go forward. It is reassuring that great strides have already been taken…………….
FBI wiretapping rooms in field offices and undercover locations around the country are connected through a private, encrypted backbone that is separated from the internet. Sprint runs it on the government’s behalf.”
Documents recently released to the EFF’s FOIA, suggest that the FBI’s wiretapping engineers have succeeded in tapping into our standard digital communication’s systems. As Randy Single writes in Wired, the FBI has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-click surveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost any communications device, according to nearly a thousand pages of restricted documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act. The redacted documentation leaves many questions, however. In particular, it’s unclear what role the carriers have in opening up a tap, and how that process is secured.
“The real question is the switch architecture on cell networks,” said Matt Blaze, a security researcher at the University of Pennsylvania . “What’s the carrier side look like?
Randy Cadenhead, the privacy counsel for Cox Communications, which offers VOIP phone service and internet access, says the FBI has no independent access to his company’s switches.
“Nothing ever gets connected or disconnected until I say so, based upon a court order in our hands,” Cadenhead says. “We run the interception process off of my desk, and we track them coming in. We give instructions to relevant field people who allow for interconnection and to make verbal connections with technical representatives at the FBI.”
The nation’s largest cell-phone providers — whose customers are targeted in the majority of wiretaps — were less forthcoming. AT&T politely declined to comment, while Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon simply ignored requests for comment.
FBI Agent DiClemente, however, seconded Cadenhead’s description.
“The carriers have complete control. That’s consistent with CALEA,” DiClemente said. “The carriers have legal teams to read the order, and they have procedures in place to review the court orders, and they also verify the information and that the target is one of their subscribers.”
Despite its ease of use, the new technology is proving more expensive than a traditional wiretap. Telecoms charge the government an average of $2,200 for a 30-day CALEA wiretap, while a traditional intercept costs only $250, according to the Justice Department inspector general. A federal wiretap order in 2006 cost taxpayers $67,000 on average, according to the most recent U.S. Court wiretap report.
To security experts, though, the biggest concern over DCSNet isn’t the cost: It’s the possibility that push-button wiretapping opens new security holes in the telecommunications network.
Documents show that an internal 2003 audit uncovered numerous security vulnerabilities in DCSNet. In this internal audit, (pg 61/112pdf), commenced after discovering that no security audit had been concluded for four years, pointed out some very basic security breeches. Some were the direct results of budget cuts, such as limiting technical staff. Others were the result of putting high tech toys in front of those too green to understand the full implications…..The security assessment titled Operation Mayday, uncovered this nugget. Problem:
“Zipdrive attached to FBINet machine.
Recommended Action: Complete Trilogy User training. Remind users not to attach unauthorized devices to network. Remind users not to install unauthorized software. Treat future instances as security violations and report through appropriate channels with increasingly severe penalties for
repeat violations.“
Remember, this accesses all your bank documents as well as your deepest, intimate conversations…..which due to lack of oversight over the past four years, if cached, is now open forever to the world……Other samples of Katrina-like misconduct or ineptitude: Problem:
Outdated or no disk encryption on laptop
computers.
Recommended Action: Install PointSec on all machines unless excepted. Provide written justification to SecD for consideration of any exceptions.
Problem-: Baton Rouge RA, CART laptop has no disk encryption.Also in the report:
1. There is no anti-viral software loaded on the DCS-3000 machines. If malicious
code, viruses, and/or executables are introduced, there will be potential for risk to the system or compromise of data, thereby compromising evidence contained therein.
Current Status:
• Verified Closed: McAfee 4.5.1 installed with Virus updated 05/05/2006Current Status:
• Verified Closed: Passwords require eight characters, complex etc.3. Successive failed logon attempt lockout is not enabled. Without a lockout policy,
an unauthorized user would have infinite attempts to gain access to the system.
Current Status:
• Verified Closed: Accounts lock out after three attempts and must be reset by
admin.5. Workstations associated with the system do not enforce adequate user permissions. Improperly configured machines do not adhere to the least privilege principle. This practice could potentially give a user access and rights not warranted for by their position.
In particular, the DCS-3000 machines lacked adequate logging, had insufficient password management, were missing antivirus software, allowed unlimited numbers of incorrect passwords without locking the machine, and used shared logins rather than individual accounts.
The system also required that DCS-3000′s user accounts have administrative privileges in Windows, which would allow a hacker who got into the machine to gain complete control.
WTF?
The flaws are appalling and show that the FBI fails to appreciate the risk from insiders. The system is insecure, essentially because the people who designed it and run it have an insecure attitude about the nature of threats to the system. Outsiders may be stopped by VPNs, firewalls, etc., but insiders may wander around the system nearly at will. Not so different from the situation that set up the Vodaphone/Greece fiasco.
As Steve Bellovin from Columbia points out:
“Instead of personal userids, the FBI relies on log sheets. This may provide sufficient accountability if everyone follows the rules. It provides no protection against rule-breakers. It is worth noting that Robert Hanssen obtained much of the information he sold to the Soviets by exploiting weak permission mechanisms in the FBI’s Automated Case System. The DCS-3000 system doesn’t have proper password security mechanisms, either, which brings up another point: why does a high-security system use passwords at all? We’ve know for years how weak they are. Why not use smart cards for authentication?”
Any wiretap system faces a slew of risks, such as surveillance targets discovering a tap, or an outsider or corrupt insider setting up unauthorized taps. Moreover, the architectural changes to accommodate easy surveillance on phone switches and the internet can in itself, introduce new and frightfully dangerous security and privacy holes.
So where does our safety lie? In a bill of goods sold to us and to Congress in order to protect us from “phantom” terrorists, we have allowed anyone and everyone to compromise our personal privacy. Most particularly, those very ones we trusted to defend us from our enemies………
I long to accomplish great and noble tasks, but it is my chief duty to accomplish humble tasks as though they were great and noble. The world is moved along, not only by the mighty shoves of its heroes, but also by the aggregate of the tiny pushes of each honest worker. (Helen Keller)
How true this is from a military perspective. We read of generals astride their horses, whose only contribution was to say, “let’s attack here” . Their work is done. They then receive history’s blame or credit depending on the outcome of those brave souls fighting for their lives.
The battle results are determined on the field by soldiers. Whether they choose to break and flee, or to stand their ground against impossible odds, alone determines the future reputation of their commander. History judges clearly.
Besides war, the same holds true for peace. Often it is more difficult to be non-violent, than to go into a rage. Yet those who propose peace, become castigated as being too cowardly to handle war, when in fact, the opposite is true. It takes deep spiritual devotion, and a strong belief in a higher power, to sail against the prevailing wind. To trust that peace will provide a dividend that is far greater than taking what you want to take with force……..requires great insight and courage, to make yourself believe in it……..
So who is brave?……. I learned that Marines (US) are brave. When shots were fired across Michigan Avenue in Fallujah, the uninitiated take cover. When they dare to look up, they see the Marines already running towards the sound of the shots. As you get to know Marines while off duty, you slowly arrive at the opinion, they are not that much different. But the moment live ammunition smacks around you, and you see them run at the source like fireman racing to a fire, you realize that courage has different levels.
We are taught from birth, (it may be instinct) that self preservation is a worthy cause. Survival is our primary concern. So when one takes the opposite tack, and puts survival below other considerations, those of us who witness it, call it courage.
It takes great courage to stand up to ones enemies. It takes even greater courage to stand up to ones friends. (Professor Dumbledore, Book 1) Think about it for a second………………..How easily do we lob insults at those representing the other side of the blogosphere? Too easy…………….Now how hard is it to do the same and to criticize those who have stood solidly with you and “watched your back” on other issues? Quite hard……..isn’t it.
But sometimes one must go against ones gut, and do what is right. What kind of insanity must possess a person willing to trust his life to some nylon and some string, and then throw himself out the door of a shot-up B17 over enemy territory? The answer is that the insanity of staying inside a falling chunk of metal, is greater than the insanity of bailing out……..
So what kind of insanity must possess a person who today, is willing to abandon the wreckage of what has been the primary focus of our nation’s foreign policy? Again, the answer is that the insanity of staying in a falling chunk of metal, is greater than the insanity of bailing out.
Wait a second: many of you by now are thinking. “Your analogy is not a good one. Many B 17′s were shot to hell and still made it back to English airfields. Those who persist in the war effort are like those few B17 crewmen who did not abandon their posts and persevered to safe harbor. Your analogy seems to support the opposite of your views?”
But there were also many who did not bail out over continental Europe, and then were force to bail out over the English Channel and certainly perish. By bailing early, their chances of survival would have been higher.
So rational people must look at each of these circumstances and make a decision based on their assessment of all the evidence. We are humans, we do this all the time.
For those who haven’t yet “got it,” the conversations we have about the war here within the blogosphere, mirror the conversations that took place within those shot up B17′s. The upcoming Petraeus report, is no more than a damage assessment sheet.
So with this upcoming report, how do we determine whether we throw our support against those who want to stay, or against those who vote to leave?……..We do it by performing a gut check.
Gut Check 1: If I lose my son or daughter in this war, will I always feel that they died to preserve my nation’s freedom.
Gut Check 2: Would I be better served to have all my money spent on this war and not on something else?
Gut Check 3: Would I be worse off if we left the war, or would it be better off to stay the course and continue doing exactly what we are doing now?
If you can answer no to any of these questions, you need to be in Rodney Square Today, from 5 to 7 pm. The rest of the arguments offered by both sides don’t matter one iota. The only thing that matters is your answer to these three gut checks.
Once you have decided that this war is not for you, then get moving to Wilmington’s Rodney Square. Don’t expect anyone else to do it for you. Even though the time will come when our policies dealing with foreign affairs will change for the better. But that will be because we can no longer afford the extravagance of war. This will occur when the American people realize that war causes too much suffering here at home, and the benefits of peace again become attractive to us all.
It is my humble opinion that America needs to change its policy. This change in policy can come easily once the people of this country decide that there is a better way to conduct ourselves throughout the world. Whenever the people turn against war as a tool to promote certain beliefs, the war ceases. That’s what we need today. (Ron Paul)
As Helen Keller stated in the opening of my piece: “the world is moved along, not only by the mighty shoves of its heroes, but also by the aggregate of the tiny pushes of each honest worker. “
Today we are in desperate need of more honest solders for peace. Ask yourself this question: “if your showing up to this event, would make the actual difference and stop this war, could you then make a greater effort do it?” If you answered yes, then show up. Just showing up may be only the “tiny push: that Helen Keller spoke about, but if you passed the gut check, it is a push in the right direction………one requiring a great amount of courage……………………
Time to run like Marines towards those enablers who keep this war running; not duck and cover.
Thanks to fellow live bloggers: Ryan Singel and David Kravets for their words and images.
Based on the judges question, an apparent victory may be at hand……..
The hearing involves two cases: one aimed at AT&T for allegedly helping the government with a widespread data-mining program allegedly involving domestic and international phone calls and internet use; the other a direct challenge to the government’s admitted warrant-less wiretapping of overseas phone calls.
In questioning of the governmental witness, this exchange occurred.
Judge Harry Pregerson suggests the government is asking the courts to “rubber stamp” the government’s claim that state secrets are at risk “Who decides whether something is a state secret or not? … We have to take the word of the members of the executive branch that something is a state secret?”
Garre counters that the courts should give “utmost deference” to the Bush administration.
Judge Pregerson: “What does utmost deference mean? Bow to it?”
Fifteen minutes later, this exchange occurs.
Judge McKeown asks whether the government stands by President Bush’s statements that purely-domestic communications, where both parties are in the United States, are not being monitored without warrants.
“Does the government stand behind that statement,” McKeown asks.
Garre: “Yes, your honor.”
But Garre says the government would not be willing to sign a sworn affidavit to that effect for the court record.
Blogger’s opinion: Pregerson, by his record, is the most liberal judge on the panel, and he clearly thinks the government is just looking for a blank check for their secret program. But the other two judges aren’t thrilled either. They seem perplexed that the government attorney can’t swear under oath that the Bush Administration isn’t warrant-lessly spying on domestic phone calls.
Proceed to the second case:
Whether the foundation’s lawyers were spied upon, which is the subject of the case, “Is itself a state secret,” Bondy argues. Expanding on that theme, the government argues that the Al-Haramain case needs to be thrown out because the secret document that the government accidentally gave the foundation is so secret that it is outside of the case.
The government claims that the plaintiff’s memories of the document can’t be allowed into the case because the only way to test them is against the “totally classified” document.
This leads to this exchange :
Judge McKeown on the TOP SECRET/TOTALLY document: “I feel like I’m in Alice and Wonderland.”
Eisenberg: “I feel like I’m in Alice in Wonderland, too.”
Al-Haramain lawyer Eisenberg argues that the government’s rationale for dismissing the cases on state secrets grounds doesn’t apply to his clients, since they already know they were surveilled from seeing the secret document.
Judge Margaret McKeown and Judge Hawkins seem unconvinced that the Al-Haramain case can continue without relying on a top-secret document that can’t be used in court.
Eisenberg also offered that the government could have the case dismissed simply by proving the court that they got a warrant.
But the panel seemed unpersuaded that the document can be used at all and generally seemed to be sympathetic to the government’s position.
Bondy, the government’s attorney, finished by reiterating that giving out any information on the alleged surveillance would help the enemy: “We just cannot confirm or deny whether they were surveilled.”
Bondy, for the government, gets the last word and neatly sums up the case for the three judges. Al-Haramain Foundation attorneys, he points out, “think or believe or claim they were surveilled.”
“It’s entirely possible that everything they think they know is entirely false,” he says.
