You are the best thing about Salon. Keep up the great work.

Ex-Lawmaker Charged in Terror Conspiracy

By LARA JAKES JORDAN – 25 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

A 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying — money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Siljander, who served two terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, was appointed by President Reagan to serve as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations for one year in 1987.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hw36mXsH7fbogLzqW06NU31aQAmgD8U75UU83

was sickening. It's no secret that he is a Republican and has no objectivity whatsoever.

Access? He has always had super access to any Republican.

May he go down into anonymity with the present WH administration.

How dare you respond this way to a member of the "best political team in news"?

CNN news makes my gag reflex kick in. I watched one of their reporters recently inform us that stability in Kenya amid the current political violence "is not just important for America. It's important for Kenyans, too." Gee, thanks for that deep insight. I would never have guessed.

We are discharging vets and providing no support services for mental health, no "decompression zones" for the transition to "peaceful" civilian life. We are perpetrators by proxy of a startling continuum of abuse to our own soldiers and to their friends, families, co-workers, neighbors.

While I agree with you completely here I just want to make the point that a huge percentage of the "troops" were droolingly eager to "go kick some sand ni**er butt".

I would have a lot more sympathy if these guys were draftees that didn't want to go in the first place. Anyone who did fifteen minutes of research would know that troops are almost always treated like crap once the war is over.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"

But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,

The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,

O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

-Rudyard Kipling

Yes, I'm a vet..

Greenwald vs. journalists

I'm curious, Mr. Greenwald, about your background, given how much you dislike journalists. Did one of those lowlifes write a bad book review? Have you ever been a reporter? Covered politics and politicians, traveling day and night, with little sleep, poor food and endless deadlines? It is a fun job. Some do it better than others. My own prejudice is that print reporters do it better than broadcast ones, so I'm not overwhelmingly sympathetic to John King. But his response raises a point that your reply dodges: what reporting did you do? From what I can tell, you referred to what was aired and then proceeded to spill your vitriol all over Mr. King. Judging from other columns about reporters, that appears to be your style. Your privilege, of course, but it does raise the question about your qualifications. Thanks to the First Amendment, you don't need any. You've written two books, so you must be an expert. But you do remind me of the airchair quarterbacks who rant about the ones on the field, even though they themselves couldn't hit the broadside of a barn with a forward pass from the inside. So what's your story, Mr. Greenwald? Are just another sidelines blowhard, or does your pontificating have any grounding in experience?

Prof. Tim Smith, Kent State University.

p.s. To save you the trouble of asking, I practiced journalism as a reporter and editor for 20 years before leaving to teach in the field.

-- Prof. Tim Smith

Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:59 AM

Funny. I, too, practiced journalism as a reporter and editor for 20 years before leaving to find a real job - NOT in academia. And what I learned in journalism school and on daily newspapers was this:

Facts reside not in my own head, not in my file cabinet or computer, not in my newsroom, but outside, on the streets, in the real world where real people with experience and expertise in every different thing under the sun know what's really going on, and if I'm hard-working and lucky, they might tell me something I didn't know before.

Many people who don't have journalism degrees or years clocked on a reporting gig are actually capable of critical reading, analysis and writing. A lot of them are lawyers.

And supposed professors of journalism who don't know the difference between "reporting" and "criticism" probably should think twice before posting nasty comments in front of people who do.

Thanks for playing, "Professor Tim Smith." You've been busted.

but I know a good piece of beef. Fuck journalism, just tell the truth!

i don't really feel like i'm arguing with you bystander, so "last words" don't matter to me.

i'm simply making the (perhaps mute) point that ...

you are what you eat

be the change you want to see

those with glass houses shouldn't be the first to throw stones

"you" the person, bystander, may excel in your ability to be transparent and aligned in how you ethically address corporate/institutional corruption. god bless you for it. others, like john king, clearly have failed in this regard. there are hoards and hoards of folks like me who are in the middle. having standards and demanding change can work sometimes ... but there are other tactics that don't get people's reactivity (and therefore defensiveness) on alert. inflammatory e-mails, comments, radio programs, etc., etc. tend to get more attention. sometimes those who decry journalistic failures embody the exact some problem they decry. sometimes people are addicted to reactivity/turbulence and don't even realize it.

people who like to or need to fight tend to need enemies. sometimes those enemies are manufactured, with severe consequences. sometimes being confrontational and direct, with compassion and understanding, can be very healing for all involved. i'm inviting you and others here to be self-reflective. maybe you don't need that. if so, i applaud you.