United States v. Mohammed Salah and Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar
United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Chicago, Illinois
Opening Statement of the Government given by Carrie Hamilton, United States
Attorney
The main theme of the Government's argument is that Mohammed
Salah and Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar have both engaged in a racketeering
conspiracy to fund HAMAS from the United States, for more than a decade.
While Salah is the bag man transporting money and information back and forth
from Israel and the US, Ashqar is a facilitator of communications, strategy
and money for HAMAS, first from his home in Oxford, Mississippi and then
from Northern Virginia.
A Summary of the Government's Opening Statements
The Government's statement opened with Assistant U.S. Attorney Carrie
Hamilton retelling of the death of David Boim, an American Jewish teenager
who was killed by a HAMAS gunman in a drive-by shooting in the West Bank on
May 13, 1996. Hamilton mentioned how HAMAS is a terrorist organization,
which brought groans from the overwhelmingly pro-Ashqar/Salah supporters in
the overflow courtroom, in which I sat. The government mentioned how
Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar, one of the defendants, kept thousands of documents in
his home and facilitated supporting HAMAS from the U.S. Hamilton then began
talking about the evidence which will be presented to the jury. They (the
jury) will learn about HAMAS attacks and the roles that the defendants
played in those attacks. Hamilton said that Mohammed Salah recruited and
trained HAMAS members in explosives here in the United States. He also
traveled to Israel to deliver hundreds of thousands of dollars to HAMAS
members. He worked with Mousa Abu Marzook, the current Deputy Head of the
Political Bureau of HAMAS, and had direct contact with other HAMAS leaders
and high level members. In September 1992, Marzook sent Salah to meet with
Salah al-Arouri, a HAMAS member headquartered at Hebron University in the
West Bank, to give him $50,000. He also met with now deceased HAMAS activist
Adel Ahmed Awadallah who provided Salah with information that was relayed by
Salah to Marzook. In January 1993, Salah was sent again to deliver money
because of the December 1992 deportation of HAMAS activists to Lebanon by
Israel. According to the government, Salah was asked to take over the
Military Wing of HAMAS. The purpose of Salah's trip to Israel this time was
again to deliver money and also to find out what else HAMAS needed. While
in Israel, Salah met with HAMAS military leaders.
Hamilton proceeded to discuss the Israeli Security Agency (ISA),
whose purpose according to the government is to prevent acts of terror, a
comment which caused heads to shake in the room. Salah lied to the ISA; he
gave only strategic bits of information during his interrogation. Hamilton
talked about Salah's statements to "Nadav," an ISA agent who was responsible
for much of his interrogation, saying that Salah talked immediately and
freely. Salah admitted that he trained HAMAS activists in the U.S., that
Marzook asked him to be the head of the Military Wing of HAMAS, and that he
met high ranking terrorists and gave them money to buy weapons for attacks.
Salah was put in prison with people that he thought were HAMAS activists,
but in reality they were working with the ISA. This is known as "Salah's
time in the Birds." These "Birds" acted as a fake HAMAS command center
inside of the prison. They asked Salah to prove that he was really HAMAS
and not a collaborator. He wrote for them a fifty-three page document that
was then given to the ISA describing Salah's activities on behalf of HAMAS.
The document included suggestions that Salah gave on how HAMAS could counter
the damage that he caused and the bad press about him in America. When
Salah was confronted by his interrogators about the document, he admitted
what he wrote was true. Salah also admitted that he had fourteen bomb
detonators in his home in Chicago, that Marzook was the source of his money,
and that Salah tried to blame his actions on someone else. He also provided
the names of the U.S. operatives that he trained.
Hamilton continued, saying that the jury would hear the ISA
taped March 18, 1993 interview of Salah, and that on screen there will be a
translation. Hamilton told the jury that they will notice the tone, calm,
and ease of Salah's relationship with "Nadav." The government indicated
they will also show bank records, and that the jury will hear how Salah
denied supplying information to the Israelis and how he threatened the
Israelis saying that he would get vengeance when he left Israel. This,
according to the government, shows that Salah was not a broken man because
he continued to boldly refuse to give up his secrets. During his
interrogation he was seen by judges, lawyers, media and U.S. consular
employees. The jury will see photos and videotapes showing Salah smiling,
again not a broken man. Hamilton said the prosecution will call Judith
Miller, the former New York Times reporter, to testify about what she saw
when she witnessed the Salah interrogation.
Another item discussed between Salah and his interrogators was the location
of the body of Israeli soldier Ilan Sadon, who was kidnapped and murdered by
HAMAS four years prior. Salah told "Nadav" that he knew the location of
Sadon's body and would tell the Israelis in exchange for the release of
Salah Shehadah, the founder and leader of the Military Wing of HAMAS.
Israel refused this request which caused Salah to change his demand, this
time for the release of all female prisoners and the return of the $100,000
that Israel confiscated when found in Salah's hotel room. The Israelis
agreed to this demand and following the signing of an agreement between
Salah and Israelis, Salah proceeded to draw a map of the location. The jury
will hear testimony of a member of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Recovery
Team that will testify that Salah's map was indeed accurate.
Word spread of Salah's confession to HAMAS members living in the
U.S. by way of Ashqar. The government asserts that Ashqar acted as a
communications conduit with HAMAS activists in the U.S. and within the West
Bank and Gaza following the deportation to Lebanon of four hundred
terrorists, many of which were HAMAS fighters and leaders including Abd
al-Aziz Rantissi, then spokesman for HAMAS.
Following the signing of the Oslo accords in 1993, HAMAS which
immediately rejected any moves toward peace, upped the level of violence in
the territories. Ashqar was relied upon in the U.S. to help transfer money
and information for HAMAS. His phone and fax line were used for strategic
purposes by HAMAS. Unbeknownst to Ashqar, the FBI had obtained a wiretap of
these devises and recorded his conversations and faxes. The jury using
translated transcripts of these communications will see that Ashqar was very
aware of the violence in the region and facilitated in strategy,
communications and money transfer.
On September 26, 1993, a phone call was made between HAMAS leader Abd
al-Aziz Rantissi and Ashqar concerning a suicide bombing which took place
the day before. Rantissi asked Ashqar to help put Rantissi in touch with
the family of the suicide bomber. During this phone call between Ashqar and
Rantissi, disappointment was expressed concerning the fact that nobody died
in the bombing other than the bomber himself. Ashqar was not able to
connect the call but the following day a fax was sent to the family of the
bomber glorifying his actions and expressing hope that others will follow in
his path towards martyrdom. This fax was signed as being from HAMAS members
in Lebanon and it was sent by Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar.
The jury will also see over 1,000 pages of documents confiscated
from the home of Ashqar including many HAMAS member confessions, minutes
from high level meetings between Marzook and Yasser Arafat, the former
President of the Palestinian Authority and Chairman of the Palestine
Liberation Organization, as well as notes of meetings between HAMAS and
Hizballah as well as HAMAS and Iran. Ashqar's address book and calendar
will also be shown to the jury which includes contact information for
aliases as well as names of HAMAS leaders including Abd al-Aziz Rantissi,
Mahmoud Zahar, a HAMAS founder, and Imad al-Alami, the HAMAS representative
in Iran. The government will show the jury records of funds sent to
specific cells, a HAMAS operations manual, information on prisoners,
martyrs, and deals for prisoner exchanges.
The government concluded by stating that HAMAS is not just a
political group but is a sophisticated global terrorist organization
targeting innocent people in order to further its cause. In October 1993,
Ashqar hand picked individuals to attend a HAMAS meeting in Philadelphia to
discuss HAMAS activities now that the Oslo Accords had been signed. At this
meeting, Ashqar mentioned the situation of Salah, who had been arrested in
Israel earlier that year, and how they have to be cautious in America.
Several times Ashqar was called to testify before grand juries
concerning his knowledge of the activities of HAMAS in the United States,
first in New York and more recently in Chicago. Both times he was
subpoenaed and both times he refused to testify. The government concluded
their opening statement by saying that the two defendants have "manipulated
our system here to further their terror"
_____
Defense Opening Argument on Behalf of Defendant Mohammed Salah given by
Michael Deutsch, Attorney for the Defendant
Lead attorney for Mohammed Salah, Michael Deutsch, gave an emotionally
filled, albeit historically flimsy, rendition of the Arab-Israeli conflict,
often feeding on the emotions of the jury, comparing acts committed by Salah
as equal to the struggle by African-Americans for civil rights. The main
theme of the opening was that Salah does not support terrorism and that he
only wanted to help Palestinians. Emphasis was made on Salah's
interpretation of the Arab-Israeli conflict as well as his arrest and
interrogation by the Israelis. Deutsch admits that Salah traveled to Israel
to distribute money but that it was only to help people and could be nothing
but a completely legal and generous act since he traveled on his own
passport and used his own checking account.
A Summary of Michael Deutsch's Opening Statement on behalf of his Client,
Bridgeview resident Mohammed Salah
The government must prove their case against Mohammed Salah and
can not just say the word terrorism. The defense asserted that Salah does
not support terrorism or have anything to do with terrorism. He did travel
twice to Israel to give money but not for terrorism, merely to help
Palestinians in need. None of his activities were done in secrecy as he
traveled on his U.S. passport and used his own bank account. Giving money
to HAMAS was not illegal until government actions in 1995 and 1997. Deutsch
asked about Salah's intentions in giving money and whether they were
humanitarian or terrorist related. Deutsch gave many examples of resistance
such as the actions of the African National Congress in South Africa, the
French resistance to the Nazi occupation, as well as our own resistance in
American against the British in 1776. The government, according to Deutsch
is trying to portray HAMAS like the Mafia or a drug cartel without giving
any context with which to understand why people do what they do.
Next, Deutsch told the story of Salah's life and experiences in the West
Bank. He spoke of how Salah's family had large amounts of land, two hundred
acres, but they lost their land in the war of 1948. Salah was born in a
refugee camp in Qalandia, north of Jerusalem, located in what was then
Jordanian controlled West Bank. In 1967, Salah's family fled, hiding for
nine days only to return and see Israeli forces at the camp. Subsequently,
Salah walked to Jordan and lived there until he immigrated to the United
States with the assistance of his brother.
Deutsch then began to describe why Salah cared so much about helping other
Palestinians. He mentioned that during jury selection a questionnaire was
given to potential jurors asking if they had heard of the word Intifada.
Deutsch commented that very few of them had and he then began to speak of
the Intifada in 1987 comparing it to the Civil Rights Movement in the United
States. He asked the jury how they reacted upon seeing the aftermath of
Hurricane Katrina and how like many of them, Salah wanted to help
Palestinians because of what he saw and read during the Intifada.
The discussion then moved on to Da'wa, which Deutsch described as social
service for the oppressed who are being occupied. He stated that when you
want to help people you work with people who are helping people and unlike
the corrupt PLO, the Islamists were known for their honesty and you can be
assured that a dollar given to them would be a dollar used. If you have an
occupation, Deutsch said, of course you will have resistance, but just
because you resist it does not make you a terrorist or a racketeer. He said
that HAMAS can not be a racketeering organization because it provides social
services and they are the government of the Palestinian Authority.
Deutsch then discussed the Israeli Security Agency (ISA) and how they are
notorious throughout the world in their ability to illicit information from
a suspect. Then Mr. Deutsch described how money was sent to Mousa Abu
Marzook, the current Deputy Head of HAMAS' Political Bureau and the former
head of the Political Bureau, from all over the world including Saudi
Arabia, Lebanon, the United Arab Emirates, and Europe. Mr. Marzook was
looking for brave people who would help Palestinians living under
occupation. Mr. Salah was given the honor and responsibility because he was
brave and trusted.
According to Deutsch, Salah did not know that the men with whom he met were
in any way associated with military activities, or if in fact they were. At
this point, Deutsch reiterated that there had been no suicide bombings by
HAMAS at the time Salah was arrested and that, at the time, it was not
illegal to give money to HAMAS . Mr. Salah did everything openly because he
did not know that anything that he was doing was illegal. Mr. Deutsch
retold the story of the arrest and interrogation of Salah once again
mentioning the ISA, which he referred to by their Hebrew name: Shabak.
Deutsch referred to ISA's use of aliases for their operatives, saying that
they use these fake names because they torture people.
According to Deutsch, the arrest and interrogation of Salah was used as a
tool by the Israelis who were in need of a connection between HAMAS in the
U.S. and HAMAS on the "inside" meaning in the West Bank and Gaza. Deutsch
asserts that Yitzhak Rabin, the Prime Minister of Israel at the time, was
trying to pressure the United States to stop the flow of money coming from
the U.S. to the Palestinians. Therefore, according to Deutsch, the Israelis
needed to find someone who would say that the money from the U.S .was being
used for terrorism. Deutsch's "proof" is that the only person allowed into
a prison complex so secret that even the prison warden was not allowed in,
referring to the ISA interrogation center where Salah was being held, was
Judith Miller, a New York Times reporter. Deutsch contends that one of the
interrogators known by the name Chaim said that Miller was allowed to watch
so that she would write an article about what she saw which would influence
the FBI to act.
Deutsch claims that when Miller observed Salah that he had already been
threatened, slapped, sleep deprived and that for fourteen days he had not
seen a lawyer. Miller saw Salah eighteen days after he was arrested at a
time which, according to Deutsch, Salah was a broken man. Concerning the
relationship between ISA agent "Nadav" and Salah, Deutsch refers to "Nadav"
as the "Good Cop" in the Good Cop/Bad Cop scenario. Deutsch says that Salah
was thrown into a prison with the "Birds," Arabs claiming to be members of
HAMAS who were in fact working with the ISA. The "Birds" wanted Salah to
prove that he was really HAMAS and to tell them what he did for HAMAS. In
response to their request, Salah wrote a four page statement, which did not
satisfy the ISA and led to Salah's transfer to another prison, this time in
the town of Hebron, for another round with the "Birds." Deutsch says that
Salah was threatened with death by these "Birds" unless he proved that he
really was HAMAS, forcing Salah to write another confession, this time a
fifty-three page statement that the government will present, which according
to Deutsch, Salah wrote over an extended period of time. The ISA asked
Salah to confirm what he wrote but he refused. Deutsch reiterates at this
point that Salah was a broken man and that everything written in his
statement was lies. Salah wrote in his statement that he was a military
commander of HAMAS but Deutsch says that this an impossibility since Salah
visited the West Bank and Gaza only a few times since moving to the United
States.
Deutsch says that Salah was offered a plea deal of five years if he would
confirm the truth of his statement, another proof, according to Deutsch that
Salah could not be a HAMAS Commander since there is no reason for the
Israelis to allow a HAMAS military commander to receive only a five year
sentence - from which he was given an early release. Upon his arrival back
to the United States, Deutsch says that the FBI planted an informant in his
welcome party that befriended Salah over the next several years but that no
evidence will be offered by the government by this informant about Salah
being involved in HAMAS activities.
Deutsch concluded by asserting that the Boim case, of which the government
spoke, was funded by the Israel lobby in order to stop fundraising efforts
by the Palestinian people in America. He said that the jury should use
common sense that if Salah was a military commander of HAMAS that some
evidence would exist concerning this from 1996-2004. So called "experts"
would be called in this trial, such as Israeli soldiers, but Deutsch asked
the jury to question their testimony outright since they are biased. He
even alluded to Matthew Levitt, the first witness called to testify on
behalf of the government, as being emotionally and personally involved with
the State of Israel. In conclusion Deutsch said that the government wants
the jury to buy into confessions made under Israeli torture but instead the
jury should judge the case on the evidence and not on the relationship
between the United States and the State of Israel.
_____
Defense Opening Argument on Behalf of Defendant Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar given
by William Moffitt, Attorney for the Defendant
Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar's lawyer is William Moffitt. Moffitt recently gained
infamy in legal and pro-Palestinian circles by defending Sami al Arian,
Islamic Jihad activist from Tampa, Florida. The main theme of Moffitt's
argument is that Ashqar is merely a free thinker being persecuted for
exercising his First Amendment rights. Moffitt emphasized how several
government agencies including the FBI and the CIA tried to recruit Ashqar as
an operative. According to Moffitt, Ashqar had a dream of coming to the
United States to receive an education and then return to his homeland, a
dream which was destroyed by the U.S. government.
A Summary of William Moffitt's Opening Statement on behalf of his Client
Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar
Moffitt began his argument by emphasizing that it is not illegal to have an
association or an affiliation with HAMAS. Moffitt did not concede that his
client, Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar, had an affiliation but if he did Moffitt
wondered what the nature of this affiliation would be. According to
Moffitt, Ashqar was not involved in any planning or committing of any
violence but was active in debate and dissent, two things which we as
Americans cherish. Moffitt began the crux of his argument by explaining the
timeline of Ashqar's activities here in the US. Ashqar came to the United
States on a U.S. government scholarship to study at the University of
Mississippi in Oxford, MS. Almost immediately after his arrival, the FBI
began surveilling Ashqar. Moffitt contends that the FBI surveillance was
not something that was of interest to the American government but instead
was undertaken at the behest of the Israeli government. In early 1991, the
FBI met with Ashqar in Oxford and asked him about his organization, the Al
Aqsa Educational Fund, an organization which Moffitt claims merely sent
books to the West Bank and Gaza, since the Israelis censor books. Two years
later, the FBI increased their surveillance by obtaining a FISA wiretap of
Ashqar's phone and fax lines.
These wiretaps informed the FBI of a gathering in Philadelphia of
individuals shortly after the signing of the Oslo Accords, but unlike the
prosecution's position, which characterizes this assembly as a major HAMAS
meeting within the United States, Moffitt claims that the event was benign
and merely afforded activists opposed to the Oslo Accords a chance to
brainstorm and discuss the future of the region. Moffitt emphasized the
innocent nature of the meeting by mentioning that it took place at a public
hotel where attendees came on their own free will and used their own names.
The government had previously mentioned that transcripts from the meeting
would be seen by the jury but Moffitt said that the transcripts will make
clear exactly what his client thinks about violence and education. Moffitt
described the meeting as being in the finest traditions of this country
since free speech has a special place in America.
Moffitt conceded that Ashqar's home was searched and that a HAMAS charter
was found as well as documents concerning HAMAS and other Palestinian groups
but that such information, especially the charter was public and proved no
special affiliation with the movement. Moffitt stressed that ideas could
not hurt people and that papers don't kill people but are merely read.
The next part of Moffitt's argument centered on what he called the
"Seduction of Ashqar." Moffitt showed the jury pictures of the business
cards that Ashqar had collected over the years including cards from several
FBI Special Agents and two U.S. Attorneys, one of which was the Chief of the
Criminal Division. Ashqar met with government agents, several times over
the early 1990s and met almost monthly with them between September 1996 and
January 1997. According to Moffitt, everything that Ashqar may have done
wrong was committed before 1996 and so the government knew everything about
him already. Moffitt claims that the government tried to recruit Ashqar as
a spy. They wanted him to "betray himself, his people, and his ideas" but
Ashqar told the government that he was not interested in becoming a spy.
When the pressure to work with FBI agents in Mississippi became too great
for Ashqar he decided to move to New Jersey, but upon hearing this,
according to Moffitt, the agents told Ashqar that he (Ashqar) "should be
careful about going to New Jersey because a certain ethnic group controls
that office." As if his implication was not clear enough, Moffitt said that
the government agents were referring to Jews. The agents gave Ashqar
several choices: to indict him for money laundering, to deport him, or to
leak that Ashqar was working with the government thereby labeling him a
collaborator. In the end Ashqar decided to leave Mississippi and relocated
in Northern Virginia.
It was in Northern Virginia where Ashqar would first be subpoenaed by a
Grand Jury in New York concerning HAMAS' activities in the United States in
1997. Moffitt conceded that Ashqar may have been offered immunity by the
government but that he had no reason to trust them since the government had
lied to him repeatedly as well as threatened him and his family. Ashqar
refused to testify and ended up serving six months for civil contempt.
Moffitt also showed the jury a letter dated January 17, 1996 which was sent
to Ashqar by the CIA asking him if he would be interested in working for
them as an overseas operations officer. Moffitt asked the jury how much a
threat Ashqar could be if both the CIA and the FBI wanted to recruit him.
Moffitt claimed that the government even offered Ashqar U.S. citizenship as
well as a position in the government of the Palestinian Authority in
exchange for his help, but, says Moffitt, in the end Ashqar chose not to
become a rat for a government that consistently lied to him. Moffitt
compared Ashqar to Nelson Mandela and John McCain who refused to give up
information against their people. He quoted Nathan Hale who said I regret
that I have only one life to lose for my country saying that if that quote
describing such ardent patriotism was good enough for Hale to be considered
a hero in America then why is Ashqar not given the same respect.
Moffitt then displayed a chart indicating the years of alleged overt acts of
conspiracy which Ashqar committed compared to the years that the government
designated HAMAS as a terrorist organization. The chart showed that during
the two years that HAMAS was designated, in 1995 and 1997, Ashqar committed
no overt acts and the only overt acts he was charged with following the
designations were his refusals to appear before grand juries. Emphasis was
given to a five year statute of limitations on acts that Ashqar alleged
crimes. Moffitt's comments concerning the statute of limitations drew
immediate objections from Assistant U.S. Attorney Carrie Hamilton on the
basis of Moffitt's misstatement of the law. Judge St. Eve sustained this
objection, after which Moffitt smirked at Hamilton.
Moffit concluded by reemphasizing that Ashqar merely sent books and tried to
help people by sending money. Israelis believe in collective punishment,
Moffitt said, stating that the Israelis will destroy your home if a family
member is involved in an attack. Moffitt called it un-American not to send
money to people who have had their homes destroyed and said that he will not
apologize for Ashqar feeding needy people. Why should the Palestinians be
different, why should they starve, asked Moffitt. Moffitt said that there
is nothing that the jury can to end the conflict, which has trademarks of
South African apartheid with partitions similar to Bantustans, a comment
which garnered nods from some jury members. Concerning the phone calls that
the government alleged were set up at the behest of HAMAS leaders by Ashqar
to relatives of HAMAS fighters in Gaza, Moffitt said that Gaza is a small
place and that everybody there knows everybody else and that the jury should
not be surprised if people reach out and call each other to see how they
are, like Americans did with family and friends in the Gulf Coast following
Hurricane Katrina. In conclusion, Moffitt returned to the "Seduction of
Ashqar" theme giving the example that if an American student went overseas
to study and somebody tried to make him a spy against the U.S., that would
be call his refusal as courageous. Ashqar is a courageous man, concluded
Moffitt, a courageous and brave man who can not return home because of the
actions of the United States.
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION
IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.intellnet.org
Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,'
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
