Ahmed Omar Abu Ali:
Al-Qaeda
Terrorist
OR
Innocent Human Being
???
Traitor
to His Country
AND/OR
Betrayed By His Country
???
December
16th, 2004: Setting the Stage
Memorandum
Opinion
“The writ of habeas corpus commands general recognition as the essential remedy to
safeguard a citizen against imprisonment by State or Nation in violation of his constitutional
rights.”
requires the Court to give substance to those words. Petitioner Ahmed Abu Ali (“Abu Ali”) is a
citizen of the United States who, through his parents, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus against several officials of
the
his ongoing detention since June
2003 in a prison of the
behest and ongoing supervision of
the
Petitioners have provided evidence, of varying degrees of competence and persuasiveness,
that: (i)
the
interrogated Abu Ali in the Saudi
prison; (iii) the
scrutiny by
States officials upon a request by the
subjected to torture while in the
Saudi prison. The
rebuttal. Instead, it insists that a federal district court has no jurisdiction to consider the habeas
petition of a
dismiss the petition forthwith. The position advanced by the
authority sought would permit the
executive, at his discretion, to deliver a
a foreign country to avoid constitutional scrutiny, or, as is alleged and to some degree
substantiated here, work through the
intermediary of a foreign country to detain a
citizen abroad.
The Court concludes that a citizen cannot be so easily separated from his constitutional
rights. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court confirmed the fundamental right of a citizen to be free
from involuntary, indefinite confinement by his government without due process. See Hamdi v.
Rumsfeld, 124
Bush, 124
hostilities -- rather, he was arrested in a university classroom while taking an exam. The United
States has therefore not invoked the executive's war powers as a rationale for his detention --
instead, the
the country as a basis to insulate Abu Ali’s detention from judicial scrutiny. There are, to be sure,
considerable and delicate principles of separation of powers that dictate caution and will narrow
the inquiry in this case. Such principles, however, have never been read to extinguish the
fundamental due process rights of a
citizen of the
detention at the will of the executive, and to access to the courts through the Great Writ of habeas
corpus to challenge the legality of that detention.
The present posture
of this case requires this Court to accept petitioners’ well-supported
allegations, to which the
authority, and corresponding contention that this Court lacks jurisdiction, cannot withstand
petitioners’ assertions at this time. The Court will accordingly authorize expeditious jurisdictional
discovery in this matter to further explore those contentions. The process of defining the scope of
that discovery is set out in the
accompanying order. In the meantime, the
request of the United
States to dismiss the petition for lack of habeas corpus jurisdiction will be denied.”
United States District Judge John Bates in his Memorandum Opinion for
Omar Abu Ali vs. John Ashcroft.
Important Court Documents
Omar Abu Ali vs. John Ashcroft - Judge John Bates analysis of the case.
United States vs. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali - U.S. Indictment and Charges against Ahmed Omar Abu Ali.
June,
11, 2003: The Day he lost his
Freedom
June
16, 2003: The House
Search
September 2003: FBI Agents
visit Abu Ali in Saudi prison
November 22, 2003: Va. Man’s
Months in Saudi Prison Go Unexplained
June
17, 2004: The MAS Protest in Washington, D.C.
July 2004: Omar Abu Ali vs. John Ashcroft
October 2004: Hearing on the Status of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties after September 11th, 2001
December 16th, 2004: Bates sides with the family
January 2005: Bates other
decisions
February 22nd, 2005: United States vs. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali
February – March 2005:
American Attitudes and Media Reactions
June, 11,
2003:
The Day he lost his Freedom
Taking a final exam can sometimes be a very daunting
task. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali,
Valedictorian of his 1999 class of the Islamic Saudi Academy (a private school
in
FBI Agents raided Abu Ali’s house in
It is important to note that while possession of such materials might arouse suspicion, people read all sorts of material to gain knowledge of different viewpoints.
The interesting piece of evidence however the FBI claims to have found was a 6 page document regarding various forms of surveillance by government and private entities detailing how to avoid such surveillance.
September 2003: FBI Agents visit Abu Ali
in Saudi prison
FBI Agents visited Ahmed Omar Abu Ali in Saudi prison and thoroughly questioned him for at least 4 days.
By Caryle
Murphy and John Mintz
Saturday,
November 22, 2003; Page A01
The strongest clue about the
reasons for his imprisonment came in July, from an FBI agent testifying in
federal court in
With no public evidence or open
court hearing in Abu Ali's case, the
degree to which he may have been involved in terrorism remains a mystery.
Neither Saudi nor U.S. authorities will say publicly whether charges have been
filed against him or tell his family what alleged acts led to his lengthy
detention. His rights as a
"If you think our son is guilty, bring him to this country," said his mother, Faten Abu Ali. "Don't have him in a country where we can't guarantee his rights. . . . Bring him into his own country in its courts, where justice can be served." …
One reason U.S. officials have said they are interested in Abu Ali is his alleged ties to the Northern Virginia men accused of conspiring to support al Qaeda and wage "violent jihad" on behalf of Muslims abroad. …
Abu Ali's family said that he knows some of the defendants in the jihad case but that this is not unusual because they were all in the same circle of young men who attended Dar Al Hijrah. One defendant in that case, Randall Todd Royer, said in an interview this year that Abu Ali had "played once or twice" with the paintball group. …
In an Oct. 10 call, he told his parents that
FBI agents had interrogated him for
several hours and threatened to send him to
"Mom, what am I supposed to do?" Faten recalled her son saying on the phone. "I have two
countries against me!"
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A4967-2003Nov21¬Found=true>
Over 6 months passed by and there was no luck for the family in getting their son back.
Imagine how that must feel for any mother. Your son is in jail in foreign country with no access to a lawyer and your own government could care less and will not do anything to help you get him back.
June 17, 2004: The
MAS Protest in
MAS protests detention of
American in
Abu-Ali was detained
during '
AMP
Report
WASHINGTON, June 17,
2004- A US Muslim group today protested the detention of a US national who has
been held in Saudi Arabia for more than a year, saying he had been jailed at
Washington's request and could be tortured.
Dozens of people took
part in the Muslim American Society's demonstration in front of the State
Department and sent letters to President George W. Bush and Secretary of State
Colin Powell to explain their concern for
Ahmed Abu-Ali, 23, who was born
in the
The group said in a
statement that, according to Saudi officials, Abu-Ali was being held at US
authorities' request, without formal charges.
…
Last week, an FBI
official told members of the
Ahmed-Abu Ali's
family, which gave interviews last fall about the case, has argued that he
should be brought home to face trial in a
…
On
<http://www.archives2004.ghazali.net/html/mass_protest.html>
July
2004:
Omar Abu Ali vs. John Ashcroft
Ahmed Abu Ali’s family decided to sue the United States Government to get their son back. However, as the following article indicates, they had a very tough time getting a lawyer to represent them.
From
Cramped Office, Students Accomplish Major Change in
Law
Rights Group Plays Key
Role in Terrorism Case
By Carol D. Leonnig
Yet all the big advocacy groups,
most based in
Sheku
Sheikholeslami, the 21-year-old intern answering the
phone that day last June, thought the case had promise. So did her boss, Morton
Sklar, executive director of the cramped, slightly
disheveled
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1507-2005Mar2.html>
The case was accepted by Morton Sklar and the World Organziation for Human Rights USA.
By
Thom J. Rose
UPI
Correspondent
Washington,
DC, Aug. 4 (UPI) -- The family of Ahmed Abu Ali, who has been detained in Saudi
Arabia for more than a year, announced plans Wednesday for the next phase of
their U.S. court battle to return him to the United States.
…
Sklar
said that five hours after the family submitted its case, a government
representative contacted them to say that
"We
didn't expect that to happen," Sklar
said.
He
said the announcement just five hours after the case was filed that
The
Saudi Embassy would give no comment, saying
Sklar
said he will respond to the call by filing a preliminary injunction based on the
legal principle that once a court case is filed the involved parties are not
allowed to change the circumstances surrounding the case in a way that might
interfere with the trial.
As
it stands, the family's lawsuit, which calls on
<http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040804-052546-1047r.htm>
October
2004: Hearing on the Status of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties after September
11th, 2001
Click for
Calendar
Shown on C-SPAN
Hosted by Congressman John Conyers
“These hearings are an effort to focus on what has happened to Civil Rights and Civil Liberties since that period in time and to highlight what kinds of solutions are necessary for the continued assurance that these very important liberties and rights will be preserved.”
- Congressman John Conyers
“Let me thank each of the panelists thus far because I know
that the American people appreciate as I do the advocacy of persons who have
become victims on this effort to turn the clock back on our most basic rights as
- Reverend Walter Fauntroy
“Thank you Reverend Fauntroy… Thank you for Congressman Conyers for hosting this hearing…
I am pretty young, probably younger than most of the panelists, I’m 22 years old and I’m a student…
My brother
Ahmed Abu Ali is a U.S. Citizen who has been detained in
Ahmed was born in
It was not until 2 months after Ahmed’s arrest, 2 months of darkness that we received our first phone call from him. When his calls finally started, instead of comforting and assuring us we were constantly restless by what we heard from him.
His calls were monitored by prison guards who would hurt him if he merely said his food was bland so he could not tell us what was going on but he alluded constantly. He was constantly confused, disoriented, and unable to finish sentences…
On more than one occasion, he had the courage to tell us straightforwardly that he was being hurt but told us not to ask him any further questions. With equal courage my mother started documenting these statements that my brother was making and even started tape recording his phone calls…
Since Ahmed’s arrest officials at the Saudi embassy have
consistently told my father that Ahmed has not violated Saudi laws and that
there are no plans to prosecute him in
They have described Ahmed’s arrest and detention as “an
American case” that
In May 2004, an official at the Saudi embassy told my father that if he ever wanted to see his son come back home, he should pressure the U.S. officials to request his release and that is in fact what we have done, we have filed a lawsuit…
Officials at the U.S. Embassy and State Dept. have repeatedly dismissed and ignored our complaints that Ahmed has been psychologically and physically abused…
Their own advice says
that
So what did Ahmed do to determine this treatment and neglect? I’m at loss to find an answer…
He(Ahmed Abu Ali) has been reduced to damaged goods. An embarrassment and scandal to be avoided at all costs.”
- Tasneen Abu Ali, Sister of Ahmed Omar Abu Ali
For the video of the complete testimony and hearing, please go to <http://www.cspan.org/>
December 16th, 2004: Bates sides with the family
Judge John Bates denied the request of the U.S. Government to drop the lawsuit based on habeas corpus jurisdiction.
January
2005: Bates other decisions
Click for
Calendar
Family
Of Saudis' Detainee Set Back
By Caryle
Murphy
A federal judge in
The ruling by U.S.
District Judge John D. Bates means that many records in the case, including
those that might show whether the
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2394-2005Jan11.html>
|
|
|
|
|
Judge
weighs use of classified
information |
WASHINGTON (CNN) --
Attorneys for the family of an American citizen detained in
U.S. District Judge
John Bates ruled in December there was evidence to support the family's
allegation, allowing the case to move forward and the family's attorneys to
request evidence from the government.
The Justice Department
has repeatedly tried to get the lawsuit dismissed, arguing the case is outside
the jurisdiction of
Bates has yet to rule
on jurisdiction, pending the outcome
of the evidence from both sides.
Bates said Friday he is "very concerned" about making sure the information provided by the government is protected but "equally concerned" with protecting Abu Ali's rights.
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/11/detained.american/>
So what happens now?
The U.S. Government could now be forced to testify about its involvement
in Abu Ali’s detention in
They “finally” decide to extradite him and charge him.
February
22nd, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
Man held for
20 months expected to face charges
Monday,
February 21, 2005 Posted: 8:48 PM EST (0148 GMT) |
…
The transfer of custody
follows a recent demand by the
Abu Ali's family said
it has been told he will face unspecified charges in federal court. He is
expected to make an appearance in U.S. District Court sometime
Tuesday.
His father Omar Abu
Ali, said he got a call from the FBI telling him his
son was coming back from
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/21/detained.american/index.html>
|
|
|
|
|
American
charged in alleged plot to assassinate President
Bush Wednesday,
February 23, 2005 Posted: 1:40 PM EST (1840 GMT) |
…
The 23-year-old Abu Ali
is not charged with a conspiracy to
assassinate Bush, only for supporting terrorists and, as part of that,
discussing Bush's possible assassination. He was denied bail
Tuesday.
The indictment offered
no evidence that the discussions ever advanced into a
plan.
…
When the charges were
read in court, his supporters and family members
laughed.
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/22/bush.plot.charges/index.html>
N.Va. Man Admitted Terror Plot, Agent Says
By Jerry Markon
Wednesday,
March 2, 2005; Page A01
"The defendant was given a choice by al Qaeda," Cole told a
courtroom packed with Abu Ali's supporters and family members. "He was told he
could be part of an operation and martyr himself or go back to the
…
Law enforcement officials have said there was division within the government about how to handle Abu Ali, with some officials believing the case against him to be weak.
…
Officials revealed at
the hearing that the case against Abu Ali is highly dependent on Saudi
sources. Much of it comes from a confession Abu Ali reputedly
hand-wrote while imprisoned in
…
Under questioning from prosecutors, Cole said
Abu Ali asked for a lawyer when a four-person government team -- two FBI agents,
an FBI analyst and a Secret Service agent -- tried to interview him in
"I told him that because he was in Saudi
custody, he was not entitled to an attorney. They would not allow it," Cole
testified.
Cole said that Abu Ali eventually agreed to
talk and that he and other agents then continued questioning him to gather
intelligence -- and not to obtain evidence for a criminal case -- because "we
felt that the information was so vital to national security.''
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64200-2005Mar1.html>
February – March 2005: American
Attitudes and Media Reactions
Click for
Calendar
Will Torture Claims Sink Terror Case?
The
Justice Department’s surprise decision to charge a young American accused of
planning to assassinate President Bush could raise tough questions about U.S.
treatment of terror suspects—and embarrass one of America’s
allies
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7018521/site/newsweek>
Ali's parents say that officials told
them repeatedly that the government had no plans to charge their
son. That is, until
the government charged their son.
Why now? We may never know for sure.
But it's easy to speculate that the posture of the Abu Ali case against the
government finally prompted the feds to lay their cards on the table. In that
detention case, a federal judge in December ordered the government to provide
information to Abu Ali's family (at that point he presumably was still being
held by the Saudis) that would shed light on his detention; information the
government had stubbornly refused to provide on national security grounds.
Knowing that its legal position had become untenable, and thanks to increased
public awareness about Abu Ali's story,
it's entirely possible that the government decided it would roll the dice and
try Abu Ali rather than authorize his release. The best defense is a good
offense, you might say.
<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/22/opinion/courtwatch/main675804.shtml>
The Abu Ali Case
and Balancing "Civil" Liberties and Security
by Daniel Pipes
(
Mr. Abu Ali's
biography indicates how he might have ended up as an Al Qaeda
operative.
He attended the
Islamic Saudi Academy in
…
These liberal
analysts evince no concern that an American citizen trained by the Saudi
government in
<http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4169>
The details of “Co-Conspirator #2” from the Government’s Indictment was revealed.
The
first multi-expert blog dedicated solely to
counterterrorism issues, serving as a gateway to the community for policymakers
and serious researchers. Designed to provide realtime information about cases and policy
developments.
February
24, 2005
Clues
to Abu Ali's Al-Qaida Contacts in
The
latest USDOJ filing in the case of Ahmed Omar Abu Ali offers tantalizing clues
as to the alleged identity of his Al-Qaida contacts in
"Between
in or around September 2002 and on or about June 9, 2003, the defendant joined a
clandestine al-Qaeda cell in
This
last detail narrows the field considerably as to the identity of Co-Conspirator
#2. That September, there was only one shoot-out of note between Saudi
security forces and Al-Qaida members wanted for their
involvement in the May 2003 suicide bombings in
<http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/02/clues_to_abu_al.html>
Ahmed Omar Abu Ali was
arrested in June 2003. At the time,
Zubayr Al-Rimi, a.k.a.
“Co-Conspirator 2” was alive and not killed until September 2003. If Ahmed Omar Abu Ali and
“Co-Conspirator 2” had any terrorist and criminal plans, then why was
Ahmed Omar Abu Ali not charged with a crime in 2003???
Why now over a year after Al-Rimi has been dead?
David
Cole,
Washington-based constitutional attorney, professor at
DAVID
COLE: Well, he was arrested in
…
DAVID COLE:
Well,
at this point, you know, what he is facing serious
criminal charges. Criminal charges that I think are going to be very difficult
for the government to actually prove out because if you -- if you look at the indictment, it
consists almost entirely of statements from -- or paraphrases of
allegations from unidentified quote-unquote co-conspirators, all
of whom are in Saudi Arabia and are presumably Saudis who were captured and
interrogated by the Saudis.
…
DAVID COLE:
Well, I
think the real -- You have to ask what
is our country coming to when it locks up its own citizens abroad in order to
avoid any kind of significant judicial review and then charges them with the statements of dead
people involving conversations and no more. What have we come to in the
war on terrorism? This is how far the government is pushing to try to show
results in its efforts.
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/25/1455238>
As mentioned above, the identity of “Co-Conspirator #2” was revealed by the Counter-Terrorism Blog as Zubayr Al-Rimi who is dead and was killed in a shootout with Saudi Security Forces in September of 2003.
However, the identity of the other 9 so-called “Co-Conspirators” is still a mystery.
O'Reilly
misrepresented NY Times,
During the February 24
edition of FOX News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly quoted
editorials by The New York Times and The Washington
Post out of context in order to support his accusation that the newspapers
were siding with an accused terrorist against the
…
O'Reilly also used a false claim to attack the
Post and the Times for expressing concern that Abu Ali might have
been tortured in
O'REILLY: But I don't understand why -- the mindset
of the other side -- of the Times and the Post. Why do they care
about Abu Ali, if he got slapped around in
In fact, at Abu Ali's first and only courtroom
appearance, as described in a February 23 Post article,
"Defense attorneys told the judge that Abu Ali had been tortured in Saudi Arabia
and offered to show the judge proof right in the courtroom." O'Reilly's claim
about Abu Ali's "testimony" was apparently a reference to a claim by U.S.
prosecutors: a February 24 Post article
on the case quoted federal prosecutors as saying that "the consul at the U.S.
Embassy in Riyadh met with Abu Ali several times during his detention and that
Abu Ali never complained of mistreatment. They said he described his treatment
as 'kind' and 'humane.'" But there is reason to distrust these alleged
statements, which were not sworn testimony, given that Abu Ali was still in
Saudi custody at the time he made them.
O'Reilly's guest analyst on the program,
conservative terrorism expert Lorenzo Vidino of the
Investigative Project, also disputed O'Reilly's assertion. When asked by O'Reilly if he was "buying"
Abu Ali's torture accusation, he replied, "Well, we can't rule it out.
<http://mediamatters.org/items/200502280001>
Terror:
A Tangled Web
By
Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
He's accused of
plotting to assassinate Bush. But even some Feds think the government won't
win.
Government officials
are acutely aware of these problems-which is one reason Abu Ali's nearly
two-year-old criminal case remained unaddressed in
After searching his
home in
<http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/022805E.shtml>
|
|
|
|
|
Man
pleads innocent to al Qaeda aid in Bush plot From Terry Frieden |
In court Monday,
federal prosecutor David Laufman said the trial would
require non-U.S. witnesses and the use of classified material.
Laufman asked for a delay until October for the
trial.
But Ashraf Nubani, an attorney
representing Abu Ali, told the court he wanted the trial to begin promptly. He
criticized the
"They've had complete access to him for 20 months," Nubani complained to the judge. "They want time to concoct a case."
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/abu.ali.plea/>
We now come to the $64,000 dollar questions.
U.S. Government’s Allegations in the Indictment United States vs. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali:
BETWEEN September 2002 and 2003, Abu Ali violated 6 Counts of U.S. Law…
1) Why was Abu
Ali NOT extradited to the
2) Why did his
family have to sue the U.S. Government to get him back into the
3) Why did the U.S. Government take the position that it had “no jurisdiction” in this case and what was it planning to do, had Judge John Bates ruled in its favor and simply dismissed the case as requested by the U.S. Government?
“One nation, Under God, Indivisible, with
“We the people” request that our Government treat people
fairly “with
But I would love to hear what the feds have to say as way of explanation for why they were so slow in coming to Abu Ali's rescue, even after the Saudis apparently said they had no interest in prosecuting him themselves. Are the feds bluffing? Are they hoping that by prosecuting Abu Ali they will force him to cave, a la John Walker Lindh? Or are they confident still that they will never have to offer details about how Abu Ali was treated? If Abu Ali wasn't treated poorly, why did a federal judge already order the government to reveal more about the matter? And if he was treated poorly, and if the government was indeed on the fence about charging him in the first place, why is there a criminal case at all?
<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/22/opinion/courtwatch/main675804.shtml>
The
Strange Case of Ahmed Omar Abu Ali:
|
|
|
|
Troubling Questions about the Government's Motives and
Tactics
By ELAINE CASSEL
----
…
...
But, readers may
object, what if the
How? The
This is not too much
to ask. And it is what the Constitution requires.
<http://writ.news.findlaw.com/cassel/20050307.html>
November 2005: The Trial
`
Click for
Calendar
Arab-American found guilty of Bush kill plot
A
A federal jury found Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, 24, guilty on nine
counts, including conspiracy to kill Mr Bush,
conspiracy to hijack a plane and offering to aid Osama bin Laden's terrorism network, according to Edward Adams, a
spokesman for US District Court in
He could face life in prison.
Abu Ali's defence lawyers said he
was tortured into making false statements in
But Judge Gerald Bruce Lee admitted the confessions as evidence over the objections of Abu Ali's lawyers.
A resident of
|
|
Wednesday
, 14 December
2005
By Deborah
Charles
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The trial of a
In a report, the
rights group criticised a federal judge for refusing
to let a jury hear supporting evidence from Ahmed Abu Ali that his confession
made in
Last month a jury found Abu Ali, 24, guilty of all charges in a
nine-count indictment. Federal prosecutors had based the case against Abu Ali
almost entirely on confessions he made while in Saudi custody for 20
months.
"To fail to permit the introduction of evidence regarding Saudi
Arabia's reputation for using torture -- a reputation well-documented in our own
State Department's human rights reports -- casts serious doubts on the jury's
ability to make an informed judgement," said Amnesty
International USA executive director William Schulz.
"Amnesty International
is very concerned that this trial sets the devastating precedent in
<http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=23561>
Man
gets 30 years in plot to kill Bush
Prosecutors had asked
for the maximum -- a life sentence -- for Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, a 25-year-old
Authorities said Abu
Ali went to
"The facts of this
case are still astonishing," prosecutor David Laufman
said. "Barely a year after Sept. 11 the defendant joined the organization
responsible for 3,000 deaths."
But U.S. District
Judge Gerald Bruce Lee said 30 years was sufficient punishment, pointing out
that Lindh -- captured on the battlefield in
Abu Ali, wearing a
green prison jumpsuit, declined to speak before his sentence was imposed.
Defense lawyers said they plan to appeal.
He was convicted in
November of conspiracy to assassinate the president, conspiracy to hijack
aircraft and providing support to al-Qaida, among
other crimes.
The jury in the
three-week trial saw a videotaped confession Abu Ali gave to the Saudis in which
he said he joined al-Qaida because he hated the
He claimed that the
Saudis had extracted a confession from him through torture. Prosecutors denied
he was mistreated.
Abu Ali said he had
the scars on his back that proved he was whipped or beaten by the Saudis.
Pictures were taken of his back, and doctors for both the government and the
defense examined him, coming to different conclusions.
In February, defense
lawyers asked for a review of the conviction in light of the disclosure that the
Bush administration had eavesdropped on suspected terrorists' conversations
without search warrants. Abu Ali's lawyers said they suspected, but had no firm
evidence, that Abu Ali had been a target of the surveillance
program.
The government's
response was not made public, but the judge decided to go ahead with the
sentencing after receiving it.
<http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/03/30/man_found_guilty_of_plotting_to_kill_bush/>