On Tuesday, July 6, 2004, Judge Reggie Walton
made a decision and ruled on my case. Under his ruling, I, an American citizen,
am not entitled to pursue my 1st and 5th Amendment rights guaranteed under the
Constitution of the United States. The vague reasoning cited, without any explanation,
is to protect "certain diplomatic relations for national security." Judge Walton
reached this decision after sitting on this case with no activity for almost
two years. He arrived at this decision without allowing my attorney and I any
due process: NO status hearing, NO briefings, NO oral argument, and NO discovery.
He made his decision after allowing the government attorneys to present their
case to him, privately, in camera, ex parte; we were not allowed
to participate in these cozy sessions. Is this the American system of justice
we believe in? Is this the due process we read about in our civics 101 courses?
Is this the judicial branch of our government that is supposed to be separate
from the other two branches in order to protect the people's rights and freedom?
This court decision by itself would have been appalling and alarming enough,
but in light of all other actions taken against my case for the past two years
it demonstrates a broken system, a system abused and corrupted by the current
executive, a system badly in need of repair.
Under this broken system the attorney general of the United States is being
allowed to illegally gag the United States Congress regarding my case. And even
worse, the United States Congress is readily complying with this illegal gag.
Under this broken system the attorney general of the United States is being
allowed to hinder ongoing investigations such as those of the 9/11 Commission
and the DOJ-Inspector General.
Under this broken system the Attorney General of the United States is getting
away with interfering and tampering with pending cases under the judicial process,
such as my court cases and the lawsuit by the 9/11 victim families.
John Ashcroft's relentless fight against me, my information, and my case,
on various fronts, from the Congress to the courts, and from the 9/11 Commission
to the Inspector General's Office, has been taking place under his attempt at
a vague justification titled "Protecting Certain Foreign and Diplomatic Relations
for National Security."
On September 11, 2001, 3,000 lives were lost. Yet this administration has
hindered all past and on going investigations into the causes of that horrific
day for the sake of this vague notion of protecting "certain diplomatic and
foreign relations."
As a result of the attack on 9/11, many thousands lost their loved ones and
had their lives changed forever. Yet, this administration knowingly and intentionally
let many directly or indirectly involved in that terrorist act go free – untouched
and uninvestigated – by simply citing "protection of certain foreign and diplomatic
relations for national security."
Today, we are told that we are still under the threat of terrorists, and remain
under various colors of the color-coded threat system invented and promoted
by this administration. Yet, this same administration is relentlessly preventing
any real investigations into finding out the facts, the real facts, regarding
acts, semi-legit organizations, and people, involved in plots against this country
and its people – under their sorry excuse of "protecting certain foreign and
diplomatic relations."
Isn't it time to ask what diplomatic or foreign relations they keep referring
to?
Isn't it fair to demand that they should let the people know what kind of
foreign relations are worth 3,000 lives lost?
Isn't it this administration's obligation to justify these costs in lives
and in our national security for the sake of maintaining certain foreign relations
that benefit only the few?
Just take notice of the means this administration has used in my case alone
to accomplish covering up and protecting those "foreign relations," and to dodge
any accountability themselves: illegal reclassifications, secrecy, gagging congressional
inquiries, blocking court proceedings, stopping investigations, invoking the
rarely invoked State Secret Privilege, asserting national security.
It is apparent that this administration confidently expects the American people
to sign blank checks unquestioningly. It is obvious that they believe they are
entitled to unchecked power, unlimited authority, and unquestioning citizens'
support. To them, our Bill of Rights under the Constitution is nothing more
than an inconvenient roadblock to overcome; our American system of checks and
balances can be bypassed by overusing national security; and people's dissent
is a problem that can be diverted away by a culture of fear and complete submission
to government authority.
As I have stated many times previously, I will continue this fight, since
in taking my citizenship oath I pledged that I would support and defend the
Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign
and domestic. Therefore, as an American citizen, I have the right and
the obligation to defend the Constitution and laws of the United States against
John Ashcroft's assaults.