| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Cigarettes For Jihad |
| 2004-03-04 |
| Five men were convicted of federal charges for their role in a multi-state ring trafficking in untaxed cigarettes. U.S. Attorney Michael Battle says the men were found guilty Wednesday after a three-and-a-half week trial before Chief District Judge Richard Arcara in Buffalo and five days of jury deliberations. Convicted were 54-year-old Mohamed Abuhamra of Lackawanna; 27-year-old Aref Ahmed of Niagara Falls; 52-year-old Rmzy Abdullah of Buffalo; 31-year-old Nagib Aziz of Cheektowaga; and 36-year-old Azzeaz Saleh of Dearborn, Michigan. Well, well, well. Another group of turbans from New York and Michigan. Must have been profiled. They were found guilty of money laundering and trafficking in untaxed cigarettes. They could face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, a fine of at least $500,000 or both. The men were accused in a massive scheme that used an Indian reservation smoke shop to put millions of dollars of untaxed cigarettes for sale on the black market in Michigan and New York. Can’t short the government on their tax revenue, they get real upset about that. Prosecutors say Ahmed provided about $14,000 to five of the so-called Lackawanna Six so they could travel to Afghanistan and train at an al-Qaeda terrorist training camp. Any plan to charge him with funding terrorists? Hello? |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #7 Reform is needed across the board - including tort law which makes Steve's observation true. It looks like we are due for a rethink across that board. What works and what doesn't in our little experiment. Everything should be in, nothing left out. I agree with 11A5S and OP wholeheartedly - I figure that if we ever actually do this, there will be another Civil War. Sometimes we need to clean house - and I think it has come in some quarters - and is not far off in others. The Internet can make this possible for individuals to participate (not just the elected reps who sometimes "forget" from whom their power is derived) - where it hasn't been prior. Interesting times are afoot and even more are approaching - at an ever-increasing pace. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-3-4 8:21:11 PM |
| #6 OP, I've often thought the same thing. Another example: I've been told that due to improvements in building construction and household appliance design, we need significantly fewer fire fighters than we did 50 years ago. (Note to fire fighters and relatives thereof: you're great people and I appreciate what you do. Please don't take this personally.) But if you were to publish that in Newsweek for example, you'd be pilloried. It's not open for discussion. You're right. It will take a revolutionary event on the order of the Civil War or the Great Depression before we can start even talking about these things. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2004-3-4 4:44:51 PM |
| #5 it's still stupid policy that's hurting us all around. If we did away with all the "stupid policy that's hurting us", we would need to fire half the federal government - they wouldn't have anything to do. It's a nice thougth, but remember the truism: "There's nothing more permanent than a 'temporary' government agency". Add to that Jefferson's comment that government, by human nature, was a beast whose only goal was to grow, and you know how difficult it is to "control" government growth. That's what revolutions are for - to reduce the size of bloated government. It's the only known, effective process. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2004-3-4 3:46:12 PM |
| #4 You're right, Steve, but dammit, it's still stupid policy that's hurting us all around. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2004-3-4 3:11:20 PM |
| #3 I guess Lackawanna means fine tobaccos |
| Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro 2004-3-4 1:12:38 PM |
| #2 but can't we at least stop the stupidity with regard to punitive tobacco taxes? What, and give up all that money? It's easier for a crack head to give up his dope than for a politician to give up tax money. That's why even if they legalize drugs, you'll still have drug smugglers. All the proposals for legalizing drugs call for taxing them to provide for drug treatment and anti-drug education. Just like the tobacco settlement was and like the proposed "fat tax" on fast food to fight obesity. It's all about the money. That's why there are still moonshiners, people don't want to pay the alcohol tax. Oh, and if you think any drug company is going to want to jump into the market to sell legalized drugs, just think about all the lawsuits they'd face for selling a real addictive drug. Look what's happening to tobacco companies. Would you want that kind of headache? |
| Posted by: Steve 2004-3-4 12:23:18 PM |
| #1 This ties in with Tipper's post the other day about a truce in the war on drugs to help us with the war on terror. Any excessive tax on a high demand item leads to black marketing. The high producer surpluses from black marketing will be used for criminal or terrorist activities. I know that there is a lot of opposition to legalizing "hard" drugs, but can't we at least stop the stupidity with regard to punitive tobacco taxes? |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2004-3-4 11:40:17 AM |