Friday, September 14, 2007
Snydy has had this up so long I thought It might be worth posting here
I Went Down To The Crossroads...
At Chicago's own Toyota Park. I am refering to Eric Clapton's Crossroads Guitar Festival. An all day long eveny to raise money for his drug rehad facility in Antigua. It was held on July 28.
The festival was an all day affair starting at 11:50am & going till 11:00pm. It was one great artist after another, with no slow spots. I managed to shoot more pictures in 12 hours than I did the 4 days at Bonnaroo! All the things were in the right place & I just kept shooting. I need to limit my shooting or time the right shot a little better.
I will copy & paste a review I wrote up for an article. It's got some length to it, but I think it covers everything about the day.
The bad part of the trip was the travel. I was supposed to leave Philly at 5:21pm & the flight was delayed 5 hours! We sat on the runway for 3 hours before returning to the gate to deboard. I was very pissed off because I ended up missing the show at Buddy Guy's club, Legends. I was all set up to shoot it & still don't know if any special guests showed up. The flight ended up leaving at 11:15pm. I got into my room at 1:30am, Chicago time. Nice.
The flight home was worse if you can believe that. It was supposed to leave Chicago at 3:31pm. The gate & planes were changed 3 times. We get on the plane & have a narrow window to take off, but then a light comes on in the cockpit & we are stuck again. Mechanics came on the plane & were baffled by this light that wouldn't go off. They switched the part out but didn't work. They debaored us & eventually canceled the flight all together. I talked to work & told them I might not be in on Monday morning & then had Melanie book me the next earliest flight to Philly. It left at 5:45am the next day. I ended up getting a room at the airport Hilton for a cheap $300 bucks! I thought long & hard about going to Legends as I wanted to go there one last time before they relocate it at the end of the year. It would have been to costly between the cabs & shirts. I stayed in watched HBO & ordered room service.
The flight left on time the next day & got home fine.
So here is the link to the pictures & the article I copied & pasted below.
Crossroads Guitar Festival Pictures - July 28, 2007
Enjoy
SB
There are moments in life when one will say “This is once in a lifetime opportunity”. Fortunately this is not one of them. What happened on July 28 in
Bridgeview
,
IL
has happened once before in
Texas
in 2004.
I’m referring to Eric Clapton’s Crossroads Guitar Festival. The
Crossroads
Center
is a rehabilitation center located in
Antigua
for substance abuse, something Clapton knows a little bit about. The proceeds from the festival go towards the funding of the center. In 2004 the first Crossroads Festival was held at the Cotton Bowl in
Dallas
,
TX
, June 4-6 and featured many of the greatest guitarists from the past and present. This year’s festival was only one day but featured many of the same artists from the 2004 festival. The festival started promptly at 11:50am with special guest and emcee, Bill Murray. He started off by telling the crowd how we were in store for some great music, for a great cause. Then with a Strat hanging by his side launched into the “only song he knew how to play on guitar”, Van Morrison’s “Gloria”.
Murray
was far from the caliber of say Clapton, Beck or one Mr. Guy, but he gave it his all and pulled through… but then again this wasn’t meant to be taken seriously. He is a comedian after all. As he was nearing the end of the song he got a little help from one of his friends, Eric Clapton. They finished the song and Clapton talked about what was in store for the day. Sonny Landreth arrived on stage to a sold out crowd at
Toyota
Park
. He launched into his set and the crowd devoured it, eager to get the events of the day underway. John McLaughlin came on next. His special blend of Jazz fusion he played complimented Landreth’s set.
Alison Kraus & Union Station were next for a touch of
Bluegrass
. Accompanied by guitarist Jerry Douglas, they soothed what wounds were caused by the two bands prior to them. Doyle Bramhill II was up next. The Texan guitarist’s set was satisfying but could have been a bit more upbeat for my taste. He played seated in a chair. The chair may be standard during his regular shows, but I would save the sitting down for playing an acoustic set, especially in this setting. He did redeem himself later when he played with Clapton’s band. In between sets Bill Murray arrived on stage dressed in period Eric Clapton wardrobes to introduce the bands. When he introduced Derek Trucks he described him as “an American success story”. Son of Butch Trucks, longtime drummer for The Allman Brothers Band, Derek has come into his own right as a respected musician. His set was well received by the crowd but got a little extra help from Susan Tedeschi, musician and wife of Trucks. At one point she tore into a solo that left Trucks looking like
Murray
during “Gloria” (Sorry Bill). The two of them were matched perfectly together. Just when you thought they were done, the legend Johnny Winter made an appearance to the stage. Though now legally blind and with some assistance to his chair, the 63 year old played a raucous version of Dylan’s “Highway 61”. Backed by Trucks and his band, Winter simply rode “Highway 61” into the sunset so to speak. Up next was, Robert Randolph & the Family Band. I’ve seen Robert & Co. a few times and was a little let down by his set. While good, I was hoping it would be the more thunderous, uplifting set I’ve seen in the past. The first of many blues masters of the day came onto the stage, Robert Cray. Robert has been around for upwards of 25 years and has no intention of slowing down. His set was soulful and heartfelt. It was only fitting that Cray was here for his second Crossroads appearance. Jimmy Vaughan, older brother of Stevie Ray Vaughan, came out to play a few numbers of his own with Cray’s band backing him. Jimmy Vaughan is very underrated as a guitarist and the mention of the name
Vaughan
instantly evokes images of younger brother, Stevie. At this time I was thinking this band needed a few more people in it (I’m joking), out comes Hubert Sumlin the great guitarist for the legendary Howlin’ Wolf. After a song or two by Sumlin, the master and living legend B.B. King came onto the stage. He got a standing ovation as he graciously waved and bowed to the crowd who continued to cheer. Finally the crowd settled down, B.B. picked up Lucille and played “Rock Me Baby”. Before the last song, B.B. gave a very sincere toast for his dear friend Eric Clapton who was watching King’s set from stage left. With the band playing softly in the background King went on to say “May I live forever, but may you live forever & a day, because I’d hate to be hear when you pass away He also went on to say “and when they lay me out to rest, may the last voices I hear be yours!”. It was a sobering appreciation of a dear friend and the 81 year old King stated he was no spring chicken anymore. It made me feel that much more appreciative of what I was witnessing. He then told the band to play louder and ripped into “The Thrill Is Gone”, King’s trademark song. This ended King’s set and he walked off the stage. Unfortunately he didn’t return for any other sets. After the first intermission of the day the show continued with John Mayer. While not knowing Mayer’s music, only knowing he possessed the needed skills to play this festival 2 times over, Mayer showed this
Chicago
crowd he could play with the best of them, literally. He played a lot of his newer stuff and someone yelled out “play some blues!” Mayer responded “I was, in my mind, but I know what you mean”. The band tore into the Ray Charles tune “I Don’t Need No Doctor” and the crowd was very pleased. He ended the set with the song “Gravity”, a favorite among his fans. Vince Gill arrived to the stage with a large band and proceeded to play his blend of country rock. Gill, who was at the Crossroads in 2004 returned this year to lend a hand. He got help from Albert Lee as they tore up a great version of “Country Boy”. Lee stayed out for a bit longer as Sheryl Crow made an appearance to the stage. She played “Strong Enough To Be My Man” with the help of Alison Kraus. Clapton came out for one of his few sit ins of the day and played “Tulsa Time” with Crow. For those who were there and were keen enough to notice a very beat up acoustic guitar sitting on the stage, knew that there would be at least one more guest to this already huge band on stage. Sure enough American icon Willie Nelson came out from the wings. He walked over to his trusty guitar “Trigger”, picked it up and waved to the crowd. He played a few songs with Gill & Crow and before it even started, the set was over. There’s just not enough time. Bill Murray referred to
Bridgeview
,
IL
all day long jokingly and while introducing the next band, he said that what Bridgeview lacked was a bit of
East L.A.
Enter Los Lobos. The band most notably known for their version of Ritchie Valen’s “La Bamba” chose to play their own material that day. The mood instantly went from mild to extra spicy. The layering of
Hidalgo
’s & Rosas’s instruments complimented the rest of the bands talents. Now in the final stretch of the show the heavy hitters started coming on stage. One Jeff Beck & Co. came on stage for an hour long set and amazed the entire crowd. Beck delved through his catalogue and played such tracks as "Because We've Ended As Lovers" and The Beatles song “A Day In The Life”. Beck’s guitar is basically an extension of his arm. The sounds you hear don’t seem to match the actions of Beck. His playing is effortless to say the least. His bassist that day, Tal Wilkenfeld sat in with Beck and amazed the crowd as well. She looks young enough to be in day camp, but she’s in her early 20’s and has a reputation of her own. There were no collaborations between Clapton and Beck unfortunately, but the next set made up for that. Eric Clapton and his band arrived to the stage with much anticipation. Armed with Trucks and Bramhill to compliment his guitar, the stage was set. For fans of Derek & The Dominos, they got a real treat with classics like “Any Day”, “Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad”, “Got To Get Better In A Little While” and “Key To The Highway”. The show also showcased a number of covers. In particular “Isn’t it a pity”, the George Harrison tune in which Clapton dedicated to longtime friend Harrison. Robbie Robertson made a rare appearance for a pair of songs with Clapton’s band, “Further On Up The Road” & “Who Do You Love” the later a tribute to the ailing Bo Diddley. Steve Winwood made his way to the stage and sat down behind his Hammond Organ. Backed by Clapton’s band he launched into Traffic’s “Pearly Queen”. Clapton made it a point to say he was excited about playing with Winwood and that they haven’t played together in 25 years. They continued with Blind Faith’s “Can’t Find My Way Home”, “Presence Of The Lord” and “Had To Cry Today”. This grouping of songs was like the cherry on a sundae, that is until Clapton went backstage and left Winwood to steer the ship. He did so with what might have been the highlight of the show for many. “Dear Mr. Fantasy” was his song of choice. When I think of Winwood, I think of a multi-instrumentalist & vocalist, not necessarily a lead guitarist. When it came time for the solos in Fantasy, he brought the crowd to a level that had not been reached all day. Clapton came back to the stage and they all finished up with the classic J.J. Cale’s “Cocaine”. One last time Billy Murray introduced the next and final act of the show. Dressed now in a Blues Brothers T-Shirt, he put it plainly “I’d like to turn it over to the local authorities”.
Chicago
’s own blues legend Buddy Guy took center stage with his band. Appropriately the set started off with “Dam Right I’ve Got The Blues”, the crowd fell in love with Guy’s set. How could you not? Guy is a master showman in every sense and knows how to entertain a crowd, even to this sold out crowd of 30,000. Nearing the end of the show, the preparations for the finale were starting to happen.
Vaughan
, Cray, Mayer, Winter, Sumlin, Trucks, Bramhill and of course Clapton took to the stage to help Buddy for a mandatory “Sweet Home Chicago”, with everyone trading licks. At about 10:45pm, Buddy and Mayer signaled over to the sound pit to see if there was time for one more. Fortunately there was. The final song of this all day masterpiece was “She’s Just 19”. As the crowd made their way out of
Toyota
Park
, one could not help but to think of the history that had just been witnessed. For all those who could not attend, a DVD will be released by years end.
www.crossroadsguitarfestival2007.com
Rod Snyder August/2007
At Chicago's own Toyota Park. I am refering to Eric Clapton's Crossroads Guitar Festival. An all day long eveny to raise money for his drug rehad facility in Antigua. It was held on July 28.
The festival was an all day affair starting at 11:50am & going till 11:00pm. It was one great artist after another, with no slow spots. I managed to shoot more pictures in 12 hours than I did the 4 days at Bonnaroo! All the things were in the right place & I just kept shooting. I need to limit my shooting or time the right shot a little better.
I will copy & paste a review I wrote up for an article. It's got some length to it, but I think it covers everything about the day.
The bad part of the trip was the travel. I was supposed to leave Philly at 5:21pm & the flight was delayed 5 hours! We sat on the runway for 3 hours before returning to the gate to deboard. I was very pissed off because I ended up missing the show at Buddy Guy's club, Legends. I was all set up to shoot it & still don't know if any special guests showed up. The flight ended up leaving at 11:15pm. I got into my room at 1:30am, Chicago time. Nice.
The flight home was worse if you can believe that. It was supposed to leave Chicago at 3:31pm. The gate & planes were changed 3 times. We get on the plane & have a narrow window to take off, but then a light comes on in the cockpit & we are stuck again. Mechanics came on the plane & were baffled by this light that wouldn't go off. They switched the part out but didn't work. They debaored us & eventually canceled the flight all together. I talked to work & told them I might not be in on Monday morning & then had Melanie book me the next earliest flight to Philly. It left at 5:45am the next day. I ended up getting a room at the airport Hilton for a cheap $300 bucks! I thought long & hard about going to Legends as I wanted to go there one last time before they relocate it at the end of the year. It would have been to costly between the cabs & shirts. I stayed in watched HBO & ordered room service.
The flight left on time the next day & got home fine.
So here is the link to the pictures & the article I copied & pasted below.
Crossroads Guitar Festival Pictures - July 28, 2007
Enjoy
SB
There are moments in life when one will say “This is once in a lifetime opportunity”. Fortunately this is not one of them. What happened on July 28 in
Bridgeview
,
IL
has happened once before in
Texas
in 2004.
I’m referring to Eric Clapton’s Crossroads Guitar Festival. The
Crossroads
Center
is a rehabilitation center located in
Antigua
for substance abuse, something Clapton knows a little bit about. The proceeds from the festival go towards the funding of the center. In 2004 the first Crossroads Festival was held at the Cotton Bowl in
Dallas
,
TX
, June 4-6 and featured many of the greatest guitarists from the past and present. This year’s festival was only one day but featured many of the same artists from the 2004 festival. The festival started promptly at 11:50am with special guest and emcee, Bill Murray. He started off by telling the crowd how we were in store for some great music, for a great cause. Then with a Strat hanging by his side launched into the “only song he knew how to play on guitar”, Van Morrison’s “Gloria”.
Murray
was far from the caliber of say Clapton, Beck or one Mr. Guy, but he gave it his all and pulled through… but then again this wasn’t meant to be taken seriously. He is a comedian after all. As he was nearing the end of the song he got a little help from one of his friends, Eric Clapton. They finished the song and Clapton talked about what was in store for the day. Sonny Landreth arrived on stage to a sold out crowd at
Toyota
Park
. He launched into his set and the crowd devoured it, eager to get the events of the day underway. John McLaughlin came on next. His special blend of Jazz fusion he played complimented Landreth’s set.
Alison Kraus & Union Station were next for a touch of
Bluegrass
. Accompanied by guitarist Jerry Douglas, they soothed what wounds were caused by the two bands prior to them. Doyle Bramhill II was up next. The Texan guitarist’s set was satisfying but could have been a bit more upbeat for my taste. He played seated in a chair. The chair may be standard during his regular shows, but I would save the sitting down for playing an acoustic set, especially in this setting. He did redeem himself later when he played with Clapton’s band. In between sets Bill Murray arrived on stage dressed in period Eric Clapton wardrobes to introduce the bands. When he introduced Derek Trucks he described him as “an American success story”. Son of Butch Trucks, longtime drummer for The Allman Brothers Band, Derek has come into his own right as a respected musician. His set was well received by the crowd but got a little extra help from Susan Tedeschi, musician and wife of Trucks. At one point she tore into a solo that left Trucks looking like
Murray
during “Gloria” (Sorry Bill). The two of them were matched perfectly together. Just when you thought they were done, the legend Johnny Winter made an appearance to the stage. Though now legally blind and with some assistance to his chair, the 63 year old played a raucous version of Dylan’s “Highway 61”. Backed by Trucks and his band, Winter simply rode “Highway 61” into the sunset so to speak. Up next was, Robert Randolph & the Family Band. I’ve seen Robert & Co. a few times and was a little let down by his set. While good, I was hoping it would be the more thunderous, uplifting set I’ve seen in the past. The first of many blues masters of the day came onto the stage, Robert Cray. Robert has been around for upwards of 25 years and has no intention of slowing down. His set was soulful and heartfelt. It was only fitting that Cray was here for his second Crossroads appearance. Jimmy Vaughan, older brother of Stevie Ray Vaughan, came out to play a few numbers of his own with Cray’s band backing him. Jimmy Vaughan is very underrated as a guitarist and the mention of the name
Vaughan
instantly evokes images of younger brother, Stevie. At this time I was thinking this band needed a few more people in it (I’m joking), out comes Hubert Sumlin the great guitarist for the legendary Howlin’ Wolf. After a song or two by Sumlin, the master and living legend B.B. King came onto the stage. He got a standing ovation as he graciously waved and bowed to the crowd who continued to cheer. Finally the crowd settled down, B.B. picked up Lucille and played “Rock Me Baby”. Before the last song, B.B. gave a very sincere toast for his dear friend Eric Clapton who was watching King’s set from stage left. With the band playing softly in the background King went on to say “May I live forever, but may you live forever & a day, because I’d hate to be hear when you pass away He also went on to say “and when they lay me out to rest, may the last voices I hear be yours!”. It was a sobering appreciation of a dear friend and the 81 year old King stated he was no spring chicken anymore. It made me feel that much more appreciative of what I was witnessing. He then told the band to play louder and ripped into “The Thrill Is Gone”, King’s trademark song. This ended King’s set and he walked off the stage. Unfortunately he didn’t return for any other sets. After the first intermission of the day the show continued with John Mayer. While not knowing Mayer’s music, only knowing he possessed the needed skills to play this festival 2 times over, Mayer showed this
Chicago
crowd he could play with the best of them, literally. He played a lot of his newer stuff and someone yelled out “play some blues!” Mayer responded “I was, in my mind, but I know what you mean”. The band tore into the Ray Charles tune “I Don’t Need No Doctor” and the crowd was very pleased. He ended the set with the song “Gravity”, a favorite among his fans. Vince Gill arrived to the stage with a large band and proceeded to play his blend of country rock. Gill, who was at the Crossroads in 2004 returned this year to lend a hand. He got help from Albert Lee as they tore up a great version of “Country Boy”. Lee stayed out for a bit longer as Sheryl Crow made an appearance to the stage. She played “Strong Enough To Be My Man” with the help of Alison Kraus. Clapton came out for one of his few sit ins of the day and played “Tulsa Time” with Crow. For those who were there and were keen enough to notice a very beat up acoustic guitar sitting on the stage, knew that there would be at least one more guest to this already huge band on stage. Sure enough American icon Willie Nelson came out from the wings. He walked over to his trusty guitar “Trigger”, picked it up and waved to the crowd. He played a few songs with Gill & Crow and before it even started, the set was over. There’s just not enough time. Bill Murray referred to
Bridgeview
,
IL
all day long jokingly and while introducing the next band, he said that what Bridgeview lacked was a bit of
East L.A.
Enter Los Lobos. The band most notably known for their version of Ritchie Valen’s “La Bamba” chose to play their own material that day. The mood instantly went from mild to extra spicy. The layering of
Hidalgo
’s & Rosas’s instruments complimented the rest of the bands talents. Now in the final stretch of the show the heavy hitters started coming on stage. One Jeff Beck & Co. came on stage for an hour long set and amazed the entire crowd. Beck delved through his catalogue and played such tracks as "Because We've Ended As Lovers" and The Beatles song “A Day In The Life”. Beck’s guitar is basically an extension of his arm. The sounds you hear don’t seem to match the actions of Beck. His playing is effortless to say the least. His bassist that day, Tal Wilkenfeld sat in with Beck and amazed the crowd as well. She looks young enough to be in day camp, but she’s in her early 20’s and has a reputation of her own. There were no collaborations between Clapton and Beck unfortunately, but the next set made up for that. Eric Clapton and his band arrived to the stage with much anticipation. Armed with Trucks and Bramhill to compliment his guitar, the stage was set. For fans of Derek & The Dominos, they got a real treat with classics like “Any Day”, “Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad”, “Got To Get Better In A Little While” and “Key To The Highway”. The show also showcased a number of covers. In particular “Isn’t it a pity”, the George Harrison tune in which Clapton dedicated to longtime friend Harrison. Robbie Robertson made a rare appearance for a pair of songs with Clapton’s band, “Further On Up The Road” & “Who Do You Love” the later a tribute to the ailing Bo Diddley. Steve Winwood made his way to the stage and sat down behind his Hammond Organ. Backed by Clapton’s band he launched into Traffic’s “Pearly Queen”. Clapton made it a point to say he was excited about playing with Winwood and that they haven’t played together in 25 years. They continued with Blind Faith’s “Can’t Find My Way Home”, “Presence Of The Lord” and “Had To Cry Today”. This grouping of songs was like the cherry on a sundae, that is until Clapton went backstage and left Winwood to steer the ship. He did so with what might have been the highlight of the show for many. “Dear Mr. Fantasy” was his song of choice. When I think of Winwood, I think of a multi-instrumentalist & vocalist, not necessarily a lead guitarist. When it came time for the solos in Fantasy, he brought the crowd to a level that had not been reached all day. Clapton came back to the stage and they all finished up with the classic J.J. Cale’s “Cocaine”. One last time Billy Murray introduced the next and final act of the show. Dressed now in a Blues Brothers T-Shirt, he put it plainly “I’d like to turn it over to the local authorities”.
Chicago
’s own blues legend Buddy Guy took center stage with his band. Appropriately the set started off with “Dam Right I’ve Got The Blues”, the crowd fell in love with Guy’s set. How could you not? Guy is a master showman in every sense and knows how to entertain a crowd, even to this sold out crowd of 30,000. Nearing the end of the show, the preparations for the finale were starting to happen.
Vaughan
, Cray, Mayer, Winter, Sumlin, Trucks, Bramhill and of course Clapton took to the stage to help Buddy for a mandatory “Sweet Home Chicago”, with everyone trading licks. At about 10:45pm, Buddy and Mayer signaled over to the sound pit to see if there was time for one more. Fortunately there was. The final song of this all day masterpiece was “She’s Just 19”. As the crowd made their way out of
Toyota
Park
, one could not help but to think of the history that had just been witnessed. For all those who could not attend, a DVD will be released by years end.
www.crossroadsguitarfestival2007.com
Rod Snyder August/2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't know what I'm more impressed with the pics or the review -dam.
Posted by: Snaporte | August 10, 2007 at 09:32 PM
Dam, made into prime positioning on Jambase. Nice large pics at the bottom too. I'd say the article got the Bill Murray pic up, probably wouldn't have happened without it. I like the BB shot at the bottom of the article. Great expression on his face.
Posted by: snaporte | August 21, 2007 at 08:11 AM
August 10th a day to remember: In one of the bloodiest events of the French Revolution, a mob overruns the royal Tuilerie Palace, murdering 600 Swiss Guards, while the Legislative Assembly votes to suspend the monarchy.
1821: Missouri is admitted to the Union as the 24th state. Under the Missouri Compromise of 1820, Missouri is allowed to permit slavery within its borders.
1831: William Driver, a ship's captain from Salem, Massachusetts, is credited with coining the term "Old Glory" in reference to the American flag.
1846: President James K. Polk signs legislation creating the Smithsonian Institution, with money left for that purpose in the will of English scientist James Smithson.
1921: At the age of 39, Franklin D. Roosevelt notices early signs of poliomyelitis at his summer home in New Brunswick, Canada. The disease will prevent him from ever walking unaided again.
1995: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols are indicted for the April bombing of an Oklahoma City federal building that killed 168 people and injured over 500 more.
Today September 2nd,
1666: The Great Fire of London starts in a baker's shop. The fire devastates the city, destroying many buildings, including Saint Paul's Cathedral and the Guildhall.
1864: Union armies led by General William Tecumseh Sherman occupy Atlanta, Georgia. They will burn much of the city before beginning their march to the Atlantic Ocean.
1945: On board the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay, Japanese officials make their formal surrender to the United States, ending the conflict between the two countries in World War II.
1945: Viet Minh forces, led by Ho Chi Minh, declare the independence of Vietnam from France, beginning an eight-year colonial war that will result in a partitioned country.
1969: Ho Chi Minh, leader of North Vietnam and architect of Vietnamese independence, dies at the age of 79.
31 BC: The forces of Mark Antony and Cleopatra are decisively defeated near Actium by the Roman army of Octavian (later known as Augustus), allowing Octavian to consolidate his rule of the Roman empire.
Posted by: Counting black crowes | September 02, 2007 at 08:20 AM
This older than your mom's cooter?
Posted by: Me | September 03, 2007 at 08:17 PM
Fuck you apple. For real. Really. Eat it!So I just got one of these high tech puppy's. A few upgrades and I'll be all Mac'd out. you can call me MAC DADDY! Well, Maybe MAC GRANDDADDY. Actually this photo and computer(the Apple 2). Is of the person who wrote the first computer virus. It was written in 1982 when this guy was in 9th grade. It made a poem come up on everyones screen who got the virus. It was transfered via floppy disc. They were the big floppy discs(they really used to be floppy). What we call floppy now was considered a hard disc.The hard disc was revolutionary I might add. Do we remember those days? Just a blast from the past-C
Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called users?
Clifford Stoll
Posted by: hello is this thing on | September 06, 2007 at 02:46 PM
Thanks for the intersting reading, I found something else that affects our daily lives....read up buddy!-Enjoy!( I finally made the comments longer than the post).
Nos. 06-1195 & 06-1196
================================================================
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
LAKHDAR BOUMEDIENE, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
GEORGE W. BUSH, et al.,
Respondents.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
KHALED A.F. AL ODAH, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES, et al.,
Respondents.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
On Writs Of Certiorari To The
United States Court Of Appeals
For The District Of Columbia Circuit
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
BRIEF OF THE CATO INSTITUTE AS
AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
TIMOTHY LYNCH
CATO INSTITUTE
1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 842-0200
Counsel of Record
================================================================
COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964
OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................. i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES........................................ ii
INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE............................. 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................... 1
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ..................................... 3
ARGUMENT............................................................... 3
I. THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS
GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION ... 3
II. THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS EXTENDS
TO PERSONS WHO ARE IMPRISONED
OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES ............. 7
III. ARTICLE III COURTS CAN AND SHOULD
REVIEW ACTS OF CONGRESS THAT
PURPORT TO SUSPEND THE WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS.......................................... 10
CONCLUSION............................................................ 12
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
CASES
Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963)........... 5
Bedlinger v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 3 Call. 461
(1803) ................................................................................ 5
Boumediene v. Bush, 476 F.3d 981 (2007)....................... 8, 9
Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936)......... 5
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004) ...........................11
Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286 (1969) ............................... 12
In re Territo, 156 F.2d 142 (1946) ........................................ 9
In re Jackson, 15 Mich. 417 (1867)...................................... 9
INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001) ................................. 4, 5
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)..................... 10
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) ............................ 12
Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995).............................. 6
New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713
(1971) .............................................................................. 12
People v. Goodwin, 1 Wheeler C.C. 470, 18 Johns.
187 (N.Y. Sup. 1820)......................................................... 5
Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211 (1995)......... 9
Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973) ......................... 12
Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004) ................................. 2, 8
Stout v. State, 36 Okla. 744, 130 P. 553 (1913) ................... 5
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259
(1990) ................................................................................ 7
Williams v. Commonwealth, 78 Ky. 93 (1879)..................... 5
iii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
CONSTITUTION, TREATIES, AND STATUTES
U.S. Const., art. I, §9...................................................passim
U.S. Const., art. I, §10.......................................................... 9
U.S. Const., amend. I ........................................................... 5
U.S. Const., amend. V .......................................................... 5
Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War, August 12, 1949, 75 U.N.T.S.
No. 972 .......................................................................... 1, 9
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-
148, 119 Stat. 2680 ........................................................... 9
Military Commissions Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-
366, 120 Stat. 2600..............................................2, 3, 9, 11
28 U.S.C. §2241 .................................................................... 2
MISCELLANEOUS
39 Am.Jur. 2d, Habeas Corpus, §5 .....................................11
Epstein, Richard, “Produce the Body,” Wall Street
Journal, October 25-26, 2006........................................... 7
Lawson, Gary, The Constitutional Case Against
Precedent, 17 Harv.J.L.Pub.Pol’y 232 (1994) ................ 10
Military Order, “Detention, Treatment, and Trial of
Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against
Terrorism,” 66 Fed. Reg. 57833 ....................................... 4
Neuman, Gerald, The Habeas Corpus Suspension
Clause After INS v. St. Cyr, 33 Colum.Hum.Rts.
L.Rev. 555 (2002) .......................................................... 6, 7
iv
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Paschal, Francis, The Constitution and Habeas
Corpus, 1970 Duke L.J. 605............................................. 6
Testimony of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales,
Hearing before Senate Judiciary Committee,
January 18, 2007.............................................................. 4
The Federalist No. 83........................................................... 6
1
INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE1
The Cato Institute was established in 1977 as a
nonpartisan public policy research foundation dedicated to
advancing the principles of individual liberty, free markets,
and limited government. Toward those ends, the Cato
Institute publishes books and studies, conducts conferences
and forums, publishes the annual Cato Supreme
Court Review, and files amicus briefs with the courts.
Because the instant cases raise vital questions about the
Great Writ of habeas corpus and separation of powers
principles, the case is of central concern to the Cato
Institute.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the
President dispatched U.S. armed forces to Afghanistan to
attack al-Qaeda base camps and to subdue the Taliban
regime. Since the invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. military
has taken thousands of prisoners. Most have been
imprisoned at U.S. facilities in that theatre, while others
have been transferred to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba. The President has determined that the
Guantanamo prisoners are not entitled to prisoner-of-war
status under the Geneva Convention Relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War, August 12, 1949, 75
U.N.T.S. No. 972.
1 The parties consent to the filing of this Amicus brief have been
lodged with the Clerk of this Court. In accordance with Rule 37.6,
Amicus states that no counsel for either party has authored this brief in
whole or in part, and no person or entity, other than the Amicus, has
made a monetary contribution to the preparation of this brief.
2
In 2002, several relatives of certain prisoners filed
habeas corpus petitions in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia challenging the legality of their
imprisonment at Guantanamo. These prisoners did not
challenge the authority of the President and the military
to take suspected members of hostile forces into custody,
but they did allege that they had never been a combatant
against the U.S. and that they had been denied access to
counsel and access to the civilian court system. The
Government responded to those claims by urging the
District Court to summarily dismiss the petitions. According
to the Government, recognizing jurisdiction over the
prisoners’ habeas claims would “intrude” on the power of
both the Executive and the Congress. This Court heard
this controversy in 2004. In Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466
(2004), this Court held that the federal habeas statute, 28
U.S.C. §2241, extends to prisoners held by the U.S. military
at the Guantanamo Bay facility.
After Rasul, Congress modified §2241 by enacting the
Military Commissions Act, Pub. L. No. 109-366, 120 Stat.
2600. That law deprives courts of jurisdiction to consider
habeas claims. Petitioners maintain that such deprivation
is unconstitutional. The Government, in turn, renews its
argument that the courts cannot “intrude” on the power of
the Executive to prosecute a war or Congress’s power to
delineate the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Thus, this
Court must now confront grave questions concerning
separation of powers principles and the boundaries of the
constitutional provision for the writ of habeas corpus.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
3
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
To resolve the grave issue at stake in this case, this
Court should start with first principles. To begin with, the
Constitution does guarantee the existence of the habeas
writ. Second, the writ does extend to prisoners in facilities
that are not on U.S. soil. Third, this Court can and should
review the validity of any act of Congress that expressly or
impliedly invokes one of the exceptions to the constitutional
rule against the suspension of the writ of habeas
corpus.
Congress does have the power to prescribe rules
affecting the writ of habeas corpus. To prevent forum shopping,
for example, Congress could designate a particular
court to consider habeas petitions from the prison facility at
Guantanamo Bay. The Constitution, however, limits Congress’s
power over the writ of habeas corpus. The Suspension
Clause limits the revocation of habeas corpus to times of
rebellion or invasion. Congress has not invoked those exceptions.
Thus, the Military Commissions Act, which purports to
withdraw the jurisdiction of federal courts over the Petitioners’
habeas claims, is unconstitutional.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
ARGUMENT
I. THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS GUARANTEED
BY THE CONSTITUTION.
This Court should begin with first principles. The writ
of habeas corpus is guaranteed by the Constitution.
Unfortunately, the Government seems to deny this fundamental
proposition. It is not the Government’s central
contention in this case, to be sure, but that contention is
nonetheless lurking in the background. In cryptic testimony
4
before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales observed “[T]here is no express grant of
habeas in the Constitution. There is [only] a prohibition
against taking it away.” Testimony of Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales, Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee;
Subject: Oversight of the U.S. Department of
Justice (January 18, 2007). The Attorney General may
well subscribe to a viewpoint that was expressed in a
dissenting opinion in this Court several years ago. See INS
v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 337 (2001) (Scalia, J., dissenting).2
In any event, such a cramped interpretation of the constitutional
text is woefully misguided.
Article I, section 9 of the Constitution provides, “The
Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the
public Safety may require it.” This Court should not waver
from the proposition that the habeas writ is grounded in
the Constitution itself. This Court should approach the
text of the Suspension Clause in light of its purpose.
Consider, for example, the consequences for freedom of the
press if one were to jump to the conclusion that taxation is
not censorship. Special newspaper taxes could be justified
with the argument that the taxes do not prohibit anyone
from saying anything. The Government might also attempt
to suppress the ideas expressed in newspapers by
interfering with the ability of writers, reporters, and
newspaper owners to coordinate and disseminate their
ideas by restricting the production and delivery process.
2 Note also the presidential proclamation that purports to deny
prisoners access to the courts. “Detention, Treatment, and Trial of
Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism,” Section 7(b)(2), 66
Fed. Reg. 57833.
5
Fortunately, this Court has interpreted the First Amendment
broadly in response to such threats. See, e.g., Bantam
Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 65, n. 6 (1963)
(“The constitutional guarantee of freedom of the press
embraces the circulation of books as well as their publication
. . . ”); Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233
(1936) (invalidating selective taxation of the press).
Consider also the double jeopardy provision of the
Fifth Amendment, which states: “nor shall any person be
subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of
life or limb.” The “life or limb” proviso might conceivably
be read in such as way as to permit multiple prosecutions
and punishments in all of the situations in which people
are facing criminal allegations that would result in “mere”
imprisonment, but the courts have properly resisted such
a construction as contrary to the central purpose of the
provision. See Bedlinger v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 3
Call. 461, 468 (1803) (opinion of Roane, J.); People v.
Goodwin, 1 Wheeler C.C. 470, 18 Johns. 187 (N.Y. Sup.
1820); Stout v. State, 36 Okla. 744, 130 P. 553, 557 (Okla.
1913); Williams v. Commonwealth, 78 Ky. 93 (1879).
Text aside, it is true that four of the state ratifying
conventions objected to the proposed Constitution because
the charter failed to affirmatively guarantee a right to
habeas corpus, St. Cyr, 533 U.S. at 337 (Scalia, J., dissenting),
but such historical material ought to constitute the
starting point of an inquiry into the original understanding
of the Constitution. The crucial point is to discern how
the defenders of the proposed Constitution responded to
such objections. That is, did the Federalists admit and
defend the absence of a guarantee, or did they seek to
rebut Antifederalist objections as unfounded or mistaken?
If the latter, the appropriate conclusion is that the drafters
and ratifiers of the Constitution approved the construction
6
offered in response. See Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70,
126-127 (1995) (Thomas, J., concurring).
Professor Gerald L. Neuman has investigated this
question and he found that the Federalists “repeatedly
assured their opponents that the Suspension Clause
protected the writ legally, not just politically.” See Neuman,
The Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause After INS v.
St. Cyr, 33 Colum.Hum.Rts.L.Rev. 555, 579 (2002). To
begin with, when James Madison discussed trial by jury,
he specifically addressed Antifederalist objections to the
lack of a constitutional provision for trial by jury in civil
cases. Among other things, he reasoned:
But I must acknowledge that I cannot readily
discern the inseparable connection between the
existence of liberty, and the trial by jury in civil
cases. Arbitrary impeachments, arbitrary methods
of prosecuting pretended offenses, and arbitrary
punishments upon arbitrary convictions,
have ever appeared to me to be the great engines
of judicial despotism; and these have all relation
to criminal proceedings. The trial by jury in
criminal cases, aided by the habeas-corpus act,
seems therefore to be alone concerned in the
question. And both of these are provided for, in
the most ample manner, in the plan of the convention.
The Federalist No. 83 (emphasis added).
Other Federalists made similar representations. During
the Virginia Convention, Governor Randolph stated, “That
[habeas] privilege is secured here by the Constitution, and
is only to be suspended in cases of extreme emergency.” See
Neumann, supra, at 579 n. 109 (citation omitted). During
the Pennsylvania Convention, James Wilson observed that
“the right of habeas corpus was secured by a particular
provision in its favor.” Paschal, The Constitution and
7
Habeas Corpus, 1970 Duke L.J. 605, 611, n. 23 (citing 2
Elliot’s Debates at 454-455).
As Professor Neuman has noted, it would have been
incongruous for the Framers of the Constitution to have
designed a habeas safeguard against the majoritarian
abuse of temporary suspension, while “trusting the political
process to police the more egregious abuse of permanent
total or partial abrogations.” Neuman, supra, at 579
n. 109. In sum, the Attorney General’s oblique contention
that the Constitution does not guarantee the existence of
the habeas writ is without merit.
II. THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS EXTENDS TO
PERSONS WHO ARE IMPRISONED OUTSIDE
OF THE UNITED STATES.
The Government argues that the habeas writ does not
extend to persons imprisoned outside of the United States.
This claim is also erroneous. It is generally true that the
safeguards of the American Bill of Rights do not apply to
noncitizens who are not on U.S. soil, United States v.
Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990), but it is simply
incorrect to analyze the issue in this case in terms of the
“constitutional rights of aliens.” At its core, habeas is a
separation of powers principle. To be sure, habeas actions
involve the prisoner, but only indirectly. The real action is
between the judicial branch and the executive branch of the
American government.3 Thus, when the writ has not been
suspended, a prisoner must have an opportunity to present a
petition to a court that his incarceration is mistaken or
3 See Richard A. Epstein, “Produce the Body,” Wall Street Journal,
October 7-8, 2006.
8
unlawful. Here, the President and the Secretary of Defense
are the custodians. The fact that the prisoners are
noncitizens is beside the point. So too is the location of
their jail cell.4
This idea is hardly a novel innovation in the law of
habeas corpus. Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466, 478-479
(2004). Indeed, Judge Cooley emphasized the jurisdictional
component of the custodian in 1867. Here is an excerpt
from Judge Cooley’s opinion:
“The important fact to be observed in regard to
the mode of procedure upon this [habeas] writ is,
that it is directed to, and served upon, not the
person confined, but his jailor. It does not reach
the former except through the latter. The officer
or person who serves it does not unbar the prison
doors, and set the prisoner free, but the court relieves
him by compelling the oppressor to release
his constraint. . . . This is the ordinary mode of
affording relief, and if other means are resorted
to, they are only auxiliary to those which are
usual. The place of confinement is, therefore, not
important to the relief, if the guilty party is
within reach of process, so that by the power of
the court he can be compelled to release his grasp.
The difficulty of affording redress is not increased
by the confinement being beyond the limits
of the state [of Michigan], except as greater
distance may affect it. The important question is,
where is the power of control exercised?”
4 Amicus will not burden this Court by reviewing the early common
law precedents. That law has already been well summarized by Judge
Rogers. Boumediene v. Bush, 476 F.3d 981 (2007) (Rogers, J., dissenting).
9
In re Jackson, 15 Mich. 417, 439-440 (1867) (emphasis
added). In this case, the “power of control” for prisoners
held by the U.S. military is in our capital city, Washington,
D.C.
There are certainly legitimate practical issues that
will arise in habeas litigation. In previous wars, there
were strong incentives for enemy personnel to remain in
uniform even if there was a strong likelihood of imminent
capture. Staying in uniform meant qualification for prisoner-
of-war status under the terms of the Geneva Convention.
That legal framework kept the vast majority of cases
outside of the American court system. (A few, of course,
crept in. See In re Territo, 156 F.2d 142 (1946)). The war
with the al-Qaeda terrorist network will entail a steady
influx of cases in which the Government will accuse a
“civilian” of actually being an enemy combatant. With the
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-148, 119
Stat. 2680, and the Military Commissions Act of 2006,
Pub. L. No. 109-366, 120 Stat. 2600, Congress has sought
to address several practical legal problems, such as forum
shopping by prisoners. However, insofar as the Military
Commissions Act violates the core principles of habeas
review, those statutory provisions are void.5
5 Amicus Curiae will not burden this Court by repeating arguments
about the problems with the Combatant Status Review Tribunals.
See Boumediene v. Bush, 476 F.3d 981, 1005-1007 (2007) (Rogers,
J., dissenting). See also Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211,
233-236 (1995) (distinguishing an unconstitutional statute from
statutes which simply reflect and confirm the courts’ own inherent and
discretionary powers). Further, as Judge Rogers noted below, in
addition to the habeas corpus provision there are several other structural
limitations on the powers of Congress, such as the Ex Post Facto
Clause and the Bill of Attainder Clause, which apply broadly. Does the
Government maintain that Congress can enact a bill of attainder
(Continued on following page)
10
The Government’s case rests upon Johnson v. Eisentrager,
339 U.S. 763 (1950). Amicus Curiae respectfully
submits that this case was incorrectly decided and ought
to be overruled for the reasons set forth in Justice Black’s
dissent.6
III. ARTICLE III COURTS CAN AND SHOULD
REVIEW ACTS OF CONGRESS THAT PURPORT
TO SUSPEND THE WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS.
The Suspension Clause clearly contemplates exigent
circumstances in which the “public Safety” will require the
Executive to move swiftly against persons who are perceived
to be dangerous. In those situations, it is likely that
the Executive will not be able to comply with constitutional
norms for every search and arrest. The suspension
of the writ will thus excuse otherwise illegal arrests and
dragnet tactics because emergency circumstances can
warrant such actions.
As long as the writ of habeas corpus is not suspended,
however, the Executive must follow constitutional norms.7
against, say, any European, as long as that person is not on U.S. soil? If
not, why not?
6 Justice Black wrote, “The Court is fashioning wholly indefensible
doctrine if it permits the executive branch, by deciding where its
prisoners will be tried and imprisoned, to deprive all federal courts of
their power to protect against a federal executive’s illegal incarcerations.”
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763, 795 (1950) (Black, J.,
dissenting). See also Gary Lawson, The Constitutional Case Against
Precedent, 17 Harv.J.L.Pub.Pol’y 23 (1994).
7 To be clear, Amicus Curiae does not dispute the authority of the
military to kill or capture potentially hostile persons in a zone of active
combat.
11
“Thus, it has been held that in the absence of Congressional
action a writ of habeas corpus cannot be denied in a proper
case even in wartime. 39 Am.Jur. 2d, Habeas Corpus, §5, p.
206 (citing Ex Parte Stewart, 47 F.Supp. 410 (1942)).
When Congress enacted the Military Commissions
Act, it did not expressly avail itself of one of the enumerated
exceptions in the Suspension Clause. Since a suspension
of the writ would unquestionably be among the most
stupendous measures that could be considered by members
of Congress, it would be wholly inappropriate for this
Court to hold that the availability of the writ could turn on
so thin a reed as inadvertance or an inference from a
legislative scheme. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 57-63, Hamdan v.
Rumsfeld, 126 S.Ct. 2749 (2006).
But even if Congress had expressly invoked one of the
enumerated exceptions to the Suspension Clause, the
constitutional inquiry must continue. Article III courts can
and should review the validity of such legislation. Contra
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 594 n. 4 (2004) (Thomas,
J., dissenting). The Framers of the Constitution could
have easily written a provision that would entrust the
weighty decision to suspend habeas corpus to the sole
discretion of the legislature. They did not craft such a
provision. Instead, the Framers established limits and
prohibitions on the exercise by Congress of certain specific
forms of legislative power, including the circumstances in
which the Great Writ could be suspended. The Suspension
Clause provides, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas
Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of
Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”
(Emphasis added). The Framers did not consider such
limitations to be mere expressions of sentiment. They were
to be legally enforceable limits. As Chief Justice John
12
Marshall noted two centuries ago, “To what purpose are
powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation
committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be
passed by those intended to be restrained?” Marbury v.
Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 176 (1803). It is imperative that this
Court eschew a deferential posture and stand, in words of
James Madison, as an “impenetrable bulwark against
every assumption of power in the Legislative or Executive.”
New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 718-
719 n. 5 (1971) (citation omitted).
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
CONCLUSION
The American Constitution affords our Commanderin-
Chief latitude to take enemy personnel into custody in a
war zone. Once the prisoners are disarmed and jailed,
there is no military exigency. If the Executive elects to
incarcerate a prisoner for an extended period of time, he
must be prepared to persuade an Article III judge that
there are good reasons for such a detention. Congress can
address some of the practical problems that may arise
from habeas litigation, such as forum shopping. If habeas
litigation is abused or becomes excessive and burdensome,
Congress can also establish a system of purely discretionary
review. So long as a prisoner has the ability to petition
an Article III court, and that tribunal possesses the power
to review the legality of the detention, as well as the power
to discharge the prisoner, the Great Writ will retain its
vitality as a bulwark of liberty. See Preiser v. Rodriguez,
411 U.S. 475 (1973); Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286 (1969).
In the instant cases, Congress overstepped the boundary
established by the Suspension Clause by attempting to
13
withdraw federal court jurisdiction over petitions for writs
of habeas corpus. For the foregoing reasons, the judgments
below should be reversed.
Respectfully submitted,
TIMOTHY LYNCH
CATO INSTITUTE
1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 842-0200
Counsel of Record
Posted by: Enjoy! | September 07, 2007 at 08:02 PM
Touche, but you might want to check your's loser.
Posted by: Leo Tolstoy | September 07, 2007 at 09:30 PM
Posted by: Maybe a post in high def? | September 09, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Post a Comment