As of this morning, the state-run Bagdad television station has gone off the air. Baghdad radio is still broadcasting, but playing "only national music and songs in praise of Saddam." Iraq's international satellite station stopped broadcasting a few days ago.

Eric Muller at IsThatLegal is guest blogging at the Volokh Conspiracy. He doesn't want to let the issue of the FBI-Iraqi interviews rest. He challenges us and Atrios to tell him what's so bad about the interviews.

Eric thinks the interviews are fine. We don't. We pretty much said all we had to say here. But in a nutshell, here's our reasons:

The program amounts to racial and ethnic profiling. It's viewing immigrants and those born in Iraq with suspicion, a guilty-until-proven-innocent approach.

It is morally offensive to us in the same way Mcarthyism was because many of those being questioned are American citizens, some who have been here for decades or who left Iraq as little children. Only by virtue of their heritage are they being asked questions like, Do you support Saddam Hussein? Do you know any Saddam sympathizers? What is your religious affiliation? What are the names and addresses of your Iraqi family members living in the United States?

It's not so different than, "Are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party?" "Is any member of your family a member of the communist party?" Both have "witchhunt" aspects to them.

While the interviews were supposedly voluntary, many Iraqis felt threatened and intimidated. They were discouraged from seeking legal counsel.

There's also the issue of how the Government assembled its database of 50,000 people in America who were born in Iraq. Was it census records? We don't know, but we don't much like the idea of the Government pressing a computer button to single out a specific group for rounding up and questioning.

The Guardian provides details on why it is likely Saddam was killed in yesterday's blast:

Accordings to the reports President Saddam and his sons Qusay and Uday were seen walking into a restaurant in the al-Mansour district of Baghdad early yesterday afternoon. The meeting, with up to 50 members of the top Ba'ath leadership is thought to have taken place in a bunker either below the restaurant or in an adjacent building. A voice sounding like President Saddam's had been overheard discussing escape routes out of the city. According to one report, his voice was intercepted because he was using an encrypted communication system sold to him by a British company in the 1980s, which British intelligence has since been able to decode. The belief that the Iraqi leader was at the meeting was reinforced by US intelligence sources within the Iraqi leadership. The intelligence was relayed almost immediately to central command headquarters in Qatar, who sent the co-ordinates to one of its B-1 stealth bombers, which are constantly patrolling the skies over Iraq in search of such targets of opportunity.

Who dresses Richard Perle and prods him to lose weight? Read all about Eleana Benedor, who wants her right wing hawks to look good on tv and the lecture circuit. If this story weren't so pathetic, it would be funny.

"I’m very meticulous," said Ms. Benador, a diminutive woman in her 40’s who is a publicist to neoconservative stars. "Clothing. Attitude. Hair style. I’m always fussy about it. Some of them, if they’re putting on weight, very gently I will go to them and say, ‘You have two choices: You go to my doctor who makes you lose weight, or you buy a new suit.’ Very gently." Ms. Benador, a Peruvian-born New Yorker who runs a one-woman publicity firm for experts on national security, foreign policy and the Middle East, noted that her star client, Richard Perle, the former chairman of the Defense Policy Board, had shown marked improvement. "I think we have seen that he’s losing weight," she said in her heavily accented English. "I’ve looked at him."

Sami al-Arian, the Palestinian professor from Tampa who is charged with raising money for the militant Palestinian Islamic Jihad, was assigned two court-appointed attorneys Monday. A ruling on his request for bond is pending.

If the Judge orders bond, will the Government accept it? No way. Here's their plan:

The government has said if al-Arian is granted bond, they will move him to an immigration detention center and try to deport him for visa violations.

Why bother having a bail statute and federal judges if Ashcroft and his minions at the Justice Department can ignore them?

MSNBC (Lester Holt anchoring) reports that U.S. officials have told them they are "confident" Saddam Hussein and his sons were in the building the U.S. bombed today. CNN reports on the bombing here. MSNBC's web report is here.

The AP reports that,

U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said American intelligence learned Monday morning of a high-level meeting in Baghdad between senior Iraqi intelligence officials and, possibly, Saddam and his two sons, Qusai and Odai. The intelligence was passed to U.S. Central Command, which sent aircraft to drop bunker-busting bombs on the target.

It may take a while to confirm whether Saddam and/or his sons were there because the building has been reduced to rubble.

Update: David Schuster of MSNBC is now reporting there are bunkers in the building--tunnels underneath that could have an exit--so it is possible Saddam got out.before the bombing. Andrea Mitchell reports there was a 45 minute lag time and Saddam could have gotten out during that time.

[ed. note: edited to include link to quoted AP article]

At a hearing today in Portland, Oregon, U.S. Districrt Court Judge Robert Jones ordered that Mike Hawash will be detained until April 29 when he is scheduled to appear before a grand jury and answer questions.

The hearing was closed to the public. Lawyers were ordered gagged. In a written ruling after the hearing, the Judge said,""I conclude by clear and convincing evidence that the material witness must be detained, but not indefinitely."

Hawash, a software contractor for Intel Corp., is being held in relation to a case that the Federal Bureau of Investigation says it cannot discuss because of court rules, which it also cannot discuss. "We are just outraged. We cannot believe that the government can hold a guy with a wife, three kids, a house and a U.S. passport for another three weeks without charges," said Steve McGeady, Hawash's former boss at Intel who is arguing for his release.

About 150 of Hawash's supporters protested at the courthouse today. Update: Here is the text of the Judge's Order. We misread the Reuters article we cited above. It states:

West Bank-born Maher "Mike" Hawash, a U.S. citizen for 15 years, will be detained as a material witness for grand jury testimony until April 29, Judge Robert Jones, U.S. District Judge for the District of Oregon, said in an order after a hearing behind closed doors with a gag order slapped on lawyers for both sides.

The Judge's order makes it clear that Hawash is either to be deposed or appear before the grand juryto answer questions on April 25, and that another secret detention hearing will be held April 29.

I hereby direct the United States Attorney (1) to perpetuate the witness' testimony by deposition; or (2) present the witness before the grand jury for testimony with or without immunity not later than April 25, 2003. A closed detention hearing will be held April 29, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 14B.

Thanks to the Portland Communique for setting us straight in the comments below. You can view pictures of the protest here .

Update: Here's more from Tuesday's Oregonian.

The 2003 Pulitzer Prizes for Journalism have been announced: Cornelia Grubman and the Chicago Tribune has won the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for editorial writing for this series of editorials against the death penalty.

Grumman credited her prize to the work of investigative reporters Steve Mills, Maurice Possley and Ken Armstrong, who spent years uncovering problems in the capital punishment system and worked to free some former death-row inmates. "They laid the groundwork for reform in Illinois, and I was just kind of making the argument,'' Grumman said. "I feel like my work has been a footnote to the book they wrote … just the last chapter calling for reform for all the problems they detailed," Grumman said. "My hat's off to them. They are my heroes."

Mills, Possely and Armstrong are our heroes too.

It's shades of 1969 out in Oakland. Police today fired rubber bullets at 750 war protesters to disperse them.

[This is] believed to be the first use of the projectiles against U.S. protesters since the American-led war on Iraq began.

Several people suffered minor injuries and demonstrators complained that police overreacted because protesters had simply blocked access to a firm they claimed was profiting from the war in Iraq when police shot rubber bullets and wooden pellets into the crowd.

One man lifted up his shirt to show a welt about the size of a baseball, and several were hit as they were moving from the scene, as evidenced by large bruises on their backs.

"I have been to many protests over the years, and I have never seen police resort to shooting people because they didn't like where they were standing," said Scott Fleming, 29, a lawyer hit several times in the back. "They had loaded guns and started charging."

Police justified their actions by saying they gave a final dispersing order. That is debated by some of those present at the protest.

Susan Quinlan was hit with pellets twice in the back. "I never heard any warning to disperse. They pursued us and shot us as we walked away," she said.

Some other comments:

"This was not professional, to say the least," said Joel Tena, a constituent liaison for Oakland's vice mayor. "I was afraid for the safety of the protesters and concerned that a nonviolent protest had turned violent at the hands of police." Leone Reinbold, a spokeswoman for Direct Action to Stop the War which organized the protest, said she saw a policeman run his motorcycle into one woman and another man get hit with a rubber bullet to the nose.

Update: Here's a photo of a woman who was struck in the face by a police projectile. Not a pretty sight.

This just in from Drug Policy Alliance:

Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) is at this very moment attempting to sneak the RAVE Act into conference committee on the National AMBER Alert Network Act of 2003 (S151). S151 is a popular bill about child abduction and has nothing to do with drug issues. S151 has already been passed by the Senate and House and is now in Conference. In contrast, the RAVE Act has not passed even one single committee this year. It did pass a committee last year, but was so controversial two Senators withdrew their sponsorship after the vote.

This means that if the RAVE Act passes the conference committee, it is likely to become law without ever having a hearing, a debate or a vote. Drug Policy Alliance has been told that Senator Biden has told other conference committee members, incorrectly, that the ACLU is no longer in opposition to the action. He also has told conferees that nightclub owners now support him (on the basis of one group that switched sides). If the act makes it into the conference language it is likely to become law. It must be stopped now.

PHONE YOUR SENATORS and Conference Committee Members (Background
information below). DO IT NOW. If you do not respond to this alert, the controversial RAVE Act is likely to become law and it will be much harder to fix.

ACTIONS TO TAKE:

Here are the details of the Rave Act and the Clean-Up Act from Drug Policy Alliance:

Congress is considering two pieces of legislation that could effectively ban live music and dancing, while throwing innocent people like you in jail. If enacted, either bill could prevent you from hearing your favorite band or DJ live. Every musical style would be affected, including rock and roll, Hip Hop, country, and electronic music. The proposed laws could also shut down hemp festivals, circuit parties, and other events government officials don’t like. Both bills would allow overzealous prosecutors to send innocent people to jail for the crimes of others. The two bills are the RAVE Act (H.R. 718) and the CLEAN-UP Act (H.R. 834). Both could be passed this year without your help.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers continues its effort to stop the Feeney Amendment by lobbying individual members of Congress, notifying federal judges, and helping to bring about favorable editorials.

The conference committee (comprised of select members of the house and senate judiciary committees) will meet tomorrow afternoon to hammer out a final bill.

If the Feeney Amendment makes it out of conference committee, it will be extremely difficult to stop. Now is the time to notify your federal judges and lobby your members of congress -- particularly if you are represented by any of the republican conferees. Be sure to call their attention to the federal judicial conference letter in opposition.

The judicial conference letter, the Washington Post and New York Times editorials, a list of the conferees with contact information, and other related documents are available on NACDL's comprehensive and up-to-date web page.

Background of Feeney Amendment to W. 151:

The House of Representatives passed legislation on March 27 that would, among other things, radically limit judicial discretion to grant downward departures from the federal sentencing guidelines. This legislation -- sometimes referred to as the Feeney Amendment -- constitutes an extraordinary transfer of power to federal prosecutors, dramatic changes to the laws and procedures that govern sentencing and a drastic encroachment on the independence of the federal judiciary. It places virtually all sentencing discretion in the hands of federal prosecutors. The amendment was attached to child abduction legislation at the last minute in an effort to avoid a debate of its merits and a discussion of its flaws. No input from the sentencing commission, the bar or federal judges was sought.

Here's more, from another defender email we just received: