San Francisco no longer will report to immigration authorities juveniles suspected of being in the United States illegally when they are arrested on a felony charge if they can show they have family ties to the Bay Area, are enrolled in school and are not repeat offenders, Mayor Ed Lee said Tuesday.
The edict creates a middle ground between the hard-line position of Lee’s predecessor, Gavin Newsom, who directed city law enforcement officers to report all arrested juveniles to federal authorities for possible deportation, and the Board of Supervisors, which backed a more liberal policy.
Supervisors passed a law in 2009 intended to prevent the city from automatically cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement unless the juvenile had been convicted of a felony – not just arrested. Newsom vetoed the law and the board overrode the veto, but he refused to enforce it.
“I’ve had to take care in balancing the issue of public safety and also due process,” Lee said.
He said his policy, revealed during his “question time” before the Board of Supervisors, reflects the spirit and values of San Francisco’s 22-year-old city sanctuary policy, which aims to create a safe refuge for immigrants, whether documented or not.
Bittersweet moment Lee’s policy, which will be carried out by the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department, was met with a combination of appreciation and disappointment by immigrant rights advocates and supervisors who back the more liberal policy adopted by the board but blocked by Newsom.
“It’s a bittersweet moment,” said Angela Chan, staff attorney for the Asian Law Caucus, for which the mayor once worked. “We appreciate Mayor Lee for taking a great first step, but it doesn’t go far enough.”
The man traveling from Chicago to San Francisco carried no luggage, bought a one-way ticket and was a citizen of Yemen (a place known as a hotbed of jihad activity), yet he apparently rang no bells for TSA employees. They must have been busy groping toddlers.
One lesson is that we taxpayers and ticket-buyers are financing a multi-billion-dollar TSA system that is politically correct window dressing, incapable of spotting an obviously suspicious character. Not that the fact is news, but this case is pretty egregious.
A Yemeni immigrant who allegedly tried to break into the locked cockpit of an American Airlines flight bound for San Francisco carried no luggage with him, prosecutors said today as a judge ordered him held without bail on the grounds that he was a threat to the community.
Rageh Ahmed Mohammed Al-Murisi, 28, who lived briefly in Vallejo before moving to New York, carried only $47 in cash, a variety of valid and expired documents from New York and California and two postdated checks, Assistant U.S. Attorney Elise Becker told U.S. Magistrate James Larson in San Francisco.
He has relatives in Vallejo, Becker said, but they did not know he was en route to the Bay Area.
Al-Murisi repeatedly yelled, “Allah Akbar,” Arabic for “God is great,” when he strode toward the cockpit of the Boeing 737 and tried to force open the door as the plane approached San Francisco International Airport on Sunday night, Becker said.
The federal prosecutor noted that the Arabic phrase has been used by Islamic individuals in other high-profile crimes, including al Qaeda operatives during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the American-born Muslim who opened fire at Fort Hood, Texas, in November 2009, killing 13 U.S. soldiers.
“The defendant poses a significant threat,” Becker said. “He attempted to enter the cockpit right before a critical part of the flight.”
Larson agreed, rejecting arguments by Al-Murisi’s attorney, Assistant Federal Public Defender Elizabeth Falk, that the government had not shown that her client was a danger to the public.
Al-Murisi, who appeared in court with an Arabic interpreter, is charged with interfering with a flight crew. He was ordered to return to court Friday for a detention hearing.
Outside court, Ahmed Almoraissi, 25, of Vallejo, said his cousin was not a terrorist and has worked as a math teacher in Yemen, where his wife and children live. Almoraissi said he was at a loss to explain Al-Murisi’s behavior.
“He’s a very normal guy,” Almoraissi said. “He has no intent of hurting nobody. I don’t know what happened on the plane. It doesn’t make sense. When I first heard about it, I couldn’t believe it.”
Authorities have not outlined a possible motive in the incident. Becker, however, said there were enough suspicious circumstances to justify keeping Al-Murisi in custody.
He did not tell his cousins in Vallejo that he was coming from New York, and none of his belongings were at his relatives’ home, the prosecutor said.
Relatives say Al-Murisi once lived on Sonoma Boulevard in Vallejo – next to the Islamic Center of Vallejo – but moved to New York about a year ago in hopes of finding a job to support his family.
Al-Murisi arrived in the United States on an immigrant visa in January 2010 and has a permanent residency card, Becker said. He obtained driver’s licenses in both New York and California and has two learner’s permits in New York, the prosecutor said without elaborating.
Al-Murisi carried two postdated checks, one dated May 15 for $5,000 and the other dated June 20 for $8,000, Becker said. Besides that, he had only $47 and an Apple charger on him, and had no luggage, keys or cell phone, she said.
The incident began about 8:50 p.m. Sunday when American Airlines Flight 1561, carrying 156 passengers and six crew members from O’Hare International Airport in Chicago, was about a half hour from landing at San Francisco.
Al-Murisi walked quickly to the front of the plane, tried the door of the cockpit door handle and then rammed the door with his shoulder, prompting flight attendants, two retired-law enforcement officials and an off-duty American Airlines pilot to jump from their seats to help subdue him. Al-Murisi suffered minor abrasions.
Before boarding the San Francisco-bound plane, Al-Murisi flew into Chicago on a separate American Airlines flight from LaGuardia Airport in New York, airline officials said.
There was a disturbing terrorist-lite attack on an airliner that landed in San Francisco Sunday night, although not all news reports included the important Islamo-details. The KGO written report below doesn’t mention the fact that the agitated Arab was yelling “Allahu Akbar” as he tried to smash the cockpit door, even though the video version showed a passenger who described that vital item.
Perhaps the station left out the Islam part to avoid inciting anti-Muslim sentiments — treating Islam with kid gloves seems to be Job #1 lately among the social engineers in editorial offices.
The perp, Rageh Al-Murisi, carried a Yemeni passport although he also has a California ID and lives in Vallejo. Perhaps he felt disappointed that Osama got whacked and decided to express his feelings in a traditional jihad sort of way. Did he intend a revenge attack to defend Islam?
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — There are new details emerging about the unruly passenger restrained who began pounding on the cockpit door during a San Francisco-bound flight Sunday night. The FBI says 28-year-old Rageh Al-Murisi is from Vallejo and was carrying a passport from Yemen.
Andrew Wai was on board American Airlines Flight 1561. He got a better look at 28-year-old Al-Murisi than most and says the man had been acting a little strange, even before accounts of him storming the cockpit door.
“Seemed to me this passenger in the back row was just a little bit fidgety, didn’t look like he was sure what he was doing, that kind of thing,” Wai said.
A police spokesperson says shortly before landing at San Francisco International Airport, Al-Murisi rushed the cockpit.
“The flight attendant asked the passenger to return to his seat, when he refused, the flight attendant put his hands on him and physically pulled him away from the door,” Sgt. Michael Rodriguez said.
Police say it took two flight attendants and two passengers to subdue Al-Murisi and place him in plastic handcuffs.
“There were abrasions caused during the scuffle with the passenger; he was taken to San Mateo County Hospital for treatment of abrasions to his chin and elbow,” Rodriguez said.
Wai says Al-Murisi’s outburst panicked many passengers.
“Passengers all around me were crying, the flight attendants were trying to calm certain passengers, we were looking at our lives flashing before our eyes,” Wai said. Continue reading this article
November 2012 may be a year and a half away, but pre-election hispandering keeps clicking up in intensity. The President naturally had a big celebration for Cinco de Mayo (as did GW Bush), with happy talk about amnesty, with Obama mentioning the DREAM Act specifically.
But another item, flying largely beneath the radar, is the proposal for a Latino Museum to be constructed on the National Mall. The President may not have the votes for a mass amnesty to create millions of future Democrats, but he can certainly marshall tax dollars for pander projects, like a museum to glorify hispanic immigrants and illegal aliens.
The list of persons to be honored is short, so one might think that a smallish inexpensive building would suffice, but no, $600 million is the price tag, half of which is to be taken from the unwilling American taxpayer. You would think we have plenty of spare cash to blow on ethnic fluff instead of being $14 trillion in the hole. The 2010 election was certainly an expression of the voters that Washington curtail spending on non-essentials, but the administration has a different idea.
The Latino Museum has its own website of course, with a YouTube stating that “America is not just a nation, it is a rich tapestry of diverse cultures.” It further propagandizes that the US has been niggardly in recognizing the many (unnamed) contributions of hispanics. Millions of illegals driving down the wages of citizens is somehow seen in a positive light by proponents, along with hispanics’ famously high dropout rates, crime and other social dysfunction.
Giving over a portion of our special national space for an expensive building to celebrate diversity and illegal immigration does not honor our heroes who fought to preserve our sovereignty from foreign foes.
Below, the World War II Monument on the National Mall in Washington, DC.
Reporting from Washington— A federal commission has recommended construction of a museum on the National Mall honoring the history of American Latinos.
The commission submitted a report to Congress and the White House on Thursday outlining the details of the proposed $600-million National Museum of the American Latino, which has been endorsed by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
It would be part of the Smithsonian Institution, which already has a museum dedicated to American Indians and is planning another focusing on African Americans.
“Part of America’s story that has not been told completely — that has deep missing gaps — has been the story of the Latino contribution to this country,” Salazar said in an interview.
Under the proposal, half of the $600 million for the American Latino museum would come from private fundraising, and the rest would be provided by Congress.
The museum would highlight contributions of Spanish-speaking people to more than 500 years of American history. The report points out that the Spanish were the first Europeans to interact with Native Americans and that they founded St. Augustine, Fla., 42 years before Jamestown was established. Latinos explored the American West before Lewis and Clark and founded many U.S. cities.
Its collections would also acknowledge the presence of Latinos in the military in addition to featuring Latino contributions to art, culture and society. Labor activist Cesar Chavez, Baseball Hall of Fame member Roberto Clemente and former Coca-Cola Chief Executive Roberto Goizueta would likely be featured.
The most recent census data shows that Latinos, at 15.8% of the population, are the largest minority group in America.
In 1994, a report to the Smithsonian titled “Willful Neglect” criticized the institution for failing to represent Latinos in museum collections and in hiring practices.
One possible reason for the underrepresentation is a stereotypical view of Latinos as foreigners, said Allert Brown-Gort, associate director of the Institute for Latino Studies at the University of Notre Dame.
“Even though Latinos are one of the oldest population groups in the United States, because of immigration in the last couple of decades, they’re seen as being all newcomers,” Brown-Gort said. “This country has had a long history of Latinos — otherwise we wouldn’t have places called Los Angeles.”
But not everyone is happy about the proposed site of the museum, at Pennsylvania Avenue near the Reflecting Pool and the Capitol.
Judy Scott Feldman, president of the National Coalition to Save Our Mall, a group that advocates for the protection of the National Mall, says that she is in favor of efforts to better tell the story of American history, but that adding more buildings to the mall isn’t always a positive move.
“The concept of the mall is rooted in the founding of the nation and the Constitution,” Feldman said. “You’ve got the Capitol and the White House, and what’s in the middle? The public promenade. The mall was the great public space, the expression of the power of the people in American democracy. But what’s happening is we’re building all over it.”
Sheriff Hennessey must have missed the dust-up surrounding Arizona’s strict enforcement law SB1070 where the Obama Justice Department said that immigration was a federal responsibility only and sued the state over that idea.
Recently the Sheriff announced he would begin releasing illegal aliens onto the streets of San Francisco, in defiance of the Secure Communities law. The lucky aliens to be released have been arrested on charges deemed minor, including disorderly conduct, drunk in public and shoplifting.
Does the minor charge category include drunk driving, a crime which has resulted in the deaths of many Americans? Unclear.
Furthermore, Hennessey’s act of defiance may catch on in other liberal sanctuary communities, where public safety is not valued. In fact, Gov. Pat Quinn has announced that he will withdraw Illinois from Secure Communities.
San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey said today he will soon begin releasing undocumented immigrants held in county jail for low-level offenses even if federal immigration officials request that they be held as part of its controversial Secure Communities program.
The program, which requires fingerprints of undocumented immigrants booked into local jails to be shared with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, will not apply as of June 1 to people arrested for low-level misdemeanors in San Francisco, Hennessey said.
The sheriff said the decision to ignore Secure Communities requests to hold the low-level offenders came after a talk last November with David Venturella, the director of the program.
“During the course of that meeting, he revealed that ICE detainers are not binding on a law enforcement agency to honor,” Hennessey said. “They’re merely a request to hold the person, not a legally binding warrant.”
He said he also reviewed San Francisco’s sanctuary law and says his new policy is in line with the local policy.
“I’m enforcing the county law, and not violating either federal or state law,” Hennessey said.
ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said Hennessey’s decision “is unfortunate.”
Kice said, “The identification and removal of many criminal aliens would not be possible without the cooperation of our state and local law enforcement partners.
She said, “ICE detainers are an effective tool to ensure that individuals arrested on criminal charges, who are also in violation of U.S. immigration law, are not released back into the community to potentially commit more crimes.”
In case there was ever any doubt that the open-borders bunch are intimately intertwined with one-worlder socialists, this item clearly reveals the academic view. The clip below is taken from a recent conference on “social justice” presented at the University of Tennessee Knoxville for the indoctrination of young minds.
Professor William Robinson of UCSB says to the conference, “One of the most important calls we can make for social justice globally is to abolish the distinction between immigrants and citizens. . . The movement for immigrant rights in the United States is part and parcel of the larger worldwide struggle for social justice.”
Frances Fox Piven pipes up a little later, declaring, “Immigrants should have the right to vote if they live here.”
The Department of Sociology and the Center for the Study of Social Justice will be hosting a conference on Social Justice and the University, Friday, April 29 – Saturday, April 30, 2011. The Conference will use the idea of social justice to explore the challenges universities face in meeting the economic, social, and global pressures of the 21st century. With faculty, student, staff, and community participants, the Conference is designed to begin an ongoing discussion of how social justice can inform the responsibilities of higher education. The participants come from a variety of academic disciplines, including Education, Modern Foreign Languages, Law, Philosophy, Sociology and Social Work, in addition to various community workers. Conference topics include Foundations and Variations on Social Justice, Social Justice and Globalization, Teaching Social Justice, and University and Communities.
Golly, I thought that Muslims around the world were “relieved” that Osama bin Laden had been removed by the US military. After all, the man murdered Muslims with abandon all over. And perhaps Muslims imagined that Americans would no longer mistrust them. Right, that’ll happen.
The press characterized the Muslim reaction with great regularity as “relieved” at OBL’s demise. The Voice of America featured a flag-splashed photo from another event with its article, US Muslims Relieved at Death of bin Laden. (Apparently Muslims residing in this country didn’t take to the streets to express their joy at bin Laden’s deletion, as traditional Americans did.)
Interestingly, the Relieved memo apparently didn’t make it across the pond, where Muslims residing in Britain are angry indeed. They marched in front of the American Embassy in London and mixed it up with the local police, while promising that Islam’s murderous jihad against Westerners would continue. Muslim immigration into Europe has brought violence, death and social upheaval, something Americans should consider more carefully regarding our own policies.
The question is why isn’t Washington taking this threat and all the others seriously. One indicator of unseriousness is the feds’ removal of the National Guard from the border. The troops were scheduled to stay for one year only, but the lawlessness remains critical and there is need for them to stay.
SAN DIEGO — A terrorist organization whose home base is in the Middle East has established another home base across the border in Mexico.
“They are recognized by many experts as the ‘A’ team of Muslim terrorist organizations,” a former U.S. intelligence agent told 10News.
The former agent, referring to Shi’a Muslim terrorist group Hezbollah, added, “They certainly have had successes in big-ticket bombings.”
Some of the group’s bombings include the U.S. embassy in Beirut and Israeli embassy in Argentina.
However, the group is now active much closer to San Diego.
“We are looking at 15 or 20 years that Hezbollah has been setting up shop in Mexico,” the agent told 10News.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, U.S. policy has focused on al-Qaida and its offshoots.
“They are more shooters than thinkers … it’s a lot of muscles, courage, desire but not a lot of training,” the agent said, referring to al-Qaida.
Hezbollah, he said, is far more advanced.
“Their operators are far more skilled … they are the equals of Russians, Chinese or Cubans,” he said. “I consider Hezbollah much more dangerous in that sense because of strategic thinking; they think more long-term.”
Hezbolah has operated in South America for decades and then Central America, along with their sometime rival, sometime ally Hamas. Continue reading this article
Look out San Francisco (and others)! Your fat checks from Congress may be pruned back entirely if freshman Congressman Lou Barletta manages to pass his new legislation, which would end federal funding to cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws.
If San Francisco had not been a hopelessly foolish sanctuary city, coddling criminal illegal aliens, then some terrible crimes might have been prevented. Probably the worst illegal alien crime was the murder of the father and two sons of the Bologna family, shot by previously arrested alien gangster Edwin Ramos who had not been deported despite the violence of his earlier crimes.
Illegal alien sanctuary cities may be a cushy deal for foreign criminals where they can avoid justice, but the policy is disastrous indeed for public safety.
The liberal politicians who run sanctuary cities are not swayed by horrific preventable crimes which cause enormous human suffering, so perhaps removing their money is the only way to get their attention.
WASHINGTON – Focusing his first solo legislative effort on an issue that gained him and Hazleton national attention, Republican Rep. Lou Barletta today said he will introduce a bill seeking to strip all federal funding from “sanctuary” cities that fail to enforce federal immigration laws.
The former Hazleton mayor and freshman member of Congress also said he is forming an “Immigration Reform Caucus” that he hopes other freshmen lawmakers will join.
Barletta said at a Capitol Hill news conference that his bill, which he expects to formally introduce within a few weeks, will be designed to “crack down on cities whose elected officials have willfully chosen not to enforce immigration policy by withholding all federal funding from them as long as their sanctuary policies are in place.”
Saying that there are more than 100 “sanctuary” cities nationwide, Barletta added, “I want to know how much they get from the American taxpayer.”
Barletta noted at the news conference that next month is the fifth anniversary of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act ordinance adopted by Hazleton in 2006 while Barletta was mayor. The ordinance, which has been ruled unconstitutional by a federal district court and a federal appeals court, sought to fine landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and penalize employers who hired illegal immigrants. Hazleton was the first city in the country to pass such a measure, and Arizona later followed on a statewide level.
The May 3 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Justice Department Oversight with Attorney General Eric Holder was quite a lively one. (Watch the hearing on C-SPAN.)
Chair Lamar Smith noted the administration’s hypocrisy about immigration being a federal issue, when it attacked Arizona for enforcement but let Utah slide for its amnesty-lite approach. Rep. Louis Gohmert had an intense exchange with the AG over the DOJ’s refusal to prosecute unindicted co-conspirators identified in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation case — watch.
But the most news was made by Rep. Darrell Issa’s questioning about Project Gunrunner, a scandal that has been increasingly burbling up for months, after the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) encouraged thousands of guns to be bought in this country and sent to Mexican cartels in a poorly considered “sting” operation. — watch Issa.
(In addition, Senator Grassley took up the topic of Gunrunner when he questioned Holder in a Senate hearing the following day, May 4 — watch.)
Fox News reported that the ATF has a history of reckless activity:
It started with one whistleblower, but now involves dozens of investigators, has created a standoff between the Department of Justice and lawmakers and threatens Mexico’s diplomatic relationship with the United States.
Friction is growing over the probe into the failed “Project Gunrunner” program — run by the Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms that intended to stop the flow of guns to criminals in Mexico. Whistleblowers claim the bureau actually encouraged the illegal sale of firearms to known criminals, then allowed those guns to be smuggled to Mexico and tracked.
On Tuesday, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) went after Attorney General Eric Holder for refusing to answer questions and subpoenas for documents that implicate who approved the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives project that allowed guns purchased illegally in U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico on behalf of the drug cartels with the knowledge and consent of the ATF.
“We’re not looking at straw buyers, Mr. Attorney General, we’re looking at you,” Issa said. “We’re looking at you, we’re looking at your key people who knew or should’ve known about this.”
Holder shot back.
“The notion that somehow or another that this Justice Department is responsible for those deaths, that assertion is offensive,” Holder said, referring to the death of American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
“What if it’s accurate, Mr. Attorney General?” Issa responded. “What am I going to tell Agent Terry’s mother about how he died at the hands of a gun that was videotaped as it was being sold to a straw purchaser fully expecting it to end up in the hands of drug cartels?”
Holder responded. “We’ll have to see exactly what happened with regard to the guns that are an issue there.”
Also on Tuesday, in a letter to the attorney general signed by both Issa and Sen.Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), the Congressmen say they are “disappointed that you do not appear to be taking this issue seriously enough”. Grassley, in a handwritten postscript, tells Holder he is being ‘ill-served’ by staff who are not telling him the whole story.
The theatre on the Hill is an outgrowth of an ongoing investigation that dates back to allegations two months ago from ATF agent John Dodson, a lone voice and career agent who told Fox News in March that the tactic of letting guns “walk” was approved by his supervisors in the Phoenix ATF office over the objections of several agents.
“How many people have to die?” he said. “We don’t know where those guns are gonna end up. I’ve been here since the beginning. Tell me I didn’t do the things that I did. Tell me you didn’t order me to do the things I did. Tell me it didn’t happen.”
Dodson was motivated in part by the death of Terry. At the scene of his shooting, police found two AK-47s that were purchased in the U.S. and distributed to drug cartels. These guns were traced to a gun shop that was working with the ATF Project Gunrunner and the Operation Fast and Furious program. Continue reading this article
The press is apparently too politically correct to characterize the murder of a young woman by her Muslim stepfather as an “honor killing.” But when even the AP says Jessica Mokedad was shot “because she left home and wasn’t following Islam” what else would one call the crime?
It’s a familiar scenario. A young woman growing up in America wants the same individual freedom that all the other girls have; but her family demands traditional Islamic subservience of females. She moves away to live a normal American life but the furious stepfather finds her and shoots her dead. Rahim Alfetlawi told Jessica he wanted to meet to work things out, but he brought a gun, indicating another plan.
Officials and scribblers don’t like to use the phrase “honor killing” because it might upset always-sensitive Muslims. Women are treated like crap in a lot of cultures, the Sons of Allah say, which is certainly true!
But Islam truly belongs at the top of the misogynist list because sharia law allows parents to kill bad girls, as explained by scholar Robert Spencer in a piece about the case of Texas honor killings (FBI admits that the murder of Amina and Sarah Said may have been an honor killing): “However, ‘not subject to retaliation’ is ‘a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.’” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). Not many disobedient boys get whacked, of course, because males are highly valued under Islam.
Local media didn’t want to call the murder of Jessica Mokedad an honor killing, even though the symptoms are clear.
WARREN, Mich. (WJBK) – Jessica Mokedad’s friends and family told us that for the first time in her life, she was finally happy. She had friends and freedom, but her stepfather is accused of taking that all away.
“I was in Minnesota, and he called me, my husband, and said, ‘I am turning myself into the police. I smacked Jessica,’” said mother Wendy Alfetlawi.
However, Warren Police say Rahim Alfetlawi didn’t slap his stepdaughter, he shot her.
Police discovered 20-year-old Jessica Mokedad’s lifeless body inside her grandmother’s home.
“I just stopped what I was doing and sat down and started crying,” said Ali Alfetlawi.
Jessica’s friends say this tragic ending was years in the making. Mokedad grew up in Minnesota with her mother and her stepfather.
“He won’t let her out of his eyesight,” Ali Alfetlawi said.
“He was too overbearing, over controlling — things I thought that were just normal, strict parenting really. Now, when I look back, I say no, it was too much,” Wendy Alfetlawi said.
He forced her to wear a traditional head scarf instead of allowing her to make that decision on her own, and when she stopped wearing a scarf, friends say he became furious. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.