Article

2006-05-02 Home Front: WoT

Judge delivers harsh rebuke to Sami Al Arian

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by mhw 2006-05-02 08:24|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Two other quotes deserve to be excerpted form this excellent article:

"That was shocking to hear that," a spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, Ahmed Bedier, said. "The judge's demeanor - he looked angry as he was delivering that, even his face was turning somewhat red."

Judge Moody was appointed to the federal bench in 2000 by President Clinton.

The WaPo does not say it, but this trial exposes the fatal weakness of the law enforcement model in combatting terrorism. It's just dumb for the jerks at Gitmo, but it could be really dangerous for fifth columnists like al-Arian. We are lucky that almost all of the Muslims in the US seems to want nothing to do with the terrs. When we make blanket denunciation of Islam, we should remember how loyal they are and how ill prepared we are to deal with domestic traitors like al-Arian.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-05-02 10:30|| 2006-05-02 10:30|| Front Page Top

#2 Hmm, maybe it's just me, but a harsh rebuke should be a a life or death sentence, not just a 30 second tounge lashing.

Posted by 2b 2006-05-02 10:47|| 2006-05-02 10:47|| Front Page Top

#3 The prosecution was so inept they had to cut a deal with al-Arian. The judge gave the max allowable under the deal. The judge did everything but dress down the prosecution and kill the deal. But that would probably have led to the govt dropping charges, so he kept his cool there.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-05-02 10:55|| 2006-05-02 10:55|| Front Page Top

#4 Nimble,

like you, I'm convinced the prosecution's case presentation was pretty inept.

However, is your 'weakness of the law enforcement model' comment based on your opinion that this level of ineptness is widespread; or is it based on your opinion that anything short of a perfect prosecution leaves opportunity for a jury to avoid a guilty verdict?

Also, do you have any thoughts on what would happen if there were a moslems on the jury, who, while opposed to terrorism, were vulnerable to implied threat from their co religionists?

Posted by mhw 2006-05-02 11:09|| 2006-05-02 11:09|| Front Page Top

#5 The Dept. Of Justice doesn't have any enthusiasm for these types of cases. Now, if Al-Arian were accused of anti-trust violations or an Enron-style crime, you'd see a plenty of initiative.

Posted by Pappy 2006-05-02 18:48|| 2006-05-02 18:48|| Front Page Top

#6 No word from CAIR, ass-clown Juan Cole, and the idiots over at antiwar.com.

Posted by Giulio Gavotti 2006-05-02 22:04|| http://www.blackdystopia.blogspot.com]">[http://www.blackdystopia.blogspot.com] 2006-05-02 22:04|| Front Page Top

00:33 ed
00:23 ed
23:50 phil_b
23:49 CrazyFool
23:45 phil_b
23:40 Frank G
23:39 Frank G
23:39 ed
23:38 Frank G
23:32 Rafael
23:30 CrazyFool
23:25 RD
23:17 JosephMendiola
23:14 macofromoc
23:13 3dc
23:12 DMFD
23:11 lurking in Germany
23:03 Rafael
23:02 RD
22:58 Frank G
22:57 Seafarious
22:54 Frank G
22:53 Rafael
22:53 sludge