You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
Judge delivers harsh rebuke to Sami Al Arian
2006-05-02
A federal judge yesterday lambasted a former Florida college professor, Sami Al-Arian, as a liar and "master manipulator," before sentencing him to nearly five years in prison for providing support to a Middle Eastern terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad....You are a master manipulator. You looked your neighbors in the eyes and said you had nothing to do with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. This trial exposed that as a lie," Judge Moody said. "The evidence was clear in the this case that you were a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."
[The WaPo has an editorial today saying that Arain is a piece of trash and also trashing the Dept of Justice's work in the prosecution]

Still no word from the defenders of Al-Arian at the NYTimes and the various scholarly institutions.
Posted by:mhw

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

00:00