Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jihadists v. fools on the bench
Washington Times ^ | August 1, 2005 | Unknown

Posted on 08/01/2005 6:33:16 AM PDT by conservativecorner

One would hardly know it from the tendentious political speech delivered by federal District Judge John Coughenour Wednesday in sentencing al Qaeda terrorist Ahmed Ressam to 22 years in prison for plotting to bomb Los Angeles International Airport, but the Ressam case shows what is wrong with a strategy of using the courts as our primary means of fighting terror -- as the Clinton administration did for eight years. The case also serves as an illustration of the potentially catastrophic consequences to Americans that can result from lax border-enforcement, asylum and welfare policies in countries like France and Canada. In sentencing Ressam, Judge Coughenour rejected the government's request for a 35-year sentence; prosecutors had sought to use the threat of more prison time as leverage to persuade Ressam, who has stopped cooperating with the government, to testify against two alleged co-conspirators who plotted with him to bomb the airport at or around Jan. 1, 2000. Ressam had originally faced up to 130 years in prison for his role in what has become known as the "millennium bombing" plot.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: ahmedressam; jihadinamerica; lax; ressam; terrortrials

1 posted on 08/01/2005 6:33:18 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

and what happens after 22 years?

He gets out and is successful in his next plot?

Dear God when are we going to start taking these people out and shooting them dead when we catch them and burying them in pig guts?

This crap has to stop NOW.


2 posted on 08/01/2005 6:35:11 AM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (3-7-77 (No that's not a Date))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

It's worse--14 years, not 22 years. He'll still be plenty young enough to do whatever he wants to do.


3 posted on 08/01/2005 6:47:18 AM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

There is always the very likely possibility none of these guys will make it for 22 years in an American prison. Lets just hope...


4 posted on 08/01/2005 6:52:12 AM PDT by auntyfemenist (Show me your papers...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Bush should now try the guy in a milatary tribunal and then send him to the firing squad.


5 posted on 08/01/2005 6:55:31 AM PDT by Texas_Conservative2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Based on the legal conferences I attend, "judicial independence" is a hot issue because judges fear their turf is being threatened.

It is not about justice or national security (many of the lawyer types see no excuse to use national security) it is about their delusion that a law will always work better than a military. Nevil Chamberlin taught us how well.


6 posted on 08/01/2005 7:10:07 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

He should meet the fate of Jeffrey Dahmer...Sometimes, Shi'ite happens!


7 posted on 08/01/2005 7:22:25 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson