Millennium Bomber’s Lenient Sentence Reversed . . . By the Ninth Circuit?
posted at 8:37 pm on February 2, 2010 by Patterico
Via Michelle, it’s rare good news from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. That’s the court that declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, is emptying California’s prisons, and never met a death sentence it liked. Yet even they couldn’t stomach the prospect of an Al Qaeda terrorist receiving a mere 22 years in prison after he was caught with powerful and deadly explosives that he planned to use to blow up LAX airport.
Especially after this turd thumbed his nose at a cooperation deal with the Government:
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered that Ahmed Ressam, a convicted terrorist arrested in December 1999 in Port Angeles with a car full of explosives, be sentenced again.
. . . .
He was tried in Los Angeles, where the proceeding had been moved.
After his conviction, he agreed to cooperate and help investigators on terrorism cases.
But he stopped cooperating in 2003 and claimed that he was “mentally incompetent” when he did cooperate, prosecutors say. Charges against two accused terrorists had to be dropped because Ressam recanted.
The court even ruled that the case will be returned to a different judge for sentencing. This surprising move becomes understandable indeed when you read the decision for yourself. Marvel as the Ninth Circuit recounts Ressam’s violent plans, and contrasts that picture of Ressam with the laughably naive assessment of the simpleton trial court judge:
Ressam targeted an airport, knowing that as a result, many civilians would die. Ressam attempted to rob a bank to obtain funds to carry out his mission and finance the attack in the United States. In the course of robbing the bank, Ressam planned to throw a live hand grenade at the police, and run, if he needed to do so in order to get away. These are only a few of the findings in the [pre-sentence report] that are in direct tension with the district court’s findings as to Ressam’s life history and personal characteristics, including the finding that Ressam is “a quiet, solitary and devout man whose true character is manifest in his decision to cooperate.”
No, his true character was manifest in his decision to plan the bombing of a major airport and slaughter countless innocent people. He cooperated only after he was convicted and looking at a life sentence. Then Ressam’s “true character” manifested itself yet again — when Ressam stopped cooperating, and recanted his previous statements, causing the dismissal of two cases against terrorists.
By the way, the Government described one of those terrorists, Abu Doha, as “a high-ranking al Qaeda member with close ties to Osama Bin Laden” who is “one of the most dangerous terrorists ever charged by the United States.” And where is Doha now? “After the dismissal of the charges against Doha in the United States, he was released from custody and is currently living in England.”
What could possibly go wrong?
The real lesson here is that when you put our country’s safety in the hands of grandstanding federal judges, we are not safe. What we really need is to try scum like Ressam in military tribunals, as warriors against our country. And then execute them.
But until we muster the will to do that, we need to keep him off the streets. And so I issue a rare kudos to the Ninth Circuit, for righting this wrong — and setting this scumbag on the road to what I hope will be a life sentence.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
A rare burst of sunshine from a place (the 9th circuit) where usually rain pours forth.
massrighty on February 2, 2010 at 8:40 PM
It is better, the saying goes, that a hundred guilty men go free in order to prevent one innocent man from going to jail.
Sorry, not if they’re fanatical terrorists bent on killing thousands.
Yes, we need some safeguards. But not all the ones afforded citizens in civilian courts.
If military tribunals are good enough for our men and women in uniform then they’re more than good enough for enemy alien combatants.
SteveMG on February 2, 2010 at 8:42 PM
We should not only execute them, but find their nests and smash the eggs.
roscopico on February 2, 2010 at 8:42 PM
Coming back from the edge………..
one step at a time.
RealMc on February 2, 2010 at 8:43 PM
The 9th Circuit can be a bit of a mixed bag. There are hard liberal judges, but also some conservatives. Depending on the panel, a decision could go either way.
Revenant on February 2, 2010 at 8:44 PM
dude, I agree. But, what about the judges who went soft on them and violated the two oaths that federal judges are required to take?
and this one. ….
Judges that fail to live up to their oaths, as well as other sworn officers of the United States, should be dealt with. These arguments need to be carried forward with regards to both the terrorists, and the judges who fail to live up to their oaths.
ted c on February 2, 2010 at 8:46 PM
hehe
Geochelone on February 2, 2010 at 8:47 PM
He-he-he
ji-ha-di
blatantblue on February 2, 2010 at 8:54 PM
This
thomasaur on February 2, 2010 at 8:55 PM
Ninth Circuit rejects jihadi brotherhood? Some one should inform Al Gore that hell’s also freezing over.
Rovin on February 2, 2010 at 9:21 PM
Them
roscopico on February 2, 2010 at 9:23 PM
Even a blind hog finds an acorn, now and then…which is why it is clear Obama is intentionally making every mistake Tingles tries to excuse…
Harry Schell on February 2, 2010 at 9:35 PM
Planning and driving toward terroristic mass-murder doesn’t rate the death penalty when caught and convicted?
Fatalistic stupidity in action.
Brought to you by the shiny happy people who think the Constitution is a suicide pact.
profitsbeard on February 2, 2010 at 9:38 PM
That is a phenomenal ruling for the 9th circuit.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 10:12 PM
This mook of a judge needs to have his head examined.Since when does quiet, solitary and devout mitigate ATTEMPTED MASS MURDER?
Geez, Louise.
hillbillyjim on February 2, 2010 at 10:58 PM
From my post at my website http://www.truthandcommonsense.com
–
I wanted to speak to this when I first heard about the decision to try the terrorists in civilian court. You have to understand, regardless of the level and the seriousness of the court, it is still a political animal to some degree. Only lefties with pie in the sky ideals miss this. To make it worse, civilian courts are not really designed to effectively prosecute difficult terror cases. Can it? Sure, but only with all the potential pitfalls built in, like in this case a judge not sentencing a man bent on murdering many to the time in prison that he deserved. In this case the problem may be rectified- or not. Remember, he can and will appeal.
I was talking with my friend about this issue of civilian verses military trials pertaining to KSM and his group. I may have been wrong, but at one point the government dropped the military charges before filing the civilian ones, leaving a period of time where KSM could have argued for bond or maybe a direct release from custody. As much as the left hated the Patriot act you would think they would complain about a man being held without charges. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States)
Not only is this an issue, but I’m sure there are many others that can be exploited by a smart legal team of lawyers who have more love for the argument than for justice. And believe me, there are a ton wanting a shot at this case. Can you imagine the amount of publicity you would receive for getting off a terrorist or exposing the weakness of the government’s case. Speaking to that, I understand KSM recanted his confession. If that is so, in a civilian court that statement is out. No Miranda, no statement. I’ve been on the wrong end of that decision a few time myself. Even when I was doing it right some judge decided, on his own, I didn’t read them time, or at the right time, or clear enough or… You get my point. We spent years studying the newest case law trying to stay up to date on the rulings. I can tell you KSM’s rights were violated, which means anything gained is out and will never see the inside of a courtroom. It can’t. The government cannot say he has the rights of a citizen in one breath and enter tainted evidence in the next.
Now Federal court is a little more free wheeling than state court in its approach to guilt/innocence and the handling of evidence, but torture trumps all cards here. If the government complains that torture is wrong, and dumbass Obama has voiced that very thing, then he’s just handed the defense all they need to get any statements and anything discovered from those statement thrown out. Add to the mix press sectary Gibbs’s statement about how KSM will have a fair trial and a wonderful hanging, you can bet finding a jury or a venue to hold the trial is fast disappearing. The spokesman for the PRESIDENT just condemned a legally innocent man to death! AAAGGGH!!! Can they be any more stupid?
The funniest part of this whole debacle is that KSM understood the military tribunals and accepted his fate. I think he actually found respect in the way we snatched him, held him, interrogated him and got what we needed. He respected the power and commitment we had. Something I think surprised both KSM and Osama. In the beginning they were dealing with the prior Democratic administration and were convinced it had no stomach for a fight. Imagine their amazement when they realized they weren’t dealing with cigar tube waving Clinton anymore as bombs rained down around them!
As I write this I understand the Christmas bomber is talking now after cutting a deal with the prosecutors. Stephen Hayes pointed out the obvious. If he cut a deal that means we gave something up. He tried to murder over three hundred people in a plane and an untold number on the ground and we gave him a deal that allowed him to tell us what he was telling us before the government agents decided to read him Miranda.
Now that’s just stupid on a scale many will have trouble measuring. (Do you notice that only during Democratic administrations the world sees us as fools and simpletons? Hmmm…) For those of you who think this is just a bumpy patch, hold on because you haven’t seen anything yet. Wait till the motions start, and the hearings, and the media blitz. With Obama’s legal team at the DOJ being so out of step, a good team of defense lawyers will tie them up in knots so tight you will be able to strum them like a guitar!
Man, 2012 can’t come quick enough.
archer52 on February 2, 2010 at 11:22 PM
Avoiding a major clusterfark…
lovingmyUSA on February 2, 2010 at 11:38 PM
All of these guys have this dead, stone-cold killer look in their eyes. Is that a by-product of Islam?
SilentWatcher on February 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM
Or is Islam the by-product of a stone-cold killer (named Mo)?
hillbillyjim on February 3, 2010 at 12:40 AM
Understand this: terrorists are not “warriors”.
They are simply terrorists, or, if you want to be nice, enemy combatants. A “warrior” is a legal, formal combatant reprsenting a government or governing body, which may or may not be legal or legitimate, in and of itself. I fought Reds in the Cold War, and as much as I despised them, I knew they may still have some sort of code of honorable conduct that they lived by. I still despise racist Russians, but even these scum have some sort of code, rudimentary and primitive though it, and they, may be. Terrorists have no code and live by the precepts of intentional dishonor, and in the case of muslims, they’re just like their Nazi forefathers. Nazis weren’t “warriors”, and especially not soldiers or marines: they were criminal thugs. What makes these criminals not merit federal criminal trials is the fact of their self-organization into paramilitary organizations and shadow governments looking to overthrow other governments through mass murder and destruction.
Do not insult us that are REAL Soldiers and Marines by trying to elevate these Satan-worshipping, child-murdering, wife-beating, Jew-hating, mass-murdering scum to our level. Just as I think the Nazis should’ve been sent to the shower, ovens and mass-graves (including those calling themselves modern, ‘neo-Nazis’), I say Auschwitz und Buchenwald should hang a sign over their gates that says: “OPEN FOR BUSINESS.
F–k a terrorist. If we’re going to use waterboarding, make sure they wear kevlar gloves so they can use a teakettle of boiling hot water.
Virus-X on February 3, 2010 at 1:15 AM
Yowsah, and kudos to your reticence.
I would only demur to the extent of “Enemy combatants my ass.” “Combatants” don’t ambush civilians while hiding behind bandannas.
I’ll second “Satan-worshipping, child-murdering, wife-beating, Jew-hating, mass-murdering scum,” though.
warbaby on February 3, 2010 at 2:11 AM
“I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”
“F*ckin’ A.”
BigAlSouth on February 3, 2010 at 6:10 AM
Yes! And I have no problem putting every single one of them that looks remotely similar to this @$$hole on Double-Secret-Probation the second they come on Airport Property.
ronnyraygun on February 3, 2010 at 6:20 AM
A
It still doesnt change the need to ABOLISH that court and start over somewhere else!! No need for discussions either! They are the most overturned court in the land. And I am with Newt on this one, if you can be a judge in America and decide that placing your hand over your heart and pledging allegiance to the flag in school in UNConstitutional, then you have NO right to be a judge in our Country and colllect tax payer $$ for life!! They are still a horrible court.
OSUBuciz1 on February 3, 2010 at 8:26 AM
YES!
OSUBuciz1 on February 3, 2010 at 8:28 AM
They are playing Hockey in Hell this morning.
SurferDoc on February 3, 2010 at 8:36 AM
Paging Al Gore, hell just froze over…..
huskerdiva on February 3, 2010 at 8:36 AM
Great minds think alike……
huskerdiva on February 3, 2010 at 8:38 AM
Maybe there ought to be a litmus test for judges—you know, civics, knowledge of the law, American history. All that bothersome stuff that they think is unimportant. If a guy has a history of anti-Americanism, why should he be elevated to a judgeship?
SilentWatcher on February 3, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Every time I hear about Mirandizing enemy combatants, I see this image (go to 4:08) of men running thru the battlefield yelling out the Miranda warning.
J_Crater on February 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM
They got the terrorist fevah . . . . and the answer is: More Time
kens on February 3, 2010 at 1:50 PM