In the conclusion of ten years of intense litigation, Dr. Sami Al-Arian and his wife Nahla boarded a plane last night and left the United States for Turkey. He arrived in Istanbul a couple hours ago. I was Dr. Al-Arian’s lead criminal defense counsel in Virginia until all charges were eventually dropped by the United States Department of Justice against him. I have received many calls from the media over the last couple of days and I have declined to respond because Dr. Al-Arian was represented by an immigration law team after the criminal proceedings concluded. I wanted to defer to those lawyers in any media comments, as I have since handed over the case last year. Dr. Al-Arian issued the statement below this morning.
Dr. Al-Arian’s case raised troubling due process, academic freedom, and free speech issues. He is a Palestinian-American civil rights activist who was also a computer engineering professor at University of South Florida (USF). He had a successful academic career at USF and held permanent resident status since March 1989. He applied for U.S. citizenship and even campaigned for George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election.
Dr. Al-Arian was indicted in February 2003 on 17 counts under the Patriot Act, but a jury acquitted him on 8 counts and deadlocked on the remaining 9 counts. The trial was handled by Dr. Al-Arian’s Florida trial attorneys, the late Bill Moffitt and Linda Moreno, who did an incredible job.
It was later revealed that jury overwhelmingly supported acquittal. The jurors 10-2 for acquittal on the remaining counts. Tapped out of money and wanting closure, Dr. Al-Arian agreed to a plea bargain that admitted to one of the charges in exchange for a promise that after a maximum of incarceration of 57 months, he would be allowed to leave the country by April 2007. (Amnesty International would later condemn his incarceration as “gratuitously punitive” and inhumane). He pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to contribute services to or for the benefit of the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a Specially Designated Terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. However, that contribution was described as hiring a lawyer for his brother-in-law during his immigration battle in the late 1990s; sponsoring a Palestinian historian in 1994 to conduct research in the U.S.; and withholding information from a U.S. journalist during a 1995 interview. Many noted at the time that none of those acts were clearly criminal.
Notably, many saw the deal as nothing more than the Justice Department seeking some face saving measure of punishment after its defeat in Tampa and many felt that Dr. Al-Arian should not have signed it. However, he wanted to continue with his academic career and be with his family, including young children. Yet, rather than fulfilling that commitment, the Justice Department called him to a grand jury for additional testimony in Northern Virginia. Dr. Al-Arian objected that he was assured that he would not be forced into any additional proceedings and many viewed the grand jury was a “perjury trap” where the prosecutors would charge on any statement that could be alleged to be inaccurate or untrue. He refused.
The Virginia litigation began in 2006 in Alexandria Virginia. The litigation would be intense for years as we sought to enforce his plea agreement but the federal court insisted that he would have to testify and the Justice Department secured a civil contempt order on November 16, 2006. This was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It was after the Fourth Circuit decision that I was brought on a lead criminal defense counsel. The Justice Department continued to call Dr. Al-Arian and effectively prolong his incarceration under civil contempt rules.
Dr. Al-Arian engaged in a series of hunger strikes, including a 60-day hunger strike on January 22, 2007 in protest to his treatment and there was an international movement in support of his release.
In addressing the proceedings in Virginia, we took the unusual step of hiring a former FBI polygraphed to ask Dr. Al-Arian every known question about the investigation into an organization called IIIT in Virginia, purportedly the reason for his being called before the grand jury (Notably, not a single indictment for IIIT would come out of the grand jury proceedings which lasted for years and was viewed by many defense lawyers as a runaway investigation and fishing expedition). We even solicited from the Justice Department. The polygraph showed that Dr. Al-Arian had little knowledge of the matters under investigation and he passed every question as answering truthfully. We submitted the results to the Justice Department. We also received additional questions from the Justice Department and submitted a sworn affidavit on those questions. It was clear that Dr. Al-Arian was not withholding information. Indeed, any information that he had was ridiculously out of date given his years of incarceration in solitary confinement and tight restrictions on communications.
Eventually, the civil contempt sanction was lifted, but the Justice Department then, on June 26, 2008, indicted him on two counts of criminal contempt, for unlawfully and willfully refusing court orders that he testify. On September 2, 2008, we were able to secure his release from jail and a court order for Dr. Al-Arian to be subject to house arrest. It was a major change in the case. We were able to later lift the restrictions of monitoring on the home confinement.
On March 9, 2010, Judge Leonie Brinkema postponed the criminal contempt trial, pending our motion to dismiss the charges in the case on the grounds of the plea agreement, flaws in the indictment, prosecutorial abuse, selective prosecution and other grounds. We also asked the Justice Department to investigate the professional misconduct in the case (which it declined to do). The litigation over the indictment continued until, on June 27, 2014, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg moved to dismiss the indictment.
Dr. Al-Arian leaves behind five children and grandchildren. His children are highly successful in their own right, including multiple books and impressive academic work. The family has been a rock of support for Dr. Al-Arian throughout these incredibly trying years. Nahla and the family formed a tight, protective circle to get through these traumatic years. After the release in 2008, Dr. Al-Arian became a doting grandfather and stayed with his children in Virginia.
I met with Dr. Al-Arian and Nahla shortly before they left the country. They were already missing their children and grandchildren, but excited to start a new chapter in their life. It is not clear whether he will resume teaching in Turkey but he is likely to continue his writing and lecturing in some form. Despite being subjected to extremely cruel treatment and conditions, he is not bitter and remains committed to the principles of freedom that first drew him to the United States. Indeed, his family is an American success story with five children who have secured advanced degrees from leading universities and will remain in the United States in teaching, journalism and other fields. It has been a particular pleasure to get to know them and watch their professional advancement over the course of this litigation.
The Al-Arian case will remain a chilling chapter in our history. The treatment of Dr. Al-Arian after his acquittal on most of the charges was widely viewed as a shocking abuse of the system and a flagrant violation of agreement reached with the Justice Department. The Justice Department put unprecedented effort into the Florida prosecution and suffered one of its greatest trial defeats in an area where convictions were taken for granted. The later proceedings were viewed as retaliatory and abusive by prosecutors. It also showed how the civil and contempt laws can be used to abuse individuals and leave them with little recourse or rights. Justice ultimately prevailed but the cost to Dr. Al-Arian and his family was prohibitively high. The Virginia litigation was not about Dr. Al-Arian’s views or associations. It was about due process and how we handle criminal trials and plea agreements in this country. The United States reached a deal with this man that committed his country to allowing him to leave following his jail stint. No matter how one feels about Dr. Al-Arian’s writings or beliefs, we should honor our agreements as a nation. Instead, the Justice Department broke that deal and then daisy-chained contempt citations to prolong his incarceration. It was abusive and it was wrong. It is now over.
Dr. Al-Arian and his wife will start anew in Turkey. He told me in our final meeting how very grateful he was to his many friends and supporters for what they gave to him. He remained optimistic about the future and spoke of his continued faith in the fundamental civil liberties that define our country. We spoke of how long this process proved since we first met in a holding cell in Virginia. At the time, he was weak from his hunger strike and we knew little about each other. Over the years, our respective families grew and the world has changed in so many different ways. It felt like a 1000 years ago when Sami was brought in from solitary confinement for our first meeting. I wish him and Nahla all the best in the next chapter of their life together. They clearly leave these shores with a heavy heart despite the pain of the prosecution. This country took much but also gave much to their family. They are now again fully in control of their future together.
Here is Dr. Al-Arian’s final statement:
February 4, 2015
A Statement by Dr. Sami A. Al-Arian
To my dear friends and supporters,
After 40 years, my time in the U.S. has come to an end. Like many immigrants of my generation, I came to the U.S. in 1975 to seek a higher education and greater opportunities. But I also wanted to live in a free society where freedom of speech, association and religion are not only tolerated but guaranteed and protected under the law. That’s why I decided to stay and raise my family here, after earning my doctorate in 1986. Simply put, to me, freedom of speech and thought represented the cornerstone of a dignified life.
Today, freedom of expression has become a defining feature in the struggle to realize our humanity and liberty. The forces of intolerance, hegemony, and exclusionary politics tend to favor the stifling of free speech and the suppression of dissent. But nothing is more dangerous than when such suppression is perpetrated and sanctioned by government. As one early American once observed, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Because government has enormous power and authority over its people, such control must be checked, and people, especially those advocating unpopular opinions, must have absolute protections from governmental overreach and abuse of power. A case in point of course is the issue of Palestinian self-determination. In the United States, as well as in many other western countries, those who support the Palestinian struggle for justice, and criticize Israel’s occupation and brutal policies, have often experienced an assault on their freedom of speech in academia, media, politics and society at large. After the tragic events of September 11th, such actions by the government intensified, in the name of security. Far too many people have been targeted and punished because of their unpopular opinions or beliefs.
During their opening statement in my trial in June 2005, my lawyers showed the jury two poster-sized photographs of items that government agents took during searches of my home many years earlier. In one photo, there were several stacks of books taken from my home library. The other photo showed a small gun I owned at the time. The attorney looked the jury in the eyes and said: “This is what this case is about. When the government raided my client’s house, this is what they seized,” he said, pointing to the books, “and this is what they left,” he added, pointing to the gun in the other picture. “This case is not about terrorism but about my client’s right to freedom of speech,” he continued. Indeed, much of the evidence the government presented to the jury during the six-month trial were speeches I delivered, lectures I presented, articles I wrote, magazines I edited, books I owned, conferences I convened, rallies I attended, interviews I gave, news I heard, and websites I never even accessed. But the most disturbing part of the trial was not that the government offered my speeches, opinions, books, writings, and dreams into evidence, but that an intimidated judicial system allowed them to be admitted into evidence. That’s why we applauded the jury’s verdict. Our jurors represented the best society had to offer. Despite all of the fear-mongering and scare tactics used by the authorities, the jury acted as free people, people of conscience, able to see through Big Brother’s tactics. One hard lesson that must be learned from the trial is that political cases should have no place in a free and democratic society.
But despite the long and arduous ordeal and hardships suffered by my family, I leave with no bitterness or resentment in my heart whatsoever. In fact, I’m very grateful for the opportunities and experiences afforded to me and my family in this country, and for the friendships we’ve cultivated over the decades. These are lifelong connections that could never be affected by distance.
I would like to thank God for all the blessings in my life. My faith sustained me during my many months in solitary confinement and gave me comfort that justice would ultimately prevail.
Our deep thanks go to the friends and supporters across the U.S., from university professors to grassroots activists, individuals and organizations, who have stood alongside us in the struggle for justice.
My trial attorneys, Linda Moreno and the late Bill Moffitt, were the best advocates anyone could ask for, both inside and outside of the courtroom. Their spirit, intelligence, passion and principle were inspirational to so many.
I am also grateful to Jonathan Turley and his legal team, whose tireless efforts saw the case to its conclusion. Jonathan’s commitment to justice and brilliant legal representation resulted in the government finally dropping the case.
Our gratitude also goes to my immigration lawyers, Ira Kurzban and John Pratt, for the tremendous work they did in smoothing the way for this next phase of our lives.
Thanks also to my children for their patience, perseverance and support during the challenges of the last decade. I am so proud of them.
Finally, my wife Nahla has been a pillar of love, strength and resilience. She kept our family together during the most difficult times. There are no words to convey the extent of my gratitude.
We look forward to the journey ahead and take with us the countless happy memories we formed during our life in the United States.
Bill T and David-
” FACT 1 is that Sami Al Arian was not a United States citizen. ”
Thanks for the meaningless factoid. I’m sure that’s a real smoking gun in loony rightie land
“FACT 2 is that Sami AL Arian voluntarily pled guilty to a federal felony involving terrorism.”
Because he had to in order for a judge to enter a ruling and allow him to finally get out of the hellhole of a nation that kept him in solitary for three years despite no criminal conviction and despite no evidence linking him to terrorism.
“FACT 3 is that Sami Al Arian AGREED to a judicial order of removal and deportation.”
Which, considering the horrendous persecution by our Federal government, is completely understandable. They drained his finances, ruined his career, kept him illegally incarcerated in harsh conditions for years without a criminal conviction, claimed to offer him immunity and then charging him with contempt for acting in accordance with the terms of that immunity. . .
And here’s a FACT that mysteriously escaped your notice-
“after more than 10 years of tapping the phone conversations of al-Arian and his family — there was no evidence directly tying him to a single terrorist attack.”
http://electronicintifada.net/content/despite-no-conviction-sami-al-arian-remains-us-prison/7655
David-
“Good point, Bill. Judge Moody sat thru the trial and concluded that Dr. Al-Arian is a master manipulator, a director and active leader of a terrorist organization ”
And he arrived at that decision despite the lack of evidence, which provides even more evidence that the prosecution was politically motivated.
From Moody’s comments-
“The evidence was clear in this case that you were a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. ”
Apparently not, since a jury of his peers acquitted him on that charge (along with 7 others, one of which stated- ”
“They have so little on [Al-Arian] that I’m disappointed. Most of us think he gave in because he was so sick of being in jail.””
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/04/23/Hillsborough/In_his_plea_deal__wha.shtml
You give a perfect example of why you righties are so dangerous to a free society- you act as an apologist for any breach of constitutional rights, no matter how heinous, if you believe it offers an opportunity to take revenge on someone you don’t like. There is no little brown fella in a turban anywhere south of the equator that is as dangerous to America as you fascist righties are.
Anarchist 2.0 – If Sami had a bench trial he would have been found guilty of at least several of the charges. He got a hung jury on 9 charges. The government had the opportunity to retool its case and go after him again on all 9. 57 months was a gift.
What I have a problem with is holding him after that, but then the Obama administration has played fast and loose with deportation since he got in office. So I am not surprised.
I did find his going to the incredibly free country of Turkey a surprise, though.
Paul C Schulte wrote: “I did find his going to the incredibly free country of Turkey a surprise, though.”
Did you know that Hamas has headquarters in Turkey where they train terrorists going into Israel.
Anarchist wrote:
————-
From Moody’s comments-
“The evidence was clear in this case that you were a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. ”
Apparently not, since a jury of his peers acquitted him on that charge (along with 7 others, one of which stated- ”
“They have so little on [Al-Arian] that I’m disappointed. Most of us think he gave in because he was so sick of being in jail.””
————
Not everybody has the background and intellect to understand shell companies and how they work to hide where funds actually end up. The evidence showed funds being collected for widows and orphans in Palestine, but half of it ending up going to terror organizations. It also showed Sami Al-Arian attempting to get money from Iran to support his organizations and shell companies that he incorporated, presumably so he could help more terror activities. While his words are protected speech, the content of that speech is pertinent to understanding his motives and what he supports. He clearly made speeches supporting terror, also calling America the Great Satan and calling for the death of America and Israel. Video was presented where Sami was introduced as a leader of Islamic Jihad in Palestine, something that Sami Al-Arian admits was true in his plea bargain.
In the article you quote from, the very next juror (Char) said the following:
“Like another person on the jury, I was convinced Mr. Al-Arian was still working with the PIJ after it was illegal. He was a very smart man and knew how not to be obvious. For me, the absence of evidence didn’t mean there was no evidence. For me, it suggested a coverup, which he admitted to, in the plea agreement.”
The problem with convicting a man like Sami Al-Arian is the same problem with convicting a mafia crime lord or a mobster like Al Capone. If the mafia godfather simply orders criminal activity and pays the criminals who do it, and later he and others lie about it, how can a court tie him to any specific crime? He may fund the criminal activity, and he may direct criminal activity, but are his hands dirty? How do you prove it? With Al Capone, they failed again and again until they decided they would get him on tax evasion. Some mafia leaders are never convicted.
Anarchist quotes the following: “after more than 10 years of tapping the phone conversations of al-Arian and his family — there was no evidence directly tying him to a single terrorist attack.”
This is sophistry. There may not have been evidence tying him to a specific terror attack, but there is evidence that he funded and directed organizations doing more than 100 terrorist attacks. He was an active leader. He spoke at terrorist conventions, and he served on the board of directors of a terrorist organization. He also spoke in code in those wiretappings, purposefully obfuscating what the conversation was about. He admitted to this.
The anti-Israel crowd will always justify Sami Al-Arian as long as they can, the same way people stood by Bill Clinton when he pointed his finger at the TV camera and claimed to all of America and the world that he did not have sexual relations with that woman. Even when his lie was exposed, people justified it because he was protecting his family and had good reasons for his lie. For them, the villain was not the man who lied to America, but the prosecutors who impeached him for it. The same dynamics are at play in this case.
dave-
” The evidence showed funds being collected for widows and orphans in Palestine, but half of it ending up going to terror organizations.”
It doesn’t matter how those widows decided to spend their money.
” presumably so he could. . .”
You presume a lot of nonsense.
” He clearly made speeches supporting terror, also calling America the Great Satan and calling for the death of America and Israel.”
both an exaggeration and irrelevant nevertheless.
” If the mafia godfather simply orders criminal activity”
Which we know Al-arian never did because his phone was wire tapped for well over a decade.
“With Al Capone, they failed again and again”
Are you really going to compare investigative techniques back then with what is available now? Hilarious!
How can you tell when a juror is incompetent? When he says-
” For me, the absence of evidence didn’t mean there was no evidence.”
Not surprising you would find the comment “Just because there was no evidence doesn’t mean there was no evidence” to be compelling.
“there is evidence that he funded and directed organizations doing more than 100 terrorist attacks. ”
No, there isn’t. He pled guilty to one count of providing non-violent aid for helping a relative get a green card.
” He spoke at terrorist conventions, and he served on the board of directors of a terrorist organization.”
Is it your general habit to accuse someone of sophistry immediately before you start lying blatantly? Those two statements are fictions of your imagination, kind of like your concept of “benevolent” dictatorship.
” Bill Clinton when he pointed his finger at the TV camera and claimed to all of America and the world that he did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
Who cares? This has nothing to do with clinton.
” The same dynamics are at play in this case.”
No, they aren’t. More importantly, Al-Arian’s, or anyone’s alleged crimes don’t provide the Federal government with the justification to violate the law in the attempt to secure prosecution. Being a cheerleader for an American dictatorship, you have no concept of rights or rule of law, but the crimes committed by the government in this case were more damaging to the American people than any crimes Al Arian was alleged to have committed.
Focusing on the actions of Al-Arian at this point, with ll that is known of the illegal and unethical behavior of our government is a bit short-sighted, to say the last.
I will give you one thing- unlike the rest of the righties, at least you don’t pretend to have a regard for rights or freedom as you lobby for the destruction of both those things. At least the honesty is refreshing, even if it does paint a picture that’s disturbing.
I wonder wonder wonder who, who wrote the book of love.
Wow, I wonder how this sits with the Republican Congress and Professor Turley defending him. I wonder if they agree with those of you here who think Dr. Al-Arian is a terrorist enabler.
Jeez, but he’s still a friend of JT. Interesting. And, then there are his kids, still here. As the French say, Quelle Salad.
Having read Judge Moody’s comments, he should have been executed rather than deported.
It’s time to end U.S. involvement in wars for izzuhrul, and time to stop U/S. intel cooperation/non-interference with Israeli false flag operations e.g. 9-11, takin’ care of bidness (again) way down in Ike n Tina Turner (Ahhgentiner).
Paul
People go to church as much for the community aspect as for being around people who are exactly like them. The more extreme the cult the more everyone is or has to be just like the other. Obama’s congregation seemed to have a reasonable spread from the nut case to people who just needed ‘communitas’, like most. For those with the objective of nailing him, tarring and feathering him, this is an ideal circumstance. Otherwise, he may simply have just been going to church.
What about Lieberman and the head of his synagogue?
The right wing of the US is well packed with religious fanatics. The tabloids would go out of business without these guys. I have never read anything about Obama that lead me to believe that he was anything other than an average ‘a la carte’ Christian.
issac – supposedly Obama was in regular attendance except for the days when the Rev Wright went ‘bats**t crazy.’ He missed those days according to him.
Paul-
” One, I think plea bargains should be abolished.”
Are you an attorney? If not, you should admit to yourself that you lack the expertise to hold a strong opinion on the subject.
“They plea bargain because it saves them time and money”
They also plea bargain because those that fight criminal charges stand a much better chance in trial than what they are offered as a plea bargain. It allows people to do time for bullsh!t charges.
Steve-
“Now you rely on a public defender – typically a young, overworked individual with little experience, who graduated at the bottom third of his law school class”
Actually, that’s not the case for Federal public defenders. They tend to be highly competent attorneys.
David-
“My sense is that Sami Al-Arian did work with the Islamic Jihad movement in Palestine. ”
I’m shocked! Who could have seen that coming from you? In case you don’t understand sarcasm- of course you feel that way. You’re the one person in America that stills supports the Iraq war.
“He was just very smart about it and hid under the cover of free speech activism.”
Translated -“He didn’t break the law, but he would have liked to, in my opinion, so a politically motivated prosecution was completely justifiable!”
” He only talks about free speech, whereas his indictments involved working with Islamic Jihad. ”
That’s hilarious! To you, it’s “unsettling” when someone prosecuted for free speech refers to that prosecution for free speech rather than launching into a diatribe about Islamic Jihad.
“Why does he not use this opportunity to claim he never helped fund or provide services to the PIJ”
Because he doesn’t have any moral or legal responsibility to keep denying bogus charges for the rest of his life just because the extreme right lunatic fringe demands it of him ?
” If I were innocent”
Interesting. So you are publicly admitting that you are NOT innocent of conspiring to advance Islamic Jihad? I knew it.
” Instead, his final statement reeks of a guilty man covering his tracks. ”
Coming from a man with a proven track record of zero objectivity, that perception doesn’t hold much weight.
” I guess our differences on this case depend upon which lies we choose to believe.”
Well, that and the inability of the government to prove it’s case after 12 years and millions of dollars spent.
” Shallah eventually left Tampa and was revealed to be the head of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad just six months later. Don’t you think it would be appropriate to investigate Sami Al-Arian and his other associates living in the U.S. over this?”
Without considering the fact that Israel has been in violation of international law since at least 1973 with an overt military campaign to seize land, displace Palestinians, and deny the state of Palestine the right to existence that would make a military response by Palestine completely appropriate, an investigation would be a reasonable response. However, there’s a wide divide between an investigation and over a decade of politically motivated, malicious prosecution.
“When questioned about it, Al-Arian lied and claimed he did not know Shallah was involved in something actually happening ”
Cite sources. You’re far too partisan to take your word for it.
“Wiretapping evidence in the trial proved he did know and had lied about it in order to cover it up.”
Which trial, the one in which he was acquitted of 8 charges and the jury failed to come to a decision on any of the others, or the trial in which the judge felt the prosecutors were overzealous and refused to make any ruling on the case for five years?
“The trial also revealed that he used coded language in many of his communications. Al-Arian admits to this.”
Unless you can cite sources, you’re lying. You’re hyper-partisan to the extent that you’ve ruined your credibility.
“Notably, in the plea bargain,. . .”
You mean the plea bargain that he was forced to accept in order to resolve the matter because a judge had refused to rule on the matter for five years?
Typical of your routinely partisan presentation of the events, you have neglected to mention that he was never found to have provided any aid, or been a member of any terrorist organization.
About your propaganda efforts here- You shoot yourself in the foot by becoming reasonably informed and offering logical (though still dishonest) arguments. Right-wing propaganda relies heavily on emotionally charged rhetoric that is devoid of all reason. The danger from rightie propagandists like you is that you will use reasonable arguments to sway other righties, which then exposes the average right winger to the thought necessary for an argument to be reasonable. If rational arguments only come from the left, then the minions of right wing dupes will be hostile towards reasonable arguments in general. If another right wing dupe presents sound arguments that they are sympathetic to, that will inspire sympathy to reasonable arguments in general, and build competence to understand and make reasonable arguments themselves. So, though a dishonest, though logical argument might win you the battle, it will cost you the war. Right wing propaganda relies upon their herd of ignorant reactionaries being incapable of thought.
Anarchist 2.0 – I hold strong opinions on a lot of things. Plea bargains are one of them. People who tell me I cannot hold strong opinions is another. 😉
Anarchist wrote: “Without considering the fact that Israel has been in violation of international law since at least 1973 with an overt military campaign to seize land, displace Palestinians, and deny the state of Palestine the right to existence that would make a military response by Palestine completely appropriate, an investigation would be a reasonable response.”
Let’s not be led down a path of selective memory in regards to history. In 1973, the anti-Israeli countries around Israel led a sneak attack on the biggest Israeli holiday, Yom Kippur. The sneak attack failed and Israel kicked their butts. They had to seize land for purposes of security. Since that time, Israel voluntarily has given the Muslims land and always worked toward trying to help them create their own functioning State of Palestine that would work alongside the State of Israel.
What many people do not realize because of all the false rhetoric is that a State of Palestine never existed before 1988. The international community called for re-establishing the State of Israel in 1948. Israel has worked toward peace, and they bought into the idea that setting aside land for a State of Palestine was a good idea. Unfortunately, that idea has not worked out very well.
I don’t know if you have ever traveled to that region of the world. I have traveled several times to Israel and Palestine, and also to Jordan and Egypt. Unless you travel there, it is difficult to understand the conflict. From my perspective, it is very much like the racial conflict we have between blacks and whites. The old city of Jerusalem is split into districts, somewhat like the segregation that naturally happens in our country between blacks and whites. When walking through the Jewish quarter, everything is nice and clean. When you walk through the Muslim quarter, it is dirty with graffiti on the walls of shops. Occasionally you see someone throwing garbage out their second story window, which falls onto a pile on the street below. I am talking stinking trash, like chicken bones and what not. When I complained how these unsanitary conditions could be allowed by the Israeli government, the Jews there claimed that they cannot teach them to use trash cans and act more civilized. They have a culture of doing things certain ways for hundreds of years and it is difficult to teach them any other way. I am not Jewish, but I find the Muslim Arab ways somewhat barbaric. The Israelis seem to be highly civilized and a very respectable population of people.
Paul
David
It is possible that this guy is the insidious 5th columnist that David portrays him to be or he could be someone associated with Islam, perhaps a member of the same mosque and other groups as terrorists, unknowingly, or knowingly hoping to keep out of it. Giving money to large organizations that then funnel some to smaller more dangerous ones is one thing, perpetrating or supporting terrorist acts is another.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of Obama, he was a member of a church that had a nut case as a priest. Most religions include branches that harbor dangerous people. He extricated himself from the situation as it became apparent that the guy was nuts. How can he extricate himself from the past when perhaps his involvement with this leader focused on the more benign aspects such as Christian beliefs and doctrines. Washington is full of guys that belong to groups and temples that include and are sometimes lead by scumbags. Lieberman comes to mind with the Jewish intellectual giant that advises him on Saturday then peeks up women’s skirts when he gets a chance. Scratch a ______ and you get a_____. You fill in the blanks.
If one is to be tarred with the same brush as the worst of the group then Oliver North and Ronald Reagan should have gone to prison. Dozens around and including Nixon should have gone to jail. Several dozen along with William Calley should have spent life in prison. In this complex and secretive world, most leaders, religious, judicial, political, and industrial would be convicted if one was guilty by association.
People when asked to choose between an ideal, religion, country, or any doctrine they feel strongly about will, for the most part choose the ideal over what they may feel personally, internally. Millions go to war and slaughter innocents as a means to an end.
JT rarely gets subjective and he might very well be taking this too personally. He may be looking through a legal glass darkly. However, his main complaint is that this guy was pushed through the system without being able to be either fully convicted or fully exonerated.
Hard to say now, the sacred DOJ made a deal that very well served them more than the guy going to Turkey. In fact, it does appear that getting rid of someone that could cause a lot of embarrassment stands as the prime mover here. If the guy was as bad as David states, then why not take it through, on the government’s nickel and prove that this time might is right. The DOJ is sorely in need of a victory like that.
issac – Obama left his church after being in attendance for many years. Oprah caught on the guy was a nut case pretty fast and left. There are others who have all the relevant dates, but the Rev. Wright was trouble for as long as Obama was a member of congregation. He preaches “Liberation Theology.”
DavidM is presenting accurate FACTS whereas the rest of you are just presenting your opinions and arguments. FACT 1 is that Sami Al Arian was not a United States citizen. FACT 2 is that Sami AL Arian voluntarily pled guilty to a federal felony involving terrorism. FACT 3 is that Sami Al Arian AGREED to a judicial order of removal and deportation. FACT 4 is that Sami Al Arian has been deported. FACT 5 is that virtually everyday our government deports aliens on the grounds that they were previously convicted of a felony. Sami Al Arian was not treated any different. HE PLED GUILTY. End of arguments. Read Judge Moody’s comments about Sami Al Arian right before he was sentenced to 57 months imprisonment if you want more FACTS. Thank you DavidM!
BillT wrote: “Read Judge Moody’s comments about Sami Al Arian right before he was sentenced to 57 months imprisonment if you want more FACTS.”
Good point, Bill. Judge Moody sat thru the trial and concluded that Dr. Al-Arian is a master manipulator, a director and active leader of a terrorist organization who constantly lied about his involvement.
Following are Judge Moody’s words for those interested:
=======================
Dr. Al-Arian, as usual, you speak very eloquently. I find it interesting that here in public in front of everyone you praised this country, the same country that in private you referred to as “the great Satan”; but that’s just evidence of how you operate in the face of your friends and neighbors.
You are a master manipulator. You looked your neighbors in the eyes and said you had nothing to do with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. This trial exposed that as a lie.
Your back-up claim is that your efforts were only to provide charities for widows and orphans. That, too, is a lie. The evidence was clear in this case that you were a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. You were on the board of directors and an officer, the secretary. Directors control the actions of an organization, even the PIJ; and you were an active leader.
When Iran, the major funding source of the PIJ, became upset because the PIJ could not account for how it was spending its money, it was to your board of directors that it went to demand changes. Iran wanted its representative to have a say in how its money was spent.
To stop that, you leaped into action. You offered to rewrite the bylaws of the organization. You proposed that all PIJ funds be controlled by a three-person committee, of which you would be one of the three. You made calls to fellow directors all over the world to gather support. This committee would account for Iran’s money, all to keep the money flowing.
But when it came to blowing up women and children on buses, did you leap into action then? Did you offer to form a committee to protect the innocent? Did you call your fellow directors and enlist their aid in stopping the bombing or even to stop the targeting of the innocent? No. You lifted not one finger, made not one phone call. To the contrary, you laughed when you heard about the bombings, what you euphemistically call “operations.” You even pleaded for donations to pay for more such operations.
I’ll give a specific example: On January 22nd, 1995, in Beit Lid, there was a double suicide bombing claimed by the PIJ. The bombings occurred at a busy bus transfer station. People, including women and children, were milling about waiting for their buses.
When one pulled up — not a particular bus, a random bus — the first bomb was detonated, killing passengers and bystanders alike. The second bomber waited ten minutes or so and blew up the ambulance crews and other bystanders who had rushed in to help the wounded and dying.
Anyone with even the slightest bit of human compassion would be sickened. Not you. You saw it as an opportunity to solicit more money to carry out more bombings.
You composed a letter to a member of the Kuwait legislature. Your true attitude is best described by your own words, and I quote: “The latest operation carried out by the two mujahideen who were martyred for the sake of God is the best guide and witness to what the believing few can do in the face of Arab and Islamic collapse at the heels of the Zionist enemy and in keeping the flame of faith, steadfastness, and defiance glowing. I call upon you to try to extend true support of the jihad effort in Palestine so that operations such as these can continue.”
And yet, still in the face of your own words, you continue to lie to your friends and supporters, claiming to abhor violence and to seek only aid for widows and orphans.
Your only connection to widows and orphans is that you create them, even among the Palestinians; and you create them, not by sending your children to blow themselves out of existence. No. You exhort others to send their children. Your children attend the finest universities this country has to offer while you raise money to blow up the children of others.
You are indeed a master manipulator.
==========================
http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/71.pdf#page=3
Ibid. LOL! I’m horrible @ this. I don’t know how someone could do 17 @ once. LOL.
Having worked in a prosecutor’s office, I can say there are good plea bargains and bad ones. The goal should be to minimize the bad ones, and keep the good ones.
Plea bargains are a bandaid on a festering sore in the justice system. Efficiency in running the perps through the system should never be an ingredient in justice. Incompetent prosecutors and court appointed defense attorneys should never be an ingredient in justice.
The main problem with some institutions is that they hinge on a degree of sanctity that allows their cancers to metastasize. Sometimes the obvious should be allowed to go toe to toe with the sacred.
how many Jewish contributors here?
Abolishing plea bargains is simply implausible.
“One, I think plea bargains should be abolished. You prove it or you don’t. The professor made a calculated decision and that is on him.”
Mr. Schulte
That doesn’t seem like a terrible idea for the overzealous and political prosecutors of our time. Problem is, there would be another period of mass incarceration. Simply look at this blog. You don’t think we as Americans (and our glorious system) would not continue to lock-up black and brown men and poor people?
Indeed this decision is on the professor (as counsel). Moreover, his propagation of broader messages that are drenched in jingoism (founding fathers especially) help permeate false views about Muslims. Only when someone appears brilliant and civilized did they receive the requisite attention.
We have been following this from Remulak since it broke back in 2003 or so. The Islamic Revolution has come a long way. We thought this guy was in bed with the terrorists. We dont know what the American government knew or thought. You folks in America need to air all that is known about this guy for if he was a terrorist then you failed in your efforts to prosecute and things like 9/11 are on the horizon. Or Verizon. But Verizon is a computer or something isn’t it? This guy is going to Turkey for a reason. Deported? Yes. Better safe than sorry there? No. Erdogan going to be kind to him?
davidm2575
If what you say, that he lied, and it can be proven irrefutably to be true, then he should be subject to the appropriate laws. And, if he did indeed break these laws then he should be deported, after serving the appropriate time in jail.
However, from Turley’s piece it appears that questions were yet to be ruled on, through the full extent of the full potential of a defendant to defend his or her self, had yet to be fully resolved. If what you state is true but with the caveat that appeals were possible and the defendant could not afford to proceed then what I wrote still pertains.
The essence of my point is that the law is often not equal and blind. This blog is one continuing recording of the law, the administration (on both political sides), the DOJ, the police bullying the citizen into compromising or just plain losing when the citizen is often in the right. This pertains to those with bottomless pits of money to pay lawyers to crush individuals and/or smaller groups regarding patent rights or any other questions that need to be decided in a court of law.
One of the attributes of law is power. Relinquishing that power is often seen as a greater weakness than perverting he law. The unspoken question is if those who wield the law admit that they were wrong then couldn’t they have been wrong before? It seems that most Americans believe that if the law is perverted just once then inalienable rights and all that is held sacred is compromised. It also seems that perverting all that is sacred is an option those in power, publicly as well as privately, through political, administrative, and/or financial advantage do on a regular basis.
JT may be missing some stuff here. You may be missing some stuff here. But America is certainly missing some stuff here.
I would love to hear Professor Turley address some of Al-Arian’s speech, such as:
“”Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death to Israel. Revolution. Revolution until victory. Rolling to Jerusalem.”
““Let us continue the protests. Let us damn America. Let us damn Israel. Let us damn their allies until death.” ”
Here is some more disturbing background information about Sami Al-Arian:
Established in 1986 by Sami Al-Arian and Hussam Jubara, the Islamic Committee for Palestine (ICP) was promoted as a philanthropic advocacy group devoted to alleviating the suffering of Palestinian women and children. In reality, the organization served as an American front for the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad. At a 1991 conference in Cleveland, Ohio, a lecturer introducing Al-Arian as the ICP President candidly called the Committee “the active arm of the Jihad movement in Palestine.” “We like to call it the Islamic Committee for Palestine here for security reasons,” he added. Shortly after being introduced that evening, Al-Arian declared, “Let us continue the protests. Let us damn America. Let us damn Israel. Let us damn their allies until death.”
In addition to financing Palestinian suicide bombers, ICP organized rallies and sponsored a number of conferences throughout the United States in the late 1980s and early 1990s. PIJ materials and emblems were prominently displayed at these events, where known terrorists were among the attendees and keynote speakers alike. Featured speakers at ICP conferences included: Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, leader of the Islamic Group and mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Sheikh Abdel Aziz Odeh, the spiritual leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ); Mohammad Al-Asi, a Hezbollah-linked radical imam who used an ICP event as a forum to exhort Muslims to create a “war front for the Americans in the Muslim world”; Abd Al-‘Aziz Al’Awda, Islamic Jihad’s “spiritual leader”; and Muhammad ‘Umar, whose Islamic Liberation Party seeks to overthrow secular government institutions throughout the Middle East.
ICP also invited several guest speakers who could not attend its conferences, including PIJ’s then-leader Fathi Shikaki, and Osama bin Laden’s ideological mentor and al Qaeda co-founder Abdullah Azzam.
ICP functioned as a sister organization to another Sami Al-Arian creation: the World Islam Study Enterprise (WISE). Through ICP’s and WISE’s pretense of legitimacy, Al-Arian was able to secure visas for terror-related individuals seeking to gain entry into the United States. Among these was Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, who served as WISE’s Director of Administration and became PIJ’s worldwide leader in 1995 (when Fathi Shikaki was assassinated).
Shallah’s elevation within PIJ prompted a federal investigation into ICP and WISE. In a 1995 affadavit, William West of the Immigration and Naturalization Service wrote: “I have probable cause to believe that ICP and WISE were utilized by Sami Al-Arian and Ramadan Abdullah Shallah as ‘fronts’ in order to enable individuals to enter the United States, in an apparent lawful fashion, despite the fact that these individuals were international terrorists.”
ICP and WISE were financed by the Virginia-based SAAR Network, which was the target of U.S. federal raids in March 2002, on suspicion that it was funding terrorism.
http://discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6385
David are you trying to say Professor Turley defended someone who actually enabled terrorists? Clarify please.
Inga wrote: “David are you trying to say Professor Turley defended someone who actually enabled terrorists?”
Yes.
Did you miss that fact in his article? Sami Al-Arian was adjudicated guilty of helping Islamic Jihadists in Palestine. The organization Sami helped was a terrorist group responsible for over 100 killings in Israel. It goes along with his free speech activity, such as saying, “Let us continue the protests. Let us damn America. Let us damn Israel. Let us damn their allies until death.”
At the mosque where Sami Al-Arian served as an imam, a guy there actually threatened to rape my daughter. He was not afraid to say it right on camera. These are the kind of people we are fighting.
And you can be sure that Sami Al-Arian believes homosexuals should be executed, and he believes in the subjugation of women too. These are things that Muslims agree upon. Muslims also believe in a doctrine called Taqiyya, which justifies deceiving non-Muslims. Muslims can make friends outwardly but never inwardly with non-Muslims.
“Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah…” Quran 3:28
Al-Tabari’s (838-923 AD) Tafsir says: “If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels’] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harbouring inner animosity for them… Allah has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels in place of believers – except when infidels are above them [in authority]. In such a scenario, let them act friendly towards them.”
This teaching within Islam is what we see played out by Sami Al-Arian. He was fearing for himself, therefore pretending loyalty to the enemy (America, Israel, etc.). Islamic law allows him even to deny his Muslim faith in order to secure his deception.
You have to accept that Sami Al-Arian either lied in his initial defense, or he lied in his pleading guilty. Apparently Professor Turley believes Sami lied in his plea of guilt. I think he told the truth in his guilty plea and lied in his previous pleas of innocence. The wiretappings proved he knew more than what he had previously acknowledged.
david – I believe that everyone is due a defense in court, but like you I think Sami comes to this with very dirty hands.