Al-Arian's sentence is more evidence of judge's bias, prosecution's lies.
You have to wonder about a few "coincidences" in the May 1 sentencing of Sami Al-Arian.
For example, Alberto Gonzales — the "torture-is-OK" and "no-law-binds-the-president" U.S. Attorney General — flew into the Tampa Bay area five days before the courtroom spectacle in which federal District Judge James Moody threw the book at Al-Arian, albeit a tattered tome that bore no resemblance to truth, justice or the U.S. Constitution.
Or, consider that Tampa's U.S. Attorney, Paul Perez, showed up — for the first time during the Al-Arian case — at the prosecution table on sentencing day. Courthouse gossips, including some of Perez's own staff, have told me he had wanted to keep a little distance during the trial in case his subalterns faltered. Falter they did. The prosecution team stumbled through awful lawyering and a series of strategic pratfalls. After a decade of investigations, costing U.S. taxpayers as much as $50 million, the feds didn't prove a single crime was committed by Al-Arian and three other Palestinians. Meanwhile, real terrorists with blood on their minds, such as Mohammed Atta, went undetected in Florida.
So, why did Perez put in an appearance at the drama's final scene? Why was he so eager to race to a spot in front of the TV cameras and make inflammatory claims about things his minions couldn't prove to a jury?
It's almost as if Perez knew Moody was going to surprise everyone and ignore the negotiated recommendations from both prosecution and defense attorneys that Al-Arian be given the light side of federal sentencing guidelines of 46 to 57 months in prison. With time served, Al-Arian could have anticipated almost immediate release and deportation. Now, with Moody's sentencing, he'll languish through as much as another 18 months in federal custody.
Those at the sentencing hearing noticed that the prosecutors appeared almost jovial when they entered the courtroom. That's suspicious when you remember how badly they were humiliated when a jury in December failed to return a single guilty verdict against Al-Arian and his three co-defendants. Why were the feds so upbeat? What had gone on when Gonzales dropped into town?
The only reasonable explanation is that Al-Arian was set up by the "recommendation" from the U.S. Attorney's office for a light sentence. Snookered. The feds never intended for Al-Arian to leave jail anytime soon.
There may be no direct proof of Moody's complicity, but there's little doubt of the judge's deeply ingrained prejudice. The judge would not allow the defense to bring up the slightest mention during the trial of the almost four decades of grinding military occupation of Palestinian lands by the Israelis. Tons of evidence — highly prejudicial and largely irrelevant to the facts of the case — was admitted about Israeli deaths. No evidence was allowed about Palestinian deaths. The jury heard about murdered Israeli children, nothing about the far greater number of murdered Arab kids.
Despite that grossly unjust imbalance dictated by Moody, the jurors saw through the propaganda and said, repeatedly, "not guilty."
In an interview last year, Al-Arian asked me to withhold his assessment of Moody. At that time, he said he feared another trial because he was sure that the overtly biased Moody would not allow a verdict other than guilty.
But a plea of guilty is a plea of guilty. The stateless Palestinian refugee eventually conceded he:
• Helped his brother-in-law, Mazen Al-Najjar, defend himself. Al-Najjar was jailed for almost four years based on "secret evidence." Al-Najjar has never been convicted of anything, although he was charged as a co-defendant in Al-Arian's case. The government, shortly before the indictment, released and deported Al-Najjar, which raises the question about whether the G-men really thought he was a terrorist.
• Provided assistance on immigration matters to Basheer Nafi, another alleged co-conspirator who was never tried and, therefore, has never been convicted of anything. Nafi also was deported by the federal government, on immigration not terrorism matters.
• Lied to a St. Petersburg Times reporter, Jim Harper. Al-Arian claimed he had no knowledge of Ramadan Shallah's role in the Islamic Jihad. Shallah left Tampa in early 1995, and there is no record he had any contact with Al-Arian or any of the co-defendants after that. About a half-year later, Shallah resurfaced in Damascus and took over the Islamic Jihad.
What Al-Arian didn't do is to admit to any violence. And, the government stipulated that nothing he admitted to resulted directly or indirectly in violence.
Moreover, what's missing from most of the egregiously misleading reports in the Tampa Tribune, and in the statements by Judge Moody at sentencing, is a time element. The record was very clear that Al-Arian had no active role with the Islamic Jihad after the federal government designated it a terrorist organization in the mid-1990s. Al-Arian's earlier activities — political activism and fundraising — occurred during the time when it was perfectly legal to support the group.
Yet, Judge Moody justified his harsh sentence by claiming Al-Arian had blood on his hands — an assertion rejected by the jurors. One who spoke to me said the jury "most emphatically" disagreed with the conclusion by Moody.
Al-Arian is far from a perfect person. Not only did he lie to Harper, but he was deceptive (or, as he told me in an interview last year, "incomplete") in statements to me. But he wasn't the only one. The ersatz terrorism expert who started the crusade against Al-Arian, Steve Emerson, also lied. Harper also reported that Emerson had claimed the Tampa Palestinians were involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Emerson claimed he had proof. He did not. Emerson also sued me and couldn't produce proof of his allegations; I prevailed.
The Tampa Tribune made up stories out of air. Under the tutelage of Emerson, the newspaper tried to pin the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing on Al-Arian. The paper has never retracted or apologized for that mendacity.
According to an article by the highly regarded St. Petersburg Times reporter Susan Taylor Martin, the Israelis weren't much interested in the final chapter of the Al-Arian case. He just wasn't that important.
But for our government, he represented the utter failure of George Bush's "war on terrorism." He had to pay the price.
It's interesting that Judge Moody called the Palestinian academic a "master manipulator." The judge was parroting Norman Gross, a radical activist for Israel who lives in St. Petersburg. On a recent WMNF show, Gross repeatedly used the terms "master manipulator" and "manipulator." Also, like Moody, Gross claimed Al-Arian was guilty of many things about which the jury specifically said there was no guilt. It's fitting, but sad, that an American judge should adopt the slogans and propaganda of one side in this case. Justice in Tampa is neither balanced nor blind.
Senior Editor John Sugg can be reached at john.sugg@creativeloafing.com. His blog is at www.johnsugg.com.
This article appears in May 10-16, 2006.