Al Qaeada Has a Deep Bench

Al Qaeada Has a Deep Bench
By Lance Thompson - Contributing Editor
1/25/2007

On 16 January 2006, the Ninth U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco shielded a convicted terrorist behind its robes when it reversed the sentences and conviction of Ahmed Ressam, who came to this country to detonate a bomb at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX).

Ressam was born in Algiers in 1967, and showed an early interest in American fashion and culture. During a trip to Paris for medical treatment when he was 17, Ressam read some Algerian-language political books that convinced him that the Algerian government was corrupt. Upon returning to Algeria, he joined an Islamic rebel group. He left his homeland in 1992 during the civil war and emigrated to France, then, on a forged passport, went on to Montreal. He was stopped by immigration officials there, but he claimed to be seeking political asylum, and was admitted into the country. In Montreal, he supported himself on Canadian welfare, and by robbing tourists on at least 30 different occasions. He joined the Armed Islamic Group (GIA), a terrorist cell affiliated with al Qaeda, whose foiled plots included a plan to hijack an airliner and pilot it into the Eiffel Tower. Ressam helped other terrorists obtain false identification documents, and provided himself with a false Canadian passport, on which he traveled to Afghanistan for advanced terrorist training under one of Osama bin Laden’s senior officers, Abu Zubaida.

Ressam returned to Montreal, schooled in firearms, chemical weapons, and explosives. He made a reconnaissance trip to LAX, and determined that he could hide explosives in suitcases and detonate them in crowded passenger waiting areas. Along with several accomplices, he planned the strike and prepared the explosives.

On December 14th, with 124 pounds of explosives hidden in the spare tire well of his rented car, Ressam took the car ferry from Vancouver to Port Angeles, Washington. Port Angeles Customs Inspector Diana M. Dean noticed Ressam’s nervous and evasive behavior, and summoned two other inspectors–Mark Johnson and Dan Clem. Johnson stood with Ressam as Clem searched the rental car, noticing a white powder in the trunk. At that moment, Ressam fled, attempting to carjack an escape vehicle. Customs inspectors apprehended Ressam before he could get away. Two of his accomplices were subsequently arrested, one of whom testified against Ressam in court.

Ressam was tried and convicted on nine counts, including conspiracy to commit an international act of terrorism, smuggling explosives, and transporting explosives for the purpose of committing a terrorist act. A potential sentence of 130 years was reduced to 22 years when Ressam agreed to provide information on his fellow terrorists and their activities.

On 16 January 2006, the Ninth Circuit reversed one of the nine convictions, that of transporting explosives for the purpose of committing a terrorist act. The Ninth Circuit judges contend that Ressam’s conviction of the charge had to be overturned because the statute did not require that the explosives had to be linked to the act of terror. Thus, the prosecution proved that Ressam possessed explosives while involved in a terrorist act, but the Ninth Circuit holds that the prosecution must further prove that the explosives Ressam were carrying were the ones that he intended to use in the bombing plot that he confessed to. On the basis of that absurd technicality, the Ninth Circuit reversed one of nine convictions, and sent the entire case back to the lower court for re-sentencing, with the requirement that the court justify the rationale behind the sentence.
When terrorists stage a successful mass-murder attack, there is no punishment on earth harsh enough to fit the crime. Every single victim–man, woman or child–is a life cut short, an outrage against civilized society, an irreparable hole blasted in a family and a community. To take the murderer’s life is but puny recompense and retribution for such a crime. When the victims run into the hundreds, or even thousands, then the punishment loses all power to provide justice.

It is only when a terrorist is prevented from committing some merciless atrocity that his punishment can be timely, appropriate and just. Ahmed Ressam has been a criminal and terrorist most of his adult life. He supported himself by preying on innocent victims while planning far deadlier crimes. He trained under al Qaeda leaders to be a terrorist, and supplied aid and expertise to other terrorists. His masterpiece was to have been the wanton slaughter of hundreds of innocent travelers he’d never met and had no particular grievance against. His goal was the highest possible body count, the greatest effusion of blood, the maximum sorrow he could inflict on stunned family and friends. This is the man the Ninth Circuit is bending the Constitution to protect and shield.

The Ninth Circuit is the most overturned federal appellate court in the nation, having approximately 75% of its decisions reversed. It is probable that this decision also will be reversed. But some of these decisions become law, and that is something to remember when voting–these judges are appointed by the President.
It is also important to remember that the decisions of appellate courts are not footnotes to history or judicial minutiae that the ordinary person need not pay attention to. These decisions bear on our everyday lives, our personal safety, our country’s future. Every time a convicted terrorist goes free, or avails himself of protections provided by the Constitution he is sworn to destroy, it emboldens his fellows and reassures his imitators.

In the war against terrorists, we are all potential targets, possible victims, likely mourners, just as are the judges of the Ninth Circuit who handed down this decision. But those judges are also one thing more–they are nothing less than accomplices in the very acts of terror that threaten our nation. They should be ashamed