Federal Appeals Court to Hear Patrice Lumumba Ford Case
Patrice Lumumba Ford's 18-year sentence will be reviewed by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on December 4 in Portland, Oregon. Ford received national media attention as part of The Portland Six, who were accused of being a "terrorist cell" in 2002. Ford's new lawyer, Shaun McCrea of Eugene, will argue that the sentencing guidelines for "treason" were erroneously applied in her client's case.
And the libs are still declaring them innocent. It almost seems like a sad case of a victim defending his/her own attacker.
29 comments:
This looks to be another liberal agenda of being friendly to terrorists. So what else is new????
they are not appealing the case, just the sentence, very different things.
Ford's family is arguing that the court used the wrong sentencing structure to set the 18 year sentence.
this guy isn't a big fish. The US gov't offered him a 5 year plea bargain, probably better deal than most gang bangers can get.
18 years ain't enough.
Silly appellate court system. Don't they know that if we give all of our citizens equal legal rights, the terrorists will win?
What act of violence or terror did Patrice Lumumba Ford carry out against the United States or its citizens?
Anonymous said...
What act of violence or terror did Patrice Lumumba Ford carry out against the United States or its citizens?
The terror cell member was caught BEFORE.....LET ME DO THAT AGAIN, BEFORE PEOPLE DIED!
If you have kids...THINK ABOUT THE RUSSIAN SCHOOL THAT WAS SHOT UP, BECAUSE THAT WAS THEIR GOAL.
I'm betting you could care less!
Hello to all ought to read this news article why some want to deport gordon smith see below
------------------------
Hello lisa Some people are wanting to deport smith and have Earl bl.
run against smith we are supporting Senator Gordon smith for re
election here is an Article I thought you should read found on oregon
conservative:
-------------
Howard Dean to Join Governor Kulongoski, Leading Democrats for Portland
Rally
10/17/2006 5:46:00 PM
To: State Desk
Contact: Damien LaVera of the DNC Press Office, 202-863-8148
News Advisory:
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean will join Governor
Ted Kulongoski and leading Oregon Democrats for a rally at the
Montgomery Park Building in Portland at 5:00PM on Wednesday, October
18. Dean and Kulongoski will be joined by Oregon Senator Ron Wyden,
Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public Instruction Susan
Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats.
With Oregon ballots beginning to be mailed to voters on October 20,
Dean will emphasize Governor Kulongoski's record of accomplishments for
Oregon's working families and encourage activists to participate in the
Oregon Democratic Party's turn- out efforts.
Who: DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Governor Ted Kulongoski, Senator Ron
Wyden, Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public
Instruction Susan Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats
What: Oregon Democratic Party GOTV Rally
When: Wednesday, October 18th at 5 PM
Where: Montgomery Park Building, 2701 NW Vaughn St., Portland, OR --
For press credentials contact Marc Siegel at 503-239-8669.
---
Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee,
http://www.democrats.org. This communication is not authorized by any
candidate or candidate's committee.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
See Daniels right blog for about deporting smith and oregon
conservative blog
see why Daniels blog probably wants to deport senator Gordon smith:
Hello lisa Some people are wanting to deport smith and have Earl bl.
run against smith we are supporting Senator Gordon smith for re
election here is an Article I thought you should read found on oregon
conservative:
-------------
Howard Dean to Join Governor Kulongoski, Leading Democrats for Portland
Rally
10/17/2006 5:46:00 PM
To: State Desk
Contact: Damien LaVera of the DNC Press Office, 202-863-8148
News Advisory:
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean will join Governor
Ted Kulongoski and leading Oregon Democrats for a rally at the
Montgomery Park Building in Portland at 5:00PM on Wednesday, October
18. Dean and Kulongoski will be joined by Oregon Senator Ron Wyden,
Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public Instruction Susan
Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats.
With Oregon ballots beginning to be mailed to voters on October 20,
Dean will emphasize Governor Kulongoski's record of accomplishments for
Oregon's working families and encourage activists to participate in the
Oregon Democratic Party's turn- out efforts.
Who: DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Governor Ted Kulongoski, Senator Ron
Wyden, Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public
Instruction Susan Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats
What: Oregon Democratic Party GOTV Rally
When: Wednesday, October 18th at 5 PM
Where: Montgomery Park Building, 2701 NW Vaughn St., Portland, OR --
For press credentials contact Marc Siegel at 503-239-8669.
---
Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee,
http://www.democrats.org. This communication is not authorized by any
candidate or candidate's committee.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
See Daniels right blog for about deporting smith and oregon
conservative blog
so if your a republican vote for Gordon senator Gordon smith!
have you seen the top of daniels blog about deporting Gordon smith here is why they want to deport smith see below-
Hello lisa Some people are wanting to deport smith and have Earl bl.
run against smith we are supporting Senator Gordon smith for re
election here is an Article I thought you should read found on oregon
conservative:
-------------
Howard Dean to Join Governor Kulongoski, Leading Democrats for Portland
Rally
10/17/2006 5:46:00 PM
To: State Desk
Contact: Damien LaVera of the DNC Press Office, 202-863-8148
News Advisory:
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean will join Governor
Ted Kulongoski and leading Oregon Democrats for a rally at the
Montgomery Park Building in Portland at 5:00PM on Wednesday, October
18. Dean and Kulongoski will be joined by Oregon Senator Ron Wyden,
Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public Instruction Susan
Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats.
With Oregon ballots beginning to be mailed to voters on October 20,
Dean will emphasize Governor Kulongoski's record of accomplishments for
Oregon's working families and encourage activists to participate in the
Oregon Democratic Party's turn- out efforts.
Who: DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Governor Ted Kulongoski, Senator Ron
Wyden, Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Superintendent of Public
Instruction Susan Castillo, and other leading Oregon Democrats
What: Oregon Democratic Party GOTV Rally
When: Wednesday, October 18th at 5 PM
Where: Montgomery Park Building, 2701 NW Vaughn St., Portland, OR --
For press credentials contact Marc Siegel at 503-239-8669.
---
Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee,
http://www.democrats.org. This communication is not authorized by any
candidate or candidate's committee.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
See Daniels right blog for about deporting smith and oregon
conservative blog
>>>> The terror cell member was caught BEFORE.....LET ME DO THAT AGAIN, BEFORE PEOPLE DIED! <<<<
Looks to me like you've sprinted into "Minority Report" territory, so who am I to hold you back from running off the cliff?
Looks to me like you've sprinted into "Minority Report" territory, so who am I to hold you back from running off the cliff?
Look's like you will need more help in 08, then you think.
We cannot work to stop these people before they kill us, GOD FORBID, THEIR RIGHTS WOULD BE TREAD ON....hope you die first!
Security VS freedom dichotomy.
Only one is promised in the constitution. Any guesses?
constitution. HEY STUPID BRYAN, THEIR USING THE CONSTITUTION AS A WEAPON AS WELL, AN YOU'RE TO BLIND TO SEE IT!
Fly on the next flight then where they do it again, call from the plane and tell me you really messed up just before they ruin a really nice Boeing 757 again.
"Security VS freedom dichotomy.
Only one is promised in the constitution. Any guesses?"
Gee, bs, I'd guess you misunderstand some basic issues.
For instance, while convenient for your simplistic little comment, your assertion that the Constitution PROMISES anything is laughably incorrect.
If you'd bother to read the preamble to the Constitution, which lays out the reasons for and purpose of the Constitution, you just might be able to ascertain the goals of the framers. You then might consider that all that follows represent the means to achieve those stated goals.
"...and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..."
Any honest reading of this document will convey the clear appreciation the framers had for security as a necessary precondition for "...the blessings of liberty..."
The real dichotomy is the tendency of some people to demand the blessings of liberty (your "freedom") without acknowledging the costs and necessity of security. These people are selfish, self-important and self-deluding. Some who comment here are among them.
Any guesses?
Wow.
Obviously, on the most basic level, you cannot have the ensurance of freedom without enough security to protect the soveirgenty of your state. However, on the level that the United States is at, increasing the amount of security almost always impedes on the individual liberties of the citizens of the United States. The president being able to accuse anyone of terrorism without having to show proof via the writ of habeous corpus is likely to cut down on the amount of terrorist acts performed against the United States, but severely impedes on our personal freedoms.
"For instance, while convenient for your simplistic little comment, your assertion that the Constitution PROMISES anything is laughably incorrect."
Really? I can think of ten reasons off the top of my head why you are wrong.
"Any honest reading of this document will convey the clear appreciation the framers had for security as a necessary precondition for '...the blessings of liberty...'"
Your point is based on a debatable inference.
"The real dichotomy is the tendency of some people to demand the blessings of liberty (your "freedom") without acknowledging the costs and necessity of security. These people are selfish, self-important and self-deluding. Some who comment here are among them."
People like you are why I will alway say most conservatives assume too much. Never once did I say that the citizens of the United States should have absolute and unchecked freedom. For example, a person should not have the right to murder someone without the threat of legal ramifications.
The only real assertion I made was that we do have freedoms guaranteed in the constitution and that an increase in freedom takes away from security and vice versa.
"The real dichotomy is the tendency of some people to demand the blessings of liberty (your "freedom") without acknowledging the costs and necessity of security. These people are selfish, self-important and self-deluding. Some who comment here are among them."
I don't see the dichotomy. Sorry.
I think the best judgment of the meaning of the Preamble can be found in... well, in the rest of the document.
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..."
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..."
"No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, unless the President shall declare such person an enemy of the United States."
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oh... you know what, I think I made a mistake... one of those sections of the Constitution is incorrect. Any guesses?
As long as the 9th Circus Court is involved in this case, Patrice Lamumba will be out of the slammer within 24 hours after they hear the case. Count on it. The 9th Circus Court is right down there with the AmINOCLU in siding with the bad guys, regardless if they are common criminals or terrorists.
The president being able to accuse anyone of terrorism without having to show proof via the writ of habeous corpus is likely to cut down on the amount of terrorist acts performed against the United States, but severely impedes on our personal freedoms.
Whose "personal freedoms" have been "severely impeded", bryan?
Yours?
In fact the president could always "accuse" anyone of anything at any time. If you mean "imprison", then say so. If that's what you mean then you're still wrong.
read:
`(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by
the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.
`(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (10 U.S.C. 801 note), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained by the United States and has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination
and... detainees can have their status as an illegal combatant, and thus their imprisonment, reviewed by the United States DC Circuit of Appeals court, meaning that they retain the the right to habeas corpus. This law only makes it so detainees can not shop for favorable judges and that the court actually needs to look at the laws regarding detention.
"... alien(s) detained by
the United States who (have) been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as enemy combatant(s) or (are) awaiting such determination.
Hardly "anyone", eh, bryan?
If you think this is too high a price to pay for a program which you admit "...is likely to cut down on the amount of terrorist acts performed against the United States...", then I don't understand your concern.
Except to help make you safer, it will never affect you or your friends...
However...
even though you've made it clear there's nothing you'll fight for; I don't really know anything about your friends...
HEY BRYAN: In the "FISHWRAPPER" THIS AM....some libber judge says it's unconstitutional that Bush can freeze the assets of terrorists groups..WTF is going on?
So far, you and yours are walking right into my arguement that the "badguys" are using that document to kill us.
If they have no money stupid, they can't by one way plane tickets to ram the dwelling you hopefully live in.
I'm really getting pissed at your protect of peoples "rights that want us dead.
I'm thinking of buying that beer for you, instead of having my returning Marine son from combat in Irag, have all the fun for your attitude adjustment lesson.
HEY BRYAN: Maybe you can get to Houston to "aid" these oppressed citizens, but stay out of the airport there, my kid arrives the in 24 hours from Iraq, he may not understand your good work.
Two in Houston charged with planning to fund, fight with Taliban
Texas Taliban. "Local men accused of conspiring to help terrorists," from KHOU:
Two Houston men have been charged with planning to aid the Taliban, U.S. Attorney Don DeGabrielle announced Tuesday.
Adnan Babar Mirza, 29 and 33-year-old Kobie Diallo Williams, also known as Abdul Kabeer and Abdul Kabir, are both in federal custody.
Williams, a University of Houston student, pleaded guilty Tuesday. Mirza hasn't entered a plea.
Both men are accused of training with firearms so they could go to the Middle East to fight with the Taliban against coalition forces in the Middle East. They're also charged with providing cash to support terrorist groups.
In addition, Mirza is charged with three violations of federal firearms law.
To hone their skills in anticipation for battlefield jihad, the indictment alleges, Williams and Mirza agreed to train with firearms at various locations located in Harris and surrounding counties.
“While these subjects did not operate at a high level of sophistication in comparison with the 9-11 hijackers, the expressed goal was to aid the Taliban by training to carry out jihad against coalition troops in the Middle East,” said Roderick Beverly, the head of the FBI’s local office.
[...]
According to allegations in the indictment, Williams and Mirza, a citizen of Pakistan who entered the United States on a student visa on Aug. 15, 2001, allegedly viewed the United States and coalition military forces on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq as invaders. In April 2005, they agreed that they should travel to the Middle East to fight with the Taliban to engage in battlefield jihad.
On at least eight occasions between May 20, 2005, and June 17, 2006, the men engaged in firearms training, and at times in reconnaissance training.
As part of and during the alleged conspiracy, Williams and Mirza are accused of agreeing to offer financial support to Taliban fighters and their families.
Federal law prohibits contributions of goods or services to the Taliban.
As a student visa holder, Mirza is prohibited from possessing firearms. Furthermore, once his student visa expired on Dec.12, 2005, Mirza’s status changed to that of being illegally in the United States. Illegal aliens are also prohibited from possessing firearms.
The indictment charges Mirza in three counts of unlawfully possessing firearms during three firearms training sessions occurring in May 2005, March 2006 and May 2006.
If convicted of the conspiracy charge, Williams and Mirza face a maximum punishment of five years imprisonment, a fine of $250,000 and three years supervised release.
Each of the three firearms alleged against Mirza in Counts Two through Four carry a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, a fine of $250,000 and three years supervised release, upon conviction.
Contrary to popular belief and for those educated in the public schools, the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, are not the final arbiter of law. Under Article 3, Section two, Congress has the power to limit the jurisdiction of judges and the courts. Congress also has the power to impeach judges (Article 2, Section 4). Any federal judge who would be willing to review a case Congress has specifically placed off limits would be in violation of the judge’s oath of office. This specifically applies to enemies of the United States. Congress has used this power numerous times in the past to prevent the federal courts from undoing legislation that provided protection of the country and its citizens. The framers wanted the power of controlling the federal courts to rest in an elected body and not an appointed one.
As for the Writ of Habeas Corpus - Article 1, section 9 allows for the Writ of Habeas Corpus to be suspended where “public safety may require it”.
Kool-Aid Kaelri, go take a class!
You first. Habeas corpus may only be suspended "in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion," neither of which exists.
The principle of judicial review has existed since Marbury vs. Madison. It's one of the checks and balances. Just as the President signs most of the bills that Congress passes, even the ones he disagrees with, Congress almost invariably accepts the ruling of the Supreme Court in spite of its power to nullify it.
Could Congress pass a law excluding its own Article I powers from the court's jurisdiction? Yeah. Will it? Probably not.
Question: you say that "this specifically applies to enemies of the United States." What are you referring to here? Not a constitutional provision - the court by default has jurisdiction over "Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party" - so I assume you're referencing a Congressional measure. I'd like to see it.
Next time, though, you can save us all a lot of time by not conveniently leaving a few words out of the Constitution of the United States.
Wittes, Benjamin. "Checks, Blances, and Wartime Detainees." Policy Review. April/May 2005: 3-22.
Granted, it didn't pass, but it is undeniable that the Bush administration was pushing for it.
Also, give me one example of where a security mesure does not impede upon individual liberties or freedoms.
Also, give me one example of where a security mesure does not impede upon individual liberties or freedoms.
GOD BRYAN, YOU MAKE ME NUTS!!!!
"SOME INDIVIDUAL"??????
ARE YOU FING KIDDING?
So your answer to the airborne terrorist is "welcome aboard flight 93!!!!"
YOU GD RIGHT I WANT TO IMPEDE "SOME INDIVIDUALS RIGHT TO KILL ME!!!
Mostly those that have sworn to do just that!!!!
I'm not a nice person about the poetential of someone trying to kill me Bryan, in fact in Nam, My response was when faced with that decision was to "EMPTY MY MAGAZINE ON MY M16!"
YOU NEED TO WAKE THE F UP!
"GOD BRYAN, YOU MAKE ME NUTS!!!!"
Really? So I'm the reason you poooossstttt wwwoooooorrrrrrddddssss lllliiiiiiikkkkkeeeeee ttttthhhhiiiiiissss?
"YOU NEED TO WAKE THE F UP!"
No. You need to "WAKE THE F UP!" and realize that posting words like "UPSSSSSSSSET" gives people the impression that you're stuck in the fifth year of your life.
"in fact in Nam, My response was when faced with that decision was to "EMPTY MY MAGAZINE ON MY M16!""
Who cares? My uncle was in the exact same position, yet he would never advocate your simplistic hatred.
"So your answer to the airborne terrorist is "welcome aboard flight 93!!!!""
That is assuming all muslims are terrorists.
"in fact in Nam, My response was when faced with that decision was to "EMPTY MY MAGAZINE ON MY M16!""
Who cares? My uncle was in the exact same position, yet he would never advocate your simplistic hatred.
Hey Bryan: Bryan: WHAT I HATE(LET ME SPELL THAT FOR YOU, H-A-T-E most, is just because you think you are smarter because you went to a grade higher then myself...DOES NOT MAKE YOU SMARTER!
My style of writing, my lack of good period and comma's in the right place, does not make you more then me. I'm 60 years old, I fought in NAM(65-69) I was in the Marines, I saw people die, I shot and killed people trying to kill me, I've been there done that.
You have not seen, nor traveled ,experienced much more then potty training if that!
The rights you THINK belong to others, then those born here by birth and service to defend this country are not going to be taken away by snot nosed brats like you.
I see who you are, and people like me...WILL PREVAIL, NOT YOU!
10:10
Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!
Without prescription vasotec Low price glucotrol Buy vastarel 10mg cialis super active Now viagra capsules Canadian accupril
Chestnut age, a construction band turned up to start stratagem a lineage on the kill lot.
The 6an6w1go 262506 887841 446245 [url=http://mios.my-board.org/sdi.html]459796[/url] issue people's 5-year-old daughter in actuality took an force in all the
job prospering on next door and dog-tired much of each headlight of epoch observing the workers.
Post a Comment