Lewis Libby freed but Mohammed Salah sent to jail for 21 months
US District Judge Amy St. Eve ordered Mohammed Salah to serve 21 months in prison, asserting that telling the truth is the bedrock of our judicial system.
The judge continued that a stiff sentence was needed to provide a deterrent. Salah was also ordered to pay $25,000 and do 100 hours of community service.
Are you kidding me?
President Bush has been lying to the American people on just about everything related to the Iraq War.
Does anyone care that the Bush lies have cost us more than 3,600 American lives and resulted in serious disabilities for 20,000-plus other American soldiers?
Lewis Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of lying and sentenced to 30 months in prison for obstructing an investigation into the outing of a CIA spy whose husband criticized Bush for the Iraq war lies.
But Bush commuted Libby’s sentence, although Libby still must pay the $250,000 fine.
Welcome to justice in America, where criminals with clout are given a pass, and those with Muslim names are given the hammer.
Salah has been punished enough.
He served five years in an Israeli prison accused of supporting the Hamas terrorist organization. Those Israeli prisons are nothing like the comfortable country-club resorts where most American politicians convicted of crimes are sent.
After serving time in the Israeli Gulag, Salah returned to the US to be with his family.
He would have been allowed to walk free except that Sept. 11, 2001 happened. The Bush administration needed scapegoats to show the American public that they were doing their job in fighting terrorism.
Salah suddenly became Terror Suspect No. 1, even though Salah’s anti-Israel activism has never been related to anti-American extremism nor tied to the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization.
During the trial, Salah’s attorneys demanded they be allowed to question Jack Mustafa, Salah’s “friend” who was also the undercover informant on the FBI payroll.
Rather than allow Mustafa to be questioned, the Justice Department dropped Mustafa’s evidence and were then forced to drop the terrorism charge, too. Mustafa was also dropped from the FBI payroll.
After a lengthy trial, the jury acquitted Salah on the racketeering charge, but convicted him on the “perjury” charge.
The perjury had to do with an unrelated, politically motivated civil lawsuit filed by
the parents of an American boy who was killed in a terrorist attack while in the occupied West Bank.
Naturally, the judge ruled against all the Arabs named as defendants in that lawsuit. What else is new?
The decision by Judge St. Eve follows in that tradition, a pathetic miscarriage of justice; the continued mistreatment of an innocent man whose only crime is that he is an Arab who has an unpopular view of Israel.
Salah’s family, meanwhile, has been devastated by the brutality of the federal prosecution. The case destroyed his life and the lives of his wife and children.
But who cares about justice for them? Apparently, not Judge St. Eve.
What Judge St. Eve did by sentencing Salah to 21 months in prison is to make a politically motivated statement declaring that an Arab can never receive justice in America. If there is a bedrock to anything, it is that this sentence proves the American justice system is politically corrupt, void of principles, absent of justice and so unfair that crooks with clout can walk while the “unpopular innocent” are forced to suffer the unjust consequences.
Ray Hanania is an award winning syndicated columnist and author and is senior columnist for the Southwest News-Herald in Chicago. He can be reached at www.hanania.com.
Join the Conversation
good post ray hanan ..
thanks for englightening us
Regarding the case itself, it doesn’t sound right and appears that, as you have stated, an injustice was done. As for what happened with Libby, the President has the right to pardon anyone, even if they don’t deserve on a moral level. Of course, if you don’t like it,the best one can do in such a situation is petition your Senator for a change in the President’s rights, which I doubt will ever happen.
Now regarding a side point:
The first point would be your use of the term Gulag. This is inflammatory and sensationalist in it’s usage on your part and presents to me, as a reader, that is very much not “moderate”. Gulags were hideous Soviet run work camps that had people die in brutal and slow way. In some instance, there was some degree of testing and experimenting done on the prisoners as was done in WWII’s concentration camps.
Second, have you seen an Israeli prison? I know of someone who did as part of their regular service time in the IDF as guard for the military police dealing with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. in their regular service. He gave a rather cynical statement that in comparison to places he had to live in during his service they had better conditions. TV, AC, access to mobile phones ( though if deemed they could do harm by contacting folks their buddies on the outside ), games, visits, etc. Red Cross workers would come in and check on the folks too, and I didn’t hear complaints from them about the living conditions. It’s certainly not a work camp either.
Obviously, in any scenario, it is still a prison, but even in the States it’s still just four walls, a bed, toilet and sink. It’s not going to be a hotel as that’s not it’s purpose.
Hmm… shoot. I see I wrote something twice.
In any case, I hope for Mr. Salah that perhaps an appeal might work for him.
The term Gulag is very appropriate for Israel’s prison system, even if Israelis don’t like it or close their eyes to it. I know people who have served in that system, moved from one place to another, beaten and intimidated every day, denied food, water, forced to sit chained in a squatting position for days, refused meetings with their lawyers and their families.
What do you call all that? A normal jail? I doubt it.
Israelis love to dish it out. They throw harsh terms at Palestinians all the time. They say they want peace — and I know many do — but they pull back when words are used that are “too critical” of Israel, or focus in on the words that are too critical of Israel because the “game” bveing played is they give the appearance of a debate but they discourage harsh criticism of Israel and encourage very harsh criticism of Palestinians. One Palestinian dancing in the streets suddenly becomes the poster child for Palestinian fanaticism. One phrase too critical of Israel becomes the basis for claims that a writer is too harsh.
You can’t have it both ways. Peace is about both sides admitting their errors and doing so honestly. Palestinians are doing that. SOme Israelis like Btselem are also doing that, with much criticism and hate from Israeli society — I know several (who are Jewish and Israeli) and they tell me the Israelis make their daily lives miserable.
Moderation is also about being able to look at yourself and criticize yourself fairly and without restraint or hesitation.
Gulag is a good place to start. The prison system in Israel is filled with political prisoners who are mistreated, abused, abandoned and ignored. They’re not all “terrorists” but the phrase allows Israelis to brush aside any criticism.
Ray Hanania
With regards to Israel’s interrogation practices, they certainly do not have clean hands, but not every prisoner has experienced that treatment. And certainly not ever person detained within the system is “terrorist”. Though I agree some Israelis due view those within the system as just being entirely that.
I can say the same about some Palestinians. And you are generalizing here as well.
Unfortunately, though criticism of the use of measures within the Israeli system is deserved in some instances, they are given access to international aid organizations, unlike prisoners that have been held in the reversal either with organizations like Hamas.
If you recall, a few years ago there were two reserve soldiers who ended up accidentally going into Ramallah, if I’m not mistaken, and were detained in the police station. The humane treatment they received was being ripped apart by the crowd while being video taped by an Italian crew who were later threatened with loosing their lives for airing it. Even amongst certain Palestinian factions, if one is deemed to be a collaborator, they are shot and killed. The gunmen are judge, jury and executioner. While I know this is certainly not all Palestinians and occurs with some groups, I would certainly that neither party is clean from abuses.
Just a side note: thanks for responding. It’s nice when the authors do so.
You’re saying that Salah did not commit perjury?
Thanks Curious. I know we may disagree about the term, but words do not kill and if we can focus on words we might be able to resolve issues. I think it is fair to say the Israeli Gulag is NOT the same as the Soviet Gulag, and that the term Gulag is used as a reference … maybe the appropriate term is “Gulag-like” … it resembles many aspects of the Soviet Gulag but events in history are rarely mirror images … still, the Israeli prison system for Palestinian political prisoners is harsh and needs to be changed. The prisons are ugly, harsh and terrible.
As for Grumpy, yes, I am saying 1) he did not commit perjury, 2) that the case he is cited in as having committed perjury was a poilitically motivated case never fairly adjudicated in the United States (where any anti-Palestinian case that goes before a judge (usually pro-Israel by the way) will be ruled BY THE JUDGE in favor of the pro-Israel plaintiffs) and 3) 21 months for “lying” is harsh, way harsh when you consider the same sentences handed down to others and how other high profile “perjury” cases are treated.
I am also saying, in the column, that the two major charges 1) terrorism and 2) racketeering were thrown out. The Government dropped the “terrorism” charge which was the real reason why Salah was falsely accused in the first place right after Sept. 11 by former US Attorney (criminal) John Ashcroft (may he burn in hell one day
) … and the jury rejected the racketeering charge that Salah was associated with Hamas.
Perjury in a terrorism case? Sounds like they had to be harsh (insert political considerations rather than law) in order to save face.
Thanks for asking though.
Ray Hanania
http://www.hanania.com
PS … I have new online commentaries now on my web site at http://www.ArabAmericanTVOnline.com … the latest one is about Tucker Carlson, Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR and the stupid question “Why do they hate us?”