In light of the fact that he already stated that he tried to explode a bomb in the Times Square subway station “for the Islamic State,” this is just courtroom jihad: forcing the Infidel to waste time and resources that could be better spent elsewhere prosecuting him. Even the very fact that he is being given a civilian trial is yet another manifestation of the false premise that every jihad plot is a separate criminal incident, unrelated to any and all others. It is part of the denial that there is a global jihad, or any overarching belief system, ideology, or goal that ties these separate incidents to one another.
“Accused NY subway bomber pleads not guilty to terrorism charges,” by Brendan Pierson, Reuters, January 11, 2018:
NEW YORK (Reuters) – The Bangladeshi man accused of attempting an Islamic State-inspired suicide bomb attack on a busy New York City commuter hub in December pleaded not guilty on Thursday to federal terrorism charges.
“At this moment, not guilty,” said Akayed Ullah, 27, when U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan asked him for his plea at a hearing in federal court in Manhattan.
The charges against Ullah include supporting a foreign terrorist organization, using a weapon of mass destruction and carrying out a terrorist attack against a mass transit system. Ullah faces life in prison if convicted.
Ullah was arrested on Dec. 11 after trying to detonate a pipe bomb secured to his body in a pedestrian tunnel in New York City’s subway system, according to federal prosecutors. The tunnel is in a busy subway station in Manhattan’s Times Square that is connected to the busy Port Authority Bus Terminal, which is used by commuters from New York’s suburbs as well as out-of-town travelers….
Ullah told police officers after the blast that he “did it for the Islamic State,” according to a criminal complaint filed on Dec. 13.
Prosecutors said that Ullah, who has lived in the United States since 2011, began his self-radicalization in 2014 when he started viewing pro-Islamic State materials online. Inside Ullah’s passport, which was recovered from his home, was a handwritten note that read, “O AMERICA, DIE IN YOUR RAGE,” according to the complaint.
Monirul Islam, head of the Bangladesh police’s counterterrorism unit, told Reuters shortly after the attack in December that his country had found no evidence linking Ullah to militants in his home country….
StellaSaidSo says
‘O AMERICA, DIE IN YOUR RAGE’
O VILE JIHADIST, DIE IN JAIL
mortimer says
Seconded.
underbed cat says
Thirded
Andy says
Trump: End ‘Chain Migration,’ ‘Visa Lottery System,’ Replace with Merit-Based Immigration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ0PD1sFOJ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4C5XEjtxWo
J D S says
Of course he would plead NOT guilty…More tax dollars will be used to defend another of this cess pool acumen bag. Of course doing things like this is the norm….it’s in ” the book”.
Frank Anderson says
J D S, I suggest the staged play that surrounds the standard “not guilty” plea is in much more than 1 playbook. It gets the defendant and his attorneys many headlines, much attention, and credibility with peers. But look at all the others who benefit by the show. There have been cases that were used by prosecutors and police investigators to keep their own names in headlines for months or years only to fall apart when finally presented in court and destroyed by the facts. The legal system depends on honest, professional and ethical handling by the defense, prosecution, judge, jury and witnesses, or the result is corrupt. Defendants who know this also know that they get more of what they want by corrupting the system wherever weakness appears. I can think of only 1 way to avoid this waste in terror cases (discussed earlier in this post). Perhaps others have better ideas. Otherwise we will be paying legal bills for trials and sentences larger than our current wartime defense spending as long as this war continues (so far 1400 years and counting daily).
mummymovie says
And shortly thereafter will come the book deal, and celebrity in American lefty circles.
Watch, you’ll see.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Maybe our brave leader Justin Al-Ottawi will give him a few mil…just because.
American Infidel says
I agree, however…..A crine like this should punish him with just a paper blanket, and a 3×8 concrete cell.
But we all know, he will get special treatment due to his cult. First halal food, then litigation jihad at tax payer expense.
Sarah says
There is something seriously rotten with the Western criminal justice system (because it happens across every Western nation, not just America) wherein someone can confess to a crime – and then plead not guilty.
It makes a mockery of the system and is nothing but a waste of time and resources.
I respect due process and believe in ‘innocent until proven guilty’ but if someone admits to their wrongdoing – well there’s your ‘proven guilty’, especially in the cut and dry cases like this one.
This guy tried his best to kill people via an act of terrorism. He copped to it. Its done. He doesn’t need a trial, all he needs is to be dragged out the back and either thrown in a hole, to never ever see the light of day again, or given two in the back of the head. Whichever suits your fancy.
mortimer says
He’s following what his lawyer says. Our system is an attempt to protect us from wrongful conviction. If he’s on camera, there isn’t much of a case for the defense.
Frank Anderson says
Mr. Spencer and others, please understand the “not guilty” plea is a formality. Any defense lawyer that allowed a guilty plea in basically the first hearing of the matter would be accused of “inadequate representation” which could destroy the chance of a conviction capable of surviving all appeals. The plea is a lie; but everyone in the system knows it. It is a necessary formality and nothing more to allow due process to be afforded in the legal system. “A lawyer’s duty of zealous advocacy of his client’s interest is limited by an equally solemn duty to uphold the law and standards of professional conduct.” Nix v. Whiteside, 457 U.S. 157 (1986). A defense lawyer is obligated to force the state to prove by admissible evidence all the legal elements of the prosecution’s case. Otherwise, in the absence of “zealous” representation, the defendant walks. Look at what happened when the prosecution violated its duty to “seek the truth” wholesale in the Duke Lacrosse players’ case. Search Mike Nifong. Nifong was removed from office, disbarred, sued by the players, lost, filed bankruptcy, denied discharge of the players’ judgments, criminally prosecuted for corruption in office and sentenced to prison, That is the way the criminal system has worked in this country on the theory that it is better to let many “guilty” people walk, than to convict one who is “not guilty”. I think statistics that can be found would show the most frequent issue on appeal in criminal cases is “inadequate representation of counsel”.
In the only case in Israel resulting in an execution, Adolf Eichman, the defendant was afforded the best defense lawyer(s) and strict following of the rights of due process. If war is declared, due process may no longer be required under “war powers” and the “accused” terrorist/enemy combatant could simply be sentenced. I think terrorists should be treated legally as pirates on land, “enemies of all mankind”, who can be shot on sight without further waste. But Suicidal Liberals of all persuasions want to fawn, and bow, and appease to people who would cheerfully kill them at any opportunity. It’s not supposed to make sense; but it is that way. Paraphrased from Ann Coulter, “If Liberals had any sense they would be Conservatives.”
CRUSADER says
Indeed. It was made clear in one episode of “Law & Order”
that a plea of “not guilty” does not mean “innocent”…..
it just means that one feels one cannot be shown to be guilty.
It’s like saying: “Prove it!” and “I want my day in court!”
(and: “I want media coverage to continue.”)
Frank Anderson says
I agree. That is the price we pay for our legal system to protect those who are not guilty. In Civil Law countries, (remember Italy and France for example), a person is presumed guilty of the charge and must prove innocence. “He is guilty or he would not have been charged. Now prove the whole power and resources of the state wrong.” It’s too bad that the “loser pays the winners attorney fees and expenses” rule does not apply where the impact of such groundless prosecutions is frequently total economic destruction of the accused, guilty or not. Think of the Amanda Knox saga in Italy.
Frank Anderson says
J.B., thank you for your comment. A prosecutor (Nifong) lost a case, and was personally and totally destroyed as he should be for failing his duty to “seek the truth”. A defense attorney (not one of the parties on appeal in the Nix case) was humiliated for performing his duty. If the defense attorney had failed in his duty of competent and zealous representation, he would have suffered the same type of disaster as Nifong. Unless you understand the difference in the respective duties of the prosecutor and defense under bar and court rules, all you can see is what you see on television stories and feel from your opinion and emotions. Any defendant who enters a plea of guilty in the absence of a really good plea deal AT THE FIRST HEARING would do so only over his attorney’s advice and objection, duly noted in the record to prevent action against the attorney for negligence, malpractice and incompetence.
As long as terrorism is “just another crime” “due process” demands zealous and competent representation within the bounds of the law and standards of professional conduct. Due process also demands that the prosecutor, judge and jury obey the law at every step for a conviction to survive appeal. Sorry you don’t like my “mixed metaphors”; but I don’t worry about such fluff when trying to discuss a life and death matter. Maybe 3 years of law school, a few successful bar examinations, 30 plus years of being licensed and a substantial and diverse exposure to criminal cases might help you see past your fluff.
CRUSADER says
John Guandolo of UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT
has noted that decree from Al-Azhar University scholars
have deemed jihad is not terrorism…..
So to a jihadi, this plea makes sense.
He was only performing jihad, not what is forbidden.
Jihad being obligatory, by divine will.
That Ullah says, “At this moment, not guilty”….is rather astounding.
Wonder what “Reliance of the Traveller” would say about that?
Prabh108 says
Males like him are the reason why the ‘third world’ is the third world.
Tjhawk says
Does anybody know if Ullah lost his balls in the failed jihad explosion? God, I hope they were blown off. In the event of failed justice, at least we would have that.
underbed cat says
The article from Rueters dated Jan. 11 2018, writtien by Brenden Piersin stated, “Monuril Isalm, head of the the Bangladesh police counterterrorism said ‘he found no evidence linking Ullah to militants in his home country”…….may be /is due to exactly to what Crusader mentioned from UTT, that jihad is not illegal in sharia countries ..so they do not see it as a crime….and with the last name of Islam it adds to the non -mystery, besides the fact the attorneys have to beleive the person on trial is suppose to be defended. Curious if this will be explained in court. Terrorism is a term that we think of as universally understood, but in sharia countries it would exclude islamic terror. That is the clever deception that makes truth about the doctrine hate speech in they eyes of muslims as dictated by Islam shariah law.
LeftisruiningCanada says
They should have accused him ‘freedom fighting’ or ‘lawful jihad against kufar”.
Matthieu Baudin says
“… Even the very fact that he is being given a civilian trial is yet another manifestation of the false premise that every jihad plot is a separate criminal incident, unrelated to any and all others…”
Yes Robert, absolutely right. I’ll be arguing the case for military trials till my dying breath.
MFritz says
Hoping for a second chance at jihad?
p bay says
Not guilty is correct according to sharia law, which he is under. Thats why they are inadmissible as per the 1952 law, Send the chain migration pile back