FBI nabs terrorist plotting to detonate a suitcase bomb in Congress

[PixelPusher]

Major news!

...or it would be if the man in question were named Mohammed bin Crockerabad instead of Demetrius "Van" Crocker. This nationally relevant story involving the omnipresent War On Terror brought to you by...The Jackson Sun, a local paper in Tennessee.

McKenzie man gets 30 years for bomb plotting
McKenzie man told undercover agents he wanted to detonate bomb
Man gets 30 years for bomb plotting

Demetrius "Van" Crocker of McKenzie, convicted in April of attempting to obtain a chemical weapon and possession of stolen explosives, was sentenced to 30 years in prison Tuesday by U.S. District Judge James Todd in Jackson.

Crocker, who told undercover FBI agents of his desire to explode a briefcase bomb while Congress was in session, was found guilty by a jury in about 90 minutes in April. (What?! No Gitmo? No waterboarding needed? No suspension of Habeus Corpus needed?)

The 40-year-old farmhand and father of two was convicted of accepting what he thought were ingredients to make Sarin nerve gas and a block of C-4 explosive from undercover agents in October 2004.

The maximum penalty Crocker could have faced for the convictions would have been a life sentence. Todd did order lifetime supervised release for Crocker once he gets out of prison.

In all, Crocker was convicted on five charges: one count of attempted possession of a chemical weapon, one count of inducing another person to acquire a chemical weapon, one count of possession of stolen explosives, one count of possession of explosive material with intent to harm an individual or damage or destroy a building, and one count of possession of an unregistered destructive device.

During the trial, prosecutors introduced video- and audio-taped conversations that Crocker had with undercover agents, laced with profanity, racial slurs and Crocker's open hatred of all things to do with the government.

Visit jacksonsun.com and share your thoughts.

Didn't see this story on NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX/CNN? Me neither...

[boutons_]

This guy is a hero to militias, white supremecists, libertarians, and Repugs for wanting to destroy the Legislative branch.

And, what happened to the Miami guys?

Jose Padilla, shackled hand and foot, ears muffed, blindfolded, is so ing dangerous that he requires serveral badasses in full riot gear just to move him around.



http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/us...rtner=homepage

Jose Padilla is apparently still so dangerous after years in custody that he makes Hannibal Lecter look like Pee Wee Hermann.

.

[xrayzebra]

I'm sure they tortured him to find out he wanted to
destroy congress.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

What?! No Gitmo? No waterboarding needed? No suspension of Habeus Corpus needed?)

Did they pick him up on the plains of AFghanistan?

This guy is a hero to militias, white supremecists, libertarians, and Repugs for wanting to destroy the Legislative branch

So you're lumping Republicans and libertarians in with militias and white supremacists? Nice reach, Gumby.

[exstatic]

Did they pick him up on the plains of AFghanistan?

Was Padilla picked up there?

[Yonivore]

Was Padilla picked up there?

Nope, on a plane returning from Pakistan after he received training from al Qaeda (apparently he wasn't brighest bulb in the class)...while trying to detonate a bomb in his shoe. Just in case you forgot.

[exstatic]

Nope, on a plane returning from Pakistan after he received training from al Qaeda (apparently he wasn't brighest bulb in the class)...while trying to detonate a bomb in his shoe. Just in case you forgot.

No, I remembered. AHF set the criteria, and Padilla didn't meet them. O'Hare <> Kabul. Padilla also wasn't the shoe-bomber. That was that bloke, Richard Something.

[Yonivore]

No, I remembered. AHF set the criteria, and Padilla didn't meet them. O'Hare <> Kabul.

So, just becuase he was able to board a plane and leave that changes his status as a terrorist and the terms under which he should be held? I don't think so.

Padilla also wasn't the shoe-bomber. That was that bloke, Richard Something.

My bad.

[exstatic]

So, just becuase he was able to board a plane and leave that changes his status as a terrorist and the terms under which he should be held? I don't think so.

No, AHF set the criteria with his question, and yes, I think US citizens apprehended on US soil deserve due process.

[Yonivore]

No, AHF set the criteria with his question, and yes, I think US citizens apprehended on US soil deserve due process.

Even if due process exposes intelligence methods and practices that can then be exploited by other terrorists to evade capture?

No thank you.

[Bob Lanier]

terrorists

murderers, child molesters, drug dealers, mafia bosses, tax evaders, pot smokers, petty thieves...

You're backpedaling because you know just as well as everyone else that due process for the accused is neither an unreasonable nor an insurmountable barrier to security.

[Yonivore]

murderers, child molesters, drug dealers, mafia bosses, tax evaders, pot smokers, petty thieves...

You're backpedaling because you know just as well as everyone else that due process for the accused is neither an unreasonable nor an insurmountable barrier to security.

I believe in the case of war, security of methods and tactics are paramount to due process.

Padilla is none of the things you listed...well, as far as we know, but, in any case, he is a terrorist suspect with obvious ties to al Qaeda. This alone warrants the terms of his detention.

[Yonivore]

By the way, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the Executive Branch does have the legal right to hold Padilla. I'm sorry that your "reality-based" worldview won't accept it, but the courts have already decided that the President does have the authority to militarily detain:

"...a citizen of this country who is closely associated with al Qaeda, an en y with which the United States is at war; who took up arms on behalf of that enemy and against our country in a foreign combat zone of that war; and who thereafter traveled to the United States for the avowed purpose of further prosecuting that war on American soil, against American citizens and targets.

That narrowly defines that the Executive does have the legal, quite Cons utional right to make specific detentions.

That narrow definition should also belay the squawkings of the hyper-emotive, Chicken Little leftists, such as yourself, that still insist, against all factual evidence to the contrary, that Bush can throw anyone in jail at any time, for any reason, without hope of a trial.

It won't, of course.

Little things like facts and court decisions just get in the way of their essential "truthiness" that President Bush is a big old evil fascist, and that what really matters, facts be damned.

[Bob Lanier]

Whom are you talking to?

[Nbadan]

There's gotta be much more to the Padilla story than is widely known.

[Please_dont_ban_me]

I'm sure they tortured him to find out he wanted to
destroy congress.

That makes me feel a little better.