Mounir El Motassadeq Gets 15 Years for Aiding 911 Attacks

Just wanted some opinions on the conviction of this terrorist with ties to the highjackers.

Is he a patsy?

Will he REALLY go to jail?

What I did find interesting is that he spoke to one of the victims family and said:

“I understand your suffering. ... The same thing is being done to me, my kids, my parents, my family — my future is ruined.”

www.msnbc.msn.com...

www.msnbc.msn.com...
the federal appeals court said evidence showed el Motassadeq knew that the hijackers planned to hijack and crash planes. It found that his actions — for example, transferring money, and helping the hijackers keep up the appearance of being regular university students by paying tuition and rent fees — facilitated the attacks.

15 years is pretty darned light for aiding an attack that killed nearly 3 thousand people and sparked what's going to be the most horrific clash of civilizations since colonialism.

Guy should probably get a bullet in his head.

Heck, before all this is over, he probably will.

As far as him saying his life is ruined, the person, a son of a victim, he said it to replied

www.msnbc.msn.com...
You have a chance to rebuild your life and be back with your family. Others don’t,” Puopolo said. “Your life is not over, but my mom’s is.”

the 1988 Lockerbie bombing resulted in the conviction of a man now claimed to be innocent by a CIA agent and a Scottish police chief who claim evidence was planted against him.

www.findarticles.com...

Lockerbie: CIA witness gagged by US government

A FORMER CIA agent who claims Libya is not responsible for the Lockerbie bombing is being gagged by the US government under state secrecy laws and faces 10 years in prison if he reveals any information about the terrorist attack.

news.scotsman.com...

A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated.

The retired officer - of assistant chief constable rank or higher - has testified that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 mass murder of 270 people.

Multiple theories on this event:
news.bbc.co.uk...

I've known about this trial, acquittal, retrial and conviction of Motassadeq since it started.

The evidence against Motassadeq apparently comes down to interrogation summaries provided by the USA.

At a retrial that resulted in the 2005 conviction, the U.S. provided limited summaries from the interrogation of, among others, Ramzi Binalshibh, a suspected liaison between the Hamburg hijackers and al-Qaida.

I don't know how the German criminal court works, but if this is all the evidence against the man in regards to actually being involved in the attack, then it came down to word of mouth. Physical evidence to place him in any way with the attacks does not exist.

I suppose this is why the sentence was eventually handed down. Its only 15 years which is the maximum German courts issue. The USA looks less guilty, and a man who most likely had nothing to do with it only loses about two decades of his life instead of all of it.

[edit on 8-1-2007 by Frith]

but if this is all the evidence against the man in regards to actually being involved in the attack,

He paid their bills, he fronted for them in order for them to be able to carry out their plans, which he was aware of, not in detail, but at least that they were going to carry out an attack.

That IS providing material support to a terrorist organization. Hell, its being a member of a terror organization. Its not word of mouth, its physical evidence, bills, checking accounts, money transfers, etc. Thats evidence.

Originally posted by Nygdan

but if this is all the evidence against the man in regards to actually being involved in the attack,

He paid their bills, he fronted for them in order for them to be able to carry out their plans, which he was aware of, not in detail, but at least that they were going to carry out an attack.

That IS providing material support to a terrorist organization. Hell, its being a member of a terror organization. Its not word of mouth, its physical evidence, bills, checking accounts, money transfers, etc. Thats evidence.

I wasn't stating that he wasn't a part of a terrorist organization. His involvement with the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 just isn't there other than from the allegations from interrogation sessions from the USA.

He should have been convicted only of laws he actually broke rather than being a fake accessory to a crime he wasn't involved in.

They are convicting him on him having provided money and cover to the people involved in the attacks and having known about the attacks.