• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Conspiracy! AQ-Patsy goes to Jail!

Oliver said:
I know this is no funny thread at all because it´s a real
world issue about real justice and real politics... :boxedin:

AQ-Wirepuller Motassadeq, who was involved into the
"evil 9/11 gubmint-conspiracy", is sentenced to 15 years in jail.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=Motassadeq&btnG=Google+Search&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
Click to expand...

Did the webfairy not save him? Where is LC when you need them? Darn, guess this guy was fooled and could not blow the story on his NWO/PNAC handlers.
 
beachnut said:
Did the webfairy not save him? Where is LC when you need them? Darn, guess this guy was fooled and could not blow the story on his NWO/PNAC handlers.
Click to expand...

If these dreamers would take the time to study these
trials instead "WOW! Look´s like CD", they would realize
that there is a real world, too... :boggled::covereyes:rolleyes:
 
Just one bump for the investigating fencesitter...
 
One thing I noticed, that perhaps you can help me with Oliver...

I noticed he was only convicted for assisting in the murder of the crew and passengers of the 4 flights. Why was he not also convicted for the murder of the other 2,700+ victims?

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
One thing I noticed, that perhaps you can help me with Oliver...

I noticed he was only convicted for assisting in the murder of the crew and passengers of the 4 flights. Why was he not also convicted for the murder of the other 2,700+ victims?

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

As far i remember they had to skip this accusation because the US-Intelligence
withhold important testimonies from imprisoned terror suspects.

ETA: I try to find an english article about it...

http://web.archive.org/web/20030419...dependent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?story=379891
http://cooperativeresearch.net/entity.jsp?entity=mounir_el_motassadeq
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/6/3515
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/086736.php
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=Motassadeq+%22blame+us%22&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=

European commentators blame US secrecy, complaining that “the German justice system [is] suffering ‘from the weaknesses of the way America is dealing with 9/11,’ and ‘absolute secrecy leads absolutely certainly to flawed trials.’”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Oliver said:
As far i remember they had to skip this accusation because the US-Intelligence
withhold important testimonies from imprisoned terror suspects.
Click to expand...


I'm just wondering if it's a matter of German law?

If he was convicted for the flights, that means they got enough evidence to prove he was involved in the plot. So the further murder of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon should be a logical progression of the guilty charge.

The only thing I could see is if he didn't know what the hijacking was for.

In New Zealand, even if he didn't know they were going to ram the planes it's still murder, because of his disregard for the lives of others in the process of committing the intended murders (the ones he was convicted for).

So is it different in Germany?

Let's take a simpler example...

Say a guy robs a bank. He jumps in a getaway car and races away from the bank to avoid being captured. His reckless driving leads him to run a pedestrian crossing, killing someone.

Although this death was accidental, under New Zealand law (i.e. under British Common Law) the charge would be murder.

How about in Germany?

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
I'm just wondering if it's a matter of German law?

If he was convicted for the flights, that means they got enough evidence to prove he was involved in the plot. So the further murder of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon should be a logical progression of the guilty charge.

The only thing I could see is if he didn't know what the hijacking was for.

In New Zealand, even if he didn't know they were going to ram the planes it's still murder, because of his disregard for the lives of others in the process of committing the intended murders (the ones he was convicted for).

So is it different in Germany?

Let's take a simpler example...

Say a guy robs a bank. He jumps in a getaway car and races away from the bank to avoid being captured. His reckless driving leads him to run a pedestrian crossing, killing someone.

Although this death was accidental, under New Zealand law (i.e. under British Common Law) the charge would be murder.

How about in Germany?

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

I guess it´s like in New Zealand: It depends on the evidence.
It´s proven that he was part of a terrorist organisation and
knew parts of the plan. But the evidence is too weak to
definitely convict him because the murder of 3066 people
because the missing evidence about his knowledge of the
"whole" plan.

Is this different in New Zealand? You can get sentenced
for a specific count of an indictment without enough evidence
for that specific count of an indictment? :eye-poppi
 
Last edited:
Oliver said:
I guess it´s like in New Zealand: It depends on the evidence.
It´s proven that he was part of a terrorist organisation and
knew parts of the plan. But the evidence is too weak to
definitely convict him because the murder of 3066 people
because the missing evidence about his knowledge of the
"whole" plan.

Is this different in New Zealand? You can get sentenced
for a specific count of an indictment without enough evidence
for that specific count of an indictment? :eye-poppi
Click to expand...



I understand that. What I don't understand is how he can be convicted for the murder of SOME but not ALL. Either there is enough evidence for convict him in relation to the actual murder of the 9/11 victims, or there isn't. They were all killed by the same collective act, therefore being found guilty of one makes you guilty of all.

I fail to see how there can be evidence to convict him for the killing of everyone on all four aircraft, but not the other people killed BY those four aircraft. Seems illogical to me.

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
I understand that. What I don't understand is how he can be convicted for the murder of SOME but not ALL. Either there is enough evidence for convict him in relation to the actual murder of the 9/11 victims, or there isn't. They were all killed by the same collective act, therefore being found guilty of one makes you guilty of all.

I fail to see how there can be evidence to convict him for the killing of everyone on all four aircraft, but not the other people killed BY those four aircraft. Seems illogical to me.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

To me it looks this way: If you sell a stolen gun to a
guy and this guy kills 10 people, you get convicted
because selling the gun but not because murder.

ETA:
(unless there is evidence you knew about this plan)

There was simply not enough evidence to prove that
his involvement was part of crashing the planes into
the targets - beside the hijacking. Maybe they would
have sentenced him in the first place - having the
needed information from the US.

I don´t know if the hamburg court of law ever got
these testimonies or if they get them later but were
not able to find enough evidence in it.
 
Oliver,

It looks like he is appealing the sentence only, not the conviction. It also looks as though his appeal is unlikely to be successful in the circumstances.
 
LashL said:
Oliver,

It looks like he is appealing the sentence only, not the conviction. It also looks as though his appeal is unlikely to be successful in the circumstances.
Click to expand...

His defenders announced several ways to dispute the
courts decision but i don´t believe that they will have
success - even if they claim to have new witnesses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom