Blackwater Murderers Go Free On Technicality

[Ecofarm]

No, its a story of someone who had harmless homemade rockets in his car while Muslim.

Those "harmless" rockets (and some literature, contacts, etc, and other stuff) got his buddy 15 years. I didn't know the sentence for "harmless rockets" was 15 years. Wow.

And what exactly does it have to do with this thread?

Here in the US, we have both forms of law and order. The one we reserve for those whom we defend regardless of what they do, and the one we use on everybody else.

 

[Patroklos]

No, its a story of someone who had harmless homemade rockets which didn't even work in his car while Muslim.

And what exactly does it have to do with this thread? Red herring much? Or was that intended as an ad hominem?

Another teaching moment where I can point out actual irony for you Forma!

 

[Ecofarm]

About the "rockets". What kind of a tard would use (plastic) PVC pipe for highly explosive potassium nitrate fuel. It's like putting an inverted coffee-cup on TNT and calling it a rocket.

I don't know much rocket science, but I can figure that if one is going to use the stuff from the Oklahoma bombing as "rocket fuel", one would want a "rocket tube" made of metal not plastic. Plastic seems completely insufficient for an Oklahoma City rocket. It seems to me that even with shaped charges, the ratio of plastic : fire+boom is not going to be launching anything - well, not in any specific direction.

The guy pled guilty to 15 years. C'mon.

Harmless rockets? Despite a guilty plea to 15 years? I'm sure an attorney was involved at some point and one does not plea to 15 for harmless rockets. Stop that BS.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You mean like these "kinds of tards"?


Link to video.


Link to video.

http://www.wikihow.com/Make-Sugar-Rockets

The guy pled guilty to 15 years. C'mon.

Because during the investigation, they found he made a video he put on youtube that showed what virtually anybody with half a brain already knows. That you can take a remote control model car and use it to detonate explosives remotely.

But the person you are trying to claim is a serious terrorist threat didn't even know anything about it. But he must also be guilty by association based on your own provincial definition of "law and order", instead of what a court of law ruled based on a jury of his peers. That he escaped justice on a technicality.

 

[Ecofarm]

Yea, he pled to 15 cause he had that. Sure.

At Thursday's sentencing, we may hear from Mohamed's former landlord. According to the sentencing memo, she often heard Mohamed make virulently anti-American statements. "She has reported that he repeatedly condemned ‘stupid Americans' and expressed his dislike of the United States and American law. She characterized him as being an opportunist and as being an individual who always felt that he was intellectually superior to most persons and thus able to deceive them consistently."

Mohamed and a friend had a brief interaction with Tampa police officers days before his arrest. The officers cited the pair for shooting pellet guns in a local park. In a videotape made later that day, Mohamed referred to the police as "dogs," "Christians," "Infidels," "racists," and "enemies of God."

His laptop, which he lost custody of at the moment of his August 2007 arrest, contained files showing his interest in jihadist ideology. The computer contained images of Osama bin Laden and videos "which extolled and endorsed that violent ideology."

That fits with a poem also found on the laptop that investigators say Mohamed authored. It lauds the "exalted Ossama (sic) Bin Laden" and other Al Qaeda members and contains his pledge of his own "blood" and "soul" to God and his dream that Egypt, his homeland, would lead the world "by G-D's canonical law, and by jihad in the cause of G-D."

Laughlin does describe the video Mohamed made and posted on Youtube in the summer of 2007. On it, he demonstrated how to make a remote-controlled bomb and described its benefits:

"..we can make an explosion from a distance. Instead of the brethren going to, to carry out martyrdom operations, no, may God bless him, he can use the explosion tools from distance and preserve his life, God willing, the blessed and exalted, for the real battles, unless he is forced to do so."

After his arrest, and before his months in solitary confinement, Mohamed told investigators "his intention in producing and distributing the recording was to support attempts by terrorists to murder employees of the United States, including members of the uniformed services, while such persons were engaged in or on account of the performance of their official duties," the government sentencing memo said.

It made clear that Mohamed is "no mere neophyte or ‘arm-chair' supporter of violent jihad." He took the time to research the explosives, to hunt for supplies and to make the video. Low grade explosives were in his car when he was arrested after a routine traffic stop in South Carolina.

None of that is mentioned in the Times story. The newspaper did a straight news report on the memo after it was submitted to the court last month. It was given about a third the space as this week's story. Those who saw the most recent offering, and that alone, could have the impression that a young man made a rash decision in an otherwise mainstream life. His attorney complains it was "the harsh conditions of solitary" and taunting by jail guards that set Mohamed off.

Anything he said or did after that, argues Lyann Goudie, shouldn't be held against him at sentencing. Fair enough. Take the taunting note to the guard about America's dead in Iraq off the table. Mohamed still has made it abundantly clear that the death of American soldiers in Iraq is not only something he desires, but something he tried to help come true all while a guest in the United States on a student visa.

This is not meant to mock the emotional pain his parents surely feel at the prospect that their 27-year-old son may be imprisoned into his 40s. It is a question, though, of what insights we gained from this story and why the focus is placed sympathetically on someone who does not wish us well. At least balance the record by providing a more detailed account of the facts in the case – facts Mohamed is not disputing.

As the memo concludes:

"The total picture which emerges from a review of Mohamed's entire persona and actions is one of a person devoted to armed struggle and the use of dangerous weapons against those he opposed. He had the knowledge, the ability, and the skill to research and carry out his plans and schemes. The fortuitous interference of local South Carolina law enforcement on the afternoon of August 4, 2007 no doubt prevented future events that could have been catastrophic to the safety and security of the public."



Read more at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/912/sob-stories-for-terrorists

But he was just a toy rocket enthusiast!

You think this is just a regular "Muslim with toy rockets"?

You think his buddy, who escaped justice in being over-charged, should get reparations and USF should accept his re-admission?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Mohammed made the video. He was guilty. Megahed didn't. He wasn't. But your form of "law and order" would apparently have him serving the same inordinately long sentence for posting the obvious on youtube, even though he had nothing to do with it.

And in this particular case, you are ignoring the US Army investigation and GWB administration FBI investigation, which directly contradict your own personal opinion based on no actual facts, just as it was with the model rocket engines above.

 

[Ecofarm]

"Actual facts" like editorial articles? Instead of the words of the man who pled guilty and continues to maintain his position?

He didn't say they were toy rockets. He said they were to kill infidels. And he maintains that. Why don't you take him at his word?




Sure... the guy who says he is guilty is an innocent "muslim with toy".

But blackwater is guilty of charges ("indeed, murder") that were never even brought against them.

Here in the US, we have both forms of law and order. The one we reserve for those whom we defend regardless of what they do, and the one we use on everybody else.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Now you are resorting to making even more stuff up while citing your own clearly biased editorial as "evidence"?

[citation needed]

 

[Ecofarm]

No, you need a citation.

He pled GUILTY to 15 years. Deal with it. And stop calling him innocent.


And stop calling people guilty of crimes that they have not even been charged with.



Mohammad is innocent after pleading guilty and Blackwater is guilty without being charged. WTH



Maybe I should go find that sob story about the Iranian guy who was still on Iran's Nuclear Project website as a high level employee when he was found in a rocket science class in Canada. Now, this guy knew damn well that he could not be involved in that stuff in his "new country", but he did it anyway and got busted. It's really embarrassing it took Canada so long to see this flagrant violation of UN sanctions. Anyway...

Some people want to paint this guy as a victim of the terrible and racist Canadians who just have no tolerance for Iranians, especially educated ones! Let's see, what thread was that...

And then there was that guy who got kicked out on an expired student visa after he refused to take a sweet deal from the FBI to stay... he was a victim too.

 

[Formaldehyde]

He pled GUILTY to 15 years. Deal with it. And stop calling him innocent.

I see you can not only read the editorial you posted, you can't even read what I clearly posted:

Mohammed made the video. He was guilty. Megahed didn't. He wasn't.

And stop calling people guilty of crimes that they have not even been charged with.

Not charged? Care to guess again? And remember this quite recent post?

He gets set free. No time. Because he was charged as an accomplice (aid, abeit, etc) and not simple as "dude who knew what was up and was hanging out".

Yet in this case, the technical fumble of overcharging the "friend" of the terrorist resulting in a complete dismissal of all charges... is hailed as a triumph of justice by SOME people. Hell, some people were convinced he should be allowed to re-enter school (or even be paid reparations)... as if any school wants people who knowingly hang out with jihadists that carry pipebombs in their cars. Some people went as far as to paint this guy to be a victim of the system, when actually he got lucky and was over-charged.


Weird.

"Weird" isn't the word for this clearly two-faced version of "law and order" !

Mohammad is innocent after pleading guilty and Blackwater is guilty without being charged. WTH

No. Once again, Mohammed is gulty after pleading guilty. And according to you and a small handful of others, Blackwater is "innocent" because the crime scene was tampered with and the GWB administration screwed up the case, despite the US Army and FBI investigations which claim otherwise.

 

[Ecofarm]

Bush's fault. Roger.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Straw man. Roger.

 

[MobBoss]

INo. Once again, Mohammed is gulty after pleading guilty. And according to you and a small handful of others, Blackwater is "innocent" because the crime scene was tampered with and the GWB administration screwed up the case, despite the US Army and FBI investigations which claim otherwise.

Uhm...why are you still making that claim when you have utterly failed to support it with any legitimate proof?

One sentence via a copied article in britannica isnt very solid 'proof'. If it were as widespread and known as much as you allege you should be finding hundreds if not thousands of references.

Where are they?

Btw, the kid plead guilty, the Blackwater guys didnt (well 1 did and now he is probably screwed). End of story.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Uhm...why are you still making that claim when you have utterly failed to support it with any legitimate proof?

I've provided "proof" that it likely happened. And it is obviously your personal opinion that it isn't "legitimate".

Btw, the kid plead guilty, the Blackwater guys didnt (well 1 did and now he is probably screwed). End of story.

So once again, your own personal opinion of "law and order" directly contradicts the US Army and GWB administration's own investigations. Why are you still making that claim when you have utterly failed to support it with any legitimate proof?

 

[MobBoss]

I've provided "proof" that it likely happened, and that I was not engaged in "conspiracy theories" as you previously falsely alleged. Furhermore, it is your personal opinion that it isn't "legitimate".

No you havent. You have alleged much, but, as I said, provided only a single sentence from an article that we have no idea in regards to its validity or bias. You have utterly failed to provide anything remotely considered legitimate, and apparently cant since there isnt really anything out there to substantiate your claims.

Its. Just. Not. There.

Like I said, if this were a situation as widely known and investigated as you have alleged, you would have provided several youtube videos of it by now, along with myriad other links from various news sources. Your inability to provide that which you so often do in a thread is very telling.

 

[MobBoss]

So once again, your own personal opinion of "law and order" directly contradicts the US Army and GWB administration's own investigations. Why are you still making that claim when you have utterly failed to support it with any legitimate proof?

Actually, there was a link earlier in this thread which gave the information about the 1 blackwater employee that did plead guilty and was working with investigators. He may have been trying to do so to get some kind of deal or lesser sentence, but it apparently backfired on him when the judge threw the rest of the cases out on constitutional grounds.

Do you really want to me go back, find it and link it when you know its there. Because when I do, its going to look bad for you. Your call.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Actually, there was a link earlier in this thread which gave the information about the 1 blackwater employee that did plead guilty and was working with investigators..

Yes, I know. I even mentioned it myself in this thread at least once, because I think it clearly shows that the atrocity likely did take place as the official investigations have determined. After all, why would he plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.

Here's another story that suggests that Blackwater may very well have bribed Iraqi officials to look the other way:

Jeremy Scahill: “Let’s remember here that we are talking about the single worst massacre committed by a private force in Iraq of that war, committed by Blackwater, the Nisoor Square massacre. It was the biggest diplomatic crisis between Washington and Baghdad at the time. You had the Iraqi government saying that Blackwater was banned from the country and then suddenly doing an about face, and Blackwater remains in Iraq to this day. So on the issue of criminality here, when you have the FBI going over to conduct a criminal investigation, if you had Blackwater officials attempting to bribe Iraqis, that’s tantamount to tampering with a federal investigation. There is a grand jury sitting right now in North Carolina that has reportedly been informed of these allegations by Blackwater officials, very serious.”

 

[MobBoss]

Yes, I know. I even mentioned it myself in this thread at least once, because I think it clearly shows that the atrocity likely did take place as the official investigations have determined. After all, why would he plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.

I dont think anyone arguing against ever alledged something bad didnt take place. Of course it did. The argument is rather was it criminal.

And you of all people should know people plead guilty to crimes they dont commit. You yourself provided proof of that very fact via the innocence project. Careful, I would love to use a former post of yours to counter that comment. It would be 'ironic' would it not?

Here's another story that suggests that Blackwater may very well have bribed Iraqi officials to look the other way:

I have highlighted the problem word in your comment. 'May' is not 'did in fact'. If a guy gets up on the stand in court and says 'they may have' do you think thats very strong proof? Absolutely not.

Keep trying. You may come up with something substantive yet, but maybe not since I am sure you have worked your google skilz to the max already on it. Proof of what you allege simply isnt out there. Or at least if it is, you sure havent found it yet.

 

[GenMarshall]

Wait, is this discussion STILL going on?! Geeze Form & MobBoss are going back n forth.

Personally, I'd like to see the Blackwater Murderers serve time in jail for there crimes. It's like letting a rapist or a convicted cereal killer go free.

 

[MobBoss]

Wait, is this discussion STILL going on?! Geeze Form & MobBoss are going back n forth.

Personally, I'd like to see the Blackwater Murderers serve time in jail for there crimes. It's like letting a rapist or a convicted cereal killer go free.

Except there is this thing called the 'Constitution' in the way. Darn it all.