Article

2003-12-13 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2003-12-13 12:09:44 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 It looks like the Rantburg community is not biting, Dan. For good reasons. Because it's all too easy to kick the ball back all the way to Washington.

US authorities have been extremely unhelpful in this case. German prosecutors were not given anything at all.. no access to witnesses held in "secret locations", no protocols from US interrogations... nothing. And the info the German BND got from the CIA and others was labeled top secret and NOT to be used at court. The BND of course doesn't want to jeopardize its access to this intelligence, so it obstructed the trial as well. So all they had in Hamburg was the fact that Mzoudi was helpful in finding an apartment and wiring money to a member of the cell in Afghanistan. Nothing to prove that Mzoudi knew anything about the 9/11 plan. Since we know now that 9/11 was not planned in Hamburg but in Afghanistan all the Hamburg judges had was... guilt by association. This is not a crime in Germany, unless you can prove that the defendant at least suspected something.

Secrecy, necessary or not, is a bitch... at least for courts that stick by the rules established for all... IN DUBIO PRO REO

Now what happens? Finally the U.S. forks over some summary about the questioning of Binalshib... a few pages of probably hundreds of documents. An Binashib is quoted saying, nope, Mzoudi didn't know nutting. Now do we have to believe this? Probably not. But why on earth does Ashcroft hand over exactly these lines to the German "FBI", the BKA, with the demand that this intelligence may only be used for... intelligence, not for the trial, fully aware of the fact that the BKA can't withold this kind of evidence (if it did it would commit a crime). So it has to act. And because the BKA cannot question Binalshib about this exoneration, it has to assume that his assertion is valid or can't at least not be refuted. And I suppose that Binalshib had his share of giggle juice, right?

So why does the U.S. fork over exactly THIS info? Several possibilities.

1) The Americans are really nice: They don't want an innocent languish in jail (insert sarcasm tags here).
2) The Americans wanted this trial to fail to
a) make the Germans look bad (less likely)
b) prove their point that regular trials don't work and that presumed terrorists can only be dealt with properly on naval brigs or in Gitmo (my guess as Ashcroft already gloated over the fact that ONLY America knows how to deal properly with terrorists).
c) make the Germans release Mzoudi, kick him to Morocco where the Americans will declare him the winner of some free Caribbean vacation (Mzoudi just applied for political asylum to avoid that, he ain't dumb!)

I might remind you of a trial in Alexandria, Va, where judge Brinkema faces the same uphill battle with Moussaoui.

You may have noticed that Washington hasn't been too vocal about all this. They know why.

Don't throw sticks at a running man and then accuse him of stumbling.

Posted by True German Ally 2003-12-13 11:25:35 AM|| 2003-12-13 11:25:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 TGA - not me, bro - I do not know enough about the specifics of this case nor German Law to comment intelligently - and in Law, the specifics are everything. I wanted to add a comment that we understand their dilemma. Same shit happens in the US legal system: the rules are the rules. We bitch and moan about it, but it works so we don't actually presume to mess it up with special case exceptions. See? I told you I didn't know enough. Now I've gone and proven it. Sheesh. ;-)

Posted by .com 2003-12-13 11:36:30 AM|| 2003-12-13 11:36:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Just a thought: think they turned him and all of this hand-wringing and anguish about having to let him go is his cover?

Regards Ashcroft - he ranks right down there with Snow when it comes to my opinion of Dubya's cabinet. I know three center-right accomplished legal beagles who could run circles around him in diplomacy, interrogation strategy, PR, Law, and courtroom tactics. And I only know four lawyers I wouldn't kill out of hand myself, given the chance.

Regards German Law in the few instances I have seen it in action - the only real complaint I have is those short short short sentences and no death penalty for those who do NOT deserve to breathe our air. Saddam and OBL come to mind rather easily as examples. That sort does, indeed, exist and I can't imagine you disagreeing - am I off the mark on this?

Posted by .com 2003-12-13 12:07:22 PM|| 2003-12-13 12:07:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 The US Gov't has shrouded the 9/11 plot in a veil of secrecy. This was partly a result of the '90s bureaucratic reflex to deny or, failing that, minimize terrorist attacks. When it became clear that it couldn't be denied, the government still covered it up due to fear of lawsuits against the airlines. Add to that George Bush's sense that we're all a bunch of frightened children who need to be shielded from the truth, and you get this mess.

There is really no legitimate security reason to keep these secrets. We don't need to keep it secret from Al Qaeda, because they were there. They already know what happened.

The only thing this secrecy accomplishes is to hamstring the USG in our fight against the terrorists. It gives the "Bush Knew!" crowd leeway, it restricts our allies (see above), it gives opponents to the war more cover.

Posted by Pete Stanley 2003-12-13 4:05:14 PM|| 2003-12-13 4:05:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 It may surprise you but I'm against the death penalty... for personal and practical reasons. The latter have to do with the fact that a punishment that is dealt out after 20 years of appeals and a million dollars of taxpayer's money spent isn't the most effective way to deal out justice.

I can't see OBL at court either. A public trial in NY, with years of CNN "legal experts" commenting, puhleeze. A secret trial in Gitmo would be underwhelming instead. Nope, these genetic aberrations are best served with a missile... case closed.

Posted by True German Ally 2003-12-13 7:30:32 PM|| 2003-12-13 7:30:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 TGA,
I am a conservative American that doesn't care much for the death penalty either. I don't have any argument with the family of the victims seeking vengance, but for others I think a capital trial becomes an untimate game show for them to watch. The trully evil deeds that some of this slime has perpetrated tend to become trivialized.

It's almost like the sicko gets the acclaim an noteriety that he craves. It seems more fitting to shelve our psycho's underground where there is no society and no sunlight. They can exist until they die in annonimity. I prefer federal charges where a life sentence means no parole. Then we don't have to see Charles Manson on parade every few years.

As for the prosecution of this clown, I certainly don't fault the German courts. Western legal systems are set up to presume innocence - that's as it should be. It frustrates everyone when a scumbag walks, but it really means that our societies are strong. I am hoping that the encourages all free people to understand that immigration and anti-terrorism policies are important enough that everyone whould pay attention and debate what is going on.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-12-13 9:14:32 PM|| 2003-12-13 9:14:32 PM|| Front Page Top

14:19 Alan Sullivan
03:13 Anonymous
00:33 Val
23:41 Zhang Fei
22:46 Swiggles
22:41 Pappy
21:52 Ptah
21:42 4thInfVet
21:41 Pappy
21:41 Jennie Taliaferro
21:37 Jennie Taliaferro
21:36 Super Hose
21:33 Jennie Taliaferro
21:29 Super Hose
21:24 Super Hose
21:21 Jennie Taliaferro
21:14 Super Hose
21:06 whitecollar redneck
20:37 Super Hose
20:34 LJ
20:32 Mike
20:28 Super Hose
20:23 Super Hose
20:09 Super Hose