HAMAS "terrorist" grocer found innocent

[ChairmanAgnostic]

Mohamed Salah, a Chicago suburban grocer, gathered money for palestinian hospitals and schools. He was captured by Israelis while delivering the $$$ beaten, electrocuted, and kept awake for several days in a row. Under heavy questioning, he admitted to supporting terrorists.

He was sent back to the States, where General John Ashscroft, in a HUGE MEDIA SPLASH, arrested him, indicted him and claimed that this would break the backs of terrorist supporters in the US.

many, many millions of dollars later, the three month trial began late last year. The feds brought in the Israeli agents who denied the torture allegations. They testified with masks and behind screens to protect their IDs, that Salah was treated just like all other Palestinians in prison, and that he freely confessed to supporting terrorists.

this year, the trial finally ended. The jury deliberated for 14 days, and found the defendants innocent. (except as to a very minor charge of obstructing justice )

So much for AG Gonzales crowning judicial assault on terror and terrorists in the US.
There are several stories here worth looking into. The torture, the lies by the feds, the anti-terror playbook used by Gonzales, and much more. Note that these guys were spied on by the NSA for quite some time, mostly without warrants, although some surveillance was done under FISA. This story has been huge locally, and everyone that I know, including employees of the grocer, agree that the feds were way out of line here.
Here are three sites on the story:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070201salah,1,2536255.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/240438,CST-NWS-salah02.article

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=180640


This is also bad news in a way. Bushista supporters will claim that normal legal proceedings are ineffectual against terrorists, and therefore we need to toss out all constitutional protections and habeus corpus. But for now, the jury spoke, and according to attorneys who observed that case, the feds have major egg on their face.

[Kagemusha]

1. Obstruction of justice isn't usually "minor" (though compared to terror...)

Compared to terror charges I suppose it is rather light.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. if your read between the lines, those charges were

throw-aways used by prosecutors simply to push for plea bargains. the codefendant was a prof from the east coast, his obstruction of justice was based on his refusal to answer questions in front of a grand jury.

[hlthe2b]

2. Good... Found NOT GUILTY

and I do worry about the unintended consequences...

[mainegreen]

4. The Israeli agents had masks on? Were behind screens?

So much for confronting your accusers to their faces. Why do they have to hide? Oh yeah, perhaps because people want them dead because they TORTURE people.

Man, gotta *love* the Israeli government and the Mossad.
:eyes:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. they were snuck into the courthouse with masks.

they testified behind screens so neither the jury nor the observers could see them.