Filed Under:  Crime, Immigration, National Security

Wrigley Field Terrorist Hassoun Gets Plea Deal (and the Public Misses Terror Story)

December 20th 2011   ·   0 Comments

It was announced this week in Chicago that a plea deal has been worked out between prosecutors and would-be terror bomber Sami Samir Hassoun (pictured), a Lebanese citizen. He had deposited a backpack containing a bomb (he thought) near Wrigley Field during a Dave Matthews concert in 2010, hoping to murder hundreds (Plea deal in works for Wrigley Field bomb suspect, Chicago Tribune, Dec 20).

It’s troubling that so many terror crimes are swept under the rug via plea deals. The usual explanation is that it saves the government money to forego the costs of a full-blown trial. The report below notes that only five percent of federal cases actually go to trial.

But trials are public events in which citizens learn more about the nefarious activity occurring in their communities. Terror trials in particular are vital to reveal the extent of the mostly immigrant fifth columnists who endeavor to mass-murder Americans. The Holy Land Foundation trial in 2007 uncovered a network of jihadists posing as Muslim charities, and the organization’s founders were given life sentences.

Perhaps the government would prefer to keep the public in the dark about how jihadist activity and crime have increased in America during the past few years. Apparently we are supposed to accept the idea that Muslim immigration diversity is desirable because every single Muslim is not a bomber. How standards have fallen regarding immigration.

High-profile terror cases headed for plea deals, ABC Chicago, December 12, 2011

Two high-profile terrorism cases in Chicago are headed toward plea bargains, according to court records obtained by the I-Team and attorneys for the accused.

The terrorism cases are unrelated and both men were arrested by the FBI at different times last year. Raja Khan was a cab driver the feds say was connected to top foreign terrorists. Sami Hassoun was the so-called “Wrigleyville bomber.”

Now with Khan and Hassoun cutting deals, the men and the government will avoid lengthy and costly prosecutions.

The Dave Matthews band was playing in Wrigley Field on September 19th, 2010. That is the night federal authorities claim Sami Samir Hassoun chose to detonate a bomb in Wrigleyville.

The 22-year old Lebanese national was charged with placing a backpack inside a trash can outside Sluggers sports bar across from the ballpark.

According to prosecutors, Hassoun thought it was a fully functional bomb in his pack, capable of leveling the city block.

“His intent was to kill as many people as he could in an area of town that was highly populated at that time of night, to create as much destruction as possible,” said the FBI’s agent in charge, Robert Grant.

Instead of setting off a blast, Hassoun was arrested in a sting operation by FBI counterterrorism agents, who say they videotaped construction of the bomb by Hassoun and an undercover agent.

Monday night, newly-filed court records state that “plea negotiations” have been underway between Hassoun and the government and “the parties now believe that this matter will be resolved without a trial.”

Also Monday night, attorneys for Pakistani-Canadian cab driver Raja Lahrasib Khan have had similar plea bargain talks with the government.

Khan has been locked up since March 2010, when he was arrested in Chicago driving his taxi in the Loop. Federal agents say Khan was in cahoots with Ilyas Kashmiri, the head of a Pakistani terror organization connected to Al Qaeda.

According to the charges, Khan is heard on tape describing that bags containing remote controlled bombs could be placed in several different locations and then: “Boom, boom, boom, boom.”

Monday night, Khan’s attorney, Thomas Durkin, says prosecutors are going to propose a written plea agreement that, if acceptable, will avoid a trial.

A hearing is scheduled in that case for next week. A large majority of federal prosecutions end up in plea bargains. Only five percent of criminal cases actually go to trial. For defendants pleading guilty, it usually results in less punishment; for the taxpayers, there are savings in justice department resources, public defender expenses, and court costs.

A version of this column originally appeared in www.limitstogrowth.org.

Related Posts:

Tags:  , , , , , , , , , , , ,

By

Readers Comments (0)





Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

What is 6 + 9 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)

BEWARE

There may be graphic photographs that accompany some articles in the body of this report. It is not our intention to sensationalize. We include these photos in order to give to you, the American public, a clearer understanding of the seriousness of the situation we are in.

Polls

Why do you think the drug cartels are more violent in Mexico than the U.S.A.

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Loading

Facebook



Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The US Open Borders usopenborders.com, its editorial staff, board or organization. Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The US Open Borders. The US Open Borders is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. The US Open Borders is not supported by any political organization. The US Open Borders is a non-profit, non-partisan research and educational initiative. Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The US Open Borders is copyrighted. US Open Borders goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.