Was Rochester Hills woman convicted of selling tech to Saddam Hussein a victim of CIA plot?

[sabra]

Source: MLive

A jury in March convicted Dawn Hanna for selling telecommunications equipment to Iraq under Saddam Hussein in 2003-03, a violation of a federal trade embargo.

But Emad al-Yawer, who worked as a middleman between the buyers and Hanna's Rochester-based company, says he initiated contact with Hanna under the instruction of the CIA.

In fact, he says the CIA was trying to purchase the equipment and then sell it to Saddam Hussein in order to spy on him.

Yawer told his story to WDIV, saying he was willing to sacrifice his life to expose the injustice.

"All those people gave their lives, Americans and Iraqis and others. For what? So innocent people go to jail?"


Read more: http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/10/was_rochester_hills_woman_conv.html

[MidwestRick]

1. Did she...

sell the equipment knowing (or at least thinking) it was going to Saddam? She very well may have a case of entrapment here, but shame on her if she thought she was selling it to Hussein.

[sabra]

3. from article:

<snip>

During her trial, Hanna said she thought she was selling the equipment to a company in Turkey, which Yawer says he told her.

[MidwestRick]

4. Apparently the judge/jury

didn't believe her. I wasn't there so I really can't say one way or another.

[uncle ray]

5. yeah, shame on her for commiting a crime equivilant to buying a box of cuban cigars.

and shame of her for not knowing that only major military contractors are allowed to trade with our so-called enemies.

[MidwestRick]

6. Cuban Cigars?

ROFL. Ok.

[uncle ray]

9. she sold phones to the bogeyman.

i find that crime equally laughable.

[damntexdem]

8. Hey, not just major military contractors:

Also the CIA.

In fact, the CIA gets to deal drugs, which major military contractors are at least discouraged from doing. ;-)

[Ian David]

2. Just because The CIA tells you to do something doesn't make it legal.

Manuel Noriega
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega

[mbperrin]

7. Yes, shame on her for dealing with Saddam! Only the most hardened

war criminals would deal with him! At least she didn't shake his hand!

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein:
The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 82

Edited by Joyce Battle

February 25, 2003

So when Rummy does it, it's good, but when Dawn does it, it's bad. Gotcha.

[MidwestRick]

10. Really?

Are you really comparing the two situations? Big difference in the world between the two scenarios.

[drdtroit]

11. You're right. Rumsfeld should be in Den Hague n/t

[mbperrin]

13. Amen.

Thank you.

[mbperrin]

12. Delineate it, please.

nt

[MidwestRick]

14. Easy

One sent by head of state to speak with a another head of state (for reasons we may not agree on, but that was the reason he was sent).

The other sold items to a country which had UN sanctions placed on it (for reasons such as shooting at US aircraft).

[mbperrin]

16. So Saddam was good when Rummy went, but he was a bad man by

the time Dawn went, and Rummy didn't arrange for poison gas to be delivered nor for satellite recon of Kurdish villages? Or if he did, it was UN approved?

Hmmm. How old were you when Reagan was elected?

[laconicsax]

15. Is this a typo or a new convention?

"A jury in March convicted Dawn Hanna for selling telecommunications equipment to Iraq under Saddam Hussein in 2003-03, a violation of a federal trade embargo."

Should it be different years or is this a weird new convention?