saw in the last days the message for excitement, but now that there will be a lawsuit against alleged mastermind of the attacks of 11 September 2001. And still more just in New York. It consists of five men detained at Guantanamo. Particular to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi bin al-Shibh, considered the two masterminds of the attacks, Mustafa al-Hawsawi as well as, Khallad bin Attash and Ali Abdul Aziz Ali.
For some, the decision to bring the five men before a civilian court, a sign of weakness against the terrorists. How to Hold the self-proclaimed "Mr. 9 / 11" and former New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani, the decision to an error. The men should come before a military tribunal, because you do so at war with them, Sun Giuliani. Obama's Republican opponent in last year's presidential race, John McCain, the whole believes is a wrong decision . He blames Obama that the process in New York undermines the fight against terror. In addition, said former Attorney General Mukasey climb, thus reducing the risk of terrorist attacks in New York dramatically.
For others however, makes the decision to suspend a civil case, the suspects, almost of enthusiasm. Kristen Breitweiser, whose husband at the attacks was killed and the other members of 9/11-Opfern largely responsible for the blocked by the Bush administration's conclusion of the investigation by 9/11-Commission , welcomed the ruling:
skeptical about the official version: Kristen Breitweiser
Also on web pages who refuse has long been the official version, is springing up at the decision hoping that now finally the great enlightenment begins about what really on Sep 11 happened. But this is a fallacy.
This process has all the features of a show trial. He will not serve the truth. This process is a PR stunt. Escape to the front, with the official version should be supported. And this is a civil process is of course much better than a military tribunal. which will be held in camera. After a civil case can be said: it was all clear, there was a fair trial, who doubts now about the official version is an incurable conspiracy theorist. What is based on the assumption that it is this process to the project, 9/11-Skeptikern wind from the sails to take and not as some suggested expressions of a power struggle within the American elite, want to wipe out the Obama and his backers from the Wall Street the neo-cons one?
First there is the recent rejection of a signed petition 80 000 New Yorkers to call with which a referendum should be initiated, in which the New Yorker in the elections in November this year to initiate a new 9 / 11 investigation would be able to vote. The court rejected the project with flimsy justifications from. With the matter itself, that the contradictions to the official version and the time by the 9/11-Commission not answered questions of family members, the Court has previously employed did not appear. As in the petition request WTC 7 was mentioned, the judge only asked, "What WTC?".
Would it really give the political will in Washington to clarify the events surrounding the September 11, this request had not been refused a new investigation. Obama and his backers would be really interested to give 9/11-Themas by the competitors from the neocon faction one across the bow, then this study would not have been nipped in the bud. The assumption is unrealistic to expect that internal power struggles will be held in this form would. Would be in court as evidence that members of the Bush administration involved in the attacks, then it would plunge the entire U.S. establishment and the entire U.S. elite in a major crisis, and not just the neocons. The assumption behind Obama's decision is an internal power struggle and a kind of punishment action against the neocons is, therefore, purely speculative.
Apart from the question remains: why these five people? The answer might be: because all five have pleaded guilty during a hearing before a military tribunal in Guantanamo in December 2008 ! Stay here, it will go in the civil proceedings only to the Schuldmaß and the derived level of the penalty. In-depth information can not be expected under such circumstances.
In contrast, five other Guantanamo inmates not a trial before a civilian court is granted. This is Ibrahim al Qosi, Omar Khadr, Ahmed al-Abd al-Rahim darbi and al-Nashiri. They all claim that their confessions were erfoltert and only came under considerable duress. The fifth, Noor Uthman Mohammed denies many of the charges against him. To summarize: The five defendants who wish to plead guilty to come, before a civil court. The five defendants, deny their guilt and defend themselves against the allegations of the charges come before a military court. Just a coincidence?
First slide for years: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
It is not expected to withdraw Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) and his co-accused her admission of guilt. Rather, it is expected that their lawyers the way to attack the adoption of such confessions, that the present format of the whole process: abduction, secret detention, torture, without legal assistance, etc. According to ' New York Times ' have KSM only two expressed wish: he wanted a lawyer and he wanted the process takes place in New York. Let us about it before, how could such a conversation by KSM and his lawyer have expired at their first meeting. All of course under the condition that KSM still has all five senses to each other - which is pretty unlikely, given the years of inhumane prison conditions. But let us once before, which would probably KSM told his lawyer? For example: "I believe that the official 9/11-Version not true and it is an" inside job "is, and therefore ask you to prove this to the process with me?". That's unlikely. More likely, he would say something like this is, "What I need to do so I will not torture? What do I do so that my family and my children will not be tortured or threatened to be to torture them? "It should rather be the basic things that occupy him not.
is and what he has to do it, much. He has to remain simple in his confession. It should be mentioned that its emitted into custody confession is a fake has been furnished. He confessed to things he could not have done. In addition to allegedly planned or attempted bombings and attacks on Pope John Paul , Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and the Big Ben in London and the Panama Canal, he also admitted the attempted attack on the "Plaza Bank" in Seattle. This should have been as part of a "second wave" after the 9/11-Anschlägen. The Plaza was banking it then and still not the time of his arrest 2003rd It was only founded in 2006 . Bad luck is called something ...
The co-chairs of the 9/11-Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton wrote in her book "Without Precedent" of Mohammed's "confession": "There was no way to verify the credibility of the statements." They also pose the question: "How can we tell whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is telling the truth?" Finally, leaving the reader of the 9/11-Berichts, "to judge the credibility of these sources, we had no opportunity." After all, based on these sources to a large extent, the official version. In the Commission's report is only about 200 times KSM cited as the source, although not even know the Chief Commissioner, whether we can rely on those sources. Finally, they got KSM and all the other sources never see. Their questions, they gave from the CIA, and got it back after weeks of CIA answered. Of course, the CIA agent responsible has not invented anything since added or omitted, all based on the correct playback of the interrogations of prisoners in the statements made. And if you do not have that, then yes Check according to the sources 9/11-Commission times even on credibility. Even though you will have no opportunity. Incidentally, this reference is to the readers to consider the credibility of even having to nowhere in the report of 9/11-Commission.
A renewed before a civil court confession will not be more credible than that which was still in the hands of the CIA minions about. Finally, you still have enough pressure to hand. KSM, for example, that threatened to torture his minor children, has been officially admitted. some evidence that this is not just about Threats acted. That his family something "happen" could, if he is not cooperative shows that extortion should be in place as before. Moreover, one can not assume that U.S. military and intelligence specialists in a position to someone they last for years without access to lawyers, family, etc. in a legal vacuum in solitary confinement and torture, can wash the brain ? Have they not had enough time to manipulate someone so that after everything he says and does what is required of him? Finally, there was indeed something that was called MK-Ultra . And 50 years ago. Over the decades, one also in the field of Consciousness control made great progress.
The statements of the accused can have no credibility, no matter what they say. Even if they contradict the official version, it would have no effect powerful meaning. Assuming that they would all claim that they had nothing to do with 9 / 11, but people from the U.S. government for more so then would the mainstream media begin, 9 / 11 critically? Or they would not vote for the damages rather than prison terms or even more as insidious attempt by Al Qaeda terrorists, the U.S. government to inflict even more damage can this way?
And that will come in this process, such as intelligence links with the accused at the language, is unlikely. The reference to national security can prevent any potentially dangerous revelation. The beginning of 2003 in Germany is likely to show-ended trial of Mounir al-Motassadeq show an example of what we can expect from the future process in New York. In the trial of al-Motassadeq was never about the question of whether have they committed the alleged 19 hijackers actually practice. It was never about whether the 'Hamburg cell' for the death of thousands was responsible. That was already fixed a prori before the procedure. This axiom, that the identity of the perpetrators is set in stone, is found in New York's application. And while the process was Motassadeq proof is not provided the deeds of the perpetrators, nor was given an evidence that al-Motassadeq anything knew about the alleged plot acts of the perpetrators. The court handed it simply as a reason for 15 years in prison, al-Motassadeq had to do with the people of the Hamburg cell and here and there, has been the suspected bombers in itself innocuous things help. He also had Islamist views and sometimes even - as tens of thousands of others - attended a training camp in Afghanistan. The the court was proof enough.
same is to be expected in New York: It must be by the court only to be proven that KSM and Co had something to do with the 19 hijackers, and already is the official version as proved. Actually it is the already since the publication of the report of 9/11-Commission. But the investigation by the Commission appeared to be the opposite of an investigation. Because the result was already established before was secretly and by the operating director of the Commission, Philip Zelikow drafted. A detailed critique on the work of 9/11-Commission found here. As related to the process, the New Yorker Question arose, what would happen if the accused would be acquitted, "said the acting Attorney General Eric Holder:
" I had not authorized the arguments of the prosecution, if I did not think that the result - that we in the result will be very successful. I will say that I have access to information that was not yet published, has given me great confidence that we can be successful with the prosecution of these cases in federal court to be. " (Source )
What information whatsoever may be, Holders statement shows once more so that it is the 9/11-Commission dealing with a farce. This is precisely why so such information would have to process in its final report public. Apparently one of the evidence, as they present to the public in the form of 9/11-Commission reports, not very convinced and therefore considers it necessary to cement with new "facts" the fragile stonework of the official version.
But what is perhaps the most decisive in evaluating whether this process will be important in the sense of real education is the study of the contradictions that have brought many people only to the official version with skepticism . meet As would be eg the lack of air defense in connection with the claim to name government officials, no one had imagined such an attack, even though held on the same day several exercises in which even such a scenario was simulated. See this snippet from "Loose Change - Final Cut":
As would be the insider trading on stock exchanges in advance of the attacks call and the insider trade during the attacks themselves No one was held accountable for it, or did before the law enforcement authorities for this dubious Warrant transactions. The 9/11-Commission negated these traces, which indicate prior knowledge of their own way: The tracks have a "single, the US-based institutional investors, which has no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda" (see Commission Report, page 499, footnote 130). No connection to Al Qaeda? So unsuspicious! So that when the perpetrator is identified before the trial started, since could not be considered exculpatory evidence. For while the attacks from the WTC out organized insider trading see also this post from the Dutch television:
There would, for example, the long list of warnings by many intelligence call and the question of why these warnings were ignored, but instead those investigators halted were that the later alleged hijackers on the track were.
There would, of course, the mysterious collapse of the Twin Towers to name, who himself studied to this day has never officially. (In NIST report the collapse itself was not investigated, but sought only after the event that the "global collapse" of the towers have had "inevitably" make. This Event was, according to NIST in bagged ceiling grid support [Trusses] that the exterior steel beams were bent inward.) And then there's the collapse of WTC 7, NIST itself according to phases took place under conditions of free fall. The only explanation that is consistent with generally accepted laws of nature: the resistance, which prevents a free fall, was previously removed artificially, ie by means of explosives. See this post:
This was just a small selection of points that people have made 9/11-Skeptikern. At any point , the five defendants to contribute. Thus they can contribute anything to clarify the doubts that exist in relation to 9 / 11. You can only help to underpin the existing official version and give it the aura of independent judicial confirmation. The process therefore aims at the great mass of those who do have some doubts, but owed their doubts in the first place of secrecy and hypocrisy of the old Bush administration - see weapons of mass destruction as justification for attacking Iraq. Order to turn this light no doubters whole blood skeptics, but the process is the right place.
And even if the above points should come before the courts of language, is intended to KSM's confession can elicit that he has to do with all these things a bit. Credibility is not assured. But the official 9/11-Version far indeed was not. As the self-confessed 9/11-Kommissions-Vorsitzenden. Disturbed but that has in the field of mainstream media has hardly anyone. Why this should now change the course of the proceedings in New York? The mass media are partying this show trial as evidence of the correctness of the self for years presented propaganda. Nevertheless, this process has an advantage: 9 / 11 moves back into the public spotlight. And this shows the chance, even the contradictory facts of a wider public to the public. To contribute to this, therefore on this blog in the future regardless of current events every now and then one or the other to contradict the official 9/11-Version be dug out and examined.
0 comments:
Post a Comment