David Ray Griffin: Support Mounir El Motassadeq
Posted by Adam Syed at 911blogger.
A LETTER TO THE 9/11 COMMUNITY FROM DAVID RAY GRIFFIN
Dear Friends and Colleagues:
I am writing in support of the international campaign, headed up by Elias Davidsson (who long lived in Iceland but now lives in Hamburg, Germany), calling for a new trial for Mounir El Motassadeq, who has been convicted of assisting the 9/11 attacks.
I have known Elias Davidsson for several years and know him to be an extremely careful researcher into the 9/11 attacks and also to be a passionate advocate for justice.
When I was in Hamburg last fall, I went with Elias to see Mounir's lawyer. He seems to be a good man and a capable lawyer, who will represent Mounir well if he gets the opportunity.
I agreed to be on the committee for Mounir along with Elias and a few others, including Annie Machon and Barrie Zwicker.
Incidentally, Mounir did indeed know Mohamed Atta. But in response to the question of whether the Mohamed Atta he knew in Hamburg was the same as the Mohamed Atta whose picture is in The 9/11 Commission Report, he said that they looked very different.
In any case, I would urge all members of the 9/11 Truth Movement to go to the website (http://www.justiceformounir.org) and read the full petition. If you then decide to support it, click the "Sign the Petition" button right under the photograph of Mounir, then fill in the blanks at the bottom.
Our best chance of getting an investigation of 9/11 is probably through the court system, perhaps especially the court system of another country. The Mounir case may present a unique opportunity to get the falsity of the official story exposed.
Below is an abbreviated form of the facts about the Mounir case written by Elias Davidsson.
David Griffin
An APPEAL for JUSTICE
Justice for the victims of 9/11
Justice for Mounir El Motassadeq
Mounir El Motassadeq is an indirect victim of 9/11. He was sentenced by a German court to 15 years imprisonment for helping his friends, three of the alleged pilots of 9/11, to “plan the attacks”. There is, however, no good evidence to support the charge that Mounir is guilty of a crime. The court did not present any evidence that his friends actually boarded the aircraft that crashed on 9/11 or that they planned the attacks. The court based its conclusions on an oral statement by an FBI official, who was no witness of any parts of the acts. His statement was pure hearsay. Mounir consistently denies all accusations of wrongdoing and expresses his dismay at such miscarriage of justice in a “democratic country”.
An international campaign has been launched to demand the reopening of his trial in the hope that the court would admit the absence of evidence regarding the participation of his friends (Mohamed Atta & Co) in the mass murder of 9/11. Effectively, there exists no documentary evidence that they boarded any of the 9/11 aircraft and no one saw them board the aircraft. The website of the campaign is www.justiceformounir.org. The campaigners urge all 9/11 truthers to sign the petition for Mounir, as a unique opportunity for a breakthrough in 9/11 truth efforts. No other action, worldwide, presents currently such an opportunity for demonstrating that the 9/11 official account is a monumental deception. Only a massive international effort will convince the judicial authorities in Germany to reopen the case.
- casseia's blog
- Login to post comments
wow
thanks, Casseia!!!!!
Here's some instructively bassackward reasoning
from "loose nuke" over at blogger:
The govt should have, and be able to produce, a great deal more than it has. That evidence is being withheld isn't proof the alleged hijackers didn't board, it's proof the govt is withholding evidence- for unknown reasons. Perhaps they're hiding something that contradicts what the public has been told, but it may not be that the alleged hijackers didn't board- it could be that this evidence might point to how they were being helped by unnamed persons on the inside at the airports. Or maybe on this aspect it's a cover up of incompetence and negligence or just ass-covering 'just in case'.
Absolutely, the govt should be pressed to release all the evidence and make it's case. I'm in favor of continued independent research and investigation, but i'm skeptical of claims that the failure of the Feds to be forthcoming is evidence the alleged hijackers/probable patsies were not knowingly involved in a terrorist plot. One of the things that does need to be established is what kind of plot the alleged hijackers thought they were participating in, and which ones, if any, were double agents. Some may have known it was a hijack, but not a suicide hijack.
The point that loose nuke is missing (or perhaps deliberately obfuscating) is that the government NEVER satisfactorily proved that the alleged hijackers were indeed involved. "Evidence being withheld is not proof the alleged hijackers did not board" is a classic straw man argument -- loose nuke needs to back up a step and ask, where is the conclusive evidence that the hijackers DID board the planes? And were who we have been told they were? How do we know that evidence is being withheld if we cannot even know with certainty that such evidence exists? Elias Davidsson makes a compelling case for this step having been omitted entirely in the construction of the OCT. Evidence being withheld strongly suggests that the government CANNOT make this case satisfactorily, although it does not prove it. More importantly, innocence until guilt is proven is central to our system of justice -- not only to make sure people are not punished for crimes without convictions but also to increase the odds that real perpetrators rather than scapegoats (to paraphrase Davidsson) are the ones convicted.
This is the danger of the patsy-obsessed fake truth movement -- that so many "facts" have accreted around a hypothesis that we should have been profoundly skeptical of by midmorning on 9-11-2001 -- facts do NOT directly support the hypothesis and which are IRRELEVANT if the hypothesis is not proven by some other means. We should have said, "You prove to us as in any criminal investigation that you are not pulling hijacker identities, etc., out of your collective ass -- using the same standard of reasonable doubt that would be required in a courtroom, rather than the more lax version employed in the court of public opinion." Instead, years have been wasted on transferred porkchops and the other machinations of the patsy network -- and what is worse, people are emotionally attached to the point of irrationality to the role of the patsies in the 9/11 narrative.
(If anyone would like to argue that the Moussaoui trial produced the evidence we need to ASSUME that hijackers boarded the planes, be my guest.)
These LIHOPers hang on til the bitter end, don't they?
The notion that this whole thing, the "New American Century".. the continuation of the imperialist Milton Freidman neoliberal privitization of every single central bank on the planet... that they would put all of their well laid plans in the hands of some goofy "terrorists" and that they would "hope" nothing got screwed up, is quite simply, just too stupid to believe.
People like "loose nuke" are clutching at straws-desperately trying to salvage a theory they have been holding onto for far too long. And that is the least offensive interpretation that I can come up with.
The fact that there is no evidence that these "terrorists" got on any of the planes in question stands as an indictment in and of itself. If people fail to grasp the significance of that simple fact, they are either being dishonest with themselves, or with us. Either way, the movement has no need of them.
It is probable that people were sent over here to be followed around and later blamed for the attacks. If that is the case, they were probably told they were being retired after years of working for the CIA, and rounded up and disposed of Sept. 10th. No one would be dumb enough to have told those loosers jack-shit about what was going to happen. The same, in my mind, holds true for Bush. Would YOU have told that idiot ANYTHING?
The planes were flown by remote guidance systems - either Dov Zakheim's SPC system or one developed by Dwain Deets at the Dryden Flight Research Center. Since Deets is now working closely with AE911Truth and running around giving lectures about everything BUT remote controlled flight systems... (and his BIO at AE911Truth just happens to fail to mention anything at all about his remote piloting past)... my guess would be Deets AND Zakheim... but that is just a guess...
And by the way, the Moussaoui trial produced nothing but Jim Hoffman's website, since ALL of his "evidence" that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon comes STRAIGHT from the prosecuters desk at that trial. That is something that has ALWAYS amazed me... how can ANY self-respecting Truth advocate take him seriously AT ALL after knowing that?
Anyway, thanks for the article Cass.
"The future is not inherited, it is achieved." JFK
The problem is that the
The problem is that the German justice system is just as corrupt as any other. It is entirely in the hand of Zionist interests. Never forget that Germany actualy puts people in jail just for asking the right questions about a certain historical event. It will soon put on trial -and no doubt severely condemn- John Demanjuk altough he has been acquitted be an israeli court (no less) for the same accusations.
DRG doesn't mention whether Motassaded's laywer is a truther, but I think it is extremely unlikely that anything will come out of this regarding 9/11 truth even if he is. Mossadeq has been condemend, then freed, then recondemmed several times already. And for what I know, all the legal possibilities for a new trial are now exhausted.
I am a bit surprised by the apparant naiveté of DRG.