Don't Believe They'd Dare Make Up More Fictitious Blame for Middle Eastern OIL-RICH Countries? "Mesbahi is always there to finger the government of Iran"

[Pottersville welcomes your donations. Mama needs a new CPU!]

This may be the most unbelievable tale you've heard yet (brought to you by those busy beavers at the CIA, MI6, Mossad, and every other type of "intelligence" regime-change agency you can think of). The 9/11 Commission's mission of not trying to find out the genesis, the sources of the funding, and the political impetus of the 9/11/01 events becomes clearer and clearer. They "throw quite a bit of spagetti against the wall to see what sticks," don't they? Try not to gasp too loudly.

Families of a very small percentage of the victims of 9/11 seek to steal 2 billion dollars from the people of Iran based on Donald Rumsfeld quotes, the absence of an Iranian stamp on passports given to the hijackers by the US State Department, and the hearsay testimony of an already discredited MEK terrorist.

. . . Turns out the "defector" is actually not a former Iranian official in their intelligence agency as is claimed by the plaintiffs in the case, but rather he is a former MEK affiliate. MEK is an Iranian terrorist organization (so deemed by every nation on the planet) which is committed to bringing down the current government of Iran.  The MEK has direct ties to the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad. Now do you think someone who has dedicated much of his life to toppling the Iranian government and who has direct ties to the CIA would make a credible witness in this case?

Another VERY interesting aspect of this case is who is being sued. You see, this case is about MONEY. A lot of MONEY. And when you consider the fact that the U.S. froze the assets of Libya just prior to launching an attack on their country, and you know that they are seeking to do the exact same thing now with Syria and Iran, you will understand just how valuable a lawsuit like this figures to be in the near future. With a ruling on the books, that will allow the plaintiffs and their legal council to make a claim on that loot.

In fact, in July of this year, the U.S. started freezing Iranian assets held in overseas accounts and investments, just like they did in Libya. The first of these lawsuits against Iran was filed in May of this year and this latest suit was filed on Sept. 8th 2011 so they knew there was already a huge pile of cash to lay claim to before they filed the suit.

“Satan in the Flames"

Though he has delayed filing his official ruling, a New York federal judge appointed by Bill Clinton in 1999 has found that Iran conspired with al Qaeda and Hezbolla to attack the United States on Sept. 11th 2001. According to the new "official story" Iran helped the terrorists get the State Department to approve their visa applications by keeping their brand new passports "clean" by allowing them to enter Iran and Afghanistan without stamping them. According to "experts" who also served on the 9/11 Commission, the lack of Iranian stamps on their passport therefore proves Iranian involvement in 9/11.

Also key to the plaintiff's case is testimony from an alleged Iranian defector who claims he was a highly ranked official in the Iranian government. This same defector also happens to have testified in a terrorism case involving the AMIA Argentina bombing of 1994 in which 85 people lost their lives. The defector also claimed then that Iran was behind the attack.

"The defector, Abdolghassem Mesbahi, had been a confidant of Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founder, and headed up European operations for the new regime’s fledging intelligence service in the early 1980s.

Then, Mesbahi actively took part in developing a set of terrorist contingency plans, called “Shaitan der atash” — meaning “Satan in the Flames,” or “Satan on Fire” — to be used against the United States." Daily Caller

Turns out the "defector" is actually not a former Iranian official in their intelligence agency as is claimed by the plaintiffs in the case, but rather he is a former MEK affiliate. MEK is an Iranian terrorist organization (so deemed by every nation on the planet) which is committed to bringing down the current government of Iran.  The MEK has direct ties to the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad. Now do you think someone who has dedicated much of his life to toppling the Iranian government and who has direct ties to the CIA would make a credible witness in this case?

Another VERY interesting aspect of this case is who is being sued. You see, this case is about MONEY. A lot of MONEY. And when you consider the fact that the U.S. froze the assets of Libya just prior to launching an attack on their country, and you know that they are seeking to do the exact same thing now with Syria and Iran, you will understand just how valuable a lawsuit like this figures to be in the near future. With a ruling on the books, that will allow the plaintiffs and their legal council to make a claim on that loot.

In fact, in July of this year, the U.S. started freezing Iranian assets held in overseas accounts and investments, just like they did in Libya. The first of these lawsuits against Iran was filed in May of this year and this latest suit was filed on Sept. 8th 2011 so they knew there was already a huge pile of cash to lay claim to before they filed the suit.

Here's a list of some of the Iranian institutions that the 9/11 families are suing based on this flimsy and contrived "evidence":

• The Central bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran
• The Iran Ministry of Commerce
• The Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines
• Iran Airlines
• The National Iranian Gas Company
• The National Iranian Petrochemical Company
• The Iranian Ministry of Economic Affairs
• The National Iranian Tanker Association
• The National Iranian Oil Corporation
• The Iranian Ministry of Petroleum
• The Current Iranian Representative to the United Nations 

The families of the victims (note that not all victims' families have signed up for this in fact as I calculate it, of the nearly 3,000 people who died on 9/11, there are "family" representatives of possibly 2% or 3% of those victims listed as plaintiffs on the lawsuit -  About 257 plaintiffs - Mark Bingham's "family" members number 12 in the suit, Timothy Ward's "family" members number 13, and William Steiner has 19 "family" members suing Iran) are seeking $2,000,000,000.00 (two billion dollars) in compensation from these Iranian institutions which represent the PEOPLE of Iran not private businesses. In fact, according to the wording of the lawsuit, the judge is capable of ADDING more compensation to the plaintiffs if he sees fit.

What we are looking at is a neoliberal assault on the publicly owned institutions of Iran facilitated by kangaroo court in New York. When the regime change takes place as was called for by the neocons as early as 1992 or 1993, these state-owned assets will be chopped up and handed over to privately owned global institutions, the same ones who pay for organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy and USAID. When that happens the accounts of this institutions will have money in them, money owned by the people of Iran. With lawsuits like this on the books, these "family members" and their globalist lawyers will seek to reach in and take from the people the wealth of the nation.

The only thing this proves, aside from proving the continued deception of the members of the 9/11 Commission, is the goatish disposition of whore-master man looking to turn a profit at any price.

Is the Great Satan in flames? You betcha. Did Iran do it to us? Let's look at the case and you tell me.

The Iranian Defector Who Was Never There

This entire case hinged largely on the video-taped testimony of 3 supposed Iranian defectors who claim that they had specific knowledge of Iran's involvement in planning and helping facilitate the terrorists on 9/11. Of those three, the most important was a man named Abdolghassem Mesbahi.

Mesbahi's testimony was never shown in court. The judge ruled that all the evidence presented to the court was sufficient to rule in the plaintiff's favor without having to go through the formalities of looking at the evidence in the courtroom. The lawyer for the plaintiffs basically told the judge what the "witnesses" said in their statements, and that hearsay evidence was good enough for the judge. The whole process to prove Iran's complicity in 9/11 took about 4 hours.

"In an unusual move, Judge Daniels did not require any of the expert witnesses to appear in court. (I was originally supposed to testify at this hearing today.) Instead, based on the credibility of the witnesses, and their expertise, the judge instead simply had an open dialogue with the attorneys who worked for eight years gathering evidence – often at risk to themselves – against Iran and Hezbollah in this case." Janice Kephart

"In presenting evidence gathered by the attorneys and their outside investigator, Timothy Fleming revealed tantalizing details of still-sealed videotaped depositions provided by three defectors from Iranian intelligence organizations." Daily Mail

Hearsay evidence presented in court and accepted by the court on a subject as vital as the attacks of 9/11.

Here's the truth about the plaintiff's star "witness" Abdolghassem Mesbahi who never really testified in court:

Abdolghassem Mesbahi was not an elite member of "Iranian intelligence organizations". He was kicked out of Iran in 1996, forced to flee the country because he was found to be a member of the MEK, a terrorist organization which plotted to overthrow the government of Iran by destabilizing the country with acts of terrorism directed toward the people of Iran.

Abdolghassem Mesbahi was allowed into Europe where he has been staying, free from prosecution even though most countries including the United States consider the MEK a terrorist organization, and he has been the go-to "witness" whenever someone wants to blame Iran for any act of international terrorism.

"Besides linking Iran to the killing of dissidents in Berlin, Mesbahi claimed that Iran was behind the 1988 bombing of Pan Am airliner. Tehran promptly attempted to dismiss his testimony as part of an anti-Iran campaign by Western media." Canadian Free Press

"Judge Galeano also interviewed Abolghasem Mesbahi, aka "Witness C", an alleged former Iranian intelligence officer who reportedly said a former Argentine president accepted a $10 million payment from Tehran to block the investigation... Abolghasem Mesbahi claimed to the Argentine court that Iran had planned the (AMIA of 1994 in Argentina) bombing, thinking the centre was a base for the Israeli secret service" Wikipedia

From Pan Am Flight 103 to the German killing of Iranians living in exile. From the Iranian nuclear weapons myth to the Argentinian AMIA bombings of 1994, Abdolghassem Mesbahi is always there to finger the government of Iran that he worked so hard to overthrow. Now he provides crucial evidence implicating Iran in 9/11.

"On March 6, 2007, former Congressman Mario Cafiero and former government official Luis D'Elia provided evidence at a press conference that Abolghasem Mesbahi, along with two other Iranians that gave alleged evidence implicating Iran in the (AMIA 1994) bombing, were members of the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), which is an Islamic Marxist organization that advocates the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran and is designated as a terrorist organization by the US. They also said that there were arrest warrants issued by Interpol for the other two Iranians, Hadi Roshanravani and Hamid Reza Eshagi"  Wikipedia

The 1994 AMIA bombing story like the Amerithrax attacks and 9/11 itself, has never really been resolved and there are serious pieces of evidence that members of the Policía Bonaerense (Buenos Aires Provincial Police) were actually involved. In fact, one lawyer associated with one of the investigations into the bombings was actually kidnapped by the Provincial Police and tortured into telling them what he knew.

Abdolghassem Mesbahi's testimony on the AMIA bombing has been completely discredited. He gave two key pieces of evidence, one was the alleged motive behind the attack and the other was the report that the president of Argentina at the time of the investigation took a bribe to squelch the investigation. Mesbahi eventually withdrew his claim about the bribe and his motive that he claims the Iranians had to bomb the Argentinians turned out to be based on the fact that Mesbahi didn't know Iran and Argentina still had a deal pending for fissile material for Iranian nuclear reactors.

"The new evidence on nuclear-technology relations between Iran and Argentina is a serious blow to the credibility of the central assertion in the indictment that Rafsanjani and other former Iranian officials decided at a meeting on August 14, 1993, to plan the bombing of AMIA. That assertion was based entirely on the testimony of Iranian defector Abdolghassem Mesbahi, who was evidently unaware of the continued uranium exports and continuing negotiations revealed in the prosecutors' report.

Mesbahi's credibility on Iran's alleged role in the bombings was also damaged by his spectacular allegation that Menem had received a US$10 million payoff from Iran to divert the investigation away from Iranian involvement - an allegation the defector later withdrew." Gareth Porter 2006

The MEK, though considered a terrorist organization, has received support from the US government and even the US army while in Iraq... fighting "the terrorists" there.

"The U.S. considers the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK, a source of valuable intelligence on Iran.

The group also is credited with helping expose Iran's secret nuclear program through spying on Tehran for decades.

Iranian officials tied the MEK to an explosion in February at a girls school in Zahedan, Iran.

The U.S. State Department considers the MEK a terrorist organization -- meaning no American can deal with it; U.S. banks must freeze its assets; and any American giving support to its members is committing a crime.

The U.S. military, though, regularly escorts MEK supply runs between Baghdad and its base, Camp Ashraf.

"The trips for procurement of logistical needs also take place under the control and protection of the MPs," said Mojgan Parsaii, vice president of MEK and leader of Camp Ashraf." CNN

So, an already discredited MEK linked terrorist "witness for hire" is the source of the crucial hearsay evidence presented in the case against Iran. A witness who spent many years working to undermine the government of Iran who now runs around and swears he witnessed whatever crime the Mossad or the State Department want to level against the current regime. This is the nature of the evidence proving Iran did 9/11?

Tomorrow we will look at former 9/11 Commission contributor Janice Kephart and the role she played in helping to finger Iran for the crimes of 9/11. In short, her claim is that since Iran's stamp doesn't show up on those visas the terrorists used which were approved by the State Department (even though some of the names were flagged and people working in the office in Jenin where they approved complained about them being approved) that in itself proves that Iran did 9/11.

Her "evidence" that Iran did 9/11 also just happens to revolve around the "sealed" testimony of the witnesses which I have just shown you to be discredited and potentially biased against the Iranian regime. Oh, but don't worry, some CIA guys watched the testimony and they said it was credible.

"The purpose of the hijackers' travel into Iran after acquiring U.S. visas was made clear by Iranian defector testimony under seal. The defectors, in turn, were vetted by two CIA veterans who reviewed numerous of hours of tape to determine the credibility of persons who stated they had knowledge of Iran's involvement in 9/11, including those claiming to have participated in planning meetings in Iran with other Iranian officials on executing the terrorist plot that became 9/11. The CIA veterans concluded that the three defectors were both credible and substantial witnesses." Janice Kephart

We will also look into the history of this judge, the lawyers who are representing the families of the victims,  and Kephart's background as well.

Once you look at the kind of "evidence" presented in this case and how it was railroaded through the court system with three former contributors to the 9/11 Commission Report front and center, one can't help but wonder about the legitimacy of that report as well.

If these people like Kephart will lie and twist the truth so much now as to finger Iran for 9/11 for monetary and geo-political gain, why would one expect they didn't do the same thing years ago after the Bush administration was finally forced to investigate the attacks of 9/11?

It would be logical to assume if their star witness lied in 2004 about the AMIA bombing, then he might be lying now about the Iran-9/11 connection and by the same token, if the Commissioner twisted facts now to make the connection, what did they do when they worked on the Commission Report?

Suffice to say the evidence presented in this case is beyond ridiculous, almost laughable when you lay it out on the table. No wonder the judge didn't want it presented in court, it was as silly as the "Satan in Flames" name of the alleged Iranian operation. Or was that "Flaming Satan" which would be a character from South Park?.

I don't mean to make light of this serious situation and the deadly serious implications for future invasions of Iran but this verdict is so contrived and opaque one has to wonder if it isn't just a joke being perpetrated by the judge who is deliberately withholding his actual verdict depending on how the general public reacts to all of this. Is this a beta test to see how we will react and how much we will dig up regarding their star "witnesses"?

willyloman | December 17, 2011

Senate OKs payroll tax cut, huge spending bill

Egypt military uses heavy hand in crushing protest

NYC protesters scale fence at vacant lot

Ryan Wyden Psychosis - posted by Robert at Angry Bear

In this must-read post, Ezra Klein asked Ron Wyden and Paul Ryan for evidence that forcing the CMS (Medicare/Medicaid) to compete more with private insurers can be used to reduce health care spending.