From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2008-09-23 15:53:31
_filtered #ygrps-yiv-621944118 { font-family:Tahoma;} _filtered #ygrps-yiv-621944118 {margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 P.ygrps-yiv-621944118MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:”Times New Roman”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 LI.ygrps-yiv-621944118MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:”Times New Roman”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 DIV.ygrps-yiv-621944118MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:”Times New Roman”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 A:link { COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118MsoHyperlink { COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 A:visited { COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 P { FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN-LEFT:0in;MARGIN-RIGHT:0in;FONT-FAMILY:”Times New Roman”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 PRE { FONT-SIZE:10pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:”Courier New”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 TT { FONT-FAMILY:”Courier New”;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118EmailStyle20 { COLOR:navy;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118EmailStyle21 { COLOR:navy;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118SpellE { } #ygrps-yiv-621944118 SPAN.ygrps-yiv-621944118GramE { } #ygrps-yiv-621944118 DIV.ygrps-yiv-621944118Section1 { } #ygrps-yiv-621944118 OL { MARGIN-BOTTOM:0in;} #ygrps-yiv-621944118 UL { MARGIN-BOTTOM:0in;} Below is a short exchange between someone who has e-mailed me occasionally and Amnesty International (US side I think). I thought his second message was really excellent – it hammered home the key issues very succinctly and encapsulates my own feelings about asking why the evidence is not looked at. —–Original Message—–Sent: 23 September 2008 00:18To: Andrew JohnsonSubject: AI & 9/11, more…Importance: Low Hi, Andrew! FYI, below is an Email exchange with AI prompted by their report on the 1st Guantánamo terror trial. I wonder how to interpret the time they are taking to respond to my 8-9 Email? Could I have made one staffer think? Love, ##### —– Forwarded by . Amnestyis/I.S./Amnesty International on 15/07/2008 15:53 —– Sent by: webmaster@amnesty.or… 14/07/2008 07:16 Please respond to To amnestyis@amnesty.or… cc Subject [Website: contact us] AMR 51/076/2008, missing important point #### sent a message using the contact form undoubtedly are aware that U.S. investigators never clarified the mostimportant aspects of 9/11. The identity of the airborne vehicles that hitthe targets of 9/11 are in doubt, reports of cell phone calls areinconsistent, and the demolitions of the twin towers bore all the marks ofpre-designed hi-tech engineering work.This element adds another interesting twist to the sad backdrop youcorrectly paint: the very real possibility that charges against the Guantanamo defendants ought to be summarily dismissed because of themultiple breakdowns in the chain of events that connect them to thethousands of 9/11 deaths.Love, Working to protect human rights worldwide DISCLAIMERInternet communications are not secure and therefore Amnesty International Ltd does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or rely on the information in this e-mail. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Amnesty International Ltd unless specifically stated. Electronic communications including email might be monitored by Amnesty International Ltd. for operational or business reasons. This message has been scanned for viruses by Postini.www.postini…. From: amnestyis@amnesty.or… [mailto:amnestyis@amnesty.or…] On Behalf Of counter-terror-with-…Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 3:19 AMTo: Subject: Fw: [Website: contact us] AMR 51/076/2008, missing important point Hello Dan First of all, thanks for your email and for sharing your concerns with us. Amnesty International has consistently and publicly condemned the acts of terrorism in recent years that have left thousands of civilians dead or injured. However, whereas we are concerned with terrorist attacks as a violation of fundamental human rights, technical investigation of the attacks are outside of our remit. The Counter Terror with Justice Campaign focuses on strengthening the human rights framework, as a means to prevent future attacks. We think terrorism can not be stopped through undermining human rights and resorting to unlawful practices such as torture, secret detention or detention without charge. For more information about Amnesty Internationals campaign to counter terror with justice, please visit the following link: www.amnesty.org/en/c… Regards, Volunteer Counter Terror with Justice Amnesty International, International Secretariat Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 3:57 PMTo: ‘counter-terror-with-…‘Subject: RE: [Website: contact us] AMR 51/076/2008, missing important point Hi, Sara! Thank you for your very sensible answer. Alas, it addresses a criticism other than the one I wanted to convey in my Email, perhaps because I wrote it fast and thinking (erroneously, thank you) that it would hardly be read: AI has not even alluded to a very disturbing component of the Guantánamo trials, namely the failure of defense attorneys to o educate themselves on the facts surrounding 9/11, the crime that landed their clients in Guantanamo , o look for clues that would potentially exonerate their clients, or o bring these to the courts attention. Indeed, as AI certainly knows, the web, many books, and to some extent the mainstream media have provided abundant information that casts serious doubts on the links between Arab extremists and 9/11 as theorized by the Guantánamo prosecutors. Presentation of this information before the Guantánamo courts would likely undermine most of their criminal cases to the point of forcing military prosecutors to backpedal on most major charges. Defense lawyers failure to bring forward these numerous convincing pieces of exonerating evidence is a symptom of a terrible lack of resources, competence or independence. Either way, it is a major blow to the fairness and balance of the trials and as such, would deserve a prominent spot in AIs list of grievances. The intent of my 7-14 webmail was to criticize AI not for refusing to investigate the 9/11 terror attacks, but for failing to raise a very disturbing aspect of the Guantánamo trials that alone would be enough to question their setup. In fact, this is strikingly similar to the endemic problem, well-documented by AI, of failure by lawyers for capital defendants in the USA to raise issues that poke doubts into the prosecutions theories, with the difference that this issue has reached such gross proportions in Guantánamo that an impartial observer could wonder whether the defense counsels have the interests of their clients in mind. For the record and even though this obviously falls outside the mission of the Counter Terror with Justice campaign, AI definitely does not come out clean regarding the investigation of 9/11. The above-mentioned evidence is more than enough to launch actions based on the very real possibility that the 9/11 murders would have been thinly disguised extrajudicial executions. Love, #######
