On Monday, April 30, Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District Court of New York ordered Iran to pay more than $6 billion to 9/11 victims. Thus far Iran has refused to acknowledge the court proceeding on the grounds that the whole world knows it is transparently ridiculous political propaganda with no legal or factual basis. But what if Iran chose to defend itself by presenting proof—in court—that the whole Official Conspiracy Theory is false? That is the suggestion of (originally) fifteen (now 81 and counting) prominent critics of the official story who have signed a letter asking Iran to consider appealing the case and mounting a vigorous 9/11 truth based defense. Below is the letter, which is already being publicized by the Iranian mass media, and will be taken up this weekend by the National Security Council of the Iranian Parliament.
May 24, 2018
To the Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Islamic Republic of Iran
We are writing to urge the Islamic Republic of Iran to immediately appeal the Southern District Court of New York’s ruling ordering Iran to pay more than six billion dollars of reparations for the 2001 terrorist attacks. Please note that the appeal must be filed by Wednesday, May 28, so this is an extremely urgent matter.
We are willing and ready to provide court testimony in support of Iran’s innocence. The extremely weak case against Iran is predicated on the 9/11 Commission’s version of events, according to which 19 alleged hijackers (15 of whom were Saudis, and none of whom were Iranians) precipitated a series of miracles including gross violations of the laws of physics. We can prove absolutely, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this version of events is false, thereby nullifying the case against Iran.
We believe that by strongly contesting this matter in a US court, Iran can win a major media victory over its enemies, and will likely win the legal case as well. For while US courts can be corrupt, they follow procedural rules, and create legal records, that will in this case make it very difficult for the anti-Iran forces to achieve their objectives.
The alternative—not contesting the judgment—hands the anti-Iran forces a victory that they do not deserve. For although they have no valid evidence against Iran, if Iran fails to defend itself, it appears to be admitting guilt.
Strong peer-reviewed evidence useful to a court defense resides on the websites of three research organizations.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth https://www.AE911Truth.org
Consensus 9/11 http://www.consensus911.org
Scientists for 9/11 Truth http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org
The leaders of these organizations could possibly be reached for consultation through myself at [email protected].
We urge the government of Iran to contact Mr. Mick Harrison Esq. of the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry who, in his capacity as a private attorney, may be able to help the Islamic Republic of Iran take the initial steps toward assembling a legal team to appeal Judge Daniels’ ruling in advance of the May 28 deadline:
Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
(which on April 10 filed a 54-page petition for a grand jury investigation of 9/11 with the U.S. Attorney of the Southern District of New York.)
Thank you, and we look forward to hearing from you.
1. Prof. David Ray Griffin, Professor Emeritus, Claremont School of Theology; author of 13 books on 9/11 (USA)
2. Prof. Richard Falk, Professor of International Law, Emeritus, Princeton University (USA)
3. Dr. Cynthia McKinney, six-term congresswoman (D-GA) and Green Party candidate for President of the United States (2008) (USA)
4. Prof. Graeme MacQueen, Associate Professor of Religious Studies (retired), McMaster University; former Director of McMaster’s Centre for Peace Studies and author of numerous articles on 9/11. (Canada)
5. Prof. Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Culture and Communication, New York University (USA)
6. Dr. John Roberts (UK)
7. Prof. Niels Harrit, chemist, former Professor at University of Copenhagen, He presents evidence that the dust of the buildings contained the explosive nano thermite (Denmark)
8. Carol Brouillet, Founder of Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance
9. Prof. Oliver Boyd-Barrett, Professor Emeritus of Journalism, Bowling Green State University (Ireland)
10. Prof. Anthony J. Hall, 911 turther, Professor of Globalization Studies, University of Lethbridge (Canada)
11. Christopher Bollyn, investigative journalist and author of Solving 9-11: The Deception that Changed the World and The War on Terror: The Plot to Rule the Middle East.
12. Jimmy Walter, venture capitalist and author & best known for sponsoring advertisements asking to reopen the investigation 911 & offering financial rewards to anyone that could prove the World Trade Center was destroyed without the use of explosives. (USA)
13. Tony Szamboti, ME, former Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems mechanical design engineer (USA)
14. Dr. Ibrahim Soudy, PE, SE, PEng, Structural Engineer (USA)
15. Ian Henshall, author, 911 The New Evidence (UK)
16. Sander Hicks, Candidate for US Congress, author of The Big Wedding: 9/11, the Whistle-blowers, and the Cover-up (USA)
17. Michael Santangelo, Co-Facilitator for Truth Action Project, New York City (USA)
18. Dr. Kevin Barrett, Former professor at Wisconsin University, Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth; author of Questioning the War on Terror (USA)
19. Dieudonné, Worldwide known Comedian, author of performance on 911 “la fine équipe du 11”
20. Giulietto Chiesa, Politician, former European Parliament member, director of Zero: an Investigation Into 9/11 (Italy)
21. Gerhard Wisnewski, author of the first critical television documentary on 911, in a large worldwide broadcast. Author of “9/11 Operation: Attack on the globe”; “9/11 Myth: Tracking the truth, New revelations” (German)
22. Prof. Rudy List, former professor at University of Birmingham, member of Scientists for 9/11 Truth (USA)
23. Art Olivier, Former Mayor of Bellflower, California, producer of “Operation Terror”
24. Prof. Hamid Algar, Professor Emeritus of Persian and Islamic Studies, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
25. Prof. Atif Kubursi, Emeritus Professor of Economics McMaster University
26. Dr. Philip Giraldi, former CIA military intelligence officer & counter-terrorism specialist (USA)
27. Wayne Madsen, former NSA officer, former head of Naval Sound Surveillance System in US Navy, investigative Journalist, author specializing in intelligence (USA)
28. Dr. Scott Bennett, former army psychological warfare-counterterrorism officer, former State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism (USA)
29. Michael Maloof, former senior security analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (USA)
30. Scott Rickard, former intelligence officer for the USAF, the NSA, and the Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) (USA)
31. Ken O’Keefe, former Marine and Gulf War veteran (USA – Ireland)
32. Colonel Alain Corvez, former advisor of French minister of defense (France)
33. Richard Labévière, former navy operational reserve officer, former editor-in-chief of Télévision Suisse Romande (TSR) and Radio France Internationale (RFI), author (France)
34. Jürgen Cain Külbel, former criminal police (Germany)
35. Tamás Samu, former MP (Hungary)
36. François Ferrier, former Marine officer, ex-regional advisor of Lorraine (France)
37. Frank Creyelman Honorary MP (Flemish Parlament) / Former Chairman committee on Foreign policy, European affairs and International cooperation, Former senator in Belgium Parliament (Belgium)
38. Dr. Christian Bouchet, politician (France)
39. Christopher Black, international criminal lawyer, member of the Law Society of Upper Canada)
40. Edward C. Corrigan, Certified Specialist by the Law Society of Upper Canada in both Citizenship & Immigration and Refugee Protection Law (Canada)
41. Isabelle Coutant Peyre, lawyer (France)
42. Prof. Kaukab Siddique, Lincoln University professor, Muslim Leader (USA)
43. Prof. Matthew Crosston, Professor of Global Security and Strategic Intelligence, American Military University (USA)
44. Prof. Claudio Mutti, former professor at University of Bologna, editor of the journal “Eurasia” (Italy)
45. Greta Berlin, Co-Founder, the Free Gaza movement (USA)
46. Dr. Paul Larudee, Former Fulbright-Bays Lecturer (USA)
47. Vanessa Beeley – peace activist and independent journalist (USA – France)
48. Joaquin Flores, Editor in Chief of Fort Russ News, Director & Analyst at Center for Syncretic Studies (USA)
49. Gearóid Ó Colmáin, Geopolitical analyst, Media commentator (Ireland)
50. Mark Dankof, reverend, political analyst (USA)
51. Dr. E. Michael Jones, former professor at Saint Mary’s College (Notre Dame, Indiana), editor of Culture Wars magazine (USA)
52. Jim W. Dean, Managing Editor, VeteransToday.com (USA)
53. Imam Muhammad Asi, Muslim Leader, former Imam of Islamic Center of Washington (USA)
54. Prof. Alexander Dugin, philosopher, political analyst and strategist (Russia)
55. Andre Vltchek, philosopher, author, filmmaker and investigative journalist (Russia)
56. Dr. Maria Poumier, former professor at Sorbonne University, author & researcher (France)
57. Dr. Stephen Sizer, former vicar of the Anglican parish of Christ Church (Virginia Water, Surrey), author of Christian Zionism – Road Map to Armageddon? (UK)
58. Konrad Rekas, journalist and senior member of “Polish Yes for Scotland Association” (Scotland)
59. Pepe Escobar, Asia Times correspondent (Brazil)
60. Lauren Booth, journalist and broadcaster (UK)
61. Jean Michel Vernochet, geopolitical analyst, former journalist editor at Figaro Magazine (France)
62. David Lawley Wakelin, Documentary film maker (UK)
63. Dragana Trifkovic, Director of the Center for Geostrategic Studies (Serbia)
64. Leslie Varenne, President of IVERIS institute of strategic studies (France)
65. Lucien Cerise, author of “Governing through Chaos – Social Engineering and Globalization” (France)
66. Hafsa Kara-Mustapha, Journalist & Political Analyst (UK)
67. Jacob Cohen, Author and Researcher (France)
68. Gilles Munier, author and investigative journalist (France)
69. Max Igan, Lecturer, Political Analyst, Radio Presenter (Australia)
70. Marwa Osman, University Lecturer and freelance journalist (Lebanon)
71. Zeina Mohanna, human rights activists, author and international event organizer (Lebanon)
72. Dogan Bermek, Muslim Leader (Turkey)
73. Tesha Teshanovic, editor in chief of “Balkan Info” (Serbia)
74. Eric Walberg, author and commentator (Canada)
75. Peter Koenig, Economist, Geopolitical analyst, (Geneva)
76. Yvan Benedetti, president of l’OEuvre française (France)
77. Ladislav Zemanek, scholar, political activist (Czech)
78. Michael Opperskalski, Journalist, Editor & International Consultant (Germany)
79. Stefano Bonilauri, Editor in chief of Anteo Edizioni (Italy)
80. Navid Nasr, Research fellow, Center for Syncretic Studies (USA)
81. William H. Warrick III MD (Retired), Veterans For Peace, Chapter #01 Auburn, Maine
Letter from the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry
THE LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE
FOR 9/11 INQUIRY, INC.
a 501(c)(3) charitable organization
426 River Mill Road
Jersey Shore, PA 17740 [email protected] www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.lcfor911.org
Kevin Barrett VIA E-MAIL
June 22, 2018
As you know, the Lawyers’ Committee Board met on May 23, 2018 and discussed and voted on whether the Lawyers’ Committee as an organization could appropriately sign on to a letter to the government of Iran such as you had drafted and have now delivered (directly or indirectly). In the end we decided that as a non-profit lawyers’ organization it would not be appropriate for the Lawyers’ Committee to sign a letter to Iran regarding potential litigation such as Iran’s upcoming appeal deadline on the default judgment. The Board directed me to provide you this detailed explanation of our position for posting on your web pages/sites with your original Iran letter.
We understand that your goal is to facilitate a presentation to the American public (and the world) of evidence as to what really happened on 9/11, and that you believe that the Iran litigation may provide an appropriate forum for that evidence to be presented in a possible public federal court proceeding as a legitimate part of Iran’s defense. While the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc. is primarily a lawyers’ organization whose mission is to promote transparency and accountability regarding 9/11 and, consequently, we are certainly not opposed to evidence being presented in a federal court proceeding regarding what really transpired on 9/11 and leading up to 9/11, we are not currently set up to litigate on behalf of other parties. Even if we were, we would have to comply with the rules of conduct for attorneys which substantially restrict attorneys from soliciting potential clients. In addition, attorneys cannot provide a recommendation for a client or potential client to take a particular legal action, including the filing of an appeal, without first evaluating the merits of that action which would include a review of the entire case file and applicable law, which in the instant case we have not done.
For these reasons, we, as an organization, cannot sign on to a letter requesting or recommending that Iran file an appeal of the default judgment that was recently entered against Iran, nor can we offer legal assistance, advice, or representation to Iran or any other nation, state, corporation, group, or individual party. Of course, the evidence we have developed in support of the Petition to the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York that we recently filed is publicly available on our web site www.lcfor911.org and could be used by any party in any litigation to the extent that it was relevant.
The decisions and limitations on actions reflected in this letter are decisions and limitations on actions of the Lawyers’ Committee and do not necessarily imply that individual attorneys, scientists, or investigators involved with the Lawyers’ Committee or on our Board would be similarly restricted in their individual and private capacities should they be asked and agree to provide legal assistance to any nation, state, corporation, group, or individual. Any such requests would have to be evaluated and decided on a case by case basis by the person(s) requested to provide such assistance, with prior consultation with and approval by the Lawyers’ Committee if needed and appropriate with regard to potential conflicts of interest.
However, the Lawyers’ Committee Board of Directors has adopted a policy intended to maintain the independence and objectivity of the Lawyers’ Committee in pursuing our 9/11 related public interest investigations and our goals of 9/11 transparency and accountability. That policy requires any Lawyers’ Committee Board Member, attorney, or staff member to timely disclose to the Board any request for legal or other assistance from any party who has been officially charged with or might reasonably be perceived to have culpability in any 9/11 related crimes, and if the Lawyers’ Committee Board Member, attorney, or staff member decides to provide such assistance to such party, then, in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of the Lawyers’ Committee, that Board Member, attorney, or staff member would be required to resign from any role with the Lawyers’ Committee.
The Lawyers’ Committee has not made any determinations regarding Iran’s, or any other nation or government’s, potential criminal culpability or civil liability, and our 9/11 related investigations have not been completed. The above mentioned policy adopted by the Board, however, would not preclude the Lawyers’ Committee, in an appropriate case or cases where the public interest would be served thereby, acting in the role of a friend of the court (amicus curiae) or as an intervening party in a 9/11 related litigation. The Lawyers’ Committee of course reserves its options to bring civil litigation on its own behalf to foster our own non-profit mission.
Mick Harrison, Attorney at Law
Executive Director, Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc.
Jane A. Clark, Esq., Chair – Mick G. Harrison, Esq. – David Meiswinkle, Esq. – William Jacoby, Esq. Julio C. Gomez, Esq. – Michael Springmann, Esq. – Ed Asner – David Cole – Barb Honegger
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.