Ten questions about the 11M 2004 attacks in Spain that still remain unanswered

@ElentirENG ES 3·11·2023 · 14:21 0

Today marks the 19th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on March 11, 2004 in Madrid, in which 194 people were killed.

Like there are still 379 unsolved ETA murders, regarding 11-M there are still large gaps. Some gaps that some seem to have no interest in resolving, because the 11-M attacks were used politically by the left to achieve an electoral turnaround, shouting "we want to know." After the elections, the left fell silent and considered anyone who asked too many questions about 11-M as suspicious, as if there was something to hide. Let's review those questions that remain unanswered:

1st. Who was the intellectual author of the massacre?

The sentence of 11-M acquitted the only defendant as mastermind, Mohamed The Egyptian, a fact that surprised the international media. In 2007, the socialist newspaper El País went from talking about the intellectual author to affirming that this figure did not exist, and even went so far as to describe it as a "hoax". Four years later, in 2011, El País presented bin Laden as the "main mastermind of 9/11".

Likewise, after celebrating the arrest in June 2004 from the "intellectual author", In 2007, the Zapatero government branded this legal concept an "invention". Something incomprehensible, if we take into account that the Prosecutor's Office of the National Court had asked to sentence El Egipcio to 38,952 years in prison as the mastermind of 11-M. Did the Prosecutor's Office request such a high sentence by appealing to a non-existent criminal figure?

2nd. Why were the wreckage of the trains removed so quickly?

It only took 4 days to give that order and in that process 90 tons were destroyed in samples, remaining only for experts a few samples weighing between 3 and 199 grams. In contrast to that speed when destroying the trains of 11-M, the train of the Angrois accident in 2013 was guarded for six months by the Police in an industrial warehouse, where according to the Efe news agency, "every loophole in the wagons" was analyzed "thoroughly".

3rd. Why didn't the examining magistrate record the source of the explosion found in February 2012?

La noticia del hallazgo fue publicada el 28 de febrero de ese año. Tanto el juez como la Policía y la Guardia Civil conocían su existencia. ¿Qué razón había para ocultar un foco que podría haber aportado más muestras sobre los explosivos utilizados en la masacre?

4th. How is it that of 116 people arrested for the attacks, only 3 were convicted?

Of those 116, only 29 came to trial and only 3 were sentenced for the events of 11M. And of those 3 convicted, the only Spaniard was a police informer.

5th. Where did the famous Vallecas backpack come from?

Remember that the backpack appeared at a police station without any witnesses would have seen it at the scene. Not even the chief inspector responsible for the custody of the packages saw it before, nor at the Estación del Pozo, from which it supposedly came, nor at the Villa de Vallecas police station or at Ifema, through which said backpack supposedly passed before. to appear at the aforementioned police station. In addition, that backpack was not prepared to explode -it had two loose cables- and inside it there was shrapnel. On the contrary, none of the bodies of the 11-M victims showed remains of shrapnel, as pointed out in 2008 by Carmen Baladía, director of the Forensic Anatomical Institute and coordinator and supervisor of the identification work and autopsies of the victims.

6th. Why weren't autopsies performed on the terrorists dead in Leganés?

In January 2008, Carmen Baladía, director of the Forensic Anatomical Institute during 11-M, acknowledged: "what is certain and true is that in In the strict sense, autopsies were not performed, complementary studies were performed". This violated Article 343 of the Criminal Procedure Law, which in instructions on the cause of violent or suspected death states that "even when the cause of death can be presumed by external inspection, the proceed to the autopsy of the corpse."

7th. Why did the examining magistrate only request these autopsies two years later, when it was already impossible to perform them?

The judge himself recognized this in April 2006. Didn't it seem important to you to have scientific evidence that is essential in all legal proceedings regarding an event of this nature, and that it was mandatory under Article 343 of the Criminal Procedure Law?

8th. Who was the author of the hoax of the two suicide bombers?

Zapatero and Cadena SER began broadcasting it the same night as 11-M. You can listen to the recording of what was broadcast by SER here. In October 2010, Iñaki Gabilondo acknowledged that it was an error for having followed a source that it considered "solvent". Who was that source that served to intoxicate public opinion on the day of the attacks?

9th. How do you explain the scandal of the two Romanians who were rewarded for testifying against Zougam?

They were both friends. Both were unable to prove that they were on the trains on 11-M. Both recognized Zougam as the perpetrator after his photo was disseminated in all the media, despite which this testimony was considered valid and key to convicting him. Witness J-70 came to testify 11 months after the attack and 15 days after technicians from the Ministry of the Interior ruled her out as a victim, which closed the doors for her to collect compensation and regularize her situation in Spain (Romania joined the EU in January 2007). After testifying against Zougam, witness J-70 was included in the list of victims and ended up collecting 48,000 euros.

Your friend, witness C-65, made a statement riddled with contradictions. C-65's husband was recognized as a victim despite stating that he was traveling with her brother-in-law, who, however, was ruled out as a victim and was even charged with a crime of simulation, for posing as a victim to collect compensation. In December 2011, El Mundo revealed that C-65 and her husband ended up receiving 100,000 euros in compensation and obtaining Spanish nationality, and were also hired by a security company owned by a person who maintains a very close relationship with high-ranking officers of the Spanish Police. In June 2012, a judicial investigation began into these facts, as a result of which These witnesses were indicted for false testimony in July 2013. Called to testify, in October 2013 refused to answer the questions of the judge, the prosecutor and the private prosecution.

10th. Why did the Ministry of the Interior honor these two Romanians accused of false testimony?

The fact became known on March 10, 2014. They were awarded the Medal of Civil Merit. It so happens that was the Ministry of Interior, the one who sent the complete file of both defendants to the court that tried these Rumanians for perjury, recounting facts that were unknown to the 3/11 court when it assessed their reliability as witnesses to that massacre.
---

With these notes I do not intend to point out any hypothesis about 11-M. They are simply to point out some incomprehensible facts in the investigation of the biggest terrorist attacks in the history of Spain, facts that indicate strange interference in the investigation. One more question remains to be added to the previous ones: what was the reason for those political interferences? Some of us still want to know.

---

Photo: Efe.