Evidence against 9/11 plotters revealed

reply to post by impressme


Below are excerpts from an article that contains a lot of information about the Moussoui trial among others. The whole article is linked below and well worth the read:

In September 2001, George W. Bush promised to bring the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice. What happened to that promise between then and January 2009 ? Let's look at his record. After the first ever 9/11 conviction, not in the USA but in Hamburg on 19 February 2003, Mounir al-Motassadeq was sentenced to 15 years for membership of a terrorist organisation and complicity in the 3,066 murders allegedly committed on 9/11; on 4 March 2004, that conviction was quashed. When his retrial on the same charges ended on 19 August 2005, he was acquitted on the murder charges but was given 7 years on the membership charge. His co-accused, Abdelghani Mzoudi, had been acquitted on all charges on 5 February 2004. On 16 November 2006, at the Karlsruhe Federal Court of Justice, Motassadeq's accessory-to-murder convictions were reinstated — but of only 246 victims, the crew and passengers on the 9/11 planes; those killed in the Twin Towers were now excluded. On 8 January 2007, he was sentenced to 15 years; four days later the Federal Constitutional Court refused to hear his appeal, and on 2 May 2007 the Federal Court of Justice refused to review the case, but it could still be taken to the European Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights, or a new trial in Germany might be possible.

The alleged "mastermind" of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was in US hands for almost five years (he was arrested in Rawalpindi on 1 March 2003), and Ramzi Binalshibh even longer (arrested in Karachi, 11 September 2002 — the first anniversary — another pure coincidence, need it be said), before in February 2008 it was announced, not by the US Attorney General, but a legal spokesman for the Pentagon, that they and four others were finally to be charged and put on trial, at Guantánamo Bay, before a military court, with their rights still to be determined by the Supreme Court, and with massive international criticism of what had already been done to them in custody, before and after being brought to Cuba in September 2006 from the CIA's safekeeping. On 12 June 2008, just one week after Mohammed, Binalshibh and three others appeared at an arraignment hearing at Guantánamo, the Supreme Court declared the Military Commissions Act unconstitutional and upheld habeas corpus rights for all foreign detainees, allowing them to challenge their status in normal civilian courts in the USA. It took until November 2009, after a change of government and the closing of — or stated intention to close — "Gitmo," before Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder announced that KSM and his associates would be tried at the Southern District Court in Manhattan, just a few blocks away from Ground Zero, presumably some time in 2010.

As for Bin Laden — that other "mastermind" — Donald Rumsfeld long ago frankly admitted he couldn't care less where he is; I dare say the feelings are mutual, and Bin Ladin is probably slightly easier to track down these days than "Rummy." ...

We can fairly swiftly discount the guilt by innuendo of the hundreds held in Guantánamo for years on end without charge, over 9/11 or anything else — for no better reason than to give the lynch mobs somebody identifiable, and in custody, to direct their hatred and stupidity at — and the repeatedly implied guilt of the late Saddam Hussein, CIA asset and US stooge for 40 years, against whom there never was any 9/11 case — but tell that to the more brainless sectors of the US public, who make up something like half of it.

www.frankresearch.info.../11_Convictions

frankresearch.info...

reply to post by Yankee451


Great find I enjoyed your post, and I recommend everyone to read it.

If the real guilty parties have not yet been convicted, the whole question of their identity is wide open. The minor players convicted so far — or even any major ones convicted in the future — could very well be the victims of manipulation by others still in the shadows. If the people who have been convicted so far didn't do it, who did ? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed ? Evidence — his alleged confession

Not to mention but wasn’t Khalid Sheikh Mohammed water boarded 183 times while in the CIA custody.

No-one who thinks the US government itself organised 9/11 need offer the slightest apology for believing it — Bush failed to prove his case, by producing trials and convictions, and Obama has yet to prove his

This is a fact.

we have Northwoods as a specific precedent, to prove that those at the very top of the US military establishment are capable of that level of cynicism — not just thinking it, but planning it, putting it in print and expecting it to be endorsed by a Defense Secretary and an Attorney General. Robert McNamara and Robert Kennedy may have had their reasons for rejecting Northwoods — perhaps not moral compunctions so much as the risks involved in something that, if exposed, would make the U-2 shootdown and the Bay of Pigs fiasco look like minor problems. By 2001, what made them major — the existence of the Soviet Union — was past history, the USA now had no serious enemies or competitors, and Donald Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft were in office.

So in order to rebuild a might military and be granted billions of dollars for expansions and more military bases in the Middle East we needed to create a terrorists organizations. The CIA did, and we named it Al-Qaida the same group that Bin Laden was trained into by our CIA. Bin Laden was not the 911 terrorist because he was working for us until 911.

[color=gold]The Myths of Al Qaeda

Al Qaeda was created by the CIA, in their offices in Washington D.C., According to Richard Clark in his most recent book. It was created for Saudi Arabia to bankroll Osama bin Laden, through the House of Saud, "in the Afghan war against the Soviet Union during the 1980's and Riyadh and Washington together contributed an estimated $3.5 billion to the mujahideen."

"In October 2003, Vanity Fair magazine disclosed information that had not previously been made public, in an in-depth report entitled 'Saving the Saudis.' The story that emerged about the relationship between the Bush family, the House of Saud, and the bin Laden family" (outlined) relationships that went back at least to the time of the Saudi Arabian Money-laundering Affair which began in 1974, and to George H.W. Bush's terms as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (1971-1973) and then as head of the CIA (1976-1977).

"Vanity Fair concluded: The Bush family and the House of Saud, the two most powerful dynasties in the world, have had closed personal business, and political ties for more than 20 years'.

In the private sector, the Saudi's supported Harken Energy, a struggling oil company in which George W. Bush was an investor. Most recently former president George H.W. Bush and his longtime ally, former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, have appeared before Saudis at fundraisers for the Carlyle Group, arguably the biggest private equity firm in the world. Today former president Bush continues to serve as senior advisor to the firm, whose investors allegedly include a Saudi accused of ties to terrorist support groups'

With the above as background, consider that Bush junior has sworn to go after all those who shelter terrorists, as well as all those who have been responsible for funding terrorist activities. Why hasn't 'Poppy' been arrested? Moreover – [color=gold]why has the public not picked up on the fact that right up until September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda was ours; we created it, we trained the terrorists and we used them! Why can we not find them now, and why has bin Laden not been captured or killed? In this light "Links to Al Qaeda!" takes on an entirely new meaning. This is not just idle conjecture - there is a real problem here. Bush and his henchmen are in this up to their eyes, and have been, since long before this current episode became public.

For many of you debunkers that think Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confession is evidences, think again. Perhaps if you were waterboarded 183 times perhaps you would say anything to live.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed [color=gold]was waterboarded 183 times while being interrogated by the CIA.
Pakistani intelligence agents say Mohammed was carrying a letter from bin Laden at the time of his arrest, but there is no evidence he knew bin Laden's exact whereabouts. By this point, any information Mohammed had would have been years out of date.
After being subjected to repeated waterboarding, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed claimed involvement in thirty-one terrorist plots.[146]. However, on 15 June 2009, in response to a lawsuit by the ACLU, the government was forced to disclose a previously classified portion of a CIA memo written in 2006 which recounted how Mohammed told the CIA that he "made up stories" to stop from being tortured.[147]
Legal experts cast serious doubt as to the validity of Mohammed's "confessions" as being false claims, and human rights activists raised serious concerns over the "sham process" of justice and use of torture[148]
On 2 June 2010, while speaking to the Economic Club of Grand Rapids, Michigan, former President George W. Bush publicly confirmed his knowledge and approval of waterboarding Mohammed, saying “Yeah, we waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed...I'd do it again to save lives.

en.wikipedia.org...
www.rense.com...

www.frankresearch.info...

I have been saying this for years, all the evidence pointing to a false flag operation (911) stops at the Bush administration, that’s where the buck stops.

reply to post by impressme


One thing I would like to poiint out. you say hitting the wtc wouldnt cause any economic hardship, however,
my macro professor brings up this topic ever so often, and she claims that, "they knew exactly where to hit us" because of the quality of people we lost that day. However I often wonder why they dont go for more damaging sites, as you mention. One thing Ive always wondered is why did they hit the towers so high up? Youd think they would of aimed another 20-30 floors lower so as to trap more people. Or atleast thats what a nutjob terrorist would do eh?

reply to post by VonDoomen


Have to remember that the towers were surrounded by other buildings 40-50 stories high

WTC 7 was 47 floors tall only 350 ft from North Tower

World Financial Center buildings on west/northwest sides were

WFC 1 - 40 stories

WFC 2 - 44 stories

WFC 3 - 51 stories

WFC 4 - 34 stories

Deutsche Bank - 40 stories just south of South Tower

They compiled bank transactions, flight records, visa applications, and dozens of telephone conversations to create the most comprehensive account of the chain of events before the attacks.

How did they compile telephone conversations? Telephone conversations are not recorded like bank transactions, if you don't record the conversation then and there you don't have it.

reply to post by filosophia


Its called records

Check your telephone bill

Has a record of who you called. Date, Time, number called, Duration of call

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Here is our supposed Trial of the Century to convict the 9/11 plotters for their role in the last attack on American soil yet the trial is not going to be on American soil or even in an American Civil Court.
No, they have to try these men in a military court in Guantanamo Cuba, Why is that?
Will they waterboard during cross-examination?
This is a sham.
If these guys attacked America then try them here in America by a civil court.
Oh, but then certain "details" might get out that the government doesn't want us to know.
Riiiiiight!

Why would they be tried for a crime in a civil court?

LOL!

Anyway, the reason that is, is because the military has different rules for evidence collection. If the evidence used to prosecute him was collected and gathered by military personel, (which it most likely was) than it is best to use a military court, as the military knows the rules of evidence.

Now, reverse that for a CIVILLIAN court. (I think that is what you were getting at, but I always laugh at that mistake, as it shows a complete lack of understanding of the US judicial system)

reply to post by impressme


It wasnt the only instance terrorism was funded and carried out under the directive of either Mossad or the CIA. In fact it happens more often than not. 9/11 was just so big an operation, so many people were involved and it drew so much attention, they just were not able to cover it up.

Has there been any kind of link between Hamas, which is a group committing acts of terror in Israel and against Israelis outside Israel (olympic games) and Bin Laden/Alquaeda? Or was the latter a group meant to extend terrorism against gentiles and other nationals under the directive of the CIA and Mossad, making the Israeli problem a world wide problem?

reply to post by FDNY343

If the evidence used to prosecute him was collected and gathered by military personel, (which it most likely was) than it is best to use a military court, as the military knows the rules of evidence.

That is IF? I just love how many of you debunkers make up nonsense off the top of your heads and expect everyone to be so gullible into believing in your opinion.
Where is your evidence that all the evidence was collected by the military and not by the CIA or FBI?

Now, reverse that for a CIVILLIAN court. (I think that is what you were getting at, but I always laugh at that mistake, as it shows a complete lack of understanding of the US judicial system)

Here you are assuming nonsense against the messenger. Because someone asked a question, doesn’t mean they lack any understanding to our judicial system.

Is this how debunking is done here by “assuming” the worst in your opponent?

reply to post by Cassius666

Has there been any kind of link between Hamas, which is a group committing acts of terror in Israel and against Israelis outside Israel (olympic games) and Bin Laden/Alquaeda? Or was the latter a group meant to extend terrorism against gentiles and other nationals under the directive of the CIA and Mossad, making the Israeli problem a world wide problem?

That is a very good question I have not read of any information that proved that Bin Laden or his group had attack members in Israel.

I have always believed they were created to "extend terrorism against gentiles and other nationals under the directive of the CIA and Mossad, making the Israeli problem a world wide problem?"
You are on the right track; one would almost believe that 911 were done in order to protect Israel, by us getting our two wars. The two countries that we invaded, Afghanistan and Iraq were firing scud missals into Israel and terrorist were training and sending in suicide bombers to kill as many Jews as possible including blowing themselves up on school buses, and shopping malls before 911 happened. Now that Afghanistan and Iraq regime has been changed and a new democracy is in place, Israel shouldn’t be having anymore problems with terrorism.

Originally posted by thedman

Problem is not easy to hit - those sited on rivers are often surrounded by hills and woods making difficult to
line up and hit


Plane was shredded into million pieces. Wall barely scratched

Oh the irony, we all know that with the appliance of *9/11* physics bending and top gun piloting skills, that no target is to small, no structure capable of withstanding the penetrable might of fibre glass Boeing noses, two jets brought down 3 towers built to withstand just that, what if the engineers that designed the WTC had also designed a nuclear power station or two?. With Al Qeada`s expertise at spotting structural weak points and design flaws, Hani Hanjour at the wheel to combat any obstacles in his path, then anything is possible.