Moussaoui says he wants more 9/11s

September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui said on Thursday he had no regrets for those who died in the hijacked plane attacks and told jurors in his death penalty trial he wished "there would be more pain."

In comments that brought at least one relative of a victim to tears, Moussaoui mocked survivors of the attacks who had told the court of their pain and said

​

he would like to see similar attacks against Americans every day.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/13042006/325/moussaoui-says-wants-9-11s.html



What a charming fellow..

 

Moussaoui is a clown. He contradicts his own statements from one day to the next. It figures he was the only one to get caught.

.

 

shaggie​

Isn't clown, Satan.​

Updated news about Moussaoui read posts #27-35-45+59​

Peace and love​

​

Yours Sincerely,​

​

Cat Stevens​

 

He might contradict himself... but he was part of it..

I awaiting somebody to claim he is a 'patsy'... why given this type of evidence do people STILL blame goverments ?.

The majority of them being dead .. might be another reason

 

Those were some confusing statements. As if Moussaoui's statements were proof that we should invade Iraq. As if we shouldn't blame the govt for invading Iraq because of what Moussaoui said.

They weren't dead before the attacks. If you would do some reading, Moussaoui got caught before 911. The opportunity was there to nail the rest. It's the less disciplined and less intelligent types like Moussaoui who tend to screw up and get caught. One of the reasons the terror group was kept small was to minizimize the chances of someone screwing up and letting the cat out of the bag.

If I remember correctly, it was actually a woman at the flight school that became suspicious of Moussaoui and reported it to the FBI. At least someone was thinking critically before the attack and knew something wasn't right.

.

 

What was incompetent and inexcusable was the lack of response after that Egyptian copilot downed that jumbo jet off Long Island about two years before 911. At that point, the govt, FAA, and other agencies should have convened and done something to secure the cockpits of aircraft, not to mention modifying other protocols and equipment to make things more secure. Nothing really changed after that incident. One can argue the same thing regarding the lack of response after the incident where someone flew his Cessna into the White House back in the mid 90s.

I know that some will still find excuses to apologize for the government's lack of response to these issue too. Condi Rice has pleaded igorance many times saying we couldn't have possibly have known that something like this would happen, even in light of the above two examples (and actually about 40 other incidents where people have intentionally downed planes for destructive reasons)

A widow of one of the 911 victims did her own research and testified before the Senate after Condi's statements and covered in detail all of the cases of intentionally downed flights. Of course, most never saw it, because C-Span and most of the other major 'news' networks in the U.S. didn't carry it. She made Condi look like an idiot.

.

 

.....he was the relief first officer=inside job. they might of had a chance with no door?........an to stay on topic, hope Moussaoui get's all 75 of his virgin's

 

I hope he gets his 75 too. But first, I hope Moussaoui gets a cell with Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. Now there's a couple of clueless people. Would make a great sitcom or reality show. The Odd Couple.

.

 

That's why I said review protocols and change them. The crew had put the aircraft on auto-pilot and left the cockpit with the copilot still there. Probably going out to get coffee and going to the mens room. That's really lax security practice. Anyone could storm the cockpit or someone could do something stupid like the copilot did before anyone had a chance to react. There should always be at least a few crew members in the cabin.

But, there's always this relentless effort to try to cover up incompetence, no matter how bad it is and make more excuses as if nothing could have been done to prevent something. The government loves that so many people will continue to apologize for it and keep it from being held accountable.

.

 

well matthew, if moussaoui is really "part of it" and is a typical arab terrorist who wanted to kill us, than why is the government so afraid to let him testify for himself? and how come they put an electric shock belt on him during his testimony? http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/280306_b_belt.htm. It seems strange that he never accepted the official story, was angry at the government and wanted to testify for himself, and now he is towing the government's line, but now maybe he just realizes he will either get death or life, he might as well just confess and get death. Also, just because a terrorist testifies to this kind of stuff doesn't mean the government wasn't involved, patsies are hired all the time unwillingly, communists, terrorists, etc. are paid for indirectly by government officials and military officials so a lot of times they don't even know who they are working for. DO you know how easy it is to find terrorists in the arab world who will participate in a terrorist attack, the CIA can hire these people unwillingly to their knowledge and tell them to do certain things, and then blame it on them.

 

​

or maybe they all are playing a game (trick/plan/acting) *Not sure at all, just a guess* however, both are evils in my POV.​

Peace and love


​

Yours Sincerely,​

Cat Stevens​

 

read my sig
​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,​

Cat Stevens​

 

Who is saying anything he said justified anything ?.

I have 'done some reading' ... if he is giving misleading statements how is it possible the verify a lot of what he has said ?.. go arrest scores of 'innocent' people.. have human rights lawyers getting 'innocent' people freed in a fortnight ??.. Even IF all those who carried out the attacks where captured .. know doubt ANOTHER team would have carried out the scheme at a later date..

At least you seem to agree a bunch of islamic fundementalists carried out these atrocities..that at least is something.

How/When ??? 3 weeks prior to a attack .. hearing misleading confuesing statements from a apparent fantasist ??.

I agree.. but then you have the issue of them being more difficult to apprehend..with the knowledge we have after the fact.. it is easy to see how certain things could have been avoided.. but with so little evidence or evidence comeing from a myriad of differing sources.. it is not a complete shock that EVERY attack is NOT avoided.

You only have to look at the london bombings to see how a difficult task it is..

If the opportunity/evidence was there it would have been taken... like the hand full or so other plots that have been scuppered..

The mere fact that this attack was so grand and was completed..should not detract from that reality.

Ofcourse their was failings and opportunities missed et etc etc.

We don't tend to argue about the ones that were avoided, do we ?.

Who was this person ??? Brenda Keene ?.

"He was a little more cantankerous than some of the other students, he was a little more pushy, a little more bossy."

"We grounded him," Airman admissions officer Brenda Keene told the jury. "We told him he needed to cease his flight training or pay more money."

Moussaoui said he needed to think about it.

"From that day, we never saw him again," Keene said

or Clancy Prevost

With his cash payment and lack of experience, Moussaoui stood out from the beginning, testified Clancy Prevost, his instructor at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Eagan, Minnesota.

Prevost was assigned to give Moussaoui a classroom presentation on the Boeing 747 cockpit. It didn't take long for Prevost to realize it was a waste of time.

"He had no frame of reference whatsoever with a commercial airliner," Prevost testified. "After 15 minutes I said, 'Let's get lunch.' "

At lunch, Prevost said, Moussaoui rebuked him for asking about Islam.

Prevost said he asked Moussaoui, "Are you Muslim?"

"I am nothing!" Moussaoui answered, raising his voice.

Prevost said that's when it struck him that the school ought not to be helping Moussaoui achieve his stated goal of learning to fly from London's Heathrow Airport to John F. Kennedy Airport in New York City.

By the second day of instruction, Prevost urged the flight school's managers to conduct a background check on his student.

"We don't know anything about this guy, and we're teaching him how to throw the switches on a 747," Prevost recalled saying.

After hearing Prevost's anecdotes, Pan Am program managers Tim Nelson and Hugh Sims made separate calls on August 15 to the FBI's Minnesota field office, and Moussaoui was arrested. He was initially held on an immigration violation.


I doubt he was a blip on anybodys radar ... nobody would have had cause to suspect him of anything.. imho it was a good call by that person at the flight school.. but hardly a person any evidence could have been garnered from to avoid anything [do we even know what he actually knew prior to the attack /- did he know ANYTHING of consequence ?].. he was 1 of many.. possibly, well obviously not a crucial element in 9/11.

Moussaoui's lies to US investigators after he was arrested led directly to at least one death on 9/11.


http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/09/moussaoui.trial/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4873828.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/09/moussaoui.trial/

Could you post that 'evidence'..

No offence but prison planet could make a arguement FOR green being blue..

I doubt they say it is used quite widely and not in every state.. it is quite a nasty thing .. but they have been in use for 10 years.. Amnesty international did a report on them [checking the issue out]...
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510451996?open&of=ENG-390

Its more about cutting costs..than mind control.. sorry it might be as boreing as that.

 

I agree that it's difficult to avoid attacks. I'm more upset at the fact that there was plenty of time to change security procedures, protocols, etc. in light of the 1993 WTC bombing, the Murrah bombing, the guy who flew his place into the White House, and the downing of the flight off of Long Island, all in the 90s. If things had been changed, the chances of a group pulling off something like 911 would have been reduced greatly.

If the 911 plot had been intercepted and another plot just like it took place at a later date, that would be an incredible embarassment for the government. I don't buy that argument.

.

 

I don't have the transcript of the woman who testified in the Senate, Matt. I may have some of it on VHS. If you look up the U.S. Senate, there's probably a transcript of meetings that transpired throughout the years. It was summer 2002 when she testified. There was a patriotic fervor at that time in the U.S. and people and the media didn't like to hear things that were critical of the U.S. government.

It was an open hearing and CNN carried it. This woman did an excellent job of documenting all the past events where aircraft were intentionally downed for destructive reasons. It was a very compelling argument that the govt should have at least been better prepared to deal with such an event compared to how it performed on 911. I could tell that it was the loss of her husband that gave her the energy to go through all the work of researching the information.

.

 

True. There was a bomb plot that U.S. govt officials stopped on New Years 2000. Someone came through the Canadian border with a bomb in his trunk planning to blow up LAX airport. One of the border officials noticed he seemed very nervous and they found the bomb in his car. I give the officials credit for stopping that one.

.

 

I agree with you.. though

'reduced greatly' is the best that could happen . Avoided is somewhat different... for all it's faults and flaws a goverment works within boundaries and has others to maintain a level of 'checks and balances'.. Given terrorists don't care if they break any law in the land.. it is that much more difficult to do things within legislation and 'human rights' [and get away with it].. don't you think ?.

I doubt 'one just like it' would occur .. I meant a alternative plan would have been in operation. Another attack would/could have happened.. maybe not so grand .. but one none the less.

I could not find it...

Well i supoose given time i will eventualy [thnaks anyway]. I read some quite informative information along the way [attempting to find it] [thats always a good thing].

Is it possible to completly legislate for suicide bombers ?.
Not something i am sure that poor lady wished to hear.

 

There are some things that could have been done without any difficulty or possible infringement of personal rights. Securing cockpit doors for one. Changing protocols so that all the pilots don't leave the cockpit with the door open to get coffee while someone still in the cockpit can down the plane. Better security at airports. Organizing various branches of government and law enforcement to response more quickly to large disasters. There were some efforts that were made in rehearsing such procedures but what happened on 911 overwhelmed everyone.

Everyone knew and admitted that airport security in the U.S. was a joke before 911. There was a time when it was taken more seriously in the late 60s and early 70s during the hijacking craze, but that effort at security waned quickly in the 70s.

They are tough lessons and the U.S. is learning them the hard way. We've been isolated from terrorism for the most part compared with other parts of the world, but people here will have to look at things more carefully from now on.

.

 

For someone who lost someone in 911, there is a frustration that something could have been done to prevent it or at least reduce the chances of it happening. I do feel sorry for the relatives involved that they were snubbed by Bush with his contention that an investigation wasn't needed and the ignorance pleas by Condi Rice that there was no way it could have been anticipated.

.

 

Here are the links for the senate intelligence committee hearing. I believe this is the hearing I saw in 2002. I'm not sure if the pdf below is the same person I was listening to. A number of people testified that day. Only CNN covered it. MSNBC, Fox, and CSPAN all ignored it. CSPAN in particular should have covered it since it is their job to cover the House and Senate and issues of national significance. Instead, they were covering some little local issue a Congressman was talking about.

Bush changed his mind in late Sep 2002 and said he would no longer thwart an investigation, probably because whoever was manipulating him was concerned about Congressional midterms in 2002. They deliberately waited until after the elections were over before assigning the chairmen. After the elections were over, Bush appointed two has-beens, Kissinger and Mitchell to head the committee, both of whom resigned shortly thereafter. Bush's 'support' for a real investigation was anything but wholehearted after that.

http://intelligence.senate.gov/0209hrg/020918/witness.htm

http://intelligence.senate.gov/0209hrg/020918/breitweiser.pdf

.