It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Zacarias Moussaoui testifies to bieng part of 9/11 plot after lying in August 2001

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 12:14 PM
link   
www.breitbart.com...




Al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui testified Monday that he and would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid were supposed to hijack a fifth airplane on Sept. 11, 2001, and fly it into the White House.

Moussaoui's testimony on his own behalf stunned the courtroom as he disclosed details he had never revealed before. It was in stark contrast to Moussaoui's previous statements in which he said the White House attack was to come later if the United States refused to release a radical Egyptian sheik imprisoned on earlier terrorist convictions.


Zacarias Moussaoui has stated that he was part of a plot on 9/11 to hijack a fifth plane. This may be part of the reason that specific information about 9/11 has not been released due to the senstive nature of this trial, and now, after so much denial, his admitting to being part of the 9/11 attacks.

He states that he lied to investigators when arrested in August, and this was able to buy the time needed to complete the attack on 9/11. This is further evidence that 9/11 was not an inside job, and that the entire attack was not even completed. This would mean that somewhere, in the US, are the other members of the cell that were to work with Moussaoui in the fifth hijacking. That in itself to me is a little troubling.

This goes against most of his other testimony but now we know why. He wanted to make sure that 9/11 was not stopped.











[edit on 27-3-2006 by esdad71]




posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Egads! You mean this cad had the Audaciousness to actually LIE to investigators about the Fifth plane aimed at the White House, and the assumable assassination of our president?? The White House was a target all along?? It was infact a Primary target??

This...the very first apprehendee of the HATED Patriot Act...really IS a Bad Guy??

Only in the U.S.A. can the authorities, with GOOD intel, walk up on a suspect, say "You're involved with a conspiracy to level the two biggest buildings in the world, and kill our President." and then have the bad guy say, "No I not."....and the authorities walk off!!! And people wonder why we still hold detainees who scream, "Hey, I ain't got nothing to do with this."

Fear not, everyone. He is probably lying this time too, being the victim of some insane torture technique, such as having panties put on his head.

Uh, one more thing, why was the courtroom stunned when he finally came out and confessed?? Because Bush was RIGHT??



esdad, I'd like to ask you to do one thing. The next time you post a story THIS big...say it in B-I-G letters.

Zacarias Moussaoui Confesses!!

Okay, this really IS the last thing. Here's the link to AOL's story on this whole thing.

articles.news.aol.com...




[edit on 27-3-2006 by Toelint]

[edit on 27-3-2006 by Toelint]



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Why has Moussaoui's testimony regarding Osama Bin Laden not been used to indict Osama? Is his testimony not credible? Here we are over four and a half years after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 and still no indictment of Osama Bin Laden in the USA despite a now confessed and convicted conspirator testifying to this.

Its also not as if false confessions haven't happened before.



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I loved it when I saw this on the news today. He literally committed perjury and public suicide by testifying.

Needless to say his lawyers were not all that happy, but who cares as long as he gets what he deserves?



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   
I don't understand this, am I reading this article correctly, it states that Moussaoui says he was going to be the 5th hijacker, but then the article itself states, 'Asked by Zerkin if he was supposed to be one of the men who would pilot a plane on 9/11, he said no, adding: "I'm sorry, I don't know about the number of planes but I was not the fifth (pilot) hijacker."'

So which is it, or did they just not expect people to read the article?



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I don't understand this, am I reading this article correctly, it states that Moussaoui says he was going to be the 5th hijacker, but then the article itself states, 'Asked by Zerkin if he was supposed to be one of the men who would pilot a plane on 9/11, he said no, adding: "I'm sorry, I don't know about the number of planes but I was not the fifth (pilot) hijacker."'

So which is it, or did they just not expect people to read the article?


I believe the difference lies in his original statement/confession and what he said on the stand. In other words what he did on the stand was commit perjury by stating something other then his original statement.



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   
That is why I wanted people to read the article. There are things in the article that fit, and things that do not. See anything else?



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 11:55 PM
link   


still no indictment of Osama Bin Laden in the USA despite a now confessed and convicted conspirator testifying to this.


Osama denied involvement:

911physics.atspace.com...



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by heelstone
Why has Moussaoui's testimony regarding Osama Bin Laden not been used to indict Osama? Is his testimony not credible? Here we are over four and a half years after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 and still no indictment of Osama Bin Laden in the USA despite a now confessed and convicted conspirator testifying to this.

Its also not as if false confessions haven't happened before.


It's one thing to coerce a confession in the heat of an interrogation. THIS one came out of the defendant while he was ON THE STAND in a courtroom! BIG DIFFERENCE!



posted on Mar, 30 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Doesn't this sound a little too good to be true? Ok he and would be shoe bomber Richard Reid were supposed to hop on a plane and crash it into the White house.
Where are all the connections? Why use 2 hijackers instead of 4 like all the other attacks especially for a target like the whitehouse? Dont believe the hype



posted on Mar, 30 2006 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Okay, wait a minute. I'm not supposed to believe the hype. How about believing the transcript? Now the evidence is coming out that the rest of Al Queda thinks this guy is nothing more than a pain-in-the-arse wannabe. So does that make him any less of a terrorist? Or, are we supposed to believe this guy IS a terrorist...but his confessioni is an act of insanity??




top topics



 
0

log in

join