In a recent thread, (prematurely closed in my view, although I do see the Mod's point of view) someone cited links to a collection of evidence used
by the federal prosecutors in the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui, the so called twentieth hijacker.
The point being discussed in the other thread was what happened to the bodies of the people on Flt.77 (the plane which was alleged to have crashed
into the Pentagon.) The links were to photos of bodies found in the Pentagon after the crash. But something else caught my attention.
Also in evidence were photos of the 19 hijackers, including the ones who are still alive in various places around the world. Now, the Mousaoui trial
didn't take place until quite some time after 9/11/01. Surely the NSA, the CIA and the FBI, although oblivious to most things 9/11 would be aware by
that time that the list of hijackers was not accurate. Why would photos of innocent people living abroad, not connected to the events of 9/11, except
perhaps that their passports were stolen from them, be introduced as evidence? Were the photos identified as stolen or possibly of people totally
unrelated to the event, at the trial?
I'm no legal expert, but would the unqualified use of these photos at the trial constitute libel on these people? Would it be grounds for a
mistrial? Would it be grounds for a charge to the jury to disregard any evidence introduced by the government of The United States, since in the case
of the photos, if labelled as hijackers, they were introducing evidence which was patently untrue?
But it doesn't stop there. There are photos of light poles knocked over and I'm assuming evidence or testimony may have been introduced that Flt.77
knocked over these light poles on it's way to the building. However this evidence is contradicted by the evidence of the flight data recorder as
analysed by the NTSB, which puts the plane at too high an altitude and on another trajectory, which would make it impossible to contact the light
poles in question. In addition, eyewitnesses interviewed in The Pentacon video also put the plane on a trajectory which would make it impossible for
it to contact the damaged light poles.
The point I'm trying to make is that maybe some of the movers and shakers in the Truth Movement, particularly ones with legal qualifications, should
give the Moussaoui trial a careful going over. There may be a lot more evidence in it which has been thoroughly debunked, that Moussaoui's defense
attorney may not have known about. Since this is already an adjudicated part of the whole 911 story, it provides an avenue into the legal process
with pitfalls and barricades already removed. An appeal by Moussaoui at this point might be very damaging to the story that the Bush administration
is sticking to.
Based on what I've written above, I predict that the Moussaoui trial is the last 9/11 related trial of a terrorist we will ever have. Any defense
attorney representing a "terrorist" has too much expert testimony in reserve now for the government to attempt another prosecution.
[edit on 21-8-2007 by ipsedixit]