Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
Can you give a source on that? I don't remember ever hearing about the flight manifests not having the hijackers listed on them...
Sorry, I haven't checked my replies in a while ...
... Yeah, the "flight manifests" everyone keeps talking about; OFFICIALLY, they've never been submitted, and the ONE TIME they appeared in a court
case, they were FAXed in -- which makes them USELESS in a court of law as evidence.
Here is an example of what we USUALLY HEAR; DISINFO
and here is the
Now, this is what was provided as the ACTUAL EVIDENCE at the Moussaoui trial;
Here is an article discussing it; LINK
>> The problem is -- all these bits of data about 9/11 need to be seen "in context."
1) There are no "legally accepted" flight manifests submitted -- so you might as well add "Donald Duck" in a powerpoint screen.
2) Moussaoui was waterboarded, and entered the trial with a shock belt -- if the government REALLY had evidence and an authentic day in court -- they
wouldn't have had to torture and reprogram the witness so that he claims he was involved in EVERY terrorist attack.
3) Quite a few of the people on that manifest, are alive and claiming they had nothing to do with it -- so WHERE do we find the actual list of people?
There was a resent Mossad hit team in Libya that was caught with forged passports -- maybe the hijackers LIED about their identities, or MAYBE someone
non-Muslim took control of the planes. We seriously, do not have a CHAIN OF EVIDENCE to prove that the hijackers were who the FBI and government claim
>> MOST of the "so called" evidence of 19 hijackers, is based on STUFF THAT GOT REPEATED by a lot of sources over and over again -- but all
referencing here-say. Other than one FBI briefcase, and some flight manuals in some rented vehicles, and some "alleged" passports that survived the
fire that brought down the towers -- there isn't much I think you could call "evidence."
The incompetence seems massive but highly convenient.