Disturbing 9/11 Tapes Played at Moussaoui Trial

The Americans are the terroists of this world. I was in New York in January and all the news stations could talk about was IRAN. Now the topic of Iran is becoming more and more prevailant. Now the media say they have started using uranium to create nuclear warheads, how do we know this is true. Its all part of the start of an elaborate campaign to have us believing that Iran is country we should fear because of their supposed ventures in the production of nuclear warheads. The thing is WE DONT KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE URANIUM. They maybe doing nothing whatsoever, but because America must continue the hunt for OIL, they have to make a case for invasion.

Agreed, that bloke is defo fcuked one way or another.

The following is a post from the politics forum about the nuclear program.

AKRASIA wrote:

Iran shouldn't be allowed to have Nukes, But neither should America. Of all countries in the world, America should not be allowed have them. America are the only country to use Nuclear weapons in a war, Bush pretty much has announced that he wants to Use his nukes in a strike on Iran. It is America who are preventing global nuclear disarmament and who are developing new nuclear technology that is designed to lower the nuclear threshold. it is america who are threatening all these dangerous countries with 'regime change' which is forcing them to seek out a deterrent to attack. America are the biggest threat to world peace by a ****in long shot. And the current republican government is certifiably psychopathic.

OK I have just listened to links posted by th OP and they are truly disturbing.

I found the woman's call quite disturbing.

I feel sorry for the man on trial.

Whether he be innocent or not doesn't matter. There is no way he's going to get a fair trial to be honest.

Hes guilty. He pleaded guilty and has laughed and mocked his way through the trial. One highlight included singing "Burn in the USA" (i.e.Bruce Springsteen) whilst tapes like the above were being played. I dont feel sorry for him.

I dont know I dont think so and even if he was he stil should have his rights...

No surprise, but to inform you...

A) He should have resigned in 2004 if he had a problem with the possibility of being deployed. He didnt, and most armies are not democracies. You go where youre ordered.

He was ordered to Iraq in 2005. He tried to argue it was an illegal war. This was thrown out (correctly) because the Iraq occupation was (by this point) 100% legal and supported by UN resolutions and international law. Hence, not illegal.

The guy in question was described as extremely arrogant by the trial judges, so I can only assume he was showboating as he had no case, as any lawyer would have told him.

Right maybe they did, put who is to say the US government didnt pay them off. Who is to say first that this Al Qaeda organisation exists?

U really believe that the two planes that hit the WTC caused both buildings to collapse in such a manner. The whole structure melting is BS that was fed to us by the US government.

Deleted User wrote:

They tried to use Saddam as a scapegoat, remember. When it first happened. Everyone linked Al-Qaida with Saddam, then this was rubbished.

Exactly my point. Thus to imply that the Americans sought to make Al Qaeda a scapegoat is BS.

Deleted User wrote:

Is it not possible that they admitted to it to save face? If you're a terrorist organisation you're not going to say, "oh nope! That wasn't me at all at all".

I don't understand your point. The WTC attacks were regarded as a massive success for terrorists. Admitting responsibility had nothing to do with "saving face".

Willem D wrote:

Right maybe they did, put who is to say the US government didnt pay them off. Who is to say first that this Al Qaeda organisation exists?

How about the fact that they have cells all around the world as well as members. i.e. Moussaoui!

Willem D wrote:

U really believe that the two planes that hit the WTC caused both buildings to collapse in such a manner. The whole structure melting is BS that was fed to us by the US government.

Sure mate, and JFK and princess Di are off living on an island somewhere too, aren't they?

Squaddy wrote:

Like when the underground trainstations were bomed last year in London, all the news stations called them terrorists but how are they terrorists they are defending themselves.

WTF are you on about? Defending themselves?

Squaddy wrote:

Its the same when they found sadam. They said he was found in a hole eating mars bars.. which was untrue... he was living the life of luxury.

Source?

Squaddy wrote:

And did Iran ever say they where making nuclear arms? No.

Would they admit it if they were? No. Why did they stop UN inspectors out of the country?

Squaddy wrote:

They have to supply electricity to 68 million people in their country and to improve their economy. Whats wrong with that! No but "america" said they are making nuclear arms so lets all believe them.

So you believe what the Iranian government is telling you, but everything the US says is lies? :rolleyes:

Squaddy wrote:

Hes a hero in my eyes...

For having a part in killing 2,986 people?

Anyone else think its a troll?

Williem D wrote:

How can you believe that a plane could cause a building to collapse in such a manner. I for one am not the only who believes this.

Take it back to the other thread about this.

I havent CH4 I am afraid but I have more4, they tend to show repeats of what has been on CH4.

Its already been better proven that the bush administration are behind it. Without going into detail, key facts;

*Bombs can clearly be seen going off in the tower as it collapses downwards. That and its physically impossible for a building like that, hit at that point,to collapse downwards. It mightve been possible for the top of the buillding to literally fall off, but not collapse. The melting point of steel does not reach the temperatures that could created by the explosion of jet engine fuel - theres no excuse for the building collapsing downwards. The WTC's were the first buildings ever to fully collapse from fire. (And dont point out the plane hitting it - I already accounted for that - the top of the tower shouldve just fell off, if anything.)

*The building fell in about 10 seconds. Also impossible. The collapse shouldve got slower as the building collapsed. Think a 10-story building collapsing in 0.8 seconds or so.

*Firemen complained about melted steel in the remains of the basement after the collapse - once again, the melting point of steel is 100% IMPOSSIBLE to reach with jet fuel. According to the firefighters themselves, "it looks like a c4 explosion)

*The WTC was evacuated the thursday prior to the attack for "new cabling" - and these new cables were set up by george bush's brother. Fantastic!

*When everyone demanded to hear the contents of the black boxes, the government said they had been literally destroyed, and are useless because of that. All 8 black boxes. (4 per plane, I believe). And yet, these black boxes, made from the strongest alloys known to man, having been destroyed, dont stand up to the incredible strenght of the passport, created from..paper. Dont we all remember the "passport of a highjacker" being found after the crash, near the crash site, completly unmarked? ****ing fantastic. Who writes this bull****?

*The Bin Laden tape is also fake. Firstly, he's wearing gold, and his wedding ring is on the wrong hand - as he's left handed. The wearing of gold is against the islamic religion, I do believe. The man in the tape also looks NOTHING like Bin Laden. His face is far too round, for a start. And why would someone accused of murdering over 2000 people make a tape for the US govt to find, claiming he did it?

I would validate my sources, but er...go and google it yourself. google vid/youtube should do for the vids, And the laws of physics should account for the melting points.



Now, secondly, cosgrave's audio synced to video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nbbRkV0lKg&search=WTC

Nice. Oil IS worth a lot of money, I suppose.

Tellox wrote:

*Bombs can clearly be seen going off in the tower as it collapses downwards. That and its physically impossible for a building like that, hit at that point,to collapse downwards. It mightve been possible for the top of the buillding to literally fall off, but not collapse. The melting point of steel does not reach the temperatures that could created by the explosion of jet engine fuel - theres no excuse for the building collapsing downwards. The WTC's were the first buildings ever to fully collapse from fire. (And dont point out the plane hitting it - I already accounted for that - the top of the tower shouldve just fell off, if anything.)

Source where this is clearly seen please. How do you know this is impossible?

Tellox wrote:

*The building fell in about 10 seconds. Also impossible. The collapse shouldve got slower as the building collapsed. Think a 10-story building collapsing in 0.8 seconds or so.

Again, how do you know this is impossible?

Tellox wrote:

*Firemen complained about melted steel in the remains of the basement after the collapse - once again, the melting point of steel is 100% IMPOSSIBLE to reach with jet fuel. According to the firefighters themselves, "it looks like a c4 explosion)

Tellox wrote:

*The WTC was evacuated the thursday prior to the attack for "new cabling" - and these new cables were set up by george bush's brother. Fantastic!

How many people would it take to install bombs all around the WTC. Even if they didn't know it was explosives at the time, after the attacks someone would of come out to the media about it.

Tellox wrote:

*The Bin Laden tape is also fake. Firstly, he's wearing gold, and his wedding ring is on the wrong hand - as he's left handed. The wearing of gold is against the islamic religion, I do believe. The man in the tape also looks NOTHING like Bin Laden. His face is far too round, for a start. And why would someone accused of murdering over 2000 people make a tape for the US govt to find, claiming he did it?

The whole point of the attacks would be to make the world aware of him, their would be no point in carrying out the attacks without admitting to them.


I'm sure some questionable things happened on the day and as a result of the attacks, but to say that the Bush administration planned the whole thing is just to far. IMO.