Comments on: Only one link here!

Only one link here!

thirteenkiller — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:28:29 -0800

Apparently, all the exhibits entered into evidence in US v. Moussaoui are available online. Enjoy!

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:39:22 -0800

From the Prosecution's stuff, some of the raw e-mail intercepts are interesting from a technical standpoint. That's all I've really gotten in to so far. Otherwise, very cool.

By: beaucoupkevin

beaucoupkevin — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:50:29 -0800

This is some version of the word "enjoy" that I have yet to comprehend. Still, a fascinating archive, even from the first bits of nosing around I've done.

By: Ironmouth

Ironmouth — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:04:43 -0800

With exception of the seven that are classified and under seal. This isn't really that amazing and it will be par for the course in the near future. Already all civil exhibits are online for a great number of Federal District Courts. Of course you have to pay, and be a lawyer, but we're getting there.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:05:49 -0800

What a shitty way to word and construct what could be an interesting post.

By: thirteenkiller

thirteenkiller — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:07:53 -0800

Feel free to improve it, xmutex.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:13:05 -0800

Ick - looks like all of the defense's video footage is uncompressed (or very poorly compressed) MPG data. 11 minutes = 600+MB. How unfortunate.

By: gorgor_balabala

gorgor_balabala — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:13:50 -0800

It's fine. (Just use the little hyperlink and you're on your way. *slam*)

By: rob paxon

rob paxon — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:34:25 -0800

Yeah, xmutex. She probably should have added a supplementary YouTube link.

By: turducken

turducken — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:39:49 -0800

Oh, quit yer bellyachin'. This is a cool post. Archive is full of stuff that should keep the conspiracy nutballs busy for years. And I find it amazing that the current iteration of our federal gummint would (a) deign to allow us lowly citizens to see this stuff, and (b) find a high school student savvy enough to actually get it up on the interweb.

By: twiggy

twiggy — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:02:40 -0800

Interesting that a big part of what made this thread a complete clusterfuck was people calling the video posted to YouTube "pornography" because it synched up the phone call with the footage of the WTC. Turns out that video is one of the exhibits -- the way the prosecution presented it.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:06:53 -0800

There seems to be a heap of photos of victims, pre- & post- mortem, plus recordings of calls from the flights, shots & clips of the Pentagon & WTC crashes, etc etc etc. Can any lawyerly american type please tell me how these pieces of evidence establish guilt? Surely, nobody was disputing that the attacks actually took place...?

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:14:49 -0800

UbuRovias; one part of the trial that was covered in the media involved "victim impact statements." That is, statements designed to show how horrible 9/11 was, just, you know, in case you forgot or something. There was probably a metafilter thread about it.

By: blacklite

blacklite — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 21:41:59 -0800

These e-mails are pretty amusing.

I have to say that I am a bit sad and surprise because why it is not possible to accesss of simulator course if you are not a Commercial Pilot with 2000 etc hrs. I am sure that you can understand that somebody is read to spend a "bit" money to have the experience of a life time to fly one of these Big Bird. I do not intended to become a Airline Pilot ( I am 33 years old a bit late to start) But this is one of my dream. Really it should not be of any problem as long as you pay [...] - FO05521.14

By: pwedza

pwedza — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:28:13 -0800

I thought these docs were quite interesting.

By: -harlequin-

-harlequin- — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:36:57 -0800

They have evidence? Well at least they're learning from their previous attempts.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:54:32 -0800

For linking to pdfs without warning, I sentence pwedza to six consecutive guillotinings.

By: mrbill

mrbill — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:15:58 -0800

Even terrorists don't pirate software!

By: CunningLinguist

CunningLinguist — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 05:23:46 -0800

Don't miss Moussaoui's handwritten motions. They were my favorite part of the trial. Search the list for "Filing by Mr. Moussaoui."

By: Unregistered User

Unregistered User — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 05:28:40 -0800

Say it with me yall, "I trust and believe in my Government!".

By: thekilgore

thekilgore — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 06:01:10 -0800

I think one of the earliest signs that these people are evil is that they used Power Point.

By: rzklkng

rzklkng — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 06:40:53 -0800

There's some interesting opportunities for open source datamining in there. I'm liking the fact that they repeatedly used the same sites for money transfers (via the money transfers). Interesting how they pretty much did everything legally and with proper documentation. Just goes to show that we are not as capable as we say we are. Also, terrorists have sucky penmanship.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:09:35 -0800

Are the courts making any effort to get motions and such as formatted text formats, like PDF or Word, rather than scanning paper versions into PDF?

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 16:49:52 -0800

odinsdream wrote "some of the raw e-mail intercepts are interesting from a technical standpoint" Quite interesting -- dumps of Hotmail form submissions. Do these end up in the browser cache or would they be from sniffing of unencrypted traffic? Guess this explains why Hotmail still doesn't meta-refresh to the HTTPS version when you reach the site. Given this one, they're grabbing whatever they can catch... are we seeing the first public data from our much-discussed uber Internet monitoring system? "We don't need information from your database -- just don't make it any easier for the connections to be encrypted."

By: etoile

etoile — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 13:08:13 -0800

I actually found the e-mail intercepts interesting from a sociological standpoint, too. Watching him beg and plead to fly a "big bird" is downright eerie now that we know why he wanted to.

By: etoile

etoile — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 13:14:14 -0800

Oh holy shit. I was reading through the prosecution's documents, going one by one through the e-mails. I clicked on "FO05521.54" which had the description "E-mail" next to it. I ended up getting this, which it says is exhibit number P200098 and the description is as follows:

Photo of Firefighter Danny Suhr on 9/11/01 [Viewer discretion is advised]

Emphasis mine. It's NOT PRETTY. It belongs on Ogrish or Rotten.com. Obviously somebody put the WRONG information in the listing of exhibits. I have got to figure out who to contact to get them to change that. Oh holy crap.

By: etoile

etoile — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 13:14:57 -0800

Erm, okay, the emphasis didn't work. Seriously folks, don't click that if you're squeamish or at work. I'm going to go wash my eyeballs now.

By: etoile

etoile — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 14:41:49 -0800

Okay, it's fixed. I e-mailed them, and the correct exhibit is now there, and the one that was in its place is now where it belongs. They fixed it within the hour. That wasn't the only mistake I found, though - there was a photo labeled as graphic that wasn't - so there may be others. Hopefully the webmaster will check them all.

By: Mid

Mid — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:58:45 -0800

This sort of stuff is why the Moussoui death penalty prosecution was such as joke. Here's some crazy guy, who was locked in a cell in Minnesota on 9/11, and 36 gazillion pictures of dead people! Hang him! It is truly great that the jury said no to the death penalty. And I'm not against the death penalty. The guys who should actually be executed are in secret CIA prisons and probably can never be hung because they been tortured and the government will never let those facts out in open court.