(Please moderators do NOT merge this as it would simply bury this and I'm actually making a different point. I don't care about the thermite or what Penn and Teller think. I want to see another investiagtion. I'm trusting in your desire to have open dialogue.) I want to consolidate some thoughts from another thread. . First off I don't know what happened on 9/11, this is EXACTLY why I want another investigation. What's more I'm not alone: Don't you think these polls show that there is a desire, especially in NYC to open a new investigation of 9/11? http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=1354 http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=855 Do these people's opinion not matter? That's what has baffled me for so long. If it's so iron-clad that it was done by guys with box cutters why not have a new investigation to put this baby to bed? I mean you guys seem so certain that there is nothing more too it and it's easy explained away by science (mind you truthers feel the same way about their claims!). Why are there so many doubters in the VERY PLACE IT HAPPENED? Don't they deserve another investiagation? If the government's conspiracy theory (dudes with box cutters) is unsatisfying to half of Americans and two thirds of NYC residents per Zogby then don't they and the 9/11 families who want another investigation deserve one? Ok so people like to say 9/11 couldn't be an inside job because: A) The government wouldn't even consider killing US Citizens to start a war. This is false http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods B) Big conspiracies aren't tenable because the conspirators would squeal. false and here's why. In addition to the examples of the Nazi's keeping death camps under wraps for the German people there is also the organized crime angle: C) if 9/11 was an inside job then they would have also hidden WMD's because why wouldn't they? No, here's why: D) Didn't Bush prosecute the war to get Osama to get justice for 9/11 and kill Saddam to save us from WMD's? No he didn't. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ghanistan.iraq If Bush was so big on security and Cheney cared so much about fighting the threat of terrorism why not complete a deal for Osama that the Clinton regime had set up? I mean really why WOULD you let the man who blew up the USS Cole slip out of your grip? http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn11012004.html emphasis mine on that final quote. Why did Richard Clarke say Rumsfeld was immediately wanting to tie 9/11 to Saddam? Richard Clarke mind you had served for MULTIPLE Republican regimes. He wanted to follow in Clinton's footsteps and nail Osama and yet Bush/Cheney got rid of investigations into Osama and the Bin Laden family at large. Clinton was no saint either. But heres what is said about the Bush Admin's attitude towards investigating the Saudi's and the Bin Laden family sans Osama (I recommend reading this whole article): http://www.nthposition.com/didthepresidentspike.php Here is his lead in which answers your questions about why people in the media and one would assume in the investigative community were afraid to look into matters more closely: This is why I say I want another investigation. 9/11 truthers and Debunkers shouldnt' be the ones who have the burden here if over half of American's want another investigation along with 2/3rds of NYC residents the government owes it to the people to open a new investigation. Explain to me please why there shouldn't be another investigation of 9/11 when over half of America wants it and two thirds of NYC residents want it. If you say because it would cost money then I say to you that isn't a good enough reason. We are spending GAZILLIONS right now and a few million wouldn't make any difference but might give 9/11 families and truthers some peace of mind.
Not to me. What makes you think a new investigation would change anything? And there are probably a few guys at the state hospital who think they are Jesus. I guess we need to investigate their claims, after all, they believe in them. Because it would be a stupid waste of time and money. Since some huge percentage of Americans believe in God, do we need to investigate that too? UFOs? Astrology? The money is a good enough reason, and truthers will never have peace of mind. There will always be another conspiracy theory to believe in. barfo
Ok, so you don't care about the opinion of 51% of Americans? Do you believe in Democracy? I mean that "opinion" crafts ALL of our policy foreign and domestic. UFO's, Astrology and God as far as I know have nothing to do with the biggest historical event in the past 30 years of American history and the ensuing dramatic policy changes both foreign (Iraq and Afghanistan Trillions and counting) and domestic (Patriot Act, Warrantless Wiretapping, Homeland Security etc.) so I think it is a tad disingenuous to compare those things. One is an event we can all agree happened (9/11) and that greatly effected our lives. The others are people's beliefs which may or may not have merit, but hopefully aren't effecting our foreign and domestic policy (arguably astrology did with Ronald Reagan). Therefore the comparison strikes me as strange at best or disingenuous. Because the people who are reasonable and lend the 9/11 truth movement credibility have said they just want a new thorough investigation. Obviously some folks won't believe anything but I don't think that is the group that really warrants the new investigation. Clearly it's the families of the victims and the residents of NYC and other concerned and rational citizens, apparently a majority, of the US that want a deep investigation of the events that "Changed the world forever." For something that big it seems there should be further investigations doesn't it?
Although I think it is totally uncecessary as well as a huge waste of money, I am not completely opposed to some sort of investigation (yet again), but there is nothing new or compelling that hasn't been examined and re-examined unto death. That begs the question, do we re-investigate 5200 times until we finally get someone to say this is partially an inside job? I think not. Now, if something really new and verified evidence sheds new light on the situation, then maybe, but this is the same old stuff.
First of all stuff has been debated off to the side in duels between truthers and debunkers. Never in a court of law, never with people like Robert Mueller, Cheney, Bush and Tennet under oath. Also there were not scientists also under oath explaining WTC7 and other anomalies. The breaches of security both on the airlines and of our Intel and Millitary apparatus were not adequately explained, examined or punished. I think that no one was punished is pretty key in all of this. Many people died if that thing happens in other countries people are fired. In our country people were awarded the medal of freedom and greater offices. I would settle with enough evidence to link Osama bin Laden to the case: Why doesn't the FBI want Osama Bin Laden in connection with 9/11? http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm surely with all the HARD EVIDENCE the government has they would include that wouldn't they? I mean I thought that was why we invaded Afghanistan? Wasn't it? 9/11? Harboring Osama bin Laden the mastermind? Guess not! I DARE ANYONE to rebut that!
People believe in all sorts of silly stuff. I am not in favor of pandering to people's irrational beliefs. None of the things the 911 "truthers" say have anything to do with that either. Wait, what? Who are these people and why haven't they been brought up in one of these threads before? A new investigation won't change anyone's mind. There would just be the same silly charges about how the investigation was biased, left out this or that piece of "evidence", etc. A new investigation is just a way to prolong the life of the 911 cult. barfo
Ok please explain why the FBI doesn't have 9/11 listed as a crime they want Bin Laden for. I mean it's crazy to think he didn't do it so surely the FBI wants him for that crime right? I mean there is enough evidence to link him to it right? P.S. I have no idea what you are saying here: If you mean 9/11 truthers are saying things that have nothing to do with foreign policy then uh, well you obviously haven't bothered to even think about it. 9/11 was the pretext for wars and vast policy changes and the spending of trillions of dollars. It's kind of an important event.
I certainly don't know, I'm not up on how the FBI prints up wanted posters. Maybe funding for the wanted-poster branch got cut back in the 90's, so there is no one to update the poster. It makes no difference in any case. They are free to charge him with the crime if they catch him, whether or not it lists it on the wanted poster. No, I was saying 9/11 truthers are saying things that have nothing to do with the actual events of 9/11. barfo
Fair enough. I've said my piece and then some. People who don't want another investigation clearly feel they know what happened. I'm quite certain I don't. Thanks for listening and giving your opinion.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm [SIZE=+1]MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH[/SIZE] [SIZE=+3] USAMA BIN LADEN [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Date of Photograph Unknown[/SIZE] Aliases: Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin, Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin, the Prince, the Emir, Abu Abdallah, Mujahid Shaykh, Hajj, the Director [SIZE=+1] DESCRIPTION[/SIZE] Date of Birth: 1957 Hair: Brown Place of Birth: Saudi Arabia Eyes: Brown Height: 6' 4" to 6' 6" Complexion: Olive Weight: Approximately 160 pounds Sex: Male Build: Thin Nationality: Saudi Arabian Occupation: Unknown Remarks: Bin Laden is the leader of a terrorist organization known as Al-Qaeda, "The Base". He is left-handed and walks with a cane. Scars and Marks: None [SIZE=+1]CAUTION[/SIZE] USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. CONSIDERED ARMED AND EXTREMELY DANGEROUS IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS PERSON, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI OFFICE OR THE NEAREST U.S. EMBASSY OR CONSULATE. [SIZE=+1]REWARD[/SIZE] The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden. An additional $2 million is being offered through a program developed and funded by the Airline Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association. [SIZE=-1]June 1999 Poster Revised November 2001[/SIZE]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700687.html Bin Laden, Most Wanted For Embassy Bombings? By Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, August 28, 2006; Page A13 Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is a longtime and prominent member of the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list, which notes his role as the suspected mastermind of the deadly U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa on Aug. 7, 1998. But another more infamous date -- Sept. 11, 2001 -- is nowhere to be found on the same FBI notice. The curious omission underscores the Justice Department's decision, so far, to not seek formal criminal charges against bin Laden for approving al-Qaeda's most notorious and successful terrorist attack. The notice says bin Laden is "a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world" but does not provide details. The absence has also provided fodder for conspiracy theorists who think the U.S. government or another power was behind the Sept. 11 hijackings. (my note: ) From this point of view, the lack of a Sept. 11 reference suggests that the connection to al-Qaeda is uncertain. Exhaustive government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings. FBI officials say the wanted poster merely reflects the government's long-standing practice of relying on actual criminal charges in the notices. "There's no mystery here," said FBI spokesman Rex Tomb. "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it." David N. Kelley, the former U.S. attorney in New York who oversaw terrorism cases when bin Laden was indicted for the embassy bombings there in 1998, said he is not at all surprised by the lack of a reference to Sept. 11 on the official wanted poster. Kelley said the issue is a matter of legal restrictions and the need to be fair to any defendant. "It might seem a little strange from the outside, but it makes sense from a legal point of view," said Kelley, now in private practice. "If I were in government, I'd be troubled if I were asked to put up a wanted picture where no formal charges had been filed, no matter who it was." Bin Laden was placed on the Ten Most Wanted list in June 1999 after being indicted for murder, conspiracy and other charges in connection with the embassy bombings, and a $5 million reward was put on his head at that time. The listing was updated after Sept. 11, 2001, to include a higher reward of $25 million, but no mention of the attacks was added. Others on the list include Colombian drug cartel leader Diego Leon Montoya Sanchez and fugitive Boston crime boss James "Whitey" Bulger, charged with a role in "numerous murders" in the 1970s and 1980s. The FBI maintains a separate "Most Wanted Terrorists" list, which includes bin Laden and 25 others who have been indicted in U.S. federal courts in connection with terror plots. But this second bin Laden listing also makes no mention of Sept. 11. "The indictments currently listed on the posters allow them to be arrested and brought to justice," the FBI says in a note accompanying the terrorist list on its Web site. "Future indictments may be handed down as various investigations proceed in connection to other terrorist incidents, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001." Staff writer Sari Horwitz contributed to this report.
And if you want to think that Martians went back in time to kill JFK because of a game of truth or dare with Skull and Bones members, feel free. But who watches TV for their news nowadays? Not me, that's for sure. Ed O.
In your world of reasonable disagreement, it's OK to say that others who disagree with you are "sticking their head in the sand", but that others may not lump you with the same crowd who thinks that the moon landing was staged or that mountains on Mars are a person's face? Really. You insult those that disagree with you, then you expect to be treated reasonably? It's ridiculous. Ed O.
So it took the FBI three years or less to indict Bin Laden for the relatively unimportant USS Cole bombings and yet here we are going on 7+ years after the biggest terrorist attack in history and there is not enough hard evidence to indict Bin Laden? http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=rex_tomb_1 Again I have a theory that wouldn't require US government collusion (see the WTC thermite thread) but perhaps a mistaken rush to judgment (Bin Laden had this pinned on him within hours). I have long wondered if Saudi intelligence was behind the attacks as the hijackers were all Saudi and the level of sophistication required to so soundly defeat our military and intelligence networks. I don't buy the keystone cops argument as we would all be speaking Russian if our defense were that porous. Some folks have suggested Hamas or even Pakistani intelligence (wanting to at that time get rid of Bin Laden and the Taliban) and there are reports of $100,000 wired to Mohammed Atta prior to the 9/11 attacks. This would not be the first time an ostensible ally carried out a terrorist attack on US soil. The Israeli government even blew up a car bomb in D.C. As far as Al Qaeda taking credit the infamous Bin Laden video has been discredited the supposed confession video is E: The 'Bin' from the 911 'confession' video is 'E' So supposedly we have a videotaped confession. And yet that isn't considered hard evidence or enough to indict him? Yet we were able to attack a soverign nation? All I'm saying is perhaps some other government is playing us for fools and using us to meet their policy goals. At the top of my list for a variety of reasons is the Saudi whose funding of terrorists is well known and documented just ask the Israelis.
Photo "E" doesn't look like Bin Laden at all. As an aside, doesn't Osama look like an Arab version of Scottie Pippen?
The traditional way the govt. indicts people accused of multiple crimes is to indict on a few in case the guy gets off on a technicality. Double Jeopardy, you know. If he does get off, then they indict on the other charges. Seen it many times with serial murderers. The did up the bounty on Bin Laden from $5M to $25M, and he's still most wanted. No conspiracy here. Nothing out of the ordinary.
Well we shall have to agree to disagree. I say I don't know what happened and would like an official under oath investigation both of the event itself and also of the handling of the intelligence and defense of the USA that failed so badly that day. You apparently do not. Just a side question are you cool with Warrantless wiretapping? The Patriot Act and the removal of Haebeus Corpus for those deemed terrorists? I hear Obama admin is using the term terrorist and applying it to a right wing spectrum now days...
If they're data mining, then I don't have a problem with what you think is Warrantless wiretapping. The difference being they know the number of someone of interest and they look at who calls it. Guys arrested on the battlefield by the military aren't entitled to criminal courts or protections. They're POWs of a sort.
Fair enough I tend to agree with both of those points. Especially the latter. Data Mining worries me in that if ever we do get an administration that is intent upon truly crushing dissent that information could have devastating consequences for liberty. One more question: Do you believe in Global Warming (Climate Change whatever the term is now)?
