Breaking News! 9/11 Mastermind confesses

I am having difficulties getting onto the BBC News website to read the story. Their site is extremely slow. Is it just me?
 
WildCat said:
It's a translation, is there a popular Arabic expression w/ a similar meaning?
Click to expand...

ETA: That's what I was thinking. Just looking for confirmation. The expression would be "totality", or "in whole"; something like that.


I have thought a little about this. "Inside Job" nonsense aside, how would the government benefit by torturing Mohammed into confession? Their goal, presumably, is to apprehend all persons responsible, not necessarily to appease the public, but to assure its safety. If Mohammed had no role in 9/11, forcing him to falsely confess, while the actual executors remain at large, does not fulfill this goal.
 
Last edited:
Axiom_Blade said:
No, I don't think so.
But why's everybody get so excited when a terrorist confesses?
They are not, after all, considered to be the most honest and truthful people.
9/11 was a HUGE event. If I were a terrorist, I'd want to take credit for that, too. Especially if the US is bound and determined to have it pinned on me in the first place.

Of course, if the preponderence of other evidence points in his direction, then he's probably guilty...
Click to expand...
First off, I think that folks around here are only "excited" in the sense that this is the sort of thing that, when widely reported, reduces the number of CT-susceptible people in the general populace. The fewer people who need "extra" education, the better.

Second, I agree that terrorists would generally love to take credit for 9/11. However, they're far more likely to do so when roaming free than when the admission will almost certainly lead [unfortunately] to a death sentence. If the confessor is truly an observant of Islam - even a radical brand - it seems even more unlikely that he would lie in that situation with Allah's judgement waiting around the corner (I wouldn't think that taking credit for the "holy work" of others would impress Allah overmuch).

That said, I agree with you that a confession is only part of the evidence desired by the judiciary when determining guilt or innocence - any number of people have confessed to crimes, only to be acquitted after a trial. If someone walked in off the street and confessed to conspiring to kill JFK - to use an extreme example - their word wouldn't be nearly enough to put them in jail, let alone land them on death row.
 
Mince said:
I have thought a little about this. "Inside Job" nonsense aside, how would the government benefit by torturing Mohammed into confession? Their goal, presumably, is to apprehend all persons responsible, not necessarily to appease the public, but to assure its safety. If Mohammed had no role in 9/11, forcing him to falsely confess, while the actual executors remain at large, does not fulfill this goal.
Click to expand...
He was waterboarded, but this was done to get him to reveal information, not as a confession device. As the al Jazeera documentary shows, he was more than willing to brag about his deeds and take full credit for them.
 
Last edited:
One would think that this confession would be the nail in the coffin to the truth movement.

Troofers will probably continue on with their lies.
 
Mince said:
I have thought a little about this. "Inside Job" nonsense aside, how would the government benefit by torturing Mohammed into confession? Their goal, presumably, is to apprehend all persons responsible, not necessarily to appease the public, but to assure its safety. If Mohammed had no role in 9/11, forcing him to falsely confess, while the actual executors remain at large, does not fulfill this goal.
Click to expand...

[off topic] Well, actually, law enforcement agencies have been known to engage in "tunnel vision" and have been known to deliberately and/or grossly negligently seek to close files to appease the public outcry for "justice" - particularly with regard to heinous and horrific crimes - by knowingly withholding evidence, by knowingly railroading innocent people, and by all manner of other dishonourable tactics. I'm not saying that this is the case with KSM but, sadly, it is true that many law enforcement agencies have been guilty of deliberately seeking to convict innocent people knowing full well that the guilty parties are still at large.
[/off topic]
 
LashL said:
[off topic] Well, actually, law enforcement agencies have been known to engage in "tunnel vision" and have been known to deliberately and/or grossly negligently seek to close files to appease the public outcry for "justice" - particularly with regard to heinous and horrific crimes - by knowingly withholding evidence, by knowingly railroading innocent people, and by all manner of other dishonourable tactics. I'm not saying that this is the case with KSM but, sadly, it is true that many law enforcement agencies have been guilty of deliberately seeking to convict innocent people knowing full well that the guilty parties are still at large.
[/off topic]
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. However, this administration, thus far, has shown very little to no desire to appease the public. I don't think they are under pressure to produce suspects; and I don't think they would care if they were. Most people are satisfied with Bush's post 9/11 performance insofar as protecting U.S. turf (we have not been attacked in 5.5 years). However, there is immense pressure on him to end the current war and several misguided policies, but he does not yield. That is why I think it is unlikely, even if he were under pressure to produce suspects, that he would do so in a fabricated fashion, assuming he is in control of such things.
 
Last edited:
Mince said:
That is why I think it is unlikely, even if he were under pressure to produce suspects, that he would do so in a fabricated fashion, assuming he is in control of such things.
Click to expand...


One thing I've always been curious about is the level of knowledge in a big country like the USA.

I mean, does Bush get a phone call one night...

CIA AGENT: Sir, the Pakistanis have captured KSM, they're gonna hand him over, what should we do with him?

BUSH: Well gee, I think we should extradite him to one of our secret CIA camps and torture the [rule8] out of him. After we've done that for a while move him to Gitmo and we'll put him through a show trial.

CIA AGENT: Yes sir!

Or is it more a case of:

AIDE: Sir, we've captured KSM. He's being held in a secure place. You'll be talking to the press in fifteen minutes. Keep it short. Smile a lot.

BUSH: How was he capture? Where? Are we going to put him on trial?

AIDE: Don't worry about all that sir. All in good time.

BUSH: Good work.

For things like this, at what level are decisions made? At what level do people stop deciding what will happen, and simply get informed that it is happening?

President? VP? Director of the CIA?

I guess I'll never know until a former President joins the JREF... :p

-Gumboot
 
CNN now has a PDF transcript of the hearing.

There's one bit that leaps out at me as being odd.

The President of the hearing states that, should they determine he is not an enemy combatant, he will be returned to his home country.

WTF?

If he's not an enemy combatant he's still a criminal wanted for numerous counts of terrorism dating back years.

If nothing else, he has been indicted in the Southern District of the state of New York for Operation Bojinka.

-Gumboot
 
PhantomWolf said:
They obviously tortured him into it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It makes you think about shermer/many other skeptics' question: "What evidence could possibly surface to make you accept evolution?"

The same could/should be asked of 9/11 truthers.

If you don't have an answer, chances are you are probably crazy.
 
gumboot said:
I'm not sure what the legal status of a "combatant status review hearing" is in the United States, but I think the only thing that could be more significant is if he confessed openly in court.
Click to expand...
They were a response to a SCOTUS finding that the treatment of detainees was unlawful under the Geneva protocols. To fulfill one of the problems, the CSR are used to determine whether a detainee is a POW or illegal enemy combatant. They are unchallenged as of yet.
 
Terrorcell @ LC Forms

This, the BBC clip of WTC7, Pentacon......

I'm not all that surprised this pops up out there.
Click to expand...

Yes Terrorcell. The US government saw the Pentacon and freaked out - so they decided to get KSM to admit to 9/11. Everybody saw the Pentacon and this must have created some serious political pressure on the US to provide more evidence against the conspiracy theorists..... riiight. What are you, stupid?

I'm sure your movie has had a huge impact on everybody. Oh what's that? It only has 19,000 views? Bad luck...
 
That's the same picture of Sheikh Mohammed I saw when they captured him over 3 years ago! He's probably already dead and this is all just a lie! I demand a tape of the confession so I can find what's wrong with it and prove that the government is lying.
 
Unfit4Command said:
That's the same picture of Sheikh Mohammed I saw when they captured him over 3 years ago! He's probably already dead and this is all just a lie! I demand a tape of the confession so I can find what's wrong with it and prove that the government is lying.
Click to expand...


♫...Sooomewheeeree over the rainbow...♫

:p
 
The Doc said:
Yes Terrorcell. The US government saw the Pentacon and freaked out - so they decided to get KSM to admit to 9/11. Everybody saw the Pentacon and this must have created some serious political pressure on the US to provide more evidence against the conspiracy theorists..... riiight. What are you, stupid?

I'm sure your movie has had a huge impact on everybody. Oh what's that? It only has 19,000 views? Bad luck...
Click to expand...


also forget the fact that the government was announcing that hearings for the Guantanomo Bay prisoners were announced months ago, and were scheduled for march.
 
Axiom_Blade said:
No, I don't think so.
But why's everybody get so excited when a terrorist confesses?
They are not, after all, considered to be the most honest and truthful people.
9/11 was a HUGE event. If I were a terrorist, I'd want to take credit for that, too. Especially if the US is bound and determined to have it pinned on me in the first place.

Of course, if the preponderence of other evidence points in his direction, then he's probably guilty...
Click to expand...
This is the key point.

Testimony is evidence, but it is not proof, regardless of whether or not the man was tortured. (Personally, I find the very idea that anyone in this country even contemplates torture is disgusting, barbaric, and ultimately counterproductive, but that's a topic for the Politics forum.) The testimony is only significant if it can be verified against the larger body of evidence.

However, having read the 9/11 Commission Report, I'm sure it can. It may also corroborate many more sources of information that we don't have full access to.

It may also explain other evidence that previously wasn't understood or considered to be mere anomalies. That would make it valuable, even significant if that leads to new discoveries.

As far as convincing the Troothers, who cares? They've already demonstrated that they can't be reasoned with. This trial, in case nobody noticed, is not being held for their benefit.
 
Wait...I forgot that all terrorists are government agents. So, Guantanamo Bay is probably just a luxury hotel for all of our CIA agents to chill at. At least that's what makes sense...I don't see why our own agents would be put through Guantanamo Bay if it's really how the media portrays it. Doesn't that make sense? The torture scandals there are probably just to distract the people from finding out the Truth about all of the government-sponsored terrorism.

That makes sense, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom