Osama to Truthers: I Did It

[Unsecured Coins]

no he did not

 

[lapman]

Did you ever think that by charging OBL with every terrorist act would simply create a legal nightmare? OBL's defense team could trail the various trials indefinitely. By only charging him with one crime, the prosecuters only need to concentrate on just one set of evidence and only one conviction. If the outcome is not favorable, then move on to the next indictment.

 

[kageki]

It says that Osama is wanted for "terrorist attacks around the world"

Maybe the FBI thinks that 9/11 wasn't a terrorist attack? OMG FBI=CONSPIRACY THEORISTS.

FACT.

proof?

 

[kageki]

Did you ever think that by charging OBL with every terrorist act would simply create a legal nightmare? OBL's defense team could trail the various trials indefinitely. By only charging him with one crime, the prosecuters only need to concentrate on just one set of evidence and only one conviction. If the outcome is not favorable, then move on to the next indictment.

It's not uncommon to charge someone with a long list of indictments. They haven't caught him with anything yet anyways right?

 

[Ocelot]

You can also add this interview:

http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_interview_ummat.htm

No I can't

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Ummat

BTW, your comparison to an act of war is pure conjecture. It's considered a terrorist act as far as I know.

Conjecture can be accurate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540544.stm

You may think them less than an act of war but the leader of the free world thinks of them as an act of war. That is what has guided policy and it is within that context that we place the FBI's actions. Sad though it may be George Bush is not the sort of guy to worry about legal niceties or even being right.

 

[Pookster]

Has anyone said it was the smoking gun? Basically none of us know why Osama isn't officially charged for 9/11. Noted.

You have nothing else to add to the discussion. Noted.

True, but Federal prosecutors have no compelling reason to seek an indictment for 9/11 crimes, at this time. Why would they? He's already indicted and wanted by the FBI. Further indictments can come later after he's captured. From a judicial standpoint, at this time, there is no compelling reason to indict him again. Once he's captured, I would expect many other indictments to follow, some of them not even related to 9/11. There's nothing unusual about this.

The discussion is actually rather silly.

 

[sackett]

Hey, listen here, Gag!Gek!Ew!

I know Rei Masamune. Rei Masamune is my friend. For $20, she was once very kind to me in a darkened pantry.

You, sir, are no Rei Masamune.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Is that proof of something? You forgot the ones who think Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.

No, it was just a "finger in your eye" reminder that after 6 years, your little movement has only reached 4.6% of the public.

 

[twinstead]

The fact remains that if OBL was CIA or being framed then why wouldn't They just make up charges? If it were so suspicious that he isn't formally charged with 911, and 911 was this huge conspiracy, then how could not charging him possibly make any sense?

Maybe there's some mundane, non cloak and dagger reason?

Nah, that wouldn't be COOL enough, huh CTers?

 

[kageki]

No I can't

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Ummat



Conjecture can be accurate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540544.stm

You may think them less than an act of war but the leader of the free world thinks of them as an act of war. That is what has guided policy and it is within that context that we place the FBI's actions. Sad though it may be George Bush is not the sort of guy to worry about legal niceties or even being right.

Since it doesn't prove that it's not authentic then it's still on the table. That same reasoning should cast doubt on any of the recent Bin Laden tapes too.

Well this guy was apparently convicted for conspiring the attacks on 9/11:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui

 

[kageki]

No, it was just a "finger in your eye" reminder that after 6 years, your little movement has only reached 4.6% of the public.

Where are you getting that number from?

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/13469

 

[Unsecured Coins]

"apparently"

is there evidence that contradicts this? was his conviction fabricated?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Exactly. He's only a suspect who has not been charged.

Wow, I managed to communicate something to a Twoofer.

The reason why he hasn't been indicted of course, is that in order for this to happen, it's not enough merely to prove that (a) al Qaeda is responsible for 9/11 (b) OBL is head of all Qaeda: one must also establish that he gave the orders.

Until then, he can't be indicted.

It's the same reason it's so hard to indict Mafia bosses.

Of course, in the fantasy world in your head there'll be a totally different reason why he hasn't been charged, involving the complete innocence of the filthy murderers who perpetrated 9/11 and the complete non-involvement of al Qaeda in the bloody crimes that they committed, but that's the actual reason.

I guess in your world inability to prove OBL guilty under law is the same as declaring every al Qaeda member innocent, yes? Is that how it works?

You people can be so silly sometimes.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

From the poll commissioned by 911truth.org.

402. There are three main schools of thought regarding the 9/11 attacks. The first theory is the official story, and maintains that 19 Arab fundamentalists executed a surprise attack
which caught US intelligence and military forces off guard. The second theory known as Let It Happen argues that certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were
coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic motives; and the third theory Made It Happen contends that certain US government elements actively planned or assisted some aspects of the attacks. Based upon your knowledge of 9/11 events and their aftermath, which theory are you more likely to agree with?

Made it happen: 4.6%

 

[kageki]

The fact remains that if OBL was CIA or being framed then why wouldn't They just make up charges? If it were so suspicious that he isn't formally charged with 911, and 911 was this huge conspiracy, then how could not charging him possibly make any sense?

Maybe there's some mundane, non cloak and dagger reason?

Nah, that wouldn't be COOL enough, huh CTers?

Osama pops his head in from time to time invoking terror and inciting fear into the public giving the government carte blanche for doing anything including invading an innocent country.

The point is that they don't want to capture him because he is the perfect bogeyman to have around. This is what is implied if Osama is a CIA asset. Why isn't he still caught if we know where he is hiding?

 

[lapman]

Where are you getting that number from?

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/13469

From http://www.911truth.org/images/ZogbyPoll2007.pdf

It's a bit more recent than your poll.

The question:
402. There are three main schools of thought regarding the 9/11 attacks. The first theory is the official story, and maintains that 19 Arab fundamentalists executed a surprise attack which caught US intelligence and military forces off guard. The second theory known as Let It Happen argues that certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic motives; and the third theory Made It Happen contends that certain US government elements actively planned or assisted some aspects of the attacks. Based upon your knowledge of 9/11 events and their aftermath, which theory are you more likely to agree with?

Only 4.6% believe in the "Made It Happen" theory that the twoof movement holds so dear.

 

[Ocelot]

Since it doesn't prove that it's not authentic then it's still on the table.

That same reasoning should cast doubt on any of the recent Bin Laden tapes too.

On what table. Are you saying that you wish to give the Ummat interrview as much creedence as the multiple video and audio tapes of Osama claiming full responsibility?

You sir are grasping at straws.

Well this guy was apparently convicted for conspiring the attacks on 9/11:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui

What's you point? Are you trying to direct me to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui#Osama_Bin_Laden_response

On May 23, 2006, an audio recording attributed to Osama Bin Laden said in translation that Moussaoui "had no connection at all with September 11... I am the one in charge of the 19 brothers and I never assigned brother Zacarias to be with them in that mission... Since Zacarias Moussaoui was still learning to fly, he wasn't number 20 in the group, as your government claimed". The voice alleged to be Bin Laden also suggested that Moussaoui's confession was "void" as it was a result of pressures applied during his incarceration.

Yet another case where Osama attempts to shoulder full responsibility.

 

[twinstead]

It's the same reason it's so hard to indict Mafia bosses.

Indeed. That's why Mafia bosses are usually convicted of unrelated crimes such as tax evasion. If OBL were brought to trial they wouldn't even need to bring 911 into it. It wouldn't be worth the extra effort; they have enough stuff on him without it.

 

[kageki]

"apparently"

is there evidence that contradicts this? was his conviction fabricated?

No the point is that someone was convicted for 9/11 since people are trying to make up excuses for why Osama isn't charged for it.

If you notice though the conviction was based partly on testimony.

 

[twinstead]

I would bet that if OBL were to know of the 911 'truth' movement he would get quite the chuckle out of it, then probably be pissed off they are trying to steal his thunder.

Then figure out a way to use them to suit his purposes.