Osama to Truthers: I Did It

[twinstead]

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.

Is 'make up excuses' your code word for 'providing rational explanations for'?

 

[The Big Dog]

"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."

An Innocent Country? Just like Japan on Deember 7, 1941, huh?

Oh yeah, you never addressed my question about this announcement being a public relations disaster for the Twoofers.

NOTED.

 

[kageki]

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.

Well don't you want to be sure of the person that did the crime?

I'm simply making the point as you say is that there is nothing else to make a indictment for Osama. Except in your mind even without any solid evidence other then this "confession" is that Osama did it.

 

[kageki]

Is 'make up excuses' your code word for 'providing rational explanations for'?

Well I don't find them quite rational.

 

[kageki]

"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."

An Innocent Country? Just like Japan on Deember 7, 1941, huh?

Oh yeah, you never addressed my question about this announcement being a public relations disaster for the Twoofers.

NOTED.

Well the US wasn't entirely innocent compared to Iraq.

The announcement being this "confession"? This is not the first time is it?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Question for Twoofers.

All Al Capone was ever charged with was tax fraud.

Does this prove the the St Valentine's Day massacre was a false flag attack of which the Mafia were completely innocent?

 

[lapman]

The other thing is that 9/11 is too well known. The defense team could claim that OBL couldn't get a fair trial since it would be next to impossible to find jury members that didn't know about 9/11. However, it would be easier to find jury members that don't know about the details of the 1998 attack.

 

[kageki]

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.



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

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



Yet another case where Osama attempts to shoulder full responsibility.

Yes basically. How do we exactly know about the authenticity of these audio recordings?

It also doesn't trouble you that Moussaoui might be innocent?

 

[Dave Rogers]

The other thing is that 9/11 is too well known. The defense team could claim that OBL couldn't get a fair trial since it would be next to impossible to finde jury members that didn't know about 9/11.

They could give him a jury of truthers. Most of them don't seem to know a lot about the 9-11 attacks.

Dave

 

[Dr Adequate]

Well don't you want to be sure of the person that did the crime?

Yes. Therefore I agree with the reasons for not indicting him for involvement in 9/11. Even the worst people are entitled to due process.

I'm simply making the point as you say is that there is nothing else to make a indictment for Osama.

There is, however, plenty of evidence that the crime was committed by al Qaeda members.

OBL is not the only member of al Qaeda.

Except in your mind even without any solid evidence other then this "confession" is that Osama did it.

Could I have that translated into English, please?

 

[twinstead]

Well I don't find them quite rational.

I've never met an ideologue who didn't think things that conflicted with his world view to be irrational, and that includes both left AND right wing extremists. Do you consider yourself objective?

Do you think it would be easy for your vast conspiracy to officially charge OBL with a 911 no matter what if it is so suspicious that he wasn't?

Don't you see the parallel between his case and Mafia bosses? Are you saying it makes NO sense to you?

 

[The Big Dog]

"Well the US wasn't entirely innocent compared to Iraq."

Oh yeah, the US totally violated numerous UN resolutions, the Japanese had no other options!

"The announcement being this "confession"? This is not the first time is it?"

Huh, no I guess not. It is gratifying to see you put away your silly Twoofer notions. Well done.

 

[Dr Adequate]

I notice that you're not answering any of my questions.

Let's repeat a couple of them.

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?

Question for Twoofers.

All Al Capone was ever charged with was tax fraud.

Does this prove the the St Valentine's Day massacre was a false flag attack of which the Mafia were completely innocent?

 

[kageki]

Yes. Therefore I agree with the reasons for not indicting him for involvement in 9/11. Even the worst people are entitled to due process.

There is, however, plenty of evidence that the crime was committed by al Qaeda members.

OBL is not the only member of al Qaeda.

Could I have that translated into English, please?

Well don't you believe that Osama did it even though there is no solid evidence other then the confession?

What plenty of evidence?

 

[kageki]

I've never met an ideologue who didn't think things that conflicted with his world view to be irrational, and that includes both left AND right wing extremists. Do you consider yourself objective?

Do you think it would be easy for your vast conspiracy to officially charge OBL with a 911 no matter what if it is so suspicious that he wasn't?

Don't you see the parallel between his case and Mafia bosses? Are you saying it makes NO sense to you?

I can say the same about you.

The difference is that Mafia bosses never made confessions. So basically you agree that there is no solid evidence to charge Osama with.

If it was so hard to charge someone then why did Moussoui get convicted for 9/11? Apparently you can make charges on this vast conspiracy.

 

[kageki]

"Well the US wasn't entirely innocent compared to Iraq."

Oh yeah, the US totally violated numerous UN resolutions, the Japanese had no other options!

"The announcement being this "confession"? This is not the first time is it?"

Huh, no I guess not. It is gratifying to see you put away your silly Twoofer notions. Well done.

Well I'm not going to get into WWII here. You also realize that Israel is a repeat offender of UN resolutions as well? That's not justification for invasion by the way.

No it's not the first time and we are wondering if any of it is authentic. I already linked to the interview where he claims he didn't do it.

 

[kageki]

I notice that you're not answering any of my questions.

Let's repeat a couple of them.

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?
Originally Posted by Dr Adequate View Post
Question for Twoofers.

No one makes that assertion. Only you.

All Al Capone was ever charged with was tax fraud.

Does this prove the the St Valentine's Day massacre was a false flag attack of which the Mafia were completely innocent?

Members of the gang were busted for that crime.

 

[twinstead]

I can say the same about you.

The difference is that Mafia bosses never made confessions. So basically you agree that there is no solid evidence to charge Osama with.

A confession must be made to the proper authorities before it can be used to indict somebody for a crime, of course you knew that.

NOW. One more time. Answer my question:

If it is SO suspicious that Osama wasn't charged with the crime, why don't your conspirators simply CHARGE HIM WITH THE CRIME?

 

[lapman]

If it was so hard to charge someone then why did Moussoui get convicted for 9/11?

That is the only thing they could charge him with. Duh.

 

[kageki]

A confession must be made to the proper authorities before it can be used to indict somebody for a crime, of course you knew that.

NOW. One more time. Answer my question:

If it is SO suspicious that Osama wasn't charged with the crime, why don't your conspirators simply CHARGE HIM WITH THE CRIME?

So then why are we all still blaming Osama for 9/11?

How do we have the authority to charge someone of a crime