[split] 9/11 Conspiracy

[Pippy]

Really?

If I may, I would love to add my two cents (give him two cents, he'll take a dollar). I was born adn raised in different parts of America, both the North and the ol' south. I now live in Canada, and I find the distance (less than an hour) helps the ability to see America clearly. I speak about America and it's recent history as a person who should know what he's talking about, but that appears openly debatable.

The short definition of America's foreign policy is "what we've done to them". If 9/11 was an attack from anti-American Islamists, it was an act of (so they felt) retribution. It was already revenge before America avenged it. The things America, and multi-nationals led by or favoring America, did too some other countries would make any victim into a fanatic.

He means something like "My whole family was killed in a bombing by Americans while they occupied our country against our will, so now I hate all Americans because I have been pushed over the edge" Not he personally, but that would be what Ameica's Foreign Policy means...

But that would be the short answer. The long answer is that there is a negligible Islamic vendetta against America. At least not even comparable to the dangerous 'anti-American sentiment' domestically. Everyone seems to forget about the Militia movement, and the Patriot movement and worry about dirt poor brown people half a world away.

There you have it, take it as you will. Thank you for listening.

[Purple Rabbit]

How can you claim to see things clearly when you cannot distinguish fact from fiction.

[Tiberius]

But no one has been formally charged with the attack. So if it was this legendary Al Queda, or Osama Bin Laden, why does Wikipedia attribute the attack to these groups but no formal charges have been laid, nor conviction of these crimes?

Erm...yes they have. Al-qaeda have been formally named as the group responsible, and Osama Bin Laden has warrants for his arrest in Spain, USA, and Libya. Not only that, but Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured, charged, and is currently being convicted of the crimes.

Perhaps you aren't that tuned into law Pippy, but for a conviction you have to actually have a person stand trial. You can charge someone without a trial, as bin Laden has been, and as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has been, (as well as other Al-qaeda operatives). You may further ask, why it has taken this long to bring something to trial? Well, the thing about our justice system is that everyone deserves a "fair trial". Evidence must be collected, brought together, and the defendant has to prepare a defence.

This evidence includes a hard-drive captured at the same time as Khalid Mohammed, which contains:

• information about the four airplanes hijacked on 11 September 2001 including code names, airline company, flight number, target, pilot name and background information, and names of the hijackers
  
• photographs of 19 individuals identified as the 11 September 2001 hijackers
  
• a document that listed the pilot license fees for Mohammad Atta and biographies for some of the 11 September 2001 hijackers.
  
• images of passports and an image of Mohammad Atta.
  
• transcripts of chat sessions belonging to at least one of the 11 September 2001 hijackers.
  
• three letters from Osama bin Laden
  
• spreadsheets that describe money assistance to families of known al Qaeda members
  
• a letter to the United Arab Emirates threatening attack if their government continued to help the United States
  
• a document that summarized operational procedures and training requirements of an al Qaeda cell
  
• a list of killed and wounded al Qaeda militants.
  

Of course, all this evidence alone points to some involvement, but I'm sure you and your conspiracy riddled brain will come up with some excuse for it.

As to why they did it? We support some of their enemies, and they see us as enemies, interfering with foreign politics in ways we shouldn't. They aren't like bad guys on TV because unfortunately for us, and contrary to what you "believe", these people actually exist and they hold a deep hatred for our countries. They've attacked us numerous times to prove how determined they are.

[Pippy]

How did they get both the American forces, and British forces to be enacting war games exercises on the very same mornings of the attacks, in two seperate countries years apart? If Al queda did it, then how is it that they get Americans to have a excercise where hijacked planes were crashing into buildings including the pentagon? Do these Al-queda people have moles in our government with enough power to schedual and plan training ops for NORAD, Northcom and the air force to help cover thei attack? Or was it just astounding coincidence. Then again on 7/7, there were police and military training drills on the very morning of the attacks that seemed not only to include the tube bombs but also the bomb on the bus. The official story is that the terrorist missed his tube ride, so got on the bus as a fallback. How owuld the training ops line up so perfectly with what is supposed to be an unplanned, last minute descision? See, that's part of what I mean about understanding the attacvks places in history. This has been done before, it is kind of a slow, large gunpowder plot. Remember, remember.

You are well versed in the pertinent facts for a non-truther, but I am afraid those facts are mostly all lies and deception. Khalid is a plant, Osama is wanted in the US for bombing the WTC... in 94', not for 9/11. We just concluded our terror trials here in Canada for the Toronto Patsies, also not real terrorists. They were held for years without charge. Only brought to court when, in the words of one US prosecutor, the "conviction was guaranteed". Their defense lawyers were not given access to the evidence, charges or witnesses. There is no jury. Keep telling me about how they need time to make sure the trial is fair, but if here in Canada there is no legal precedent for the terror trials, then in America and Britain it must be far worse. Did Hussein get a "fair" trial? How many of his defense lawyers were shot? Did any of the people still being held in Gitmo (after barky 'closed' it) get a trial? No.

Keep telling yourself that there are crazies out there who will hurt you, and so you had better give all you freedoms up in the name of liberty. CCTV everywhere, bobbies with guns... I wish I could show you in a way you respected, and did not mock, that you are playing into their hands by adopting such an attitude.

We are all just humans, brother and sisters, cousins at worst. I have no reason to hate tan people on the other half of the planet, and if they hate me then I will love them in return. Keep fighting fire with fire, and see where that leads.

Thanks.

[Eilonnwy]

How many times are we going to let Pippy get on a 9/11 rant and split a new topic?

[Pippy]

Once a month.

It isn't that you let me, I am sprrued into it. I don't want to talk about 9/11, just like I don't want to talk about god. But if it comes up, I can only add what I think, it would be false of me to pretend to agree. Then we get going, me and Adrian post our obligatory links of glowing proof. We than pat off our hands and walk away feeling like we won the debate.

I will try in the future to just let it go.

But please don't think I enjoy this at all.

[Purple Rabbit]

Depends how much room you're prepared to give here for disturbed people. At the moment it hasn't reached the nature of spam so I have no objection to his appearance here. I think freedom of thought is more important than the cons of strange quirks of the individual here on AF.

[Tiberius]

Firstly, the only "evidence" I've seen of British "wargames" on 7/7 is on truther sites, and is hearsay (i.e. it's mentioned alongside the training exercises of 9/11). This is a typical truther trick; tell some truth, and hide a lie inbetween the lines and hope people don't notice. So yes, I'd like some evidence for that wild assertion please.

As for the 9/11 training exercises, you do realise that during non-war scenarios, countries tend to like to train their men FOR war scenarios. It wasn't anything to do with Al-Qaeda, it was just a training exercise, like probably many previous training exercises that the military performs. You can probably bet good money that if the attacks had taken place on 9/12 instead, there would still have been some form of military training exercise taking place.

As for the details of the attacks; it's called "military intelligence". Yes, I know, it seems bizarre that in this world of mass communication, we can somehow know the plans of people living thousands of miles away, but it's possible. </sarcasm>

Bush had reports that Osama was planning to attack the twin towers with planes. At the time, he didn't think such attacks were feasible. He was wrong. It wouldn't have surprised me that after 9/11, the British intelligence forces wouldn't have started looking into possible attacks in our own country, and conducted similar military exercises. However, as I've said, you haven't yet given any actual evidence for them doing these.

Khalid is a plant? Evidence please...

Osama is wanted for 9/11. He was previously wanted for other terrorist actions, and after 9/11, once the CIA and British Intelligence released reports that 'irrefutably' linked Osama to the 9/11 attacks (plus the video in which Osama admits them), his bounty increased since the US sought him even more, and the manhunt began. If he is eventually caught, he will be charged formally with the crimes, though I doubt he will be caught. He is evidently a very clever and powerful man.

Yes, Hussain got a fair trial. It is not the fault of the court if defense lawyers keep getting killed, and to day so is a non sequitur. You might remember one of the judges was also killed at some point during the trial. If you hold a court in a country split down the middle, with supporters of Saddam Hussein clashing with Saddam protestors, you are going to get carnage, especially if the country isn't yet stable. The only thing not fair about the trial was the death sentence, which I stand opposed to in all cases on moral and ethical grounds.

No, people in Gitmo don't get a trial yet. Obama is seeking to change this, although in my opinion is not doing it quickly enough. He missed his deadline yesterday, and I haven't heard anything about closing the camp for weeks. This doesn't effect the trial of the terrorist Khalid though, who is being tried in a fair trial in New York City.

Keep telling yourself that there are crazies out there who will hurt you, and so you had better give all you freedoms up in the name of liberty. CCTV everywhere, bobbies with guns... I wish I could show you in a way you respected, and did not mock, that you are playing into their hands by adopting such an attitude.

Actually, you have me completely wrong there. I'm a Libertarian, I support maximum political and civil freedom, and that means the removal of CCTV cameras that loiter our streets, the ability for people to own guns, and the transparency of government actions. Course, I'm also against foreign intervention and all the actions that inevitably led to the US and Britain being attacked by terrorists. I'm not playing into their hands; we're on the same side. I just prefer to accept the facts and build a case for freedom based on rights and social values, rather than some conspiracy that governments want to take it away from people.

[Pippy]

If we were on the same side, we would have the same enemies. You want the world to be void of Osama, and Hussein, and all these low ranking brown people (both of which may be already dead). I think the real enemy to our ability to live free lives are the leaders of our respective governments. My enemies are Bush and Obama and Harper and Brown and Blair, because they are the ones making all of this terrorism bullshit up. And all the people behind the scenes that actually run things.

If you think Saddam's trial was fair, then we are at am impasse. If you were leader of a country, a sovereign nation, and I decided I didn't like you for whatever reason. I would come and invade, bomb the absolute shit out of you little country (even after 11 years of bombing and sanctions after the first iraq war). I would topple your government and replace it with a puppet outfit that will do what I want it to do. Iraq was destroyed based on the lies about Al Queda and WMDs, both of which were found to not exist in Iraq. Then this puppet government, one that stands as a foreign military occupation has it's first trial ever. Against the former leader of the nation. His defense lawyers also did not have access to the charges, the evidence or the witnesses. Many times Saddam roared into an outburst about how this was a kangaroo court with no jurisdiction, and how it was going to kill him. He was right, and he was brave. He faced his execution as any man should, and wrote a very well spoken letter to the world before he died. If to you a trial in a country occupied based on lies is in any way fair, we just won't see eye to eye on this one.

And don't say Saddam murder the Kurds, that like the Taliban are mean to women or the Davidians were molesters. That is not a motivator for war. America can't fool me into thinking it actually cares about other countries and their quality of life. And if they do, they are terrible at it. There about between 4 and 6 million dead afganis and iraqis. This is the new holocaust, but don't let the Jewish people hear me say that.

This terrorism thing is all a big lie. The war on terror counts as perpetual war for perpetual peace. Orwell warned us about that, or did you not get around to reading that one? Huxley also warned us. This is how the new brand of control will be doled out.

Sigh. Thanks.

[LEDO]

If you go to the FBI web site, Bin Laden is wanted for other crimes, but not 9-11. The FBI says they can not list 9-11 because there no court has issued a warrent. They do go on to say that if they capture Bin Laden, he would then most likely be charged with the 9-11 crime.