Discussion in '9/11' started by suede, Sep 28, 2011.
Time to go!
Well I'll be dammed. We're still here.
So... Which god do you worship? Is it the same god who says to revere him and praise him and speak his name in good regard for all to hear?
My work here is done. I want to thank you for helping me get this one off the board too.
No problem.. I figure you to chicken out.
Don't forget when you are being judged, to explain to your god why you are ashamed to specify your faith in him.
No problem... At least you admit you're not here for earnest debate but rather to stifle and bury discussion.
No need for me to say you're being cowardly when you admit it so openly.
Not at all. Just using you like a tool.
You just admitted you are trying to silence the debate and get the thread locked.. This is your chosen path when you can't respond to the arguments and rebuttals and support your argument.
Just thought I'd show the readers again you do everything in your power OTHER than explain the trump card that blasts your argument out the water.
Care to explain KSM's proven false confessions like the nonexistent canary wharf plot?
Nope... Can't do it.. Please moderaters, candycorn wants you to lock the thread because he's getting humiliated!
The mods lock the threads at 500 posts historically. If they wish to leave this one open that is up to them; their ball.
I hardly filled up a 500 post thread dear.
I didn't say you filled up the thread, I said you clearly admitted that you're trying to silence your opposition instead of earnest debate.
You have nothing new to offer. KSM confessed. You say he didn't. Why? I don't know but you say he didn't.
KSM hasn't recanted. You say he has. Why? I don't know but you say he has.
You said there was no contact with the outside world since his confession. I showed you that there was in a picture the Red Cross released. I'm sure you'll say that is a fake too.
It literally never ends with you people.
What else is there to debate? At this point, I'm using you like a tool.
I already shot you down.
I showed the whole forum that KSM made PROVEN false confessions while being tortured, which you have no explanation for.
I need NOTHING else as you've been long since discredited and are now just repeating yourself.
You've got no responses to the critical questions, or no solid forensic evidence... If KSM were behind 9/11 as you claim, why did the biggest criminal investigation ever, PENTBOMM, not find a SHRED of forensic evidence?
I never said he didn't confess. Stop lying. I said his confession was obviously coerced, and because it's circumstantial evidence, requires corraborating evidence (some evidence that verifies his statements are true).
I never said he recanted... I said you have NO PROOF he didn't, and your claim he didn't is baseless speculation.
When did the red cross say he hasn't recanted?
Plenty more to debate.. I'll even put it in bullet points like you like so much.
-Show evidence KSM never recanted.
-Explain why PENTBOMM or the 9/11 commission or anyone else couldn't find any corraborating forensic evidence to back up KSM's story.
-Explain why KSM made false confessions to other plots that don't even exist.
-Explain the reasoning why torture induced confessions are inadmissable in court.
-Explain why your country, after having KSM in custody nearly 9 years, have been completely unable to prove him guilty and convict him, if he did actually do it.
You see, there's PLENTY else, it's just the critical trumps that you cower away from because you have no rebuttal.
So yes or no, did KSM confess?
So yes or no, did KSM recant?
This should clear up any need for further debate because in the end, those are the two questions.
A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.
You can say "yes" or "no" can't you dear?
Yes.. He confessed to 9/11, after being rendered psychotic by CIA MKULTRA techniques, tortured, and having his family threatened. Just as anyone else would do yourself included.
He also confessed to being behind a plot to bomb Canary Wharf in London, a plot PROVEN to have NEVER existed.
How the hell should I know? He may or may not have.. I could speculate, just as you did for your claim he didn't, but unlike you, I won't try to pass off baseless speculation as fact.
I just did.
I have been earnestly honoring your requests, answering your questions and such. I am interested in debate.
Why can't you do the same?
Why can't you offer an explanation for KSM's proven false confessions, just like you demand others explain lightpoles being knocked over?
Debate is not a one way street.
I've answered you.
Now please answer my bullet points. I'm asking as nicely as I can.
Why, if KSM was not the perpetrator would the U.S. government try to pin the planning of the event on him?
If they are trying to pin the event on him, why would the story include torture? Why wouldn't KSM simply be portrayed as super proud of his accomplishment right from the start? Why KSM and some some other preexisting enemy of America?
That's the part of your line of argument that doesn't seem to make sense at all. What's your end game in arguing that there's not enough evidence to charge KSM with the planning of 9/11? Is your next step to establish that someone else is responsible for the planning?
I was under the impression that KSM was waterboarded for information about future events, not to garner a confession from him about 9/11.
If KSM weren't the perpetrator, then I think the most likely scenario for this is they did it to cover for somebody else.. Get everyone to think so and so did it, and this satisfies their craving for finding who did it, as they believe they found them, so the real perpetrator can breathe easy because they've stopped looking now that they've got the fall guy... Scapegoating.
Also to consider, at the time the story was conceived and built upon, Osama Bin Laden was nowhere to be found, and yet still, the public were outraged about 9/11 and looking for justice to be served.. Catching a bad guy to satisfy them and not come across as incompetent can also be a motivation.
The story did not include torture.. The torture really happened.... They didn't decide to invent a story with torture in it... They just wanted to get him to confess, to make their story plausible (since they had no forensic evidence).
The torture was meant to be a secret.. Not at all for public consumption. It only came out on accident, at which point they had to struggle to accomodate it into their story...
...trying to accomodate this torture into their story, now they have to portray him as stubborn to cooperate and confess (otherwise why would they torture him?)
Also, the fact is that "super proud" wouldn't even make sense.. Because there's no positive indication of KSM doing anything to show pride about the attack, only until they tortured such statements out of him.
"super proud" is what the terrorists usually show by making public statement. "We have bombed you infidels because you support the zionists and we will bomb you again as long as you continue this"..
This is the POINT of terrorism... To let your enemy know you did it, and more importantly why, so that the change your action is meant to effect in your enemy can happen (can't get them to stop supporting Israel if they don't know that such support is why they got bombed).
Super proud terrorists get in front of the camera and say they did it.. They take credit and embrace it.
There is no recording or anything of KSM's voice, or video of KSM, to take responsibility.. How can he be "superproud" of it if he never even took credit or told the public?
Where's the confession tape sent to AJ which AQ is known for after their attacks?
The "proud" terrorist concept only emerged from statements after he was effectively psychologically reprogrammed by MKULTRA techniques.
By the way, if you research the topic, or perhaps you already know this, MKULTRA was a program designed and researched by the CIA over decades, one application of which is to get people to do or say things they never otherwise would, by using a variety of techniques, and breaking them down psychologically.
These are the SAME people who ultimatily held KSM and the SAME techniques they used on him.
KSM looks like the perfect practical successfull result of the MKULTRA research.
The fact that you have a guy who never said it until AFTER they were made psychotic by the CIA means most people should be able to put two and two together.
You could ask this same question no matter who they selected to serve as scapegoat. You gotta pick somebody, don't you? No matter who you pick, the fact will be the same, somebody else could have been picked. So I don't see too much purpose in this question.
The fact is KSM was the ideal fall guy.. No doubt he is hostile towards the United States, and since he is already allegedly implicated in the Bojinka plot and '93 WTC bombing, he is the PERFECT candidate.
I don't know who plotted 9/11.. I don't claim to know when I don't. The truth could be in the evidence the U.S. possesses and buries, like the redacted and censored pages of the original congressional 9/11 inquiry.
But as far as my end game.. That's a good question.
My main purpose is two fold.. First of all, I see official story people ridiculing truthers for professing speculative stories and demanding proof for it.
I'm trying to show them that they are doing the same thing, at least when they accuse an unconvicted man as being the principle architect of the attack and declare that as fact even though they don't have firm evidence.
Secondly, and more importantly, this whole situation SHOULD be a concern and a major issue for people who live in democratic common law societies, and who hold these ideas about freedom as ideals.
Instead we see millions of people could care less that their government is now in the business of indefinate detention without fair trial.
The fact that the United States conducted the biggest criminal investigation ever, PENTBOMM I believe it's called, as well as the 9/11 commission who claimed to investigate the plotting of the attack, and yet can't come up with a shred of evidence against KSM even after all that inquiry, and yet STILL insist he's the plotter, should be a red flag.
Also the fact that if he's so guilty, the fact that the United States can't even convict him for it after almost nine years of having him in custody, the very fact that they aren't securing a conviction against him for ANYTHING, SHOULD call into question his guilt.
I mean when was the last time it took this long? Tim Mcveigh was not only convicted but had the three needles just a couple years after his capture.. Ramsi Yousef was convicted and sentenced for the '93 WTC attack just a couple years later.. Even Mugrabe the Lockerbie bomber was sentenced in less time, in a very complicated international case where it was harder to determine which country the crime was against. Moussaiu, albeit only operative and not plotter, was convicted and sentenced YEARS ago.
And yet here we are... KSM collecting dust.. First they argued they needed to put systems to try him, they couldn't otherwise (military commissions) which is nonsense because the United States has always been able to try and convict people for crimes against the United States, both domestic and foreigners, as they have in the past.. Then his guilty plea was attempted, and as soon as his mental competency was questioned and he was meant to have a mental competency hearing before such plea could be accepted, they abrubtly terminated the proceedings.. (probably they might notice his mind has been affected by CIA reprogramming techniques, and lack of forensic evidence and no acceptable guilty plea would leave no grounds to convict and they risked a not guilty verdict, making his long term detention hard to justify).. THEN to explain the termination, they said it would be for a civilian trial.. This was early 09.. And not long later, still in 09, civilian trial was ruled out and now off the table and impossible. So now the ONLY option was to reinstate the military commission hearing.. Yet they didn't.. They STILL haven't.. They're not still debating the venue to try him.. It was determined the only possible venue over two years ago, and other than more baseless lip service of promises to get around to reopening his commission hearing, they haven't.. Why not? What are they waiting for?
It's obvious... If they could convict they would.. They won't so they probably can't.
But they are buying time... Nobody is clamouring for justice to be served and a gavel to be slammed.
My best theory is they are buying time until he dies in custody.. This would be perfect.. Now they can establish him as an infamous legend of an enemy, write history, and he can live on forever always regarded as the 9/11 mastermind even though they never proved it. And they'll never have to prove it.. He's dead.
Similar reasoning to why the Navy Seals received "only kill no matter what" orders for Osama Bin Laden, so they shot him up unarmed, even though his capture would be a potential treasure trove of intelligence as well as the chance to ruin his opportunity to be a martyr.
The downside is they'd be in the same dilemna as KSM.. No hard evidence to convict him, and yet can't just let him go after saying he's behind 9/11 either.. No choice but indefinate extrajudicial detention without trial, a concept which should APPALL people who feel proud of living in what they see as a free society.
How did you get that impression? Certainly not because the CIA sez so I hope.
Fact is the CIA destroyed the interrogation tapes before the 9/11 commission could see them, even though they requested to see them, and a judge ordered the tapes preserved.. This FORCES people to take the CIA's word for it.
Where is your evidence that the KSM water boarding admission was an accident?
They obviously kept it secret. It was done in a secret CIA black site.. They admitted nothing.. They said nothing.. All the memos back and forth from white house to CIA were stamped top secret. Tapes were destroyed so the 9/11 commission couldn't see it.
In the middle of the decade, roughly, KSM said he was waterboarded, human rights organizations as well as former CIA agents blew the whistle on it.
It wasn't till AFTER this that CIA director admitted it, it was too late, the cat was out of the bag.
If they wanted the torture to be part of the story, they wouldn't have kept it secret, would they?
Game over indeed... Your inability to explain how a confession can prove someone's behind a plot when KSM confessed to plots proven to not have existed proves you forfeit.
The guy confessed. That ends it.
If you don't want to show proof, provide explanations and answer questions, or otherwise debate, then don't bother replying to me... I'm interested in debate here.
KSM made proven false confessions.. You can't explain that... Indeed your inability to back up your stance does indeed end it.
Good, then I needn't look forward to any more of your incredibly lame explanations.
Can you source this, please?
Separate names with a comma.