I fear a terrorist attack will happen right before the elections.

[Bushknew]

A freshly staged US government attack would lock down the country just like 911 did.

After all, questioning the war is STILL hard to do TODAY.

Another US staged terrorist attack would immediately stifle any dissent and/or questioning.

All Conservatives have to run on is fear.

Canadian medicine is harmful.

Only Conservatives can protect Americans etc etc É

Alas, I hope IÕm wrong about the attacks.

[Sugarbleus]

1. I hope you're wrong also..........but

I won't be one bit surprised if it happens............

[Bushknew]

2. "Al-Queada Won"

Is how the media and conservatives are spinning the tragedy in Spain.

Never mind the fact that the majority of the Spanish people disagreed with the policies of the conservative party. ThatÕs why they were voted out.

Dems must fight the "Al-Queada Won" spin before the US government
stages itÕs terrorist attack.

After American citizens have been killed, it will be hard to question and criticize W. The nation will be in mourning.

They must question and criticize W NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the attack happens, and Bush loses, conservatives will say "Al-Queada Won".

If the attack happens, and Bush wins, conservatives will say "Al-Queada did not win"

ThatÕs why this Al-Queada Won in Spain argument is so important for democrats to win.

The people of Spain voted against the policies of the conservative party not in fear
of Al-Queada.

[Bolo Boffin]

3. And it's a crying shame

Anyone who looks at the Spanish elections realizes that it was not the terrorist attack that influenced voters, but the spinning of the terrorist attack for political gain that enraged the public.

Rightwingers can spin this how they want, and many may believe them, but we should take note: Using a terrorist attack for political gain won't work if the facts get out. The Repuke convention in New York may yet backfire on the Bushistas.

[Abe Linkman]

5. Depends on the definition of "spinning"

The best "spinning" isn't perceived as spinning. Next time, the Spanish Government should consider hiring Hill & Knowlton...and let some real pros help them get the "facts" out.

[Sugarbleus]

4. Yes, I understand that..... the

Al Q/terrorist attacks there were separate from what Spain wishes to do with their government/elections.

And Bravo to the Spaniards for getting what THEY really want.

I hope the Hell we can do the same.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

9. Spain suspects 'were informants'

The Spanish interior ministry says it is investigating reports that two suspects in the 11 March Madrid train bombings were police informants.

The move came after Spain's El Mundo newspaper said Moroccan Rafa Zuher and Spaniard Jose Emilio Suarez had been in contact with police before the attacks.

The men are suspected of providing dynamite for the attacks, which killed 191 people and injured more than 2,000.

The paper said they passed on details about drug deals and other crimes.

Full article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3670627.stm

The people involved in this event have been tied to the "Security Agencies" that supposedly protect the people, not unlike the FBI's connection to the first WTC bombing in 1993.

'The New York Times reports that the FBI knew in advance that terrorists were plotting to build a bomb and 'blow up the World Trade Center' and 'planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives...'

Detailed information here: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=wtc_bombing


The only successful terrorists are state-sponsored, for without sanction they would end up being busted like Irv Rubin & Ahmed Rassam.

[Abe Linkman]

10. Agreed. You can say the same thing about 9/11-type conspiracies.

"The only successful terrorists are state-sponsored, for without sanction they would end up being busted like Irv Rubin & Ahmed Rassam."

The U.S. government knew all along that with time, more and more people would come to realize the absurdity of thinking that a cave-dwelling group of Arab men could possible plot, plan, and successfully carry out
something like what happened on 9/11. That's one of the main reasons why disinformation agents have been assigned to the 9/11 "case" file.

A group of cave-dwellers certainly have played a "part" in 9/11...they
all played the same starring role: "Patsy".

[MercutioATC]

11. What state agency sponsored Timothy McVeigh?

...you posted:

"The only successful terrorists are state-sponsored, for without sanction they would end up being busted like Irv Rubin & Ahmed Rassam."

...just curious...

[Abe Linkman]

12. Good question. Why don't you take a guess. Oh, wait. I know why.

Because you are hoping that someone will go out on a limb and name a likely culprit which will then allow you to:

* Demand proof
* Mention CT
* Mention "tin-foil hats"
* Denounce people who dare raise legitimate questions

The one thing you WON'T do is admit how stupid it is to ask such a question as "What state agency sponsored Timothy McVeigh".

YES - I know that you are well-acquainted with cognitive dissonance, because of your belief that "they" had foreknowledge of 9/11 and intentionally ignored it...and your equally strong belief that you "don't ncecessarily believe everything the Government has said about 9/11". Oh, I believe you're part of the A-men chorus that sings: Intel failures, negligence, bureaucratic snafus, and QUITE AMAZING coincidences, but certainly Osama bin Laden is the guilty party.

[MercutioATC]

13. It was a simple question...

...you made a statement and I asked a question based on that statement. That's all. Why is it "stupid" to ask about a terrorist that i don't think conforms to your theory?


Care to take a stab at an answer?

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

14. Don't you mean Lee Harvey McVeigh?

BTW, I stated, state-sponsored, not agency-sponsored, but anyway.

A supposed white supremacist that blows up the Murrah building because the govt killed a bunch of supposed cultists, many of which were non-whites, in Waco.

A guy who had been TRAINED TO KILL by who? Oh that's right the state, ergo he learned his "terrorist" skills compliments of Uncle Sam, which makes his actions state sponsored terrorism. He did not learn to make bombs swinging on monkeys bars with Atta & the Afghan 18.

A guy that runs around gun shows predicting things such as (para phased by Denis Mahon) "What comes around goes around. If they keep doing this terrorism on our people, terrorism's going to happen to them.' Hmmm guess printing leaflets and stamping his office address on them would have been passe.

A guy with ties to a possibly fake white supremacist compound (Elohim City, infested with more informants than Carter had liver pills) where the security is run by a German politician's son, Andreas Strassmeier. Politician's children don't have any ties to the state now do they.

A guy that was seen running from the building with the infamous John Doe #2, who later became Gone So # through. Guess the state didn't want the whole story to become public.

A guy with almost the same name as the main character of a book about bombing a federal building in Oklahoma. "The Final Jihad" by Martin Keating features a Tom McVey, as the bomber, written 4 years before the real bombing. Martin Keating just happens to be the former governor of Oklahoma's brother, Frank was an ex-FBI agent. Nope, no siree no state connection there either. Move along folks, the show is over.


P.S.
And please do explain in minute detail the exact physics that this "magic" truck bomb theory employed to bring down more than 1/3 of that structure.

[Abe Linkman]

15. Excellent. I'm glad to know some of the facts you mentioned.

Very interesting information.

Police Agencies engage in all kinds of "terrorist" acts every day of the week. They entrap people, conspire to "sting" people, frame people, conspire to hide and destroy evidence, convert criminals (both those who are factually innocent & those guilty) into undercover informants etc.

The FBI office in Boston has a long history of condoning murders committed by some of their informants (isn't that a form of Agency terrorism? I think so.).

Almost 100% of large drug busts are the result of a conspiracy cooked-up by narcotic agents.

Almost 100% of murder-for-hire arrests are the result of a conspiracy cooked-up by Police agencies.

The percentage of people who are aware of the above (and more) is growing every day. So too, is the percentage of people who are becoming aware of historical U.S. - sponsored terrorist acts ... from "Remember The Maine" to "Pearl Harbor", JFK, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X, Wellstone, Gulf of Tonkin, WMD, Murrah Building, 1993WTC, 9-11, and on and on and on.

Progress comes slowly, by degrees, but the day is coming when a majority of voters will come to understand that just as Police agencies (local, state, federal) commit terrorist acts and engage in all manner of criminal conspiracies, so too, do United States Government Agencies.

If they didn't, there wouldn't be any need for Disinformation agents, now would there?

[Bolo Boffin]

18. Care to cite any actual evidence for your "facts"...

...other than your moral certitude that it is so, that it is certainly so?

[demodewd]

16. And then...

And then they demolish the building and bury the rubble quicker than one can say Bill Clinton is a sex fiend and it is under guard watch to this day as far as I know.

[Bolo Boffin]

17. Murrah building collapse

*sigh*

The truck bomb damaged three columns. The loss of the columns caused a transfer girder to fail. The transfer girder failure caused the collapse of the columns being supported by the girder. The floors being supported by those columns fell.

The physics involved: When one thing's supported by a second thing, and the second thing fails, the first thing falls. It's called Gravity.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

19. Well Bolo, Let's see what a Brigadier Gen. USAF thinks.

*eyeroll, with a sigh*

This is an analysis of the Oklahoma City bombing by General Benton Partin, who headed the USAF Weapons Development Center. The math of General Partin's analysis is indisputable and is a matter of congressional record. Why have most American's never heard this alarming evidence? Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City and other acts are leading this nation towards totalitarianism ... it can happen here. It already is! Please read this report and form your own conclusions. (Jeff Head, 1997)
Bomb Damage Analysis Of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building
July 30, 1995

by Benton K. Partin
Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.)

On April 19, 1995, the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma was bombed, causing extensive damage to the structure, the loss of 168 innocent lives, the victimization of the families of those who lost loved ones, hundreds of non-fatal injuries, and substantial property damage in the vicinity.

The media and the Executive branch reported that the sole source of the devastation was a single truck bomb consisting of 4,800 pounds of ammonium nitrate, transported to the location in a Ryder Truck and parked in front of the building. It is impossible that the destruction to the building could have resulted from such a bomb alone.

To cause the damage pattern that occurred to the Murrah building, there would have to have been demolition charges at several supporting column bases, at locations not accessible from the street, to supplement the truck bomb damage. Indeed, a careful examination of photographs showing the collapsed column bases reveals a failure mode produced by demolition charges and not by a blast from the truck bomb.

To understand what caused the damage to the Murrah Building, one needs to understand some basics about the use and nature of explosives.

First, blast through air is a very inefficient energy coupling mechanism against heavily reinforced concrete beams and columns.


Full article here: http://verdade.no.sapo.pt/law/general_partin_okc.html

Nice try with your "Fantasy Fysics" theory. On this paper you get an F.

[Bolo Boffin]

20. Thinking is what you call that?

Now that we've heard from the Brigadier General, let's hear from some actual building engineers that examined the evidence and know what they're talking about.

http://orbita.starmedia.com/~martzsolis/THE%20OKLAHOMA%20CITY%20BOMBING.htm

From the analyses described in Reference 2, the blast was equivalent to the detonation of 4,000 pounds of TNT. The blast caused the removal of Column G20 by brisance as well as the shear failure of Columns G16 and G24. With this loss of three intermediate principal columns, the transfer girder supporting the upper portion of the building on the west side collapsed. Most of the devastation was due to this progressive collapse rather than the direct effects of the explosion. Limit analyses of Column Line G indicate that the frame does not have the capacity to resist its self-weight if any of the first-story columns on Column Line G is lost.

Just what I was saying, in other words.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

21. Men paid to blow up hardened targets for a living...

I notice they leave out any mention of air being a very, very poor coupler in explosions. Try putting a lady finger firecracker in the open palm of your hand and lit the fuse, you will not get seriously injured. Now do the same thing only this time, close your fist around it as tight as possible and lit the fuse. Care to guess what the outcome will be Bolo? So how did Timothy Copperfield perform this great feat of using air as a coupler?


Computing the blast pressure for the Ryder truck’s estimated
4,800-pound ANFO bomb, the EBES determines that the radius from the
center of the device that would manifest a pressure of 70 psi or more
would be 42.37 feet. “It can therefore be expected,”
explains the study, “that within a radius of 42.37 feet from the
center of the explosive, any six-inch reinforced concrete panel
positioned so as to have a major face perpendicular or nearly
perpendicular to the travel path of the blast pressure wave from the
explosion would be damaged.” The study notes that the floor
panels in the Murrah Building were of the same thickness as the ETS
panels and, starting with the third floor, had a similar positional
relationship to the device as the panels in the Eglin test.
Accordingly, the EBES found: “A limited area of the third and
fourth floors of the Murrah Federal Building immediately adjacent to
the position of the Ryder truck would be affected. On the third floor
a roughly circular shape extending into the building and approximately
40 feet down the north face of the building from the center point of
the explosive, which was located some 14.5 feet north of the north
face of the building. This circular area contained approximately 1,250
square feet of six-inch panel.... The fourth floor panel that
experienced 70 psi and above was limited to a roughly circular-shaped
pattern of approximately 400 square feet.”

The conclusions of the Eglin Blast Effects Study are compelling and
carry stunning implications. With the ETS having significantly less
integral strength than the Murrah Building, the EBES conclusions have
a built-in margin of error that, if anything, overstate the extent of
damage to be expected at the Murrah Building. Moreover, the
computations for the Ryder truck bomb also are overly generous.
“Because ANFO is also a low-energy explosive (approximately 30%
that of TNT) and due to the inherent inefficiency of eight barrels
forming the explosive assembly estimates], it is doubtful that the device produced blast pressures
close to the calculated maximum potential blast pressure,” the
study asserts. “This being the case, it is doubtful that the
radius of damage even approached the 42.37 foot range as calculated
herein.”

Finally, the EBES concludes:

Due to these conditions, it is impossible to ascribe the damage
that occurred on April 19, 1995 to a single truck bomb containing
4,800 lbs. of ANFO. In fact, the maximum predicted damage to the
floor panels of the Murrah Federal Building is equal to
approximately 1% of the total floor area of the building.
Furthermore, due to the lack of symmetrical damage pattern at the
Murrah Building, it would be inconsistent with the results of the
ETS test one to state that all of the damage to the Murrah
Building is the result of the truck bomb.

The damage to the Murrah Federal Building is consistent with damage
resulting from mechanically coupled devices placed locally within
the structure....


Full article here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/multibla.html

As to secondary devices being inside the building:

[MercutioATC]

30. That article was written by William F. Jasper...

...who is a senior editor of "The New American". I don't see credentials showing that he has ANY expertise in engineering.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

43. He is using info. from a report made by men that get paid to blow stuff up

Why not email Mr. Jasper and ask him to confirm what is in his article?

And seeing as most of the editors of most periodicals are NOT experts in engineering/terrorism/finances/ATC etc. I guess we should just not bother with any of them or their frivolous scribblings, ever, Eh?

[LARED]

59. CT'er citing John Birch'ers on DU

Some days this is just plain fun to watch.

[Abe Linkman]

61. That's nothing. Apologists for bushco lies about 9/11 post on DU, too.

In these days of modern times, it's hard to tell the ACs from the DCs.

Hard to know which apologists for the bush 9/11 Fairy Tale are just plain uninformed and which are active PR flacks.

[LARED]

64. Just out of curiosity do you find citing a John Bircher

as credible?

[Bolo Boffin]

33. Since I don't have a spare 25 dollars to give to the militiaheads...

...who are selling this Elgin report, and since I can't find another copy of this report listed anywhere else on the net besides wacko American Patriot websites (and now DU), I think I'll find a more generally available source of info.

Oh, look!

http://www.mipt.org/Oklahoma-City-Bombing.asp

There's a .pdf file destined for my "beloved" category. It's number 10 on the above page, entitled Blast Loading and Response of Murrah Building. The study was conducted by members of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the results released in the magazine Forensic Engineering.

Let's see, pages 3-4:

Column G20 was the exterior column supporting the noteworthy transfer girder that was closest to the explosion. In fact, it was at the edge of the crater only 14 ft south and 7 ft west of the center. This corresponds to a scaled range

H/W^1/3 = (14^2 + 7^2)^1/2 / 4000^1/3 = 1.0 ft/lb^1/3

in which H is the horizontal range in feet and W is the explosive energy expressed as an equivalent mass of TNT in lb. Experience indicates that adjacent explosions destroy reinforced concrete columns by the direct or shearing effects of blowing out, severing, and undermining. Bomb damage assessments following World War I1 reported that this occurred within scaled ranges of 3.0 ft/lb^1/3 for cased bombs (National Defense Research Committee, 1946). Based on contemporary research on the breaching of concrete walls (McVay, 1988), the corresponding limit for brisant failure of columns by bare charges is estimated to be 1.5 ft/lb^1/3.

Thus in all likelihood, Column G20 was abruptly removed by brisance following the explosion. At a scaled range of 1.0 ft/lb^1/3, it was well within the experimentally based range for this phenomenon. Further, no one found any evidence of this column in the debris or in the crater following the bombing.

There wasn't a scrap of Column G20 left, and it was well within a scientifically established limit for brisant failure of columns. G20 is completely demolished, and G24 and G16 failed from sheer damage. This led to the destruction of the transfer girder they destroyed, which led to the collapse of the columns supported by the transfer girder, etc., etc., etc.

You will note that the truck was parked 14 feet from Column G20. Concrete slabs 42 feet away shouldn't even enter into this conversation. It's not about destroying the face of the building 42 feet away; it's about destroying the supporting column 14 feet away from the center of the blast. Focus, PY, focus.

[MercutioATC]

38. Sure, they may be engineers, but how many articles have they had

published on left-wing Internet sites?

C'mon, Bolo...where's your credibility?

:silly:

[demodewd]

24. bring on the government schmoozies

Your NIST and FEMA folk again...that figures.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

56. How did 'gravity' cause this?

Look at the car on the bottom right of the picture.

http://www.imagepilot.com/"img.dll?x=20040716_0:16:11_79.jpg"

Sorry but you have to merge the above address manually as it contains an illegal character when I tried to post it as one link. Just copy it to your address bar and delete the quotes.

[MercutioATC]

25. Sorry, I'm not a physicist or an engineer...

...so I can't provide you with a detailed analysis of the explosion.

I'm interested, do you believe that McVeigh is innocent altogether or just that he was ex-military, allowing the claim that "the government was involved"?

As far as the book reference, how do you believe that Martin Keating was involved and what proof of this have you found (aside from a story he wrote)?

[LARED]

34. Lets try logic

Oh that's right the state, ergo he learned his "terrorist" skills compliments of Uncle Sam, which makes his actions state sponsored terrorism.

What amazing logic.

Let me try it out

PerpetualYnquisitive learned his writing skills compliments of Uncle Sam, which makes his statement state sponsored _______________.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

42. You have it almost right LARED.

PerpetualYnquisitive learned his writing skills compliments of Uncle Sam, which makes his statement state sponsored _______________.

...expression of opinion. (Replace Uncle Sam with Queen Elizabeth)


For if the state did not sponsor me by teaching me to read, write and express opinions, I would not do these things. So by the state sponsoring me to learn these skills, the state obviously wanted me to use them as well, just as the state teaches others how to kill, the state most assuredly wants them to use their skills as well.

Why else would they invest the resources for such teaching?

[MercutioATC]

49. So the state is sponsoring terrorism every time they train a soldier?

They're sponsoring a terrorist every time government college loans are used to train a doctor or a physicist?

I don't think many here will share that view. The definition of state-sponsored terrorism requires a lot more than providing for defense or social services to most people here (at least, I'd like to think so).

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

51. Do you not agree that...

...When the American Military bombed Nagasaki, the population was terrorized. When the Chinese Military rolled into Tiananmen Square, the population was terrorized. When the Russian Military attacked Afghanistan, the population was terrorized. When the Iraqi Military attacked Kuwait, the population was terrorized. Why is that people insist that only "lone nutters" or "fringe groups" commit terrorist acts?

None of these events were committed in "Defense." The "Department of Defense" is really just a good PR label for what in reality is the "Department of Belligerent Aggression."

What would TERRORIZE you more, the chance of being killed in a "terrorist" attack by All CIA'Duh or the chance of being killed in a "terrorist" attack by a foreign military, such as China during an open conflict?

War = Terrorism

They are only potential terrorists, until they commit an act of violence against civilians, then they become terrorists. The guise of "warfare" is no excuse, for there is no sanction for killing civilians. Incompetence is not a valid defense.

Would you accept the death of your child as just "collateral damage?" Your mother? Your brother?

[MercutioATC]

52. It's semantics, but that wasn't the issue.

I understood that you claimed that McVeigh represented "state-sponsored terrorism" when he bombed the Murrah building because he was formerly in the military.

Did I misunderstand you?

[LARED]

50. Are you trying to tell me

that if

the state did not sponsor me by teaching me to read, write and express opinions, I would not do these things

Am I to understand that without the state your parents would have left you to be illiterate and ignorant?

[Abe Linkman]

22. mercutio: Question for you about "Osama bin Oswald"

What is the basis for your belief that OBL is the main culprit for the crimes of 9-11?

You don't need to cite any right-wing propaganda URLs (whether
Gov't or private) -- just tell us, in plain English, free of ATC jargon,
what evidence or proof logic convinces you to this day, that OBL is the
9-11 "evil doer" that bush says (or used to say) he is.

Thank you.

[MercutioATC]

23. For the following reasons:

1) Although it's been disputed, he said he did it.

2) He has a history of terrorist acts and had the ability to do it.

3) He has specifically targeted the U.S. before.

These three things alone are pretty persuasive for me. Add to that the lack of any other perpetrators, and I'm secure in my belief that OBL engineered the 9/11 attacks.

[demodewd]

26. weak...very very weak.

Well well well well well. You exclude the government as a pssible perpetrator right from the start. Your weak logic wouldn't confict him in a court of law...in fact you would have no case.

[MercutioATC]

28. A confession isn't admissible in Court?

People have been convicted on much less.

[Abe Linkman]

31. Rules of Evidence would NOT admit what you say is OBL "confession"

As far as your statement that "People have been convicted on much less",
it is true that people get convicted every day based on false evidence, planted evidence, frame-ups, perjured testimony, forced confessions, suppressed evidence etc. In criminal cases, police and prosecutorial misconduct is commonplace, and often results in wrongful convictions.
Crooked lawyers are also well-known for coercing false confessions from
criminal defendants (James Earl Ray is a good example). I have personal knowledge of a lawyer who "sold out" his client to prosecutors (he was featured on "60 Minutes" about five or six years ago).

Confessions against self-interest are a commonplace in American jurisprudence. Worldwide, it's even worse. Here, there isn't as much physical tortue to gain false confessions, but unfair, extrajudicial pressures are often brought to bear to force defendants to admit to crimes they didn't commit. Using jailhouse snitches, undercover agents, and informants also often leads to false confessions.

Osama's "confession" isn't credible and would not be admitted into evidence in any jurisdiction I can think of in the United States.

[Bolo Boffin]

35. Osama's confession wasn't coerced!

He was relaxing in the home of a friend and was videotaped by this friend talking about how he helped to plan the attacks. No CIA or FBI interrogators were near him.

Unless you're speaking of some other confession...the only one I know of is the tape discovered in Afghanistan. No concerns of torture playing a part in Osama's confession would bar this tape from use in any courtroom. What are you talking about, Abe?

[Abe Linkman]

36. No one said it was coerced. It's most likely a CIA-doctored tape.

IF it wasn't a fake tape, it is in conflict with other alleged Osama tapes in which he denied any participation in 9/11. So, the evidentiary requirements for admissibility would almost certainly lead to a ruling of INadmissility. A hearing regarding it's admissibility isn't something that your side would likely request...due to the snicker, snicker factor.

You're also a supporter, I believe, of the famous "boy, Osama sure doesn't look like himself" videotape. Seems to me like you apologists for the "Cavepeople" Conspiracy Theory would at least have the wit to
say that Osama just looks different in those tapes, because, well, Osama looks different...he's got a pair of bad oil filters, you know. Even had to get treatment at the U.S. hosptial in Yemen where he was visited by the local CIA Station Chief (yes, we know you say that Le Figaro is lying about that) in July, 2001, and on September 10, 2001, he entered the military hospital at Rawalpindi, Pakistan (yes, we know you say that Dan Rather is lying about that). But, even IF OBL WAS in those hospitals, as reported, his illness would cause him to look different.
(it wasn't a doctored video, so stop laughing). Right.

The claim you are making isn't about a confession, anyhow. But, maybe you just see it as your ____(okay, not that, just a moral obligation) to come to Osama's defense.

I just have one question: why?

[Bolo Boffin]

41. Why?

The claim you are making isn't about a confession, anyhow. But, maybe you just see it as your ____(okay, not that, just a moral obligation) to come to Osama's defense.

I don't think that saying Osama is guilty of participating in the worst terrorist attack in history is coming to his defense.

Perhaps you meant to say Bush, and typed Osama. We've been down the road of whether I'm defending Bush or not - I see it as convicting Bush of his real crimes, which are bad enough.

Le Figaro isn't lying to say what they did - their story is that French intelligence sources say that meeting took place. That's true - French intelligence source did say it. But did the sources lie about it for their own reasons? Don't know. Could be. That's what I'm saying there.

Dan Rather isn't lying about Osama in that Pakistani military hospital, as far as I'm concerned - what I dispute is that this prevents Osama from being involved in the planning of 9/11. His dialysis treatment could have easily been over in time for him to be back at his headquarters (cave, whatever) for the attacks to begin. In fact, it shows a little foresight on his part, don't you think? He's got his own equipment, but squeezing in one last hospital visit before the attacks...it's like he knew that option wasn't going to be available in the near future....

One compressed frame capture from a compressed video file is the only picture ever used to dispute Osama's identity in that confession video. Actually watching the streaming video makes it clear that it's Mrs. bin Laden's bad boy Osama. Seeing a few more captured frames makes it clear, actually. Osama fessed up to his buddy. The buddy caught it on tape. Now we got the tape.

I've already answered why I debunk these extreme conspiracy theories here. I see this message board as a tool to get the Repukes out of power. I see these extreme conspiracy theories as detrimental to that goal. I see debunking them as defending DU, not Bush.

That's Why.

[Abe Linkman]

44. Your debunking sounds like bunk

The only conspiracy theories you've debunked were ones that no one here subscribes to.

No one here said that O's dialysis treatment means he couldn't have been involved in the planning of 9/11, so why would you say that?

Proof requires evidence, but evidence isn't necessarily proof. Doctored video tapes are extremely common these days. So, the tape you cite is not persuasive at all. It's a fake tape, courtesy of the CIA.

If the only evidence you can provide that OBL had anything to do with 9/11 (aside from his role as a patsy) is that doctored video, then you don't have a case at all, bolo.

It's very hypocritical of you to attack video images that conflict with your "message" as being photoshopped, but swear to the high heavens that
the one of OBL that you talk about is perfectly legitimate. btw - and of course, all those tapes that just mysteriously appear...is just another one of those odd 9/11 coincidences, right? Sure.

[Bolo Boffin]

48. Well...

...when you invade a country and send some people on the run, they tend to leave things behind, even some things that they'd prefer not to leave behind. When the United States invaded Afghanistan and ran Taliban and bin Laden supporters out of their various hideyholes, I don't find it unusual that they found a few tapes. I certainly don't consider it a simple coincidence that they found Al Qaeda videos in Al Qaeda strongholds...

Re: the dialysis machine. It's my understanding that the 9/10 hospital visit was touted as showing Osama couldn't have been in his cave on 9/11 to witness the attacks. Is there another reason for thinking this hospital visit suspicious?

[Abe Linkman]

54. Who told you that, bolo? ( another Red Herring?)

"It's my understanding that the 9/10 hospital visit was touted as showing Osama couldn't have been in his cave on 9/11 to witness the attacks."

[Abe Linkman]

45. bolo: You must not be familiar w/this info on the FAKE TAPE of Osama

THIS is what I'm talking about, bolo. Why didn't you mention it?


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html

[demodewd]

46. fatty face

I went through this with bolo once...he truly believes fatty face is OBL.

[Abe Linkman]

53. MAYBE he does, and maybe he doesn't

"he truly believes fatty face is OBL."

It isn't possible to know for sure, and DU rules forbid other approaches that might be helpful.

I guess when you're an apologist for something as bizarre as "Cavepeople pulled off the biggest sneak attack on U.S. interests in world history"
CTheories, you're pretty much stuck with having to defend all kinds of things that don't make sense.

[Bolo Boffin]

47. There are several things wrong with your post, Abe.

Number one: you linked to WhatReallyHappened.com. That's not allowed here at Democratic Underground because they have a nasty anti-Semitic problem over there.

Number two: look at the "odd man out" group of pictures. The one from the confession video is the picture I'm talking about - it's the same one used in every denial of Osama being on that tape. Do you understand that you just proved my point?

Three: Even that page gives the lie to your argument. There are other video captures from the confession tape on that page and all of them show that Osama isn't as fat as he appears in that one single picture being used for comparison. Why don't you provide a link to the actual streaming video?

You'll never do that, because watching the video makes it clear that it's Osama.

[seatnineb]

55. Fatty Face Rules O.K!

Assalam Al-kum.....



My name is Osama........
I am a prime suspect for the bombings of the Khobar Towers,the U.S
Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the U.S.S Cole aswell as 9/11.........

So far I managed to not formally acknowledge that I've been the one involved in the above.......

But listen up peeps..........
Thats all gonna change now ..

Cos' with this latest vid I'm gonna demonstate to ya' all that it was me and the brothers ..........and nobody else.......
Cant have those goddam conspiracy nuts takin away our glory!

Hey and dont ya pay any attention to my nose when you watch da vid... ya hear!

[Abe Linkman]

27. Wow! I had no idea you were so easily persuaded.

You realize, of course, how truly weak your position is, don't you?
Your argument is based on zero proven premises.

Just as I thought. Anyhow; you DID respond, and I appreciate it.

[MercutioATC]

29. Seems we BOTH have that problem...

...neither of us have any concrete evidence. I still think it's a lot less likely that the government actively made 9/11 happen, but that's just an opinion. Truthfully, neither of us can definitively prove the innocence or guilt of either party.

[Abe Linkman]

32. Honestly, speak for yourself. I don't have the same "problem" you have.

I believe there is substantial credible evidence to conclude that OBL had nothing to do with 9-11, and that the available evidence strongly supports the complicity of the U.S. Gov't. I believe that foreign parties WERE used in some manner to provide plausible deniability, guilty knowledge, convenient scapegoats, and easy-to-blame Patsies, especially from countries with substantial assets coveted by U.S. corporate interests.

You're entitled to your own opinions, but as far as I can glean what they are, they aren't even close to being persuasive.

[MercutioATC]

37. I have yet to see any concrete evidence from anybody - you included.

Concrete evidence is what I was discussing, not "credible evidence".

"credible" is a matter of opinion, "concrete" isn't.


And, as I've said, I'm not trying to persuade you (or anybody). I'm simply presenting another side of the issue, with some technical clarifications thrown in when needed.

[Abe Linkman]

39. That's why you need to learn how to reason things out.

Your own employer (I'm assuming you really are a civilian ATC employee, with zero connection to the military, or any other branch/pretend branch of the Gov't...other than what might be necessary in order to keep your job)...destroyed some important what you might call "concrete" evidence.

In the case of 9-11, most people here (other than you & your fellow travelers/apologists for the "Cavepeople" CT), understand that the Gov't has not released any "concrete" evidence concerning who is behind 9-11.
The Administration said they would provide proof that OBL is the master 9-11 criminal and that they would release evidence showing that. They haven't.

So, when "concrete" evidence isn't available (as in the WTC), you have to use circumstantial and other forms of evidence, and then see where it leads. If a preponderance of the evidence points to Osama, then it's reasonable to conclude Osama is guilty of whatever the evidence supports. If there's no substantial evidence, no credible testimony, and you can't even make a logical argument ("case") for his guilt, then how in the world do you expect to not seem a little light in the loafers?

You always say you're "simply presenting another side of the issue"..
but you never say WHAT ISSUE you're referring to, and you don't even "present" a "side" of an issue. If you feel that's untrue, then kindly point to an example that shows you "presenting another side of the issue"...using facts, reason, and logic.

btw - just regurgitating a statement like "Osama SAID he did it" doesn't count.

I'm not trying to embarass you. So, go ahead. I won't hold you to the same standards as would be expected in a formal debate.

[MercutioATC]

40. Fair enough...

Yes, a Quality Assurance person working for the FAA did destroy an interview tape. I have no idea why. The fact remains that the controllers interviewed are still around and could, even now, be interviewed. As a matter of fact, I know of one controller who worked UAL93 at my facility who's since retired (no, not Stacey) so he has no reason to be anything less than candid were he interviewed today (I talked to him shortly after 9/11. I'm pretty damn sure his story wouldn't change).

I know how ATC works. I know what the weaknesses were, and are, in the system. I sincerely believe that the delays on 9/11 were a direct result of the procedures that were in place, not the fault or intentional action of any single person or group of people.

You're correct about my "simply presenting another side of the issue" quote. What I should have said is that I was "simply presenting other sides of the issues". The point I was trying to make was that I've seen some technical errors related to ATC and I try to correct them. I also post my opinions, in part based on my experiences.I'm not presenting any "side". I misspoke.

Don't worry, you're not embarrassing me. I'm cautiously finding our new dialog refreshing.

[DulceDecorum]

6. Then we make like Spain

and get out of Iraq
and Venezuela
and Haiti
and oh gosh
the list is endless.....

[Bushknew]

7. Hey guys É

We all seem to be in agreement (even bolo :evilgrin:) about the Al-Queada won spin.

Dems need to win not only to stabilize the country again but to go after all the 911
slight of hand.

Abe wrote:

<<The best "spinning" isn't perceived as spinning.>>

ThatÕs true Abe, the TRUTH is that the majority of the Spanish people disagreed with how the conservative party dealt with terrorism. ThatÕs why they lost.

Q posted some interesting questions.

<<Isn't it strange that the US is fighting a 'war' on terrorism that's killing more innocents than the terrorists? How in the hell is this suppose to make sense to a rational mind?>>

<<Terrorists kill 3000 innocent people on our soil and the US response is to kill tens of thousands of innocent people?>>

<<What makes this worse is that the thousands slaughtered in the name of the war on terrorism didn't even live in the same country as those suspected of planning and executing 9-11.>>

<<Is there a way to fight terrorism without murdering innocents?>>

Yeah Dulce, Venezuela and many other things will be toast if Shrubya wins.

[John Doe II]

8. Terror warnings and martial law

A lot of terror warnings are out there. Also hints that the US would react differently than Spain meaning Us will install martial law. There is a very interesting article by Griffin Tarpley (even if one doesn't neccesarily have to agree with his choice of words). Therefore I wanted to post it in order to start a new discussion:
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=355

[soleft]

57. The CEO of the company I work for was considered for head of CIA

In the last several weeks the employees have been prepped with on line emergency training courses and provided with smoke masks and goggles. It seems he believes an attack is forthcoming.

[Dancing_Dave]

58. Of course, they'll try it.

But at this point they may not succeed in terminating Democracy in favor of neo-con fascism as intended.

[tngledwebb]

60. threat of attack

Madrid a trial run for USA 2004? Many parallels to 9/11 and the present day, with a too close to call election upcoming. Will it happen? If needed, ie. if black box voting, or electoral college jiggery, or Supreme Court rulings look like they WON'T fool enough people this time, yes, it could happen here AGAIN, perhaps as a mid-October surprise. So polling data has remain nearly 50/50 for those less destructive options to be viable. ( Wonder if one should trust the mainstream pollsters anyway, they may be in on this, along with big mainstream media. Like to think that in actuality Kerry has a 20 point lead, since this bolsters one's limited faith in the common sense of the electorate. Either way, if the American voters were not so brainwashed by our liberal media, if the truth ever got out, its a good bet that a sizable majority would vote the Democratic ticket in most cases.) If the polls DO start showing a sizable Kerry lead, go to Code Red, stock up on duct tape etc. Re the type of attack, note recent Los Alamos security issues- the credible threat of wayward nuclear material or technology would be enough to declare martial law under the Patriot Act, and to postpone elections indefinitely.

[Abe Linkman]

62. Terror threat will be in Calif. in mid-afternoon election day, if race ...

is so tight that buscho might lose legally. The idea is that rich people will most likely have already voted (they can easily take off from work, or show up late) - so if election appears too tight, TERROR threat will be issued for CA, thus causing large #s of Democratic voters to head home, not to polls. Also, for those brave enough to try...polls will be hard to get to.

If needed, threat will be extended to Washington State.

[tngledwebb]

63. What then...

will election results stand, or will elections be postponed, and for how long, or will everyone just sit back and take it until 2008, or the Rapture, whichever comes first...? And if those folks who can happen to re-read the Declaration of Ind. and attempt the same, how may assault weapons and hummers and jet fighters w/smart bombs do they have on hand to take on the biggest military force in history? One thing is certain- this admin will NEVER relinquish power. Worst case scenario is they win this one legally, or seemingly so, if just by a hair. And no-one will seriously question election 2004, or election 2000, or 9/11, ever again.