Drewprops: you are using the 'guilt by association' gambit again. Tip: it doesn't work.
Besides, we disposed of it above. Actually the reason that such material is found on conspiracy sites is because the mainstream media won't report it. Obviously things they won't report end up together in some instances - some of these things are vile, some are true. Unless you think the media is an impartial arbiter of objective justice.
As Sammi Jo points out, the basis of the 'evidence' (we were promised more but it has yet to be forthcoming) against OBL both in the public's mind and in the authorities actions, is in fact, this tape.
It has been shown to be seriously questionable and the balance of reasonable doubt lies with the supposition that is in fact a fake. The question of who faked it and why is an interesting one but it is besides the point here.
The facts are: the 'best evidence' that OBL was responsible for 911 is dead in the water and there is alternative evidence that OBL denies involvement in 911.
My point is not to argue whether he was responsible or not, but to question why with this evidence available there is not some sort of ongoing investigation into the situation rather than a blanket refusal to look at facts which contradict the official line. That is not justice - it's called something else.
Oh and btw - before the Osama interview gets rubbished as a whitewash by radicals (or whoever), note that he doesn't denying attacking the US or the existence of al-Q and his part in it - he merely denies involvement in 911.
Very true, but objective rationality has suffered as a result of the overwhelming subjective and emotional content of 9-11. This is a very common effect of such traumatic events, especially a massive crime like this, and there is an overwhelming demand and expectation for (the government) to pin down the culprits and blame someone as rapidly as posssible, in the interest of perceived security for the nation, and closure for those affected, not to forget revenge. This has happened many times in the past, a classic example being the "Birmingham Six", who were blamed for multiple IRA terrorist bombings in the UK in the 1970s...railroaded by the British government, which was under pressure to "get someone" (read "get anyone") by an angry populace, and the six men spent a total of 96 years in jail for crimes they had nothing to do with. In the wake of 9-11, Osama bin Laden was the obvious culprit in view of his association with many previous terror attacks on US interests and people overseas. We Americans needed a figure on which we could vent our anger and emotion, as soon as possible, and Osama bin Laden, assumed the guilt party for 9-11 (and previous attacks) did provide some kind of release, whether it is real, imaginary or just convenient.
As Segovius pointed out, if anyone can show us some real evidence that Osama bin Laden is definitely the guilty party, then great... I'd love to see him behind bars, ready to appear in a public US courtroom...wouldn't we all? But until then, all the government has to rely on is this tape, collected under very dodgy circumstances, with an extraordinarily poor and amateurish analysis by the Pentagon, and nobody dared question it. (Presumably they were not expecting anyone to be bothered, even if the evidence was lacking, or even pure garbage). With such lack of evidence against him (for 9-11), could a conviction even be possible, given a fair trial that is? Wouldn't it be a supreme fvck-up if some other party was responsible for 9-11. and in our obsession with bin Laden, they elude discovery, perhaps to attack us again?
Oh wait a minute...didn't this guy do 9-11 ?????????????
Comments
Originally posted by segovius
Drewprops: you are using the 'guilt by association' gambit again. Tip: it doesn't work.
Besides, we disposed of it above. Actually the reason that such material is found on conspiracy sites is because the mainstream media won't report it. Obviously things they won't report end up together in some instances - some of these things are vile, some are true. Unless you think the media is an impartial arbiter of objective justice.
As Sammi Jo points out, the basis of the 'evidence' (we were promised more but it has yet to be forthcoming) against OBL both in the public's mind and in the authorities actions, is in fact, this tape.
It has been shown to be seriously questionable and the balance of reasonable doubt lies with the supposition that is in fact a fake. The question of who faked it and why is an interesting one but it is besides the point here.
The facts are: the 'best evidence' that OBL was responsible for 911 is dead in the water and there is alternative evidence that OBL denies involvement in 911.
My point is not to argue whether he was responsible or not, but to question why with this evidence available there is not some sort of ongoing investigation into the situation rather than a blanket refusal to look at facts which contradict the official line. That is not justice - it's called something else.
Oh and btw - before the Osama interview gets rubbished as a whitewash by radicals (or whoever), note that he doesn't denying attacking the US or the existence of al-Q and his part in it - he merely denies involvement in 911.
Very true, but objective rationality has suffered as a result of the overwhelming subjective and emotional content of 9-11. This is a very common effect of such traumatic events, especially a massive crime like this, and there is an overwhelming demand and expectation for (the government) to pin down the culprits and blame someone as rapidly as posssible, in the interest of perceived security for the nation, and closure for those affected, not to forget revenge. This has happened many times in the past, a classic example being the "Birmingham Six", who were blamed for multiple IRA terrorist bombings in the UK in the 1970s...railroaded by the British government, which was under pressure to "get someone" (read "get anyone") by an angry populace, and the six men spent a total of 96 years in jail for crimes they had nothing to do with. In the wake of 9-11, Osama bin Laden was the obvious culprit in view of his association with many previous terror attacks on US interests and people overseas. We Americans needed a figure on which we could vent our anger and emotion, as soon as possible, and Osama bin Laden, assumed the guilt party for 9-11 (and previous attacks) did provide some kind of release, whether it is real, imaginary or just convenient.
As Segovius pointed out, if anyone can show us some real evidence that Osama bin Laden is definitely the guilty party, then great... I'd love to see him behind bars, ready to appear in a public US courtroom...wouldn't we all? But until then, all the government has to rely on is this tape, collected under very dodgy circumstances, with an extraordinarily poor and amateurish analysis by the Pentagon, and nobody dared question it. (Presumably they were not expecting anyone to be bothered, even if the evidence was lacking, or even pure garbage). With such lack of evidence against him (for 9-11), could a conviction even be possible, given a fair trial that is? Wouldn't it be a supreme fvck-up if some other party was responsible for 9-11. and in our obsession with bin Laden, they elude discovery, perhaps to attack us again?
Oh wait a minute...didn't this guy do 9-11 ?????????????
you know, Osama Saddamladen bin Hussein?
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/opinio...ion-columnists
Yikes.