Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chilliwilli
Ooookay...So, they (FBI) provide investigative information to indicte "the shoe bomber" and Moussaoui (who was already in prison on the day of 911) but admit they don't have a shred of evidence against bin laden...You must look at history concerning this debate and consider "other" possible alternatives...
Perhaps you should do a bit more research on that "taped confession"...
To reiterate...not a shred of evidence linking bin laden to 911. Proper research on the financial trail actually points in an interesting direction.
Until all evidence and some type of real investigation comes to fruition, the events of that day may never come to light. Believe what you believe but I believe the word "conspiracy theory" should be removed from this debate as I doubt you're qualified to know what on that day (before & after) was theory and which was fact. One of the most important people recommended to the 911 comission by the families, is Sibel Edmonds. Unfortunately, she's been gagged beyond belief. Newsweek calls her the most gagged person in U.S. history.
There are "entities" that stand to profit from Bhutto's assasination, bottom line. The list of "who" could be endless. Regardless, it's a damn shame that such a possible light of hope for her country was extinguished.
Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10Jn4vTGb_8 |
Please... if you are going to be an adept Conspiracy Theorist, you really must frame your arguments in a more logical fashion.
First of all, you've stated repeatedly that there is not a "shred" of evidence" linking Bin Laden to 9/11. From the oft-quoted
Muckraker Report of 06/26/2006:
"On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s
Most Wanted web page, Tomb said,
“The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
"No hard evidence" is not even remotely close to "not a shred of evidence." Every 911 truther website use the phrases "lack of conclusive" evidence or "no hard evidence", so why are you stretching this to "not a shred of evidence"?
But then you bring the Sibel Edmonds into your argument. Let's get the story straight - Anthony Romero, the director of the ACLU, which is representing Ms. Edmonds in her civil case, stated "Sibel Edmonds is the most gagged person in American history..." which was merely quoted by Newsweek. Citing this as an editorial comment attributable to Newsweek is incorrect and irresponsible.
But then wait... since you did bring Sibel Edmonds to the forefront of this discussion, in page 3, paragraph 2 of her
letter to Sen. Thomas Kean of 04/01/2007 states:
"Over three years ago, more than four months prior to the September 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama Bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high- level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of
intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan he received information that: 1) Osama Bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting 4-5 major cities, 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes, 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States, 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism, Thomas Frields, at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing “302” forms, and the translator translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the Special Agent in Charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to ‘keep quiet’ regarding this issue."
Your two statements directly refute each other. Nice try, though...