Jesse Ventura at a Ron Paul rally questions why Usama Bin Laden has not been charged for 911 even though we are fighting two wars and have the Patriot Act on the books because of Usama. He says the FBI says they don't have enough evidence. What the bleep ... I just looked at the FBI posting on Usama and no mention of 911!!! Bin Laden Wanted

two minute vid

Ahh, so let's see, Osama is already wanted and charged for capital crimes against the US, the FBI can point to these should extradition ever be requested, and additional charges may be added should Osama ever reach a US courtroom. So what Jesse wants to see happen is for the FBI to waste it's time going to court now and get a grand jury to explicitly charge Osama for 9/11? What a wonderful use of a grand jury's time.

[edit]
And then I researched, the above was merely the application of critical thinking, Bin Laden, Most Wanted For Embassy Bombings? Washington Post 8/28/06:

Exhaustive government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings. FBI officials say the wanted poster merely reflects the government's long-standing practice of relying on actual criminal charges in the notices.

"There's no mystery here," said FBI spokesman Rex Tomb. "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it."

Critical thinking, it's fun to try it every now and again.
[/edit]

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

additional charges may be added should Osama ever reach a US courtroom.

Yes, THAT would be the BEST time to START compiling the EVIDENCE... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

additional charges may be added should Osama ever reach a US courtroom.

Yes, THAT would be the BEST time to START compiling the EVIDENCE... ;)

Umm, still not engaging that critical thinking are we? No grand jury is not quite the same thing as not compiling evidence. How about starting with the man's own words?

'From Usama bin Muhammad bin Ladin to the American people: peace be upon he who has followed the Guidance.

'This is a brief message whose topic is my testimony on behalf of the Muslim prisoners you are holding, and in it I will talk about the truth concerning them, which is something which the Bush administration hates and is hostile to.

'I begin by talking about the honorable brother Zacarias Moussaoui. The truth is that he has no connection whatsoever with the events of Sept 11th, and I am certain of what I say, because I was responsible for entrusting the 19 brothers -- Allah have mercy upon them -- with those raids, and I did not assign brother Zacarias to be with them on that mission.

Would you like more?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Would you like more?

Naw, I've seen enough videos already... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Now your starting to catch on,

Don't ask some stranger about truth and evidence. Look for it yourself.

I'll ask for what I want, when I want.

Post data and/or links to your data and move along. Each will find truth the only way possible: By working on it.

I'll post link to data and stick with it, or move along as it pleases me.

All else can only be opinion.

I do not need to be told by you how to establish the veracity of what's being asserted. Fora have traditionally been arenas of debate, if you have a point to make, it's quite valid for me to request evidence to support it (as you have done on many occassions), if you can't then say so and we can move on, because at that point we'll all know we're discussing your opinion, and I'm already well aware that your opinion is not influenced by evidence.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Update on the "over 50% of Americans believe 9/11 was an inside job" front, on Page 7 of the following, you'll find:

4.6% of Americans believe in a US Gov't sponsored conspirary
26.3% of Americans believe the US Gov't let 9/11 happen
63.9% of Americans believe the "official story"

While I stand by my statement that truth is not a popularity contest, if it were I'd be on the winning side. Good to find the majority of my fellow citizens are not as gullible as some of the posters here would suggest.

Even better to find the trend is away from the half-truthers, as previously posted on 08/01/2006 the "let 9/11 happen" and "organized 9/11" groups together numbered 36%, a year later that was down to 31. Seems the more people think about these things the more it becomes apparent that Occam's razor is the tool to use.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Seems the more people think about these things the more it becomes apparent that [snip]

Resistance is futile... ;)

(Living in denial is far more comfy than living in a cardboard box.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Seems the more people think about these things the more it becomes apparent that [snip]

Resistance is futile... ;)

(Living in denial is far more comfy than living in a cardboard box.)

LOL, isn't it the half-truthers that all look alike in their black t-shirts? Isn't it they that repeat the same moronic nonsense again and again and again ("9/11 was an inside job").

Again with the accusation of denial, much like MrGray's "hassle free zone", it's so palpably wrong it's staggering. Denial is the first stage of grief, I got past that a long time ago.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

("9/11 was an inside job")

I don't blame Ronald McDonald nor the entire company when some goon behind the counter spits in my burger...

Nonetheless, that goon most certainly did spit in my burger... and most likely has spit in many other burgers...

This isn't about a 'conspiracy', this is about jack_@$$_e$ with an agenda abusing their positions of power... ;)

(Methinks you have me mistaken for someone else.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

("9/11 was an inside job")

I don't blame Ronald McDonald nor the entire company when some goon behind the counter spits in my burger...

Nonetheless, that goon most certainly did spit in my burger... and most likely has spit in many other burgers...

This isn't about a 'conspiracy', this is about jack_@$$_e$ with an agenda abusing their positions of power... ;)

(Methinks you have me mistaken for someone else.)

Apologies, I thought that you were suggesting I was part of some Borg collective for suggesting that the "official story" of 9/11 is likely to be the most accurate description of events.

I do realize that you and MrGray are separate entities, it may just be the particular circumstances that make it look like the two of you agree on almost every point of the discussion in this thread.

While I really hate to do this, and I really do, here's a link for those that have watched Loose Change and think that it might be a useful contribution to the 9/11 debate really ought to take the 178 mins (yeah nearly 3 hours, but if that's too much, watch any 15 minute segment you like, you'll get the idea) of the following googlevideo:

Loose Change - Not Freakin' Again edition

And I do mean any 15 minute segment, once you've seen that chances are that you'll have an appreciation of the remainder of the video, and the validity (or otherwise) of Loose Change's arguments.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I thought that you were suggesting I was part of some Borg collective

That's a topic for another thread and another time... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Now this is peculiar... they even made a movie... ;)

September 11, 1857

Mormons believed the US Army was trying to destroy their freedoms and their way of life...

Mormons mustered to fight against the US Army and murdered innocent men women and children...

Mormons tried to conceal the evidence and place the blame on the local Indians...

(Draw your own conclusions, but in my book, that's one heck of a 911 coincidence!)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Now this is peculiar... they even made a movie... ;)

September 11, 1857

Mormons believed the US Army was trying to destroy their freedoms and their way of life...

Mormons mustered to fight against the US Army and murdered innocent men women and children...

Mormons tried to conceal the evidence and place the blame on the local Indians...

(Draw your own conclusions, but in my book, that's one heck of a 911 coincidence!)

I think you might be on to something there 1+8+5+7 = 21, 2+1 = 3, 2+0+0+1 = 3, so the years add up to the same thing too! The parallels are clear, according to the wiki entry, the Mountain Meadows massacre started on 9/7, and on 9/7/2001 errm nothing, oh well, but on the wiki page about the movie:

Director Christopher Cain was prompted to make September Dawn because of his opinion that religious extremism is particularly relevant today.

Well now we're getting somewhere, religious extremism resulting in a massacre. I wonder if there's a day in the year where that kind of thing hasn't happened.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Draw your own conclusions

1+8+5+7 = 21, 2+1 = 3, 2+0+0+1 = 3, so the years add up to the same thing too!

I sure hope that you're not a 'scholar'... ;)

(I'm guessing that you argued AGAINST the mathematical miracle found in the Koran... But I digress!)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Getting back to the OP, the BBC show is being re-aired with additional footage tonight (10/26), including an interview with Michael Hess, the man the late Barry Jennings went to find. The editor of the show has his own blog, his encounters with the half-truthers make for an interesting read.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I had a dream last night. I asked american president of the 911 tragedy. He said, it's not a tragedy at all; the whole event was planned by media. And I believe in that.

I know of one anomaly, there has not been attack on US soil for over 7 years!

"National defense is one of the cardinal duties of a statesman." --John Adams

"In the seven years since 9/11, there were no further attacks on American soil. This is an argument that's been around for a while but is newly re-emerging as the final argument for [President] Bush: the one big thing he had to do after 9/11, the single thing he absolutely had to do, was keep it from happening again. And so far he has. It is unknown, and perhaps can't be known, whether this was fully due to the government's efforts, or the luck of the draw, or a combination of luck and effort. And it not only can't be fully known by the public, it can hardly be fully known by the players at all levels of government. They can't know, for instance, of a potential terrorist cell that didn't come together because of their efforts. But the meme will likely linger. There's a rough justice with the American people. If a president presides over prosperity, whether he had anything to do with it or not, he gets the credit. If he has a recession, he gets the blame. The same with war, and terrorist attacks. We have not been attacked since 9/11. Someone -- someones -- did something right." --columnist Peggy Noonan

"After more than 7 years since 9/11, we can now issue a verdict: Islamic terrorists have won our hearts and minds. Let's thank those who made it happen: the U.S. government, European governments and the mainstream media. It's time to stop placating or being intimidated by Islamic front groups who masquerade as civil rights groups. In 2007, the perversity of [this] was demonstrated when the FBI released its annual 2007 hate crime reports. Of the total 1,628 victims of anti-religious hate crimes, 69.2% were Jewish and 8.7% were Muslim. Yet by my still unfinished account, there were at least 40 times more stories last year about Islamophobia than about anti-Semitism. The Mumbai massacre was a heavily planned plot carried out by Islamic terrorists. Period. Memo to Obama: Until the onus of responsibility is put on Islamic 'civil rights' groups that want to ban free speech and claim that anyone who uses the term Islamic terrorist is a racist, there is no hope of winning the battle." --Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Steven Emerson

---

I know of one anomaly, there has not been attack on US soil for over 7 years!

[snip]

"We have not been attacked since 9/11. Someone -- someones -- did something right." --columnist Peggy Noonan

[snip]
"Memo to Obama: Until the onus of responsibility is put on Islamic 'civil rights' groups that want to ban free speech and claim that anyone who uses the term Islamic terrorist is a racist, there is no hope of winning the battle." --Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Steven Emerson

It was over 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC (2/26/93) and the second attack. So by your (and Peggy's) logic, everybody walking into WTC 1 or 2 on 9/11/2001 should have been thinking, "Nothing's happened in the past 8 years, what a wonderful job our gov't is doing to protect us from the terrorists". Right? Great.

As for the Islamic groups of Steven Emerson, the onus of responsibility for what exactly? All terrorist activities committed by people that claim they're Muslim? Does that mean that because some Americans have committed terrorist activities, all American 'civil rights' groups must take on the onus of responsibility for them? Absurd.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I know of one anomaly, there has not been attack on US soil for over 7 years!

[snip]

"We have not been attacked since 9/11. Someone -- someones -- did something right." --columnist Peggy Noonan

[snip]
"Memo to Obama: Until the onus of responsibility is put on Islamic 'civil rights' groups that want to ban free speech and claim that anyone who uses the term Islamic terrorist is a racist, there is no hope of winning the battle." --Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Steven Emerson

It was over 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC (2/26/93) and the second attack. [snip]

I said terrorists attacks, there were several that took place between the two WTC attacks. EX:
February 24, 1997: Ali Abu Kamal opens fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building in New York City, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France before turning the gun on himself. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claims this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine". His widow claimed he became suicidal after losing $300,000 in a business venture. In a 2007 interview with the New York Daily News his daughter said her mother's story was a cover crafted by the Palestinian Authority and that her father wanted to punish the United States for its support of Israel.[1]

As for the Islamic groups of Steven Emerson, the onus of responsibility for what exactly? All terrorist activities committed by people that claim they're Muslim? Does that mean that because some Americans have committed terrorist activities, all American 'civil rights' groups must take on the onus of responsibility for them? Absurd.

LOL, they aren't labeled terrorists because they are muslim. They are labeled "muslim extremists" because they blow up things.

---

I know of one anomaly, there has not been attack on US soil for over 7 years!

[snip]

"We have not been attacked since 9/11. Someone -- someones -- did something right." --columnist Peggy Noonan

[snip]
"Memo to Obama: Until the onus of responsibility is put on Islamic 'civil rights' groups that want to ban free speech and claim that anyone who uses the term Islamic terrorist is a racist, there is no hope of winning the battle." --Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Steven Emerson

It was over 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC (2/26/93) and the second attack. [snip]

I said terrorists attacks, there were several that took place between the two WTC attacks. EX:
February 24, 1997: Ali Abu Kamal opens fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building in New York City, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France before turning the gun on himself. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claims this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine". His widow claimed he became suicidal after losing $300,000 in a business venture. In a 2007 interview with the New York Daily News his daughter said her mother's story was a cover crafted by the Palestinian Authority and that her father wanted to punish the United States for its support of Israel.[1]

As for the Islamic groups of Steven Emerson, the onus of responsibility for what exactly? All terrorist activities committed by people that claim they're Muslim? Does that mean that because some Americans have committed terrorist activities, all American 'civil rights' groups must take on the onus of responsibility for them? Absurd.

LOL, they aren't labeled terrorists because they are muslim. They are labeled "muslim extremists" because they blow up things.

So this is simply wrong then, and:

2008 July 27 Jim D. Adkisson opened fire in the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville,Tennessee killing two and injuring seven before being tackled to the ground by congregation members. A note found in his SUV indicated this was intended as a suicide attack and said the church was apparently targeted because of its support of liberal social policies.

or:

2002 July 4: Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, a 41-year-old Egyptian national, kills two Israelis and wounds four others at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport. The FBI concluded this was terrorism, although they found no evidence linking Hadayet to any terrorist group.

are not examples of terrorism (regardless of what the FBI say), because they happened in the US after 9/11? Right.

I think you're dodging the second part. However you label the terrorists, what responsibility lies with the Islamic 'civil rights' groups? For that matter, what groups specifically should have this responsibility, any and all "Islamic 'civil rights' groups"?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...