When did they ID AA77's parts?

page: 16
12
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


Again - is that information released to the public when the investigation is ongoing? And more particularly - when issues of national security are involved?

And, you've already stated that all the information is "contaminated" by virtue of persons allegedly taking away items from the scene so what good are paper reports?




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Again - is that information released to the public when the investigation is ongoing? And more particularly - when issues of national security are involved?


What ongoing investigation? Are you saying the official story is not correct because ther is still an ongoing investigation?

What issue of national security?


And, you've already stated that all the information is "contaminated" by virtue of persons allegedly taking away items from the scene so what good are paper reports?


There is no allegedly about it, i showed the FBI site stating that FBI employees took items.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



What ongoing investigation?


OBL and other members of AQ have yet to be brought to justice. Ergo the case is still open.


What issue of national security?


Are you serious?


There is no allegedly about it, i showed the FBI site stating that FBI employees took items.


So answer the question - why are so anxious to get your hands on reports that YOU believe are essentialy fiction?

[edit on 20-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
OBL and other members of AQ have yet to be brought to justice. Ergo the case is still open.


As stated before the FBI and DOJ have already stated there is no evidence to link OBL and AQ to 9/11.



So answer the question - why are so anxious to get your hands on reports that YOU believe are essentialy fiction?


I am hoping to get the actual facts and evidence of what happened that day. I do not know why you have such a problem with wanting to find the truth.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

As stated before the FBI and DOJ have already stated there is no evidence to link OBL and AQ to 9/11.


I've seen some evidence that might suggest that OBL didn't have much to do with 9/11, but can you point me to where the FBI have stated there's no evidence of Al-Q involvement?

This is a genuine question - I have tried searching myself but can't find anything.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I've seen some evidence that might suggest that OBL didn't have much to do with 9/11, but can you point me to where the FBI have stated there's no evidence of Al-Q involvement?

This is a genuine question - I have tried searching myself but can't find anything.


Well OBL is the leader of AQ.

www.globalresearch.ca...
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.”



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



As stated before the FBI and DOJ have already stated there is no evidence to link OBL and AQ to 9/11.


So I guess naming them as co-conspirators numerous times in the Mossaoi trial means there is no evidence?


I am hoping to get the actual facts and evidence of what happened that day. I do not know why you have such a problem with wanting to find the truth.


I know enough of the truth to know what happened that day to my (and everyone else's) satisfaction and I am mature enough to know that certain things will remain forever unknown. However these unknown facts are not necessarily relevant to the situation.

You have repeatedly stated that the "crime scene" was contaminated so what "facts" could possibly be derived from the reports of a contaminated crime scene?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Well OBL is the leader of AQ.


www.globalresearch.ca...
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.”



Well hang on, that's not quite the same thing, is it? You said there was no evidence to link Al-Qaeda to 9/11, but that's not what he's saying. Indeed he only mentions Bin Laden.

I mean, Al-Qaeda aren't listed at the Companies Register. You can't sift through their corporate structure like you can with Vodafone. They're a disparate multinational terrorist network with many splinter groups and influential individuals. Just because there isn't any "hard evidence" linking someone who may have been one of those individuals to 9/11 doesn't mean the entity as a whole had nothing to do with it.

Take the Detroit bomb. In all likelihood OBL had nothing to do with it. But Al-Q definitely did.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
I know enough of the truth to know what happened that day to my (and everyone else's) satisfaction and I am mature enough to know that certain things will remain forever unknown. However these unknown facts are not


How can you know the truth if the investigation is still ongoing and most and evidence and the official reports have not been released yet?

Basically its your OPINION of what happened not the truth.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


At some point, when billions of people have the same "opinion" it becomes a little more than a subjective point of view.

The investigation is opened to the extent that not all parties have been brought to justice, not factual discovery as to what happened.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
The investigation is opened to the extent that not all parties have been brought to justice, not factual discovery as to what happened.


Oh another opinion. How do you know there is no factual dscovery as to what happened.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join