It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will Osama's capture end the 9/11 theories?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Well somebody had to give some kind of instructions, so that an object could travel for 40+ minutes to the pentagon without being intercepted.


That sounds like you're all but admitting you've been hypothesizing without any basis in fact whatsoever. I shouldn't have to tell you that offering baseless hypothesis as proof of some sinister plot to take over the world is in fact conspiracy mongoring. What concerns me is that out of all the possible rational hypothesis for the lack of interception, such as planes flying over the Appalachean mountains without transponders being impossible to pick up from DC until they're almost on to of them, you instinctively gravitate toward the most sinister sounding ones.

Here's a hypothesis for you- if they had captured OBL instead of killing him, and he confessed fully to being behind the 9/11 attack, would you believe it or would you look for excuses as to why you shouldn't believe it?




posted on May, 2 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Bin Laden wasn't wanted for the 911 attacks.

So why would this stop 9/11 theories?

Except maybe the OS?



posted on May, 2 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 



Bin Laden wasn't wanted for the 911 attacks.

Yes he was.

So why would this stop 9/11 theories?

There you have a point. Since the theories are completely removed from reality why would a change in reality affect them?

Except maybe the OS?

Well, yes it does affect the OS. Now the OS includes the death of OBL by American Forces in Pakistan.



posted on May, 2 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by descartes90
does this prove he is guilty?

what do you think?


Does capturing him prove he's guilty?

No, but I guess that's as close to "proof" for the OS as you're ever going to get anyway, so why not?



posted on May, 3 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 



"The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden with the 9/11 attacks on america" - FBI spokesman Rex Tomb

On June 5, 2006, reporter Ed Hass contacted the FBI Headquarters to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. He spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Ladens Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”


I checked the FBI most wanted page many many times. If Bin Laden was wanted for 911 it was a very recent addition.



edit on 3-5-2011 by jprophet420 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


You should have checked the most wanted terrorists list with the State Department. You would have found Osama wanted in connection with 9/11/01.

Of course, this is what the FBI has to say about the subject

www.fbi.gov...
edit on 3-5-2011 by vipertech0596 because: added



posted on May, 3 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Now you are hypothesizing again, while it is again the other side and always has been, that revolves around facts, like the fact that the buildings came down of a sudden, instead of gradually aching due to stress from fire weakened steel according to the official conspiracy theory. An airliner with or without transponder is quite easy to track. Radar is used for that. For it to reach the Pentagon in a flight of almost an hour steps from within had to be taken to prevent and interception, there is no talking away that point.



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by jprophet420
 


You should have checked the most wanted terrorists list with the State Department. You would have found Osama wanted in connection with 9/11/01.

Of course, this is what the FBI has to say about the subject

www.fbi.gov...
edit on 3-5-2011 by vipertech0596 because: added


That's whats nice about the internet. People cache it and take "snaposhots" so that when the story gets changed you know. To understand why is whats important here.

Also, this really illustrates departments NOT working together as they should have been both pre and post 911.



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by descartes90
 


If i raid your house in the middle of the night and 'double tap' you in the head and chest, does this prove your guilty of 9/11 ?



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Now you are hypothesizing again, while it is again the other side and always has been, that revolves around facts, like the fact that the buildings came down of a sudden, instead of gradually aching due to stress from fire weakened steel according to the official conspiracy theory. An airliner with or without transponder is quite easy to track. Radar is used for that. For it to reach the Pentagon in a flight of almost an hour steps from within had to be taken to prevent and interception, there is no talking away that point.


Baloney. If your side had even a microbe of proof to back up these inane claims of controlled demolitions, cruise missiles at the Pentagon, lasers from outer space, or whatever, you'd actually be posting it all over creation. You wouldn't need to resort to all these grasping at straws antics of innuendo dropping. quote mining, and five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" games. Come on now, seriously, how can you people even remotely confuse "does the order still stand" with "stand down order"? That's intentional embellishment and you know it.

As for the radar thing, no, I'm not hypothesizing, I actually read it. The whole reason they even have transponders is for aircraft to announce to the world who they are, and when it's turned off the only way ground controllers can pick them up is by their radar reflection, which is subseptible to false reflections from ground objects liek mountains. Not that it matters, since this whole "they should have picked them up on radar" bit is nothing but innuendo dropping on your part anyway.

So, when I say that Osama's death won't make a lick of difference becuase the conspiracy people will still continue to believe what they want to believe, how is this showing me to be wrong, precisely?



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
If the US administration really had discovered OBL recently they could have captured him, gained a full public confession of his involvement in the planning and carrying out of 9/11, and found out any other individuals or groups that were involved in 9/11 and other terrorist incidents.

What better way would there have been for the leaders of the democratic free world to conduct their affairs than clearly demonstrate OBL's guilt and show that the rule of law - even in a war situation must prevail.

Instead they chose to execute him outside the rule of law as an act of revenge and we are expected to believe that the alleged tape confession that the CIA have is enough proof of his involvement in 9/11.

If anything the US governments recent actions have muddied the waters of the 9/11 debate and they have missed an opportunity for truth, honesty, justice and closure to run its course.

I guess the question you have to ask yourself is why...



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I was just thinking about this actually. Glad you made a thread.

I still believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Every time I read the official story I smell doo doo. When you look into it for yourself it doesn't make sense.

Although I see many here on ATS saying this is Osama's crime. I just came from another thread questioning "Innocent until proven guilty" The OP thinks they killed him to hide their own mistakes so truth won't leak out of the court room. Which is very plausible.

It's not very big but check it out:

Osama Assassination: Whatever Happened To "Innocent Until Proven Guilty?"



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vanishr
reply to post by descartes90
 


If i raid your house in the middle of the night and 'double tap' you in the head and chest, does this prove your guilty of 9/11 ?


I don't expect a raid in the middle of the night but I haven't made videos like this :-

www.youtube.com...



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyestotheskies
If the US administration really had discovered OBL recently they could have captured him, gained a full public confession of his involvement in the planning and carrying out of 9/11, and found out any other individuals or groups that were involved in 9/11 and other terrorist incidents.

What better way would there have been for the leaders of the democratic free world to conduct their affairs than clearly demonstrate OBL's guilt and show that the rule of law - even in a war situation must prevail.

Instead they chose to execute him outside the rule of law as an act of revenge and we are expected to believe that the alleged tape confession that the CIA have is enough proof of his involvement in 9/11.

If anything the US governments recent actions have muddied the waters of the 9/11 debate and they have missed an opportunity for truth, honesty, justice and closure to run its course.

I guess the question you have to ask yourself is why...



Actually, anything those SEALs did would have been outside the law because this was a secret mission into another country which that country's authorities didn't know anything about. Capture would have been as much outside the law as killing.

However, this situation was hardly normal. 3000 innocent people were murdered in the US and it seems to me that it is pretty obvious that the Pakistani authorities, or parts thereof, must have been shielding the head of Al-Qaeda.

So, if it was illegal to capture or kill him what does it matter which action was taken ? Having learnt of his whereabouts the US could hardly ignore the whole thing.

I personally am more concerned about the feelings of the relatives of the victims than I am about OBL's supposed legal rights. If he had been taken back to the US for trial it would have dragged on for years and provided a pulpit from which OBL could have justified the attacks. As it is I feel many relatives have a sense of closure, and I have seen them saying this, and they have waited a long long time already.

Having OBL in custody in the US would also have been an open invitation to hostage taking of American citizens throughout the world. So I say good riddance whatever the strict legal niceties.



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyestotheskies

If anything the US governments recent actions have muddied the waters of the 9/11 debate and they have missed an opportunity for truth, honesty, justice and closure to run its course.

I guess the question you have to ask yourself is why...



Because they don't care about the "9/11 debate".



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
end? if anything I believe the capture will raise more questions as to why they don't want us seeing his body, and the fact that they buried him in 24 hours. I don't know about you but by now only the most ignorant sheep of them all would not be asking questions and celebrating like the rest of them.




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join