You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #188: What was the level of proof for the prior indictments? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #179
188. What was the level of proof for the prior indictments?
> First of all, thanks for changing the tone of this sub thread.

Thanks to responding positively to my olive branch. I started with the snarkiness first, so I thought it was appropriate to try to tone it down.

> With regards to the Bush Doctrine, I don't know if I believe that the Afghanistan war really falls in the first
> element you listed.

At the time of the invasion, it didn't, since it hadn't been formally articulated yet. Bush justified the invasion post-facto one year after 9/11, at least if my memory serves me.

> First off, as listed in the OP, the taliban initially offered to hand over anyone thought to be involved with
> the attacks so long as the U.S. government offered proof they were involved. After that, the taliban offered to
> hand Bin Laden over to Pakistan even without proof.

I think the problem with handing bin Laden over to Pakistan was that Pakistan was largely sympathetic to the Taliban and Islamic militancy in general. The Pakistanis served as the conduit for much of the hardware we sent into Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, and their ISI was rife with Taliban sympathizer (and may still be).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/taliban/intervi...

> They said then that if the U.S. offered any proof, they'd then extradite Bin Laden to the U.S. Time for Change
> does a really good job of covering this in his OP (full disclosure, I'm TfC's son).

I think that was a pretty safe offer to make, since there was no obvious (to me at least) way to prove his culpability at the time. If we had pursued this in the World court, things could have dragged on for years. Slobodan Milosevic died of old age five years afer he was indicted by the World Court. Then there was the additional problem of even apprehending him. The Taliban could have waffled forever, blaming the rough terrain and ambiguity of the border with Pakistan for their inability to take him into custody.

> As for the majority of Americans agreeing with the Afghanistan invasion, that really doesn't mean much at all to
> me. Supposedly, the majority of Americans supported GWB and at one time, the majority of Americans supported
> slavery.

Well you're exactly right about that. Tyranny of the Majority I think it's called. The rule of law should always trump popular opinion. But wouldn't you agree that this was an (almost) unprecedented event? Afghanistan did not attack us, but their guests (allegedly) did. I'm not aware of any international standards that addressed an attack on a state by a stateless entity.

> As for the cognitive dissonance you see regarding me not believing that Bin Laden was involved with 9/11 and yet
> still wanting to see him dead, I think that can be explained rather easily. There are many dispicable acts that
> I have very little doubt that OBL did do. He's wanted for terrorist acts by the FBI, including the embassy
> bombings in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi. Also, he's been indicted by the Spanish government for his involvement
> with the 2004 Madrid train bombings.

What was the standard of evidence used to indict him for these crimes? Forensic or circumstantial? Did al Qaeda operatives testify against him? And as a practical matter, he can be indicted all day long, but unless he turns himself in or someone goes in to get him, a conviction is unlikely to be forthcoming.

> As for why Bin Laden wouldn't have claimed it was fake, I'm not entirely certain. There are so many
> inconsistencies pertaining to the events surrounding 9/11, it's hard to find a single thread that ties
> everything together and makes sense.

We're in violent agreement on that.

> I certainly don't buy the official government explanation, and probably never will.

The 9/11 Commission Report was a total whitewash - agree 100%. What I'm not sure of is whether the intention was to cover asses or something more sinister.

> However, I look at various conspiracy theories and there doesn't seem to be a thread to tie them together as
> well. One possible reason could be that Bin Laden is now dead. Another reason I can think of is that he benefits
> by taking responsibility. It's very easy to make the argument that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars have been
> extremely good for recruiting violent extremists.

No doubt on both counts. I think this was certainly anticipated by most thinking people. Iraq especially has provided a very compelling argment that we are engaged in wars of aggression against Muslims.

At the end of the day I have no good legal arguments for the invasion of Afghanistan. My reasoning is that the Taliban were playing games with us and that they would have taken advantage of the civilized worlds' adherence to law to avoid ever having to turn him over. The only practical way to bring him to justice was to go get him.

I know this action has turned out badly, as has everything else Bush has done. It would be very interesting to see how a Gore or Kerry would have handled the whole affair.

Anyway, hope you had a good Thanksgiving. I don't expect we'll agree on the whole Afghan business, except that Bush has certainly screwed it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Why Bush Cant Allow Habeas Corpus And Why we Need to Leave Afghanistan Time for change  Nov-22-08 09:45 PM   #0 
  - Bin laden denied responsibility for the 9/11 attacks from the beginning  seemslikeadream   Nov-22-08 09:49 PM   #1 
  - If bin Laden had done it,  HeresyLives   Nov-22-08 09:52 PM   #2 
  - That's what I think  Time for change   Nov-23-08 01:45 AM   #9 
  - i think we need to leave the Muslims to themselves, whatever the consequences, because ..  sam sarrha   Nov-22-08 09:57 PM   #3 
  - I do not give a flying fuck in the Afghans eat each others' children  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 04:26 PM   #40 
     - but we need evidence to support that assertion....  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 07:29 PM   #51 
     - Bill, read your own link... there is no mis-translation of the admission of guilt.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:53 PM   #53 
     - eyes only  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:32 PM   #126 
  - "Not a "Good War" Gone Bad"  JohnyCanuck   Nov-22-08 10:13 PM   #4 
  - 1 other reason/factor  Aragorn   Nov-23-08 07:52 AM   #18 
  - True  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 08:17 AM   #19 
  - "..an unjust, imperialist war of empire,.." should be a no-brainer,  G_j   Nov-23-08 08:45 PM   #62 
  - Another reason Afghanistan is NOT our "good" war.  aquart   Nov-22-08 10:15 PM   #5 
  - The Bush administration promised we the people  gratuitous   Nov-22-08 10:25 PM   #6 
  - WOW - Does Obama Know????? nt  Traveling_Home   Nov-22-08 10:43 PM   #7 
  - He knows or he's ignorant.  Oregone   Nov-22-08 11:11 PM   #8 
  - Ah yes, PIPELINES..  Karenina   Nov-23-08 03:28 AM   # 
  - Jesus Christ. Is it 2002 again?  theboss   Nov-26-08 01:35 PM   #178 
  - Ah yes, PIPELINES..  Karenina   Nov-23-08 03:28 AM   #13 
     - Indeed. The pipelines  RufusTFirefly   Nov-23-08 09:55 AM   #22 
        - A carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs...  Karenina   Nov-23-08 10:31 AM   #23 
  - I don't see how he could not  Time for change   Nov-23-08 12:35 PM   #25 
  - Thank you for this and k&r!  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 01:56 AM   #10 
  - Yes and I always think the answer to that question is  illuminaughty   Nov-23-08 03:23 AM   #12 
  - "Smirk." - Commander AWOL & cabal of corrupt republicon cronies  SpiralHawk   Nov-23-08 06:47 AM   #17 
  - Thanks for so clearly laying this out.  BlueMTexpat   Nov-23-08 03:12 AM   #11 
  - "I have always maintained that our launching a war against Afghanistan after 9-11 was not justified"  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 05:28 AM   #15 
  - Wow man. Mind blowing. Bush-Co never ceases to amaze me.  DUlover2909   Nov-23-08 04:15 AM   #14 
  - The Gipper in effect threw us a $1 trillion party: junior's policies and actions/inactions  indepat   Nov-23-08 07:23 PM   #49 
  - And what IS the incentive for the "War On Terror" and presence in Afghanistan (and all the Stans)?  Dover   Nov-23-08 06:21 AM   #16 
  - Excellent bit  Orwellian_Ghost   Nov-24-08 08:09 AM   #76 
  - A Timeline Of Oil And Violence Afghanistan  OmmmSweetOmmm   Nov-23-08 08:25 AM   #20 
  - Interesting link, thanks. Wish they would update it to present.  Dover   Nov-23-08 03:06 PM   #32 
  - Another great thread  malaise   Nov-23-08 08:31 AM   #21 
  - TFC, you're one of the main reasons I stay tuned to DU!  nashville_brook   Nov-23-08 11:24 AM   #24 
  - Thank you very much nashville  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:25 PM   #60 
  - T/C - you do know that Obama plans to send more troops to Afghanistan - right?  pirhana   Nov-23-08 01:02 PM   #26 
  - Sure  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:24 PM   #59 
  - Twoofer BS  Odin2005   Nov-23-08 01:17 PM   #27 
  - you want Usama's head on a pike but Bush does not! nt  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 01:36 PM   #28 
  - No contry in history has ever survived the occupation of Afganistan  Phred42   Nov-23-08 02:39 PM   #31 
  - Comparing the Soviet occupation to the American's is a facile analogy.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 08:03 PM   #55 
     - Your assumptions puzzle me. What evidence do you have that  Mithreal   Nov-24-08 03:51 AM   #71 
        - We're not fighting a proxy war with a *superpower*. We are fighting  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 08:33 AM   #78 
           - The Russians had their hands full in Georgia.  Swede   Nov-24-08 11:33 AM   #84 
              - Good article - so it really wasn't a cakewalk at all. nt  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:11 PM   #89 
  - Why?  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:22 PM   #38 
     - Afgansitan needs to be stablized so it can't be a haven for A-Q and the Taliban.  Odin2005   Nov-23-08 04:41 PM   #42 
        - What makes you think that Afghanistan won't turn out to be another Iraq or Vietnam  Time for change   Nov-23-08 05:03 PM   #43 
  - So if Bin Laden didn't do 9/11  BecauseBushSaysSo   Nov-23-08 02:20 PM   #29 
  - False Flag. It was an inside job  Phred42   Nov-23-08 02:37 PM   #30 
     - I agree  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:21 PM   #58 
  - "bin Laden didn't do it" is not a convincing reason to abandon Afghanistan,  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 03:09 PM   #33 
  - What reason would you give to stay there and  Time for change   Nov-23-08 03:35 PM   #34 
     - You might want to re-examine "Assuming that the Afghanis don't want us there."  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 03:55 PM   #35 
        - Why ARE we in Afghanistan to begin with?  Dover   Nov-23-08 04:06 PM   #36 
        - Because failed states result in worldwide proliferation of  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 11:39 PM   #66 
           - I hope you are being sarcastic.....you are actually quoting Busholini in your statement..  KoKo01   Nov-24-08 12:05 PM   #87 
        - Here's a re-examination:  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:14 PM   #37 
        - Oh, wow, "Worker's World." I trust their opinion, especially when it's offered without any support  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 11:40 PM   #67 
           - Talk about intellectually insulated  Time for change   Nov-24-08 11:23 AM   #83 
        - Absolutely spot-on in every point. Thanks. nt  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 08:05 PM   #56 
  - It never ceases to amuse (and amaze) me that people who  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 04:24 PM   #39 
  - Those tapes are very controversial  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:31 PM   #41 
  - Look at the bigger picture... al Qaeda declared war on the US in 1998  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:46 PM   #52 
     - The bigger picture  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:20 PM   #57 
        - I respectfully disagree - the Taliban were playing games.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 10:27 PM   #65 
  - Which Bin Laden?  arikara   Nov-23-08 06:20 PM   #45 
     - Are you aware of the PAL to NTSC conversion issue?  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:16 PM   #47 
        - not very persuasive! nt  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 07:24 PM   #50 
           - It's only non-pesuasive if one is ignorant of the technical issue.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:57 PM   #54 
           - Ridiculous. What about line doubling?  EOTE   Nov-24-08 07:08 AM   #74 
              - Simple PAL to NTSC converters just throw away every fifth line.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 08:20 AM   #77 
                 - Both vertical and horizontal resolution is tossed.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 09:00 AM   #79 
                    - You're full of beans. Analog video does not contain pixels, only  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:38 AM   #80 
                    - And what are those lines comprised of?  EOTE   Nov-24-08 10:13 AM   #81 
                       - What is the resolution of an analog TV set?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 11:56 AM   #85 
                          - The NTSC standard is 480x720.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 12:08 PM   #88 
                          - You should quit while you're behind.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:29 PM   #91 
                             - Analog video does not contain pixels, only lines of resolution.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 01:00 PM   #93 
                          - And read this if you want to find out why horizontal resolution typically isn't listed.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 12:15 PM   #90 
                             - Well, thanks for proving my point. This is what I have been trying to explain to you.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:33 PM   #92 
                                - Output resolution, not input resolution.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 01:06 PM   #94 
                                   - At this point you're just arguing with yourself. nt  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:19 PM   #101 
                                   - I'll take that as a concession.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 02:38 PM   #104 
                                      - OK, please explain for us how a cheap analog converter handles  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:46 PM   #106 
                                         - They "squash" the image horizontally just as it is done vertically.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 03:03 PM   #111 
                                            - Oh, I understand that it can be done correctly using a digital  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:27 PM   #117 
                                            - Because once he denied it, the cat is out of the bag.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 03:46 PM   #118 
                                            - EOTE, Thanks for the info regarding video....  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 04:32 PM   #127 
                                            - No problem.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 04:47 PM   #128 
                                            - I'm in complete agreement on that also. thanks for the response. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 05:10 PM   #129 
                                            - You continue to ignore data that conflicts with your pre-conceived notions.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:39 PM   #138 
                                            - You've got some nerve talking about ignoring data.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 06:02 AM   #142 
                                            - Semantics 101  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 02:27 PM   #150 
                                            - You are some piece of work.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 03:11 PM   #152 
                                            - You are incapable of understanding a simple concept...  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:08 PM   #156 
                                            - Why has Bush not provided any evidence of Bin Laden's involvement?  EOTE   Nov-25-08 05:31 PM   #159 
                                            - Self-delete  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:41 PM   #160 
                                            - There was a strong chain of evidence of al Qaeda attacks on US interests going  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 08:20 PM   #167 
                                            - Once again you launch into the non-sequitors.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 08:45 PM   #168 
                                            - Deleted message  Name removed   Nov-25-08 10:31 PM   #170 
                                            - Have yourself another big helping of fail.  EOTE   Nov-26-08 09:28 AM   #171 
                                            - Epic WIN!  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:16 PM   #172 
                                            - You too! You can have my extra portion of stuffing :)  EOTE   Nov-26-08 12:17 PM   #173 
                                            - Thank you. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:34 PM   #175 
                                            - Bill, reading has never been your strong suit, so here's some help....  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 12:28 PM   #174 
                                            - I read as well as you.  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:41 PM   #176 
                                            - You were right about the Bush Doctrine and I was wrong.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 01:33 PM   #177 
                                            - I'll try to reply one by one.  EOTE   Nov-26-08 08:15 PM   #179 
                                            - What was the level of proof for the prior indictments?  Flatulo   Nov-28-08 09:47 PM   #188 
                                            - technically it was first known as "the wolfowitz doctrine" and the primary author was guess who?  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 10:23 PM   #180 
                                            - I completely oppose the notion of pre-emptive war.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 11:09 PM   #183 
                                            - does the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you?  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 10:56 PM   #181 
                                            - I reply below.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 04:22 PM   #124 
                                   - Here's a good article on how NTSC video works....  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 10:02 PM   #139 
                                      - None of this changes anything.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 06:22 AM   #143 
                    - Did you see this article from Muckraker?  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 06:26 PM   #164 
           - It's rather easy to demonstrate  anigbrowl   Jan-04-09 07:31 PM   #193 
  - Because he can't pronounce Habeas Corpus?  DailyGrind51   Nov-23-08 05:10 PM   #44 
  - Robert Fisk on dj double-vu in Afghanistan  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 06:38 PM   #46 
  - Isn't that the truth.  Time for change   Nov-23-08 07:18 PM   #48 
  - Gates and the Urge to Surge  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 08:40 PM   #61 
  - no smoking gun for nine one one  reinvestigate911   Nov-23-08 09:23 PM   #63 
  - Maybe no smoking guns, but certainly some powder burns and fingerprints.  balantz   Nov-23-08 11:46 PM   #68 
  - claims of no-planes and "video fakery" are part the disinformation campaign  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:13 PM   #99 
     - It was a media psyops job. What corporate entities own the media? n/t  balantz   Nov-24-08 02:54 PM   #108 
     - i suppose the media psyops also created the airplane debris that crushed pedestrians...?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:07 PM   #121 
        - I'm not calling you a disinfo agent, though I could attack you like you are me.  balantz   Nov-24-08 04:29 PM   #125 
           - evidence of aircraft parts directly refute the so-called no-planes "theory"  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 06:22 AM   #144 
     - The funny thing about the Truth Movement is that each camp  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:05 PM   #113 
        - presence of these hare-brained "theorists" should tell you something--or do you deny counter-intel?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:10 PM   #122 
           - Why do you assume that there are no people dumb enough to believe in no-planes  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:27 PM   #136 
              - you cannot disprove the existence of what people call god. no-planes can be disproven.  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 07:07 AM   #145 
                 - Heh, I agree, but no-planers would call you a fool.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 01:50 PM   #148 
                    - it might proven that i am a fool... just show me a survivor who believes there was no planes.  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 09:21 PM   #169 
                       - Time for a second helping of crow.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 10:59 PM   #182 
                          - just saw this  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 11:41 PM   #184 
  - Thank you for all these links  Time for change   Nov-24-08 06:43 AM   #72 
     - check this one out  reinvestigate911   Nov-27-08 12:16 PM   #185 
  - K&R !  G_j   Nov-23-08 09:23 PM   #64 
  - I have a compromise: We still find and kill OBL, but refuse to do any nation building/occupying  anonymous171   Nov-24-08 12:05 AM   #69 
  - OBL not wanted for the crime of 9/11  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 12:42 AM   #70 
     - And as Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio bear witness,  JohnyCanuck   Nov-24-08 06:49 AM   #73 
     - anthrax letters, clearly false-flag terrorism  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:54 PM   #96 
     - OBL is already on the 10 most wanted list. How many times would you like him to be listed?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:00 PM   #86 
        - let's ask washington, shall we?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:44 PM   #95 
        - guess you missed that silly movie on this very topic  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:58 PM   #97 
        - Go here...  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:10 PM   #98 
           - .. and he's not listed for the crime. what's your point?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:19 PM   #100 
              - My point is that he's one the top-10 list. He was on it before 9/11.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:30 PM   #102 
              - considering FBI's rex tomb said No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11 that's relevent how?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:36 PM   #103 
              - bin Laden didn't hijack or pilot any of the aircraft. So no, there is no  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:49 PM   #107 
                 - did i say bush did it?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:10 PM   #115 
              - you've been lied to, friend  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:40 PM   #105 
              - Ah, the Big Gun of the Truth Movement... ...YouTube!  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:55 PM   #109 
                 - be as snarky as you like but "press for truth" is sourced entirely from mainstream media...  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:03 PM   #112 
                    - Oh, I don't pretend to know the truth. Please don't put those words  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:16 PM   #116 
                       - i suggest you engage those college-honed critical thinking skills you paid so much money for and...  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:50 PM   #119 
                       - Wow, did you just watch 'Network' this afternoon?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:35 PM   #137 
                          - nah - but you seem to be pretty out of touch with ideas contained therein  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 07:22 AM   #146 
                             - No, I'm completely familiar with the premise of your screed.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 01:51 PM   #149 
                                - you just take joy in debate then?  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 03:19 PM   #154 
                                   - I've been hanging out here for a few years now, mostly in the Dungeon.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 04:55 PM   #155 
                                      - your assertion is simply untrue  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 05:46 PM   #161 
                                      - Alrighty then, I guess we're done here...  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 06:19 PM   #163 
                                      - sounds more like you're done  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 06:49 PM   #165 
                                      - just a sec  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 05:53 PM   #162 
                       - the purpose of any investigation....  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 03:15 PM   #153 
                          - So should we investigate space beams and mini-nukes?  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:13 PM   #157 
                             - "we" won't be investigating anything.  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 05:19 PM   #158 
              - Did you happen to read in the OP the reason why 9/11 is not listed as one of bin Laden's crimes  Time for change   Nov-24-08 04:15 PM   #123 
              - Your YouTubing is seriously out of date. Go here to see the  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:02 PM   #110 
                 - youtubing? it's from the BBC. maybe you should send them this link in order to redact their story?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:08 PM   #114 
                    - Great job man!  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 05:35 PM   #130 
                       - I'm curious, do you also agree with his post 121? n/t  balantz   Nov-24-08 06:17 PM   #131 
                       - I do believe disinfo is used to foil any prospect of investigation...  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 07:44 PM   #132 
                          - I agree with that. But attempts to discredit with disinfo aren't limited to one research area.  balantz   Nov-24-08 08:02 PM   #133 
                             - i don't know anyone stupid enough to deny the fact that airplanes collided with WTC towers 1 & 2  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 08:48 PM   #134 
                                - I know plenty of people stupid enough to believe in no-planes.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 10:07 PM   #140 
                                   - for those who haven't seen the argument against this "theory"  reinvestigate911   Nov-28-08 07:07 PM   #186 
                       - thank you, and i appreciate the welcome  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 08:16 AM   #147 
        - once is enough.....  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #151 
           - There is hard evidence. The media record. n/t  balantz   Nov-25-08 08:12 PM   #166 
              - one more time for the thinking impaired  reinvestigate911   Nov-28-08 07:32 PM   #187 
  - K&R  valerief   Nov-24-08 07:53 AM   #75 
  - Americas Wars of Self-Destruction  JohnyCanuck   Nov-24-08 10:39 AM   #82 
  - If You Want To Know Why  Mark D.   Nov-24-08 03:59 PM   #120 
  - Kicking  Orwellian_Ghost   Nov-24-08 09:07 PM   #135 
  - kick. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 12:28 AM   #141 
  - Russian experience in Afghanistan and Why we don't torture  WilliamHenryMee   Nov-28-08 11:43 PM   #189 
  - a kick  Twist_U_Up   Jan-04-09 11:17 AM   #190 
  - and a plummet  boloboffin   Jan-04-09 11:26 AM   #191 
     - you don't make yourself look too intelligent.  Twist_U_Up   Jan-04-09 06:14 PM   #192 
  - So how do we get Obama to reveal the truth?  I814U   Jan-05-09 03:08 PM   #194 
     - I suggesting hiding and watching.  boloboffin   Jan-05-09 06:07 PM   #195 
        - You know what you get when you hide and watch criminals?  I814U   Jan-06-09 11:59 AM   #196 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC