"...[T]he US is lecturing India not to go off half-cocked and attack Pakistan, simply because all of the attackers in the terrorist assaults in that city arrived by boat, apparently from neighboring Pakistan."

Gee, I wonder why the US is recommending such an approach? Could it be related to the fact that the two countries were on the brink on nuclear war a few years ago in 2001/2002 - click here ? Of course, though, who is the US to lecture these two on the use of nuclear weapons where the US is the only country to have actually used a nuclear device on another country? Some people DO learn from their mistakes and don't want others to make the same ones.

"US officials... are calling on India to engage in a "transparent" and "thorough" investigation into the attacks to establish who was responsible. How different this is from the American government's response to the 9-11 attacks in the US!"

Hmmm... Have you forgotten about these statements and investigations that occurred in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks?

September 27, 2001 - http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/092701hjpic.htm

October 2, 2001 - http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress01/caruso100301.htm

October 12, 2001 - click here and more documents here: http://www.epa.gov/wtc/documents.htm

November 27, 2001 - click here

May 2002 - http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_cover-toc.pdf

January 2003 - http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

July 24, 2003 - http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/911rpt/

Given the confusion of that day and the enormity of the events (not to mention the increased confusion from the anthrax attacks that followed a few weeks later), I think the investigative responses were quite thorough but not very unified in their differing foci and approaches.

But... once the above-referenced reports were released and reviewed, the need for other investigations was made clear. And thus, we had the more thorough and detailed 9/11 Commission and NIST reports.

Do you recall these statements and investigations, Mr. Lindorff? I trust you're not dismissing them as being "nothing". They represent America's initial response to an horrific act; a response that you have flippantly dismissed as non-existent.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2103 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:16:20 AM

  (0+)

Hey Bush crossed the line when he did not go through the United Nations.  It would have oked Afghanistan.  Not a very good example for others to follow.

by Michael Dewey (5 articles, 1 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 245 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03:12 AM

  (0+)

"So, you mean that's why it didn't attack Pakistan even though about 17 of the alleged hijackers were from that country."

Ah... *scratches head*  you're trying to trick me, huh?  15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis - not Pakistani - https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2002/DCI_18_June_testimony_new.pdf .  But I'm certain you KNEW that, right?  I mean... if you got this fact wrong... what else have you got wrong?

"And, Tom, in these "investigations" did OBL ever get indited?"

Osama bin Laden was already indicted for the African embassy bombings in 1998 - http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/binladen/usbinladen1.pdf .  An Arrest warrant had been issued for him and the UN instructed Afghanistan and its then Taliban-lead government to turn him over to either the US or a neutral country - http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/index.shtml .  The Taliban explicity refused the UN resolution.

As a result of this indictment, the need to issue another indictment of "OBL" was (largely) immaterial.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2103 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:35:47 PM

  (0+)

"Actually I did get the numbers wrong way round but the point you've evaded remains the same..."

What? You got the NATIONALITIES wrong, unless you consider a Saudi a Pakistani and vice versa. But... I think they would beg to differ with you. And what point are you referring to that I evaded? The indictment of Osama bin Laden (أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن) for the 9/11 attacks? It wasn't an evasion; it was a statement of fact. He already had an indictment from the US and an Interpol warrant from Libya - click here . And since the initial Interpol warrant, Spain has also issued a warrant for his arrest.

Therefore, how many more indictments do you want to pile atop the existing ones - click here ?

As to Osama bin Laden's role in the 9/11 attacks, his words speak for themselves:

May 1998 – "Through history, American has not been known to differentiate between the military and the civilians or between men and women or adults and children... Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says...," - click here .

February 2002 – "They did this, as we understand it, and this is something we have agitated for before, as a matter of self-defense, in defense of our brothers and sons in Palestine, and to liberate our sacred religious sites/things. If inciting people to do that is terrorism, and if killing those who kill our sons is terrorism, then let history be witness that we are terrorists," - click here .

September 2002 – "We calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all," - click here .

October 2004 – "I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.. And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children," - http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/1964.cfm .

Couple this quotes from videos and tapes released by al-Qaeda to the previous indictments and warrants and I think you can see where we're going with this... You're arguing an irrelevant and immaterial point that does not change the outcome – Osama bin Laden is wanted for crimes against life and health by means of terrorism and terrorism conspiracy – period.

"Pakistan was involved including paying $100000 to one of the alleged hijakers who miraculously survived. No iraqis, no Afgans involved. So your response to that? another evasion no doubt. And you said it, OBL was never indited for 9/11, for the same reason Mr Aswat was never even questioned."

Are you drinking and typing here? You've mixed two issues as one. Issue One: Mr. Aswat, a British citizen, was involved allegedly with the 7/7 London bombings - not the 9/11 attacks. Mr. Aswat was trained in terrorist camps located where? Yuppers, you guessed it – Afghanistan and Iraq. Issue Two: Saeed Sheikh, a supposed Pakistani ISI agent, reportedly wired $100,000 USD to Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of the 9/11 hijackers, during the summer 2001.

I suggest you read the information at this link for a better explanation of the alleged ISI-Atta connection - click here . The connection is far from certain as many Truthers would have you think. If you think this is evasion and not a reporting of fact and deductive reasoning, then so be it. You seem like a person who's convinced already and nothing I can write would change your mind. So be it, but I DO reference my sources when stating a position.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2103 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:11:53 PM

  (0+)

False flag....another person who has flown every single kind of plane there is, John Lear. He says there is no way, no how, that planes of that weight and size can fly at that speed and that low. He also has been heavily involved with 51 and many "top secret" military accomplishments.

The history books will write the facts. The Government lies continually and the ppl just gulp it up.

Please, how does a man that is seven feet tall and dragging around a kidney dialysis machine escape an intelligent military as ours for 7 yrs? Answer: he must be protected by that very investigative team that is supposedly after him.

This whole 9-11 scheme gets everyone's panties in a knot and invokes FEAR and what does FEAR do? It huddles the masses. Except the Downing street memo's provided an eye opener, but hey, news media just didn't quite give that memo much attention. How c^o^n^v^e^n^i^e^n^t.

Oh, and there were no plane parts "at the scene", except a couple of shells of Cesnea aircrafts that Lear says were hauled there. He spilled his guts but hey, no one listens to a man that has been flying, repairing and designing aircraft for USAF for 35 yrs.

by shirley reese (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 592 comments [98 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:03:53 PM

  (0+)

When the U.S. attacked Iraq and Afghanistan it was not an honest mistake as a reaction to 911.  Our world conquest adventure was hatched long before by the same neocons who cobbled together the 911 stunt.

by John Hanks (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1760 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:00:58 PM

  (0+)

The whole 'arrive by boats from mothership' angle could be untrue to throw blame towards Pakistan.

 The carnage was designed to discredit the 'official' cause - e.g. killing hospital patients and railway-passengers, not 'just' (ahem) rich-people in iconic buildings.

One of the first victims was the very top police chief of the Anti-terrorist Squad who had been receiving death-threats and mounting political pressure for weeks in connection with his following the trail of other supposed 'Islamic' bombings (claimed by unknown Internet-based group of 'Indian mujahideen') to extremist Hindutva elements, with ten charged so far and how many other stones ready to be unturned?? 

 Co-incidence? Maybe, but my guess is not, and that 'Deccan mujahideen' could be anyone out to cast blame on Muslim extremists/foment antagonism and destroy trade deals between India and Pakistan and Iran.  

Indian Intel servie had been worrying about Mossad developing links with these AB (Hindu extremist army) people, whose leaders had called for Hindu suicide squads to be ready to 'defend against Islamic take-over'.

Though two of the men spoke with North Indian accent, most looked South Indian and spoke Hindi and at least one wore a red thread bracelet (=Hindu).

It is important that all people of goodwill, all Hindus and Muslims of good will as well as Jews and Christians and humanists, etc encourage thorough, transparent investigation of ALL angles in this tragedy, and don't automaticallay credit either the media or security services with a record of lying (e.g. previous phoney 'advance warnings' stories put about by CIA to disguise the fact that it was a clique in US and Israeli security services that would carry out the 'attack on America' = Manhattan domestic murders spree and snuff movies. ) 

May all beings be happy.

by Keith Mothersson (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 74 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:38:29 AM

  (0+)