Horus,

Your attitude is very typical. 'I may be wrong, but I thought Bin Laden claimed credit for 9/11'

Everybody thought this and thoughtthat without looking at the facts for themsleves. One survey suggested that over 50% of Americans didn't even realise that 3 buildings, not 2 collapsed in NY on 9/11. Anybody who looks at the facts about that day will conclude that we are not being told the whole truth

CHRIS....

1/ You still have not answered my question from the other thread...
here it is again.

"What are u proposing as a workable (key word) alternative ideology to democracy to solve the problems that you highlight" ?

2/ Quoted from your post re Osama Bin Ladin "Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of battle."

COMMENT "That is an OUTRIGHT LIE" and here is the evidence in black and white.

Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html
Book 019, Number 4321:
It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

The Hadith BEFORE that one... DOES say It is not permissable to kill women and children in war...but ask yourself this.. One says "A" the other says "B" and they are in conflict.. so bottom line, you can pick which ever suits at the time. The one I showed here DOES allow it as long as not 'deliberate'...... but nevertheless ALLOWS.

Now..on 9/11 the mind truly boggles.. I'm beginning to wonder if you are being employed to spread disinformation. Did you not SEE the planes hit the towers ? Gee..I did.(as did the world)

Osama DID admit to involvement. But questioning the video, is tantamount to questioning ALL things no matter how clear they are simply because of a pre-determined attitude of fixatedness with conspiracy theories. I'll BET you would deny the Holocaust also right ?
Don't forget my MOST important question you seem to be avoiding. (above)

9-11 Part 2

(Hi Carl and Dave - still trying to write a lead article on this)

It seems that we make choices based on our pre-conceived bias, with a generous amount of help from the MSM and our government.

Even the more impressionable Muslims seem to have fallen for the romantic notion of their bearded Robin Hood. For them, disbelief in OBL's prowess is a bit treasonous - what a perfect setup. Everyone wants to believe for their own reasons.

Look - Hopalong Cassidy really existed - no doubt. He could ride, sing and shoot. But did he REALLY help make the wild west a better place for settlers, little old ladies and bald-headed babies?

Likewise Mr Zarqawi, the ubiquitous unidexter of Umm Qasar - the one-legged Tarzan of Tikrit. Too bad he had to go, just as I was becoming fond of him.

See - we are at it again. Fiddling around the edges, talking nonsense while the perps laugh all the way to the bank. Vast fortunes are being made while we avert our gaze. Our laws are being changed to make the world a safer place for corporate overlords.

A classic f'rinstance -

When the price of fuel hits two bucks a litre, our bitumen highways will have to be augmented by the information highway. That communication will be crucial to maintaining some sort of democratic society in a future filled with uncertainty. Yet the price of a share of this crucial asset is tumbling, even as the sale approaches. What do you want to bet that the bulk of it ends up in the hands of the hedge funds? From then on, that information highway will be populated with Dick Turpins who will exact a toll at every turnpike. See if they don't.

- and what will we be doing while this highway robbery takes place? Probably goggling at the revelation that you can defeat an aeroplane's navigation system with tissue paper and comb.

I can't believe this rubbish was penned by a professor of law. By starting the article with the same trick as the Murdoch press and ABC in exploitatively using statements from victims of the Bali bombings, you immediately discard serious legal argument in favour of populist commentary. What kind of law do they study at Deakin? Law of the jungle?

Well said Bilko!

A professor at law should not be peddling this drivel. He states:

"A long standing rule of evidence is that confessions obtained from suspects as a result of threats or inducements are normally inadmissible. This is even if the reliability of the confession is not in question and the case would collapse without the confession."

Of course, if the confession is deemed unreliable and questionable then it will consequently be inadmissable.

I sincerely hope the professor is not practising law.

tassiedevil

Dave.

Marlene and I sat up all that night and watched in transfixed horror - as did you, I bet. No doubt about it, planes hit the towers, people died horribly.

We remember many things that were said during the live multiple broadcasts. It's stamped in our minds. The trouble is, so much of that disappeared during subsequent days - expunged from the official narrative. Yet these were really important details.

It helps if you are willing to watch one of the several documentaries that include the "redacted" eyewitness footage. My very favourite is by three young fellers in their twenties. I have personally corresponded with them, one of whom is a veteran of the Iraq invasion - hardly a bystander. If you will take my word for it (for now) that they are the genuine article, then please take the time to see their film (Google video):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&hl=en

Here's a remarkable ABC audio interview with the late, great Hunter S Thompson (2002):

http://www.loosechange911.com/download/hunter_thompson_aug29_2002.mp3

The very best explanation of the underlying geopolitics (narrowband video):

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/history_of_oil.ram

(I checked every detail of the above - it is all well documented)

Finally, in the bit of space left, I should explain myself. Marlene is afflicted with chronic arthritis, so I am on a carer's pension (this is a good opportunity to thank OLO contributors for their tax dollars). Her misfortune has granted us the gift of time not available to working families. We try to use our time to put something back through forums like this one, having free-ranged across the Internet all day in search of knowlege. We don't consider ourselves to be more intelligent than others, and every day we become more astonished at our past ignorance.

Finally, I'll squeak this in:

http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php/weblog/comments/george-the-axe-and-the-cherry-tree/

- and bid you adeiu - here comes the robot to chop off my head -

Cheers