KSM to (finally) have his day in court

Discussion in '9/11' started by Hannibal, Apr 19, 2012.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok, truthseekers - now's the time to gather all your evidence and support the defense of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his pals.

    You ... DO ... have some evidence, don't you?

    Source

    Anyone?
     
  2. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All we hear from the KSM cheerleaders is that there isn't enough evidence. Apparently they were wrong.
     
  3. gr8dane

    gr8dane New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course there's evidence of a cover-up. KSM is supposedly in a secret prison on a communist island while being offered some type of new and approved Pentagonian justice for 9-11. With a set-up like that the man doesn't even have to be alive. But if he is, his two children were supposedly also taken into custody around the time he was so there are still loose ends to the story so to speak. Someone should contact the military official responsible for abducted children and find out about the family because a confession regarding the current outline would be rather worthless and unbelievable.
     
  4. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You KNOW they do.....they told us it was 'crushing'..
     
  5. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is so secret about Guantanamo?

    What should have been done with his children and how does that conflict with what was done?
     
  6. gr8dane

    gr8dane New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guantanamo? Apparently the naval base there has built a stealth camp that has special prisoners where secret guards take care of masterminds and accomplices. That's about all I know.

    As for the kids there should have been a follow-up article where someone mentions we released them about 8 years ago. Ya know, so we don't look stupid. But supposedly even the known knowns are kept a secret.
     
  7. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the limit of what you know is relevant to the secrecy of Guantanamo? If Guantanamo is a secret prison, it's been the most scrutinized prison in the history of secret prisons. The prisoners have access to red cross monitors. They have access to legal counsel. They have telephone access, video conference access. They have laptops, Hundreds of reporters have written thousands of articles about the treatment, environment, and conditions within the prison. If Guantanamo is secret, then the Beetles are a band that no one has ever heard of.

    Who's job is it to write articles?
     
  8. gr8dane

    gr8dane New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0



    It's been a while since I've read about camp 7 but the high profile detainees are still being kept in a secret location -

    What? How is someone being paid NOT to write this stuff?
    The official story is we got his family and so he takes credit A to Z.
    And that's good enough?

    I demand a rewrite. The military deserves better than a tortured confession combined with abducted children.
     
  9. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who's more high profile than KSM? The red cross has visited him regularly.

    You tell me. Do you have evidence that someone is being paid not to write something? The media doesn't seem to have an interest in KSM's children. You seem to have an interest. Maybe you should write an article.
     
  10. gr8dane

    gr8dane New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Is that the International Red Cross from Switzerland? I wonder does Zawahiri's uncle Salem still live there?

    When taken into custody it has been normal protocol for the detainees to be totally shaven. That didn't seem to happen with KSM. Of course someone had to dress him as an Arab (in his secret prison) for the Red Cross picture that Jarret Brachman (I think that's his internet name) found on the internet - supposedly posted by the same family that the media isn't interested in.

    So it's probably safe to say that the regular Red Cross visits are an illusion.
     
  11. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh man, the Red Cross is in on it too? That makes LOADS of sense.
     
  12. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    At this point I think it would be prudent to ask truthers exactly who ISN'T in on the conspiracy as it appears that list will be a lot shorter. I'm betting the short list is only truthers except those truthers truthers think are shills. :lol:
     
  13. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You've got it backwards.. You don't "prove" people not guilty; they are not guilty by default, legally. Nobody needs any "evidence" to that effect.

    Rather, the burden of proof is on anyone who accuses someone else of a crime to prove them guilty, not the other way around.

    You DO have evidence, don't you?

    Tell me what illegal actions KSM specifically took, (please be specific), and then provide your best evidence for it.
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did I say "prove him not guilty"? No, I said "Support his defense."

    Can you?
     
  15. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So what's the evidence?

    If all you can mention is the confession, then spare it, as there are other possible explanations for it, as I proved to you in another thread.

    I mean what real world physical evidence is there that corrobarates the narrative as told by KSM's confession?





    +-`
     
  16. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You asked for "evidence".

    "evidence" for what? What do you want others to provide "evidence" for? YOU are the one who's supposed to provide evidence, if that is you want to accuse him of a crime (do you wish to do so?).

    I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent; I'm not making any claims either way, so I don't need to provide "evidence" for anything.
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's up to the prosecution to decide. What I'm asking here is: will you gather your evidence and support his defense? Will you donate to his legal fees? Will you lead rallies to declare his innocence, based on the evidence you have that he could not possibly be guilty?

    What will truthers do to help defend a persecuted man they have declared is innocent? Anything?
     
  18. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then why are you replying to this thread? It's not about his guilt or innocence, it about what people who believe he's innocent are doing to help him.
     
  19. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who are you quoting?
     
  20. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well then my apologies.. This question was not for me.. I'm not like some people that like to make definitive conclusions about things which are not at all definitive and we couldn't even know, especially being outside the event horizon of the "national security" black hole.

    What do you think, Hannibal? I noticed you stopped short of stating your own point of view.

    Do you think he was "principal architect" of 9/11, and behind it from a to z? Would you classify this as merely a belief, or would you declare it as fact?

    Or are you like me and don't know for sure either way?

    Or what exactly?
     
  21. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you need evidence other than a confession for an indictment? The FACT he is going to trial shows that evidence exists whether you want to believe it or not. If there truly is no evidence then this should be a short trial and he will be acquitted, right? If not, then he will be found guilty.
     
  22. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Even the people in solitary confinement?!?!
     
  23. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not at all.. I welcome indictment.. And I believe they have enough grounds to do so. As I've maintained all along, a trial is a great idea, and LONG overdue. They shouldn't have ever terminated the first trial.

    This is merely an assumption on your part. Just because someone gets tried for a crime doesn't necessarily mean they were guilty of the crime and that there was rock solid evidence for this. Such declarative statements about the guilt of the accused and the quality of the prosecution's evidence should occur AFTER the evidence is debated in court and the verdict is rendered, not before.

    To assume that just because somebody gets prosecuted means they must be guilty and the evidence is all watertight is erronious. This must mean that the billions of "not guilty" verdicts ever issued in the history of the world were all wrong and all these people got away with it.

    The trial is meant to determine if the prosecution is right or not. When you assume the prosecution must be right, even before the trial, means that every single not guilty verdict ever was wrong.. That is the logical conclusion that follows your premise.

    You must at least entertain the possibility that sometimes the prosecution is wrong, and their evidence isn't as conclusive as you'd like to think.

    Otherwise you're simply basing your argument on an opinion/assumption, not the merits of the actual evidence itself.

    I don't know.. I'm not psychic and I don't read the future.. Nor do I know what's behind the "national security" blanket.
     
  24. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, for the most part you would be wrong. It is very rare for someone to be indicted on a confession alone because then you have nothing to fall back on if any inconsistancies in the confession come up or if the person suddenly recants their confession. Considering they knew KSM was the mastermind behind 9/11 well before he was actually captured, much less confessed, shows they had evidence to support him being the mastermind.

    No. It isn't. No grand jury is going to hand down an indictment without evidence nor is any judge going to try a case without evidence. Where do you come up with the idea one can be tried without evidence?

    This is a completely bull(*)(*)(*)(*) statement from you. Nowhere in this thread have I stated the solidity of the evidence or that it proves KSM guilty. This is yet another example of you lying about what other people are talking about. The ONLY thing in discussion at this point is the presence or abscence of evidence.

    The ONLY one who has made anything even resembling the statement above is you, so your claims I am assuming such is a blatant lie. Your dishonesty is getting to be a bit much, wouldn't you agree?

    Nobody has said anything different.

    Another blatant lie by you. I've never made the above assumption.

    Wrong yet again. All I've stated is that there is evidence and that the KSM worshipers would pretend there isn't. So far my premise is playing out to be 100% correct. YOU dreaming up all kinds of ludicrous statements and attributing them to my assumptions is both dishonest and rather petty.

    Where have I EVER stated that the prosecution must always be right? Where have I even broached that topic? I haven't. Yet more lies from you. Do you honestly think people don't notice when you so blatantly make up stuff I've never said or even hinted at?

    My argument is the existance or abscence of evidence. I've not stated how solid the evidence is, much less made a presumption of guilt based on opinion as you claim.

    Really? Let me clue you in because you don't need to be a psychic much less be able to read the future. If there is no evidence, you can't convict someone. I don't know what judicial system you are use to where one can be convicted "just because" and without any evidence that you did what you are accused of, but (*)(*)(*)(*).... I sure wouldn't want to live there!
     
  25. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, even the people in solitary confinement. Solitary confinement means you are isolated from other prisoners and talking with people you're not suppose to talk to like... oh.... the other leaders of Al Qaeda so they can plan another attack. :lol:
     

Share This Page