Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 94
  1. #21  
    Since this is a cell phone forum, shouldnt this thread really be called Moussaoui verdict -- fair and flexible?
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  2.    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    If you are aware of information that leads to the commission of a felony you can be found to be an accomplice.

    Say a person is a member of a team that organizes a bank robbery but that person does not participate in the act, he is still a participant in the crime.
    thank you for patience -- as you know I am a foreigner, and these are difficult concepts for me.

    If I understand -- the police find evidence that you are an accomplice in the robbery of a bank -- they provide this evidence to the district attorney who then introduces it to the jury -- and if they are persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt, you are convicted of a crime -- perhaps conspiracy. C’est vrai ??

    But how does this apply to these sets of facts -- where are you being compelled to give testimony, to speak to the police, to confess of criminality without being afforded immunity ??

    again I must beg your indulgence -- as a foreigner these are difficult -- how do you say ?? abstruse ?? concepts for me to understand ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  3.    #23  
    earlier as I rushed to leave, I inadvertently posted an expired link to an article about how the FBI's incompetency contributed mightily to 9/11.

    here's the corrected link and some relevant excerpts from the article:


    FBI in the dock at September 11 death penalty trial
    Wed Mar 22, 3:25 AM ET

    The death penalty trial of Al-Qaeda plotter Zacarias Moussaoui turned into a gripping inquest into the FBI's failure to detect and prevent the September 11 attacks.

    Michael Rolince, who headed the FBI headquarters' international counter-terrorism section in 2001 -- before the strikes on New York and Washington -- admitted that he had not read a document by an FBI field agent that Moussaoui was a terrorist who might hijack an airliner.

    When asked by the defence if he knew of the fears of agent Harry Samit, who arrested Moussaoui after he stirred suspicion when trying to learn to fly a jumbo jet at a Minnesota flight simulator school, Rolince answered "No."


    "I am just curious as to what document it was," he said.

    Defense counsel Edward MacMahon shot back: "Mr Samit's communication to your office dated August 18, 2001." ...

    ...Defence lawyers also quizzed Rolince on why the then-director of the Central Intelligence Agency George Tenet had been fully briefed on Moussaoui days after he was arrested, but FBI officials did not give Samit authorisation for a search warrant against him.

    Rolince, a feature at White House, CIA and other top secret US intelligence briefings, also testified that threat levels were intense by mid-2001, but were not specific as to where the attack would occur...
    Last edited by BARYE; 05/04/2006 at 12:14 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4. TomUps's Avatar
    Posts
    22 Posts
    Global Posts
    28 Global Posts
    #24  
    FBI's incompetency contributed mightily to 9/11.
    Crazy comment.

    Their incompetence maybe failed to stop it, but they had no contribution at all to the events of 9-11. Please stop trying to lay the blame on anybody but al-qaeda. Its an insult to the people who were murdered.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    But have I not heard of something about the right to remain silent ?? The protection against self incrimination ?? Something about a fifth amendment ??
    It would be in the interest of society (and in my non-legal opinion) required by the Constitution to simply use such admissions as evidence against others, not as evidence against the conspirator who announces the plan to the authorities.
  6.    #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    It would be in the interest of society (and in my non-legal opinion) required by the Constitution to simply use such admissions as evidence against others, not as evidence against the conspirator who announces the plan to the authorities.
    unless a judge (or congress) is persuaded to grant some form of immunity, you cannot be compelled to testify, you cannot be compelled to talk.

    If you were given immunity you could be forced to testify about your conspiracy -- under penalty of contempt !!

    And again, unless you are practicing at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo prison, I don't think there's a “moral” compulsion to talk -- waterboarding and puppy dogs not withstanding ...
    A judge or congress, can -- under limited circumstances -- afford immunity to compel testimony -- but even then a forgetful memory is liable to be an acceptable excuse.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    And again, unless you are practicing at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo prison, I don't think there's a “moral” compulsion to talk -- waterboarding and puppy dogs not withstanding ...
    So you don't think you have a responsibility to your fellow man to save your fellow man's life by doing nothing more than opening your mouth? Wow. That's heartless at best, evil at worst.
  8.    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by TomUps
    Crazy comment.

    Their incompetence maybe failed to stop it, but they had no contribution at all to the events of 9-11. Please stop trying to lay the blame on anybody but al-qaeda. Its an insult to the people who were murdered.
    I hope you read some of what was written about the criminal level of incompetency revealed about this govt. at this trial.

    The field agent who had interrogated Moussaoui (as well as his flight instructors, and a field agent in Az.) recognized that a terrorist conspiracy to use airplanes as weapons was afoot.

    The supervising FBI official who routinely briefed the White House, did not bother to even read the memo from the field agent who described with chilling insight the prospective terrorists intentions. The agent was doing everything but a Tom Cruise jumping up and down on Oprahs couch to call attention to his fears -- but he was ignored.

    And though both White House (presumably junior too) and Attorney General Ashcroft were briefed on Moussaoui's arrest -- they did not see it as something that rose to the level of urgency as to qualify for asking a judge to get a search warrant so that they could look into Moussaoui's laptop.

    If you are not willing understand what happened, ascribe blame, and hold responsible those who are by their action are proven incompetent -- how can you have a better outcome the next time ??

    Michael Rolince, who headed the FBI headquarters' international counter-terrorism section in 2001 -- before the strikes on New York and Washington -- admitted that he had not read a document by an FBI field agent that Moussaoui was a terrorist who might hijack an airliner.

    When asked by the defence if he knew of the fears of agent Harry Samit, who arrested Moussaoui after he stirred suspicion when trying to learn to fly a jumbo jet at a Minnesota flight simulator school, Rolince answered "No."

    "I am just curious as to what document it was," he said.

    Defense counsel Edward MacMahon shot back: "Mr Samit's communication to your office dated August 18, 2001." ...

    ...Defence lawyers also quizzed Rolince on why the then-director of the Central Intelligence Agency George Tenet had been fully briefed on Moussaoui days after he was arrested, but FBI officials did not give Samit authorisation for a search warrant against him.

    Rolince, a feature at White House, CIA and other top secret US intelligence briefings, also testified that threat levels were intense by mid-2001, but were not specific as to where the attack would occur...
    Last edited by BARYE; 05/04/2006 at 01:10 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  9. TomUps's Avatar
    Posts
    22 Posts
    Global Posts
    28 Global Posts
    #29  
    I hope you read some of what was written about the criminal level of incompetency revealed about this govt. at this trial.

    Yes the FBI is incompetent,
    The CIA is incompetent,
    George Bush is incompetent

    Bottom line, Al-qaeda killed those people...not anybody else. Its amazing to me how people can even attempt to blame somebody else. If thats the case, you can blame the goverments of any country when the fail to stop a terrorist attack at home.

    Using your theory, what percent fault is the FBI? Is it 90% qaeda 10% FBI?
  10.    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by TomUps
    Yes the FBI is incompetent,
    The CIA is incompetent,
    George Bush is incompetent

    Bottom line, Al-qaeda killed those people...not anybody else. Its amazing to me how people can even attempt to blame somebody else. If thats the case, you can blame the goverments of any country when the fail to stop a terrorist attack at home.

    Using your theory, what percent fault is the FBI? Is it 90% qaeda 10% FBI?
    I can't change the nature of cockroaches -- blaming them for what they do is obvious, mindless -- and advances nothing.

    What I can do that is useful is to recognize that the Bug Killer I've hired is a lazy incompetent contributor to the problems I have, despite all his fancy words about "mission accomplished".

    What's useful is to understand how I came to have a cockroach problem, fire the lazy fat guy who leaves his donut crumbs everywhere, and replace him with someone who knows what he's doing -- just a thought ...
    Last edited by BARYE; 05/04/2006 at 12:26 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by TomUps
    Yes the FBI is incompetent,
    The CIA is incompetent,
    George Bush is incompetent

    Bottom line, Al-qaeda killed those people...not anybody else. Its amazing to me how people can even attempt to blame somebody else. If thats the case, you can blame the goverments of any country when the fail to stop a terrorist attack at home.

    Using your theory, what percent fault is the FBI? Is it 90% qaeda 10% FBI?
    You are absolutely right. Incompetency has NOTHING to do with this question. Full responsibility resides with the perpetrators. It doesn't matter if the authorities were the Keystone Cops; it does not mitigate the hijackers' responsibilty. Should we shore up homeland defense, ABSOLUTELY. But this societal bent to fix blame on ourselves for the misdeeds and misfortunes of others, or to assign "fault", is ridiculous.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I can't change the nature of cockroaches -- blaming them for what they do is obvious, mindless -- and advances nothing.

    What I can do that is useful is to recognize that the Bug
    Killer I've hired is a lazy incompetent contributor to the problems I have, despite all his fancy words about "mission accomplished".

    What's useful is to understand how I came to have a cockroach problem, fire the fat guy who leaves his donut crumbs everywhere, and replace him with someone who knows what he's doing -- just a thought ...
    Maybe the real answer to your problem is:

    USE AN EXTERMINATOR! Yes, I'm sick and tired of the "no collateral damage crowd".
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  13. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I can't change the nature of cockroaches -- blaming them for what they do is obvious, mindless -- and advances nothing.

    What I can do that is useful is to recognize that the Bug
    Killer I've hired is a lazy incompetent contributor to the problems I have, despite all his fancy words about "mission accomplished".

    What's useful is to understand how I came to have a cockroach problem, fire the fat guy who leaves his donut crumbs everywhere, and replace him with someone who knows what he's doing -- just a thought ...
    Which the American people did. We replaced the bug killer who did nothing but talk with one who took action. With our 20/20 hindsight the action may not have been the best, but at least it was action. If you have children, they will try something small, if they get away with it next time they try something a little more robust, and will continue this pattern until you step in with severe enough punishment/consqences to make them decide it is not worth the risk. That is what happened with the terrorist for about 10 years, small attacks here and there on small targets, then a large building, then a navy vessel, kept going until someone stepped in and said ENOUGH and went in with force. Once that force was used, how many additional attacks on our soil? Will it happen again, unfortunately I have to say the chances are very high.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  14.    #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Which the American people did. We replaced the bug killer who did nothing but talk with one who took action. With our 20/20 hindsight the action may not have been the best, but at least it was action. If you have children, they will try something small, if they get away with it next time they try something a little more robust, and will continue this pattern until you step in with severe enough punishment/consqences to make them decide it is not worth the risk. That is what happened with the terrorist for about 10 years, small attacks here and there on small targets, then a large building, then a navy vessel, kept going until someone stepped in and said ENOUGH and went in with force. Once that force was used, how many additional attacks on our soil? Will it happen again, unfortunately I have to say the chances are very high.
    the problem wasn't that the cockroaches were being encouraged by the smallness of the response -- the difficulty was that the size of the attack dictated the level of response that could be justified.

    Clinton could not have invaded Afghanistan and (temporarily it now seems) overthrown the Taliban just because Bin Laden could be indirectly connected to the bombing of our destroyer, or the destruction of our African embassies.

    As it was when he tried to kill Bin Laden he was attacked for trying to distract from the hideous inquisition into his underdesk hummer.

    Clinton and his team understood the threat Bin Laden and his cockroaches represented. From Clinton on down they lectured junior and his "know everything junta" about how terrorism and Bin Laden would be the primary responsibility of the incoming administration.

    Clarke -- who stayed on and served in both administration -- could not get them to schedule a meeting with junior to push forward the plans for addressing this.

    Though the FBI briefed the White House on Moussaoui, Ashcroft didn't think a search of Moussaoui's laptop was warranted (pun intended).

    What's the point of knowledge if no learning accrues from it ??

    Almost the same scenario played out for Katrina, with the same excuses -- "who could have predicted a Cat. 5 storm, who could have anticipated the levees breeching"...

    And ultimately their solution to 9-11 was not so much Afghanistan, (which never got much money or attention), but Iraq.
    Last edited by BARYE; 05/04/2006 at 12:23 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    That is what happened with the terrorist for about 10 years, small attacks here and there on small targets, then a large building, then a navy vessel, kept going until someone stepped in and said ENOUGH and went in with force. Once that force was used, how many additional attacks on our soil?
    "Went in with force"? Went where? With how much force? You're talking about destroying those responsible for 9/11?

    According to Tommy Franks, there really wasnt that much force left after the president called him and asked him to send most of his troops to Iraq. And I am pretty sure I heard Osama on the news the other day, giving orders. I cannot remember the last time I heard the president even say his name.

    Worldwide terrorism is at or near an all time high, hatred toward the united states has never been greater, most of our troops are bogged down in a civil war while indefinitely occupying the only secular power in the middle east, Iran exerts even more power in the weakened Iraqi regime, and is developing Nuclear capability, the ******* responsible for 9/11 is talking to us on the news, and you are somehow calling our response to 9/11 a success becaue Al Quaida has not blown up any more of our buildings? Are you kidding?
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    Clarke -- who stayed on and served in both administration -- could not get them to schedule a meeting with junior to push forward the plans for addressing this.
    Let's make sure this sinks in.

    In the weeks leading up to September 11, the president was given a document detailing how Al Quaida could use planes as bombs in suicide attacks.

    The document was entitled. "Ql Quaida Determined To Attack Inisde the United States".

    His terrorism zhar (since Nixon), had been asking for a cabinet level meeting with the president, to outline the threat. The meeting finally happened on Septermber 14, 2001, with the Pentagon, and the Twin Towers smouldering.
    Last edited by theBlaze74; 05/04/2006 at 12:21 PM.
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #37  
    Barye, flicker (blaze)
    Yes, I am saying that responding to terrorist attacks with force, instead of telling them to stop or else has been an integral part of no additionl attacks on our soil. Barye, yes Clinton understood the threat Bin Laden represented, but as so many politicians do, they just tell the next person about it instead of taking action. If you take no action you will not have to worry about your plan failing.
    Flicker, when was the last time the country you live in had a terrorist attack it? You do realize the worldwide terror stats are calculated differently now and include attacks on civilians in Iraq, right. If you cared to add the attacks on the citizens that Saddam and his cronies carried out on a daily basis the numbers would tell a different story. I really do not expect you to consider that because it would then go against what you want to believe. Your choice, don't really care how you read the numbers.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    Clinton could not have invaded Afghanistan and (temporarily it now seems) overthrown the Taliban just because Bin Laden could be indirectly connected to the bombing of our destroyer, or the destruction of our African embassies.
    It was a little more than just that....here is a AQ timeline during Clinton's admin:

    Oct. 12, 2000
    Two suicide bombers, suspected to be associated with bin Laden, attack the navy destroyer USS Cole in Aden, Yemen, killing 17 sailors.

    Nov. 4, 1998
    A U.S. federal grand jury indicts Osama bin Laden in the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa.

    Feb. 22, 1998
    Osama bin Laden calls for attacks on American citizens.

    Aug. 7, 1998
    Bombs explode at the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 220 people and injuring 5,000. The U.S. retaliates with air strikes against suspected training camps in Sudan and Afghanistan.

    June 25, 1996
    Bin Laden followers bomb U.S. military base near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 American soldiers and wounding hundreds of Americans and Saudi Arabians.

    1996
    After Osama bin Laden is expelled from Sudan, al-Qaeda moves its operation to Afghanistan. Iran sponsors a re-organization of al-Qaeda with bin Laden as leader.

    Nov. 13, 1995
    Seven people, including five Americans, are killed when two bombs explode at a U.S.-Saudi military facility in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden is blamed for the attack.

    June 26, 1995
    Al-Qaeda tries, unsuccessfully, to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Oct. 8, 1993
    Al-Qaeda supporters attack UN troops in Somalia, killing 18 U.S. servicemen

    Feb. 26, 1993
    A 500-kilogram bomb explodes in a garage under World Trade Center in New York, killing six and injuring 1,042. Bin Laden associate Ramzi Yousef is sentenced to life without parole in February 1998 for orchestrating the bombing.

    1993
    Osama bin Laden sets up militant training camps in Sudan and begins searching for nuclear material and weapons.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/os..._timeline.html
    Both admins knew the danger......and both did not do enough prior to 9/11, IMHO.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    It was a little more than just that....here is a AQ timeline during Clinton's admin: Both admins knew the danger......and both did not do enough prior to 9/11, IMHO.
    Richard Clarke said the suggestion he proposed in response to everything in that list, to Clinton and G W Bush, was to simultaneously strike all known Al Quiada camps.

    However, he also said that the incoming Bush administration felt that the outgoing Clinton administration had become "obsessed" with terrorism. And he said that during his time at the White House, Clinton had approved and signed every military suggestiont dealing with terrorism that was put in front of him.

    Clarke blamed Clinton for having too poor a relationship with the Joint Chiefs who were often at odds with him, and gave him little or no military options.
  20.    #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    It was a little more than just that....here is a AQ timeline during Clinton's admin:
    no complaint about the timeline hobbes --

    it does not undercut the fact that none of these attacks --- even where they could (eventually) be connected back to Bin Laden -- rose to the level that would have justified invading another country. It took bringing down Trade Center and attacking the Pentagon for that.

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Both admins knew the danger......and both did not do enough prior to 9/11, IMHO.
    I do differ in your categorization of how they acted.

    junior inacted.

    He did nuthin.

    Rice's excuse that they were trying for a more "comprehensive solution" is pitterpatter for babies.

    They did squat -- though they were warned warned and warned.

    As Blaze very accurately quoted:
    "In the weeks leading up to September 11, the president was given a document detailing how Al Quaida could use planes as bombs in suicide attacks.

    The document was entitled. "Al Quaida Determined To Attack Inisde the United States".
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions