-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Brian Phillips wrote:
I don't dispute any of the preceeding statements you make.
> Fact. Bin Laden has sworn on the Koran that he didn't
> do 9-11.
Can you furnish a reference on this one? Not being snippy, I really do
want to read the original quote.
> Opinion. I have no idea whether Mossad or any other
> party was the party behind 9-11 (behind in the sense
> of mastermind, rather than the triggermen). I have
> absolutely no illusions that Mossad or the Israeli
> government is incapable of performing such actions
> should they feel them to be "neccessary". I am especially
Nor do I, nor do most people including Israelis.
> taken with the fact that there is a logical fallacy based
> on motivation for the Bin Laden hypothesis.
> Supposition. Bin Laden is a fanatical partisan of Islam.
> He performs these many monstrous evil deeds because
> of his "faith". This is his presumed motivation for 9-11.
> However. Bin Laden is reported (by the former Pakistani
> Minister of Defense, himself a devout Muslim) to have
> sworn to his old friend on his Holy Koran that he was not
> responsible for 9-11.
This is second hand information. The minister himself did
not swear on the Koran, merely said that Bin Target did.
Furthermore, as you point out he is a friend and a fellow
devout Muslim, therefore not an impartial witness.
> So is he devout enough to blow us up, but apostate enough
> to swear before his God that he didn't do it?
Are Muslims even allowed to invoke Allah or the Koran when
they swear something is true? Anybody know? Besides, if
he didn't do it, why not repeat the statement on tape, so
the US would either have to stop bombing the Taliban and
look stupid or lose the support of all its allies for
continuing to bomb an 'innocent' Islamofascist state?
> This is not the proper pattern. We should be open to
> alternate explanations.
> Opinion. Taliban is evil. Bin Laden is evil. Israel is evil.
> (insofar as "evil" is a word with meaning). A plague on
> both their houses. Let the Arabs slaughter the Jews,
> drill Alaska full of holes, and sell OUR oil to Japan
> and Europe and let the Muslim world find it's own way.
> Alex, please feel free to support your offhand characterization
> of the Mossad theory as "insane"... but as always..
> be prepared to get clubbed with the big stick of truth.
> In this case it's a really BIG stick.
Fine, I'll upgrade it to 'extremely unlikely'. For reference, I
believe that Mossad wiretapping of Whitehouse phones and attempting to
blackmail Clinton during the peace talks (which fell through and
resulted in the Lewinski scandal) to be in the general vicinity of
The reason I think Mossad direct involvement in this incident is
unlikely is because:
1. The cell phone conversations from flight 93 were quoted in the news
as describing the hijackers as Middle-Eastern looking. Granted, the
original conversations now only exist in the memories of the family
2. I don't see why a mercenary would go on a suicide
mission. Therefore, if the Mossad was behind this, all the hijackers
would have to be Israeli patriots. Granted, it's not impossible for a
Sephardic Jew to pass for an Arab. Granted also, fake paper trails
pointing to Muslim countries could be constructed.
3. Bin Loser advised his lieutenants to return to 'home base', shortly
before the attack according to a statement by Tony Blair. Granted,
Blair is not necessarily an impartial source of information.
If you say that Mossad knew about the plot and didn't tell us, I'll
consider that plausible. If you say that Mossad materially helped out
the perpetrators, I'll consider that plausible. But actually do this
particular deed? No.
If Bin Flattened's denial of responsibility for the bombing is
confirmed (and he doesn't have to swear on the Koran-- the word of
somebody with so little to gain by lying serves just fine) is
confirmed by video tape or numerous and disinterested witnesses, my
next guess is some other Islamic fundie group or Iraq. Even so, if
what we think we know about Al Qeda is true, they are certain to have
served at least as an enabler for whomever it was that did this.
Anyway, I also agree with Colin Powell-- whether Bin Satan did this
one or not, we should still take him out for the things he does own up
to doing, and for being a dangerous, power-hungry demagogue who just
might succeed at his goal otherwise.
PS: His goal? Nevermind Israel, Palestine, and the 'plundering of
Arabia by the Great Satan'. The cavemen are just as spin-savvy as us
imperialists. The real target is Pakistan. If he can get the
Pakistanis riled up to the point where they overthrow Mussharaff, it
may become the first Shariya state to posess a nuclear bomb. The tide
of hype issuing from such a coup could probably sweep several other
nations over the edge. Maybe Egypt. Maybe Saudi Arabia, which would
give him oil in addition to the bomb, and kick the legs out from under
our [crude] efforts to contain Iraq [that we turned into our enemy in
the first place for reasons that still make no sense to me].
* I believe that the majority of the world's Muslims are good, *
* honorable people. If you are a Muslim and want to reassure me and *
* others that you are part of this good, honorable majority, all *
* you need to say are nine simple words: "I OPPOSE the Wahhabi cult *
* and its Jihad." *
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:14 MDT