Accused 9/11 mastermind tells hearing he wants martyrdom

Friday 06th June, 05:30 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 29 Total Comments Show All

WilliB at 06:39 PM JST - 6th June

In the event, Khalid Mohammed touted his achievement even before he was captured, and 9/11 is widely celebrated among muslims. I guess that means they are celebrating Jews, then? But a little logical contradiction has never been a problem for the Ummah.
skipthesong at 06:59 PM JST - 6th June

9/11 is widely celebrated among muslims." Very true.

Sabi, if you think this man is some angle, please let us know why you think that. I have stated before while I was not in those buildings at that time, I was working there. Co-workers who survived said they seen large planes. People died on those planes. I can not account for the Pentagon, but I can account for NYC/WTC. I did not live far away. Even pieces of engins dropped down on some streets. Thus, it was not an internal explosion.

If you know of some remote control device to help this guy's trial, show it. He may be a patsy, but I would say a patsy for AQ.

BTW, if he really wanted Martyrdom, perhaps he should have strapped himself with a bomb and did it the usual way. The security at the WTC was not that intense. Anyone could have just really walked right in. And this is a place that was previously AQ attempted to destroy in 93'.
sabiwabi at 08:17 PM JST - 6th June

Sabi, if you think this man is some angle, please let us know why you think that.

I don't think he's an angle. From his picture, he seems rather round.

If you mean angel, I have no idea. I don't like him and I don't hate him, because I don't know him. All I know, for sure, 100%, is that he is not the mastermind of 911.
skipthesong at 11:11 PM JST - 6th June

If you mean angel" Ok, you got me.. anyway, "All I know, for sure, 100%, is that he is not the mastermind of 911." Tell me how/why you are sure. And I assume you want him to be free too, correct?
WilliB at 01:23 AM JST - 7th June

sabiwabi:

" All I know, for sure, 100%, is that he is not the mastermind of 911. "

And how do you know that "for sure, 100%"?
Eccoman at 10:13 AM JST - 7th June

It's not likely the actual mastermind of the Sept 11 attacks will be revealed in the foreseeable future, but I'm with Sabi in that it's unlikely Khalid was the man pulling the strings.

Skipthesong, of course engine debris would be found on the ground - due to the impact at high speed - regardless of who was flying the plane and how many people were murdered in the incident.

I strongly believe that 9-11 was our equivalent of the Reichstag fire, the false flag used to justify a power grab and excuse for war. This is something I've arrived at after several years of sifting through evidence and debunkings, plus observing what has happened since that watershed day.

Flame me if you will, but that's my position. Khalid was most likely a patsy, and whatever comes out of those kangaroo courts in Guantanamo Bay are suspect to say the least. It's clear the US govt holds its own constitution in utter contempt, otherwise they'd have nothing to fear in trying these alleged terrorists in open court.

Moderator: Readers, please do not turn this thread into a discussion on conspiracy theories.
sabiwabi at 03:11 PM JST - 7th June

As for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed being the 911 mastermind, that is indeed an outrageous conspiracy theory. Some here seem to think I am simply defending a fellow Muslim (I'm not Muslim). I don't know the guy, whether he is a decent or evil man, I just don't think he is any more the mastermind as Elvis is.
kinniku at 03:26 PM JST - 7th June

sabiwabi,

If you don't know Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, it seems you do not have enough facts to discuss intelligently whether he is innocent or guilty. Yet, again, this doesn't stop you from saying you know he has nothing to do with 9/11.
super delegate at 10:55 AM JST - 8th June

I think a lot of Lefties secretly envy those clowns. To be "tortured" would be a dream come true for some of them.
sabiwabi at 06:43 PM JST - 8th June

kinniku

If you don't know Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, it seems you do not have enough facts to discuss intelligently whether he is innocent or guilty.

I'm surprised your still pretending not to get my simple point. I don't know much about this guy, but I do know more than enough about 911 to know that this guy is not the mastermind. Seems you do not have enough facts of 911 to discuss intelligently whether he is innocent or guilty. You should make an effort to learn more about this very important event, instead of relying only on the mass media.
kinniku at 08:54 PM JST - 8th June

sabiwabi,

Thank you for your kind response. However, the question remains how it is that you can say 100% that "this guy" did not mastermind the terrorist attacks. Are you seriously expecting people to just take your word for it? It is a simple question, posed to you by many in this thread. I truly don't think you have an answer for them. This logically leads me to believe you don't know what you are talking about.

Unfortunately, this seems to be rather a pattern. On the Iran thread several people kindly asked you to explain how you were sure Iran was working on alternate sources of energy. There too, you left the question unanswered.
sabiwabi at 01:03 PM JST - 9th June

Are you seriously expecting people to just take your word for it?

No. I expect people to think reasonably at the facts and make their own conclusions. I believe I have responded more than adequately, while respecting the mod's request. I also addressed the Iran questions, if you still don't get it, ask a grown up to explain it to you.

Unfortunately, this seems to be rather a pattern.

I too see a clear pattern. Its your pattern of showing up on this forum, it seems, simply to criticize my posts, while not contributing anything at all related to the article.
kinniku at 02:55 PM JST - 9th June

sabiwabi,

No. I expect people to think reasonably at the facts and make their own conclusions.

Then why berate people so much when they disagree acting as though you have answers and then never actually specifically respond?

I believe I have responded more than adequately, while respecting the mod's request. I also addressed the Iran questions, if you still don't get it, ask a grown up to explain it to you.

You never answered the question. It is as simple as that. Go back and read both this thread and the other one. People keep asking you for your specific answer. You have provided none.

Lastly, you seem to think it is up to you how people can comment and in fact even goes as far as to suggest that some people are not allowed to comment. Why should that be? Why should your voice be considered the authority. As a member of the forum, I have just as much a right to read articles and the comments that follow and to comment when I would like. Why not try focusing on thinking of your answers rather than my comments.

You have not shown any specific reason for anyone to believe it is 100% sure (your words)that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent.
sabiwabi at 03:45 PM JST - 9th June

People keep asking you for your specific answer. You have provided none.

You choose not to see the answers. Reread my posts, its all there.

As a member of the forum, I have just as much a right to read articles and the comments that follow and to comment when I would like.

You certainly do. I am just pointing out that you often show up only to criticize my posts (often pretending not to understand some very simple points I'm trying to make). Except for your criticisms of my posts, what have written regarding this article?
kinniku at 04:03 PM JST - 9th June

You choose not to see the answers. Reread my posts, its all there.

Re-read your post...sorry, I still do not see where you have shown how you are 100% sure Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent. You do not need to launch into your familiar conspiracy theories to do this. You claim you do not know the man... that you don't know if he is good or bad...yet you claim you know for sure 'that guy' is innocent. When other people (I certainly was not the first in this thread) asked you how you were so sure, you did not respond. If you think that is you 'responded more than adequately', your definition of adequately is sorely lacking.

Except for your criticisms of my posts, what have written regarding this article?

Ummm...hate to burst your self-centered bubble, but until you jumped back in to angrily respond, I did not mention you nor did I quote you. In addition, people are allowed to comment on the articles and on other people's comments. Again, maybe you should spend more time answering people questions (if you are so inclined, which I sincerely doubt) rather than worrying about what I write.

By the way, your point just seems to be 'I say he is innocent and that is it'. Why should we believe you?