Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

gyroscope

(1,443 posts)
64. Irrelevant to the discussion
Sun Jan 22, 2012, 09:17 PM
Jan 2012

1) the wanted poster mentions nothing about 9/11

2) the FBI has never indicted bin laden for 9/11

why is that?

The information was shared with the FBI noise Jan 2012 #1
Not according to Clarke gyroscope Jan 2012 #2
So, now you believe... William Seger Jan 2012 #3
I dont know if you could call them hijackers gyroscope Jan 2012 #4
That link to the FBI Most Wanted Page for bin Laden: could you tell me what this means? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #5
You would have to ask those organzations gyroscope Jan 2012 #7
"the FBI says..." OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #6
The poster makes specific mention gyroscope Jan 2012 #8
that's irrelevant to what you claimed OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #12
"Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world." Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #13
That would be in reference to other smaller attacks gyroscope Jan 2012 #17
So the USS Cole attack is not a significant attack and did not involve American casualties? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #18
That's not what I said gyroscope Jan 2012 #21
A United States battleship attacked in the Persian Gulf Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #23
Why do you think the FBI wanted poster fails to mention 9/11 at all? gyroscope Jan 2012 #24
It doesn't mention a lot of Al Qaeda attacks. Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #26
Was bin Laden ever indicted for 9/11? gyroscope Jan 2012 #28
Your answer inside. Which Al Qaeda attacks, small or large, involved airplanes, gyroscope? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #30
Did the FBI say that? gyroscope Jan 2012 #33
Your answer inside. You didn't answer mine. Which AQ attacks, small or great, involved airplanes? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #41
I agree that gyroscope should step up and answer questions OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #46
Ah, yes, you've got it AND the quote I was looking for originally, the "for example" one. Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #47
Why didn't the FBI indict bin laden? gyroscope Jan 2012 #56
I have answered that question already. You have not answered mine. Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #58
Irrelevant to the discussion gyroscope Jan 2012 #64
I see. Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #67
and here's another question: why do you think you know this? OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #60
So there would be no confusion about who was responsible gyroscope Jan 2012 #65
in other words, you've got nothing OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #68
"a new independent investigation to answer" what question? William Seger Jan 2012 #9
I doubt the official story gyroscope Jan 2012 #10
You think Clarke doubts ... William Seger Jan 2012 #11
I don't presume to know what he thinks in that regard gyroscope Jan 2012 #14
Why is that an issue ... William Seger Jan 2012 #15
Who said they weren't? gyroscope Jan 2012 #16
You were... William Seger Jan 2012 #19
I never claimed no plane crashed into the Pentagon gyroscope Jan 2012 #22
your claim zappaman Jan 2012 #25
What part do you not understand? gyroscope Jan 2012 #27
so you have no idea what struck the pentagon? zappaman Jan 2012 #29
do you not consider this clear evidence? zappaman Jan 2012 #31
From your link gyroscope Jan 2012 #32
We'd know it was AA77 ... William Seger Jan 2012 #34
How does Sunder know how large the explosions were? gyroscope Jan 2012 #37
His comment was based on how large the explosion would need to be William Seger Jan 2012 #40
You guys don't read the paper do you? gyroscope Jan 2012 #43
You are a prime example... William Seger Jan 2012 #44
"The explosions weren't loud enough" gyroscope Jan 2012 #48
which raises the question: where have you been? OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #49
Is there such a thing as a silent explosion? gyroscope Jan 2012 #50
why do you continue to misrepresent what we all can read? OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #51
According to Sunder gyroscope Jan 2012 #52
Is English not your primary language? zappaman Jan 2012 #53
Sunder is a clown who belongs in a circus act. gyroscope Jan 2012 #54
No difficluties with English here. zappaman Jan 2012 #55
Comedy gold gyroscope Jan 2012 #57
"according to Sunder, the explosions were silent which is why no one could hear them on 9/11." zappaman Jan 2012 #59
speaking of which OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #61
good point on how the "discussion" started zappaman Jan 2012 #62
So what is Sunder saying? gyroscope Jan 2012 #63
can you show us what you don't understand? OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #66
"some witnesses say it was a large airliner" zappaman Jan 2012 #36
You did claim it couldn't be AA77 William Seger Jan 2012 #35
Where did I say that? gyroscope Jan 2012 #38
"But a look at the flight data recorder information provided by the NTSB..." William Seger Jan 2012 #39
Again gyroscope Jan 2012 #42
Clearly, that is NOT "simply" what you did in the quotes I posted William Seger Jan 2012 #45
I thought that Clarke was notified Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2012 #20
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Counterterrorism Czar Acc...»Reply #64