"September 11 mastermind" - "Terror Chief"

HelterSkelter

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1256038,00.html

Ok, so one guy who was held at Guantanamo Bay for God knows how long without trial has confessed to virtually every terrorist attack I've ever heard about!1 This includes the following:

- plotting the 9/11 terror attacks.

- planning, financing, and training others for bombings, including the 1993 attack at the World Trade Centre

- planning and financing the attempt by shoe bomber Richard Reid to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight.

- planning 29 individual attacks, including many that were never executed.

- beheading US journalist Daniel Pearl

Seriously can we believe the confessions of a man who was held in Guantanamo Bay without any trial, in a place where detainees were subject to abuse and torture (according to detainees who have been released)?

I would like to hear the evidence against this man (other than his "confession"). If I was locked up in Guantanamo Bay for four or five years without trial, I think I too would admit to almost anything. It would be better to get the death penalty than remain in that place with no end in sight, especially if you were innocent. Reminds me of the Guilford Four's "confessions".

lostexpectation

and as far as I remember this guy handed himself in,
but no doubt he was involved in 911 and al qeada but how far did all these other plots go? a guy from human rights wtach was saying that this guy is actually going to get some sort of trial as head honcho with lots of evidence against him and the other random guys that are stuck in guantanmano who won't get anything half proper

where this guy from originally? saudi arabia?

InFront

That reminds me of the metro article a few days ago that mistakenly named Khalid Sheikh Muhammad (above guy) as Sheikh Mohammed the ruler of Dubai. Luckily, I don't think they get that Metro edition in the USA.

Anyway, KSM's transcript is here. The fact that he takes the total blame for such an unbelievable list of things (lok at pages 18 and 19 for full list), even partial resposiblity for shooting the pope - and the fact that mention of torture has been deleted from this transcript, leaves it open to a lot of doubt. I'm sure Khalid Sheikh Muhammad is no innocent man, but really this seems like he is either ridiculing the system, he is trying to claim undue fame as a martyr, or else there is some other force at play on the US side. This and the manner that the trial is being carried out is not very reassuring.

InFront

lostexpectation wrote:

where this guy from originally? saudi arabia?

Pakistan

Akrasia

It's just a fascist show trial. It might as well be the spanish inquisition.

KerranJast

No one ever expects that.

MoominPapa

KerranJast wrote:

No one ever expects that.

LOL. Wonder if it was the comfy chair that broke his spirit

lostexpectation

InFront wrote:

Pakistan

ah right yes.

Akrasia

MoominPapa wrote:

LOL. Wonder if it was the comfy chair that broke his spirit

He probably broke after the rack

runswithascript

Didn't you guys here? It was the Jews and the Catholics that did it. Those guys are always conspiring together.

We don't like your sort around here. They took our jeebs!

j/k.

FatherTed

The news about him being the mastermind behind the 1993 WTC attack and 9/11 is exactly new. The other stuff is.

Sand

Seriously can we believe the confessions of a man who was held in Guantanamo Bay without any trial, in a place where detainees were subject to abuse and torture (according to detainees who have been released)?

Seeing as you feel the testimony of Gitmo detainees cant be trusted, why exactly do you accept the testimony of other Gitmo detainees?

cozmik

The Bush Administration has done so much damage to U.S. credibility that there is no way to know what comes out of Gitmo is true or just propaganda.

In cases like this there needs to be a proper trial, a secret hearing in an illegal jail doesn't cut it.

Frederico

Sand wrote:

Seeing as you feel the testimony of Gitmo detainees cant be trusted, why exactly do you accept the testimony of other Gitmo detainees?

I would be much more likely to believe someones account rather than a forced confession from Saddam's secret prisons/Gitmo/Chechnya. For logical reasons I don't trust US administration/military.

Sand

I would be much more likely to believe someones account rather than a forced confession from Saddam's secret prisons/Gitmo/Chechnya. For logical reasons I don't trust US administration/military.

But you do trust the accounts of Gitmo inmates, unless those Gitmo inmates admit they were involved in terrorism in which case you do not believe those accounts?

RedPlanet

hey wait!
I thought Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks!
Surely you all remember the "smoking gun" video?

Frederico

Sand wrote:

But you do trust the accounts of Gitmo inmates, unless those Gitmo inmates admit they were involved in terrorism in which case you do not believe those accounts?

I trust the accounts of inmates as much as I would trust any other account. To me any confession, etc that comes out of that place is null and void. I dont believe in torturing information true or false out of anyone.

Frederico

Quite simply, if I had my own little illegal secret prison, I take you, throw you in, get you to confess to anything I want.

You tell people what really happened: They will generally believe you.

I show your confession to the world, will they believe it?: Nah.

If you are muslim, have stubble, and kinda 'look' like a terrorist, portray you that way in the media, then show your confession to the world, will they believe it?: A good few will.

Such simplicity.

Kevster

I was just going to post something along that same line Frederico. It would not surprise me at all if this guy had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. The US government are proven liars. Those in the highest positions of the said government should have dates in an International court. Will it happen though? - No.

The USA is a bully.

Kevin.

cozmik

They're all SUDDENLY confessing.

Mastermind of USS Cole Attack Confesses

WASHINGTON Mar 20, 2007 (AP)— A Yemeni portrayed as an al-Qaida operative and a member of a terrorist family confessed to plotting the bombings of the USS Cole and two U.S. embassies in Africa, killing hundreds, according to a Pentagon transcript of a Guantanamo Bay hearing.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2962915

Hobbes

The problem isn't "do we believe him or not". Checking the guys history he was wanted for a load of things before he went to gitmo.

The point is without proper due process how can we believe anything said under torture? For example some of the Iraq WMD intel is from a person who was renditioned. There have been similar things, the so called liquid bombs in the UK that never appeared, another I recall some time back of bridges being blown up which was also fake.

The main question is why is this being reported recently. Most likely to get away from the scandals currently hitting the whitehosue.

HelterSkelter

Sand wrote:

But you do trust the accounts of Gitmo inmates, unless those Gitmo inmates admit they were involved in terrorism in which case you do not believe those accounts?

Yes I do believe their accounts as a matter of fact! However I don't believe statement or confessions from people who have been held for up to 5 years without trial.

runswithascript

It was the dude on the grassy knoll with the magic bullet already.

Zombrex

Sand wrote:

Seeing as you feel the testimony of Gitmo detainees cant be trusted, why exactly do you accept the testimony of other Gitmo detainees?

You mean the claims of torture could have been made under torture, and cannot be trusted