Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - I killed JFK, honest!

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged number three in al-Qaida, confessed to planning the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 2001, in front of the secret military tribunals being held for the top detainees in Guantánamo, the Pentagon said last night.

Mohammed was tortured by the FBI and CIA after being given special permission by the White House to do so, this included 'waterboarding'.

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/2...alidarteh2.jpg

According to reports Mohammed said ..

- I was member of al-Qaida council

· I was director for planning and execution of 9/11, fr om A to Z

· I was commander for foreign ops

· I was directly in charge ... of cell for biological weapons, and follow-up on dirty bomb ops on American soil

· I was responsible for shoe bomber operation to down two US planes

· I was responsible for Bali bombing

· I was responsible for second wave attacks after 9/11: California; Chicago; Washington; Empire State, NY

· I was responsible for operations to destroy American vessels in the Hormuz, Gibraltar, and Singapore

· I was responsible for planning operation to destroy Panama canal

· I was responsible for planning assassination of ex-US presidents, including Carter and Clinton

· I was responsible for planning operation to destroy Heathrow, Canary Wharf and Big Ben

· I shared responsibility for assassination attempt on John Paul II in Philippines

· I was responsible for operation to assassinate President Musharraf


He also confessed to killing JFK, sinking the Titanic and getting Anna Nicole Smith pregnant.

President Bush hailed this as a great day for the American legal system.


Source.

Well that's that sorted. As he was clearly responsible for everything they may as well let the rest go, pull the troops out and repeal the Patriot Act.

Nice to tie all the loose ends up.

Not until he admits to Roswell, and also faking the moon landings. :blink:

You can get anyone to confess something if you assault them for long enough.

Lol, after 4 years of interrogation they only found out how to spell his name in court.
Overall i'm unsure, i read the transcript and its a bit more convincing, but can't believe its anything but a confession under extreme duress.

He may be taking the view that he has no chance of getting out so he may as well take the heat for everything. The more he confesses to the less credibility the process has in the eyes of the general public and the more martyrish he is in the eyes of the Arab world.

Would have thought confessing to September the 11th would have been more than sufficient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

He may be taking the view that he has no chance of getting out so he may as well take the heat for everything. The more he confesses to the less credibility the process has in the eyes of the general public and the more martyrish he is in the eyes of the Arab world.

Would have thought confessing to September the 11th would have been more than sufficient.

---

No! We cant have that. In accordance with police procedure all over the world records have to be cleared up. If he said he did it then he did it. I'm not too sure about the Titanic confession. He may have been too young at the time.:wacko:

Stalin revisited.

He was also an infamous porn icon

Stalin? :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

Stalin? :unsure:

---

http://www.cuppatea.org/ron_jeremy_captured.jpg

The man is telling the truth, we do indeed share responsibility for all that happens here on Earth...and in the heavens.

..Still, ..nothing like a scape goat, something Khalid Sheikh Mohammed understood, all to well, just before he received his last waterboard "therapy".
Nevertheless, it's rough justice, and there are only 6 virgin goats waiting in paradise for him too;... lifedeath, sucks..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged number three in al-Qaida, confessed to planning the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 2001, in front of the secret military tribunals being held for the top detainees in Guantánamo, the Pentagon said last night.

Mohammed was tortured by the FBI and CIA after being given special permission by the White House to do so, this included 'waterboarding'.

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/2...alidarteh2.jpg

According to reports Mohammed said ..

- I was member of al-Qaida council

· I was director for planning and execution of 9/11, fr om A to Z

· I was commander for foreign ops

· I was directly in charge ... of cell for biological weapons, and follow-up on dirty bomb ops on American soil

· I was responsible for shoe bomber operation to down two US planes

· I was responsible for Bali bombing

· I was responsible for second wave attacks after 9/11: California; Chicago; Washington; Empire State, NY

· I was responsible for operations to destroy American vessels in the Hormuz, Gibraltar, and Singapore

· I was responsible for planning operation to destroy Panama canal

· I was responsible for planning assassination of ex-US presidents, including Carter and Clinton

· I was responsible for planning operation to destroy Heathrow, Canary Wharf and Big Ben

· I shared responsibility for assassination attempt on John Paul II in Philippines

· I was responsible for operation to assassinate President Musharraf


He also confessed to killing JFK, sinking the Titanic and getting Anna Nicole Smith pregnant.

President Bush hailed this as a great day for the American legal system.


Source.

---

He also confessed in rather graphic detail to personally beheading the Jewish New York Times reporter Daniel Pearl, which fact escaped your note, though you obviously felt a humorous expansion of the quoted litany necessary.

I'm not at all curious as to why you posted as you did - it is your way, after all.

The problem is the Islamic religion itself. Their Justice (The Sharia) system, stood still at about the time Mohamed died. The be-headings, the stoning of women, the cutting of of the hand that steals...this is the way they make sure no on dares to look any further for some real faith. They are frightened and intimidated into becoming and staying Muslims. Now and if they fight their individual jihads, then they can expect, to be rewarded with 7 virgins in paradise... How stupid can one get? I see that as an insult to the female race, and also shows the material base of the Islamic religion. Nothing spiritual going on there... only Blood and Gore...

Well..IMO Muslims should when they move to other, in particular so called "Christian" countries, be made to swear allegiance to the state and the prevalent faith in said same country. No Mosques would I allow to be built, if they want that, then move back to an Islamic county of choice. Also, taking into account that the ultimate goal of Islam is to spread itself, if necessary by force, to the Whole Wide Word. We ourselves are allowing the seeds of problems for the future to take root and flourish by allowing them entry today. Our Children and Grand-children are at risk. We really should act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

He also confessed in rather graphic detail to personally beheading the Jewish New York Times reporter Daniel Pearl, which fact escaped your note, though you obviously felt a humorous expansion of the quoted litany necessary.

---

The list I posted was a direct quote, the source of which I included, so if you feel something is missing I suggest you take it up with The Guardian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I'm not at all curious as to why you posted as you did - it is your way, after all.

---

So, now you're a modictator, you can tell me how to post?

Anyone who believes this man did what he says, any or all of it, after the White House has admitted they authorised his torture, is a fool.

The Titanic was really gross.. Still perhaps he is also resposible for global warming and the cause of all those icebergs....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

The list I posted was a direct quote, the source of which I included, so if you feel something is missing I suggest you take it up with The Guardian.

---

I am aware of the content of the Guardian article, and that you quoted the final summation.

I am also aware that your aim was to litanize, and therefore cast doubt and ridicule on the conclusions of the tribunal.

While the list you reproduced was complete in all other aspects, I merely pointed out you felt no need to note KSM's exploits as to Pearl, which, given your bias, makes perfect sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

So, now you're a modictator, you can tell me how to post?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Anyone who believes this man did what he says, any or all of it, after the White House has admitted they authorised his torture, is a fool.

---

So you believe him to be totally innocent, then.

Whatever.

As to your other comment, tell me precisely where and when I've told you how to post?

As you yourself have said, bullshit deserves a label, and a bullshitter likewise.

Moderator or not, I'm entitled to label people just like you do.

Wizeard

I think your Draconian approach is perhaps a tad over the top. Most Muslims are not hard line and only a handful of Islamic countries stone people and go in for non-consensual cosmetic surgery. Brutal punishment was the order of the day right up until the 18th century enlightenment in Europe.

Catholics and Protestants burned each other at the stake Luther drowned Baptists (particularly fitting he thought) and all of them burned witches. In Britain hanging drawing and quartering and burning at the stake was only removed from the stautes in the 1780s and was used regularly during the 18th century

Islam needs a jolt to bring it into the 21st century but they are not so far behind as we might fancy. There are still Christian fundamentalists who hanker after the good old days when they could put the gay and adulterous behind bars.

We should not tolerate intolerance :) and I agree that intolerant Islam should be given short shrift. It beggers belief that someone who can't cope with alcohol in shops, lingerie adverts on bill boards, and impious humour in newspapers would move to a liberal democracy in the first place and I would happily facilitate their return to somewhere they would feel more comfortable.

J2

There is little doubt he is a key AQ member and guilty of terrorist acts. It just seems that the security services rather filled their boots on the confession front. There is a danger that if he confesses to too many improbable things the probable may be the baby thrown out with the bathwater when it goes to trial - although I can't see many judges letting this one loose again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I am aware of the content of the Guardian article, and that you quoted the final summation.

---

If you're aware of the article, as you claim, you would know that there was no admission from him that he killed Pearl, that revelation came later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I am also aware that your aim was to litanize, and therefore cast doubt and ridicule on the conclusions of the tribunal.

---

Litanize is the wrong word to use, however much spin you put on it, and I have a right to criticize confessions obtained out of torture. As to the conclusions of the tribunal, we're talking about confessions, not the conclusions of a kangaroo court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

While the list you reproduced was complete in all other aspects, I merely pointed out you felt no need to note KSM's exploits as to Pearl, which, given your bias, makes perfect sense.

---

As noted above, there was no mention in that article of him confessing to the murder of Pearl. But don't let facts stop you, it hasn't in the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

So you believe him to be totally innocent, then.

---

Words in the mouth again? You watch too much Fox.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Moderator or not, I'm entitled to label people just like you do.

---

Label away, it seems to turn you on.


...any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.
U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 15


If an investigation ... establishes that an act of torture ... appears to have been committed, criminal proceedings shall be instituted against the alleged offender.
U.N. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 10


An order from a superior officer or public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 2(3)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

We should not tolerate intolerance :) and I agree that intolerant Islam should be given short shrift. It beggers belief that someone who can't cope with alcohol in shops, lingerie adverts on bill boards, and impious humour in newspapers would move to a liberal democracy in the first place and I would happily facilitate their return to somewhere they would feel more comfortable.

---

I totally agree. Only I think it should apply to all immigrants. If you don't like a country why did you go there in the first place. Everybody should be aware of the laws of country they are about to emigrate to. They should not be asking for the laws to be changed to suit them. They should also be able to speak the language fluently. I am not talking about asylum seekers who have no option but seek another country to stay in.

The way I see it is that his "I did everything" stance is being used more for political currency than actual "we got him" justice. I say this as a comment on how it is being phrased by the talking heads both elected and political activists.

Biggles pointed to it being possible that as he confessed to everything and probably some of those things he had little if nothing to do with it could weaken the validity of confession of the things he did do.

It's entirely possible that the tactic AQ have decided on upon capture is not to resist confessing but to confess to everything thus making confessions even more unreliable.

It could also distract the investigations into the things he didn't do,
letting the guilty escape, which is why torture is unreliable.

He almost certainly had nothing to do with the Bali Bombing, no commentator seems to believe that. That was carried out by Jamaah Islamiah, and the people who owned up mentioned nothing of al Qaeda.

As to Daniel Pearl, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh has already been found guilty of killing him, and sentenced to death.

Reports going back to WW2 have said that confessions extracted by torture are unreliable and potentially dangerous, as they can lead, as vidcc pointed out, to the guilty ones escaping justice and continuing their work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

If you're aware of the article, as you claim, you would know that there was no admission from him that he killed Pearl, that revelation came later.

As noted above, there was no mention in that article of him confessing to the murder of Pearl. But don't let facts stop you, it hasn't in the past.

---

From the article:

"Time magazine reported last October that he had been the one to personally wield the knife that killed the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl."

I believe any reasonable person would agree that qualifies as a "mention".

As to the "revelation" itself, do you contend that "last October" is a date subsequent to today's date?

In any case, it is part of the story, and his admission to this act (which was mentioned in every medium I saw today) seems genuine in all respects.

You gave it a miss, and the why of that is plain.

I rest my case.

Jon Stewart's reply to this thread.
http://www.ifilm.com/video/2832997

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 100%

Jon Stewart's reply to this thread.
http://www.ifilm.com/video/2832997

---

Dr. Feelgood, eh?

That was him? :dabs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

If you're aware of the article, as you claim, you would know that there was no admission from him that he killed Pearl, that revelation came later.

As noted above, there was no mention in that article of him confessing to the murder of Pearl. But don't let facts stop you, it hasn't in the past.

---

From the article:

"Time magazine reported last October that he had been the one to personally wield the knife that killed the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl."

I believe any reasonable person would agree that qualifies as a "mention".

---

A 'mention', which is actually an 'accusation', has nothing whatsoever to do with a 'confession'. It also has nothing to do with my post, in which I said, ".. there was no mention in that article of him confessing to the murder of Pearl"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

In any case, it is part of the story, and his admission to this act (which was mentioned in every medium I saw today) seems genuine in all respects.

---

As I said, the story of his confession to killing Pearl came later, it wasn't in the original story, and it certainly wasn't in the story I posted, the first to hit the net.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

You gave it a miss, and the why of that is plain.

I rest my case.

---

I didn't 'give it a miss', it wasn't there! No matter how much you squirm, you were wrong, again.


So, once again you aren't man enough to admit you were wrong ... typical!

As usual, you waded in with your personal agenda, not bothering to check your facts, just like the bogus Quran story.

No wonder they made you a mod, you'll be creeping back and changing your posts next.

I rest my case. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

From the article:

"Time magazine reported last October that he had been the one to personally wield the knife that killed the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl."

I believe any reasonable person would agree that qualifies as a "mention".

---

A 'mention', which is actually an 'accusation', has nothing whatsoever to do with a 'confession'. It also has nothing to do with my post, in which I said, ".. there was no mention in that article of him confessing to the murder of Pearl"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

In any case, it is part of the story, and his admission to this act (which was mentioned in every medium I saw today) seems genuine in all respects.

---

As I said, the story of his confession to killing Pearl came later, it wasn't in the original story, and it certainly wasn't in the story I posted, the first to hit the net.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

You gave it a miss, and the why of that is plain.

I rest my case.

---

I didn't 'give it a miss', it wasn't there! No matter how much you squirm, you were wrong, again.


So, once again you aren't man enough to admit you were wrong ... typical!

As usual, you waded in with your personal agenda, not bothering to check your facts, just like the bogus Quran story.

No wonder they made you a mod, you'll be creeping back and changing your posts next.

I rest my case. :)

---

You are dealing with the difficulty of countering your own oft-used tactics, only in this instance the usage is merited.

You counter by personally attacking and insulting those who oppose you.

Tsk, tsk.

So you admit you were wrong then? :)

Your reply to my post was a personal attack on me, so don't cry like a little girl when you get it back.

People can read my post, and your replies, and make up their own mind, they needn't listen to your waffling.

In future you should stick to the facts, it will save a lot of inevitable egg on face. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

No wonder they made you a mod, you'll be creeping back and changing your posts next.

---

Are you insinuating something? That FST staff alter board history?
Please post in the report section if this is the case.

I resent your remark as a slur on my own character.

Resent on, I wasn't referring to you, and I resent being falsely accused by someone who should be setting an example to others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Resent on, I wasn't referring to you, and I resent being falsely accused by someone who should be setting an example to others.

---

You were referring to all FST staff when you posted:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

No wonder they made you a mod, you'll be creeping back and changing your posts next.

---

---

You imply that the next step for a new mod is to start altering their previous posts. As a mod, I resent that.

Where have I falsly accused you of anything? Can you not make one post that isn't intended to prickle another member into an argument? If not, I'll gladly help you to the door (again) and firmly close it behind you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chewie

You were referring to all FST staff when you posted:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

No wonder they made you a mod, you'll be creeping back and changing your posts next.

---

---

You imply that the next step for a new mod is to start altering their previous posts. As a mod, I resent that.

Where have I falsly accused you of anything? Can you not make one post that isn't intended to prickle another member into an argument? If not, I'll gladly help you to the door (again) and firmly close it behind you.

---

I implied nothing of the sort, as you well know, your false indignation is as transparent as your motives.

My remark about being falsely accused referred to j2k4, and the remarks he made in reply to my first post.

And don't hold banning over my head as a substitute for something relevant to say, who do you think you are? Am I meant to grovel to you now, and admit to things that aren't true, just to post here?

This is what has happened here before, and lost you some very good posters. A mod makes a mistake, deliberate or otherwise, and others step in, wrongly, to back them up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chewie

You were referring to all FST staff when you posted:You imply that the next step for a new mod is to start altering their previous posts. As a mod, I resent that.

Where have I falsly accused you of anything? Can you not make one post that isn't intended to prickle another member into an argument? If not, I'll gladly help you to the door (again) and firmly close it behind you.

---

I implied nothing of the sort, as you well know, your false indignation is as transparent as your motives.

---

Your meaning appears quite clear to me, as does your unwillingness to explain it otherwise. My indignation is very real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

My remark about being falsely accused referred to j2k4, and the remarks he made in reply to my first post.

---

In that case, why did you put it in the same sentence as a comment directed toward me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

And don't hold banning over my head as a substitute for something relevant to say, who do you think you are? Am I meant to grovel to you now, and admit to things that aren't true, just to post here?

---

Your arrogance is showing again.
Who do I think I am? I am someone who has been insulted by you for no reason. You have not explained your alternate meaning to that comment.
No-one is meant to grovel to anyone. Explaining yourself is another matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ava Estelle

This is what has happened here before, and lost you some very good posters. A mod makes a mistake, deliberate or otherwise, and others step in, wrongly, to back them up.

---

This board has lost some great posters for many reasons.
You're obviously talking about your previous bans since you could have posted This has happened here before to signify a generalisation
Perhaps neither of your bans were mistakes, wrongly backed up by other staff. Having read more than a few of your other posts throughout FST, I don't recall you posting anything genial or conversational and your method of discussion appears to consist of ridiculing other members.
On that evidence I'd say you overstepped the mark at least twice before.

This thread has moved completely OT. If you wish to continue this, use PMs as I have plenty of space there.
I shall summarily delete any replies to my posts in this thread as OT.

Back on topic for a moment if you dont mind:

Damn what the hell did they do to this guy hes admitting everything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guardian on friday 16th march

The alleged al-Qaida mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, boasted of being personally responsible for decapitating the US journalist Daniel Pearl five years ago, in a new transcript released by the Pentagon yesterday. The claim comes on top of 30 other al-Qaida operations he said he been involved in.

...

A Pentagon spokesman, Bryan Whitman, said the passage was withheld from 26 pages of his "confession" released on Wednesday to allow time to inform Pearl's wife, Mariane. They also have a son, Adam, born four months after his death.

In the full transcript Mohammed admits responsibility for 31 actual or planned plots, ranging from the attacks on New York to "an operation to destroy Heathrow airport, the Canary Wharf building and Big Ben on British soil".

---

apparently my post is two short??