At 14:39 14-9-01 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
> > >So, the US government is lying when they say there is very credible
> > >evidence?
> >
> > You never heard me say that.
> >
>
>Not exactly, that's why I asked it as a question. You said "The only reason
>why I might have less objections is that your version does not already put
>the blame on a specific person when there is
> no evidence that this person is indeed guilty."
>
>I took "there is no evidence" as meaning that evidence did not exist. Did
>you mean something else?
>
>If you just didn't know about evidence, then the usual statement is
>
>"I know of no credible evidence." Stating it as a fact indicates that you
>have some basis for stating it, not that it is just an opinion.
I'm sorry, but I have neither the time nor the money to have each and every
one of my posts checked by someone who majored in English, to see if there
might be some chance that someone might misinterpret those messages.
> > So, what evidence *has* been made public by the US government?
>
>The name of the hijackers. The fact that the German government has
>identified three of them as tied to a known Islamic terrorist group. Where
>the hijackers got their training in the US is also known. They were clearly
>well financed and organized. The hijackers were identified from at least 1
>plane before it crased from a call from within the plane. Luggage of one of
>the hijackers that didn't make the fatal flight was opened, and a flight
>instruction manual in Arabic was found.
But how does that prove that Bin Laden was behind the attack?
Jeroen
_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://go.to/brin-l
