CatEyes10736 wrote:

If I were Bush I probably wouldn't be too keen on celebrating the death of this terrorist that happened under my successors administration as opposed to my own.

IA. Wouldnt be surprised if it was sour grapes. Must be KILLING Bush that Osama was killed under Obama's watch. But what a jerk to not show up and observe the destruction this guy caused! "Staying out of the public" my ass. This ain't Leno. Oh well!

Oh please. Bush doesn't care who got him. Neither president really deserves any credit. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc! Bush just doesn't want to make a big public spectacle. People just like hating on him.

That was the best decision for him to make.

The more he stays out from in front of a camera the more I like it. Wish a few more would try that.

CeCe wrote:

The more he stays out from in front of a camera the more I like it. Wish a few more would try that.

Especially mouthy celebrities.

Quote :

6 May 2011
Last updated at 07:22 ET
Osama Bin Laden 'planned 9/11 anniversary train attack'



Bin Laden was considering an attack on the US railways, officials said



Documents found at Osama Bin Laden's Pakistan home suggest he was planning attacks on the US, including on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, reports say.

One plan was to target a US rail route, US officials revealed, although no imminent threat was detected.

Officials are examining computers, DVDs, hard-drives and documents seized from the Abbottabad home where Bin Laden may have hidden for six years.

Several rallies are expected across Pakistan in protest at Monday's raid.

Many Pakistanis are angry at what they see as a US infringement of their country's sovereignty.

They are also critical of the government for allowing the commando operation to happen, although officials deny they were told about it.

Around 1,000 people had already gathered in central Abbottabad following Friday prayers, the AFP news agency reported.

They were setting fire to tyres, blocking a main road and shouting "Down, down USA!" and "Terrorist, terrorist, USA terrorist".

Anti-American sentiment appeared to be high at a similar protest in the south-western city of Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan province.

Later on Friday, US President Barack Obama is due to meet some of the troops involved in the helicopter-borne assault.

He will hold private meetings on Friday at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, with at least some of the Navy Seals who took part in the raid.
Derail plan

Information about the apparent plans unearthed in Pakistan was contained in a joint FBI and Homeland Security bulletin, the Associated Press news agency said.

The bulletin, circulated to law enforcement officials, said the idea to tamper with an unspecified US railway track was found in handwritten notes taken from Bin Laden's compound.
The US president carries a wreath during a ceremony at Ground Zero, in New York (5 May 2011) Mr Obama also visited a New York fire department office during the trip

According to the bulletin al-Qaeda operatives planned to derail a train so that it would plunge into a valley, or from a bridge, AP reported.

"While it is clear that there was some level of planning for this type of operation in February 2010, we have no recent information to indicate an active ongoing plot to target transportation and no information on possible locations or specific targets," the warning read.

One intelligence official said the notes revealed the ambition to hit the US with large-scale attacks in major cities and on key dates such as anniversaries and holidays.

One unnamed US official told the New York Times the documents revealed that Bin Laden was not merely a figurehead for al-Qaeda sympathisers worldwide.

"He continued to plot and plan, to come up with ideas about targets, and to communicate those ideas to other senior [al-]Qaeda leaders," the newspaper quotes the official as saying.
Contradictions

Meanwhile, further details have emerged about Bin Laden's life in the Abbottabad compound and the exact sequence of events that lead to his death.

A senior Pakistani military official said one of Bin Laden's wives told investigators she had been living in the compound for five years, along with her husband.

New reports of the raid appear to contradict earlier information about the raid.

White House counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan had originally suggested that Bin Laden was among those who was armed within the compound.

Early accounts of Sunday night's raid had suggested a lengthy exchange of fire throughout the 40-minute operation.

But US officials now say that only one person fired on the US special forces.

He is believed to have been Bin Laden's courier, Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, who was killed at the start of the raid.

Critics have raised concerns about the legality of the operation after the US revised its account to acknowledge Bin Laden was unarmed when shot dead.

However, the US has maintained that Bin Laden was a lawful military target whose killing was "an act of national self-defence".

The US raid against Osama Bin Laden was launched after months of CIA surveillance from a safe house in Abbottabad, the Washington Post reported on Friday.

Citing unnamed officials, the newspaper said the CIA's operation used satellite imagery and attempted to record voices inside the compound, but was stood down before the military operation was eventually launched.

Pakistan's army has acknowledged "shortcomings" in its own efforts to find Osama Bin Laden but has also threatened to review ties with the US military if it carries out any further unilateral operations.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13304809

My guess is is that he wouldn't have tried anything on THAT day. Security would've been crazy and at even higher alert.

Nystyle709 wrote:

My guess is is that he wouldn't have tried anything on THAT day. Security would've been crazy and at even higher alert.

That's a good point. I think that he would have gone a different route.

He wouldn't have gotten away with it on the anniversary; especially not the tenth anniversary. I don't care how sly he thought he was.

seems like it's just more propaganda. Maybe wishful thinking on his report - a diary entry detailing what he'd like to do, rather than actual plans to do something. I don't see how he could have gotten away with it.

9/11 Memorial set to open on tenth anniversary; September 11th, 2011

http://www.911memorial.org/

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2nXAMo/inhabitat.com/nyc/911-memorial-uses-green-design-to-create-a-place-of-remembrance







Museum Preview (scheduled to be opened in 2012)
http://newmuseumme.national911memorial.org/preview.php

I will believe it when I see it.

I'm not impressed one bit that they didn't invite the first responders to the memorial. I feel for the survivors & the families but they're aren't the only ones who deserve to be there.

Shit's going to hit the fan if they're really going to charge people $25 to see it.

Every year since the 9/11 attacks, the names of the 2,753 victims who died at the World Trade Center have been read aloud during the annual memorial ceremony at Ground Zero. But, Mayor Bloomberg recently announced, on his weekly radio show, that the tradition may end after this year's tenth anniversary ceremony.

"Some people have said we should go on forever," said Bloomberg. "Some people have said change is good. The subject's come up a couple of times. I think we've said the foundation board will talk about this."

What do you think of this? Should the tradition continue?

Yes the tradition should continue. I am surprised Bloomjerk agreed that it should continue.

Sure, why not. Until you can think of something better.

I think the names should always be read, 9/11 only come around once a year.

I don't see why it should ever stop.

why cant they just post the names on a wall like the vietnam vets? They dont read the names of the victims from pearl harbor. They dont read the names of the victims of any attack yearly forever. Honor them yes. But read their names forever?

This was a poll question on MSN today, I said no and while we're not the minority, still more people seem to think it should be. Why should it be? Can anybody answer that?

It is the new "Day that will live in infamy" but it should not be a holiday, just a day of remembrance as Dec. 7th was for half a century. Unfortunately, it may be replaced by even more heinous attacks by sociopaths.

It's always been my thinking that holidays were for celebrating. Why would anyone want to celebrate the day terrorists launched an attack on America? It should always be observed, or a day of remembrance, but I don't know if 'holiday' is the right word.

Impact wrote:

It's always been my thinking that holidays were for celebrating. Why would anyone want to celebrate the day terrorists launched an attack on America? It should always be observed, or a day of remembrance, but I don't know if 'holiday' is the right word.

See this is what I'm thinking too, granted, Memorial Day and Armistice/Veterans Day started out as days of remembrance to those who had fallen as well, but those were soldiers who served in battle, these were civilians in non-war times in a non-war area.

Shale and Impact bring up a good points. There isn't a Pearl Harbor Holiday. Both days should be commemorated not celebrated.