Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 4 votes

911 inside job - for what?


  • Please log in to reply
4446 replies to this topic

#826    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,215 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 14 February 2013 - 07:25 AM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 14 February 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

101 my friend you give me to much credit. I don`t post nearly as much as I us to. I don`t think my views have changed to much but as anybody views are changable.  Imo the facts and the hear say so to speak tell a tail that has both if not three sides involved and OBL  as a scape goat. I will not jump on a tail coat but for such a thing as 9-11 to happen with 4 plains and a 75% accuraccy from 19 morons seems improbable. i am willing to look at any aspect of that but will not buy into a government report that used trillions on a war and a few million on an investigation as to how and why.  Im not a ct guy but I know what a dead rat smells like.  I`m not like Boon as he often went with the popular midia as sky does.  

I want an open investigation and that was never allowed. The lies as to to the wars are now transparent ad a joke I feel the people need an honest investigation. That will never happen though. So I guess we believe the govenment 100% as well as politicians or we just keep getting called Ct`folk when we want better answers

No mate, credit where it is due, you are awesome, we do not all have to agree all the time, it would not be much of a discussion if we did. However, the media is not my bag, I have a strong construction background and understand well how the buildings were constructed, and have no problem with discussing the engineering of an aircraft, I am no expert in that field, but I am a good reader and have a realistic grasp of engineering and construction principals. Built a few High Rises myself in my time, and I am sure I can find my way without resorting to media. I have seen too many young people follow the 911 CT's to nefarious ends recently, and I feel I need to roll my sleeves up, and take this new challenge on with all that I have to put behind it.

To me, what was claimed is not at all impossible considering the level of security and the overconfidence of America at the time, if overconfidence is the right word. I just read a thread where people are arguing that Dorner could hold the US hostage with like 6 marines, yet 19 people who trained for at least 2 years to carry out one specific mission could not? I am not sure about that. I do not feel the 6 marines could hold the US hostage, but I bet they could wipe out more the 911 did. Soliders also did not believe in Kamikaze Pilots, after all, who would be mental enough to smash your own plane into a target?

I am hoping to be here in a technical capacity, and offer what I can to dispel any untruth. Sometimes things do not make sense until one sees a bigger picture. I am wagering that be the case here with what I understand.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#827    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,215 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 14 February 2013 - 07:50 AM

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

Just to clear up for those who don’t click the link - it’s a spoof/comedy.

To be frank, I do believe the little whistling smiley might just have given that one away.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

Excellent, your ‘reality’ is to link the same Fox News article and inaccurate headline four times.  Why don’t you quote the part of the 2004 videotape where “Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11”?  But you wont... because he doesn’t.

So we have one guy posting spoofs and another linking fallacious Fox News headlines, - OCTs really know their stuff.


I look forward to reading your posting as I chew through the thread. I am sure we will have much to say when I do. Not sure why a little obvious levity is reason for you to claim some sort of judgement over those who have a hard time considering your proposals. Not like the clip entered was supposed to be evidence of some sort is it? If it was, this thread could just close right now couldn't it?

Now I do not trust the media either, they c*** up what they hear, and they twist it, why? Because they have to sell headlines, I understand that, so should you, so lets have a look at that articles (did you follow the links? Same one isn't it) they reckon:


Quote

Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so because of injustices against the Lebanese and Palestinians by Israel and the United States


Now that seems a good place to start. Do you feel this is not at all the case, and that Bin Laden did not feel the US had interfered? Because it seems to be a pretty common theme from what I hear. I do not care what the article says, but I would like to break it down to little pieces for accuracy. Is that an accurate stament? Did Lebanon and Palestine have a friendly relationship with the US before 911, or is this at least true? Lets determine the level of exaggeration in this article, and see if it is deserving of your mockery. As a news article  I agree verification is required, so perhaps proving what elements are incorrect might be a good start I think, do you agree?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#828    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 14 February 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

To be frank, I do believe the little whistling smiley might just have given that one away.


I look forward to reading your posting as I chew through the thread. I am sure we will have much to say when I do. Not sure why a little obvious levity is reason for you to claim some sort of judgement over those who have a hard time considering your proposals. Not like the clip entered was supposed to be evidence of some sort is it? If it was, this thread could just close right now couldn't it?

I think little whistling smileys can be interpreted in different ways and it could easily be misconstrued at a cursory glance that redhen had provided a rebuttal to my prior post – I cleared up that he had not provided a rebuttal to my prior post.


View Postpsyche101, on 14 February 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Now I do not trust the media either, they c*** up what they hear, and they twist it, why? Because they have to sell headlines, I understand that, so should you, so lets have a look at that articles (did you follow the links? Same one isn't it) they reckon:

Do they ever, and to sell headlines is only one part of it – you must know that politics are also at work.


View Postpsyche101, on 14 February 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Now that seems a good place to start. Do you feel this is not at all the case, and that Bin Laden did not feel the US had interfered? Because it seems to be a pretty common theme from what I hear. I do not care what the article says, but I would like to break it down to little pieces for accuracy. Is that an accurate stament? Did Lebanon and Palestine have a friendly relationship with the US before 911, or is this at least true? Lets determine the level of exaggeration in this article, and see if it is deserving of your mockery. As a news article  I agree verification is required, so perhaps proving what elements are incorrect might be a good start I think, do you agree?

This is not the case: -

“Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so...”

That is a lie, fed to millions.

When we look at the transcript here, there is no admittance that bin Laden “ordered” anything.

There is “praise” of the attackers.
There is a 20 year old “desire” to reciprocate attacks on America.
There is an attempt at “moral justification” for the action.
There is evidence of “foreknowledge”.
There is even evidence of “agreement” with Atta.

These descriptions are a far cry from the Fox News headline, “Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11” or that, “he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks”.

None of this is unusual – it follows the pattern of previous attacks and bin Laden statements.

Let me show you what a real bin Laden ‘confession’ looks like: -

“… I had sent 250 Mujahidin. We got moral support from local Muslims. In one explosion one hundred Americans were killed, then 18 more were killed in fighting.”

~bin Laden, 1997



It appears bin Laden was not shy of admitting where he had ordered direct action.  Here he admits responsibility for sending those 250 fighters to Somalia that resulted in over 100 American deaths.

Yet in the same interview, immediately prior to the above excerpt, he denied responsibility for the killing of five Americans in the Riyadh bombing.  I see no reason for him to lie about these five after admitting to over one hundred.  So the pattern is thus...
  • When bin Laden gave a direct “order”, he openly claimed responsibility for the action.
  • When bin Laden had a peripheral role (those descriptions noted above – moral justification, foreknowledge, etc), he denied responsibility.
In the case of 9/11, he denied responsibility (twice!) and credited Mohammed Atta for the operation (twice!).  If the pattern above is followed, this suggests bin Laden did not “order” the operation, but rather had the peripheral role mentioned.

Therefore, both the transcript and precedent show the Fox News headline and editorial to be fallacious.

Now you might ask why all this is really important; so what if bin Laden is ‘only’ an accessory to the crime (a supporter), rather than the principal (the perpetrator)?  It is important because it affects the whole focus of investigation, public perception and the reaction.

With realization of bin Laden’s true role (not accusations of the political and media witch hunt witnessed) it is seen there are thousands of disgruntled Jihadists out there just like him – he loses that bogeyman glamor; he is not particularly special anymore.   And whilst the public rallied around the war, their focus on getting bin Laden, the real perpetrators, Mohammed Atta and the hijackers, are left by the wayside.

We need to forget this constant bin Laden, bin Laden, bin Laden propaganda, and instead understand who the hijackers were, where they came from, their motivations, their connections and who they were associated with.  That is where we start to realise the more direct hand behind 9/11.

These 'hijackers' were men, prior to 9/11, facilitated, assisted, protected, funded and housed by the intelligence services (you will gather much of that if you read through this thread).  These were men, not lifelong Jihadists nor particularly religious, but well educated Westerners who recently and all at once turned up on bin Laden’s doorstep, and against previous experience of the Bojinka plot, pledged suicide for the cause.  These are men whom the 9/11 Commission could not account for their motive.  These are men who had family plans after 9/11 and strangely bought return tickets for their last flight.  These are men who obtained their visas from the same avenue that the CIA used to construct their ‘Al Qaeda’ database during Operation Cyclone.  These are men with a number of aliases, interestingly, prior to ever becoming ‘Jihadists’.  These are men related to an Israeli intelligence informant and with reported friendship to a CIA asset.  I could go on and expand in much detail, but I’m sure you catch my drift.

No, let’s not leave it to chance, I’ll spell it out.  These ‘hijackers’ are men for all the world with the appearance/profile to be expected of intelligence agents.  Those who guided the way of these agents required a “new Pearl Harbor” to propel their policy, in fact, they believed the very global pre-eminence of America depended on it.  They were all over and inside ‘Al Qaeda’ ever since its inception.  They knew the desire of bin Laden and failure of the Bojinka plot.  They presented and enabled the 9/11 attack to bin Laden like a carrot on a stick, or the grandest case of entrapment if you like, and bin Laden took the bait, becoming enmeshed in their Neocon plot.

Oh I could go on and on, there are so many evidence points connected which back up everything that I’m saying, but I’ll leave it there to digest for now.  If you are in doubt of the source for anything then please let me know.  Or we could even just forget it altogether, because after all, Fox News said that bin Laden did it.

:whistle:

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#829    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM

.


woah...psyche101 joining the 9/11 'battle royal'.... :w00t: ...never thought I'd see THAT


9/11 is always polarised between Official Account and Inside Job, but I have my own theory.

And that is.... that it wasn't an Inside Job...but there were 'things' that happened that day that were classified and covered up.


In a nut shell....the things that I think were covered up...

That Flights 93 and 77 were shot down...because with the hijackers at the controls they became 'enemy aircraft'...

That Flight 77 was taken by remote control over the Atlantic and shot down.

That there could have been some kind of truck-bomb or human suicide bomb that breeched the Pentagon defences...
and this was fired upon by small (ish) ground defence missiles.

That a mock up of flight 77 crash was put into place...to explain away what happened to it...

That the WTCs 1 + 2  were brought down by some kind of Directed Energy Weapon when the top of the South Tower
was about to topple over...this was done to limit the damage to the surrounding area. North Tower weakened by field
effects and this is why it was brought down.

That Building 7 was weakened by the field effects of the DEW and it, too, was brought down as safely
as possible with some kind of DEW.



anyway....good luck and let battle commence. Not with me because my theory always gets sidelined...and 9/11 is such
a head-banger that I only dip into it now and again...


:tu:


.


#830    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,378 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:31 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 14 February 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

No mate, credit where it is due, you are awesome, we do not all have to agree all the time, it would not be much of a discussion if we did. However, the media is not my bag, I have a strong construction background and understand well how the buildings were constructed, and have no problem with discussing the engineering of an aircraft, I am no expert in that field, but I am a good reader and have a realistic grasp of engineering and construction principals. Built a few High Rises myself in my time, and I am sure I can find my way without resorting to media. I have seen too many young people follow the 911 CT's to nefarious ends recently, and I feel I need to roll my sleeves up, and take this new challenge on with all that I have to put behind it.

To me, what was claimed is not at all impossible considering the level of security and the overconfidence of America at the time, if overconfidence is the right word. I just read a thread where people are arguing that Dorner could hold the US hostage with like 6 marines, yet 19 people who trained for at least 2 years to carry out one specific mission could not? I am not sure about that. I do not feel the 6 marines could hold the US hostage, but I bet they could wipe out more the 911 did. Soliders also did not believe in Kamikaze Pilots, after all, who would be mental enough to smash your own plane into a target?

I am hoping to be here in a technical capacity, and offer what I can to dispel any untruth. Sometimes things do not make sense until one sees a bigger picture. I am wagering that be the case here with what I understand.

How is it that pursuit of the truth, and the asking of questions, are considered to be nefarious ends?


#831    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 14 February 2013 - 04:55 PM

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

That Flight 77 was taken by remote control over the Atlantic and shot down.

Oh bee, I’d like to say it’s nice to see you, but the above makes diddly-squat sense.

If the aircraft were under remote control in your scenario, an attempt would be made to land it rather than unnecessarily shoot it down.  If destruction of the remote aircraft were necessary for some unforeseeable reason, then it wouldn’t need to be shot down... it’s under remote control... we nose dive it into the sea.

You really could do with some work on the basic logic and practicality of your suggestions.

And DEWs... oh dear  :lol:

Back to the drawing board.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#832    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,404 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 February 2013 - 05:09 PM

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

If the aircraft were under remote control in your scenario, an attempt would be made to land it rather than unnecessarily shoot it down.

Whereas, the aircraft would leave a track to its destination, transponder or no transponder.

Quote

...If destruction of the remote aircraft were necessary for some unforeseeable reason, then it wouldn’t need to be shot down... it’s under remote control... we nose dive it into the sea.

And, that location can be determined using radar and satellite data, transponder or no transponder.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#833    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,378 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 February 2013 - 08:04 PM

Well I'll say it--good to see you back Bee, no matter where you stand. :st


#834    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:26 PM

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

Oh bee, I’d like to say it’s nice to see you, but the above makes diddly-squat sense.

If the aircraft were under remote control in your scenario, an attempt would be made to land it rather than unnecessarily shoot it down.  If destruction of the remote aircraft were necessary for some unforeseeable reason, then it wouldn’t need to be shot down... it’s under remote control... we nose dive it into the sea.

You really could do with some work on the basic logic and practicality of your suggestions.

It's different for us looking back when all the details have been put under the microscope...

When events were unfolding no-one knew what the extent of it was...what might be coming next.

In the heat of the attack decisions had to be made and were made. They might not have wanted everyone to know

that it was possible to take commercial airliners under remote control...and like I said...with hijackers at the controls

those planes would have become enemy aircraft. Perhaps the military resources weren't available for a protracted

hostage situation when the country was on red alert. I suppose different rules apply when it's 'Red Alert'


And if it WAS a decision that could be questioned and criticised later then all the more reason to classify the info

and cover it up.... ^_^




Quote

And DEWs... oh dear  :lol:

Back to the drawing board.

Yes DEWs...don't play the innocent with me... :lol: ...and your support for Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon is (and has always been) noted....

lol.... :P



View PostBabe Ruth, on 14 February 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:

Well I'll say it--good to see you back Bee, no matter where you stand. :st


cheers Babe...just popping in for a quick visit.... :st
.


#835    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,404 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:33 PM

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:


his is not the case: -

“Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so...”

That is a lie, fed to millions.

Oops!! You overlooked this.

Quote

Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11

Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so because of injustices against the Lebanese and Palestinians by Israel and the United States.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c...l#ixzz2KqrtR1ZD


KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#836    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,404 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:34 PM

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:


Hi, Bee, long time no see! :w00t:
.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#837    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,404 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:37 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 14 February 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:


Hi, Psyche! I haven't seen you since the last time I saw you.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#838    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:39 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 14 February 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

Hi, Bee, long time no see! :w00t:
.

Hiya Sky...... :tu:

.


#839    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,215 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 15 February 2013 - 05:23 AM

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

I think little whistling smileys can be interpreted in different ways and it could easily be misconstrued at a cursory glance that redhen had provided a rebuttal to my prior post – I cleared up that he had not provided a rebuttal to my prior post.

Perhaps for a brain dead moron. Could any one person possibly watch that and think for one second it is real? You can't help but chuckle as soon as AQ starts arcing up. Hell, I think if someone was dim enough to consider that true, then they would not even have the brain power to be questioning the incident to begin with.
In fact, they probably would not have the brain power to tie their shoes.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Do they ever, and to sell headlines is only one part of it – you must know that politics are also at work.

Polotics are for sale. Do they have some sort of hold over the snot nosed kid who just got out of college and is writing for a penny a word? Do they have control over the fringe garbage publication like Vanity Fair? This is where CT's like 911 come from. If you think the CIA has control over every paper in the world, then I simply do not believe you. Fox news is but one outlet, from what I see below, you seem to think Middle Eastern media are more reliable sources??? If that is not the case, why go to them?
No media source, in fact no source is sacred. As far as I am concerned every single one of them has no option but to prove what they say.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

This is not the case: -

“Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so...”

Never was going to be if one thinks about it for even a fraction of a second. Jihad is not one mans war.


View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

That is a lie, fed to millions.

Well, yes it is, most people are smart enough to realise that Jihad is more than Bin Laden, and that all those who have been brainwashed onto thinking slaughter and debauchery is a worthy reason to die all turn to the leaders. He is regarded as top shelf is he he not? Is the Pope responsible for the statement that the Vatican believes in ET? Nope. But if we find ET with Vatican telescopes we are going to run to the Pope with questions aren't we? But I bet he has probably not even ever visitied the Observatory. No it is not the same thing, I am trying to illustrate a hierarchy, because that is how Bin Laden fits in. If he was leading the operation, he would be in a billion pieces like those he sent to cripple America.
You can't expect some PFY to be on the ball with world polotics, and PFY's are the people who spit his crap out. Everyone has to make a living, and to be quite frank, pointing a finger at News sources is not going to resolve anything, and in no way does it absolve Jihad leaders.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

When we look at the transcript here, there is no admittance that bin Laden “ordered” anything.

There is “praise” of the attackers.
There is a 20 year old “desire” to reciprocate attacks on America.
There is an attempt at “moral justification” for the action.
There is evidence of “foreknowledge”.
There is even evidence of “agreement” with Atta.

What I would expect from a group leader. He did not have the guts to strap a bomb to himself, he hid like a coward. He sent other people to do his work. We see this with too many dictators, heck, we see this in any war. In the same sense, you can also say Truman had nothing to do with Hiroshima, Tibbets dropped the bomb, but who was blamed for the action? The US. Did Truman ever say "I bombed Hiroshima"?

If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike for example - Sweden? And we know that freedom-haters don't possess defiant spirits like those of the 19 - may Allah have mercy on them.

What is he saying there - we. Not me (Bin Laden), not Atta, not Mickey Mouse, the Jihad. Do you feel Bin Laden was not a part of the Jihad? Because that is the only way I see him absolved from responsibility. What I see is not proof of absolving Bin Laden, I see proof of word games.

But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

Again - we. We are in the 4th year. How is he not part of "we"?

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

These descriptions are a far cry from the Fox News headline, “Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11” or that, “he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks”.

None of this is unusual – it follows the pattern of previous attacks and bin Laden statements.

Hang on, previous attacks. He has no problem attacking America at any time, but he would not be part of 911? What?
Do you feel his past terrorist actions do not indicate a willingness to hurt America? Problem is his twisted values are not shared by the US. He though he was attacking a landmark that all people believed in and it would hurt everyone. It did, but not how his little mind works. People were horrified and outraged that another human being could act in such a sub human manner. The wealth, the damage, all second to the lives. He does not understand the Western value placed in life, that is obviously by the continuous sacrifices to bring the evil point to light.

Now Fox news also published the names of the cretins with box cutter's. We know Bin Laden was not on board we know any involvement he had was from some safe little dark corner, and how did he evade capture? He knew he would be targeted. He went into hiding. The headlines are not litteral, he no more was personally responsible than Truman was at Hiroshima, that in no way absolves his role, and his pride of the incident alone is enough to place him in the cross hairs as far as I am concerned. If you praise the death of innocents like that, you have no place in modern society. He got what he deserved, and he deserved to spend his final years in contant fear of the inevitable.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Let me show you what a real bin Laden ‘confession’ looks like: -

“… I had sent 250 Mujahidin. We got moral support from local Muslims. In one explosion one hundred Americans were killed, then 18 more were killed in fighting.”

~bin Laden, 1997



It appears bin Laden was not shy of admitting where he had ordered direct action.  Here he admits responsibility for sending those 250 fighters to Somalia that resulted in over 100 American deaths.

Yet in the same interview, immediately prior to the above excerpt, he denied responsibility for the killing of five Americans in the Riyadh bombing.  I see no reason for him to lie about these five after admitting to over one hundred.  So the pattern is thus...
  • When bin Laden gave a direct “order”, he openly claimed responsibility for the action.
  • When bin Laden had a peripheral role (those descriptions noted above – moral justification, foreknowledge, etc), he denied responsibility.
In the case of 9/11, he denied responsibility (twice!) and credited Mohammed Atta for the operation (twice!).  If the pattern above is followed, this suggests bin Laden did not “order” the operation, but rather had the peripheral role mentioned.

And he is openly advocating 911 by your own link, and he keeps saying "we" admitting he is a part, and anyone can see an instrumental part, He is held in high esteem by those who train in order to try and change the world how they want it to be. And these gutless freaks send children to do their dirty work whilst they hide. Why was there dancing in the streets at this senseless killing in the middle east? Anthony moron Mundine here in Australia said he personally supported the vile action as well, damn shame he is still in the country, we would not miss him at all. Those actions were not media Hype, I heard Mundine speak myself, there are some twisted ideals from those who believe this was a just action, and to be perfectly straight  I do not think a sensible person alive thinks that Bin Laden was Solely responsible, he is an inspiration and leader to his soldiers who fight for the wrong reasons, but ones he makes up himself.

This sounds like a confession to me:

And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.

Nobody said he flew a plane. But he does not seem innocent to the situation making statements like that. He is outlining some sick twisted vendetta that he seems to feel personally responsible to fix. Seems pretty self incriminatory to me.


It never occurred to us that the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces would abandon 50,000 of his citizens in the twin towers to face those great horrors alone, the time when they most needed him.

But because it seemed to him that occupying himself by talking to the little girl about the goat and its butting was more important than occupying himself with the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers, we were given three times the period required to execute the operations - all praise is due to Allah.


Not hard to see he has some deep seated personal problem with Bush. And his father. It sounds more like he set up an assassination attempt for Bush, expecting him to rush to the scene and it failed. No evidence for such, I'm just saying what I hear in this. Seems pretty incriminating I feel.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Therefore, both the transcript and precedent show the Fox News headline and editorial to be fallacious.

Taken at face value yes, as an organisation no.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Now you might ask why all this is really important; so what if bin Laden is ‘only’ an accessory to the crime (a supporter), rather than the principal (the perpetrator)?  It is important because it affects the whole focus of investigation, public perception and the reaction.

The perp was an ignorant fool who believed some religious garbage about hitting America where it will matter and followed orders. I wonder what he would think if he saw America today, with Bin Laden feeding the fishes? I wonder how he would feel about not making any impact to the US spirit and econnomy? Would he still have given his life knowing he did not dent the US spitrit, nor the econnomy and they have risen from these ashes, and his actions have only left him to be remembered as a cold blooded murderer? He is vaporised, what do we do? Put some air and ashes in a courtroom? I see Bin Laden as responsible for those deaths too. As far as I am concerned, he got of lightly for his actions. This i not a one on one, this is combined action that was to hit America where is hurts. Problem being the leaders were ignorant mongrels who could not see past their own ego's. Had they been able to do so, they just might have realised their values are not American values, and what they think was crippling was merely a disgraceful act. Misdirected ignorant fools in nothing more than a vile cult hellbent on chaos. That can never be "one man".

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

With realization of bin Laden’s true role (not accusations of the political and media witch hunt witnessed) it is seen there are thousands of disgruntled Jihadists out there just like him – he loses that bogeyman glamor; he is not particularly special anymore.   And whilst the public rallied around the war, their focus on getting bin Laden, the real perpetrators, Mohammed Atta and the hijackers, are left by the wayside.

Gee, Saddam seems to have taken a back seat, you speak as though this was a vendetta against one man, It was not, It was a mission to take out a gutless ring leader who sends children to their deaths.

I actually never asked why is Bin Laden targeted, you seem to like to focus on the aspect. I asked you about the relationship between the US and Lebanon/Palestine. I did ask if you felt Bin Laden felt this way too, so perhaps your post is justified in that way, but you seem intent on absolving Bin Laden.

Can I ask you outright, do you feel Bin Laden has no involvement with 911 at all? Just a short answer will suffice, do you feel is is innocent and not part of this action at all?

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

We need to forget this constant bin Laden, bin Laden, bin Laden propaganda, and instead understand who the hijackers were, where they came from, their motivations, their connections and who they were associated with.  That is where we start to realise the more direct hand behind 9/11.

These 'hijackers' were men, prior to 9/11, facilitated, assisted, protected, funded and housed by the intelligence services (you will gather much of that if you read through this thread).  These were men, not lifelong Jihadists nor particularly religious, but well educated Westerners who recently and all at once turned up on bin Laden’s doorstep, and against previous experience of the Bojinka plot, pledged suicide for the cause.  These are men whom the 9/11 Commission could not account for their motive.  These are men who had family plans after 9/11 and strangely bought return tickets for their last flight.  These are men who obtained their visas from the same avenue that the CIA used to construct their ‘Al Qaeda’ database during Operation Cyclone.  These are men with a number of aliases, interestingly, prior to ever becoming ‘Jihadists’.  These are men related to an Israeli intelligence informant and with reported friendship to a CIA asset.  I could go on and expand in much detail, but I’m sure you catch my drift.

I catch the drift, but it seems like pretty muddy water to me.

There are many High-jackers, you seem to be rather broad brushing them? Below you mention the Bojinka plot? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not only guilty, but has a history of trying to carry out just such an operation. Surely you are not suggesting it was CIA who contracted Boston controllers? You would want to have solid evidence for such an accustation.

How many bombers are life long Jihadists? Any? This is the purpose of recruitment camps and cells is it not? David Hicks is a man from my own country who lost his mind and joined this senseless violation of human rights. A typical target, and angst teen who ran with the wrong crowd and managed to get on the wrong side of the law, and then hated the law because he got in trouble for breaking it. His wife had an affair on him, and he reacted badly by trying to kill the world, just like Dorner. Some people are not stable, and fight the wrong fight, it is not hard to convince such lost souls that death and destruction will bring them the peace they seek. Such confused young minds are easily influenced, and scum take advantage of youth. It is much harder to help them enter society as a useful and constructive individual.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

No, let’s not leave it to chance, I’ll spell it out.  These ‘hijackers’ are men for all the world with the appearance/profile to be expected of intelligence agents.  Those who guided the way of these agents required a “new Pearl Harbor” to propel their policy, in fact, they believed the very global pre-eminence of America depended on it.  They were all over and inside ‘Al Qaeda’ ever since its inception.  They knew the desire of bin Laden and failure of the Bojinka plot.  They presented and enabled the 9/11 attack to bin Laden like a carrot on a stick, or the grandest case of entrapment if you like, and bin Laden took the bait, becoming enmeshed in their Neocon plot.

How are their profiles those of Intelligence agents? Can you extrapolate, that is one heck of an unsupported statement to make. The above reads like your proof is your preference. Because they had education? That makes them prime candidates for what they had to do. You are not going to get some little girl, or some uneducated goat herder to fly a plane now are you?

You mention Bin Ladens desire, which as far as I can tell is some twisted revenge vendetta for something he felt he was going to take responsibility for, and quote religion as the reason for slaughter. Your link above pretty much says just that. All it does not say is that Bin Laden had the guts to carry out these actions, and with his profile, the entire operation would most likely have failed.

If Bin Laden did not guide these men, then I do not see why he is so happy about the result. He should be annoyed that he was set up, but his did what he wanted, and was happy. He destroyed what he thought was the pillar of American life - wealth and business. Just another twisted piece of human garbage who thinks his idea of the world is everyone's idea of the world.

View PostQ24, on 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Oh I could go on and on, there are so many evidence points connected which back up everything that I’m saying, but I’ll leave it there to digest for now.  If you are in doubt of the source for anything then please let me know.  Or we could even just forget it altogether, because after all, Fox News said that bin Laden did it.

:whistle:

To be honest, you do not seem to be saying much more than you do not believe it, and that Bin Laden did not personally fly a plane into a building. Mate, that's nothing new as far as I am concerned, I do still have 30 pages to catch up on, and hope to not go over old material but I am not seeing any proof for America killing it's own people and blaming some people who already have some really twisted values, and who celebrated the action, and whom were happy to admit to it, even talking to air traffic controllers during the process and show no regret.
I see not one shred of evidence that absolves Bin Laden and his band of murderers from 911.

Edited by psyche101, 15 February 2013 - 06:21 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#840    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,215 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 15 February 2013 - 05:41 AM

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

.


woah...psyche101 joining the 9/11 'battle royal'.... :w00t: ...never thought I'd see THAT

You know what, neither did I. It touches me deeply, even all the way across the other side of the world. I guess it was a matter of time I suppose.

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

9/11 is always polarised between Official Account and Inside Job, but I have my own theory.

And that is.... that it wasn't an Inside Job...but there were 'things' that happened that day that were classified and covered up.

Would you be Bee if you thought this was as straightforward as a bunch if sick twisted religious fundies attacking a misguided target.

:no:

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

In a nut shell....the things that I think were covered up...

Bee, you think everything is covered up. Except maybe lunch, because that is obviously a ploy to sell cling wrap.

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

That Flights 93 and 77 were shot down...because with the hijackers at the controls they became 'enemy aircraft'...

That Flight 77 was taken by remote control over the Atlantic and shot down.

That there could have been some kind of truck-bomb or human suicide bomb that breeched the Pentagon defences...
and this was fired upon by small (ish) ground defence missiles.

That a mock up of flight 77 crash was put into place...to explain away what happened to it...

That the WTCs 1 + 2  were brought down by some kind of Directed Energy Weapon when the top of the South Tower
was about to topple over...this was done to limit the damage to the surrounding area. North Tower weakened by field
effects and this is why it was brought down.

That Building 7 was weakened by the field effects of the DEW and it, too, was brought down as safely
as possible with some kind of DEW.


Zechariah Stichin would be proud.

Nothing was shot down. Some people allowed religion to do what it always does, cause conflict and affect lives.

View Postbee, on 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

anyway....good luck and let battle commence. Not with me because my theory always gets sidelined...and 9/11 is such
a head-banger that I only dip into it now and again...


:tu:


.

I'll try to be as kind as I can, but it is not like the ET whackjobs that do not matter, this matters. Were not dealing with some brain dead hippy who canot understand how rocks can be stacked together, this is a religious war and affects lives, and ones across the globe I cannot promise to take of the gloves, as I said, this deeply saddens me, and personally I struggle with people trying to absolve murderous scum in order to feel good about denting their own government, fact of the matter is people are dead, many innocent people who should not be. I deal with people who were killed in 911 as well, from the Westfield Corporation. People rejoiced this, that strikes me that something is very wrong with the people who support this action at all. No matter who you want to blame, or how much of a fun game this seems to people, at the end of the day, nobody in their right mind would rejoice in slaughter. We ashould remember that foremost.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users