Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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"?
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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".
Q24, 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?
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
Q24, 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.
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.
6
...never thought I'd see THAT
