Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,447 posts in this topic

Why would you ignore bin Laden rejoicing for the 911 attacks?

[/indent]

Indeed mate, this is disgusting. It shows where the heart of a "911 truther" really lies!

Thank goodness we did not have these people defending us!! What sort of a world would we have today!

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're assuming that we have absolutely every necessary aspect of the equation.

Since we keep discovering new aspects, that's not a very scientific way to look at it.

That assumption is going on faith that you have every aspect of the equation. All faith, still.

What 1+1=2?

Yes, I am happy to say we have all aspects of that equation down, and it is a scientific way to look at it. Science has dumped philosophy for the large part. Like I say, it seems total hippy BS to me. You can sit on your backside pondering all day if 1+1 really = 2. I'll be outside using that "inaccurate ploy" to build buildings.

Not faith - demostrable proof. I can get one of any thing on earth, then go get another one, and all across space-time, it will still be 2!

Shouldn't you be bugging some other hippy in the Philosophy section about this crap?

model-hippies-T375.jpeg

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with him. The last 10 pages could easily be skipped, if one is judging relevant substance.

So your an arrogant so and so too I take it? If you do not want to discuss a thing, and only want to be heard, then a blog would be suitable, not a discussion forum.

If that is to your preference, then do not let the door hit you on the backside on your way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So 9/11 is really at the hobby level now... :hmm:

ps. but there's nothing wrong with a hobby....what ever gets you through the night etc etc

:wacko:

.

Cool, I look forward to seeing some more about experimental holograms Bee, I am sure you can squeeze them in someplace! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, I look forward to seeing some more about experimental holograms Bee, I am sure you can squeeze them in someplace! ;)

Errrrrrrrrr no :unsure2: .....no holograms on 9/11 as far as I'm concerned...

just the military getting control of the situation after the hijackers got lucky with flights 11 and 175 due to confusions with the

Vigilant Guardian exercise taking place. That was their window of opportunity.

Then I think the military got on top of the situation and everything after that was damage limitation.

But I know you're teasing, so..... :P

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your an arrogant so and so too I take it? If you do not want to discuss a thing, and only want to be heard, then a blog would be suitable, not a discussion forum.

If that is to your preference, then do not let the door hit you on the backside on your way out.

With all due respect mate, what you offer here is not reasoned argument or analytical thinking. What you present is a regurgitation of the talking points of a story proven many times to be a hoax. You present stale claims that cannot be true. IMO, that is not really discussion. I wonder if next you might present a 'discussion' about how the world is actually flat?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee

What I find interesting about the dancing Israelis is that they were set up and filming, as and before the planes struck the towers. That provides some measure of insight. :innocent:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are the judge of what has been what you call politically steered are you? Or rather you run it past Al Jazeera for approval? , Al Jazeera is owned by the government of Qatar, now you are telling me that one Government is better than another, or that the local Government is more accurate? Might that be because they happen to be in the very region that these killers come from and are trained and bred in? Damn you sound like a hypocrite right now.

I think my earlier suggestion of just qualifying any media claim that either party wishes to challenge might still be the best path.

I agreed with your suggestion in my last post, that media claims should be checked for validity. It would be nice if you could apply your own suggestion, though judging by your attempt to defend Fox News in this case, response above and other comments, I’m not sure you really know how to.

My method of determining validity does not rely on running anything past Al Jazeera or believing one local government more accurate (I thought that would have been clear from my post #847: “I don’t believe, generally speaking, there is much difference between the way that Western and Middle Eastern media operate; neither are immune to the politics of their respective regions”).

What I have done, in the case discussed, is to compare the subtitles/transcript of the bin Laden videotape (the source material), against what each of Al Jazeera and Fox News actually reported...

Al Jazeera simply reports the facts and transcript in full: -

http://www.aljazeera...3336457223.html

Fox News provides only excerpts of the transcript, with addition of a propagandistic headline and editiorial, “Bin Laden Claims responsibility for 9/11” and “Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks” (neither of which are contained within or can be concluded from the actual transcript): -

http://www.foxnews.c...,137095,00.html

One is an example of factual reporting, the other an example of propagandistic ‘reporting’. I would urge everyone to click on the links above to compare and contrast the reporting styles. It is a fine example of what we are dealing with when it comes to the Western media witch hunt that followed 9/11. Please be aware of what you are reading – then at least it is an informed choice whether to be sucked in or not.

This is of course one specific case, and whilst a repeating pattern can be seen through further examples, each case should regardless be judged on its own merit.

All peoples views are interesting, it is downright rude of you to say the last 10 pages of discussion are not worthy of you. You certainly have a high opinion of yourself.

I did not say the last 10 pages are “not worthy” of me. It was mostly tongue in cheek, I actually read every page and there were some interesting points which could have been responded to. But the following turned me off digging through to find them and is what my comment was aimed at: -

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

This type of spamming is not so interesting (say, after the first three times) and in my opinion disrupts the chain of constructive discussion/reduces informative value of the thread. I should add that I hold most responsible the member who refuses to directly address a question, which can be frustrating for the member attempting to hold an open and honest discussion.

Along with Stundie and Shrooma bickering about a “12 year old girl”, yeah screw it, I’m going to take the easy option and pretend like those 10 pages didn’t happen. Sorry if you think that’s rude. If there was anything raised that was vital to our discussion then please point me in the right direction and I’ll respond.

So why on earth would Hijackers go to someone that has nothing to do with a certain action, does not provide any money for it, and essentially just heard about it after it happened, if one follows your path. Is that not just another person in the mix who could jeopardise such a delicate operation, you just said they went to Bin Laden. Why would that bother seeing him at all if he is not a main player?

From the perspective that my research suggests, it was obviously necessary for the agents to implicate themselves with bin Laden, ‘Al Qaeda’ and the Taliban – the purpose of the operation was to entrap the target and provide pretext for the ‘War on Terror’. I also believe that Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi official in Prague prior 9/11 for exactly the same reason, but that source of propaganda fell apart when Czech intelligence distanced themselves from the claim – anyway, that’s another story. Had the meeting with bin Laden not occurred, the Bush administration may have been left with a quite useless, though perhaps interesting, pretext for a ‘War on Hamburg’ (referring to the Hamburg cell of hijackers who formed the lead pilots).

From an official story perspective, the Hamburg cell left their comfortable Western lives, travelled to Afghanistan and met with bin Laden to become Jihadists. Bin Laden ‘ordered’ them, under his non-existent ‘command structure’, to carry out the 9/11 attack and these men became the suicide pilots of Flight 11, 175 and 93. Interesting that not one of them said, “Err, screw flying a plane into a building” as apparently was the case during planning of the 1995 Bojinka plot, and as the majority of sane people, capable of long term planning, would.

I think there is truth in both version of events above. Whilst bin Laden would welcome hearing from anyone willing to carry out such a suicide attack on U.S. interests, Western agents damn well knew that and took advantage of it.

"I did not plan" is not the same as "I was not involved".

Direct action is not openly apparent, why would it be? Bin Laden was cold blooded not stupid. If the evidence was clear enough to place in a public forum, we would not have this conversation would we?

All very true... which is no basis to launch a war and assassination team.

Of course you would, because they are plain actions taunting the rest of the world outside of Sunni Islam about his glee at the success of his "group of people". As you prefer the term. This is the where the larger part of the world "gets" that which you seem to purposefully remain ignorant about. From what I gather, so you can try to kick the American Government.

I specifically asked, “What direct order or action did bin Laden make which enabled the attack?” When you come back stating that bin Laden ‘rejoiced’ or was ‘happy’ after the attack, of course this does not provide an answer to the question in any way.

I do “get” that there are many people who think it justified to victimise any person who opposes U.S. policies in the Middle East, wars and all, and who express ‘glee’ when reciprocation occurs. How many from that region have been killed as a result of U.S. supplied and/or funded arms? Many times more than 3,000 that’s for sure. Again, bin Laden’s satisfaction at the attack, which many shared, is not evidence of his responsibility, nor alone in my opinion is it moral justification, when we look at the whole story, to put a bullet in his head.

Following the above, let me restate that it is not my aim here to absolve bin Laden of responsibility for any acts of violence that he did coerce. In the grand scale of things it makes no difference that bin Laden is now swimming with the fishes, though in an ideal world, it is my opinion that bin Laden should have been put on trial and faced punishment for his actions, along with a great many others.

My argument here is simply ‘who is directly responsible for/who perpetrated the 9/11 attack and for what reason’. If the conclusion is that a false flag operation/setup occurred to provide pretext for yet more war, then I think it quite right that the American government/Bush administration deserve to be kicked for that.

You are good at playing obtuse aren't you. Yes I said that, in the context with the scenario of my work and my boss, I did not mean he directly funded the measly $500,000.00 for the plane strike, he funded Al Qaeda. Without Bin Laden, there may be no Al Qaeda.

Ah, so you have admitted there is no evidence that bin Laden ‘ordered’ the 9/11 attack and now you accept there is no evidence that bin Laden ‘funded’ the 9/11 attack. Neither are you able to answer the question: “What direct order or action did bin Laden make which enabled the attack?” (the answer, we all know, is “none”).

Therefore, we might ask, why did the Bush administration and Western media so quickly make bin Laden and regime change in Afghanistan the top priority target? Like that could ever solve the problem. The public initially swallowed it hook, line and sinker, including myself, though it’s sheer madness that any informed person could support this line of action as a way to prevent a future attack.

Why were not all resources put into shutting down that support network closest to the hijackers said to be responsible for direct perpetration of the attack? If 9/11 were the result of a genuine ‘terrorist’ attack then the administration might have been more interested in getting to that truth of the matter. Why are Omar al Bayoumi, Omar Sheikh, Israeli agents, the CIA, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc, who did more to facilitate 9/11 than bin Laden ever did, getting off scott free? Is it that those who held the strings of the investigation and response knew there was little threat without their approval of the false flag to begin?

What, this report?

Yes, read the 9/11 Commission report, chapter 5.4 “A Money Trail?”, to understand that neither funding of ‘Al Qaeda’ nor the 9/11 attack came from bin Laden’s pocket.

Yes the CIA funded the Mujahideen. So what? You know as well as I why, Operation Cyclone. It was a joint effort against the Soviets, I doubt you are too young to remember the Cold war, which had not ended with withdrawals from Afghanistan.

This is important because ties were not severed with the end of Operation Cyclone.

Bin Laden’s ‘first trainer’, Ali Mohammed, was a CIA/‘Al Qaeda’ double-agent who operated with both groups up to 1998 for one example, and has now ‘disappeared’ in U.S. detention. Then you look at Jamal al Fadl, recruited to ‘Al Qaeda’ from Brooklyn in the U.S. in 1988, and who ended up being the star witness that helped define ‘Al Qaeda’ as a coherent ‘organisation’. We look at CIA infiltration of ‘Al Qaeda’ that was ongoing, we understand through Operation Gladio how the CIA were proficient in creating ‘stay-behind’ factions, we listen to former FBI translator, Sibel Edmonds: -

“I have information about things that our government has lied to us about. I know. For example, to say that since the fall of
the Soviet Union
we ceased all of our intimate relationship with Bin Laden and the Taliban - those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11.

I know you are going to say 'Oh my God, we went there and bombed the medical factory in the 1990s during Clinton, we declared him Most Wanted' and what I'm telling you is, with those groups, we had operations in Central Asia, and that relationship - using them as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict - we used them all the way until September 11.

There is so much information that of course our Mainstream Media has not reported, but there have been some good books written on the topic, and that is: What we have been doing, what we were doing in those years, all the way, all the way until that day of September 11, in Central Asia, in what they call East Turkistan where we are talking about the Uighurs, and with Bin Laden, via Turkey.”

Incidentally, the “intimate relationship” described above is something that bin Laden suspected, and given Edmonds’ statement, he was correct: -

“The United States wants to incite conflict between China and the Muslims. The Muslims of Xinjiang are being blamed for the bomb blasts in Beijing. But I think these explosions were sponsored by the American CIA.”

~bin Laden, 18 Mar 97

What betting he was also correct when later stating of 9/11: -

“The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. They can be any one, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the US itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups, which are capable of causing a large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American Jews, who are annoyed with President Bush ever since the elections in Florida and want to avenge him. Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year.

Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who made the attacks.”

~bin Laden, 28 Sep 01

Anyhow, I digress. The point is, there were certainly overlapping areas with the CIA/ISI and with Western intelligence all over and inside ‘Al Qaeda’ all the way to 9/11 – from there, the setup/entrapment of bin Laden was easy.

The paper quoted bin Laden as saying: "Neither I nor my organisation Al-Qaida is involved in the attacks and the US has traced the attackers within America.

LINK

As I began this post, this is another example of your poor ability or unwillingness to validate media reports. I’ll give you a chance, and because I’m tired of spoon-feeding this stuff that’s available to anyone. Find the actual transcript of the interview from the Daily Ummat newspaper which your linked article is reporting second-hand on. Check for yourself whether bin Laden states, "Neither I nor my organisation Al-Qaida...". Then please come back and confirm for us that bin Laden didn't say that at all. Perhaps even apologise for spreading the misinformation in bolded and red text?

All Muslims are Islam.

I am sure he does know his views better than I do, but he made no secret about them. Why you try to absolve a know killer is rather bewildering. But when he speaks of the Islam Nation and Muslim brothers, he is indeed not speaking for Islam, but his merry band of insane killers who follow the fundamentals of Shari'ah. So my point stands despite your protest.

Dr. Yahia Abdur-Rahman, from the Islamic Shurah Council of Southern California (ISCSC), offers Supplication For The Victims Dr. Maher Hathout, from the the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and The Islamic Center of Southern California (ICSC), condemns the attack and issues a statement. Clickhere to listen

Dr. Ahmad Sakr, from the Islamic Education Center (IEC), offers his condolences to the families of the victims and condemns the attack. Click here to listen

Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, former president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), condemns the attack. Click here to listen

These people do not call what he does an act of Islam do they. They do not say he is part of what they stand for. These are different groups of people.

We are discussing bin Laden’s views, it doesn’t matter what other people think. Bin Laden thought of himself as representative of Islam, it doesn’t matter that others of the faith did not conform to his views – it does not shake bin Laden’s belief that he is representative of Islam.

Your initial point does not stand, nor ever did, because you have not proven who bin Laden refers to by “we”.

What? Who did I ignore where?

I provided a link to information that bin Laden was detained after 9/11 and remained in imprisonment in Pakistan up to his assassination. You complained of the Telegraph reports and declined to comment on the rest of the information.

Bin Laden is guilty!

Shout it enough and you will believe it unconditionally. The real question is, bin Laden is guilty of what, specifically? And as we are discussing 9/11 here, does his guilt outweigh that of others; the direct perpetrators and those within the the U.S. system itself? Judging by the answers to my questions you have provided, it seems not.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox News provides only excerpts of the transcript, with addition of a propagandistic headline and editiorial, “Bin Laden Claims responsibility for 9/11” and “Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks” (neither of which are contained within or can be concluded from the actual transcript): -

http://www.foxnews.c...,137095,00.html

But, many people already knew that Osama bin Laden was responsible.

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

Skyeagle: bin Laden admitted responsibility for 9/11.

Stundie: Why didn’t the FBI indict bin Laden for 9/11?

He failed to take a hint.

I provided a link to information that bin Laden was detained after 9/11 and remained in imprisonment in Pakistan up to his assassination. You complained of the Telegraph reports and declined to comment on the rest of the information.

Let's take another look at your link.

AFGHANISTAN'S Taliban regime has confirmed that Osama bin Laden, the suspected mastermind of the attacks on America, is under house arrest.

But US Secretary of State Colin Powell later said he could not confirm the reports. Mr Powell did, however, announce that bin Laden was a main suspect in the hunt for those responsible for Tuesday's attacks.

Sources close to the hunt for the hijackers' accomplices and backers have described his involvement as"all but 100 per cent certain".

But the Los Angeles Times reported diplomatic observers were sceptical about the Taliban's moves and were aimed at avoiding criticism and possible reprisals for harbouring bin Laden since 1996, when he fled Sudan after US Cruise missile attacks on the country.

Diplomatic sources told the newspaper only a complete and unconditional surrender of bin Laden and his band of aides would satisfy the United States, where he is already wanted for his alleged part in bombing American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

The FBI has had the terrorist at the top of its 10 most-wanted list since the 1996 bombings in Africa and some of his followers have been successfully prosecuted.

Edited by skyeagle409
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, many people already knew that Osama bin Laden was responsible.

He failed to take a hint.

Yeah.. err.. why don’t you link that false and propagandistic Fox News headline and editorial again to 'prove' your point?

Better yet, take a look here: -

“Following the latest explosions in the United States, some Americans are pointing the finger at me, but I deny that because I have not done it. The United States has always accused me of these incidents which have been caused by its enemies. Reiterating once again, I say that I have not done it, and the perpetrators have carried this out because of their own interest.”

~bin Laden statement through Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press, 16th Sep. 01

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States.

~bin Laden interview with Karachi Ummat, 28th Sep. 01

Come on, I’m waiting for you to ignore this and repost the Fox News article.

Because that’s all you’ve got, isn’t it.

Let's take another look at your link.

Oh, the initial claim you spammed was that bin Laden had admitted responsibility for the 9/11 attack. Now you are just quoting an alternative source who believe that bin Laden was "involved". Ok, that's quite the climb down.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What 1+1=2?

Yes, I am happy to say we have all aspects of that equation down, and it is a scientific way to look at it. Science has dumped philosophy for the large part. Like I say, it seems total hippy BS to me. You can sit on your backside pondering all day if 1+1 really = 2. I'll be outside using that "inaccurate ploy" to build buildings.

Not faith - demostrable proof. I can get one of any thing on earth, then go get another one, and all across space-time, it will still be 2!

Shouldn't you be bugging some other hippy in the Philosophy section about this crap?

model-hippies-T375.jpeg

Nope, because you're the ignorant one. It's your brain I want to engage, not the people whose brains are already engaged.

Science has not ditched philosophy at all. Poor science has ditched philosophy. The kind of people who treat science like an infallible religion have ditched philosophy. That would be you by the way. By simplifying all of the worlds equations into 1+1=2, you're wilfully missing the point. Wilfully missing a lot of points, I bet. When you ask a scientist "Will the outcome of this experiment be this based on these calculations you have provided?" they will never say "Yes, absolutely." The response is always "There's a good chance." or "Most likely."

My point, my whole point, is that you have to leave room for error. Because every now and then, one is going to crop up.

Also, there's a difference between sitting around pondering, and pondering and then going to figure it out. So I go and figure it out. The people who say "Science says this as a fact" and then move on with their day are the people who just kind of sit around and accept what they're given. That would be you, by the way.

Also, the philosophy of hippies revolves entirely around justifying the legalization of various drugs. This isn't really that discussion.

Editing to add: This discussion is happening in this thread because my original post on this subject was on topic. It's you who dragged it out into something more. If you don't like it, that's tough. Reap what you sow.

Edited by Nathan DiYorio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't the one spamming the page.

neither was I the one 'bickering'.

it would seem that media groups aren't the only ones responsible for cherry picking what they wish to report.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

philosophy??

hippies smell.

discuss.

:-)

.

(i think someone has the wrong idea about hippies. 'ENTIRELY' around?!)

discuss.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and before you try jumping down my throat, I was merely trying to inject a little humour in to what's become a stagnant, repetative, set of posts that have descended in to nothing more than personal attacks at each others opinions, and certainly nothing that could be called 'debate'.

discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the philosophy of hippies revolves entirely around justifying the legalization of various drugs.

And you just hypocritically called someone else 'the ignorant one'... You apparently do not know, at all, what you are talking about regarding hippies; I don't know how someone can miss the additional focus on liberal attitudes towards sexuality, organic/health foods, new age spiritualism, music, pacifism, etc. Apparently this is one of those things that you haven't personally experienced and are therefore accepting as true based on misplaced 'faith', apparently in inaccurate stereotypes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how someone can miss the additional focus on liberal attitudes towards sexuality, organic/health foods, new age spiritualism, music, pacifism, etc.

.

(you already answered your own question...)

:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn't realize you guys couldn't recognize a tongue-in-cheek statement.

Maybe next time I'll put a big sparkly banner warning you all about a forthcoming joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn't realize you guys couldn't recognize a tongue-in-cheek statement.

Maybe next time I'll put a big sparkly banner warning you all about a forthcoming joke.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'll assume your discussion about your personal definition of 'faith' was tongue-in-cheek also, as that would definitely make more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.. err.. why don’t you link that false and propagandistic Fox News headline and editorial again to 'prove' your point?

Better yet, take a look here: -

“Following the latest explosions in the United States, some Americans are pointing the finger at me, but I deny that because I have not done it. The United States has always accused me of these incidents which have been caused by its enemies. Reiterating once again, I say that I have not done it, and the perpetrators have carried this out because of their own interest.”

~bin Laden statement through Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press, 16th Sep. 01

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States.

~bin Laden interview with Karachi Ummat, 28th Sep. 01

Come on, I’m waiting for you to ignore this and repost the Fox News article.

Because that’s all you’ve got, isn’t it.

Let's take another look.

Bin Laden Admits 9/11 Responsibility, Warns of More Attacks

A tape aired by Al-Jazeera television Friday showed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden admitting for the first time that he orchestrated the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and saying the United States could face more.

In the 18-minute tape, bin Laden, who appeared to be sitting or standing at a table against a neutral background, said: "Despite entering the fourth year after Sept. 11, Bush is still deceiving you and hiding the truth from you and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened."

Bin Laden said he thought of the method of attacking U.S. skyscrapers when he saw Israeli aircraft bombing tower blocks in Lebanon in 1982

----------------------------------------------------------------------

In late November 2002, a letter attributed to Osama bin Laden and translated by British Islamists surfaced, often called bin Laden's 'letter to America'. It states the motive behind the September 11 attacks as being: "because you attacked us and continue to attack us" and justifies the selection of a civilian target. Itemizing a list of perceived Western wrongdoings, the letter concludes that "the oppressed have a right to return the aggression" and hinted at further attacks. Also included are a list of demands, advice, and a statement of grievances against the American government and its people

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America'

http://www.guardian..../24/theobserver

Definitely doesn't sound like Osama bin Laden has proclaimed his innocence in the 911 attacks.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'll assume your discussion about your personal definition of 'faith' was tongue-in-cheek also, as that would definitely make more sense.

Nope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee

What I find interesting about the dancing Israelis is that they were set up and filming, as and before the planes struck the towers. That provides some measure of insight. :innocent:

The story goes.....that a woman had a phone call from a neighbour AFTER the first plane had hit and this is when she

got her binoculars out to take a look and this is when she saw (what turned out to be) the Israelis....kneeling on top of

the van....and seeming to be videoing or taking pictures...

So there are no witnesses to them setting up and filming BEFORE the planes struck.

Just that one woman who saw them AFTER it had all started...

Correct me if you have anything to show this is is not what happened.... :)

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee

That certainly could be the case. Maybe they did not have prior knowledge and just happened to be in the right place at the right time with the right equipment. Maybe the moving company they worked for really was not a front company for Mossad, despite the fact that investigators could not really find any "movers" working there, or any signs of having done business at all. Yes, maybe if a frog had wings, he would not bump his rear end, and maybe George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld were telling us nothing but the truth, and the whole truth, eh? :tu:

The final disposition of their case is equally interesting, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bee

That certainly could be the case. Maybe they did not have prior knowledge and just happened to be in the right place at the right time with the right equipment. Maybe the moving company they worked for really was not a front company for Mossad, despite the fact that investigators could not really find any "movers" working there, or any signs of having done business at all. Yes, maybe if a frog had wings, he would not bump his rear end, and maybe George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld were telling us nothing but the truth, and the whole truth, eh? :tu:

The final disposition of their case is equally interesting, IMO.

You might want to review this.

Israeli security issued urgent warning to CIA of large-scale terror attacks

ISRAELI intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States last month that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent.The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Centre's twin towers and the Pentagon were humiliating blows to the intelligence services, which failed to foresee them, and to the defence forces of the most powerful nation in the world, which failed to deflect them.

The Telegraph has learnt that two senior experts with Mossad, the Israeli military intelligence service, were sent to Washington in August to alert the CIA and FBI to the existence of a cell of as many of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 23, 2001: According to German newspapers, the Mossad gives the CIA a list of terrorists living in the US and say that they appear to be planning to carry out an attack in the near future.

Air Defense of the United States

Norad, the command headquarters in Colorado responsible for defending all of North America from air attack, was notified of the first hijack at 8.38am and six minutes later two F-15 fighter jets were ordered into the air from Otis airforce base on Cape Cod. Before they could take off, however, the first hijacked airliner crashed into the World Trade Centre's north tower at 8.46am. Six minutes later the two military jets were airborne, but when the second hijacked airliner hit the south tower shortly after 9am they were still 70 miles from Manhattan. The only successful action against the hijackers was taken by passengers of the fourth airliner, whose heroic decision to fight back led to its crashing into the fields of Pennsylvania.

The reason lies in the strict distinction America draws between civil and military power, combined with the fact that until last week nobody had confronted the possibility that a terrorist hijacker might turn kamikaze pilot.

Although Norad has its own radar system to track aircraft over the US, its prime task is to watch for hostile aircraft approaching America from outside. "We assume anything originating in US airspace is friendly," said a spokesman.

For the same reason, the 20 or so American fighter planes on permanent full alert in case of a suspect intruder, were deployed at half a dozen bases in the likeliest flightpaths of an attack from the former Soviet Union, several hundred miles from New York or Washington DC.

All aircraft flying over American airspace are monitored and controlled by a network of 20 regional Federal Aviation Authority air traffic control centres, backed up by individual airport control towers. Military aircraft under Norad control can intervene with domestic traffic only if called on for help by their civilian colleagues.

That is what happened on Tuesday, but in no case was there apparently enough time after the FAA's warning for fighter planes to reach the hijacked airliners. More puzzling, there were 45 minutes between air traffic controllers losing contact with the third airliner, which took off from Dulles airport just outside Washington, and its crash on to the Pentagon. At that point, however, the aircraft was still flying on its intended course westwards. It may not have been until later, possibly after a passenger's mobile phone call to the Justice Department, that the civil authorities finally twigged what was happening. It was not the military but civilian air traffic controllers at Washington's Reagan National Airport - tipped off by their colleagues at Dulles - who alerted the White House to the fact that an unauthorised jet was flying at full throttle towards it.

http://www.telegraph...or-attacks.html

I would like to add this as well.

AFGHANISTAN: Al-Qaeda is planning an imminent "huge attack" inside the US that will kill thousands

Late July 2001: The Taliban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil learns that bin Laden is planning a "huge attack" on targets inside America.

The attack is imminent, and will kill thousands. He learns this from Tahir Yildash, leader of the rebel Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), which is allied with al-Qaeda at the time. Muttawakil sends an emissary to pass this information on to the US consul general, and another US official, "possibly from the intelligence services," also attends the meeting. The message is not taken very seriously; one source blames this on "warning fatigue" from too many warnings.

Also, supposedly the emissary was from the Foreign Ministry, but didn't say the message came from Muttawakil himself. The emissary then takes the message to the Kabul offices of UNSMA, the political wing of the UN. They also fail to take the warning seriously. [Independent, 9/7/02, Reuters, 9/7/02]

http://s3.amazonaws....ters090702.html

If you want to see a real celebration regarding the 911 attacks, check this out.

As a result of the 911 attacks, Osama bin Laden is now lying in a watery grave and most of the senior leadership of al-Qaeda has been taken out.

Edited by skyeagle409
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets just Keep our Look out to the Sky`s ! :gun:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take another look.

Well, another predictable response.

On the plus side, you just demonstrated that PBS can be just as propagandistic as Fox News with their false headlines – it doesn’t show the U.S. mainstream media in a good light, not at all. What you should realise skyeagle, is that it doesn’t matter how many false reports you can find that bin Laden ‘admitted responsibility for 9/11’, such a claim is not contained within nor can be logically or legally concluded from the actual transcript reported on, and therefore is misleading.

Like psyche, you need to learn to research and understand facts for yourself, rather than relying on the word of certain mainstream media who demonstrably broadcast propaganda to deceive the public and suit political aims of their country.

I have no idea what you think the second link adds to your view, but I recommend that anyone who wants to understand the grievances bin Laden had against America give it a read.

Definitely doesn't sound like Osama bin Laden has proclaimed his innocence in the 911 attacks.

Of course not, because you completely and wilfully ignored the denials of bin Laden, as I said that you would. You are a fantastic example of what no OCT should aspire to. How blind and hollow your views are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.