Bin Laden's role?

[Poi]

If you have a reason to believe that OBL is a U.S. government proxy, then share it with the group please.

There you go again, making an untrue assumption. Makes little difference if I point your supposition out because you choose to believe no matter what anyone else says. You even appear to be emotional about it, though of course that is something I can't know for sure.

Once again, for your benefit, I do not believe OBL is a government proxy. I simply acknowledge that there are suspicious aspects of the entire story behind him so I try to keep an open mind, enough so that I understand what "the other side" is feeling, where they are getting their argument. Discernment has nothing to do with belief.

Just because I think you occasionally indulge yourself in the same thing that you argue against in others, you assume I've lied to you about my own view point about him. Everyone but you is outrageous. LOL Argue my side better, with just the real life facts.

 

[fitzbew88]

If you have a reason to believe that OBL is a U.S. government proxy, then share it with the group please.

There you go again, making an untrue assumption.

Request <> Assumption

Makes little difference if I point your supposition out because you choose to believe no matter what anyone else says.

I don't think it's intellectually honest of you to refuse to give me a reason to change my mind and then accuse me of not being willing to change my mind.

You even appear to be emotional about it, though of course that is something I can't know for sure.

Then that IS a supposition! ["uncertain belief"]

Emotional? If I was, so what? Is that bad?

Once again, for your benefit, I do not believe OBL is a government proxy.

I agree with you. I really didn't believe you had a good reason to think so, but it's nice to see you flat out say it.

I do appreciate you pointing out alleged ties between OBL's family and the Bush family, and attempting to cast doubt on whether OBL was to blame for a series of well-known al Queda attacks on U.S. citizens. These were sensible comments in the framework of your disbelief.

I simply acknowledge that there are suspicious aspects of the entire story behind him so I try to keep an open mind, enough so that I understand what "the other side" is feeling, where they are getting their argument. Discernment has nothing to do with belief.

I don't understand some of this. If there are "suspicious aspects" of OBL's story that should cause me to keep my mind open about the possibility that he may be a U.S.-gov't proxy then by all means share them.

I have (what I think) are sound reasons for believing he is NOT. If there are sound reasons for thinking that he IS, I would like to hear them.

Just because I think you occasionally indulge yourself in the same thing that you argue against in others, you assume I've lied to you about my own view point about him.

You lied to me? What in the world are you talking about? All that I wish from you is to tell me what you truly think and why. That is all.

I'm not sure what the "..same thing..." is that you are talking about, so I can't address it. (Gullibility?)

Everyone but you is outrageous. LOL Argue my side better, with just the real life facts.

There is a lot of outrageous stuff in these forums but not everything is outrageous.

I don't really understand what you mean from the "LOL" onwards.

 

[Poi]

Assumption, presumption, etc. Gullibility? Just another assumption on your part? In fact, probably a projection, but that's okay. We all do it. Some of us will not admit it, however.

I've pointed out a flaw in some of your thinking, having never had to give up my belief that in the final analysis you are correct. I've also done so without engaging in your circular logic. If you don't understand, well, I'm satisfied anyway. Carry on.

 

[fitzbew88]

Assumption, presumption, etc. Gullibility? Just another assumption on your part? In fact, probably a projection, but that's okay. We all do it. Some of us will not admit it, however.

Ok, don't get upset or anything but this seems empty to me.

I've pointed out a flaw in some of your thinking, having never had to give up my belief that in the final analysis you are correct. I've also done so without engaging in your circular logic. If you don't understand, well, I'm satisfied anyway. Carry on.

I'm correct but there's a flaw in my thinking?

Well...my basic "thinking" is: OBL has a long history of anti-Western and terrorist acts (and complementary rhetoric) that pre-date the 9/11 attacks. If OBL was acting as a U.S. gov't proxy on 9/11 then his earlier history must be reconciled with his actions on 9/11. Either that earlier history was *part* of the cover, or it was sincere and somehow the U.S. "converted" him prior to 9/11. The former possibility seems the only conclusion that is viable to me. Why? Because the latter possibility ("conversion") requires even more outrageous assumptions than the first possibility --- and that's saying a lot!

I don't see any "circular logic"...not right off hand anyway. At least not using the traditional definition of the term.

Perhaps you are saying that OBL's "history" is a false assumption...but I don't see any reason to doubt the history. It seems like a valid and reasonable assumption. The fact that other people have falsely confessed is irrelevant; OBL's personal confession is not the only supporting evidence for his guilt.

The only things you've "pointed out" are bin Laden ties to the Bush family and questioned OBL's guilt in some of the historical attacks ---- but even if there was some "gravity" in either of these distractions it wouldn't change anything. The "conspiracy" --- and OBL's "cover" would still need to extend well before the Bush administration.

Mohammed Atta was in the U.S. in June 2000, before Bush was even elected. Some of the terrorists were here in January 2000.

Why don't you just explain the flaw in my thinking, instead of just letting me flounder around? Would you be more comfortable talking via PM? I promise I will keep our talk private, assuming you do the same.

Other than time, you have nothing to lose.

 

[schticknz]

A few things:

(1) A number of the so-called "9/11 terrorists" are still alive. See here: http://www.welfarestate.com/911/ and a bit more here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

(2) OBL is probably dead and has been for some time: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html

(3) Five Israelis dressed as Arabs were seen to be "dancing" when the WTC buildings were hit. They were later interviewed on Israeli TV saying they were there to 'document' the event:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html

plus

http://youtube.com/watch?v=w0hmhLycNyQ

(this video says that one shouldn't jump to conclusions about who to blame for 9/11 ... though why anyone would be aware that the 9/11 event was coming so as to document it is anybody's guess).

Bin Laden is a just dead CIA stooge who is brought out now and again just to keep the US populace edgy and to make sure that bills get through congress.

Oh ... and finally this from the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

Hmmm ... no mention of 9/11 ... I wonder why???

schtick ... who thought he would just throw a few things in just to try to get over the fact (again) that the 9/11 event was not what it seemed to be, and was in fact a "false flag" operation jointly manufactured between the US and Israel

 

[fitzbew88]

A few things:
(1) A number of the so-called "9/11 terrorists" are still alive. See here: http://www.welfarestate.com/911/ and a bit more here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

Of course this is a little silly. Everyone that was on any of the planes is dead.

And even if some of them were identified incorrectly, so what? (You realize that many humans share the same name.....?)

And it took about five minutes to find this:
BBC Confusion About Hijackers

(2) OBL is probably dead and has been for some time: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html

OBL might be dead. But his most recent audiotape was May 18. He has certainly discussed the Iraq war so we know he was alive at least well into 2003.

(3) Five Israelis dressed as Arabs were seen to be "dancing" when the WTC buildings were hit. They were later interviewed on Israeli TV saying they were there to 'document' the event:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html

Well that makes perfect sense. Israel did it and sent some dancers! Whoo hoo!

plus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0hmhLycNyQ (this video says that one shouldn't jump to conclusions about who to blame for 9/11 ... though why anyone would be aware that the 9/11 event was coming so as to document it is anybody's guess).

I didn't understand this at all.

Bin Laden is a just dead CIA stooge who is brought out now and again just to keep the US populace edgy and to make sure that bills get through congress.

Well, thanks for sharing.

Oh ... and finally this from the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

Hmmm ... no mention of 9/11 ... I wonder why???

Because he's innocent and we don't want to offend him? What do you think? Maybe the vast government conspiracy just decided that associating him with 9/11 on a wanted poster was going too far?

schtick ... who thought he would just throw a few things in just to try to get over the fact (again) that the 9/11 event was not what it seemed to be, and was in fact a "false flag" operation jointly manufactured between the US and Israel

Ok, thanks. I'm convinced.

 

[thetruthisoutthere]

I am one of the people that believes that the bush administration was responsible for 9/11. Now as far as my fews on Bin Laden I think that he his/was just a freedom fighter and that he could not have organized an attack like the one on 9/11.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I am one of the people that believes that the bush administration was responsible for 9/11. Now as far as my fews on Bin Laden I think that he his/was just a freedom fighter and that he could not have organized an attack like the one on 9/11.

So Bin Laden is just trying to take credit for what the Bush admin did?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Since we're talking conspiracy here, Liberal commentator Lynn Samuels, on her Sirius radio show today, claimed (I hope not seriously), that Bin Laden's people were hacking the oil futures computer system to manipulate the price.

So that's why it's $140 a barrel, right? Yeah, sure.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Since we're talking conspiracy here, Liberal commentator Lynn Samuels, on her Sirius radio show today, claimed (I hope not seriously), that Bin Laden's people were hacking the oil futures computer system to manipulate the price.

So that's why it's $140 a barrel, right? Yeah, sure.

I guess placing blame on the oil companies is too farfetched for Lynn.

 

[schticknz]

I guess placing blame on the oil companies is too farfetched for Lynn.

Isn't it funny that whenever somebody in the oil business stubs their toe, the oil prices go up?? Actually you can probably extend this to all stock exchanges in any country you wish to think about

Economics theory/practice in any country seems to me to be akin to astrology: oh my god the ex-planet Pluto is in alignment with the future planet Mickey, and my mothers cat, Snuggles has done a poo in her best hat while Liverpool FC have drawn away from home again (2 - 2 against Tottenham Hotspur ... hmmm must be time then to increase the oil prices again

 

[Gene Steinberg]

But what about the oil speculators?

 

[mike]

But what about the oil speculators?

i can never get my head around how that all works, and ive worked for stockbrokers and merchant banks.
i recall my first job as a computer operator (old HP 3000)
at 2 in the morning the box would be humming along making tomorrows reports and cheque runs, so i would go up to the commodities trading floor and watch the night traders work.
one night this guy buys a parcel of pounds sterling, next thing there is a rush on that because of his previous trade, and ten mins later he resells the parcel at profit improving his "position".

"making money" this way has always bemused me, i understand the theory but to me its still a closed system where at the end of the day one traders gains are anothers loss, like moving beans around on a plate.

 

[Rocketsauce]

I am one of the people that believes that the bush administration was responsible for 9/11. Now as far as my fews on Bin Laden I think that he his/was just a freedom fighter and that he could not have organized an attack like the one on 9/11.

If the bush admin was to plot anything like this, I'd think planting WMD's in Iraq to really justify a war would have been far more effective and to the point of their agenda then killing thousands of innocent people via terrorists who are 'not' from Iraq. That's just IMO. I'm sure they saw it as an opportunity, but i don't personally don't believe the 911 conspiracy stuff, aside from it's possible they destroyed a building that may have had some gold reserves once the other buildings were destroyed to avoid theft.

I don't give Bush much credit to mastermind anything more than organizing a keg party. Chaney on the other hand, if there is an underground cartel that runs things, I'd expect to his name on the meeting notes!

 

[cottonzway]

I'm sure they saw it as an opportunity, but i don't personally don't believe the 911 conspiracy stuff, aside from it's possible they destroyed a building that may have had some gold reserves once the other buildings were destroyed to avoid theft.

How did they rig a burning building with explosives in order to to do that? Also it takes weeks if not months to plan out a controlled demo of a building. So they did that in a matter of hours in the middle of chaos on a building that had small fires in it.

huh?

 

[Astroboy]

How did they rig a burning building with explosives in order to to do that? Also it takes weeks if not months to plan out a controlled demo of a building. So they did that in a matter of hours in the middle of chaos on a building that had small fires in it.

huh?

Am I mistaken or did you change your position on the 9/11 conspiracy theory? I thought you believed in the whole controlled demolition scenario.

 

[valiens]

Wait...don't make me read this whole thread to find out no one said "That's not the real bin Laden on those tapes."

If it hasn't been said, I'll throw it out there: We have no way of knowing that the guy on those tapes is really bin laden in the first place.

 

[fitzbew88]

If it hasn't been said, I'll throw it out there: We have no way of knowing that the guy on those tapes is really bin laden in the first place.

So, are you casting doubts on voiceprint analysis, or that his friends and family can't recognize his voice, or that he has some strange reason for not pointing out "Hey! That's not me!" or what exactly?

Which tapes? Audio or video? All of them?

In my own mind, the real question is: Is there a reason to believe that it's NOT him?

 

[Rocketsauce]

How did they rig a burning building with explosives in order to to do that? Also it takes weeks if not months to plan out a controlled demo of a building. So they did that in a matter of hours in the middle of chaos on a building that had small fires in it.

huh?

Spending time learning the logistics to actually back up my beliefs? No thanks Honestly though, my reason for considering this possibility is based on my NYC brother who was talking to a couple of his local Firemen who relayed the story about how people were stealing gold during the chaos of 9/11. In regards to the logistics of that I don't know, but I do trust my brother and his opinion on these types of things. I'd look into it further but I don't care that much at this point and actually the whole topic of our government and how bad they fucked up the whole war in Iraq based on 9/11 just depresses the shit out of me so I won't be doing any more research on this topic for my own mental sanity. The UFO stuff is depressing enough

 

[valiens]

So, are you casting doubts on voiceprint analysis, or that his friends and family can't recognize his voice, or that he has some strange reason for not pointing out "Hey! That's not me!" or what exactly?

Which tapes? Audio or video? All of them?

In my own mind, the real question is: Is there a reason to believe that it's NOT him?

I'm saying it's been proposed so many times that the bin Laden audio was forged and the "bin Ladens" in the video tapes are so different (fat/thin, young/old, impossibly alive) that they must be faked--I can't believe no one brought it up yet.

My opinion is that I cannot trust anything that comes out of this White House and so if they say it's really him I'd rather flip a coin than take their word.