Bin Laden's role?

[digigeek]

Thank you?

Well...if you ever gave me a good reason to believe 9/11 was anything other than Islamic terror, then I apologize because I totally MISSED that post.

But Jeremy all those guys are gone. What they did or considered doing so long ago has no bearing on 9/11. It's not a reason to believe that 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. government. I'm sorry, it's just not.

Despots and plotters rely on folks like you. They rely on the fact that most people are as blind and complacent as you. Do you honestly believe that the men wielding all the power are beyond doing WHATEVER needs to be done to achieve their ends?

These are completely ruthless people without any respect for others, and allegiance to groups other than their own cabal. People like that have always been this way.

It's completely Machiavellian and, indeed, Brzezinski does address doing whatever is needed to keep the "commoners" off-guard and supportive, keep the "lordly" rich and happy, and to keep the "barbarians" from congregating. Hence - keep the American and British people afraid and convinced that terrorists are everywhere and will kill us all if we don't give up all our freedoms, AND stir up shit in the Middle East so that the Pakistanis and Iranians fight and bring the Saudis and other into it...they'll be too busy hating each other to worry about what we are doing - for awhile - maybe just long enough.

This is classic strategy. It's too bad so many people are ill-read and blind to it.

 

[valiens]

I've been waiting and waiting for Fitz to respond to this with a neat little breakdown. Apparently you only go after me. Funny, that.

 

[CapnG]

What I'm saying is: The fact that some old guys considered doing something bad fifty years ago is not evidence of U.S. government complicity in 9/11.

Yes because that sort of thing just doesn't happen anymore.... except for this recent revelation by Seymour Hersh about plans discussed with VP Cheney on how to intiate a war with Iran should the administration wish to take that option-

HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build - we in our shipyard - build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up. Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can’t have Americans killing Americans. That’s the kind of - that’s the level of stuff we’re talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected.

Of course there was also the now infamous Downing street memo that was released a few years back that talked about shooting down NATO planes to provide an excuse to invade Iraq but they decided it would be simpler to just run Colin Powell's travelling anthrax show and then go in guns-a-blazing.

These men, supposedly elected leaders, are constantly drawing up horrific plans of deception and using the pretense of "security" to start wars but ultimately they reject most of them based on how it would reflect ON THEM. That is reality, it is documented fact. And while it does not provide the proof of complicity you demand, I challenge you to look at 9/11 in light of this knowledge and not see a pattern of intent.

 

[fitzbew88]

I've been waiting and waiting for Fitz to respond to this with a neat little breakdown. Apparently you only go after me. Funny, that.

I believe you are right to criticize me for this.

Since others for whom I have a great deal of respect hold you in high regard, I hold your opinions and beliefs in high regard. I am more attentive when you are talking.

If you say the U.S. government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, then I freakin' want to know why you believe that to be true. Since you believe it, I automatically ask the question: "Hey...is there any truth in this theory? The Clueless One believes it."

So far, I am not aware of any reason to believe the theory is true.

What other folks may believe or not believe...I may be interested or not.

You are a leader in our "community", and fair or not you get extra scrutiny.

If you invest in such a theory without any kind've of evidence, I then have to somehow come to terms with that result.

 

[valiens]

A leader, eh? I think Biedny just threw up in his mouth a little.

 

[fitzbew88]

These men, supposedly elected leaders, are constantly drawing up horrific plans of deception and using the pretense of "security" to start wars but ultimately they reject most of them based on how it would reflect ON THEM. That is reality, it is documented fact. And while it does not provide the proof of complicity you demand, I challenge you to look at 9/11 in light of this knowledge and not see a pattern of intent.

I think this is essentially true, although you may be going a little overboard.

Your examples don't really help your argument.

I am looking for reasons to believe the U.S. government orchestrated 9/11. I already know governments do bad things, and consider doing bad things. Hell, I've considered doing bad things.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm demanding "proof of complicity". I think I would settle for just some good reason to believe that such an assertion is true. Just a reason to keep the file open, so to speak.

So far, I have not seen anything. (Well, I have seen some stuff but it's more amusing than convincing.)

 

[fitzbew88]

A leader, eh? I think Biedny just threw up in his mouth a little.

Well...you have been willing to put yourself out there, and talk about things that 99.9% of the world won't even think about....so....to me, that's at least a form of leadership.

People *do* look to you.

Anyway, I meant it positively.

 

[CapnG]

I think this is essentially true, although you may be going a little overboard.

Your examples don't really help your argument.

I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that a group of people who sit around all day thinking up bad things to do might actually decide to go through with some of them, that's all.

That and that the two men purported to be Bin Laden in the previously mentioned videos are different men of course.

 

[fitzbew88]

I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that a group of people who sit around all day thinking up bad things to do might actually decide to go through with some of them, that's all.

And I think you are wise to believe this.

But I am trying to get to the truth of whether or not "they" are guilty of a crime, not whether they are nice or not. Or whether they are capable of doing bad things. 9/11 was a real event --- somebody did it. I have lots of reasons to believe it was Islamic fundamentalist terror, I have not yet seen any reason to believe the U.S. government orchestrated it.

That and that the two men purported to be Bin Laden in the previously mentioned videos are different men of course.

I appreciate that you are convinced of this, and I hope that you will take the time to quantify it. So far, all the videos of OBL I have seen looked like OBL. But I have NOT watched them all in their entirety. Is there a particular video? (Have I already asked you this? I'm getting deja vu.)

 

[CapnG]

I have lots of reasons to believe it was Islamic fundamentalist terror, I have not yet seen any reason to believe the U.S. government orchestrated it.

Ah well see there's a point of divergence between myself and perhaps others in this thread. I am fairly convinced that Islamic extremists carried out 9/11 but maintain that they were allowed to do so by getting various intentional free passes from the intelligence agencies both prior to 9/11 and on the day itself. So for me at least it's a kinda "both" answer.

I appreciate that you are convinced of this, and I hope that you will take the time to quantify it. So far, all the videos of OBL I have seen looked like OBL. But I have NOT watched them all in their entirety. Is there a particular video? (Have I already asked you this? I'm getting deja vu.)

Check back. I think I made my points pretty clearly, as well as the reasoning behind them and commented on the various videos posted by yourself and others. I wasn't looking to reopen that debate 10 pages later, I'm just citing it now as another example of something that for me, personally, nudges the needle over from "possible" to "suspiciously probable" when it comes to US government involvement in 9/11, nothing more.

 

[fitzbew88]

Ah well see there's a point of divergence between myself and perhaps others in this thread. I am fairly convinced that Islamic extremists carried out 9/11 but maintain that they were allowed to do so by getting various intentional free passes from the intelligence agencies both prior to 9/11 and on the day itself. So for me at least it's a kinda "both" answer.

If anyone in the U.S. government deliberately allowed the attacks to happen, it would be just as insidious a crime as if they planned the attacks themselves. For purposes of this thread, I would not differentiate between orchestrating the attacks or just letting them occurr.

Do you have a reason to believe that anyone in the U.S. government had specific information about the attacks beforehand?

I do not dispute that they should've known...alarm bells were going off everywhere...but you know the old saying about hindsight. They just didn't have a working mechanism in place that could put it all together. They bungled it.

Check back. I think I made my points pretty clearly, as well as the reasoning behind them and commented on the various videos posted by yourself and others.

No, actually, you never made this case very well. You gave me an Alex Jones video and this jpg:

http://h1.ripway.com/ken_from_dublin/fake_osama_comparo1.jpg

Unfortunately, neither one of these survived even cursory scrutiny.

I wasn't looking to reopen that debate 10 pages later, I'm just citing it now as another example of something that for me, personally, nudges the needle over from "possible" to "suspiciously probable" when it comes to US government involvement in 9/11, nothing more.

I wonder if you are making a mistake.

But even if one or more of the videos were faked, so what? I can think of a few reasons that Al Queda might fake such a video, but it wouldn't mean that the U.S. government was complicit in 9/11.

 

[CapnG]

If anyone in the U.S. government deliberately allowed the attacks to happen, it would be just as insidious a crime as if they planned the attacks themselves. For purposes of this thread, I would not differentiate between orchestrating the attacks or just letting them occurr.

Just being precise.

Do you have a reason to believe that anyone in the U.S. government had specific information about the attacks beforehand?

For me the NORAD stand-down is the signature element. There are others but that's the big one.

They just didn't have a working mechanism in place that could put it all together. They bungled it.

That's patently absurd and apologetic on a level that pushes well beyond reason in my book. For some things to go wrong, I can accept. For EVERYTHING to go wrong at the same time? No way.

No, actually, you never made this case very well. You gave me an Alex Jones video and this jpg. Unfortunately, neither one of these survived even cursory scrutiny.

According to whom? I stated my reasons quite clearly and the means with which I arrived at them. I didn't see one single solid rebuttal to the points I made regarding bone structure, nasal width, etc beyond "the video's really blurry". Trust me, it would have to be ALOT blurrier before I'd reconsider.

Now let me just throw this down. I have had, through my schooling, some training in the distinguishing of facial features. Have you? Has anyone else here? Because if you or anyone else has I will defer. If not, then I submit that my opinion is an EDUCATED opinion and not a random assesment. We scream when people like Mr. Schermer sweep pilots and military people in the same pile as rubes when it comes to observation in the UFO field. I'm no expert, I could still be wrong but I don't think I am and my edumacation tells me I'm not. I'm just looking for a little balance here.

But even if one or more of the videos were faked, so what? I can think of a few reasons that Al Queda might fake such a video, but it wouldn't mean that the U.S. government was complicit in 9/11.

So can I but I can also see why a former CIA operative would well serve the purposes of men who would WANT a 9/11 to happen and would be able to at the very least keep a tab on Bin Laden. It's another notch on my suspicion pile.

 

[fitzbew88]

For me the NORAD stand-down is the signature element. There are others but that's the big one.

It looks like the gist of the "stand-down" element is that NORAD should've been able to intercept the airliners before any damage was done. The fact that they didn't suggests foreknowledge. One web site even says that NORAD intercepts over a hundred "lost" airliners a year, and should have been able to easily chase down a few airliners.

Unfortunately, this is not correct. NORAD had intercepted only a single civilian aircraft in the preceding ten years in U.S. air space.

The problem that morning is that nobody knew where the planes were. What capabilities NORAD had (before 9/11) were focused outward from the continental U.S.. Not helpful.

These were just four blips among a sea of 4,000-5,000 blips. As we have learned from our UFO studies, once an aircraft turns its transponder off it becomes exceedingly difficult to find.

Add in the fact that many many of those "blips" were not running transponders for good reason, then you can just forget finding anything fast.

I noted one 9/11 stand-down web site that was using itself as a footnoted reference. Sigh.

That's patently absurd and apologetic on a level that pushes well beyond reason in my book. For some things to go wrong, I can accept. For EVERYTHING to go wrong at the same time? No way.

Oh, no, it wasn't all at once. It was over a long period of time.

And in my experience, it's common for everything to go wrong at once. Ever gotten ready for a wedding?

According to whom?

Me.

I stated my reasons quite clearly and the means with which I arrived at them.

No you didn't. You made a few bold assertions, threw us some links to Alex Jones and a nonsensical jpg of dubious origin.

I appreciate your confidence, but it is not by itself convincing.

I didn't see one single solid rebuttal to the points I made regarding bone structure, nasal width, etc beyond "the video's really blurry".

You explained how you would do it, but you didn't actually do it.

The problem was not that the video was "blurry", the problem was that you didn't tell us which one.

Show us an analysis. There must be some foundation to this confidence.

Then we'll talk.

Now let me just throw this down. I have had, through my schooling, some training in the distinguishing of facial features. Have you?

I appreciate your education, but art training is not necessary to recognize a face...

I'm no expert, I could still be wrong but I don't think I am and my edumacation tells me I'm not. I'm just looking for a little balance here.

Convince us. Show us an analysis.

So can I but I can also see why a former CIA operative would well serve the purposes of men who would WANT a 9/11 to happen and would be able to at the very least keep a tab on Bin Laden. It's another notch on my suspicion pile.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are driving at here.

 

[CapnG]

I appreciate your education, but art training is not necessary to recognize a face...

Then clearly you do not in fact appreciate my education, since you dismiss it so readily.

Convince us. Show us an analysis.

I can't plug your eyes into my brain, I'm telling you what I see. His nose is different. The bone structure of the cranium is different. The shape and length of the ears are different. Picking up on a theme yet? These aren't minor anomalies, they're major differences, even if they don't appear to be to you. That IS my analysis. If you can't actually see that for yourself I can't help you, I don't have the time or the means to do some 3D CSI crap.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are driving at here.

Two seperate ideas. If 9/11 was strictly a muslim affair and Bin Laden is dead, then it serves Al Queada to make a video featuring a double to rally the troops. If 9/11 was a partly or wholly orchastrated by the administration and Bin Laden was either dead or unavailable, it serves their purpose to put out fake OBL tapes whenever the flames need fanning.

In either case the, the strategic need to have "other" Bin Ladens on tape seems self-evident (at least to me).

 

[fitzbew88]

Then clearly you do not in fact appreciate my education, since you dismiss it so readily.

No, I appreciate your education. What I am saying is that advanced art training is not necessary in order to recognize someone in a video.

I can't plug your eyes into my brain, I'm telling you what I see. His nose is different. The bone structure of the cranium is different. The shape and length of the ears are different. Picking up on a theme yet?

Yes, you are repeating yourself but you are still not showing us anything.

These aren't minor anomalies, they're major differences, even if they don't appear to be to you. That IS my analysis. If you can't actually see that for yourself I can't help you, I don't have the time or the means to do some 3D CSI crap.

Well, how about this: I don't want to trouble you by actually coaxing evidence out of you, but how about at least tell us which video you saw in which this determination was so evident?

There have only been a handful released since 9/11, how much trouble can it be to find it?

You've made a bold confident statement. Surely, you can't blame me for wanting to test its validity.

Two seperate ideas. If 9/11 was strictly a muslim affair and Bin Laden is dead, then it serves Al Queada to make a video featuring a double to rally the troops. If 9/11 was a partly or wholly orchastrated by the administration and Bin Laden was either dead or unavailable, it serves their purpose to put out fake OBL tapes whenever the flames need fanning.

In either case the, the strategic need to have "other" Bin Ladens on tape seems self-evident (at least to me).

Ok, then I think we agree on this. The mere presence of a fake tape will not really support a "9/11 as an inside job"-type theory.

Earlier, you said that the existence of a fake tape "...nudges the needle over from "possible" to "suspiciously probable..." that 9/11 was an inside job. Why is this? Even if 9/11 was "...strictly a muslim affair...", a fake tape might still be created. I don't see why a fake tape should sway your opinion one way or the other.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

No, actually, you never made this case very well. You gave me an Alex Jones video and this jpg:

http://h1.ripway.com/ken_from_dublin...a_comparo1.jpg

I posted the vid not Capn

 

[fitzbew88]

I posted the vid not Capn

Ah. You are correct. Thanks.

 

[CapnG]

There have only been a handful released since 9/11, how much trouble can it be to find it?

It's the ones already posted, including the jpg of "dubious" origin. You keep asking for analysis and evidence. The video and image ARE the evidence. My verbal description IS the analysis. I don't have better quality versions to show you, I'm working with what I've got.

Earlier, you said that the existence of a fake tape "...nudges the needle over from "possible" to "suspiciously probable..." that 9/11 was an inside job. Why is this?

Because it's one more suspicious/fraudulent element in a string of suspicious elements.

Back to something you mentioned earlier but I forgot to comment on:

These were just four blips among a sea of 4,000-5,000 blips. As we have learned from our UFO studies, once an aircraft turns its transponder off it becomes exceedingly difficult to find.

Add in the fact that many many of those "blips" were not running transponders for good reason, then you can just forget finding anything fast.

None of that makes any sense by way of an excuse. In the first place, isn't it FAA regulation to notify the air force when a plane's transponder goes off since like the 70's after the hostage crisis? And it's not like these were stealth craft, just because their transponders went off they didn't vanish. Okay so there are 4000 other blips on screen... WITH transponders. Are you telling me they have no filters on their systems to track objects with no codes and screen out the rest? Unlikely. They had a vector, they had a procedure, they had the means and the opportunity and still nothing happened. FOUR times in ONE day in less than what, three hours? I'm no George Noory but that stretches waaaaaaaay beyond coincidence OR incompetence for me.

 

[mike]

they faked pearl harbour as well, so they could join ww2, thus selling lots and lots of war bonds and munitions.......

this also allowed them to put all the japanese americans in camps, thus forestalling the popularity of sushi by 40 years.....

 

[fitzbew88]

There have only been a handful released since 9/11, how much trouble can it be to find it?

It's the ones already posted, including the jpg of "dubious" origin. You keep asking for analysis and evidence. The video and image ARE the evidence. My verbal description IS the analysis. I don't have better quality versions to show you, I'm working with what I've got.

You mean the video that I found and shared with the group?

Here is the link to the video:


And I have already posted the link to the Comparison Jpeg (which is the only thing you have contributed so far. AHEM.)

As I pointed out in Post 68, it doesn't look like the Comparison Still comes from that video. I couldn't really begin to evaluate what you were saying until I knew which video you were saying was faked.

Here are some of your posts about this, to kinda refresh our mutual memory.

"...I can't really convince you, you simply have to look for yourself. REALLY look....Ignore his face (Ed. - huh?) and simply compare the images side-by-side, feature for feature, like ... puzzles."

"Now if you watch the videos from which the frames are taken, the differences become glaring but the obvious differences in nose length and breadth are hilighted here. The man on the left has a cranium which would be classified in the mesocephalic range whereas the man on the right is more dolichocephalic (ie longer). That's just two points that never change with age or weight. These are different men."

"Unfortunately I am not a wizard able to summon video at will. I remember seeing a video some years ago which ran the two videos of the images shown in the freeze frame side by side and I concluded that these were different men, a conclusion I still hold today for reasons I've already explained."

"I'm sorry fitz but seriously, if you think that's the same man, you need glasses thicker than mine. Maybe it's just me, maybe it's the schooling I've had but the differences seem glaring and obvious to me. Nose, hairline, cheekbones, beard length and desity, ear shape, cranial mass... these are two different people. They do look similar but similar is not "same"."

"I can't plug your eyes into my brain, I'm telling you what I see. His nose is different. The bone structure of the cranium is different. The shape and length of the ears are different. Picking up on a theme yet? These aren't minor anomalies, they're major differences, even if they don't appear to be to you. That IS my analysis. If you can't actually see that for yourself I can't help you, I don't have the time or the means to do some 3D CSI crap."

"According to whom [does the evidence not pass scrutiny]? I stated my reasons quite clearly and the means with which I arrived at them. I didn't see one single solid rebuttal to the points I made regarding bone structure, nasal width, etc beyond "the video's really blurry". Trust me, it would have to be ALOT blurrier before I'd reconsider."

"I can't plug your eyes into my brain, I'm telling you what I see. His nose is different. The bone structure of the cranium is different. The shape and length of the ears are different. Picking up on a theme yet? These aren't minor anomalies, they're major differences, even if they don't appear to be to you. That IS my analysis. If you can't actually see that for yourself I can't help you, I don't have the time or the means to do some 3D CSI crap."

Here's a jpeg of stills from the video that I found and the still from the comparison jpg that you do think is OBL. The "real" OBL is the top left photo of course; I have not been able to figure out exactly when the "real" photo was taken. Possibly as early as 1998.



Now we can proceed, we have an "accepted" photo of OBL and stills from the video you claim is faked.

Now, why is the man in the video not OBL?