New Bin Laden tape about 9/11

Do you think bin Laden planned 9/11?

  • no

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • do not have an opinion

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060523.wbinladen0523/BNStory/International/home

CAIRO, Egypt — Osama bin Laden purportedly said in an audio tape Tuesday that Zacarias Moussaoui — the only person convicted in the U.S. for the Sept. 11 attacks — had nothing to do with the operation.

"He had no connection at all with Sept. 11," the speaker, claiming to be Mr. bin Laden, said in the tape posted on the Internet.

"I am the one in charge of the 19 brothers and I never assigned brother Zacarias to be with them in that mission," he said, referring to the 19 hijackers.

The al-Qaeda chief said the Sept. 11 hijackers were divided into two groups, "pilots and assistants."

"Since Zacarias Moussaoui was still learning how to fly, he wasn't No. 20 in the group, as your government has claimed," Mr. bin Laden said. "It knows this very well," he added.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
Well there are two threads about this tape and minimal interest. One would think conspiracy hounds would be eager to challenge it to prove the supremacy of their thinking.

Is Bin Laden real or an illusion? Does Pakistan or Afghanistan even exist or are they simply backdrops on a hidden stage in Hollywood?

We hear nada and so it must be real.
 

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
No one really cares because it is old news. The yankees blew it, and that is the fact. Gotta get on with life.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
K guys, those who believe oussama bin laden is behind 9-11, there is must an evidence somewhere then show me the evidence, cause i 'vent seen them yet, dont bring the video where we see almost nothing, cause i have the same kind of video of me, admitting that i 've killed o.J. simpson wife.

A video, isnt an evidence of anything.so i am waiting.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
-The tape is one piece of evidence
-Interviews from the families of the hijackers is evidence as well as they have all disappeared.
-As have the individuals who were on the planes and some of them were quite prominent like Barbara Olsen
--There was other material evidence found in Afghanistan and Pakistan linking al Queda to 9/11

Some type of operation must have been initiated from Afghanistan. How was this coordinated in the US with the American government? It must have been quite a large action involving participants on 3 different continents.

What you have are just pieces of information and you are trying to use these singular pieces to offer an alternate theory. What you can't do with this approach is explain how all the pieces fit into a puzzle. That is the limitation of your argument.

Why is bin Laden making these tapes if he was not involved in 9/11? Saying you are involved with OJ somehow does not answer this question.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
sanch said:
-The tape is one piece of evidence

Sorry this isnt piece of evidence, because the video is highly disputed, the quality is very bad, and the guys who pretend to be oussama bin laden is suddenly right handed, when in fact oussama is left handed according to FBI,also wearing a gold ring, is higly forbiden by muslim orthodox, since it is only the US officials who brought this video, it is safe to say, just like many other things like the fabricated facts on the war in iraq, it was a total strawberry crap.

sanch said:
-Interviews from the families of the hijackers is evidence as well as they have all disappeared.

What we have seen after 9-11, is the fact that saudi governement denied acces to fbi to the 9-11 terrorist family, so where are those interviews?

sanch said:
-As have the individuals who were on the planes and some of them were quite prominent like Barbara Olsen

I dont believe in those calls, why , look at this.

In 2003 a Canadian team conducted experiments to determine if cell phones could be used from civilian aircraft flying at cruising speeds and altitudes. [119] Their findings concluded the probability of a typical cell phone making a stable connection to a cell on the ground is roughly 0.006% (approximately 1 in 16,000) from the altitude that Flight 93 was supposedly flying at at the time of the cell phone calls. Anecdotal evidence provided to the team by airline passengers in other parts of the US and the world corroborates their finding

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

and this..

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm


Knowing what they us officials did for the war in iraq especially on feb 2003, when powell came to the united nations with fabricated proof on wmd, means they are able to do anything to achieve what they want.



sanch said:
--There was other material evidence found in Afghanistan and Pakistan linking al Queda to 9/11

Ok what is it?



sanch said:
Some type of operation must have been initiated from Afghanistan. How was this coordinated in the US with the American government? It must have been quite a large action involving participants on 3 different continents.

How this operation would have been initiated from deep cave in afganisthan?

6 hijackers are alive and well, according to bbc , and this is since december 2001, and still in the 9-11 comission report it still talks about those who are still alive as terrorist who did the event.

We know for a fact,that us governement tried to do the exact same event in the 60's to support a war against cuba.

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a 1962 plan to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro as part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative. The plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state sponsored terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the highest ranking member of the U.S. military, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwood


sanch said:
What you have are just pieces of information and you are trying to use these singular pieces to offer an alternate theory. What you can't do with this approach is explain how all the pieces fit into a puzzle. That is the limitation of your argument.

Why is bin Laden making these tapes if he was not involved in 9/11? Saying you are involved with OJ somehow does not answer this question.

THe oj simpson video, is to show you how stupid it is to rely on a confession tape, cause it means absotly nothing at all, since this , oussma bin laden is more popular than micheal jakson ever wish to be, so recruiting young fart to do their job, is quite easier now, especially when you know, oussama bin laden denied the involvement on 16th and 28th of september 2001.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
Here are the reason why i think us governement is behind 9-11


-Operation norhtwood
-Anthrax attack after 9-11(which the key of this event)
-Building 7( leaseholder admitting they controlled demolitions the building on pbs documentary called "" america rebuilds"")
-George w bush admitted to have seen live on tv, the first plane hittting the wtc, which is impossible.
-firefighters witnesses and police report on both wtc
-Pnac web site, asking for a new pearl harbor to get their agenda going.
-bush administration back off fbi from bin laden trail before 9-11
-saudi gov denied acces to fbi investigation on 9-11 familiy.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
What I am saying aeon is that with the official version of 9/11 the facts all hang together in a coherent narrative. Single facts are quite easy to question and you have shown a remarkable skill for dissecting them.

One could use Montreal as an example. Is the city real or is it a figment of your imagination? From a Zen Buddhist perspective one could say the city is a construct of your imagination, of the molecular design you impose on the world.

You might respond that the city is very real and has a life beyond the imagination for how else would one explain the people and buildings in the city.

I could then respond that I have evidence that Atlantis never existed yet people believe it did and that is proof in itself that Montreal does not exist.

So to get beyond the quibbling over facts do you have an alternate coherent narrative that takes into account all the facts that you agree with and that explains what happened on 9/11?
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
sanch said:
What I am saying aeon is that with the official version of 9/11 the facts all hang together in a coherent narrative. Single facts are quite easy to question and you have shown a remarkable skill for dissecting them.

One could use Montreal as an example. Is the city real or is it a figment of your imagination? From a Zen Buddhist perspective one could say the city is a construct of your imagination, of the molecular design you impose on the world.

You might respond that the city is very real and has a life beyond the imagination for how else would one explain the people and buildings in the city.

I could then respond that I have evidence that Atlantis never existed yet people believe it did and that is proof in itself that Montreal does not exist.

So to get beyond the quibbling over facts do you have an alternate coherent narrative that takes into account all the facts that you agree with and that explains what happened on 9/11?


Good post, it made me think,honestly i just try to go with the logic and facts, sorrounding 9-11, this event is too big for a group like alquada according to what i've read , i also go with the Neo-cons agenda, which were asking for those change before 9-11,i aslo look at the motives and who will benifit from it, knowing that 9-11 was a very complexe event, means it was done by people who were smart enough to calculate everything that sorround the event, but in what sense it is advantaging muslim? so in other word, they were able to plan this complexe event, but wasnt smart enough to calculate that usa will use this excuse to invade thier countries, and steal their ressources.

but i can tell you right now, how the bush administration and their friends profit from 9-11.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Sanch... you can talk facts until you are blue. Aeon does not want to believe the facts and would rather stick to a whole slew of theories that support his position.

For example... he says that a missle hit the Pentagon as opposed to Flight 77. He has no theory on where Flight 77 went. As far as he is concerned Flight 77 is a non issue as the dissapearance of it and the loss of life is irrellavent. Irrellavent not in the way that he doesn't care about the passengers but that it's vanishing off the planet on 9/11 doesn't fit into his theory that a missle hit the Pentagon.

Barbara Olsen and her call to her husband that they have been hijacked are just not rellevant to these folks. All of the eye witnesses, the downed light poles... all irrellavent.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
Re: RE: New Bin Laden tape about 9/11

EagleSmack said:
Sanch... you can talk facts until you are blue. Aeon does not want to believe the facts and would rather stick to a whole slew of theories that support his position.

For example... he says that a missle hit the Pentagon as opposed to Flight 77. He has no theory on where Flight 77 went. As far as he is concerned Flight 77 is a non issue as the dissapearance of it and the loss of life is irrellavent. Irrellavent not in the way that he doesn't care about the passengers but that it's vanishing off the planet on 9/11 doesn't fit into his theory that a missle hit the Pentagon.

Barbara Olsen and her call to her husband that they have been hijacked are just not rellevant to these folks. All of the eye witnesses, the downed light poles... all irrellavent.


I 've never said in my entire life ,that only a missile hit the pentagone , in fact i said, a smaller plane did crash on the pentagone along with a missile , that shows how credible you are.

And i am sorry, but the 5 frame of video that took 2 years to released(which is a complete farce for the american), support my claim that a smaller plane crashed into it, i guess in 1000 years, we will be able to see the 84 tapes, that are still classified, withouth no reason at all.






Just the antrax attack itself reveals many things about us governement, and the fact you guys doesnt acknowledge this antrax event, make you guys not so objective.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
aeon said:
i also go with the Neo-cons agenda, which were asking for those change before 9-11,i aslo look at the motives and who will benifit from it, knowing that 9-11 was a very complexe event, means it was done by people who were smart enough to calculate everything that sorround the event, but in what sense it is advantaging muslim? so in other word, they were able to plan this complexe event, but wasnt smart enough to calculate that usa will use this excuse to invade thier countries, and steal their ressources.

but i can tell you right now, how the bush administration and their friends profit from 9-11.

The theory I prefer is the official one where bin Laden planned the attack. There were probably major screw-ups in the US in tracking the hijackers that are now being covered up. Still the planning was conducted at an al Queda camp in Afghanistan by bin Laden and well known associates.

Here is the visual reference for your theory. What did they do next? How do you see the planning?

 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Re: RE: New Bin Laden tape about 9/11

aeon said:
EagleSmack said:
Sanch... you can talk facts until you are blue. Aeon does not want to believe the facts and would rather stick to a whole slew of theories that support his position.

For example... he says that a missle hit the Pentagon as opposed to Flight 77. He has no theory on where Flight 77 went. As far as he is concerned Flight 77 is a non issue as the dissapearance of it and the loss of life is irrellavent. Irrellavent not in the way that he doesn't care about the passengers but that it's vanishing off the planet on 9/11 doesn't fit into his theory that a missle hit the Pentagon.

Barbara Olsen and her call to her husband that they have been hijacked are just not rellevant to these folks. All of the eye witnesses, the downed light poles... all irrellavent.


I 've never said in my entire life ,that only a missile hit the pentagone , in fact i said, a smaller plane did crash on the pentagone along with a missile , that shows how credible you are.

And i am sorry, but the 5 frame of video that took 2 years to released(which is a complete farce for the american), support my claim that a smaller plane crashed into it, i guess in 1000 years, we will be able to see the 84 tapes, that are still classified, withouth no reason at all.






Just the antrax attack itself reveals many things about us governement, and the fact you guys doesnt acknowledge this antrax event, make you guys not so objective.

Well I asked you on another thread what you thought happened and you answered with one word... "Missle". How am I to read your mind and know that you really mean "Small plane and missle"?
That shows your credibility and integrity. You are jumping from one theory to the next because you NEED to believe that it was a US Plot. It is your existence.

So if a small plane and missle hit the Pentagon... where did Flight 77 go? Where are all of those people? The cell phone calls from Flight 77... I assume they were all faked right?
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
sanch said:
aeon said:
i also go with the Neo-cons agenda, which were asking for those change before 9-11,i aslo look at the motives and who will benifit from it, knowing that 9-11 was a very complexe event, means it was done by people who were smart enough to calculate everything that sorround the event, but in what sense it is advantaging muslim? so in other word, they were able to plan this complexe event, but wasnt smart enough to calculate that usa will use this excuse to invade thier countries, and steal their ressources.

but i can tell you right now, how the bush administration and their friends profit from 9-11.

The theory I prefer is the official one where bin Laden planned the attack. There were probably major screw-ups in the US in tracking the hijackers that are now being covered up. Still the planning was conducted at an al Queda camp in Afghanistan by bin Laden and well known associates.

Here is the visual reference for your theory. What did they do next? How do you see the planning?



Then how would you explain that building 7 was demolish by controlled demolition?

You can all have those call you want, but it doesnt prove that alquada is behind the event, so to summerize, you have absotly no evidence at all that alquada is behind it, but u believe it, cause it fits your view.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
Re: RE: New Bin Laden tape about 9/11

EagleSmack said:
Well I asked you on another thread what you thought happened and you answered with one word... "Missle". How am I to read your mind and know that you really mean "Small plane and missle"?
That shows your credibility and integrity. You are jumping from one theory to the next because you NEED to believe that it was a US Plot. It is your existence.

So if a small plane and missle hit the Pentagon... where did Flight 77 go? Where are all of those people? The cell phone calls from Flight 77... I assume they were all faked right?


Find the post, where i said, only a missle, until then, think before you post.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
You can all have those call you want, but it doesnt prove that alquada is behind the event, so to summerize, you have absotly no evidence at all that alquada is behind it, but u believe it, cause it fits your view.

I said it was my view. I am also trying to figure out what your view is. Who gave the order to shoot the missle? That kind of stuff.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
sanch said:
You can all have those call you want, but it doesnt prove that alquada is behind the event, so to summerize, you have absotly no evidence at all that alquada is behind it, but u believe it, cause it fits your view.

I said it was my view. I am also trying to figure out what your view is. Who gave the order to shoot the missle? That kind of stuff.


You know conductin terrorist act against their own civilian isnt new concept, it has been going on for century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than your own. Terrorist attacks may sometimes be in fact false flag operations, as in the Italian strategy of tension in which several bombings in the 1970s, attributed to far-left organizations, were in fact carried on by far-right organizations cooperating with the Italian secret services. Elsewhere in Europe, the Mouvement d'Action et Défense Masada, supposedly a Zionist group, was really a neo-fascist terrorist group which hoped to increase tension between Arabs and Jews in France.
 

sanch

Electoral Member
Apr 8, 2005
647
0
16
You know conductin terrorist act against their own civilian isnt new concept, it has been going on for century.

This doesn't explain anything about 9/11. You don't have a theory. As with the Montreal example we could subject every aspect of your existence to scrutiny and at the end we could raise enough doubt as to whether you were an alien or an earthling. Challenging facts here and there mean nothing. You have to add your facts up to see if you can have them make sense. That is the only way you are going to be convincing.
 

aeon

Council Member
Jan 17, 2006
1,348
0
36
sanch said:
You know conductin terrorist act against their own civilian isnt new concept, it has been going on for century.

This doesn't explain anything about 9/11. You don't have a theory. As with the Montreal example we could subject every aspect of your existence to scrutiny and at the end we could raise enough doubt as to whether you were an alien or an earthling. Challenging facts here and there mean nothing. You have to add your facts up to see if you can have them make sense. That is the only way you are going to be convincing.


That doesnt explain anything about 9-11, i agree, but it shows that governement has used terrorism throught history, and usa did plan those act , operation northwoood is one of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwood


You know proving that montreal exist, is something different to what a phone call did exist for real, i guess you agree on that.

However phone call that describes peoples, is nowhere near an evidence that alquada was behind it, that is also a fact.