Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks - CNN

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   
I can remember immediately after 9/11 I was anxiously awaiting one of Bin Ladens famous videos to surface, and there has always been one. Everytime he has orchestrated, and succedded in pullling off an attack without exception he gloats. No such thing came after 9/11 though . If I recall correctly he did issue a statement praising the perpetrators, however he never took direct responsibility for it, which does not fit his Modus Operandi.

I always felt that if Bin Laden were behind it he would of jumped at the opportunity to let everyone know it was him, as previously stated this did not happen though.........

I do not believe he was behind it. IMO-he is the Lee Harvey Oswald of 9/11.






posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1wintermute1
I can remember immediately after 9/11 I was anxiously awaiting one of Bin Ladens famous videos to surface, and there has always been one. Everytime he has orchestrated, and succedded in pullling off an attack without exception he gloats.


Really? Where are the clear claims of responsibility from him for bombing the Cole, or the attacks in Tanzania and Kenya? Or didn't he carry out those, either?

Also, there are plenty of occasions when al Qaeda members have indicated their responsibility for 9/11, from audio-tapes of interviews from the planners, naming some of those involved, even video wills from the hijackers. There's a summary of some at www.911myths.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
WyrdeOne-

I'm no expert on how bin Laden speaks when in casual conversation in someone's home, and I'm willing to bet you aren't either. Furthermore, do you even speak his language? If not then I'd hardly say you can compare what he was saying in the video to previous videos he has been in. It's funny how the CIA could pull off 9/11 basically without a hitch, yet they don't have any good makeup artists for their "fake bin Laden."

As far as benefiting from the war in Iraq, I have not. I've had several friends sent over there to fight. That's something I wasn't too happy about. I've read a lot of the 9/11 conspiracy stuff. As far as the hijackers still being alive, I'm not so sure. I believe there's something like 75 Muslim names to even choose from, so its not surprising that there are many Arabs with the same name as the hijackers. They also could have been bogus or stolen identities. That doesn't mean that 19 hijackers working for al Qaeda didn't die in those crashes on 9/11.

My opinion on 9/11 is not cast in stone at all. I've read everything from "George Bush did it" to "The Mossad did it" and I'm not convinced of anything. Yes, I'm a Republican. Yes, I'm conservative on many issues. But the last thing anyone can accuse me of is being close-minded.

Show me some real proof of something and I'll look at it. But if all your evidence for conspiracy comes from some guy's site on Geocities where he has a blurry video of a teradactil (sp) flying into Tower 1, then forget about it. lol



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I have many points to state.

1. Why would Bin Laden at first deny it, then totally change? Isn't that a bit suspicious

2. Wouldn't it be obvious that there are MANY holes in the 9/11 story, and it's not likey Osama carried it out?

3. Regarding those Osama videos, why does he keep using poor audio so the videos can't be authenticated ?

4. Why does he keep saying he did 9/11 in each video, even 4 years after the attack? Come on

5. Are the guys below all the same people?





posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashmok

Originally posted by 1wintermute1
I can remember immediately after 9/11 I was anxiously awaiting one of Bin Ladens famous videos to surface, and there has always been one. Everytime he has orchestrated, and succedded in pullling off an attack without exception he gloats.


Really? Where are the clear claims of responsibility from him for bombing the Cole, or the attacks in Tanzania and Kenya? Or didn't he carry out those, either?

Also, there are plenty of occasions when al Qaeda members have indicated their responsibility for 9/11, from audio-tapes of interviews from the planners, naming some of those involved, even video wills from the hijackers. There's a summary of some at www.911myths.com...


I do not have them available now, but i do remember him claiming responsibility for the cole as with others (kenya, tanzania, etcf ). I will try to find links to substantiate my claim though give me time please.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Upper right corner is the snapshot stuck in my mind.

It looks so unlike him.

Is it possible it was picked for just that effect? To increase the conspiracy babble and conceal
the identity of the real masterminds?

rasputin
I'm not politically aligned at all, but I'm in the same boat you are. I've been up and down the thing, and the only thing I know is that there's too much unknown. There's too much hanging for the official story to ring true for me. Of course the conspiracy ideas have similar problems.

My problem isn't the lack of evidence, it's the flood of evidence! And it all seems to point in different directions - that's the real problem we face. I'm sure you're aware of all the same evidence I am, if you've spent time on the subject.

The 'Mossad did it' is in reference to the van full of Israelis with remote control gear cheering as the towers fell, right? That certainly didn't add up for me for several reasons. One, it was too unprofessional. Two, it was too easily let go after the fact, the men were just released, just like that. Three, it was too easy to follow, it gave a clear picture, (Mossad did it) that a lot of prejudiced people automatically take as gospel - that especially seems to be evidence of a grander cover up. Also, Mossad reputedly had an underground facility beneath the WTC complex, and I doubt they would have shot themselves in the foot like that, if indeed they planned on using it to take over America or whatever.

I do think the radio controlled plane concept needs to be refuted, because it seems to correspond to flawed (altered) surveillance (messed up time stamps) and the Global Hawk system's capabilities. It also seems to fit with the amazing precision with which the planes were flown. Such a concrete approach could have been planned years in advance, and practiced on simulators until it could be done in the dark with a blindfold. There is also the matter of the radio beacon that was noticed by some the day of the attack, shortly before the first plane struck. This could explain away the remote control theory, or bolster it, depending on how you look at it, and the limits you ascribe to the technology.

Also, any or all of the above information could be faked, intended to mislead, so one has to take that into account. There's so much more too, reams and reams of paper, book after book, a billion websites...

All that 'evidence' makes me sure of only one thing. Somebody, or some bodies are actively engaged in trying to confound those searching for the truth by presenting false leads and half truths meant to isolate the searchers. It makes some look like lunatics in the eyes of staunch party defenders, while also making you look like an apologist for rejecting anything not completely accurate. What it serves to do is transplant elements of the middle into the extremes, while at the same time reducing the impact the remaining middle people can have on their 'bookends' by infusing the debate with liberalism, patriotism, nationalism, racism, religiosity, and FEAR.

That's the main thing proven. So whoever did commit 9/11 most definitely wanted to make us afraid.. Not necessarily afraid of one thing over another, but distrustful and fearful of practically everything.

I think JFK was getting stale, so they had to think up another mind boggling tangle of loose ends and half truths to keep the people busy for a while so that they (whoever the hell THEY are) could cement their control or execute another attack.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
What's that about? People on the other side have reasonable questions that have not been answered. We're trying to enlarge the middle ground, by sharing information. We can have neutral ground here, but not if this persists. First of all it stinks of hopelessly rigid beliefs, and that's unhealthy. Second of all, it stereotypes unfairly. All the proof I've seen fails to impress. Have you seen different proof than I have? If not then we're coming to different conclusions based on the same data, and that means one or both of us has an agenda nudging logic out of the way. I think my bill of health is clear from agenda infections ( I have very little/nothing to gain from what goes on in the world, short of humanitarian disasters impinging on my right to life, and that's what's drawing nearer by the day if we can't find a way to work together). What do you think?



You have voted WyrdeOne for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

WyrdeOne: your arguments are clear, well-stated and totally justified. I think as you do that there is more to all these stories than meets the eye. But I fear that for some it will be too painful to ever admit that things don't add up and then look for the truth and be prepared for what will be uncovered - maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon..and there will be hell to pay. Unfortunately it will be so much easier for many to continue to deny ignorance instead of asking the hard questions because it will mean that everything they have been led to believe is a sham.

Well done.
[

[edit on 3/4/05 by AlwaysLearning]



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Ill give my short reply:




What else is new?



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 11:40 PM
link   
We're approaching 4 years since the 9/11 tragedy, DHS has assured us agencies are now fully sharing info, CIA has had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed at an undisclosed location for over 2 years now, yet the FBI Most Wanted site for bin Laden itself still makes no inclusion of his involvement in the WTC bombings:

MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH

USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD

and still no answers from the supreme prognosticator CIA Executive Director 'Buzzy' Krongard regarding his "PUT" options.

Even so, to prevent a now inevitable domestic reprisal for our liberating Afghanistan from the Taleban, I believe the al-Qa'ida hydra deserves persistent decapitation from a steadfast, relentless mission of attrition. Each successful stroke of the blade delivers further multi-furcation of its reconstituting hierarchy, taxing each upper echelon of experience, extirpating "The Base" of its practical potency; forcing each regenerating head(s) to devote that much more time & effort scampering to recruit, train and internally re-fortify (chain of command), as dreams of their jihad producing some strategic messiah increasingly resembles a receding mirage.


[edit on 3-4-2005 by Vajrayana]



posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Well if he's not guilty then why doesn't he turn himself in for some questioning?


dh

posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by demosthenes
Well if he's not guilty then why doesn't he turn himself in for some questioning?

He's the puppet muppet saved in the Chinese provinces for some future time event
Purely protected
Thats why the trail went cold immediately



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Usama/Osama is a Terrorist, however he does not carry out sophiscated Terrorist attacks like 9/11



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13



Um, how about the biggest heroine/ opium trade spot in the world for the last couple centuries?!



Ohhh so now not only do we go to war for oil, but we go to war for opium???

How about the fact that this country harbored and refused to turn over the world's most wanted terrorist? The very man who financed and orchestrated an attack on our nation that killed over 3,000 people and caused us billions and billions in damages. Or is this not a good enough reason for you?

People like you will never be satisfied with any justification that's used to go to war.


You are forgetting the oil pipeline through afghanistan that US oil companies wanted but the taliban refused before the war.
You are not well informed





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join