It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bin Laden Brothers tell American couple of U.S Government plot to topple Twin Towers

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
this is freaky. i'm surprised i haven't seen it here, yet(link, click me)

the couple suffered a home invasion by the bin laden brothers in 1987.
i eagerly await the stream of disinfo and ad hominem attacks from neocon pundits.

i notice that they even used the same paradigm back in 1987 as PNAC used in spring 2001. a new "pearl harbour" was 'needed' to get american sentiment on the side of war in the middle east for oil control.




posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   
good find billybob, I will read / see it later, have to run



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:10 PM
link   


As they say in Hollywood, what happened in between is "the stuff movies are made out of," as fact is sometimes stranger than fiction.





"Both of us were interested in advance learning and brain development and worked together on several mechanical devices involved with dream enhancement and foreseeing the future," said Logsdon, an engineer by trade who previously had government security clearances when working for Motorola. "We worked on several devices which put people into a hypnotic state and became well-known for our advanced techniques and use of this type of technology.





"Our work spread quickly through the scientific community and become known to somevery wealthy people who were quite interested in exploring development for healing purposes as well as visions of the future."


ummm yeah... I beleive these "freaks".....



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   
So, I just finished reading it and I see no credible evidence that this story has any truth to it whatsoever.

All I see is opinion, an editorial, and some more opinion.

IMO, it seems like someone is a good writer, but needs to get some new meds.

I don't buy it, seeing as there is NO proof to back these claims up.

-wD



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   
""We worked on several devices which put people into a hypnotic state and became well-known for our advanced techniques and use of this type of technology. "

so googling motorola and their names would corroborate this right ? nope, it just brings you to more websites with the same article. suspicious at best.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
It would make for a great movie though...



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Indymedia accepts submissions and doesn't verify them, no? Its not a credible news source because of that.


During the years that followed, Welch, the recipient of most of the CIA?s physical abuse, wrote a 150 page account of the 1987 incident to protect her life, sending copies to the Clinton White House and Arizona law enforcement officials

IOW, he's a bit of an obsessive.



"These men told us to be very cautious and to assume that we were under surveillance by our government. For several hours they showed us films of meetings of key Arabs and U.S. government officials discussing the oil issues. The bottom line was that if the Arabs did not do it their way, the U.S. would simply take their oil by force. They also explained that they have been manipulated into setting up bank accounts where oil profits were siphoned off and were no longer under their control."


I'm sorry, and not to be rude, but does anyone actually beleive this ridiculous story? It may as well be MIBs comming to their house. The whole thing is silly, some of the bin ladin family get together with the CIA and come to some random guys house to tell him that the US and Mid east are in a clash over oil (duh) and that they are telling him this so that he can do something about it? He is charged with the sacred and secret mission to alert the world and stop the evil? We they CIA, MIB, or was it an apparition of the Virgin Mary?

ed. to correct BB code

[edit on 24-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   
No proof at all. This sounds like a load of rubbish.

Why didn't they come forward with this after the first attack on the WTC?



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
i knew you would all make it out for this one. we're missing a few faces, yet, though.
c'mon guys, you can hammer these people harder, can't you? i mean, 'new meds' is SOOOOO tired.
did i say this was true? do i believe it? is it true? all moot points to those who have already made up their minds (based on the fact that if it's true, it puts the whole conspiracy theory right up at the vanguard of truth, even for far-right neocons).
'we' can't have that, now, can we?

keep that spin and venom coming. just be careful which way the wind is blowing, ...."you don't tug on superman's cape, you don't piss into the wind, ....".



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   

did i say this was true? do i believe it? is it true? all moot points to those who have already made up their minds


Well, billybob, what exactly did you expect?

You posted it. If you don't believe it, why did you expect others to take it seriously?

There are a lot more credible conspiracy theories around with some kind of evidence that goes further than 'it's true, i said so' and they are seriously contested as people attempt to disprove them. How do we disprove this?

Essentially all it consists of is some guy saying that the Bin Laden brothers told him the govt were planning to hit the WTC. That's it. Zero evidence, zero corroborating stories, nothing of any substance at all.

edit: Why didn't they come forward with this after the 1993 attack on the WTC?


[edit on 24-6-2005 by Chris McGee]



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:42 PM
link   
so let me get this straight, you post junk with no credibility, then label the posters that call it for what it is far right neo-cons ?


THATS getting tired around here



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chris McGee

did i say this was true? do i believe it? is it true? all moot points to those who have already made up their minds


Well, billybob, what exactly did you expect?


i expect people to read interesing information and put it in storage for later reference within developing contextual frames. got ya. you read it. you stored it in your head.

i also fully expected a cascade of 'debunking' tirades. i even said so in the first post, my little carrot followers.
as usual, though, nothing has been debunked despite the confident proclamations of all the official story apopolgists.
I LOVE IT!



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
"At one point during the meeting, Logsdon said the two bin Laden brothers made it clear they were the "mavericks" in the family, not wanting to see American colonialism take a firm hold over their country?s values and vital resources. He also said they were very curious as to whether his "light and sound" machine could help pinpoint dates and times about when a future U.S. takeover of the Middle East would occur."

If these two were the mavericks of the family and didn't want the US in their territories, that would mean that somebody didn't mind them being in there.

If somebody was willing to cooperate with the US, then, the US wouldn't have had to take the oil by force as they had said.

Also, why didn't these people mention anything about the other trade center bombings.

Oh, and these people were just hand picked out of the clear blue. They were left with no video for proof, nothing. Their just sitting there one day when here comes some rich Saudis in limos to tell them their government is going to blow up some buildings, yeah right.

This is among the worst bologna I have ever heard in my life.

[edit on 24-6-2005 by SuperKyle]



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
thats quite an ego you have there billybob, we all must get in line and agree with you, or we're wrong, venemous neo-cons to boot

I didn't realize you were always right about everything. now I stand corrected, eagerly awaiting your next nuget of wisdom



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
so, to recap, ....once again, i'm not saying it's true, i'm leaving it open as a possibility rather than deciding truth based on my political beliefs, like you all are doing, oh gathered right wing bush supporters.

my ego is surprisingly non-existant. this makes me unbateable. this was a process i went through in order to get closer to god. i'm a fatalist to the end. 'what will be, will be'. not, 'what i want to be, will be'.

i think the ego that makes reality proclamations based on partisan politics over HONEST investigation and research is the obvious fathead in the crowd.

of course, i could be wrong. about everything.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   
OK billybob, but have you considered the fact that i'm not american and so don't really care about the reps/dems crap?

Have you considered the fact that I don't believe the official story of 9/11?

Or have you just decided that anyone that thinks its a load of rubbish is a right wing neo-con pig?

Where is the 'honest investigation' you espouse? Some guy claims something fairly ridiculous with absolutely nothing to back it up and you want us to take it seriously? How much 'honest investigation' have you put into it? If you have something more i'm sure we'd all like to know what it is.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chris McGee
OK billybob, but have you considered the fact that i'm not american and so don't really care about the reps/dems crap?

Have you considered the fact that I don't believe the official story of 9/11?

Or have you just decided that anyone that thinks its a load of rubbish is a right wing neo-con pig?

Where is the 'honest investigation' you espouse? Some guy claims something fairly ridiculous with absolutely nothing to back it up and you want us to take it seriously? How much 'honest investigation' have you put into it? If you have something more i'm sure we'd all like to know what it is.


actually, neoons are everywhere. in the middle east, they are, 'the muslim brotherhood', they are connected through grover norquist to the republican party and agenda, and 'al-queda' is a subgroup.

and, YET AGAIN(sigh), i never claimed to believe it. i posted it as a note of interest so that people can BEGIN investigating it.
rightwing bushies don't want to investigate, though. they just want to sweep it under the rug, true or false. using all the tired neocon accuses, too, like, 'tinfoil hat, 'meds', 'liberal agenda'. and i'm sure, 'anti-american' and 'bush-hater' aren't far behind.

i have put NO investigation into it, except for reading it, and posting it here, so that others can enjoy the lead.
i don't claim to know anything about it. i love how i'm attacked, though. it's such a 'tell'.

i never called right wing hate-mongering, war-mongering fascists, ....'pigs'. i don't like to insult people.

take a deep breath. let it out. feel better?



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
actually, neoons are everywhere. in the middle east, they are, 'the muslim brotherhood', they are connected through grover norquist to the republican party and agenda, and 'al-queda' is a subgroup.


Now that sounds interesting.



and, YET AGAIN(sigh), i never claimed to believe it. i posted it as a note of interest so that people can BEGIN investigating it.
rightwing bushies don't want to investigate, though. they just want to sweep it under the rug, true or false. using all the tired neocon accuses, too, like, 'tinfoil hat, 'meds', 'liberal agenda'. and i'm sure, 'anti-american' and 'bush-hater' aren't far behind.


Sweep what under the rug? The site you quoted is the only one carrying it. There's no evidence whatsoever either way. It may have happened, it may not but with absolutely no evidence at all I tend towards the view that it's garbage.

No-one's attacking you, it's just a junk story. There's really nothing to debate. It's just a good story and until some evidence emerges to substantiate it that's all it will be.

No-one is attacking this because of their political allegiance. No-one has mentioned 'tin foil hats' or 'anti-american' or 'liberal agenda'. People are attacking it because it has no grounding. No evidence, no corroborating stories. One 'news' website is carrying this on the whole net, what does that say?

p.s. Why didn't they come forward after the 1993 attacks on the World Trade Centre?



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
i knew you would all make it out for this one. we're missing a few faces, yet, though.


I'm staying out of this one. It is too silly.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 09:29 PM
link   
The last thing I'd call this author is a "good writer." It amazes me sometimes the articles that make it past the so-called "editor." This thing was filled with spelling and grammar errors. Besides there being absolutely no corroborating evidence, the poor writing is the first blow to this author's credibility, IMHO.

Granted, I'm no scholar myself... but I'd at least read and re-read any article that I ever attempted at publishing. Especially one in which I'm trying to convince the reader of a hardly-believable story.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join