It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 09:58 PM
Sometimes I think you have to fast forward before you rewind. Back around 1999 or maybe even 1998 we were on the verge of hitting $10 a barrel oil. Now it is 2005 and the price of oil has jumped to $60 a barrel. And the increases aren't over. We are talking about price increases of 600% in 6 or 7 years. Joe Average on the street isn't going to know the true story behind the supply of oil. Those in charge of our energy policies certainly do.

Lets assume that peak oil is the real deal. Based on a 600% increase in price as I have shown it would seem to be true. Having an economy that is so heavily dependent on oil and most importantly foreign oil you would want to secure additional sources. The problem is one of the big suppliers of oil was heavily restricted because of sanctions (Iraq). The rest of the world's oil supply was pretty well distributed among the big guys like the US, Russia and China. As the demand grows the price will continue to skyrocket (as it has). So you will want to secure your own large private stash. Attempting to drill for and find as much oil as Iraq has would take decades and would frankly be too late. But how do you get your hands on that much oil without the rest of the world noticing? I mean you can't just invade and take their oil. You'd be faced up against the Russian and Chinese armies in a hurry.

So you have your eyes on a rather large chunk of oil but you need to find a way to get it without being the bad guy. But how? You can't send over your troops and just loot the country. But if you were attacked first then you'd be justified in attacking back. Unfortuantely Saddam didn't really have a way to attack so we needed something else? Why not a faceless enemy like a terrorist? This is someone we can put into a group and this group would have no borders. This would allow us to move freely from country to country to chase this enemy. In order to pull something like this off you'd need serious public outrage.

The U.S. got hit before when a truck bomb blew up in the basement of the WTC. This really had little effect on Americans. Something bigger was needed. Big but not too big and it had to be visible. What i could be more visible than the twin towers? The two tallest buildings in the most media exposed place in the world. Conveniently a camera manages to capture footage of the first jet hitting the wtc. We didn't know about this until later. Apparently no one knew about this except the President who was reading My Pet Goat to some children. Of course the 2nd jet was well covered and the story about NY was etched in stone. But as good as that was you really needed something big to show the nation was in jeopardy and what better way to do that than to hit a government building itself. Enter the AA 757 piloted by the best BAD student in history. Here is a below average Cessna pilot making stunt pilot moves with a 757 he had never flown before and he is able to keep it feet of the ground and fly it in to a mostly unoccupied wing of the Pentagon to minimize government casualties.

I don't think the 4th plane was ever going to reach its target. That is where America comes to the rescue and stops those evil terrorists dead in their tracks. We must have at least one victory to make the story look good. So now we have our enemy. Which I might add we identified immediately including the ring leader (Atta).

So of cousre we know who the 19 terrorists were, who they worked for, who funded them and where they trained. Off to Afghanistan with the troops. We drop some bombs and chase some people around the desert for a short period of time and then the focus quickly shifts to the real reason we were over there. Enter Iraq and their WMD program and their link to 9/11. We quickly invade Iraq and once the oil fields were secured we declared an end to major combat. This happened before we captured the one guy we set out to get (Saddam) and before we killed the insurgency. That declaration alone gave it away.

So we created the enemy, we attacked, we claimed their oil fields and now we can't define an exit date (conveniently enough) because we haven't gotten control of the insurgents. Two years have gone by and despite endless raids the attacks keep coming. And of course as long as the attacks come so do our excuses for staying and keeping control of the oil fields.

So ask yourself this. If the U.S. economy is facing the potential for the greatest crisis in the history of the industrialized world (peak oil) can you justify the loss of 3000 American civilians and a few thousand troops to secure America's economic future?

Also why else with prices rapidly rising would the U.S. continue to stockpile its strategic reserves?

Flame if you want but i think you would be best served to think this over carefully.

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 10:41 PM
Bait And Switch 101

First, billybob posted this:

Originally posted by billybob
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.

Then, after several ATSers commented about the article, billybob posted this:

Originally posted by billybob
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, ....".

This is a critique of ATSers, not the article, and it only tangentially addresses the reasonable skepticism expressed here.

The coup de grace:

Originally posted by billybob
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.

Emphasis mine, and I agree with the sentiment, if not the wording. I also agree with the last point, and suggest careful contemplation of it.

This is an example of a “bait and switch” thread. Set the bait in the form of a topic, then switch the discussion to those who respond to it. A rather obvious example of it, if not the most skillful.

Ad hominem arguments are heckled out of debates for good reason.

There's nothing wrong with posting questionable stories. ATS is a place where the members get to decide what is worth reading, not censors, and the tolerance for dubious information here is fairly high for a website this big.

However, steering threads from the original topic and towards fellow ATSers is, in my opinion, a good habit to get out of.

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 09:22 AM

Sadly, I'd probably support the government's decision, assuming they were behind 9/11. The ends justify the means. It's a terrible world that we live in. But I need cheap gas for my SUV! I pray everynight for all those who lost their lives on 9/11 and all those who continue to lose their lives in this War on Terror. That being said, let's invade Iran or Saudi Arabia next so we can get gas prices back under $2.00 a gallon!

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 09:56 AM
Shouldn't this be in the collaborative fiction forum

I agree with majic's call. billybob - you're being ornery and you know it.

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 10:17 AM
That about sums it up...

Now for something totally different.

I stand with Majic on this one 100%. I've seen plenty of "baiting" posts in my life and this is certainly a classic. One wonders why the poster felt the need to do this.

Is there some underlying situation here we don't know about? Is there a motivation to keep the stories of Government involvement in the demise of WTC alive and well that is more organized than we may suspect?


posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 10:42 AM
Well I read it, sounds like a good movie, What are the first names of the brothers Grim? The light and sound machine are real, I have seen plenty of these and it is true with certain drugs your will can be changed.

Would you like to see one of these machines for your self? Head out to you’re nearest Bar or Club

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:22 AM
There are SOME people on here who SHOULD of known better (and did) they turned a blind eye, hid under the carpet and chose to support the lies etc.

[edit on 25-6-2005 by ThePunisher]

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:01 PM
I like how the guy who started this thread gets all offended personally when certain people don't believe the story. He acts as though he personally wrote the article and was a witness to the event. Take a chill pill, dude! Just because we don't buy the story, it doesn't mean you don't have any credibility. It really has nothing to do with you. In fact, we appreciate the fact that you brought this story to our attention, regardless of its truthfulness.

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:15 PM
i honestly wasn't trying to troll for righties. i just know that certain concepts are unacceptable to the conservative mind, and i knew i would be attacked for DARING to post such an 'obvious lie'.

even our hardened conspiracy theorists aren't buying it. the difference is, they joke about it, whereas, apologists think it's a scam targeted at the repub admin.

sound and light machines HAVE been invented and tested. the binaural beat head band thingy, for example. the vatican is rumoured to be in possession of 'the chronovisor', which is a device that let's the user see into the past(and future?). these claims alone are not that outlandish/unbelievable. whether these devices actually do anything is a different story.
if the bin laden brothers were sucked into some techno hype, would that make them any more or less human than you or i?

i'm going to stand against the popular tide, and say it still MIGHT be true.

i'm sorry that the group i said would attack people who identified with the story, and not the story itself, chose to ignore my prescience and predisclaimer.

i'm going to see if i can find anything else related. stay tuned.

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Rasputin13
Sadly, I'd probably support the government's decision, assuming they were behind 9/11. The ends justify the means. It's a terrible world that we live in. But I need cheap gas for my SUV! I pray everynight for all those who lost their lives on 9/11 and all those who continue to lose their lives in this War on Terror. That being said, let's invade Iran or Saudi Arabia next so we can get gas prices back under $2.00 a gallon!

In all honesty it would be more than just cheap gas that we'd be fighting for. It would be the energy to heat our homes in the winter. I wonder how many people would die from freezing in the winters ahead if we didn't have the energy we needed to provide warmth or if the energy was so expensive that millions of Americans couldn't afford their energy bills. This is the price you pay for being so heavily dependent on a single form of energy. The impact would be much less if we were able to use nuclear energy without all the government and special interest obstructions.

I would use this little grace period we have to heavily build up our national rail network and electrify it with the power supply being nuclear. This will give us the ability to transport goods from coast to coast with a greatly reduced dependency on oil. If electrified rail was used for cargo and some public transportation it would lower our dependency on oil and make it more affordable for normal driving and more affordable to heat our homes.

Eventually the prices will get so high that people will be left with the choice of staying warm or going on a trip or buying something new and staying warm will win and our economy will suffer as a result.

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 10:23 PM
As far as building up our SOR (Strategic Oil Reserves), of course we're going to. We're going to stockpile as much as we possibly can in case we have to use it. That's what it's there for, in case we have to use it.

As far as the story goes, I'm having a hard time believe that these people were just picked at random and told what would happen. I guess that makes me a right wing neocon for actually thinking for myself and laughing at such an unbelievable story. My disbelief has absolutely NOTHING to do with my politics, it has to do with the fact that this story is so unbelievable, and was only posted on ONE "news" (and I used the term VERY loosely) site.

And again, Why didn't they say anything after the FIRST WTC attack.

[edit on 25-6-2005 by Zaphod58]

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Zaphod58

And again, Why didn't they say anything after the FIRST WTC attack.

[edit on 25-6-2005 by Zaphod58]

presuming what they say is true, for the sake of argument, then they didn't say anything because they were constantly harassed and terrorised by the american secret police, be it fbiciansaosshlstiamibwhatever.
i guess they would've decided everyone's in the same boat, now, so they've shored up their reserve courage and gone public, knowing they have WAY more allies on the 'outside'.
i don't presume what they say is false.

posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by Indy
Sometimes I think you have to fast forward before you rewind. Back around 1999 or maybe even 1998 we were on the verge of hitting $10 a barrel oil. Now it is 2005 and the price of oil has jumped to $60 a barrel. And the increases aren't over. We are talking about price increases of 600% in 6 or 7 years.

First of all Indy, Excellent post above!!

I was wondering where you found the numbers indicating the price
per barrel was $10 around 1999?

As far as the story... I don't think so...

I decided to only waste a couple hours trying to verify this and
all I could find was reprints of the story (as someone already stated)

Our work spread quickly through the scientific community

I was not able to verify this

Searching for these "advanced sound and light machines" or devices
that could be considered as much I can only come up with brain
stimulation or relaxation aids.

The story says that they sent a document by registered mail to the
Clinton white house, yet they offer no proof of any kind or even some
transcripts of part or all of the document (supposedly 150 pages).
There is nothing at all except the story??

I believe there are alot of real conspiracies out there and this may
well be one of them but the story will be nothing more than a story
to me without any way to verify any part of it.

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 06:54 AM
OK, I'm not sure about this story myself. I don't quite understand why the Bin Laden brothers should take the trouble to do a film presentation for this couple.

But I am, naturally, staggered by the fact that only one poster did any searches to try and verify what was in the story. Everyone else just went off at Billybob.

This story has turned up a third person who claims to verify the then-couple's claims. It also seems now that they were connected to NASA. Of course, this isn't a good sign:

Welch, a licensed hypnotism -therapist and head of the Global Elite Scientist's Club,

It's not just the misplaced apostrophe... can there really be such a club? I mean, come on. These words just don't belong in that order in this context. So a search brought me to this entirely wonderful article that analyses the story just the way I would if I were only that little bit smarter and funnier. Billybob, check it out. You'll love it. Especially "Global Cleanse 2000", which should have happened by now, surely? Maybe they've renamed it "Global Cleanse 2012".

I find I'm actually wanting this story to be true, although the feeling that it really isn't is coming over me like the onset of a head cold.

Hey. guess what? Alex Jones has bought it. Apparently he's done no verification either... he's just pretty much reprinted the story I first linked.

This is turning into a depressing round of unverified BS.

However it did lead me here, but alas the source of the story is Alex Jones who, as we have seen, doesn't put a lot of effort into verification. The story relates to the sacking of 4-star general Kevin Byrnes, which was supposedly for sexual misconduct. According to other sources, Byrnes may have tried to lead a coup against the neocons. Frankly, I think if that were the case, he'd be dead.

However, it does fit in with one piece of the puzzle around 9/11 and the London Bombings. Why do they coincide with terror "drills"?

Because it's easier to slip in a real terror attack and keep it under control when everything's up and running already.

Lehrman’s army sources, including a former Captain in intelligence, became outraged when they learned that the official story behind 9/11 was impossible.

They told Lehrman that the imminent Northcom nuclear terror exercise based in Charleston, S.C, where a nuclear warhead is smuggled off a ship and detonated, was originally intended to ‘go live’ - as in the drill would be used as the cover for a real false flag staged attack.
This website has relentlessly discussed similar style drills which took place on the morning of 9/11 and on the morning of 7/7 in London.
“Speculation exists that he had potentially discovered the fact that it was gonna go live and that he was trying to put a stop to it or also speculation indicates that he may be part of a military coup designed to prevent the ridiculous idea of doing a nuclear war with Iran, ” said Lehrman.

I remember a lot of rumours flying around a few months ago about a nuclear warhead being detonated in a US port... I thinik Galveston might have come up as one possible location. I can't imagine they'd do that unless Cheney wanted Halliburton/KBR to make a killing on the insurance on their sites there.

Anyway, I'm done. No verification of the wonderfully named "Global Elite Scientist's (sic) Club, but Welch is certainly persisting with her story. Hmmm.

posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 09:58 PM
hey, rich23, a belated thanks for all that.

i just reread this story which i'd forgotten about until mmichael reminded me, and i've got to say, if you were going to make up a story, it would make more sense to have the story make more sense, and not have such a bizarre cast of characters.
sometimes, truth is stranger than fiction, eh.
there are 3 1st hand witnesses claiming it's true. that's 2 more than 1.

i have to say, too, that gee willigers, the initial reaction to this article was totally, "it is incredulous, so it can't be true".
it is well known that the CIA and NASA are interested in things like remote viewing, so it is not THAT far out that people who work in these departments would be under constant surveillance, and would be threatened and harassed if they broke the "cone of silence".
so, i find it interesting that people immediately dismissed this, rather than put it in the "i have no idea" box.
my "i have no idea" box is overflowing, LOL.

i wonder why nothing else was ever heard from on this story. it was never rabidly "debunked" like most of these types of stories, and that makes me wonder. i guess the debbies just think it's too fringe to bother with.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in