Honestly, I believe this thread is more about the psychology of the human mind rather than part of the 9/11 conspiracy. But then again, all conspiracies are closely related to psychology.

If any solid information is given by a detainee, the only way to verify it is to actually physically check. There is no doubt that Osama isn't in the same location as he was when the detainee was captured, so location information would be useless.

I'm not going to give my opinion on the torture, but what I will say, is that they need to ask the right questions. And again, I'm sure they are, it's just that the media is just throwing whatever they can to us. This has become such an issue now that the media will use anything they have to their advantage for their personal benefit.

And now that I think about it, maybe a psychiatrist will do better than the soldiers when it comes to questioning. Unfortunately, after all the prisoners have been through, they're minds are probably rock hard and wouldn't succumb to reasoning.

Hi everybody,

Only just joined and here its my two cents worth,

Wow, America tortures people, it's official and that is weak. I thought the US was above that sort of stuff, and shame on the people in charge. Comparisons to the worst regimes in history can be made, history will judge harshly on those involved.

People have different opinions and people can be hypocrites, some believe torture is never justified, others think torture should be allowed in certain circumstances, still others think torture is great and happily kick a cat to death, and there is a range of opinion in between. But does not basic human nature state that when tortured people say what they think will get the torture to stop?!?

And the secret services in the US are pretty expert in torture, they wrote the manual (and instructional DVD). I guess someone is gonna come out and claim that the US does not torture people, but come on, read a few books about foreign policy and open your mind a little.

On a purely semi-intellectual level, the confession does not prove 9/11 2001 is a fabricated story, as a story can be a story which is true or a story which is fictional, but come on, you have mad men running the country, no offense to Obama who seems like a nice person, not.

Power and equality

PS, that is right I am bringing back "not" as a term of sarcasm.

I am starring and flagging this not because I think that the title is right. I am doing it because it shows exactly what I have always known to be true through my psyche classes. What has been proven over and over by the great psychologists of our time.

That TORTURE does not work. It never has and never will. Sure, there will be those that come out and say that we stopped other attacks from information taken while torturing people. Problem is, it's the word of those that have lied to us over and over that I have to question. Cheney and Bush lied many times. They changed their tune many times. I'm sick of the lies in the name of 'National Security'.

It's not about national security. It's about greed and they are hiding behind their national security blanket. I'm sick of it.

Though this doesn't state that 911 was indeed a fabricated story (I happen to believe that much of the official story is a ton of BS), I feel that this goes to show that indeed torture is wrong and the information garnered cannot be trusted. Thus, it's just wrong.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I
Telling someone who is torturing you to tell them what they want to hear... what they want to hear. Sounds like a logical predictable cause and effect. Proof in itself that the majority of the 'official story' is propped up on lies.
[edit on 16-6-2009 by The All Seeing I]

I know full well you're not coming up with this garbage yourself, but from some stupid website telling all sorts of foolish things before directing you to their T-shirt shop. Naturally for self serving con artists, there are huge numbers of things they're not telling you.

The truth is, Osama bin Laden came out on the Al Jazeera network and *admitted* to being behind the 9/11 attack. That's not even counting the fact that we gave our intelligence to our NATO allies showing al Qaida was behind the attack, and they compared it to what their own intelligence services were telling them, and they found it convincing enough to invoke article 5.

To claim Al qaida wasn't behind the attack, it would mean...

a) Al Jazeera is involved in the conspiracy, since they're a favored media outlet for Al Qaida, they certainly have their own methods of authenticating Bin Laden's broadcast

b) Al Qaida is involved in the conspiracy, since if the announcement was faked, they'd certainly come forward and say it was faked, and they haven't

c) NATO is involved in the conspiracy, since they looked at our evidence and publically agreed with it. You do know we're not the only ones in Afghanistan, right?

d) That's not counting just about every *other* country in the world from Japan to Mexico to India, who actively approves and supports our campaign against Al Qaida for the same reason.

SO, either 100,000 people from all over the world are in on the conspiracy to stage the attack, or it really *was* a terrorist attack and all these conspiracy web sites are just plain full of sh*t. I don't think I need to say which one I myself believe it is, do I?

Originally posted by jprophet420
the bin laden admission tape has been confirmed fake. Im not discrediting your whole arguement but just citing facts. The guy in the confession is fatter than bin laden (which could change) but also has a different nose. the 2 people are not one in the same. Also there is a video of him claiming not to be behind the attacks, so all credibility is shot.

"The guy in the confession is fatter than Bin Laden"??? Would you mind terribly explaining this? In the Al Jazeera broadcase he was wearing loose robes, a shawl, and a cap, and with his beard there's no way you could tell if he was fat, thin, or if he just came out of Aushcwitz. Besides, if it wasn't him, Al Qaida would certainly have come forward and told Al Jazeera it wasn't him.

Let me guess...you got all THAT from one of those conspiracy web sites, too. Of course.

I dunno, I can make a casual observation or 2. Even Reuters reported it as 'a man who looks similar to bin laden'.
as isaid the weight is wrong, facial features are wrong, and dexterity is wrong (writes with wrong hand in video).

Where did you get your information from? I'm pretty sure you don't speak the same language and relied on the translation for one. If you do and did say so. I have to rely on what the translator says personally. However the things i mentioned are noticable no matter what your milk tounge is.

Originally posted by jprophet420
I dunno, I can make a casual observation or 2. Even Reuters reported it as 'a man who looks similar to bin laden'.
as isaid the weight is wrong, facial features are wrong, and dexterity is wrong (writes with wrong hand in video).

??? What ARE you referring to? I'm referring to the Oct 2004 broadcast on Al Jazeera. He didn't write anything during the video. He just sat there and made his announcement. He had a piece of paper on the table in fromt of him, but I don't recall he actually wrote on it.

Where did you get your information from? I'm pretty sure you don't speak the same language and relied on the translation for one. If you do and did say so. I have to rely on what the translator says personally. However the things i mentioned are noticable no matter what your milk tounge is.

I got it from the same place the rest of the world did- Al Jazeera. They're the ones who received the broadcast from Al Qaida to begin with, they're the ones who aired it and put the translation on their website, and I have to presume that being the premiere news network representing the Islamic world that they're going to provide us an honest English translation of his broadcast.

As you say, I have to rely on what the translator says personally, milk tongue notwithstanding.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I
Nice try Dave... we all know that you are well aware of the fact that Bin Laden is dead and the tapes are fakes, it's part of your mandatory DoD* training/orientation for all Psyc-Ops assigned to defending the Official Story.

Al Jazeera regularly broadcasts Al Qaida material so they'd have their own methods to prove authenticity, so if the video is fake then it means Al Jazeera is a willing co-conspirator of the secret 9/11 plot to stage a terrorist attack and frame bin Laden, too. Go ahead, then, tell me that Al Jazeera is also in on this Gov't 9/11 conspiracy of yours, too. I double dog dare you.

Good grief, talk about drinking the kool-aid.

Originally posted by tezzajw
You claimed that news sources should have their own methods to authenticate material that they broadcast. Well, the US media should have authenticated Aziz ElHallan's story of lies before they let him go to air - live - right?

It depends on the news sources and it depends on the information being supplied to them. Since Al Qaida likes to give their broadcasts to Al Jazeera becuase they cater to the muslim world, and Al Jazeera likes to broadcast them becuase more people are going to tune in to their station to watch all their other stuff, they're necessarily goign to have some form of authentication method between them. It's the same way cops withhold critical evidence found at a crime scene from the press- when they see it again an another crime scene, they'll know it's really the same guy. Otherwise, the CIA would probably be trying to discredit bin Laden by forging videos showing him having sex with goats, or something.

How long has Aziz El Hallan been using US media for *his* broadcasts?

posted by GoodOlDave

I got it from the same place the rest of the world did- Al Jazeera. They're the ones who received the broadcast from Al Qaida to begin with, they're the ones who aired it and put the translation on their website, and I have to presume that being the premiere news network representing the Islamic world that they're going to provide us an honest English translation of his broadcast.

Come on Dave. Everybody knows that Al Jazeera is a CIA mouth organ half-filled with former BBC journalists. Why else did they come out with pronouncements and videos and audios exactly when Dubya got himself in trouble and needed them most?

Osama has been dead since December 2001 and you know it, and the Bush Regime knew it. They never went after Osama because it is a waste of time and manpower to chase after a dead man who could be buried anywhere.

Besides a dead man works just as well as a live one as a boogeyman to frighten the mindless sheeple. Correct Dave?

great find. star and flag.
I can not understand why anybody can take the statements taken during the interrogations in Gitmo as any kind of evidence. and even so they could not break 99% of hte tortured prisoners.

s&f for this interesting thread.

also, if you truly believe Osama was not behind the attacks on 9/11....then you're living in a little tiny hole...with tin foil on your head.

Religious extremists attacked us on September 11th, 2001. Stop thinking the government was behind it. Yes, Bush was fully aware of the attacks. However, he planned it? The man that f'd up Iraq carried out the largest attack on the US in ...history? Think again...please...THINK.

Indeed, and a well scripted story....



Can you or anyone please explain the above image Dave?

Edit:
The otherwise meticulous record keepers at the BBC have since 'lost' that footage by the way.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by twitchy]