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.

 

10 Facts That Alex Jones says PROVES The Bin Laden Fable Is a Contrived Hoax

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


I'm sorry, but I cannot watch the videos just now. My husband telecommutes and I don't want to bog down his connections. I have seen some of them though.

I do not doubt that some of the videos are not OBL. That, in itself, proves nothing, though. There are fake videos out there. You seem to have decided which are the real Osama and which ones are fake. I wonder how you know...


You would think there wouldn't be any fake UBL videos endorsed and used by officials to propagate the bogeyman story to the public using the MSM. If one is fake then they all could be fake. How can one be convicted and executed with little more than a likely fake video confession. Wasn't good enough for the FBI to want him for it in his warrant anywhere.

Closure on the CIA asset UBL chapter or whoever he was sounds like a better script for the making of movie out this fall.

:-)




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Opspeculate
 


I've just about finished watching the intire interview of Obama and 60 MINS......watch Obama's expressions, eye contact, twitching of the right eye; his voice was nervous, stammers and repeats the interviewer's words....listen and watch carefully.......Obama is lying!!!



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I simply asked you a question. You didn't answer, thus proving your inability to add something constructive to this thread. The conclusions drawn, you have no merit.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 



Originally posted by bluemirage5
You wonder how I know? You make a bold statement like that after admitting you have'nt watched the videos I posted here in date order ???


Do I have to watch the video to wonder how you know? I'm just curious as to how you know, that's all.



It's obvious whioch ones of Osama are real and which ones are not.


OK. I will watch them after my husband gets off work and get back to you with my thoughts.


Originally posted by Opspeculate
You would think there wouldn't be any fake UBL videos endorsed and used by officials to propagate the bogeyman story to the public using the MSM.


I completely agree. In an uncorrupted government, I would think that a fake video would not be endorsed, but based on what I've seen and heard over the past 10 years or so, I firmly believe that our government has used fear to persuade us to feel a certain way. I remember at least one fake tape being used during the GW Bush era, so I don't need to be convinced of that.
I just haven't read an assessment of the recently-released video(s). I did see the one of him sitting on the floor, watching TV. I didn't think that looked like OBL should look. I just haven't done much research on the video side of things as I've been involved in some other discussions about the whole OBL thing.




If one is fake then they all could be fake.


It's true. If one is fake, they could all be fake. Hence my question to bluemirage5 about how he knew which were real or fake. Nearly got my fingers bitten for that one.



How can one be convicted and executed with little more than a likely fake video confession. Wasn't good enough for the FBI to want him for it in his warrant anywhere.


I'm not sure that's all the evidence they had on OBL. In fact, I think it's safe to say that they have more intel on him than a video confession.
Granted, I'm assuming that, but since we funded him in the first place, we probably know quite a bit about him.

Assuming the basics of the official story are true, I don't think we took Bin Laden out because he was a threat to the world. I think it was more political. It's something Obama said he was going to do and he did it. Before this happened, I thought OBL was dead. Wouldn't swear to it, but it's what I believed. And when this is all over, I may still think that. But I'm not going to assume things and jump on a bandwagon either way. I'm going to play the devil's advocate all the way. That's me. That should be my username.



Closure on the CIA asset UBL chapter or whoever he was sounds like a better script for the making of movie out this fall.


Yeah.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Realms
 


Let's see... What was your question again? Looks like there are several here. I'll do my best.


Originally posted by Realms
I've seen past posts were you cry foul at each turn for " facts". And yet when an article is submitted to you as possible evidence, you discredit it?


I don't know which posts of mine you're talking about, so I cannot answer this question. I do ask for facts, that's true. You'll have to tell me which "possible evidence" I discredited, so I can answer that for you.



Why is that? Why is it that past posts Ive reviewed, if the source of the information isn't to your liking, you attempt to spin and discredit information presented?


There could be several reasons a source would lose credibility for me. One reason might be that the source has shown to be overly biased or sensationalistic in the past. Or perhaps they have a habit of addressing issues out of context. Maybe it's a blog or another forum used as a source. So, yeah, the source matters.

Again, I'd have to know which posts you're referring to to address this more specifically.



I'm laughing....Im curious to know what your definition of " fact " truly is? Must be mind spin that suits your needs?


My definition of fact? It's pretty much the dictionary definition. Something actual. Reality. The truth. Something that has been proven to be true.

Hope that answers your questions.

.
edit on 5/9/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Now let's see who funded who because I jumped on something none of us are going to read in any of our newspapers today.....

an update on the 2008 Mumbai attacks.....be patient because this gets REAL interesting and probably deserves it's own thread:

This showed up today in the India Times.......

economictimes.indiatimes.com... w/8207322.cms

Jewish victimes of the Mumbai attacks:

www.telegraph.co.uk...


Mumbai attacks linked not to Al Qaeda, but the Pakistani and Indian Diamond trade:

moneyjihad.wordpress.com...


This article was in the India Times back in March 2009; I think the Pakistanis were correct:

indiatoday.intoday.in...;+India+trashes+it/1/33210.html


Blood Diamonds, the Pakistani/Indian/African link, diamonds used in purchase of weapons for terrorist networks, it's link to 9/11:

video.google.com...#


NOTE: are any of you aware that the BLOOD DIAMOND trade is linked to 70% of the world's terrorist attacks?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Thank you. You are the first to actually address questions directed to you. In the past, Ive seen issues of avoidance. So thank you for your presentation.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





What? I have stated my opinion and given explanations for the first four points. If that's not enough, too bad. These are not "10 facts". That is laughable! These are suspicions, suggestions, assumptions and misunderstandings, NOT facts. As I said, I have doubts about the official story, too, but to call these points 'facts' is incorrect.


Despite the fact I believe our government is completely fabricating this whole bin Laden raid, what Benevolent Heretic is saying here is true. The one that sticks in my craw, in particular, is this claim of AJ's that it was already "confirmed" that bin Laden died 10 years ago. The comments made by those he quotes do not "confirm" anything. There is no proof of him dying 10 years ago....and there is no proof that he died on May 1. We have no proof of anything...period.

All we can do is look at what circumstantial evidence we have thus far, including the fact our own government has, indeed, promoted fake bin Laden tapes as propaganda in the past, and draw our opinions from that. There is very little hard evidence to prove bin Laden is dead at all. For me, I have come to believe he did die several years ago because all of the audio/video tapes since 9/11 are highly suspect to me. If he has truly been alive this whole time, then why is there always controversy over his audio and video tapes? If it's him, it should be very easy to prove after analyzing the tapes that this is true....but this is not the case, is it? In fact, it never seems to be the case when it comes to bin Laden. There is always a question mark. If that doesn't raise concern, I have to ask why?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
None of the links in the AJ Story work for me, so I cannot check out his sources.

Number one "Fact": A bunch of people thought OBL was already dead.

That doesn't prove anything. Neither do his other "facts".

I'm not saying I believe the OS on Bin Laden, but these "facts" are not facts. They are suspicions and suggestions and simple misunderstandings, as far as I can tell.


actually "A bunch of other people" are more than just "other people" these are the "types of people" that one would look to for confirmation of such claims as OBL being dead or alive...these are the same "types of people" in the "types of positions" that are saying "hey will killed OBL"

I believe this is why AJ used this as part of his 10 facts.

The facts imply suspicion when someone believes someone is dead for years but continues to hunt them implies they think hes dead but not really...if they weren't looking how did they find a supposedly very alive (but supposedly now dead) OBL??

The implications of the FACTS are SUSPICIOUS....that is all. AJ went wrong saying these facts PROVE something....they don't...if they prove anything its the incompetency or dishonesty within our government. I'm not sure which, probably both.

The facts are facts...you can reference them its THE IMPLICATION of those facts is where the "suspicion" and suspicion is not "proof" its suspicion...

AJ's 10 facts prove nothing....they highlight why there are suspicions though.

that is all.

~sly~



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Benevolent......as one who believes in many of these conspiracies, I believe your points are valid, and I wish more people would refrain from taking AJ's reports just at face value. Unfortunately, his reports must be dissected for truth, much like the MSM.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 





AJ's 10 facts prove nothing....they highlight why there are suspicions though. that is all.


Exactly, Sly1.......

second line....



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





What? I have stated my opinion and given explanations for the first four points. If that's not enough, too bad. These are not "10 facts". That is laughable! These are suspicions, suggestions, assumptions and misunderstandings, NOT facts. As I said, I have doubts about the official story, too, but to call these points 'facts' is incorrect.


Despite the fact I believe our government is completely fabricating this whole bin Laden raid, what Benevolent Heretic is saying here is true. The one that sticks in my craw, in particular, is this claim of AJ's that it was already "confirmed" that bin Laden died 10 years ago. The comments made by those he quotes do not "confirm" anything. There is no proof of him dying 10 years ago....and there is no proof that he died on May 1. We have no proof of anything...period.

All we can do is look at what circumstantial evidence we have thus far, including the fact our own government has, indeed, promoted fake bin Laden tapes as propaganda in the past, and draw our opinions from that. There is very little hard evidence to prove bin Laden is dead at all. For me, I have come to believe he did die several years ago because all of the audio/video tapes since 9/11 are highly suspect to me. If he has truly been alive this whole time, then why is there always controversy over his audio and video tapes? If it's him, it should be very easy to prove after analyzing the tapes that this is true....but this is not the case, is it? In fact, it never seems to be the case when it comes to bin Laden. There is always a question mark. If that doesn't raise concern, I have to ask why?


True... True...



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   
You need to change your title....Alex Jones has nothing to do with the article other than the site. Sick of ppl trying to give Jones credit for sh*t he didn't do. Lost alot of respect for the guy over the last couple of years. Seems he's all talk, and alot of it. That's about it....

BTW the AUTHOR is Paul Joseph Watson.....just figured he should get the credit considering its his article.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chickensalad
You need to change your title....Alex Jones has nothing to do with the article other than the site. Sick of ppl trying to give Jones credit for sh*t he didn't do. Lost alot of respect for the guy over the last couple of years. Seems he's all talk, and alot of it. That's about it....

BTW the AUTHOR is Paul Joseph Watson.....just figured he should get the credit considering its his article.


AJ has everything to do with it... everyday... Why you would say something like that when you obviously really don't know is suspect.

If you can show or get AJ to post or announce or send smoke signals that he does not have anything to do with this article or website or interviews or endorsement of all the content show it...

infowars.com...

The itemized points have been talked about for days on his radio show and articles that is on his main page.... His source and friend is Watson amongst many many others all interviewed live on his show on these points with AJ repeating and expanding on every detail because that is how he does it everyday.

For a week this itemized list is all he has talked about.

Do you want to at least point out if any of this is correct. Just listen to the show or ignore it. You would not even say that if you did and that is not the point.

It could be Mickey Mouse says it if you think that's the centre piece to the article............ what about what it says. and AJ says on the show everyday for the last week..........

If you think AJ is wrong just go through the list and explain and make him look bad... not so easy it would appear.

Seems there is hardly any ATS bunk to the content...... just mostly junk posts... about nothing avoiding the points

So this was a waste of time for some... redundant for others and enforces the point that romantic arguments about AJ are the only way to address his points when you don't actually address his points.

It is much easier to take a number from the list and show your metal and have some self control with the romance and just make AJ look bad by taking the points and showing he is totally wrong and just making it all up for money. Only a few did so far and they did a great job at expressing themselves.

So you have already answered with your non points with respect to the post that you have no point other than you would like to change the title and add some credits ... when you can source the info for all the credits yourself.

Do I also have to provide an employee list so we know who does the artwork... CSS... word press... answers the phones... etc......... No point man when the point is the content and that is my OP point not yours.

You took the first line and the last line and missed the entire article in between. Very good research for a distraction. You have to open a book to get to the content. The cover is not the book.

I suspect you will continue without a single point of interest other that your romantic arguments about AJ or anything else other than the point... boring dude...

I hope you see my point and not cut yourself short. You very well could have all the answers that can shut infowars and AJ.

1 to 10........... just pick one and make AJ and his interviewed, uncredited associates look bad.

I can give you a new list if you prefer.... any time...
edit on 9-5-2011 by Opspeculate because: Spelling



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   
What is far more important at this time.......what AJ can prove or not? Or that President Obama, chief of one of the most advanced militaries in the world LIED to his countrymen and woman AND the intire world to gain brownie points?

I think the latter should take priority because we have here a President who has lied and deceived EVERYBODY, got caught out......and should be made responsible for those actions and impeached immediately.

Very little if anything was ever known about Osama bin Laden before 9/11; Clinton never wasted time looking for him before 2001, GeorgeW. Bush never wasted time looking for him after 2001; in fact NO ONE had barely ever heard his name mentioned until after 9/11. All we really know is OBL was a money runner between the Afghans and Saudi Arabia via USA while the Afghans were at war fighting the Russians.

I do believe OBL was dead before early 2002, and it's always convienent for the USA to use the face of a dead man when creating a "mystical" character for their own war machine.

AJ is'nt running for the presidential elections, he does'nt hand over your hard earned money to bail out the banks and other large corporations, he is'nt forcing you out of your homes and businesses, he is'nt invading foreign lands for financial gain; in fact it does'nt really matter what AJ thinks or says......but by God it does when a President is elected in to one of the most powerful jobs in the world and has been LYING to you all along.

I noted not one of you had anything to say over that 60 MINS interview with Obama.....





edit on 10-5-2011 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
I think the latter should take priority because we have here a President who has lied and deceived EVERYBODY, got caught out......and should be made responsible for those actions and impeached immediately.


Can you tell me specifically what he lied about? What impeachable offense has he committed?

(Please don't assume that because I have asked this question that I 'bow at the leader's feet' or believe everything he says or support everything he does... It's just a question. )



I noted not one of you had anything to say over that 60 MINS interview with Obama.....


I did watch the interview last night. There were a few times I saw things that could be interpreted as him being a little nervous or trying to formulate an answer, but I'm not sure we can say it's because he is lying, as you suggested earlier. I think you may be assuming a lot. We would see that with anyone who was being interviewed for 40 minutes. I thought he maintained good eye contact and answered the questions intelligently and as thoroughly as he could.

The #1 cause of eye twitching is stress... Hmmm... I wonder if he's been feeling stress lately. Or tired or have eye strain from reading... Sometimes the most obvious answer is the answer.



Called myokymia in doctor lingo, these rippling muscle contractions in an eyelid can be triggered by:

* Stress
* Tiredness
* Eyestrain
* Caffeine
* Alcohol
* Dry eyes
* Nutritional imbalances
* Allergies

Read more: www.allaboutvision.com...


There are things a government cannot share with the public. It's always been that way. Obama knows every detail of our military actions and it would be stupid for him to go into too much detail when talking to the world. He has to think on his feet and give us the information he can, while balancing that with our security. He's got a big job and I wouldn't want it.

I'm not saying Obama has never lied to us. In fact, I think IF OBL was killed recently, it was over with days before it was announced. My personal theory is that the operation happened in late April and the DNA testing was done and his ID verified, and then they popped him in with the fishes, and then announced everything, saying they buried him within 24 hours to avoid inflaming religious and political tensions that are already at all-time highs. That would make sense to me that a military operation would be announced a few days after it was over.

I'd really like to hear what Obama has lied about and his impeachable offenses.



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


My personal theory is that Osama never died in April or May of 2011, in fact, I strongly believe this "staged operation" never happened in the first place! That million dollar property turns out to be valued at no more than $200k; NO American ever entered that property at any given time. If anything ever took place on that property it would had been a drug heist or simply an accident by Pakistani military; either way it had nothing to do with any American commandos because none ever step foot on that property at all.

Obama (as well as Bush) and the WH have released many videos of what many believe is Osama when it was'nt but only stage act propped up by actors and some pretty louzy photoshops. The real Osama has never been seen or heard of since 2001. I can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt and with absolute surity Osama was dead by mid December 2001 but the Americans sure can't prove Osama was alive after 2001 either other than afew fake videos.....and they WERE fake; that's 100% sure.

Now either Obama is in denial or he lied through his teeth. He certainly meets the criteria of a sociopath (so does his wife for that matter; did anyone pause at the 60 MINS interview of Obama doing a speech with Michelle sitting to his right at the table next to him? I suggest you stop at the vision and look at her face language!). Obama seemed to be in good spirits in parts of the interview like this is all some kind of a joke but the joke is going to bite him back in the bum! His eye contact was terrible, always looking down and making it up as he goes along. Obama was stuttering, repeating the interviewer like a parrot, twitching of his right eye from half way through the interview; he just was'nt conviencing at all. Wish they showed us his hands which was convieniantly not shown through most of the interview....but I saw all I needed to see, Obama was lying. I also suggest you pause the video of the interview when he did his photo/speech with the military surrounding him. Look closely at their faces, look very closely; they appeared to not be very happy campers. They knew.

Why should Abama be impreached? Because, like Clinton, he lied. There are more coverups of incidents in that White House since Obama became president than during any presidency I've seen since the 1960s and 1970s. This one is up there as one of best lies ever told coming from a president of the USA.

I don't know what else the Americans need as proof of what is already out there that Obama is one big lie after the other.

On a final note......all is not well in the White House !!!


edit on 10-5-2011 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


So, you haven't shown me proof that he lied, you just suspect he lied. (If I'm wrong, please correct me). And you didn't talk about impeachable offenses... You just think he lied, so believe he should be impeached. I'm sorry, but I can find 1000 posts on ATS that say the same thing. They don't like Obama, so suspect he lied and should be impeached for it.



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Just a consideration either way...

It would be easier to discern all of this stuff if direct fluid spontaneous unbiased questions could be posed and picked apart during a cross examination of the now several official stories during the 2001 - 2011 time-line.

Everyone has questions and have the right to at least test any testimony with a real proceeding without shadow and not just the soup of the day set by the MSM agenda. Why something on the MSM talks about classified secretes is beyond me. If dead men tell no tales then tell no tales.

A rehearsed set of talking points for fairy land TV that is not allowed at any time direct fluid spontaneous unbiased questions is a fairy tale until that testimony is scrutinized for inconstancies, lies and embellishment.

We just ASSume direct fluid spontaneous unbiased question have been asked by the MSM along with proof that they are using good ethics that the story is scrutinized for inconstancies lies, and embellishment....

A real public forum with all parties present with this logic takes out the middle man and gets to the heart of the matter without question by unbiased professionals.

Just a consideration either way...



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Opspeculate
It would be easier to discern all of this stuff if direct fluid spontaneous unbiased questions could be posed and picked apart during a cross examination of the now several official stories during the 2001 - 2011 time-line.


Wake up, man! You must have fallen asleep for a minute there because you were dreaming!


Yes, that would be really nice. I'd LOVE to see that... I guess over the past 30 years or so, I have resigned myself to the idea that the government lies to us. I hate it and I think it's WRONG, but it's the way this corrupt operation works now. This is not our forefathers' government. This is a new beast. This is the US in the 21st century. It's horrible and doesn't, in any way, resemble what this country was meant to be.

I cry for my country. Crying for My Country



new topics




 
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join