I have thought about it and I came to the same conclusions you did. My wife didn't even bother to look into the matter. She heard the story once
briefly in passing and knew it was a false flag.
Though many key documents from the U.S. District Court case remain sealed, a June 2010 sentencing transcript provides an account of Nakoula’s cooperation with federal investigators in Los Angeles (and how his prison sentence was reduced as a result).
It obvious isnt it?Of course it isn't, otherwise you wouldn't have had to go through eight assumptions to reach an extraordinarily questionable conclusion.
Now use logic. Why is the Wall Street Journal (owned by Murdoch ) giving an interview to an obscure 'film maker' when nobody had heard of him or his movie? Why would they do that?Because it's a hot news story and that's what newspapers do?
Why then would the AP interview the guy?Because AP reports on hot news stories just like the Journal?
Why would it be dubbed into arabic and shown on Egyptian television?Because AP is an international news service?
We know that the Muslim Brotherhood is in the pocket of the United States.How in the name of all that's holy do you know that? That claim requires some evidence, don't you think?
Why would a Saudi businessman start an Egyptain Islamic TV Station? Think about it.Perhaps to make money?
Now back to the mysterious Sam Basile. Does he not remind you of the mysterious pathetic crim that the US Government used as a patsy for the fake Iranian 'terror plot' to blow up the Saudi and Israeli Embassies?Actually he reminds me of my Uncle Morris.
Would you not agree that its a touch suspicious that Basile is a snitch that got a reduced sentence for working with the Feds? Think about that.There's nothing to think about. That's what happens to almost all cooperating witnesses.
Back to The Wall Street Journal, the weakest link, why is nobody questioning their role in all of this? Why would they interview an obscure loser like Basile?I've already told you why. Besides, they're no friend of Obama.
These fake news stories created by the US Government are becoming absurd. Its telling.You've gone to the trouble of posting a long thread with absolutely no evidence, or even any logical reason for believing this. And even if it were true, you've provided absolutely no evidence to support your headline.
Because it's a hot news story and that's what newspapers do?
I've already told you why. Besides, they're no friend of Obama.
postscript- and that was long? You have gone to more trouble with your response than I went to for the opening post.You're quite welcome. It's for a good cause.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by freemarketsocialist
The trailer was posted on YouTube two months ago. So if the Journal story was before that, I'd have to rethink my position, but I'd like to know what that interview was about. So, I'll stick with my position until you can tell me a little more. Did you find the rest of my post to be accurate?
postscript- and that was long? You have gone to more trouble with your response than I went to for the opening post.You're quite welcome. It's for a good cause.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by freemarketsocialist
I'm guessing that the interview was prompted by seeing a wildly controversial video on YouTube which was posted two months before the attack.
What interview are you talking about? Where can I find it? I'm perfectly willing to change my view, if I have some evidence to suggest I should.