Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US till 9/11

[quicknthedead]

.

Although this should go into a new thread, and I thought to do so when I read it a couple of weeks ago, note that the LaRouche web site (I know, I know; the inevitable connection to the British is there; take it for what it's worth) recently posted a couple of articles (here's one) and a video about what is claimed to be the Saudi intelligence handlers of two of the hijackers while they were in San Diego. This is based on information de-classified earlier this year, plus a LaRouchean investigation.

Hi metamars,

Now this is funny. It's been a while, but here we are now both posting today about this new information from Jeff Steinberg - "9/11 Cover Blown", almost at the same time in the same thread.
Take care!
Craig

 

[metamars]

Hi metamars,

Now this is funny. It's been a while, but here we are now both posting today about this new information from Jeff Steinberg - "9/11 Cover Blown", almost at the same time in the same thread.
Take care!
Craig

Small conspiracy world, eh? For the record,
1) I didn't know about your new thread until you posted about it in this one
2) You and I didn't conspire to create a Saudi news blitz

 

[T.A.M.]

See, this is the whole reason why 9/11 Trutherism is so frustrating.

There are some valid questions about the underlying support for al-Qaeda, i.e. who in the Saudi hierarchy supported them, did they know anything, was it just an individual here or there or was it whole ministries, etc. Let's not leap to conclusions without actual evidence, but these kinds of things are at least possible.

If true, these allegations also lay to rest ANY notion that anyone other than al-Qaeda carried out the attacks, or that they were directed by elements rogue or otherwise in the US Government. Following this trail will take us farther from the realm of the Truth Movement, as science and logic usually does.

All this wild speculation about controlled demolitions, thermite, Leo Wanta, whatever only distracts and drags us further from a productive discussion. In fact, even in this thread we have people trying to extrapolate from possible Saudi support that the US supported bin Laden then, and even to this day. Stop that! It's stupid! I know you all want to polarize this discussion between "truth seekers" and "debunkers," but it just isn't that simple. What is polar, however, is the difference between "reasonable inquiry" and "wild speculation." If you're on the wrong side of that fence, then do something about it.

Perhaps we should make him a deal.

We will entertain the possibilities outlined, if he publicly proclaims that all facets of the MIHOP line of 9/11 truth are BOGUS and unfounded.

I would not hold my breath.

TAM

 

[metamars]

It ain't necessarily so

If true, these allegations also lay to rest ANY notion that anyone other than al-Qaeda carried out the attacks, or that they were directed by elements rogue or otherwise in the US Government.

It took him a while, but the "the Dude" finally figured out that the other Lebowski had given him a ringer. Thus, his buddy, Walter, threw out a "ringer for a ringer".

If the daunting question before us is, "Was Saudi intelligence a 'ringer for a ringer'", i.e., proxies for American intelligence, "rogue or otherwise", somehow I don't think that can be settled definitively in an internet forum.

Could this be a reason why the 911 Truth movement has been calling for a serious re-investigation?

 

[carlitos]

Dude, wheels within wheels.

Who is going to head this "serious re-investigation," by the way?

 

[Wowbagger]

I have evidence that Osama Bin Laden celebrated his 9/11 victory, by enjoying a trip to Walt Disney World, with some family members. He went on all the rides, ate a bunch of hot dogs, and even got his photo taken with Mickey Mouse!

The evidence is that Disney's attendence took a dive, after that day, so there would be few witnesses to recognize him, and to deal with.

The government obviously told Disney to keep quiet about it.

What do you think? How does my bombshell compare to yours?

 

[boloboffin]

I have evidence that Osama Bin Laden celebrated his 9/11 victory, by enjoying a trip to Walt Disney World, with some family members. He went on all the rides, ate a bunch of hot dogs, and even got his photo taken with Mickey Mouse!

The evidence is that Disney's attendence took a dive, after that day, so there would be few witnesses to recognize him, and to deal with.

The government obviously told Disney to keep quiet about it.

What do you think? How does my bombshell compare to yours?

At least we haven't heard it before.

Of course, "Sibel Edmonds Says Same Thing She's Been Saying All Along On Radio Program" doesn't have the same kind of punch as the thread title, having only truth to recommend it.

 

[R.Mackey]

It took him a while, but the "the Dude" finally figured out that the other Lebowski had given him a ringer. Thus, his buddy, Walter, threw out a "ringer for a ringer".

If the daunting question before us is, "Was Saudi intelligence a 'ringer for a ringer'", i.e., proxies for American intelligence, "rogue or otherwise", somehow I don't think that can be settled definitively in an internet forum.

You won't read The Looming Tower, yet you'll unabashedly apply the wisdom gained from The Big Lebowski in a geopolitical context...

Could this be a reason why the 911 Truth movement has been calling for a serious re-investigation?

That none of you knows anything if you didn't see it in a movie? Could be.

 

[R.Mackey]

Perhaps we should make him a deal.

We will entertain the possibilities outlined, if he publicly proclaims that all facets of the MIHOP line of 9/11 truth are BOGUS and unfounded.

I've always been open to a "Deal." The deal is simple: Bring evidence. Speculation isn't evidence.

So far, this thread has been real, real short on evidence.

 

[carlitos]

You won't read The Looming Tower, yet you'll unabashedly apply the wisdom gained from The Big Lebowski in a geopolitical context...

The dude drank 9 White Russians in the movie, and Belarus shares the Struve Geodetic Arc with 9 countries ... AND ... 9 principalities of the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania were settled by Belorussian ancestors ... wheels within wheels, dude. This thing runs deep.

 

[GreNME]

See, this is the whole reason why 9/11 Trutherism is so frustrating.

There are some valid questions about the underlying support for al-Qaeda, i.e. who in the Saudi hierarchy supported them, did they know anything, was it just an individual here or there or was it whole ministries, etc. Let's not leap to conclusions without actual evidence, but these kinds of things are at least possible.

If true, these allegations also lay to rest ANY notion that anyone other than al-Qaeda carried out the attacks, or that they were directed by elements rogue or otherwise in the US Government. Following this trail will take us farther from the realm of the Truth Movement, as science and logic usually does.

All this wild speculation about controlled demolitions, thermite, Leo Wanta, whatever only distracts and drags us further from a productive discussion. In fact, even in this thread we have people trying to extrapolate from possible Saudi support that the US supported bin Laden then, and even to this day. Stop that! It's stupid! I know you all want to polarize this discussion between "truth seekers" and "debunkers," but it just isn't that simple. What is polar, however, is the difference between "reasonable inquiry" and "wild speculation." If you're on the wrong side of that fence, then do something about it.

You see, the "truth" movement doesn't want to follow Saudi connections to see where they go, but to instead find connections between Saudis and the American government. That's their only goal with bringing up Saudis. Meanwhile, they ignore the Saudi interloping in pretty much any inflammations in the Mid-East all the way into Pakistan, instead laying the blame solely on US interventionalism-- indeed a policy that deserves criticism in several theaters-- because their own shallow imaginations and tendency to assume some all-inclusive conspiracy keep them from considering that anyone but Jews and rich Americans (and, sometimes, including the British royal family).

 

[BigAl]

You see, the "truth" movement doesn't want to follow Saudi connections to see where they go, but to instead find connections between Saudis and the American government. That's their only goal with bringing up Saudis. Meanwhile, they ignore the Saudi interloping in pretty much any inflammations in the Mid-East all the way into Pakistan, instead laying the blame solely on US interventionalism--

bin Laden put the Saudi royal family on his hit list right there with the US and carried out several effective attacks on the kingdom. The attacks ceased after the Saudi secret police did mass arrests and enought torturing to find out who else to arrest.

 

[Bobert]

Sorry but if Bin Laden has done all this secret work for the US Government then why has he not come out and verified this?
If this nonsense was true certainly it would benefit him to come out and say this and provide the proof of this.

 

[stateofgrace]

Sorry but if Bin Laden has done all this secret work for the US Government then why has he not come out and verified this?
If this nonsense was true certainly it would benefit him to come out and say this and provide the proof of this.

I asked basically the same question on page one of this thread, to date I have not had an answer.

Strange that, eh?

 

[johnny karate]

It took him a while, but the "the Dude" finally figured out that the other Lebowski had given him a ringer. Thus, his buddy, Walter, threw out a "ringer for a ringer".

If the daunting question before us is, "Was Saudi intelligence a 'ringer for a ringer'", i.e., proxies for American intelligence, "rogue or otherwise", somehow I don't think that can be settled definitively in an internet forum.

Could this be a reason why the 911 Truth movement has been calling for a serious re-investigation?

No.

 

[progge]

You see, the "truth" movement doesn't want to follow Saudi connections to see where they go, but to instead find connections between Saudis and the American government. That's their only goal with bringing up Saudis. Meanwhile, they ignore the Saudi interloping in pretty much any inflammations in the Mid-East all the way into Pakistan, instead laying the blame solely on US interventionalism-- indeed a policy that deserves criticism in several theaters-- because their own shallow imaginations and tendency to assume some all-inclusive conspiracy keep them from considering that anyone but Jews and rich Americans (and, sometimes, including the British royal family).

The static concept of the enemy is just one part (or the second step) of the explanation why some/many truthers tend to draw one and the same conclusion from very different sets of facts. The other part (or the first step) is that some/many truthers - and some debunkers, too - tend to reduce complex scenarios and constellations to simple scenarios and constellations, which generally includes polarization. E.g. either the 9/11 CR is a great piece of research or a piece of crap; either the NIST writings are awesome examples of technical reporting or they are a cover up of demolition; either CIA knew the whole 9/11 plot in advance or can´t be called to account for anything bad; etc.

Now, take complex constellations like this: Four parties - Sovjet invaders, Afhgan Mujahideen, UBL, CIA -, which means four lines of interests and plans, colliding and fusing here and there. This is too much, it needs complexity reduction! Therefore, reduce the parties, lump together Afghan Mujahideen, UBL and CIA, and you have a wonderful, simple picture you can use to spread claims every simple mind can follow.
The same goes for the question of hijacker financing. If you start research about the Saudi Royal family and you do not arrive at CIA HQ, but just at the Saudi Royal family, while the CIA is another and very different line in the whole picture, then you just got a picture which is waaaay too complex to work with - at least for the case you are interested in spreading propaganda. And some/many truthers seem to have a vast interest in spreading propaganda.

Therefore, ISI means CIA, UBL means CIA, and House of Saud means CIA. Or, to put it even simpler, it´s just all NWO.

It took him a while, but the "the Dude" finally figured out that the other Lebowski had given him a ringer. Thus, his buddy, Walter, threw out a "ringer for a ringer".

If the daunting question before us is, "Was Saudi intelligence a 'ringer for a ringer'", i.e., proxies for American intelligence, "rogue or otherwise", somehow I don't think that can be settled definitively in an internet forum.

Could this be a reason why the 911 Truth movement has been calling for a serious re-investigation?

This is just one random example for the above observation.

 

[stateofgrace]

Perhaps because they share my view that JREF is a bastion of half-wits and misanthropes?

A better question, I suppose, is why do I post here? I'm not entirely sure, actually - to a large extent, I view this as a form of entertainment, though not of a very uplifting kind. I mean, the endless parade of half-wits congratulating themselves for (from my perspective) failing to connect dots or posit plausible explanations with the same facility as a 10 year old, provides an endless 'rubber-necking delay' kind of diversion.

On the positive side, if one is willing to look past the crap, some good information and arguments gets posted by debunkers. Some.

Well I for one want to thank you. Thank you very much for gracing us mere mortals with your superior presence. It must be so difficult for you being the most intelligent person on the planet and having to deal with all those nasty half wits everyday.

Oh and don't take any notice of the rest of the meanies that post here and simply destroy your fantasies everyday, you have my eternal gratitude just for being here. Your words of wisdom light me up every time and take my breath away. Thank you very much, oh great one, I know when I am in the presence of greatness and I am honoured to actually post in the same thread that you started.

Could you please respond, oh greatness, even to call me an half wit or any other lame insult of your choice, it is would give me such a thrill to be acknowledged by such a superior being as yourself.

Thank you very much, oh great one.

 

[twinstead]

What metamars doesn't realize is that his reception on this forum is indicative of what his "movement's" reception will be, and has been, in the "real world". I guess JREF is "The Man". Down with The Man. Power to the People!!!111111!!!!

 

[Bobert]

Jref rocks!

 

[jacque]

*mutters* Took me long enough to figure how to do simple GIF animations in Fireworks CS4...

Anyway...

[qimg]http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/tim-osman-memo-comparison.gif[/qimg]

I've highlighted areas of interest. In the 911myths.com version (the one with less crap on it), the entire top portion of the document has obviously been replaced.

Additionally, throughout the image you can see areas where lines have crossed words in Senenmut's version, but weren't removed in the 911myths.com version.

You can also see that in certain other areas, parts of text have been removed along with the markings where the two come very close.

ETA: As a note, I didn't have to do any repositioning to get these images to line up. They fit each other perfectly.

Not to say Senenmut's version is legit, or even the original. It's just that it seems the version on 911myths.com has been altered from the version Senenmut posted.

Hi-
I am a woman and sorry if you have a problem with believing what I say but I origianly saw that document in Michael Riconosciuto's files. It was meant to be just a part of his defense in the drug case that put him in prison. We (Mike, etc) were dealing with a huge amount of information then.
I wonder where you got the copy of the document? Is it on Stew Webb's site?
Mike's documents are floating around all over the place.
I can only tell you that when I was helping with the papers (faxing, mailing, etc) and hearing all the information, I felt it was true.
Mike is an interesting guy- definitely a genius.
What is true or not----among those of us who were caught up in this, I can say with no hesitation, no one knows for sure, but a lot of the stuff was confirmed by his father, Marshall
Now gunderson's stories--that is another matter. He sure did not seem to be doing Mike no favors.