Jonesing on conspiracy theories (another Prof Jones article)

by **Dreams End** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:57 am

I'm confused about all these tapes. Is it your thesis, Qutb, that ALL the tapes are really bin Laden and really say what the CIA "analysts" say they do? Faking tapes would suggest they do NOT have control over the man, not that they DO have control over him. (or that he's dead) Otherwise they wouldn't need to fake them, they'd just Fedex him a script and some blank videotape. I don't know EXACTLY how much direct interaction there is these days or even immediately before 9/11 between the US intelligence folks and "Al-Qaida". But I don't need to. I know bin Laden was part of a well funded, multinational Islamic merc force running missions for the US in Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia. You know, this reminds me of a strange conversation I had one time, about 7 or 8 years ago. I went to a local restaurant and the waiter was a guy who'd grown up across the street from me. We chatted, and he seemed a tad "glassy eyed" to me... He told me he'd been in the special forces recently and had been serving in East Germany. Notice, please, that his time of service was pre-1989. I don't remember the exact context as this was before 9/11, but we were talking about terrorists of some sort and he immediately said, "If they were a real threat, they'd be dead." He explained that this was from personal experience. He then went on to call the US evil (don't remember the exact phrase but it was VERY strong.) He told me he couldn't really say what he'd done specifically, just that he'd seen enough to know that the US was completely evil and that no true enemy of the US would live for long. He was extremely adament and would not admit to any possible exceptions. I have no way of verifying that he was ever in special forces, but it was a chance encounter and there's no reason to suggest he'd lie to me. I tried to get more out of him but he said that's just the way it was and he didn't really have much else to say. To be honest, his whole demeanor was kinda spooky. Anyway, I'd still love more info on that whole "Muslim Brotherhood" side of things. And my old neighbor may have been a little shell shocked and prone to exaggeration. But I'll bet I know what HE'D say about 9/11 and bin Laden.

by **NewKid** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:14 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Anyway, I'd still love more info on that whole "Muslim Brotherhood" side of things. <hr></blockquote> I would too, Qutb. I know you've put up some stuff before, but anything new you've found would be cool. I do think this avenue is fascinating.

by **Dreams End** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:32 pm

This article is not quite the same, but it's a little introduction to how the CIA "hired" bin Laden. Here's a snip and the link is not just to the article but a whole post by "Black Jade" at Liberty Forum. Black Jade has a bunch of such posts but I don't claim to know anything about him. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> The CIA looked for a Saudi prince to lead this crusade but was unable to find one. It settled for the next best, the son of an illustrious family closely connected to the Saudi royal house. We need to remember that Osama bin Laden did not come from a backwater family steeped in premodernity but from a cosmopolitan family. The bin Laden family endows programmes at universities such as Harvard and Yale. Bin Laden was recruited, with U.S. approval at the highest level, by Prince Turki al-Faisal, then head of Saudi intelligence. <a href="http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_history&Number=292887318#Post292887318">www.libertyforum.org/show...t292887318</a><hr></blockquote> Obviously much more to it than that. The whole thing was about fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and involved a close working relationship with Pakistani, Saudi and other intelligence agencies. One could still, with ONLY this article to go on, argue (not convincingly, in my view) that 9/11 was "blowback". But I think even on its own terms, this article is pretty damning.

by **Qutb** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:22 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I'm confused about all these tapes. Is it your thesis, Qutb, that ALL the tapes are really bin Laden and really say what the CIA "analysts" say they do? Faking tapes would suggest they do NOT have control over the man, not that they DO have control over him. (or that he's dead) Otherwise they wouldn't need to fake them, they'd just Fedex him a script and some blank videotape.<hr></blockquote> My thesis is that they all show Osama Bin Laden. I don't get the part about CIA analysts - they're translated by al-Jazeera, for the most part. I think the people at al-Jazeera, and others who have met him, would be able to spot a fake Bin Laden. As for who puts words into his mouth - I don't know. Al-Zawahiri? Pir Gilani? Nizamuddin Shamzai, the Binori Town (Karachi) maulana who probably produced one of the tapes? The CIA? All possible, I guess, though I doubt the scripts are fede-exed him by the CIA to be honest. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I don't know EXACTLY how much direct interaction there is these days or even immediately before 9/11 between the US intelligence folks and "Al-Qaida". But I don't need to. I know bin Laden was part of a well funded, multinational Islamic merc force running missions for the US in Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia. <hr></blockquote> Exactly. In Afghanistan, in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Azarbaijan, in Chechnya, paid £100,000 by the MI6 to kill Gadaffi... it's an "enemy" we've been awfully cozy with. It may be more of a "symbiotic" relationship, though, than the CIA giving orders to al-Qaida. A book I'd like to recommend to everyone is "Who killed Daniel Pearl" by French investigative journalist Bernard-Henri Lévy. Lévy went to Pakistan shortly after the murder of Daniel Pearl to see what he could find out about it. The second part, in particular, is very interesting. Thanks for the anecdote, Dreams. Interesting that US special forces would be in East Germany before 1989, too...

by **proldic** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:41 pm

very interesting character that Johnson CIA IMO Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=proldic@rigorousintuition>proldic</A> at: 11/28/05 12:43 pm

by **NewKid** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 10:28 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>very interesting character that Johnson CIA IMO <hr></blockquote> Could be. What do you think of Madsen? Qutb, what's your take on him?

by **mr e** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:27 am

Strange that in this thread, no one has referenced the videos that were posted on this very forum a few weeks ago: <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1292.topic&index=19">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...c&index=19</a> That did it for me. Controlled demolition video: little puffs of greyish smoke explode laterally from buildling, followed by collapse. WTC (1 or 2?) video: little puffs of greyish smoke explode laterally, followed by collapse. There is a big descending cloud of black smoke too, but you can clearly see the smaller white/lt. grey puff emerging separately, below the black cloud. The video clip provided does not show the full length of the tower nor the full collapse, but it shows enough. If that was not a controlled demo, it was a mighty fine imitation of one. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes">

by **Qutb** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:52 pm

The international bankers did it with some of that free energy they're hiding from us. All those videos etc etc were addressed in the 20-page controlled demolition thread.

by **Byrne** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 1:51 pm

more ‘selectively dealt with’ than addressed…………. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>All those videos etc etc were addressed in the 20-page controlled demolition thread.<hr></blockquote>Were they Qutb? Your take on things isn't the last word, but unfortunately a lot of people get fed up with responding to your interminable posts re CD. I couldn't belive the twist that this thread took in mentioning UBL & his broadcasts. How anyone on this forum cannot see that his transmissions (which pop up at oportune moments - I mean, was it 1 or 2 days before the US election date) ultimately serve as an attempt to vindicate those that foisted 9/11 & the ensuing wars on us.

by **FourthBase** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 3:23 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Your take on things isn't the last word, but unfortunately a lot of people get fed up with responding to your interminable posts re CD.<hr></blockquote> Amen. Qutb, let someone else take the reigns for your side for a while.

by **Qutb** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 3:52 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I couldn't belive the twist that this thread took in mentioning UBL & his broadcasts. How anyone on this forum cannot see that his transmissions (which pop up at oportune moments - I mean, was it 1 or 2 days before the US election date) ultimately serve as an attempt to vindicate those that foisted 9/11 & the ensuing wars on us.<hr></blockquote> Yes, it's so "obvious" that no evidence is needed and all evidence to the contrary can be disregarded. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)">

by **Qutb** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 7:17 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Qutb, let someone else take the reigns for your side for a while.<hr></blockquote> All you Mulders need a Scully. And there ain't many of us around these parts. On edit: So I saw that video again. It's still just air, not explosives. Not much to get excited about. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=qutb>Qutb</A> at: 11/29/05 4:20 pm

by **FourthBase** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:14 pm

GO. AWAY. Come back to this thread, to the issue of CD. But TAKE YOUR TIME. Let the rest of us have some space. Your contributions on other threads and issues are great. You'll have plenty to do while you leave us alone here. So... GO. AWAY. Please. Thanks.

by **nomo** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:22 pm

Hey now, wait a second. I thought this was supposed to be a discussion forum? Since when has it been reduced to a club of people who agree on all the issues? Seriously man, if I wanted to read about CD and nothing but CD, there's plenty of other sites I could be frequenting. I come here to listen to all sides of the story, and that includes Qutb, and even you. I kind of like it that way.

by **FourthBase** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 9:19 pm

I'm not asking for all the people who disagree with CD to go away. Just Qutb. I myself don't see enough evidence to endorse CD for the Towers. But it's a different story re: WTC7. My request is not an attempt to sanitize the discussion. It's just a request for one particularly aggressive party to leave the rest of us alone for a little while. Not sure how many discussions in the real world you've been a part of, but sometimes a request like this is helpful to the discussion as a whole. If Qutb abides by the request, you never know, he might come back and be surprised to see that the general consensus about CD has turned in his favor.

Jonesing on conspiracy theories (another Prof Jones article)

Re: Bin Laden

Re: Bin Laden

Re: Bin Laden

Re: Bin Laden

Re: Iroquois & Chamlers Johnson

Re: Iroquois & Chamlers Johnson

controlled demos 'r' u.s.

Re: controlled demos 'r' u.s.

I’d be inclined to say

Re: I’d be inclined to say

Re: I’d be inclined to say

Re: I’d be inclined to say

Qutb

Re: Go away

Re: Go away

Who is online