*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, May 9th, 2011 1:42am PDT - promote requested by original submitter bareboards2.

yeah, just don't disagree with the "official" version. you'll be ostracized. I'm still amazed at how it is generally accepted that our government lied to get us into Iraq but told a sparkling truth to get us in and keep us in afghanistan.
whatever fits the narrative

this video smells of almost ruby

>> ^criticalthud:

yeah, just don't disagree with the "official" version. you'll be ostracized. I'm still amazed at how it is generally accepted that our government lied to get us into Iraq but told a sparkling truth to get us in and keep us in afghanistan.
whatever fits the narrative


The difference is evidence. None of us should have an implicit trust that our government always tells the truth, but we do have reasoning skills. Many of the claims leading up to the Iraq war turned out to be demonstratively false.

But looking at the killing of Bin Laden, there is substantial evidence that it is true. There's the testimony from Bin Laden's widow and daughter, who were there at the time. There's the videos that the US has released which were taken from the compound. They show Bin Laden there and match photos journalists have since taken of the interior. There's the fact that al-Qaeda has accepted his death officially. And finally there's how easily it could all be disproved if it weren't true.

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^criticalthud:
yeah, just don't disagree with the "official" version. you'll be ostracized. I'm still amazed at how it is generally accepted that our government lied to get us into Iraq but told a sparkling truth to get us in and keep us in afghanistan.
whatever fits the narrative

The difference is evidence. None of us should have an implicit trust that our government always tells the truth, but we do have reasoning skills. Many of the claims leading up to the Iraq war turned out to be demonstratively false.
But looking at the killing of Bin Laden, there is substantial evidence that it is true. There's the testimony from Bin Laden's widow and daughter, who were there at the time. There's the videos that the US has released which were taken from the compound. They show Bin Laden there and match photos journalists have since taken of the interior. There's the fact that al-Qaeda has accepted his death officially. And finally there's how easily it could all be disproved if it weren't true.


he never acknowledged it himself, as far as my research goes. i can't really think of a reason why he wouldn't had he actually masterminded the greatest attack on american soil.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/
and then, i believe shortly before we invaded Afghanistan, the government proffered this "confession" video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhctMpvszqQ&feature=related
I have a difficult time believing that is a video of bin laden. And if isn't, then there are many questions to ask. But it is fairly easy to conclude based on the past and present actions of our government that bin laden was simply an violent extremist that fit the terrorist narrative very well. Part that narrative would have required the aggrandizing of both he and his rather loosely based network ("al queda", a U.S. term) in order to support the mass buildup in both the military industry as well as the security industry (and providing a distraction from the stripping of the civil rights and wealth of the citizenry). Bin Laden has been an exceedingly profitable figure for many interests.
Lately however, with popular rebellion marginalizing small scale terror and an un-winnable effort by the U.S. to create a profitable infrastructure in Afghanistan, bin laden's value likely decreased to that of an election chip.

Also, at the time of 9-11, bin laden was operating in Afghanistan. 9-11 was almost an exclusively Saudi operation.
So bin Laden fits the profile and narrative now very well, being both Saudi and NOT being in Saudi Arabia.

maybe assume for instance that 9/11 was a Saudi job, arranged and carried out by Saudi's operating out of Saudi Arabia. imagine how that scenario would impact the breadth of U.S. foreign policy in the area. It would have been severely constricted.
but....Bin laden and a network of foreign terrorists....? much better way to spin it.

It took him a while, but he did claim responsibility for the Sept. 11 attacks. Not just that al-Qaeda did it, but that he personally recruited the hijackers.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html

http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20080701092211/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700687.html

>> ^entr0py:

It took him a while, but he did claim responsibility for the Sept. 11 attacks. Not just that al-Qaeda did it, but that he personally recruited the hijackers.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.
html
<a rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow" href="http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20080701092211/<a rel="nofollow" href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms">http://classic-web.archive.org/web
/20080701092211/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/
08/27/AR2006082700687.html


i'd suggest that the audio confession tape is as curious as the likely fake videotape confession. could be wrong of course. but lets look at the rather impractical nature of both recruiting, training, and running an urban airport operation from the hills of afghanistan.
Note that the tape surfaces on the eve of an election.

2nd, rather trite reasons for the 9-11 attack are given. a fairly large red flag. as to why the operation was carried out in the first place, it was unlikely anything but an operation designed to create a predictable response. A terrorist operation cannot defeat the U.S. militarily. However, history is full of empire's that crumbled partly as a result of military over-extension, and the election of bush and his cabinet of warhawks presented an incredible opportunity to goad the U.S. into stretching itself thin. Which it did, and continues to do. Basic Sun Tzu: entice your enemy into an un-winnable battle.

or fuck me, maybe i'm just crazy. maybe i'm just overly suspicious because we never get the straight story from this government: i'm pretty sure we dropped nukes on japanin WWII because of the soviet threat, that Vietnam had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with markets/labor/raw materials, that Oswald wasn't the only Kennedy shooter and he was killed to keep him quiet, that Iraq was about oil, and that we sure as hell haven't been in Afghanistan for 10 years because of one guy.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by critical_d.

*talks but http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cbsnews/atlantis2/cbsnews_player_embed.swf is *dead.

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by ant.

Adding video to channels (Talks) - requested by ant.

Mordhaus has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because Mordhaus's points are already fully charged.