Obama lied about Osama bin Laden's death

[SAYIT]

Osama Bin Laden Has Been Dead Since 2001 - YouTube

Channeling Alex Jones doesn't prove OBL has been dead since 2001 but it does prove you are a flaming loon. Thanks for playing!

 

[SAYIT]

So very true Katsung.That is correct that they kept Bin Laden alive for their false flag war on terror.That was why Clinton did not go after him when he had the chance.Bush haters who like Clinton say that Bush ignored warnings that there were going to be terrorists attacks against the united states in the upcoming months and point out correctly that Bush did nothing,that he ignored them and was more interested in taking vacations in texas the first 9 months while president than he was in protecting us which is true but then they always go and make the false claim that Clinton went after Bin Laden like a firestorm but Clinton just missed him when he tried to attack him by a day or so or something like that and they quote these sources below as their evidence.

FactCheck.org : Clinton Passed on Killing bin Laden?

However that link is all a bunch of B.S and lies because its a known fact that 2 different countrys offered Bin Laden up to clinton on a silver platter and he had no interests in him.Matter of fact it was all over the newscasts INITIALLY of a high ranking general in the military coming on CNN being interviewed late at night once "thats how the media operates,they'll show some important information ONCE late at night,and then you never seen them broadcast it again since like in this case,it was not politically correct."

That General came on the nightly news and said that they had Bin Laden cornered and were ready to go in and arrest him and bring him before a court but he said right there live on the newscast that Clinton told them to lay off him and leave him alone.

I remember seeing that right there that very night,I was channel hopping and just happened to come across that and saw it. I was pleased to see Dick Morris write a book about it a few years later because like I said,that news item conveintly disapeared and you never heard anything from the lamestream media about that again after that so I was pleased to see Dick Morris- who served in the Clinton White house, write a book about it and HE even mentioned that point in the book that I remember seeing that night when he wrote the book years later.I read his book and saw where he mentioned that general coming on that nightly newscast and said-Yeah I remember that.I saw him say that that night,I remember that moment."


So yeah,you totally hit the nail right on the head there when you said they kept him alive because they needed him for their phony war on terror and false flag operation. Bin Laden was just like Oswald,a patsy for their war on terror.


Mr Jones hit the nail on the head as well when he mentioned this over on that same thread where I got that link on Clinton when he posted this below.


It is well known that Clinton and Bush Sr. are buddies. This 2 party "system" is BS. the sooner you understand this the better you would realize it is always the people that lose.
Clinton is just as much responsible, and is just as much a shady character as the Bush die nasty family. They both had war mongering Zionists extremists flooding their administrations.
Clinton was not eligible for a 2nd term, so it was up to the incoming Bush presidency to facilitate the events of 9-11, and Gore couldn't be trusted to do it so the 2000 election fiasco
was a crucial step in bringing this treasonous bunch into power.



Its a very well known fact that Clinton has a long standing close friendship with the Bushs that date back to at least the early 80's.

By the way Wildcard,since nobody else has commented on this post of mine except Katsu who is obviously awake,that none of the trolls have dared to tackle it,I would like to hear YOU comment on it,were you aware of these facts mentioned in this post of mine by chance?

Oooo, you're so scary ... a regular legend in your own very small yet pompous mind.

 

[SAYIT]

I've noticed those who believe the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center was an "inside job" tend to focus their attention on motive and conspiratory factors but ignore what would be the nuts & bolts of such an enormous undertaking.

I suspect the reason for avoiding discussion of the material factors of the task is complete ignorance of controlled demolition methods. Because anyone who does understand what would be required to surreptitiously carry out a methodical destruction of that magnitude would not for one moment believe bringing down the Twin Towers could possibly have been an "inside job."

First of all, there are only two demolition contractors in the entire world who are capable of handling a project of that size, which is greater than any controlled demolition in the history of the craft by a factor of hundreds, and the idea that either of them could be somehow encouraged to engage in something so bizarre is utterly absurd. Even if a crew of dedicated terrorists could be assembled and trained to carry out such a monumental task, the World Trade Center complex was protected by an exceptionally efficient security force headed by a former FBI Terrorist Task Force member. All contractors working in or about the buildings were screened and accounted for.

To rig just one Tower for demolition would take at least six sappers working for several days. It would involve placement of explosive charges connected by a wiring network running throughout the service corridors, every bit of which would be conspicuously visible to dozens of regular tradesmen, electricians, carpenters, tinsmiths, plumbers, painters, etc., who moved about in those corridors on a daily basis -- not to mention the routine security patrols. To consider that no one would ask questions about such activities is another absurdity.

I have no doubt the World Trade Center "inside job" theories were inspired by the perfectly vertical manner in which both Towers collapsed. They came down exactly like buildings we've all seen come down in televised documentaries of controlled demolitions. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation for that phenomenon, but rather than waste time and space explaining it here an important question must be considered: If the objective of bringing the Twin Towers down was to cause massive damage, why take the time and go through the trouble, risk, and expense of effecting a controlled demolition? Why not just place a single toppling charge, such as the one placed in Tower One by Ramseh Yousef in 1993? That charge was a bit too small and it was not properly positioned or it would have done the job. A slight adjustment in size and positioning would easily have caused the building to topple, wreaking massive damage on the entire neighborhood of lower Manhattan. The very notion of a controlled demolition is in fact counterproductive to the objective of the 9/11 attack.

So these critical details, all of which are carefully and purposefully ignored in the "inside job" conspiracy theories, make it clear that it is not only unlikely that the 9/11 attack was an inside job -- it is quite impossible.

Thank you for doing the heavy lifting, Mike. I've seen these facts and understand the logic behind them but didn't have the time to dig 'em up. GuyPinata has been trying to make the case that "they" slipped a few old ladies in with regular union peeps to rig the buildings for demo. As you noted, an ever-so-slight error would have caused the buildings to topple rather than collapse which would have destroyed vast property and killed tens of thousands of people. Our conspiracy theorists have waaay too much free time on their hands.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I have no doubt the World Trade Center "inside job" theories were inspired by the perfectly vertical manner in which both Towers collapsed. They came down exactly like buildings we've all seen come down in televised documentaries of controlled demolitions. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation for that phenomenon, but rather than waste time and space explaining it here an important question must be considered: If the objective of bringing the Twin Towers down was to cause massive damage, why take the time and go through the trouble, risk, and expense of effecting a controlled demolition? Why not just place a single toppling charge, such as the one placed in Tower One by Ramseh Yousef in 1993? That charge was a bit too small and it was not properly positioned or it would have done the job. A slight adjustment in size and positioning would easily have caused the building to topple, wreaking massive damage on the entire neighborhood of lower Manhattan. The very notion of a controlled demolition is in fact counterproductive to the objective of the 9/11 attack.

So these critical details, all of which are carefully and purposefully ignored in the "inside job" conspiracy theories, make it clear that it is not only unlikely that the 9/11 attack was an inside job -- it is quite impossible.

Stupid question. They couldn't lead a plane to hit WTC at the bottom where there are so many high buildings aroud them. The stage show of collapse must be from the top where the building was impacted by the plane. So they had to play it in a self demolishing. The perpetrators was not stupid enough to plan a plane to hit the top then explode the WTC with a single charge on the bottom to your ecnomic design. It doesn't make sense.

well said.He also ignores the fact that many witnesses reported hearing explosions in the towers and many were experienced in the sounds of explosives including many experienced firefighters and first responders.Not only that but anybody who nows anything at all about the laws of physics knows buildings dont topple down at free fall speed like they did due to fire.that they gradually fall down over a period of time.

Not to mention they were designed to take hits from multiple airliners and remain standing.and over a thousand architects and engineers have come forward and risked their jobs by stating that its impossible for them to topple like that due to just fires.and even some demolition experts have said so as well.when they were shown bld 7,without knowing it was bld 7, in new york,they said it was a controlled demolition.

one conveintly died months later after saying that.as well did Barry Jennings whos testimony is the crux of the 9/11 coverup that they cant get around.He told reporters immediately that he heard explosions in the basement in bld 7 PRIOR to the towers falling which shreads to piecs the lies of the 9/11 coverup commission.and how conveinient for the government and NIST that he allegedly died in a hospital two days before the NIST report came out.It was convenint for them that he died because his testimony there at would have shread to death the lies of NIST that the fires caused them to collpase since he told reporters that there was an explosion in the basement of bld 7 before the towers fell which shreads to pieces the lies of the NIST report that the fires caused bld 7 to collpase.the official conspiracy theory apologists always dodge these facts to no surprise.

 

[katsung47]

An interview conducted between Osama Bin Laden and Ummat newspaper , Karachi on Sep.28 2001
(This inteview has not seen the light of day in the Western press, nor will it ever see the light of day, because it is extremely damaging to plans West has for the Islamic world)

Ummat (in Urdu), Karachi, 28 September 2001, pp. 1 and 7. Daily Ummat

Ummat’s introduction

Kabul: Prominent Arab mojahed holy warrior Usamah Bin-Ladin has said that he or his al-Qa’idah group has nothing to do with the 11 September suicidal attacks in Washington and New York. He said the US government should find the attackers within the country. In an exclusive interview with daily “Ummat”, he said these attacks could be the act of those who are part of the American system and are rebelling against it and working for some other system. Or, Usamah said, this could be the act of those who want to make the current century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. Or, the American Jews, who are opposed to President Bush ever since the Florida elections, might be the masterminds of this act. There is also a great possibility of the involvement of US intelligence agencies, which need billions of dollars worth of funds every year. He said there is a government within the government in the United States.

The secret agencies, he said, should be asked as to who are behind the attacks. Usamah said support for attack on Afghanistan was a matter of need for some Muslim countries and compulsion for others. However, he said, he was thankful to the courageous people of Pakistan who erected a bulwark before the wrong forces. He added that the Islamic world was attaching great expectations with Pakistan and, in time of need, “we will protect this bulwark by sacrificing of lives”.

Following is the interview in full detail:

An interview conducted between Osama Bin Laden and Ummat newspaper , Karachi on Sep.28 2001

 

[SAYIT]

So very true Katsung.That is correct that they kept Bin Laden alive for their false flag war on terror.That was why Clinton did not go after him when he had the chance.Bush haters who like Clinton say that Bush ignored warnings that there were going to be terrorists attacks against the united states in the upcoming months and point out correctly that Bush did nothing,that he ignored them and was more interested in taking vacations in texas the first 9 months while president than he was in protecting us which is true but then they always go and make the false claim that Clinton went after Bin Laden like a firestorm but Clinton just missed him when he tried to attack him by a day or so or something like that and they quote these sources below as their evidence.

FactCheck.org : Clinton Passed on Killing bin Laden?

However that link is all a bunch of B.S and lies because its a known fact that 2 different countrys offered Bin Laden up to clinton on a silver platter and he had no interests in him.Matter of fact it was all over the newscasts INITIALLY of a high ranking general in the military coming on CNN being interviewed late at night once "thats how the media operates,they'll show some important information ONCE late at night,and then you never seen them broadcast it again since like in this case,it was not politically correct."

That General came on the nightly news and said that they had Bin Laden cornered and were ready to go in and arrest him and bring him before a court but he said right there live on the newscast that Clinton told them to lay off him and leave him alone.

I remember seeing that right there that very night,I was channel hopping and just happened to come across that and saw it. I was pleased to see Dick Morris write a book about it a few years later because like I said,that news item conveintly disapeared and you never heard anything from the lamestream media about that again after that so I was pleased to see Dick Morris- who served in the Clinton White house, write a book about it and HE even mentioned that point in the book that I remember seeing that night when he wrote the book years later.I read his book and saw where he mentioned that general coming on that nightly newscast and said-Yeah I remember that.I saw him say that that night,I remember that moment."


So yeah,you totally hit the nail right on the head there when you said they kept him alive because they needed him for their phony war on terror and false flag operation. Bin Laden was just like Oswald,a patsy for their war on terror.


Mr Jones hit the nail on the head as well when he mentioned this over on that same thread where I got that link on Clinton when he posted this below.


It is well known that Clinton and Bush Sr. are buddies. This 2 party "system" is BS. the sooner you understand this the better you would realize it is always the people that lose.
Clinton is just as much responsible, and is just as much a shady character as the Bush die nasty family. They both had war mongering Zionists extremists flooding their administrations.
Clinton was not eligible for a 2nd term, so it was up to the incoming Bush presidency to facilitate the events of 9-11, and Gore couldn't be trusted to do it so the 2000 election fiasco
was a crucial step in bringing this treasonous bunch into power.



Its a very well known fact that Clinton has a long standing close friendship with the Bushs that date back to at least the early 80's.

By the way Wildcard,since nobody else has commented on this post of mine except Katsu who is obviously awake,that none of the trolls have dared to tackle it,I would like to hear YOU comment on it,were you aware of these facts mentioned in this post of mine by chance?

Or perhaps the norms just consider you and your lunacy to be your prob, Princess.

 

[SAYIT]

I've noticed those who believe the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center was an "inside job" tend to focus their attention on motive and conspiratory factors but ignore what would be the nuts & bolts of such an enormous undertaking.

I suspect the reason for avoiding discussion of the material factors of the task is complete ignorance of controlled demolition methods. Because anyone who does understand what would be required to surreptitiously carry out a methodical destruction of that magnitude would not for one moment believe bringing down the Twin Towers could possibly have been an "inside job."

First of all, there are only two demolition contractors in the entire world who are capable of handling a project of that size, which is greater than any controlled demolition in the history of the craft by a factor of hundreds, and the idea that either of them could be somehow encouraged to engage in something so bizarre is utterly absurd. Even if a crew of dedicated terrorists could be assembled and trained to carry out such a monumental task, the World Trade Center complex was protected by an exceptionally efficient security force headed by a former FBI Terrorist Task Force member. All contractors working in or about the buildings were screened and accounted for.

To rig just one Tower for demolition would take at least six sappers working for several days. It would involve placement of explosive charges connected by a wiring network running throughout the service corridors, every bit of which would be conspicuously visible to dozens of regular tradesmen, electricians, carpenters, tinsmiths, plumbers, painters, etc., who moved about in those corridors on a daily basis -- not to mention the routine security patrols. To consider that no one would ask questions about such activities is another absurdity.

I have no doubt the World Trade Center "inside job" theories were inspired by the perfectly vertical manner in which both Towers collapsed. They came down exactly like buildings we've all seen come down in televised documentaries of controlled demolitions. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation for that phenomenon, but rather than waste time and space explaining it here an important question must be considered: If the objective of bringing the Twin Towers down was to cause massive damage, why take the time and go through the trouble, risk, and expense of effecting a controlled demolition? Why not just place a single toppling charge, such as the one placed in Tower One by Ramseh Yousef in 1993? That charge was a bit too small and it was not properly positioned or it would have done the job. A slight adjustment in size and positioning would easily have caused the building to topple, wreaking massive damage on the entire neighborhood of lower Manhattan. The very notion of a controlled demolition is in fact counterproductive to the objective of the 9/11 attack.

So these critical details, all of which are carefully and purposefully ignored in the "inside job" conspiracy theories, make it clear that it is not only unlikely that the 9/11 attack was an inside job -- it is quite impossible.

The CTs are committed to their CTs to the exclusion of facts, truth, logic and reason. Anything which interferes with their CTs is, by definition, bogus and anyone who disagrees is, also by definition, a paid gov't agent.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Wikileaks, Al-Qaeda, Osama's family members, friends, foes, Democrats, Republicans, all the news organizations & media on the planet, & all the governments on the planet are lying??????

That's an interesting strategy you're attempting, considering the same question begging for logic regarding the countless entities insisting impending global oil depletion. It keeps slamming you in the face, as you don't seem to have an answer to that question, and yet you're using it in reverse here.

All those entities are lying? Hmmmm...

Anyhow, see you back in the energy forum, where you continue to miss the point entirely and work backwards from a fundamentally flawed conclusion.

 

[jillian]

So, I've been told that the OP is Rimjob with spell check. The words are spelled right but he's still a fucking Gage dupe.

Let's see, can neg you again Friday or Saturday.

Unless of course you change your ways and actually start contributing something of intellectual substance to this board.

Naw, that'll never happen. See ya' Friday!

Phaggot!

don't you mean that post for the lunatic o/p?

you know, a conspiracy theory loser who adds nothing of sane substance to the board, much less 'intellectual'.

i love oppositeland.

 

[jillian]

I guess Pakistan & Al-Qaeda are also lying when they also claim we got him. You do know Osama's blood was all over that bedroom so Pakistan could run their own DNA test & prove it was or was not him.

shhhhhh... you don't want to wreck a perfectly good conspiracy theory.

 

[katsung47]

US Government Contractor Claims “Al-Qaeda” Has Confirmed Bin Laden Fairytale

SITE organization was behind release of fake “Al-Qaeda” tapes released at politically opportune times stretching back years
Wednesday, Aug 17, 2011 05:30 AM PDT
SITE’s claim that “Al-Qaeda” has confirmed the official White House version of events concerning the death of Bin Laden, thereby lending presumed credence to a narrative that has quickly attracted derision and suspicion even amongst mainstream journalists, is about as credible as if Barney the Purple Dinosaur had made a statement assuring us that Osama was killed on Sunday evening.

SITE is a US military-industrial complex front and has been caught red-handed releasing fake Al-Qaeda tapes on numerous occasions.
The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam, the majority of which is paid for by U.S. taxpayers. The group was founded by Rita Katz, the daughter of an executed Israeli spy. Katz has worked closely with the Department of Justice, Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Homeland Security.

SITE’s website content was found to be largely copied from the U.S. State Department. “SITE’s “Terrorism Library, on cursory investigation, looks to be a straight data scrape from the U.S. Department of State’s Patterns of Global Terrorism – 2003, Appendix B,” notes SourceWatch. This organization is nothing more than a dummy group which acts as a conduit for Pentagon propaganda.

Everything about SITE indicates that it is nothing more than a trojan horse that is regularly used by the military-industrial complex to release staged Al-Qaeda videotapes as part of the ongoing propaganda offensive to justify the brutal, pointless and manufactured war on terror.

Prison Planet.com » US Government Contractor Claims ?Al-Qaeda? Has Confirmed Bin Laden Fairytale

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I guess Pakistan & Al-Qaeda are also lying when they also claim we got him. You do know Osama's blood was all over that bedroom so Pakistan could run their own DNA test & prove it was or was not him.

shhhhhh... you don't want to wreck a perfectly good conspiracy theory.

like the conspiracy theory of the governments that you blindly worship and run off away from when countered with facts you cant refute. he hasnt wrecked jack squat troll.in fact he keeps evading facts we post to him which is something you excel at.

 

[katsung47]

A four less operation.

1. Corpse less – They say they dropped it into sea.

2. Picture less – They let you imagine by yourself with this picture.

3. Witness less – Navy Seals died twice in helicopter crash

(1)

May 1, Abbottabad

(2) August 6, 2011 5:11 AM

22 Navy SEALs dead in Afghan chopper crash

4. Site less – No clue could be tracked any more on site

 

[ABikerSailor]

WitnessLess, because you weren't there.

BaseLess, because your arguements don't hold water.

UseLess, because your posts are crap.

 

[TyrealJenkins]

What the hell is this shit, seriously dawg? So much scrutiny for Obama. What did he do to deserve this? I bet if he was white nobody would be doubting he took out bin laden.

In case nobody remembers, world trade centers? Boom boom? 2 planes? Motha fuckas crashed down, killed a bunch of people, bet it was crazy to be there.

Anyway barack had Bin Laden taken out MAFIA style, shot in the head twice!

3. Witness less – Navy Seals died twice in helicopter crash

WHAT!? I know those Navy Seals be some BAD motha fuckas but how the fuck you die twice? Get your shit s8 b4 you scrutinize a brotha.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Good question.........................how do you die twice?

 

[KissMy]

Wikileaks, Al-Qaeda, Osama's family members, friends, foes, Democrats, Republicans, all the news organizations & media on the planet, & all the governments on the planet are lying??????

That's an interesting strategy you're attempting, considering the same question begging for logic regarding the countless entities insisting impending global oil depletion. It keeps slamming you in the face, as you don't seem to have an answer to that question, and yet you're using it in reverse here.

All those entities are lying? Hmmmm...

Anyhow, see you back in the energy forum, where you continue to miss the point entirely and work backwards from a fundamentally flawed conclusion.

The difference is facts! The government has been lying about peak oil for 130 years. The subsequent higher oil production facts prove that they have been lying for 130 years.

It has been proven in court that our government lies about torturing & killing US citizens without trial. But posting from a computer saying "Obama lied about Osama bin Laden's death" is pure B.S. because they have zero facts to back that statement. Show us proof!

 

[KissMy]

Osama bin Laden & his son-in-law Suleiman Abu Ghaith on video together saying "The storms shall not stop, especially the airplanes storm"

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX6lD4_uuB8"]1998 - Osama Bin Laden Interview with ABC John Miller[/ame]

 

[ABikerSailor]

Wikileaks, Al-Qaeda, Osama's family members, friends, foes, Democrats, Republicans, all the news organizations & media on the planet, & all the governments on the planet are lying??????

That's an interesting strategy you're attempting, considering the same question begging for logic regarding the countless entities insisting impending global oil depletion. It keeps slamming you in the face, as you don't seem to have an answer to that question, and yet you're using it in reverse here.

All those entities are lying? Hmmmm...

Anyhow, see you back in the energy forum, where you continue to miss the point entirely and work backwards from a fundamentally flawed conclusion.

The difference is facts! The government has been lying about peak oil for 130 years. The subsequent higher oil production facts prove that they have been lying for 130 years.

It has been proven in court that our government lies about torturing & killing US citizens without trial. But posting from a computer saying "Obama lied about Osama bin Laden's death" is pure B.S. because they have zero facts to back that statement. Show us proof!

Quick question Blow Me..................(yeah............I'm gonna call you Blow Me instead of Kiss My, because if you suck dicks like you suck with facts, you could be fun)..........how the fuck does oil have anything to do with Bin Laden?

Go ahead................try to weave a logic string..............you're gonna fail.

 

[candycorn]

Haven't seen any Osama videos recently....hmmm did something happen to him?