Osama bin Laden issued a chilling pre-warning of 9/11 attack 'plan', al-Qaeda audio tapes reveal

Osama bin Laden recorded a chilling warning about the 9/11 bombing just a few weeks before the devastating attack on the World Trade Center, according to an analysis of a vast cache of al-Qaeda cassette tapes. The collection of more than 1,500 audio tapes recovered from an Afghan compound after the US invasion in 2001 offer an extraordinary insight into the listening habits, influences and mindset of the terrorist organisation.

The BBC’s full documentary, The Bin Laden Tapes, will air on BBC Radio 4 tonight at 8pm BST, and will be available afterwards on the BBC iPlayer.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/osama-bin-laden-issued-a-chilling-prewarning-of-911-attack-plan-alqaeda-audio-tapes-reveal-10459142.html

Clealy spelling the death nail for the conspiracy nuts, even though this is self evident from the like of Snowden who's sole intent was to expose American never claimed 9/11 was done by anyone other than Al Qaeda.

Yes he also denied it lots of times too.

I see it clearly now though; you will believe something if the BBC tells you that's what happened

Brainwashed.

No I look at evidence and can see for myself what is the truth.
You have poor claims and ignore two men who went to tell the world of the truth of wrongs being done and neither make no claim that backs up 9/11 being done by the US.
They back this was Al Qaeda, you even have Bin Laden here with no world watching tell others of an event to come that will bring much celebration to his followers.
I just hope your conscience is clear you can look many of the survivors and relatives in the eye and make your claim to them.

Let me know how you get on.

Yes I read where OBL said he didn't do it.
Numerous times.

If the BBC made a documentary and said the three bears blew up the WTC you'd believe it.

Brainwashed didge.
You only ever believe one set of anything you read.

Really Eddie, you have seen all the documents on this.

So Again which you have failed to answer.

Snowden stole thousands of secret NSA documents with one main aim to expose the US intelligence service and all the wrongs the US does.
Why has he also backed Al Qaeda committing this?
Surely a person who flees his home country and seeks sanctuary in another would not have a monents second thought also exposing if this was as you claim? You do realise he has access to many files which include 9/11?

In your own time

Really didge, you have read all documents on this?
You don't even read people's posts properly.

I'll keep,an open mind and you follow the BBC as they always tell the truth.

Funny how the BBC are putting out this documentary when Russia have been threatening to expose the U.S.

It's all about timing I guess.

eddie wrote:Really didge, you have read all documents on this?
You don't even read people's posts properly.

I'll keep,an open mind and you follow the BBC as they always tell the truth.

Again answer the Question which you always avoid


Snowden stole thousands of secret NSA documents with one main aim to expose the US intelligence service and all the wrongs the US does.
Why has he also backed Al Qaeda committing this?
Surely a person who flees his home country and seeks sanctuary in another would not have a monents second thought also exposing if this was as you claim? You do realise he has access to many files which include 9/11?

In your own time

Erm right? And so that is what Russia are saying too!

And btw, if snowden was saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of why you believe about 9/11 you would say he was lying!

eddie wrote:Erm right? And so that is what Russia are saying too!

And btw, if snowden was saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of why you believe about 9/11 you would say he was lying!

Snowden says it was Al qaeda Eddie.
So that is a copout.
So again:

Snowden stole thousands of secret NSA documents with one main aim to expose the US intelligence service and all the wrongs the US does.
Why has he also backed Al Qaeda committing this?
Surely a person who flees his home country and seeks sanctuary in another would not have a monents second thought also exposing if this was as you claim? You do realise he has access to many files which include 9/11?

In your own time

"I think this collection of French songs reveal the extent to which Afghan-Arabs in Kandahar spoke many languages, and had many world experiences. Many had lived in the West for long periods and it can't be said enough that they had led multiple lives," says Miller.

"These songs suggest that that someone, at some point in their life, was enjoying the songs of this Algerian Jew - and may have continued to enjoy them despite other struggles that clearly would have suggested doing so was heresy."
Another unexpected name to make an appearance in the tapes is Mahatma Gandhi, who is cited as an inspiration by Osama Bin Laden in a speech made in September 1993.
This is also the first speech in the collection in which Bin Laden calls on supporters to take action against the US… by boycotting its goods.
"Consider the case of Great Britain, an empire so vast that some say the sun never set on it," says Bin Laden.
"Britain was forced to withdraw from one of its largest colonies when Gandhi the Hindu declared a boycott against their goods. We must do the same thing today with America."
Bin Laden also encourages his audience to write letters to US embassies, to raise concern about America's role in the Middle East conflict. Still no mention of violence against America...........

........
"That changes in 1996, days after he is exiled from Sudan," says Miller.
"Under US pressure he is stripped of his Saudi citizenship in 1994 and he has also lost all of his money and so he's at his wits end. And so Bin Laden has to come up with something desperate to galvanise his extremist supporters, and that's done in his 1996 speech from Tora Bora."
Holed up in the Hindu Kush, this speech is often called Bin Laden's declaration of war - but having gone through a complete recording of the speech found in the collection, Miller says this is not entirely accurate.
"The last third of this speech is 15 poems, and many times when this speech is translated, the poetry gets dropped out. Because of this, we don't appreciate the extent to which this speech wasn't a declaration of war, as it was framed by the media at the time.  .......................

...................... It's only in one of the final recordings found in the collection that there is any allusion to 9/11, in a recording of the wedding of Osama Bin Laden's bodyguard, Umar, which was taped a few months before the attacks on New York City and Washington DC.
"There's a lot of mirth on the tape and then Bin Laden comes up, and it's no longer mirth. He talks about how celebration is important, but it mustn't overshadow more austere issues."
Bin Laden then makes an ominous reference.
"He talks explicitly about 'a plan' - he doesn't reveal details - and how we are 'about to hear news' and he asks God to 'grant our brothers success'," says Miller.
"I understand that to signify the 9/11 attacks [because] he is talking specifically about the United States at that juncture."
It's curious that across more than a decade of recordings which feature Osama Bin Laden, the thing he is most commonly associated with - terrorist violence against the West - gets such little mention.
"Al-Qaeda's primary enemy on most of these tapes, most of the time, is Muslim leaders," says Miller.
"Al-Qaeda's continued presence in Yemen, its effects in Iraq, and its ongoing devastation of Muslim lives in the Muslim world only confirms the fact that this organisation, this idea, claims many bloody paths.
"There is nothing inevitable about 9/11 on these tapes. It was hard working on these tapes to remind myself of that."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33931657

Absolutely no mention of the World Trade Centre or what the plan is, or if it was ever carried out.

Are you spamming Didge? Didn't you accuse me of that when I posted the same link TWICE?

Practise what you preach.
Please.


I am ignoring your questions because what's the point in asking them? I could so the same to you!
You can't prove anything wrong that I say on 9/11 because it's all hearsay and so highly and closely guarded that none of us will ever know the real truth.

I think the real truth lies somewhere between what you believe and what other's believe (what you call conspiracy)

Seriously, so a major event to be celebrated that is going to happen in the US would be what then sassy?
4th July celebrations?

eddie wrote:Are you spamming Didge? Didn't you accuse me of that when I posted the same link TWICE?

Practise what you preach.
Please.


I am ignoring your questions because what's the point in asking them? I could so the same to you!
You can't prove anything wrong that I say on 9/11 because it's all hearsay and so highly and closely guarded that none of us will ever know the real truth.

I think the real truth lies somewhere between what you believe and what other's believe (what you call conspiracy)

You are ignoring them because you have no answer, which proves your claim has fallen very flat

If you cannot answer simp[le questions which show your claim to be false you are just avoding at every cost and make very poor excuses.

So basically when faced with a very difficult question which does in fact show the claim to be false, you fall at the first hurdle

That was way too easy

Didge perhaps I don't think your questions are worth answering?

You simply cannot accept that you don't KNOW what happened.
You simply cannot accept that you only ever believe the "official" story of what you're told.

Like I said, you're brainwashed and of course, you don't realise it.

eddie wrote:Didge perhaps I don't think your questions are worth answering?

You simply cannot accept that you don't KNOW what happened.
You simply cannot accept that you only ever believe the "official" story of what you're told.

Like I said, you're brainwashed and of course, you don't realise it.

How can they not be important Eddie?

He worked for the NSA, which means he had access to countless information.
He took thousands of information for the sole intention of exposing wrongs being done by the US.
He more than anyone has this information which could expose 9/11
He though states the US were negligent in not taking a threat seriously.
He states it was Al Qaeda.
So it is very important a person who has acces to files which would if your claim was true, would be most definately exposed by him.
That is why to claim its not important is gibberish Eddie.
The fact is I think Snowden is a traitor, a point you have over missed.
Yet this traitor is the one person who could expose 9/11 and states otherwise.
You need to explain why he would cover up information when his sole purpose was to expose cover ups

Not only that it would take over a hundred thousand people to keep quite of such a cover up/

Probaility of this Eddie?

Yada yada yada yada.  Have you any idea how much you bore us?

sassy wrote:Yada yada yada yada.  Have you any idea how much you bore us?

Poor deflection.
usual answer of someone who cannot answer.

Sassy I've put up a video from YouTube on the 9/11 thread

Apologies if it's been put up already

eddie wrote:Sassy I've put up a video from YouTube on the 9/11 thread

Apologies if it's been put up already

Yes this has been easily debunked Eddie

Claim: Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing. The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker. LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images—the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."

Eyewitnesses say they saw one thing yet you will ignore that and believe "officials""

Like I said didge; brainwashed.

eddie wrote:Eyewitnesses say they saw one thing yet you will ignore that and believe "officials""

Like I said didge; brainwashed.

Eddie explain to me how on the ground people can zoom into see what is under the wing of a plane at such speed before it hit the tower?
Could they have been mistake or gone off what the video is claiming later?
Do you have some of these eye witness accounts that say this at the time and I mean all eye witness accounts because believe me many conflict and are very different?

I'm so tired of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. The arguments just go on forever, each side just getting more frustrated at not being listened to.

Ben_Reilly wrote:I'm so tired of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. The arguments just go on forever, each side just getting more frustrated at not being listened to.

Like I said: the truth lies somewhere inbetween and we will never know the truth, sadly

Eddie, what do you base your suspicions on exactly?

When this first happened I saw photo's of a passenger plane hitting the first tower, I also saw a plane [ of some description] hitting the other one. I also saw a video of a plane flying into the Pentagon, Did I imagine it? I don't think so.

Raggamuffin wrote:Eddie, what do you base your suspicions on exactly?

Inconsistencies
Too many coincidences

Links to other "disasters"

They're all in different threads rags - you'll have to look sorry

nicko wrote:When this first happened I saw photo's of a passenger plane hitting the first tower,  I also saw a plane [ of some description] hitting the other one.  I also saw a video of a plane flying into the Pentagon,   Did I imagine it?   I don't think so.

Indeed Nicko and to be honest when you see most of these so called inconsistencies and claims they are nothing of the sort and very much easily refuted. Its kind of like a religious movement those that buy into the conspiracies on this.What is even scraier is why some want to be right on this. Some to blame Israel and the intent there is to create hate of cause to the point then Israel is ostracized and left defenseless, which I think we can all then imagine then witnesses a second holocaust. I mean that makes no sense anyway, as if Israel really wanted to do this, they would have framed Iran and not Iraq, being as they are their greatest threat and enemy, but they simply overlook this major issue.

Then we have that President within 8 months of Office, manged to get literally hundreds of thousands of people involved in a conspircy, all to be complict in the murder of thousands of innocent lives and that not a single one had a conscience about killing innocent lives? And to what end? As an excuse to take out the Taliban? Not only this that they would use a plane in some of the attacks but use Missles in others? Seriously do they think a plan would be that sloppy? None of it when you think about it makes any sense nor is viable. The war with Iraq was about claims to weapons of Mass destruction, so that can easily be ruled out. So we are left with Bush creating mass killings on his own people to start a war with a country that had little to benefit from doing so other than freeing people from a nightmare regime. I can certainly think of far better and easier ways to get on board nations to form a coalition to attack Afghanistan. Then to top this off he then has to get on board Al Qaeda to take responsibility, who have carried out before and since attacks on Americans. Its bonkers when you think about what actual gains could be made from such a plan. But as seen people are convinced not by the claims but by the people making the claims.

Hey ho, if that makes their lives feel important, good luck to them

And of course, some people are susceptible to brainwashing and others, are not.

Hey ho. If it makes their lives feel safer within their concrete logical box, who am I to argue?

eddie wrote:And of course, some people are susceptible to brainwashing and others, are not.

Hey ho. If it makes their lives feel safer within their concrete logical box, who am I to argue?

Hang on though. I've not been brainwashed, and I've queried and dismissed some of the conspiracy theories. Nobody has yet come up with anything to counter what I've said in any meaningful way.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:And of course, some people are susceptible to brainwashing and others, are not.

Hey ho. If it makes their lives feel safer within their concrete logical box, who am I to argue?

Hang on though. I've not been brainwashed, and I've queried and dismissed some of the conspiracy theories. Nobody has yet come up with anything to counter what I've said in any meaningful way.

Rags even though I dint always agree with you I'd never consider you brainwashed.
You're far from contained in a logical box too

I can say that I've in good faith listened to and read the conspiracy theories, applied whatever brain power and critical thinking I have to them, and came to the conclusion that while the official story is (and will probably forever be) lacking in answers to some questions, it's acceptable. The conspiracy theories require too much coordination and corruption to be believable.

I also think that whenever someone says 9/11 was a conspiracy, they should have to say which conspiracy they believe -- was it a stand-down order, letting AQ attack? Was it missiles? Was it controlled demolition? Was it all faked, as I've heard some people argue (i.e. no planes crashed, nobody died, it was CGI)? These theories contradict one another.

Thousands of people have been investigating this for almost 14 years and nobody has produced the smoking gun that proves al Qaeda didn't hijack planes and crash them into buildings.

That's a fair enough post Ben
Like I said, I think the truth lies in-between.
I don't think the USA are innocent and I don't think it was CGI-fanned either?
Not heard that one - that's too far-fetched for me to believe.

I hope we hear the truth in our lifetime though I doubt it.