-Caveat Lector- From http://www.angelfire.com/ab6/waragainstislam/contradiction.htm
}}}>Begin Oooops......! by Samata Ullah Shortcuts: 14th December 2001. Analysing "Bin Ladin's" comments. 13th December 2001. Analysing the video 12th December 2001. Contradiction in the video ______________________________________________________________________ _____________ 14th December 2001. Something to ponder: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1710000/1710483.stm "The defence minister of the ousted Taleban regime in Afghanistan told the BBC that he was doubtful about the recording's authenticity, saying it was unlikely that Bin Laden would have been naive enough to say such things on a recording." No matter from what source the comment came from, I think that is credible to assume that. Why would he want to convict himself with this video, knowing that there is the slight possibility of it getting into the wrong ha nds and therefore cementing the weak case against him? Osama Bin Ladin said in an interview with a Pakistani newspaper; "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no kn owledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle." Why for instance, if he knew the consequences if he was caught, would he still run the risk of getting caught by making a video which explicitly shows him confessing to the attack? Surely, won't he'd keep that so secret t hat only close confidants would know that he did the WTC attack thus cutting the risk of getting caught? I think it is absurd that he'd even think about making such a video and it only shows the sheepish mentality of the people who assume he'd be stupid enough to make a video like that. An excerpt from the "transcript" of the Bin Ladin Video tape: [Speaking to Bin Ladin] Shaykh: "(...inaudible...) You have given us weapons, you have given us hope and we thank Allah for you." A question, is there any proof that Osama Bin Ladin was giving weapons to people in Saudi Arabia? The video says so, so where is the evidence from intelligence sources which say that? It would be supremely stupid for the intelligence agencies not to have even mentioned that before or not to have knew that before, so where are those reports? This hints to me of a campaign of demonisation against Bin Ladin, they (whoever that may be) want t o further discredit him by suggesting that he provides weapons to foreign countries to "support terrorism". Asides from the difficulties of smuggling weapons from Afghanistan, it is nearly impossible for him to buy illega l weapons for these people in Saudi Arabia if he chose an alternative to smuggling weapons from Afghanistan to give to them. Furthermore, where are these weapons used? Who uses them and for what purpose? Think about it, I have never even heard of an indigenous Saudi rebel attempt of overthrowing the regime, have you? There certainly were isolated cases but this was years ago, this video was recent so it would suggest that this funding of "rebels" in Saudi Arabia is ongoing, why do we not hear of Saudi militant rebel groups? Certainly there can be people whose ideology expresses that desire but the video suggests it is an armed struggle. I have not heard o f any recent armed struggle in Saudi Arabia from conventional news or intelligence sources. One to think about! A sample of the critical emails of the Bin Ladin video which appeared on Rense.com: ********************************* "I have viewed exceprts from the "Smoking Gun" bin Laden video and I can't see how anyone could mistake the actor on the video for Usama bin Laden. It seems that UbL has been gulping down more than his fair share of the " food aid" that is being dropped because he is obviously carrying a few more pounds, mostly in the face, since the videos screened on Al Jazeera not long ago, reportedly recorded only a few days earlier. I seem to associat e the actor on the video more with Will Smith than with UbL. It must further be mentioned that the parts of the audio that can be heard do not sound anything at all like the audio of bin Laden on the Al Jazeera broadcasts. In fact it does not even sound like the arabic spoken by an arab. I wonder just how many people are falling for this deception after the "planted spy" American Taliban debacle did not have the desired effect. Sorry America, you guys are just being absolutely stupid in believing that shrub (bush jnr). You people should take note of the words of your Ben Franklin when he stated "Those who would give up freedom for security deser ve, and will get, neither.""-Haroon Sulaiman "2. The man that was purportedly Osama bin Laden was not. His profile did not match that of Osama. His nose was flatter than that of Osama. Take a look at past photographs and see for your self. This was a look-a-like."-P at Taylor Comment >From John Marshall London, UK 12-13-1 What the Bin Ladin Tape proves The Bin Ladin video tape finally released by the Pentagon turned out to only prove four things: 1 - That the audio quality of Bin Ladins voice was the worst of those talking on the video (?) 2 - The sound was so bad that the Arabic grammer could be heard either way i.e. "we did" or "we said" could also be heard as "they did" or "they said" etc. Which means the difference between a person being a spectator or a mastermind. 3 - Bin Ladin must be exceedingly stupid to admit in an open dinner party (this while the US air force and special forces are carpet bombing the entire country) and with kids and guests all over the place that he planned and carried out the WTC attacks while previousely declaring to the World he had nothing to do with it. 4 - If he is that stupid then there is no way a person of that level of intelligence could have pulled of the sophisticated operation Washington claims he did from the caves of Afghanistan. Where is the "concrete" evidence they claimed to have before that is still being hidden from us?? ********************************* That last comment reminds me of this critique of the 21 page document which "proved" that Bin Ladin did it: http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=98195 _________________________________________________ 13th December 2001. OK, lets get down to business. Lets take a good look at one of the pictures taken off the video: You decide who that is! If you guess correctly you can win one of the fabulous prizes we have on offer! Play Spot the Rag-head now! Now lets see a picture taken from one of his videos which was taken outside and was therefore expected to be of less quality: Hi, my name's Binny, wanna' play? Firstly, the difference in quality is staggering, the video shot outside was of such good quality and the video shot inside was of dubious quality, that makes me wonder. Why should the new "video" just released by the Ame ricans be of such bad picture quality if it was shot inside and therefore had no weather conditions affecting it? Why is the video shot outside of such high quality? Assuming that Bin Ladin shot the new "video", why did h e not use the good quality camera which he obviously has judging by the video shot outside? So, what we have here is a video which purports to be of Bin Ladin yet the video quality is so bad that one cannot honestly confi rm whether that is really Bin Ladin! So why have we got such a bad quality video when we know that Bin Ladin is capable of shooting the video in even more better quality? This video is supposed to confirm his guilt yet we cannot even confirm if he even appeared on the video! I really don't expect this nonsense from a government, are they that desperate? Obviously, if America expects us to believe them then obviously they should have prese nted us a video which actually shows Bin Ladin! More points when I can think of more. Secondly, please take a closer look at the video, please look at Ayman Al-Zawarih's lips when speaking, this is the only man in the video whose face appears towards the camera while actually speaking a long sentence, and guess what? Yup, the synchronisation of the voice and the video image of his lips was not in tune with each other! Please take a look, at the video if you don't believe me, Ayman Al- Zawarih is the only person on the video whose face appears towards the camera while speaking a long sentence and the voice clearly was not in synchronisation with the image. Another point is the actual circumstances of the video, why does this appear only in Jalalabad and only one copy? If it was for distribution then it would have been in lots of copies, yet we only have one! Now, the language, the sound is clearly inaudible at places, and the rest of the sound is affected by the distortion of the camera, therefore how can we assume he said what the translators wrote down if it is so distorted? Why would they want to film themselves anyway? Think about it, you just committed the greatest act of terrorism and you deny that you did it, you'd at least be careful and never allow any opportunity for this confession to become public, so why would you be so stupid enough to film the confession even though you know there is the slight possibility that your video confession will get into the wrong hands? Would it not be better to just have the meeting without the risk of this worthless (but incriminating) discussion's speech found out? It was just a discussion and recap with a couple of men discussing something, surely it does not have to be taped to be shown to every Al-Qaeda member? Using that logic any random worthless discussion (to ordinary Al-Qaeda members) should have been taped, why have they only found this incriminating discussion? I'd like to emphasise, if one reads the transcript of the discussion, one would get the impression that it is just an ordinary meeting, sort of like a "how are you doing?" meeting yet this "confession" happened to be taped, why? I will update this page regularly when more thoughts emerge, God willing. [These two paragraphs below were taken from here, which features the 12th December article of mine but interpolated two good paragraphs which I reproduce now] All of Bin Laden's other videos have been exceptional quality, why is only this one such bad quality? What was supposed to be the purpose of this video? If Bin Laden was keeping a video diary, then must be many other videos, why was only one video found? _________________________________________________ 12th December 2001. A contradiction exists between Bin Ladin's "new video" and the letters of the hijackers. The new video claims to have "proof" that Bin Ladin did the attack, OK, but why does it say that he thought the hijackers did not know they were about to commit suicide? Did not the letters "uncovered" by the FBI from the "hijackers" luggage shortly after the WTC attack claim that they knew they were about to commit suicide? Therefore we have a contradiction, Bin Laden "claims" (on this new "video") that the hijackers did NOT know they were about to commit suicide, yet earlier a few weeks ago when the hijackers luggage was "discovered", letters were found which said the hijackers KNEW that they were going to commit suicide on the planes, why such a big discrepancy? Obviously the lies have reached such a point where they have got clumsy. Also, why was an ARABIC "video" found in Jalalabad where the people don't speak Arabic? If it was for distribution around the Arabic world then they'd at least find much more of these tapes, right? Another thing, this seems to me to be an attempt to further demonise Bin Ladin by saying that he "tricks" people to commit suicide, thus making more people in the Muslim world oppose him and some of the just causes he stands for. More more thing, if the people then explain this contradiction away as "lack of knowledge due to the cells being seperate", then how can Bin Ladin be blamed for organising this if he did not know what they were doing? Think about it, if these "terrorist" cells really don't know what each other is doing, then how can we blame Osama for the attacks? So, if the people explain the contradiction between Bin Ladin's video and the letters of the "hijackers" as due to the fact that these cells don't know what each other cell is doing, then we CANNOT blame Osama for "conceiving, organising and carrying out the attacks". Back to homepage End<{{{ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men. Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all. Then accept it and live up to it." The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller, German Writer (1759-1805) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." --- Ernest Hemingway <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
