Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: What a surprise, it's a "NEW" Bin Laden Tape

  1. #1

    What a surprise, it's a "NEW" Bin Laden Tape

    Source

    Bin Laden Says He Ordered 9/11 Attacks
    By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press Writer

    CAIRO, Egypt - Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), addressing the American public four days ahead of presidential elections, said in a video aired Friday that the United States can avoid another Sept. 11 attack if it stops threatening the security of Muslims.

    Reading a statement, the al-Qaida leader refrained from directly threatening new attacks, although he said "there are still reasons to repeat what happened."

    "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry, Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands," bin Laden said, referring to the president and his Democratic opponent. "Each state that does not mess with our security, has naturally guaranteed its own security."

    Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so because of injustices against the Lebanese and Palestinians by Israel and the United States.

    It was the first footage in more than a year of the fugitive al-Qaida leader, thought to be hiding in the mountains along the Pakistan-Afghanistan (news - web sites) border. The video, broadcast on Al-Jazeera television, showed bin Laden with a long gray beard, wearing traditional white robes, a turban and a golden cloak, standing behind a table with papers and in front of a plain, brown curtain.

    He gestured and his hands were steady as he spoke.

    The Bush administration said Friday it believes the videotape was authentic and had been made recently. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the administration did not plan to raise the nation's threat level for now.

    "All Americans are united in our strength and resolve to defeat the ideology that bin Laden articulates in this tape," McClellan said. "We are doing everything we can to prevail in the war on terrorism."

    Al-Jazeera said it broadcast one minute of the five-minute tape. There was no way to determine when the tape was made — but it offered evidence that bin Laden was alive and actively following events. Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) emerged as the Democratic candidate in the spring.

    Bin Laden said he wanted to explain why he ordered the suicide airline hijackings that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (news - web sites) so Americans would know how to avoid "another disaster."

    "To the U.S. people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another disaster," he said. "I tell you: security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."

    He accused President Bush (news - web sites) of misleading Americans by saying the attack was carried out because al-Qaida "hates freedom." Bin Laden said his followers have left alone countries that do not threaten Muslims.

    "We fought you because we are free .... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours," he said.

    He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.

    "While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said.

    "God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind," he said.

    Bin Laden suggested Bush was slow to react to the Sept. 11 attacks, giving the hijackers more time than they expected. At the time of the attacks, the president was listening to schoolchildren in Florida reading a book.

    "It never occurred to us that the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face these horrors alone," he said, referring to the number of people who worked at the World Trade Center.

    "It appeared to him (Bush) that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God," he said.

    In planning the attacks, bin Laden said he told Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers, that the strikes had to be carried out "within 20 minutes before Bush and his administration noticed."

    The image of bin Laden reading a statement was dramatically different from the few other videos of the al-Qaida leader that have emerged since the Sept. 11 attacks.

    In the last videotape, issued Sept. 10, 2003, bin Laden is seen walking through rocky terrain with his top deputy Ayman al-Zawahri, both carrying automatic rifles. In a taped message issued at the same time, bin Laden praises the "great damage to the enemy" on Sept. 11 and mentions five hijackers by name.

    In December 2001, the Pentagon released a videotape in which bin Laden is shown at a dinner with associates in Afghanistan on Nov. 9, 2001, saying the destruction of the Sept. 11 attacks exceeded even his "optimistic" calculations.

    But in none of his previous messages, audio or video, did bin Laden directly state that he ordered the attacks.

    U.S. authorities have long said they believe bin Laden is hiding in a rugged, mountainous tribal region of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan, but there has been no firm evidence of his whereabouts for three years.

    The last audiotape purportedly from bin Laden came in April. The speaker on the tape, which CIA (news - web sites) analysts said likely was the al-Qaida leader, offered a truce to European nations if they pull troops out of Muslim countries. The tape referred to the March 22 assassination by Israel of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin.

    Al-Zawahri, bin Laden's Egyptian deputy, has spoken on three recent audiotapes that emerged on June 11, Sept. 9 and Oct. 1 this year. In the latest, he called on young Muslims to strike the United States and its allies.
    Weren't we all expecting this ...... reallly come on
    Ab alio spectes alteri quod feceris






  2. #2
    Kurbinat0r Kurbi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    414
    yeah, its a conspiracy!!!!!!!! come on, get real...

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Posts
    81
    Lon are implying that this is a conspiracy? If you are you gotta be kidding, this tape was released by Al Jazeera(sp?) which the US govt absolutely hates. Don't think we would be cooperating with them.

  4. #4
    Tiny Terror Amadis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradil
    Lon are implying that this is a conspiracy? If you are you gotta be kidding, this tape was released by Al Jazeera(sp?) which the US govt absolutely hates. Don't think we would be cooperating with them.
    The US government has cooperated with scumbags it supposedly hates much more often than Bin Laden has claimed responsibility for his organization's attacks.

    While you may be right, using the government's "likes" and "dislikes" as a basis for any argument makes no sense. Try justifying our foreign policy towards China along those lines.
    Amadis de Gaula
    Pocket Sized Blender

  5. #5
    Heh, to believe this is a conspiracy shows how brainwashed some people are.

  6. #6
    Hoss / EQ & WoW Forty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    4,008
    I see nothing in Lons post to suggest she implied anything other then the fact that with less then a week away from the election, there's a new tape.


    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphina
    Heh, to believe this is a conspiracy shows how brainwashed some people are.
    Aye, those 3 out of 4 Bush supporters that still believe Iraq has wmd are pretty brainwashed, I agree.
    Last edited by Forty; 10-30-2004 at 11:19 PM.

  7. #7
    Well, you know what she meant FOrty. But I do agree with you, people who believe Iraq had WMDs are brainwashed. Its silly as we know Iraq did not have those WMDs due to the sanctions that were placed on it after the first Gulf War.

  8. #8
    Hoss / EQ & WoW Forty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphina
    Well, you know what she meant FOrty. But I do agree with you, people who believe Iraq had WMDs are brainwashed. Its silly as we know Iraq did not have those WMDs due to the sanctions that were placed on it after the first Gulf War.
    Do I? What was it that she meant? Are you impling that she meant the Bush Admin. would purposely work with Bin Laden to release a tape telling the voters not to vote for Bush in hopes that they really would? That the US voters would say, "Screw you, I'll vote for Bush now that you said that!" But I don't see anywhere in the article where he said that. Maybe I missed it. /shrug I did find...

    "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry, Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands," bin Laden said, referring to the president and his Democratic opponent. "Each state that does not mess with our security, has naturally guaranteed its own security."

    This seems to imply to me, that he doesn't think it matters which is voted president.

    I dunno if it was because of the sactions, but having US intellegence report(s) saying the wmd were dismantled in 1991 just after the first Gulf War AND the fact that there are no signs of any wmd or that they were actively trying to restart today, pretty much summed it up for me. And all of these reports saying the basic same thing were given to the president before we went into Iraq.

  9. #9
    Well, if you read what she wrote, you'd realize what she is saying. I'm not questioning the article, or what it could mean for either candidates. Thats still up in the air, and will depend on what either candidates do with this new information.

  10. #10
    Hoss / EQ & WoW Forty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    4,008
    I did read what she wrote. But you haven't answered the question. What is it that you think she meant?

    I'm just surprised Lonskils is posting something that has occurred within the last month much less this decade. Her "way-back" machine must be broken.

  11. #11
    Guild Asshole Tarissa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,028
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphina
    Well, if you read what she wrote, you'd realize what she is saying. I'm not questioning the article, or what it could mean for either candidates. Thats still up in the air, and will depend on what either candidates do with this new information.
    It's not often I meet someone so resolute in their vague opinions.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Posts
    81
    Forty so far all you have done is denigrate people that do not agree with you. You ask everyone for proof of what they are saying, acuse people of not reading
    anything recent. Well your statement

    I dunno if it was because of the sactions, but having US intellegence report(s) saying the wmd were dismantled in 1991 just after the first Gulf War AND the fact that there are no signs of any wmd or that they were actively trying to restart today, pretty much summed it up for me. And all of these reports saying the basic same thing were given to the president before we went into Iraq.
    is wrong. The part about not having WMD's may be correct, but the part about not trying to restart them is totally off base as proved by the Duelfer report of which I have included.

    http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_...y_Findings.pdf


    If you look at the major findings of the report you see that Saddam's major goal was to get rid of the sanction's so he could reconstitute his WMD program. There was overwhelming evidence of this. By the way the good thing about the internet and this country is that when someone tells you to shut the fuck up you don't have to.

  13. #13
    Hoss / EQ & WoW Forty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradil
    Forty so far all you have done is denigrate people that do not agree with you. You ask everyone for proof of what they are saying, acuse people of not reading
    anything recent. Well your statement



    is wrong. The part about not having WMD's may be correct, but the part about not trying to restart them is totally off base as proved by the Duelfer report of which I have included.

    http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_...y_Findings.pdf


    If you look at the major findings of the report you see that Saddam's major goal was to get rid of the sanction's so he could reconstitute his WMD program. There was overwhelming evidence of this. By the way the good thing about the internet and this country is that when someone tells you to shut the fuck up you don't have to.

    Umm, please...But thank you for confirming what I wrote....per your link.

    The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions. Neither was there an identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam. Instead, his lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long association with Saddam and his infrequent, but firm, verbal comments and directions to them.

    It was the "opinion" that he wanted to restart but they failed to provide solid actual evidence to support the "opinion". And after reading the "major" findings, it suggests that while they "could" have restarted there was no evidence to suggest he was, and that if he did, it would be in reaction to Iran's build-up. So, again, I stand by my original statement.
    Last edited by Forty; 10-31-2004 at 11:19 AM.

  14. #14
    You guys read to much into this, all Im saying is werent we all expecting a october surprise, well here it is....JFC
    Ab alio spectes alteri quod feceris






  15. #15
    Just ask Walter Kronkite.

  16. #16
    Hoss / EQ & WoW Forty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Lonskils
    You guys read to much into this, all Im saying is werent we all expecting a october surprise, well here it is....JFC
    There ya go.....

    And by the way....

    Quote Originally Posted by Aradil
    Forty so far all you have done is denigrate people that do not agree with you.
    If you truly think this then I invite you to reread anything that I have posted, and if you find anything that suggests I've defamed anyone, except maybe you, then that was my mistake. The intent of "most" of my postings was simply to challenge people to think clearly and fully about what is going on in the world and not take the attitude that they'll vote for Kerry because Laura Bush has evil woman cat-eyes or that they will vote for Bush because Michael Moore is an asswipe. Does that mean I think I'm 100% right each and every time? Nope, I don't. I don't have all the answers; shoot I don't even know half the questions. But when I do have questions, I'll search until I feel I have enough information to make an informed decision. I simply won't rely on Fox News or the New York Times and neither should any of you. Just because a news source is biased doesn't mean anything of what they have to say is true or untrue. And if I see someone post something that conflict with the information I've found, I'll post it. Does that mean I expect that person to immediately fall in to line behind me? Nope. But if I've made even one person recheck their facts, to search the web for more information that either confirms or disproves either side, then I feel I've accomplished something.

    Having said all that, I have one (ok, maybe more) question I think each and everyone of us should ask ourselves.

    Why Iraq and why now? Afghanistan I fully understand and support, but what about the other countries that pose a greater threat to the United States and/or the fight on terrorism? We all know that Rumsfeld and the PNAC have had a hard-on to attack Iraq for quite a while, but is it that simple? Maybe /shrug. (In case you missed this link in the other thread...http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

    Iraq aided terrorist activities? Well, even the Bush Admin has dispelled most of this. So you have to ask yourself, why exactly did we go in then?

    Iran openly stated they looked the other way as terrorist went in and out of its borders. Iran was in the process of and since completed testing it's nuclear capabilities. Why are they any less of a threat then Iraq when they are on the list of terrorist nations? Seems to me they posed a greater threat and were more directly involved in the movement of terrorists then Iraq was. Could we be in Iran next?

    North Korea openly sold military equipment to terrorist organizations, has restarted their nuclear capabilities and even basically told the US to stick it up our ass. Why did we not look at them first? Shoot, the North Korean government and what they have done to their people makes Iraq look like Disneyland and Chemical Ali like Mickey Mouse. Seems to me they pose an even greater threat to everyone.

    Japan. Yes Japan. Anyone read how they are quietly building their military with our help? They were once our enemy but now we help them build everything but the actual warheads. Sound familiar? Sound like Iraq? Iraq was once our friend then the enemy then our whatever. Japan is building their military in response to North Korea's build up. Much the same way Iraq did in response to Iran's. But now Japan is considered a threat to the United States. Yep, that's right, at least according to this unclassified document. So how long before we actually take action against them? Check the date of this report compared to the letter to Clinton and you'll see at least two names in common.

    http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/missil.../pt3_japan.htm

    also http://fas.org/irp/threat/missile/rumsfeld/

    Really read this and see how it compares to the Duelfer report on the speculation of what is or has been the intended use of commercial/military equipment in Iraq. Here's some highlights:

    Since the end of the Cold War, there has been considerable speculation that
    Japan may become East Asia's preeminent military power, and that it may
    develop nuclear weapons and intercontinental delivery systems. Although
    Japan has never provided any indication that it will modify its SLV's into
    ICBM's, any such activity could have implications for U.S. national
    security.

    And....

    Towards A Nuclear Delivery System?

    There is considerable speculation that Japan has aspirations to become a
    nuclear power, and that it could develop nuclear weapons on short-notice,
    if it has not already done so. Japan's technology in the atomic field is
    highly developed, and would have little difficulty building a nuclear
    arsenal if chose to do so. Furthermore, Japan has stockpiled significant
    amounts of plutonium, and continues to reprocess spent nuclear fuel in its
    closed nuclear fuel cycle. Although this plutonium is not weapons grade,
    Japan could easily convert it for military use.

    Despite the strong sense of pacifism that exists in Japan, and Japan's
    position as an NPT adherent, the literature suggests that Japan has the
    technical know-how to convert its space launch vehicles into
    Intercontinental nuclear delivery systems by the year 2015, and thus, pose
    a direct threat to the United States. Furthermore, Japan possesses
    sophisticated satellite capabilities for earth observation and
    communications. Although Japan has used land, marine and geostationary
    meteorological satellites for civil purposes, these satellites could be
    easily adapted for use in a ballistic missile program if one were ever
    contemplated.

    But I'm sure most of you have already seen this and been asking yourself some of the very same questions.


    While I like some of Bush's domestic policies, I dislike many/most of his foreign policies, and simply can't help feeling lied to in regards to Iraq.

    Yes, I know this long winded so thanks for getting this far.
    Last edited by Forty; 10-31-2004 at 09:37 PM.

  17. #17
    I'm not sure, as I don't want to waste my day looking it up, but I'm pretty sure that North Korea only restarted their nuclear weapons program after George W. Bush placed them on the 'Axis of Evil'. Being placed on the same list as Iraq, which we invaded, might scare a country into restarting their nuclear weapons program as a kind of insurance? Don't fuck with us or we're going to blow up your shit in South Korea, etc.

    I hope we dont have to invade Japan because they all know karate
    Juice, Al'Kabor
    Lothaine

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Where ever ZP is!!
    Posts
    54

  19. #19
    hogwash
    Ab alio spectes alteri quod feceris






  20. #20
    Thats retarded.

    In the same video he says it doesnt matter who the president is. That interpretation makes no sense.
    Juice, Al'Kabor
    Lothaine

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •