From the neutral country - Switzerland

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi greatcalgarian,

We also have reports of five Israel dancing with joy and filming the WTC event. Check your source of information before claiming those are facts and what actually happened. Part of your statement is true, and no one is claiming that it is a setup. No 9/11 'conspirators' ever claimed that there were no 'Arab' taking over the plane as far as information that the government allowed to be made public.

I was simply asking a question, that is not a straw man. Where are these reports of Israelis dancing with joy and filming the WTC attack?

So, you agree that Arabs took over the planes on 9/11?

I have posted before, using Jews and raising anti-semetic feeling is the disinformation technique by the US government to cover up the truth of 9/11. So if you read any story of Jews in the 9/11, it is pure disinformation by the CIA/NeoCon, I am not sure which one is the perpetrator.

Wait, so the CIA is going to the Middle East and teaching impressionable young Arab and Muslim minds that the Jews perpretrated 9/11? Do you have any evidence for this?

 

[FatMan]

It's almost embarrassing to see somebody keep having a conversation with himself, all the while dismissing anything that doesn't agree with his convoluted reasoning.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Hi greatcalgarian,



I was simply asking a question, that is not a straw man[Straw Man ususally started off from an innocent looking question:yes: , let us wait till the end to see whether this is a straw man or not. GC]. Where are these reports of Israelis dancing with joy and filming the WTC attack?

So, you agree that Arabs took over the planes on 9/11?



Wait, so the CIA [not the CIA, the MSM, GC] is going to the Middle East and teaching impressionable young Arab and Muslim minds [not teaching those people, but teaching the gullible American public GC]that the Jews perpretrated 9/11? Do you have any evidence for this?[plenty, follow the google suggestion, GC][/QUOTE]

You have got most of the facts correct. Immediately after 9/11, there is a team of experts from the government (this is heresay, rumour, conspiracy theory if you like) who executed a scheme to throw those people who may get suspsicious of the government involvement (could be LIHOP or MIHOP) off thread. This trick is to start people working on the presumption that the Jews, the Israel intelligent are behind or are also involved in the planning and execution of 9/11. Some MSM helped to propagate this tidal wave of Israel behind 9/11 from the 5 dancing Israel (Please just type in google "9/11 five dancing Israel conspiracy", and you will be able to find all the news), and the no Isarel in the WTC because they received pre-warning and have all stayed away from WTC on 9/11.

I have no idea whether truely the Arabs took over the 4 planes, or there are CIA agents on board those planes who were given order to be on that plane to assist and after that sacrificed just like the 2 thousands odd in the towers.
The likely possibility is that US Government (or the conspiracists in the Bush government) has provided the secret code or method of entering the cockpit without any suspicion from the pilot. It could also be that the pilots have been swapped prior to departure. I really do not know. The only positive evidence that there was a take-over is the plane that clashed in Pensylvania (the only black box that the government released partial information). The other three planes, nothing has been told by the Bush government so far whether they have recovered the black boxes, where are they, and what are the content. If you know of any official reveal of the information from the black box, I would be very happy to read the transcript on those black box if audio is not available. Only after having witness the evidence, then only i am comfortable to say specifically that the Arabs has taken over the planes all by themselves (which will still point to likely hood of LIHOP), and if the black box revealed abnormal behavior or incident happening, it will then render supporting evidence to MIHOP.

 

[greatcalgarian]

It's almost embarrassing to see somebody keep having a conversation with himself, all the while dismissing anything that doesn't agree with his convoluted reasoning.

Let us see what are those thingd that doesn't agree, and how they were being dismissed

It does not give someone good feeling to cause other to feel embarrassed.

 

[FatMan]

One can just point to your supposition that the black boxes could even be found from the WTC planes. They disintegrated in the heat or exploded in the collision, just as the steel in the building did.

It is one thing to rant on a conspiracy slant and another thing altogther to dismiss logic and the wide scope needed to perpetrate the event.

At least I know we both saw Capricorn One. You probably took it as fact.

 

[Ciscokid]

Switzerland is well known for her neutrality in the world political affair.

I don't think "neutrality" is the best term...'apathetic' might be a better way to describe them. They're like the dwarves from Lord of the Rings...they just mine all day searching for precious metals...caring not for the affairs of mankind.

 

[greatcalgarian]

One can just point to your supposition that the black boxes could even be found from the WTC planes. They disintegrated in the heat or exploded in the collision, just as the steel in the building did.

It is one thing to rant on a conspiracy slant and another thing altogther to dismiss logic and the wide scope needed to perpetrate the event.

At least I know we both saw Capricorn One. You probably took it as fact.

Sorry, those boxes were constructed to be able to stand the heat or explosion of the air plane. However, in the case where other chemicals are involved that produces reaction heat that melted the steel or metal, then if these two boxes got entrapped in those molten metal, then the boxes will not be recoverable. These are facts. Whereas what you have stated like the black box being destroyed in explosion and fire are fallacy, your own imagination or facts you learned from other government conspiracists

Currently, EUROCAE specifies that a recorder must be able to withstand an acceleration of 3400 g (33 km/s²) for 6.5 milliseconds. This is roughly equivalent to an impact velocity of 270 knots and a deceleration or crushing distance of 450 mm. Additionally, there are requirements for penetration resistance, static crush, high and low temperature fires, deep sea pressure, sea water immersion, and fluid immersion.FDRs are usually located in the rear of the aircraft, typically in the tail. In this position, the entire front of the aircraft acts as a "crush zone" to reduce the shock that reaches the recorder. Also, modern FDRs are typically double wrapped, in strong corrosion-resistant stainless steel or titanium, with high-temperature insulation inside.

9/11 "black box" cover-up at Ground Zero?

Philadelphia Daily News | October 28 2004

Two men who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center claim they helped federal agents find three of the four “black boxes” from the jetliners that struck the towers on 9/11 - contradicting the official account.

Both the independent 9/11 Commission and federal authorities continue to insist that none of the four devices - a cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) from the two planes - were ever found in the wreckage.

But New York City firefighter Nicholas DeMasi has written in a recent book -- self-published by several Ground Zero workers -- that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate three of the four.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2004/281004blackbox.htm

The government has not even taken up the stand that those boxes were destroyed in the WTC, only that they were not found. On the other hand, there are lots of rumours and witnesses who claimed to have seen those boxes recovered.

A footnote to the 9/11 Commission Report issued this summer flatly states: “The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175” - the two planes that hit the Trade Center - “were not found.”

And officials for the FBI - which oversaw the cleanup at Ground Zero - and the New York City Fire Department repeated this week that the devices were never recovered.

Your source of the black boxes being destroyed??

Capricorn One???

 

[greatcalgarian]

I don't think "neutrality" is the best term...'apathetic' might be a better way to describe them. They're like the dwarves from Lord of the Rings...they just mine all day searching for precious metals...caring not for the affairs of mankind.

Neutrality means they do not take side, they do not comment, they do not try to influence the outcome of world events contested by the different power camps, such as the US-UK alliance, the Russian-East European block, etc. Neutrality ensures no other country will fight war on their land. Neutrality means they are never going to exploit another country.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi greatcalgarian,

The likely possibility is that US Government (or the conspiracists in the Bush government) has provided the secret code or method of entering the cockpit without any suspicion from the pilot.

Do you have any evidence for this (and I am not trying to be sarcastic here, I really want to know if what you are saying has plausibility)? It looks like we have some pretty good evidence that Arabs boarded the plane (I believe we have pictures of them at the airport). We have recordings of men, presumably the Arab men, who initially said that they had bomb on the plane (and the evidence from the Pennsylvania crash). And then we have a third piece of evidence in the people that were called by the people on the hijacked planes telling their loved ones that some Arab men have just hijacked the plane. So, altogether I think that is pretty solid evidence that Arab men hijacked the planes.

Wait, so the CIA [not the CIA, the MSM, GC] is going to the Middle East and teaching impressionable young Arab and Muslim minds [not teaching those people, but teaching the gullible American public GC]that the Jews perpretrated 9/11?

I am confused, but I don't think a lot of people in the U.S. believe that Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks, but a cosniderable amount of people in the Arab and Muslim world do (maybe because they hate Jews, I'm not sure).

 

[Ciscokid]

Neutrality means they do not take side, they do not comment, they do not try to influence the outcome of world events contested by the different power camps, such as the US-UK alliance, the Russian-East European block, etc. Neutrality ensures no other country will fight war on their land. Neutrality means they are never going to exploit another country.

And if all countries were "neutral" Hitler would have destroyed the Jews and God knows who/what else. Neutrality = wussification plain and simple.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Hi greatcalgarian,
I am confused, but I don't think a lot of people in the U.S. believe that Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks, but a cosniderable amount of people in the Arab and Muslim world do (maybe because they hate Jews, I'm not sure).

I have not come across people in the Muslim and Arab world claimed that jews were behind the 9/11 attacks. Where did you come across this information?

On the other hand, it is freely floating in abundance in the web (most likely by Americans) that carry out the story of Jews being behind the 9/11, such as the dancing Jews, no Jews in the WTC etc etc., for example in Wikipedia:

Claims related to Jews and Israel
Some conspiracy theories hold that Israel or "organized Jewry" played a key role in carrying out the September 11 attacks.[201] According to the Anti-Defamation League, "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories have not been accepted in mainstream circles in the U.S.," but "this is not the case in the Arab and Muslim world."[202] The Anti-Defamation League has published a paper, Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, identifying the claims made and responding to them. Several websites of the 9/11 truth movement have also worked to debunk such claims and expose websites and individuals engaging in Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.[203][204][205]

A claim that 4,000 Jewish employees skipped work at the WTC on September 11 has been widely reported and widely debunked. This claim originates with Al Manar television. The number of Jews who died in the attacks--typically estimated at around 400[206][207][208]--tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area. Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.[209]

Ariel Sharon, in 2001 Prime Minister of Israel is said to have cancelled a planned trip to New York around the time of the attacks. Some have interpreted this as evidence he was warned to stay away. In fact, the event that Sharon had been scheduled to appear at was actually a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly originally scheduled for September 23 to October 5 but postponed to November 10-16[210], while the rally scheduled for September 23, 2001 and canceled on September 12, 2001 [211] was likely intended to coincide with the meeting of the General Assembly.

On September 17, 2001,[212] the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz' reported that four hours after the attack the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of their company's building for "puzzling behavior." The Israelis were said to have been videotaping the disaster with cries of joy and mockery.[213] On June 21, 2002, ABC reported that the FBI has not reached a consensus on whether they were Israeli intelligence operatives but concluded they had no advance knowledge of the September 11 attacks.[214] The five were released and deported to Israel on November 20-21, 2001 [215], claiming later in a newspaper interview that their arrest was done following a false accusation due to a personal conflict with a neighbour [216]

According to The Daily Telegraph (September 16, 2001), Israel had sent two Mossad agents to Washington in August to warn both the FBI and CIA of an imminent large-scale attack involving a cell of up to 200 terrorists. The Telegraph quoted an unnamed senior Israeli security official as saying "They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama bin Laden and told the Americans that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement."[217]

You may have read this one:

Prominent Arabs
blame 9-11 on Jews
Middle East media filled with talk of 'Zionist conspiracy'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 10, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

High-ranking public officials and prominent columnists in the Middle East are promoting a claim that Jews perpetrated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and the Pentagon, according to Arab media sources translated by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute.

without realising that MEMRI is actually a propaganda of the US government:
http://www.memri.org/aboutus.html

Founded in February 1998 to inform the debate over U.S. policy in the Middle East, MEMRI is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501 (c)3 organization. MEMRI's headquarters is located in Washington, DC with branch offices in Berlin, London, Tokyo and Jerusalem. MEMRI research is translated to English, German, Hebrew, Italian, French, Spanish and Japanese.

To support MEMRI's undertaking please click here to send your secure contribution online, or send your donations to:

MEMRI
P.O. Box 27837
Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
Email to: [email protected]

if you really believe this is a 'neutral' source without certain agenda or axe to grind.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi GC,

I have not come across people in the Muslim and Arab world claimed that jews were behind the 9/11 attacks. Where did you come across this information?

I have read it in a number of places. Of course the whole thing doesn't make much sense because also a lot of Arabs and Muslims were happy that 9/ll occurred. But consistency has never been their strong suit.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

GC -

I'm seeing the same old, tired tactic in all of your posts and in the websites you have posted. It's the EXACT same tactic used by the intelligent design movement to argue against evolution. The tactic is to find anomalous details having to do with the 9/11 attacks, and if no explanation is immediately forthcoming, then the lack of explanation is taken as evidence for a government conspiracy, the default explanation. In fact, it is not an explanation. Saying, "Aha, I'm not sure how ___(fill in the blank with some 9/11 detail)___ occurred, therefore the government made it happen," is just as flawed as "Aha, I'm not sure how ___(fill in the blank with some evolution detail)___ occurred, therefore an intelligent designer made it happen".

I notice that the 9/11 "truth" movement uses other tactics that the "intelligent design" movement uses (I also see this in your posts): they bombard you with tons of questions and objections, giving them all a very superficial treatment and appealing to incredulity (e.g. "There are dozens of proteins required for a functioning flagellum, and you need them all to have something useful! How could that evolve?? Therefore, an 'intelligent designer' did it." Or, "In one of the videos in which UBL confesses to orchestrating 9/11, UBL looks fat! How could that be him? Therefore, 'the government' did it." One wonders, how did the ingelligent designer/the government 'do it'?)

But, as in the intelligent design debate, I think it would be more useful, instead of giving 1,000 issues a superficial treatment, to give 1 issue a thorough treatment.

One of the websites you posted ( http://www.911review.com/myth/binladen.html ) objected that in one of the videos in which UBL claims responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, he doesn't quite look like his usual self. He looks "fat". (The website shows a few pictures of Bin Laden from the video, then below pictures A, B, C, D, and E, where the first four are from other videos and E is from the video in question.)

Your explanation:

'the government' did it.

My explanation:

It is Bin Laden, it just looks a bit different because of differences in the aspect ratio and video quality. The image in picture E does, admittedly, look like a 'fat' Bin Laden. But you can get a snapshot of anybody, every now and then, at such an angle or while they're making such a face that it doesn't look quite like them. Notice that he does not look fat in other images from the same video, showing his face at different angles (particularly the first image your website shows). He also does not fat in this version of the same video, which is higher quality and has a different aspect ratio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0FVeqCX6z8

If you take the time to watch the higher quality, different aspect ratio version I posted, I think you will see that there is no obvious difference between this Bin Laden and the Bin Ladens in all the other videos. The differences are less significant than these pictures of Bill Clinton, none of which were presumably faked:

http://top2bottom.net/watermarked/Canidate%20Governor%20Bill%20Clinton-web-2.jpg
http://www.frankejames.com/images/bill_clinton.jpg
http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=91393&rendTypeId=4
http://img.timeinc.net/time/personoftheyear/archive/photohistory/images/clinton.jpg
http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Events/4334/FormerPres_AmyG_7427619_400.jpg

 

[greatcalgarian]

GC -

I'm seeing the same old, tired tactic in all of your posts and in the websites you have posted. It's the EXACT same tactic used by the intelligent design movement to argue against evolution. The tactic is to find anomalous details having to do with the 9/11 attacks, and if no explanation is immediately forthcoming, then the lack of explanation is taken as evidence for a government conspiracy, the default explanation. In fact, it is not an explanation. Saying, "Aha, I'm not sure how ___(fill in the blank with some 9/11 detail)___ occurred, therefore the government made it happen," is just as flawed as "Aha, I'm not sure how ___(fill in the blank with some evolution detail)___ occurred, therefore an intelligent designer made it happen".

I notice that the 9/11 "truth" movement uses other tactics that the "intelligent design" movement uses (I also see this in your posts): they bombard you with tons of questions and objections, giving them all a very superficial treatment and appealing to incredulity (e.g. "There are dozens of proteins required for a functioning flagellum, and you need them all to have something useful! How could that evolve?? Therefore, an 'intelligent designer' did it." Or, "In one of the videos in which UBL confesses to orchestrating 9/11, UBL looks fat! How could that be him? Therefore, 'the government' did it." One wonders, how did the ingelligent designer/the government 'do it'?)

But, as in the intelligent design debate, I think it would be more useful, instead of giving 1,000 issues a superficial treatment, to give 1 issue a thorough treatment.

One of the websites you posted ( http://www.911review.com/myth/binladen.html ) objected that in one of the videos in which UBL claims responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, he doesn't quite look like his usual self. He looks "fat". (The website shows a few pictures of Bin Laden from the video, then below pictures A, B, C, D, and E, where the first four are from other videos and E is from the video in question.)

Your explanation:

'the government' did it.

My explanation:

It is Bin Laden, it just looks a bit different because of differences in the aspect ratio and video quality. The image in picture E does, admittedly, look like a 'fat' Bin Laden. But you can get a snapshot of anybody, every now and then, at such an angle or while they're making such a face that it doesn't look quite like them. Notice that he does not look fat in other images from the same video, showing his face at different angles (particularly the first image your website shows). He also does not fat in this version of the same video, which is higher quality and has a different aspect ratio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0FVeqCX6z8

If you take the time to watch the higher quality, different aspect ratio version I posted, I think you will see that there is no obvious difference between this Bin Laden and the Bin Ladens in all the other videos. The differences are less significant than these pictures of Bill Clinton, none of which were presumably faked:

http://top2bottom.net/watermarked/Canidate Governor Bill Clinton-web-2.jpg
http://www.frankejames.com/images/bill_clinton.jpg
http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=91393&rendTypeId=4
http://img.timeinc.net/time/personoftheyear/archive/photohistory/images/clinton.jpg
http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Events/4334/FormerPres_AmyG_7427619_400.jpg

Let us forget first about your first paragraph of linking my post to intelligent design vs evolution. It is indeed a great honor as I am an athiest, and I have been chuckling to myself the arguement put forward by the intelligent design arguement, and suddenly I have been branded as using their technique.

Let me just go very briefly to the arguement about fat Ladin.
I particularly liked your different pictures of Clinton to use that to argue that fat and thin Clinton picture gives the same person. Can you please tell me that all those pictures are taken around the same time period, and the weight of Clinton has not differed by more than 5 pounds? When you put on weight, your feature changes. Unless you can show that those pictures represent the similar period of time where Clinton has not put on or lost weight. And that the difference is purely due to camera angle etc.
If you have read all the web arguement about the fat Ladin case, you would have realized that some one has raised the point of whether it is because of the different time at which Ladin was being film. All things taken into consideration, from some of the video that is truely Ladin before and after the claimed video, no one can reach the conclusion that that video is faked.
There are two other points that 'conspiracy theorists' observed:
(1) wrong hand used in writing
(2) wearing gold ring
Perhaps these two points does not mean anything to a learned person like you, who I am sure can come up with a good explanation (like using Clinton pictures without really fully qualifying your pictures taken time etc).

If you have been honest with yourself, the CIA has never claimed that the fat bin Ladin video is authentic. They have said that this could most likely be real and not faked, but they are not absoutely sure of that. Do you know bin Ladin denied that 9/11 was done by him immediately after 9/11? Perhaps you have never read about that news which was reported by MSM once, and then very strangely has never been referred to again, whether a clarification from the West Media that that is not true, that it is a mis-reporting and so on. The MSM simply ignored that they have reported it once, and then close their eyes. This is exactly the same technique (perhaps this is the Intelligent design technique you like to link me to) of the BBC reporting that some of the 19 Arabs are alive, and then kept very quiet about that report until in 2006 came up with one clarification which did not manage to clarify anything, judging from the reader's response:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
Again I hope you will read the above link from top to bottom, and all the response of the readers.
BBC did not have anything else to add after that, and has again kept very quiet.

If you have any specific point regarding my post, or the weblink I provided, state them clearly like the fat bin Ladin case. And not generalized into something in your first paragraph, where there is no specific point I can clarify my point to you.

You should have noted that I have stated very clearly that certain 9/11 web page are muddying the whole issue.
Let me introduce you to this Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed where I resonance with most of this point of view in his recent write up:
http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=7091

And if you really spend your time reading that article, you will notice that several people quoted by him have received very little or no 'debunking' (reasonable one, and not some debunking that based on personal attack, red herring, strawman etc) from any one. These people are:
(1) Jim Hoffman
(2) David Ray Griffin
(3) Steve Jones
Please google Jim Hoffman and read all his debunking of Popular Mechanics and other, just like David Ray Griffin book on the Commision report. If you can answer to the points rasied by David in his book, my hat off to you, and you will be doing a great service to the whole 9/11 truth movement and seekers.

Anyway, tell me frankly, have you read say 10% of this web page:
http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html
If you have read more than 10%, I congratulate you for having an open mind. However, if you just skim one page, and then refused to read further because you tried to block off whatever that is haunting you from the arguement and facts presented in that web page, then I feel that you have never really wanted to find out the truth about 9/11. Too bad. Again I quote: The Three Monkeys that See no Evil, Hear no Evil, and Speak no Evil, but many people adopted the first two and forgot about the third to keep everything to themselves since they have not look at or listen to everything available there for them to explore to find the truth.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Misinformation
The 9/11/01 attack was and is a psychological operation: It was designed to deceive people by exploiting their subconscious conditioning and desires, such as the extreme reluctance to consider seriously the possibility that the "leaders of the free world" are in fact the perpetrators of 9/11/01 and similar false-flag terror operations. The true identities of the perpetrators of the attack are further hidden by disinformation campaigns which reinforce the idea that only foolish conspiracy theorists question the official story. The most effective such campaigns are waged mostly by unwitting participants, victims of cleverly marketed misinformation.

Mr Spinkle,
For example, please fully explore at least this web page and all the links and articles:

http://911research.wtc7.net/resources/web/psyop.html

and this

http://www.911review.com/infowars.html

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Let me just go very briefly to the arguement about fat Ladin.
I particularly liked your different pictures of Clinton to use that to argue that fat and thin Clinton picture gives the same person. Can you please tell me that all those pictures are taken around the same time period, and the weight of Clinton has not differed by more than 5 pounds? When you put on weight, your feature changes. Unless you can show that those pictures represent the similar period of time where Clinton has not put on or lost weight. And that the difference is purely due to camera angle etc.

That's it? You aren't going to address the points I raised about the aspect ratio and the image quality? I provided a link which shows the same video, but with a different aspect ratio and better image quality. You don't have anything to say about whether Bin Laden looks fat in that video?

The pictures of Clinton were mainly just to show that there are many ways a person could look very different in different pictures. A person can lose or gain weight, they might change as they get older (if the pictures are a year or more apart), they could have just woken up early in the morning, image quality/angle can be different, etc. These are all possible explanations that neither you nor the website you posted considered.

If you have read all the web arguement about the fat Ladin case, you would have realized that some one has raised the point of whether it is because of the different time at which Ladin was being film.

I am sure that I haven't read everything there is to read on the internet about the 'fat Bin Laden" issue. Let's examine each point in turn: first, perhaps you should respond to the possibility that he only looks heavier because of the aspect ratio and the image quality. This possibility is supported by the fact that he doesn't look heavier in other frames on that video, and he doesn't look heavier in the better quality video I linked to.

There are two other points that 'conspiracy theorists' observed:
(1) wrong hand used in writing
(2) wearing gold ring

I didn't see anyone writing in the video. How many minutes/seconds into the video does Bin Laden start writing? Also, it does appear that he is wearing a ring, although I can't tell whether or not it is gold. But I notice that he wears a ring in this video as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dls5JTD-uG0&mode=related&search=
Here's a photo of him wearing a ring: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bin_laden_12_27a.jpg

Perhaps these two points does not mean anything to a learned person like you, who I am sure can come up with a good explanation (like using Clinton pictures without really fully qualifying your pictures taken time etc).

Sorry, I wish I hadn't posted the Clinton pictures. Those pictures weren't really supposed to explain the fat Bin Laden issue, they were more of an afterthought. What we really should be talking about is the aspect ratio and image quality of the video in question, and especially the link I provided to the same video but higher quality.

If you have been honest with yourself, the CIA has never claimed that the fat bin Ladin video is authentic. They have said that this could most likely be real and not faked, but they are not absoutely sure of that. Do you know bin Ladin denied that 9/11 was done by him immediately after 9/11?

No, I didn't know that. Could you link to this video? What about all the videos in which he does claim responsibility?

Perhaps you have never read about that news which was reported by MSM once, and then very strangely has never been referred to again, whether a clarification from the West Media that that is not true, that it is a mis-reporting and so on. The MSM simply ignored that they have reported it once, and then close their eyes. This is exactly the same technique (perhaps this is the Intelligent design technique you like to link me to) of the BBC reporting that some of the 19 Arabs are alive, and then kept very quiet about that report until in 2006 came up with one clarification which did not manage to clarify anything, judging from the reader's response:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

Let's come back to this after we've dealt with 'fat Bin Laden'.

If you have any specific point regarding my post, or the weblink I provided, state them clearly like the fat bin Ladin case. And not generalized into something in your first paragraph, where there is no specific point I can clarify my point to you.

I raised very specific points in my second to last paragraph, points that you have thus far ignored.

You should have noted that I have stated very clearly that certain 9/11 web page are muddying the whole issue.
Let me introduce you to this Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed where I resonance with most of this point of view in his recent write up:
http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=7091

And if you really spend your time reading that article, you will notice that several people quoted by him have received very little or no 'debunking' (reasonable one, and not some debunking that based on personal attack, red herring, strawman etc) from any one. These people are:
(1) Jim Hoffman
(2) David Ray Griffin
(3) Steve Jones
Please google Jim Hoffman and read all his debunking of Popular Mechanics and other, just like David Ray Griffin book on the Commision report. If you can answer to the points rasied by David in his book, my hat off to you, and you will be doing a great service to the whole 9/11 truth movement and seekers.

Anyway, tell me frankly, have you read say 10% of this web page:
http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html
If you have read more than 10%, I congratulate you for having an open mind. However, if you just skim one page, and then refused to read further because you tried to block off whatever that is haunting you from the arguement and facts presented in that web page, then I feel that you have never really wanted to find out the truth about 9/11. Too bad. Again I quote: The Three Monkeys that See no Evil, Hear no Evil, and Speak no Evil, but many people adopted the first two and forgot about the third to keep everything to themselves since they have not look at or listen to everything available there for them to explore to find the truth.

Let's take it one issue at a time. We were talking about 'fat Bin Laden', and there are some points I raised that you have not addressed.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Mr. Spinkle:
Aspect Ratio. I am fully aware of that, especially now the new TV set if you chose the wrong format, you get fat man and fat lady all over the place.

You have to prove your point that the aspect ratio is the cause. So far I have not come across any video clip of this particular one that show the right slimness of bin Ladin. Give me a source. If that is the case, this fat bin Ladin would have been debunk long ago by others.

This one did try to show changing the aspect ratio, but the thinned image looked strange, as other part of the face got distorted, this is claimed to be changing the Pals to NCST format or something like that:
http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id372.html

 

[greatcalgarian]

Mr. Spinkle,
Now I got your attention, the real conspiracy story I want you to read is here, not really the fat bin Laden:

http://muckrakerreport.com/id301.html

http://www.teamliberty.net/id302.html

And bin Laden denial of 9/11 not a video, but an interview:
http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html
and other interesting perspective of fake video in the war of misinformation and disinformation:
http://www.public-action.com/911/hvideo.html

 

[FatMan]

It must suck to be so feeble that one has to latch onto conspiracy theories to have a fruitful discussion of what has happened in history.

Then again, this discussion hasn't been fruitful at all. Carry on.....

 

[greatcalgarian]

It must suck to be so feeble that one has to latch onto conspiracy theories to have a fruitful discussion of what has happened in history.

Then again, this discussion hasn't been fruitful at all. Carry on.....

Conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy, aren't you tired of blaming everything onto conspiracy theories, and tell us some of the non-conspiracy truth?