Osama Bin Laden has been killed by U.S. Action

[schm0]

Then it amounts to about the most unlikely coincidence in the history of coincidences. Hence the term "Coincidence Theorist".
That really is some exquisite guess work - to accidentally pick the exact date and location of a terrorist attack - when your remit was to prepare for just such a terror attack.
Sure, it 'could' be a coincidence - but I know that if I were trying to execute a "false flag" operation - then a "Mock Terror Training Exersize" is about the best cover I could use.

Except it was a coincidence. Admittedly so by the very source which you claim your information came from. I suppose he must have been paid off, right? Again, you choose to ignore the easiest explanation and instead purport the most unsubstantiated (and ludicrous) one. The sites were chosen because of historical relevancy, not by complete randomness. I ask you this: what does a training excercise by a security firm have anything to do with "deceiv(ing) the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities?"

Either this 7 billion to one chance happened just by accident - and the fact that they released CCTV footage of the bombers with whole minutes cut out (just as a jaguar parked in exactly the same location - on both the dry run 9 days earlier - and on the day of the actual bombing pulled up beside the cars known to be driven by the 'bombers') doesn;t strike anyone as even slightly unusual?

It's not 7 billion to one, as I pointed out. If the sites had been chosen randomly, you would be correct. But they were not. I haven't seen any CCTV footage with "minutes" missing. If you could post a source (which you haven't yet) I'd be happy to check it out. Not sure what a jaguar has to do with anything, but I'm pretty sure that cars parking in the same spots in a place of business wouldn't be unusual at all.

& Does anyone care to explain exactly what Osama Bin Laden had to do with Iraq?

There were allegations that they had ties but they have been proven to be loose or inconsequential at best. We went to war in Iraq to topple a dictator, but were also told that it was because of WMDs when the intelligence suggested as much. That intelligence turned out to be incorrect.

They like to downplay the link now - because of all the lies they were caught out on - such as the WMD program - the Mobile Weapons laboratories etc - all complete fabrications to justify an illegal invasion. - But of course, that's just a coincidence.

Fact is, he had nothing, nada - zip - zero - to do with Saddam Hussein and Iraq.... and yet this link was touted by the worlds media - without any cooberrating evidence or journalistic principle.

Well, they weren't fabrications. There were sources in U.S. intelligence (and other national intelligence agencies) that were feeding us incorrect information. What happened is that the U.S. used this intelligence one of several arguments to go to war. It was a bad decision, and one I personally despise. But there is no conspiracy here, just incompetence by the the intelligence community and gullibility on behalf of the American people and its allies. This glaring mistake by our government has been investigated, dissected and lambasted by the media in the years since the Iraq war, and rightly so.

The same with every tape released by Osama post 9/11 - no independant verification, and yet every media outlet accepted them as genuine. Only when they were finally independantly examined, they were found to be false. The fact this wasn;t as widely reported as the tape releases themselves is just a coincidence.

Again, I'd love to see your sources. Every tape release by Osama for the last 10 years? That's simply not true. I've heard that some audio tapes purporting to be made by Osama have later turned out to be false, but again, if this were true (i.e. verifiable, factually sound, etc.) it would be worldwide news.

Why it's almost as if the worlds media is controlled - possibly by a powerful group of self interested rich people (no, of course not the Bilderberg Group - that's just a coincidence)? But of course - that could only happen if the vast majority of media outlets were controlled by just a few individuals (like Rupert Murdoch - just another coincidence).
The fact Rupert Murdoch always hosts private dinners for Politicians (prior to them becoming leaders of a country)? - Just a coincidence.

It's almost as if the world's conspiracy sites are controlled - possibly by a paranoid group of self-interested lunatics (no, not the conspiracy theorists - that's just a coincidence)? But of course, that could only happen if the vast majority of the internet were drowned out by loonies and crazies (like Alex Jones - just another coincidence). The fact that Alex Jones and his ilk have been proven wrong on so many things that he is entirely ignored by the mainstream media (except Fox) - just a coincidence.

Seriously, though... you really believe that thousands, no tens of thousands of journalists around the world are controlled and manipulated by a handful of men? You're more crazy than I thought.

It's like a black hole - there is no evidence of black holes - there is an absense of evidence that outlines it's shape. And when we are dealing with the covert, illegal actions of governments - the evidence that is missing is what is telling - like the fact there has been no independant public enquiry into 7/7 bombings (which is actually required by UK law when such events happen) - or the missing CCTV footage from what has been officially released.

It's a bad analogy, as we do have observable evidence of black holes. Regardless, I found an article stating that a public inquiry could very well still happen. It just hasn't yet. While I agree one is necessary, an inquest was recently concluded. Now, I don't understand the difference between an inquest and a public inquiry as it pertains to British law, so I can't say what has or hasn't been satisfied in this respect. Is it that the inquest wasn't done independently? And where does the law state that a public inquiry must be done so independently?

The fact that 9/11 was used to justify the war in Iraq ?- just a coincidence.
The fact the Anthrax Postal attacks were blamed on Al Qaeda and used to further justify an invasion of Iraq (when in fact they were from a domestic source)? - Just a coincidence.

Did you read the letters sent with the Anthrax? They were sent out the week after 9/11, and contained phrases like "We have anthrax. You die now. Are you afraid? Death to America. Death to Israel. Allah is great." However, investigations into the allegations of a connection between Iraq and the anthrax have been amply investigated. From this article, highlighting the extensive investigation into these false allegations: "It's extremely possible -- one could say highly likely -- that the same people responsible for perpetrating the (anthrax) attacks were the ones who fed the false reports to the public, through ABC News, that Saddam was behind them." Did it help firm up support for the Iraq war? Sure. Was it a false flag event or part of the general hysteria that pervaded American media in the months after 9/11? I'd argue the latter.

The Fact nearly all "coincidences" happen at politically convenient times? - Just another coincidence

They're only politically convenient if you believe them to be.

Some people obviously believe that such astronomical coincidences happen all the time - and given they are all related to the same ongoing narrative further compounds the coincidence - I, however, am a bit more skeptical.

It's just like Jack Nicholson said - "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!" ;

There's a fine line between a coincidence and a conspiracy. The problem is, you lack proof. In fact, your theories lie in direct contrast to established fact. Unfortunately, the result of that conundrum is that it poses a bit of a problem in the realm of logical argument.

The burden is on you, and I'm sorry to say, but you've failed miserably of providing any proof of your theories. Perhaps you need to reformulate your hypothesis?

All of these things are related to Osama because of his affiliation with terrorism, Al Qaeda, and the major events that have shaped the 21st century. There have been missteps along the way, and some bad intelligence that took us into a war we never should have started (in my opinion.) There have been false statements, lies, and allegations that have shaped the course of action through these times. I agree with your general call for transparency and public disclosure, but I am disturbed that you make such grand assumptions and "leaps of faith" about nearly every major event in the last decade. To sit here and call all of these events in the world part of some global conspiracy is not only dangerous, but factually unsound.

[Macnme]

Osama Recordings were Fake ;
"In 2007 Switzerland's Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence, which does computer voice recognition for bank security, compared the voices on 15 undisputed recordings of Osama with the voices on 15 subsequent ones attributed to Osama, to which they added two by native Arab speakers who had trained to imitate him and were reading his writings. All of the purported Osama recordings (with one falling into a gray area) differed clearly from one another as well as from the genuine ones. By contrast, the CIA found all the recordings authentic."


It isn't the journalists who decide what goes into a national news report - it's the editors.
Media is a weapon of war - a propaganda tool. You should read up on how non-western controlled media outlets are reporting on things like the current Libyan Conflict - and you'll quickly see how there is a completely different interpretation to events as what is portrayed from within our own propaganda bubble, News agencies such as Al-Jaseera or Chinese CCTV News.


Other discrepencies include - all footage purported to be of the 7/7 bombers that has been released was actually taken from the "dry run" on the 28th of June. The CCTV footage purporting from 7/7 always has the time stamp obscured - so, why would they obscure the time stamp if they had nothing to hide? Of course, it's just a coincidence that the time-stamp was removed.

You can view the "Jaguar" footage here;
I guess it's just another "coincidence" that this footage cuts out exactly as the Jaguar approches the bombers car.

If you knew half of the stuff that has already been proved to be true - and consider that in all likelyhood, it is still going on (a government will not surrender a usefull illegal weapon if it is usefull to them - they will simply deny it's existence - See Isreal's Nuclear Weapons for further proof) - you may draw a different conclusion. That the missing CCTV footage probably shows their M15 minder handing them their Rucksacks (of course all attempts to get the police to investigate the jaguar have fallen on deaf ears - coincidentally)

Also - "coincidentally" - the 76 CCTV cameras from Kings Cross Station just happened to 'malfunction' on the morning of 7/7 between 8.30am - 8.50am (the exact time of the bombings). Wow - What a "coincidence"!

Am I really so "factually unsound" to conclude that maybe - just "maybe" - these aren't coincidences... sure taking one event on it's own you might conclude it was a "bizarre" coincidence - but when you start stacking them up, they make up the most unlikely series of coincidences in the history of coincidences.
Anyone who believes the current "official" version of events is clearly a coincidence theorist.


On May 27th 2003 - there was a report that Saddam Hussien did not have the capabilty for Mobile Weapons Laboratories (to date - no government in the world has "Mobile Weapons Labs) ;
Yet despite the report the Bush Administration continued to insist that Saddam did have such Labs - Evidence, you might say, that they were deliberately lying to make a case for war.
It was claimed that the Anthrax strain could only have come from Iraqi biological weapons labs (despite being an American strain of Anthrax)
And "coincidentally" - the British counter-part Iraqi weapons expert Dr.David Kelly - suffered a very politically convenient death.

And if you understand how the 7/7 bombings gave a massive resurgence for waning support for America's war on terror - you might say the 7/7 bombers did the Politicians a favour - coincidentally of course.

Of course all of these niggling doubts and inconsistencies can simply be laid to rest with those magic 4 words - "It was a coincidence".

[schm0]

Osama Recordings were Fake

The only other legitimate link I could find was this one from the BBC, in which it says that only one of the tapes (not all) was a fake. It is not uncommon for other "unattributed" tapes to be submitted to Arab networks purporting to be one jihadist group or another. In other words, it's not surprising that one tape out of many turned out to be a fake. The only other links I can find backing up your version (i.e. all the tapes) are located on conspiracy sites.

It isn't the journalists who decide what goes into a national news report - it's the editors.
Media is can be a weapon of war - a propaganda tool. (It can also be a legitimate source of valid and truthful information.)

Fixed that for you.

You should read up on how non-western controlled media outlets are reporting on things like the current Libyan Conflict - and you'll quickly see how there is a completely different interpretation to events as what is portrayed from within our own propaganda bubble, News agencies such as Al-Jaseera or Chinese CCTV News.

...Which is why I have several international news feeds in addition to my American ones. Do you know what this country would do if it didn't have it's celebrity gossip? IQs around the country would skyrocket! Can't have that, you know.

Other discrepencies include - all footage purported to be of the 7/7 bombers that has been released was actually taken from the "dry run" on the 28th of June. The CCTV footage purporting from 7/7 always has the time stamp obscured - so, why would they obscure the time stamp if they had nothing to hide? Of course, it's just a coincidence that the time-stamp was removed.

You can view the "Jaguar" footage here;
I guess it's just another "coincidence" that this footage cuts out exactly as the Jaguar approches the bombers car.

If you knew half of the stuff that has already been proved to be true - and consider that in all likelyhood, it is still going on (a government will not surrender a usefull illegal weapon if it is usefull to them - they will simply deny it's existence - See Isreal's Nuclear Weapons for further proof) - you may draw a different conclusion. That the missing CCTV footage probably shows their M15 minder handing them their Rucksacks (of course all attempts to get the police to investigate the jaguar have fallen on deaf ears - coincidentally)

Like I said, I haven't seen any footage. It's intriguing to the point of launching a public inquiry, but I think it's a stretch to assume the positions your questions take: i.e. "they had something to hide" and "it's not a coincidence that the time-stamp was removed." From what I can see of this footage, which was shown in a court of law, this specific train had entered the tunnel prior to the detonation. I'm not sure what a CCTV camera would be doing in a darkened tunnel. Note there are no timestamps or any other markings on this video. Perhaps there was nothing to "remove?"

There's really no context to the footage I'm being shown here. Was this a raw, unedited copy of the footage? Or something released to the public? Regardless, what does it prove? What of the numerous videos showing the bombers gathering materials, or eye-witness accounts, or all the other evidence pointing to the fact they did it? Are they all in on this conspiracy too?

Lastly, what the hell does MKULTRA have anything to do with this? Look! Governments are capable of secret projects and bad things! That's the only possible explanation for what must be happening here?

Also - "coincidentally" - the 76 CCTV cameras from Kings Cross Station just happened to 'malfunction' on the morning of 7/7 between 8.30am - 8.50am (the exact time of the bombings). Wow - What a "coincidence"!

I couldn't find any reports of this in the media, including reports from the inquest. The only sources I can find are other conspiracy sites.

Am I really so "factually unsound" to conclude that maybe - just "maybe" - these aren't coincidences... sure taking one event on it's own you might conclude it was a "bizarre" coincidence - but when you start stacking them up, they make up the most unlikely series of coincidences in the history of coincidences.
Anyone who believes the current "official" version of events is clearly a coincidence theorist.

Yes, when you start saying the word "coincidence" in light of facts, yes, I can see how you can come to your conclusions. However, all you seem to have are questions (some valid) and no answers. In order to validate a theory, one must test it. The short of it is there is simply no evidence to back your allegations.

On May 27th 2003 - there was a report that Saddam Hussien did not have the capabilty for Mobile Weapons Laboratories (to date - no government in the world has "Mobile Weapons Labs) ;
Yet despite the report the Bush Administration continued to insist that Saddam did have such Labs - Evidence, you might say, that they were deliberately lying to make a case for war.
It was claimed that the Anthrax strain could only have come from Iraqi biological weapons labs (despite being an American strain of Anthrax)
And "coincidentally" - the British counter-part Iraqi weapons expert Dr.David Kelly - suffered a very politically convenient death.

An ignored report, an administration official in denial, and a weapons expert who committed suicide... you somehow link them altogether to support your claim without providing any evidence of a link or a supporting argument. You ask the reader to "connect the dots" and let their minds wander on their own without placing any burden of proof on what you allege. The last story is sensational at best, and I'm sure it helped sell a lot of copies of his subsequent book.

And if you understand how the 7/7 bombings gave a massive resurgence for waning support for America's war on terror - you might say the 7/7 bombers did the Politicians a favour - coincidentally of course.

There apparently are only two choices: either what you allege, or it was a "coincidence." That's a false dilemma. Perhaps there are other choices than just those two? Maybe most people don't dig around for every inconsistency and try to string them together to form some sort of pattern? Maybe it was just another strike against the West by those who wish to wage jihad against us for the injustice they feel we have perpetrated on them?

Of course all of these niggling doubts and inconsistencies can simply be laid to rest with those magic 4 words - "It was a coincidence".

Your continued use of the word "coincidence" in quotations and at the conclusion of each of your arguments is merely meant to belittle anything that I attempt to refute. You try to chalk my statements up to a sort of naive misunderstanding of events, when all you do is ask questions and provide no answers. You raise some leading questions, state some provocative things, but fail to do much else constructive to substantiate any sort of global false flag conspiracy.

All that has been proven here is how easy it is to take what is unknown and create a fantastic story to explain it. Man has been doing this since the beginning of time. The sun is a god who rides across the sky in a golden chariot, and the earth is the center of the universe! What a coincidence! In the end, I hardly think we'll ever see eye to eye on this. *sigh*

To each their own, I suppose.

Where's Hana_Kami? I need a hug.

[Dapiek Absaroka]

Y'know Mac, for someone who spends so much time denigrating America you really are starting to sound like the raving dregs of American society though I'm glad it hasn't gotten in the way of your ability to run off on tangents and conjecture in place of genuine proof.

I'm not going to deny Obama took the actions (whatever the details behind them may be) he did to increase his own approval rating, but given the chance to give the kill order for the FBI's most wanted man just about anyone in his position would. And while there are people that demand proof in the form of the photographic evidence or whatnot he has little reason to see a benefit to doing so as the most vocal have already shown themselves to be nothing more then an unpleasable strawgrasping mob driven by blind hatred and prejudices rather then genuine criticisms of his actions. When Obama took steps to prove his US citizenship and even released his own birth certificate twice (and even McCain stepped up to defend his status) none of it was enough to satisfy them and it is likely that taking similar actions in regards to Osama would just result in continuing a pattern of attempts at public appeasement and increasingly unreasonable accusations of falsification.

[Maxi]

I thought this was interesting/cute on the subject.