We’re the show hosts (& writers & producers) of AHC Podcast. We just put out a deeper dive episode on Osama bin Laden for the 20th anniversary of 9/11. It's also our two-year anniversary show. Ask us anything you want about Osama bin Laden...

Would you say that things have turned out more or less how Bin Laden had figured they would after he attacked? I recall him talking at length about how he expected the US to react and that that was his ultimate goal, long term.

I imagine a lot of it did. I mean, I'm sure he didn't want to get killed, but as far as tipping the world's superpower into self-destructive chaos, it's pretty hard to argue that it didn't happen that way. War in Afghanistan, War in Iraq, Civil Liberty encroachments, political strife, further police militarization... all of it. 9/11 has reverberated throughout the US cultural climate, and I feel in almost an entirely negative way. I often wonder what this country would look like without 9/11 having happened and it makes me sad. So yeah, I think he got mostly what he wanted, unfortunately. :(

-MIKEY

Looks like he was successful. Without entering into conspiracy theories (since these have the same footing now as any other mediated reality) I’m curious to know who at home benefited and benefits most from the chaos - as Littlefinger says, “Chaos is a ladder”

I’m curious to know who at home benefited and benefits most from the chaos

The Military-Industrial Complex.

-MIKEY

Do you think that if the FBI and the CIA were sharing information with each other and properly communicating about the hijackers as persons of interest that they would have been apprehended before boarding the planes so to speak?

Absolutely I do. It's at least a whole lot more likely. And I wish the Bush Administration had paid more attention to the warnings that summer. And I wish the Clinton Administration would've done more after the African Embassy bombings and the USS Cole attack. But hindsight is 20/20, I suppose. Plenty of blame to go around.

--MIKEY

Clinton Administration would've done more after the African Embassy bombings and the USS Cole attack.

Mogadishu?

I was referring to the US Embassies that were bombed in Kenya and Tanzania. Al Qaeda took responsibility for these and it really kind of is the opening salvo on America after bin Laden issued his declaration of war.

-MIKEY

No, I mean that Mogadishu and Somalia in the mid-late 90s killed off the US's taste for terrorists in the Middle East, hence why US wouldn't have been interested in costly action vs. Bin Laden and his associates until after a major attack on US soil. 9/11 reignited US will to intervene in those places.

Ah! I see. Yeah, that's a very fair take. The political will for those kinds of actions was definitely diminished after the disaster in Mogadishu.

-MIKEY

What was your favorite thing that was discovered on bin Laden's hard drive?

The ICE AGE movie, undoubtedly! It's such a hilarious, absurd vision. The most notorious terrorist villain in the world chuckling at Ray Romano's Mammoth character.

My favorite thing to do to people that seem beyond normal is to try to humanize them in embarrassing ways. Osama bin Laden is just a guy, at the end of the day. He probably shit himself at least once in his life. And that is endlessly amusing to me.

-MIKEY

Why did they dump his body in the ocean? Wouldn’t the world want some kind of photographic evidence of his demise like they did with Uday and Qusay Hussein?

Yeah, that's something that has always bothered me a bit. Like, I understand that you don't want to have a place for his body that can be enshrined and used for PR. But I think the pictures should be available to disprove anybody that wants to climb into the conspiracy rocket. I know they distributed pictures to some government officials-- and nobody seemed to dispute the veracity of his identity. But still, I think the smarter move would have been to make them public.

That being said, I'm just an amateur podcast host with zero policy experience, so take everything I'm saying with that in mind.

-MIKEY

If they had the body they would’ve shown it. Former head of Pakistani ISI stated he didn’t believe the official story and that bin laden was already dead. The ISI is known for its ties to various terrorist organizations and that makes them very credible in my opinion.

Seymour Hersh wrote a long essay challenging most aspects of the official story. Again this is a well respected, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. Worth a read.

The timing of his “death” was also very very convenient politically speaking for the us president.

Most wanted man ever just after Hitler, the US kills him and doesn’t show a lick of evidence and respecting Islamic tradition is the explanation?

Puleassseeeeeee.

I respect Seymour Hersh. I just tend to think that if OBL wasn't dead, we would have had some video released by now. OBL loved watching coverage of himself. He would have been more than happy to expose a US lie on a global stage, IMO.

That being said, the world is a weird place and anything is possible when it comes to shit like this.

-MIKEY

That's assuming he was still alive. Comment above yours says that people think he was already dead.

Yeah, I just tend to think that OBL was killed in Abbottabad. I doubt they'd create a whole scenario in which they had to (arguably) violate international law to sneak into Pakistan and fake ice a guy that was already dead. Wouldn't it just make more sense to "kill" him back in Afghanistan and avoid the risk of pissing off the global community by entering into Pakistani airspace and what not? It's just overly complicated, IMO.

-MIKEY

Wouldn't that be less of an impact on the then president, Barack Obama? Just telling people "OBL died in a drone strike", as opposed to the heroic covert-ops Seal Team Six story?

Honestly, at that point OBL being dead was win no matter which way you sliced it. There's only marginal difference in the narrative, IMO. But it's all speculation at this point.

-MIKEY

Oh I agree that OBL is definitely dead, that part of Hersh’s story isn’t credible but he still has a few other good points.

As you mentioned OBL would’ve surfaced if he was alive.

That being said yes it’s a crazy world indeed!

Thanks for your response and great AMA btw!

Thank you for the kind words! AMA's are a lot of fun. :)

-MIKEY

The Movie "Zero Dark Thirty" basically said Osama Bin Laden was found because of interrogating Al-Queada prisoners with approved torture interrogation (waterboarding). Is this accurate or inaccurate? Because most sources note that torture is actually ineffective at obtaining reliable information. Thank you.

This is-- as far as I understand it now-- largely inaccurate.

Ali Soufan-- who was an incredibly successful interrogator for the FBI-- argues that the enhanced interrogation techniques led to no actionable information and actually caused a lot of problems. There are a lot of studies that have been done that debunk the idea of torture as a successful interrogation tool. It tends to lead to inaccurate information due to the person being interrogated doing whatever will get them out of the situation-- e.g. confess, give confirmation to an interrogators theory, et cetera.

That being said, I am not an expert and there is debate on the issue.

But aside from the effectiveness issue-- torture is just plain wrong, regardless. Go watch Christopher Hitchens get waterboarded and his reaction. That shit is wrong.

-MIKEY

Christopher Hitchens is the perfect example. Because he was pro water boarding before hand, and it took him all of three seconds to become an ardent detractor of it.

Still waiting for Hannity to try it

Regardless of anyone's politics... a promise is a promise, right? Hannity needs to step up and be a man of his word.

--MIKEY

What does AHC stand for?

It stands for "AssHole Court". When we first started, we couldn't get stuff to take a title with a swearword in it. So we settled on AHC Podcast after we discovered AC Podcast was already taken.

--MIKEY

What were Osama Bin Laden's beliefs that lead him to be a 'terrorist'? Did he truly believe in some greater (religious?) purpose or was he just another human looking for power, wealth etc?

I think he was a true believer. We go into some depth on this in the show, because there was kind of a cultural wave in the Middle East in the mid to late 20th century in which young men were looking to fundamental Islam for answers.

It was kind of akin to the Hippy/Jesus Freak movement here in the US in the 70s.

A lot of this movement stemmed from the writings of Sayyid Qutb, who made his life's work the promotion of literal and figurative jihad.

I think OBL was an earnest believer-- though he obviously wasn't always religious, as demonstrated by the contents of his computer they found after he was killed. LOL!

Why didn’t osama bin laden plan to hit the world trade centers later in the day? They would have killed significantly more people. A lot of people were not at work yet.

That's a good question. I mean, the first impact was at like 8:46, I think. So yeah, had it been a mere hour later, I think it could've been much worse. But-- if I were to make a guess-- it probably had a lot to do with operational constraints. They likely sacrificed some level of timing to coordinate the attacks from different airports. But I'm totally just spitballing here.

--MIKEY

I know that OBL came from money, but to fund all these plots, groups and projects where was that money coming from?

Well, his family (allegedly) cut him off in the 90's. He was getting roughly 7 million a year from them when he was living in Sudan. But honestly, al Qaeda (and other terrorist groups/networks) are pretty competent when it comes to raising money. So, a lot of the money was coming from people and organizations that had nothing to do with OBL's family.

--MIKEY

What is the most surprising thing you've learned about 9/11 recently that you didn't know before?

I've been reading on 9/11 and the global jihadist movement for awhile now, so it's tough to pinpoint the most surprising thing.

But, let me see... I keep going back to it, but the contents of OBL's computer were pretty wild (even though that's only tangentially related to 9/11).

As for 9/11 itself, the sad thing is the litany of health effects that it has had on first responders and people who were present at Ground Zero. It's a national shame, in my opinion, that this isn't discussed more.

-MIKEY

Thanks for the quick response! I agree, the way that the first responders and others in proximity to Ground Zero on that day and in the aftermath have been treated is rather disgraceful.

The sad thing is that as they die off, the odds of anything substantial being done becomes less likely. And it's the same thing with soldiers. There is a mental health crisis amongst veterans that gets a lot of lip-service, but not much in the way of real help (although, I admittedly don't know what that solution even looks like). These people are politically expendable. :(

-MIKEY

Bin Laden was famously found to have a certain group of games and anime on the hard drives recovered in 2011. Was it ever determined if these were watched by the man himself or just his family?

As far as I know, they can't definitively say what programs/movies/videos belonged to who. There was only one computer in the compound and multiple (potential) users. But, just for my own amusement, I just assume that it was OBL masturbating to hentai and nobody else. :)

-MIKEY

Really. Honestly. What good comes out of re-hashing this when there's a very narrow narrative that is allowed to be aired about what happened and who was responsible?

Every time anybody in the media brings up 9/11, it's always answering the "what's", not the WHY? If you ask your typical American why 9/11 happened they'll respond with some retarded, "They hate our freedumb!" response. There's no actual insightful information propagated in any of these regurgitations of historical events.

Everybody acts like the US was a complete innocent party in this. Like we were just minding our own business and some mean Muslim dude stuck a stick in the wheel of our bicycle. There's no talk about the decades of fucking around in the middle east, playing sides in a civil war we had absolutely no business being in. Playing games with dictators so we could steal resources from other people. I grow weary of the never ending stream of propaganda whitewashing 9/11 as if it was a completely one-sided thing. Bin Laden him self published info on why he did it - that never gets any attention (US Army bases in Saudi Arabia and our $6B kickback scheme with Israel to fund their oppression of their neighbors, among other things). It was blowback. Everybody knows it. Why don't we talk about that?

It also wasn't an attack against "America." That's another bullshit narrative. Those people attacked very specific locations and very specific people that were involved in dynamics that we'll probably never fully-know the extent of. They tried to take down the WTC several times. Who and what was there? Why that building? I'm not a conspiracy theorist but this wasn't a random "attack against America" - it was a very specific target. Another thing we're not going to talk about.

And why was Bin Laden's family allowed to leave the country when nobody else could fly? Why aren't we talking about that? Or that the Bush administration basically did nothing against the real perpetrators (the majority of which were Saudi) and instead blew $13 Trillion in Iraq and were never held accountable? George W. Bush caused more innocent death following 9/11 than in 9/11 and was never held accountable.

There's no sense talking about 9/11 when there are so many things that can't or won't be said.

As such, 9/11 is nothing more than a smokescreen, covering up more egregious crimes.

What's your response to that?

We definitely cover blowback and the reality of US military interventions and insurgency funding as problematic. A lot of people talk about that. It isn't a taboo subject, to be honest. I mean, sure a lot of people have a basic response to it and don't want to address the complexities.

But here's the thing, outside of the blowback and military interventionism and all of that... there were thousands of innocent lives that were taken that day in a viscerally stunning fashion. Of course it's upsetting. Of course we're going to cover it twenty years later because it had a huge effect on us.

And we can cover it and still agree with the vast majority of things your saying. Nothing to get upset about, my friend. Give it a shot and see if you like it. If not, that's okay too. Everyone has a right to their opinion.

-MIKEY

Did you rate Osama bin Laden a 9/11 on the horrible scale?

No. But now I wish I had! LOL

​

-MIKEY

Can't imagine the podcast is too comedic, if you missed that one...

Well, to be fair, I never said that we were good at what we do. ;)

-MIKEY

Love the show guys, congrats on two years!

Tell us an asshole that you can't help but have a soft spot for and why, although they are 100% an asshole?

Thank you! Glad you're enjoying the show!

For me, the asshole that I can't help but (sorta) like is Jose Canseco. He's such an insane character. And honestly, there's some nostalgia there from being a massive baseball fan as a kid (even though I was a Dodgers fan and hated the A's).

-MIKEY

Question for each host, which person has had the most surprising score? Like maybe you were sure this person was gonna be a 10 on the AHC scale, but actually ended up significantly lower? Or vice versa?

There were two for me:

Christopher Columbus for how high his score was. And Ty Cobb for how low his score was. I knew Columbus was bad, but jeez. It was so much worse than I even thought. And I thought Ty Cobb would be an absolute monster. But it was more complicated than that.

​

-MIKEY

What do you guys think of the conspiracy theories about 9/11?

I am not a fan of them. On the surface, some might seem plausible. But once you dig in, it's pretty easy to see how absurd they are. I've had friends dive down that rabbit hole and it's tough to convince them otherwise.

At this point, the only 9/11 conspiracy that I think is even plausible is that people in the government knew an attack was going to happen and didn't do anything about it. But even that is a stretch. I'm going to go with Hanlon's Razor on that one: never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

--MIKEY

people in the government knew an attack was going to happen and didn't do anything about it. But even that is a stretch

That kinda happened and was part of the reasoning for the Department of Homeland Security. Making a conspiracy out of that is definitely a stretch though. It's Most likely that analysts were only vaguely aware of what might happen.

Yeah, I don't think it's the case. It likely was just a matter of being unable to connect the dots, to be honest. I'm just saying that it's the only 9/11 conspiracy that I think can even be considered anymore.

-MIKEY

[removed]

Building 7 is weird on its face, but when you talk to structural engineers, it definitely makes more sense. Those fires were raging inside for the entire day and the building took a massive amount of structural damage when the others fell.

The NIST has a pretty good FAQ on it.

--MIKEY

Why is it that after so much time effort and resources to find and capture the man, they simply kill him and dump his body?

I totally understand the sentiment, but I mean, what else were they supposed to do? They dumped him in the ocean to avoid creating a physical spot to enshrine him as a martyr. And it's been a while since civilized nations have posted heads on pikes.

With all that has happened since the attacks on 9/11 (creation of Homeland Security, Patriot Act, NSA spying on citizens, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc), do you believe that it's possible another terror group could potentially organize and set off another attack on the same scale as the WTC attacks?

Absolutely. I mean, it might not have the visual devastation the next go 'round. But there are a lot of things that could happen. I was just listening to another really great podcast (Power Corrupts) and they were discussing a story that happened near Tampa during the Super Bowl. Somebody hacked into a water treatment facility and was making adjustments to add a ton of lye into the drinking water. It was caught in real time, but had they coordinated with other water treatment facilities and weren't detected, you're talking MASS casualty event.

Like I said at the end of the podcast... hold onto your butts Westerners because terrorist attacks are just a part of life now (unfortunately).

-MIKEY

Thanks for the reply. And yeah, I remember hearing about the Tampa treatment plant. I honestly don't think it got the coverage it deserved. There could be any number of reasons for that, though.

I agree with what you said, and I really think it's just a matter of time until something happens again. It may not be the work of a foreign terror group hijacking airplanes again, but with the way technology is progressing and the US seeming to not take cyber attacks as seriously as they should, one person anywhere in the world could be successful at something similar to the failed Tampa attack.

Back in May, Russian hackers broke into federal agencies. Back in July, hackers broke into over 200 US companies, between 800-1500 worldwide. 2 days ago, hackers shut down banks and post offices in New Zealand. I could go on and on; while I realize none of these lead to any deaths, my point is that I think the next big attack that DOES lead to deaths will be a hack of some kind, and I don't believe cyber security worldwide is taking it seriously enough.

Thanks for doing the AMA. Going to check out the podcast!

Yeah, when I heard about the water treatment plant-- HOLY SHIT! I was blown away.

We know that the future of warfare is cyber-oriented, but I don't think people realize how destructive that can be. Look at what the Russians have been doing to Ukrainian power grids and whatnot. It's crazy. And you're right. They have been all up in our shit for the past few years and aren't going to stop anytime soon.

Thanks for the interesting conversation. Hope you like the show.

-MIKEY

Hey guys, great episode as usual. How do you tackle research intensive episodes like this one? Do you all try to find out as much as possible and then gather and compare your results or do you split it up in some way?

Also what was the most surprising thing you found out during the research for this episode?

Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed it!

We split up show writing duties. Randy or I do the research and write the show. Whoever is the narrator is who did the research. Buddy does all of the audio editing and recording expertise stuff.

Some shows can get pretty extensive, research-wise. This was definitely one of them. Thankfully, I had a good base of knowledge from having read a lot on the subject over the past decade.

Still, the most shocking thing was the contents of bin Laden's computer. That shit was hilarious. Definitely added a nice finishing comedic touch on a pretty heavy subject.

--MIKEY

Did Bin laden fight back against the seals? I’ve heard reports that he shot at them and others that say he just ran

I honestly don't know for sure. I've heard the same conflicting stories.

What I will say (and something we talk about in the show) is that Osama bin Laden was not really known for being a hard-as-nails soldier/operator. He admitted at one point that during the Soviet-Afghan war, he fainted when his position was being attacked and woke up to find the Soviets had been repelled. Which, to me, is fucking hilarious!

So take that reputational story and apply it as you will.

-MIKEY

Who lives in a pineapple under the sea?

Spongebob bin Laden!

Could osama beat a bear in a fist fight?

If Osama fought a bear, just imagine the scrawniest kid on your bus in elementary school throwing a temper tantrum against the Rock. Blood and turban everywhere...

-RANDY

Wahdkat promoted Osama Bin Laden to be involved in the 1993 bombing?

Yeah, I think I oversimplified that in the show, to be honest. The truth was that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the first attack and I tied him with OBL (which he was). But it would likely be more accurate to say that KSM and Omar Abdel-Rahman were more involved.

​

--MIKEY

What was their motivation?

Bin Laden used the 1998 Al Shifa attack as a excuse to attack New York.

But why the first attack?

What upset KSM and OAR?

Yeah, great question. It's interesting for sure. We touch on that in the show for sure. There seemed to be a fundamental wave of radical Islam that washed over the middle east around the mid-20th century. I attribute a lot of it to the works of Sayyid Qutb-- who I discuss on this episode. Lawrence Wright discussed this a good bit in the amazing book The Looming Tower. OBL was definitely not the only person who hated the West (and assigned the US as the figurehead of it).

​

-MIKEY

It's seems odd that both attacks targeted the same building.

Also that no reason seems to exist for the attack in 93. Especially considering that reason was given for the second attack in 2001.

Well, to be fair, the WTC was either the most famous building in NYC or the second most famous (after the Empire State Building). It also was a symbol of American Economic power, so it doesn't surprise me that it was chosen as a target. It would have been weird if they attacked some random building in the Upper West Side twice. But the WTC makes sense from a symbolic perspective.

​

-MIKEY

Similar to how Iran got pissed off and cyber attacked the Sands Casino's over the owner's inappropriate words about bombing them, do you guys worry about retaliation about talking about certain figures?

I'd be lying if I said it doesn't cross our minds at some point. But right now, we're just a little indie podcast that can easily be ignored by the show subjects. If we start getting bigger, I'll likely sign up for cybersecurity and jiujitsu classes at my local community center.

-MIKEY

LOL! thanks for the reply guys, always wondered if there was stress behind uploading stuff like this. Gained yourself a follower on Spotify! Keep it up happy 2 yrs

Glad to have you aboard! Feel free to reach out and request show topic ideas. We try to do those as much as possible and shout out the fan who gives it to us. :)

-RANDY

Id love to know more about the guy who had a lot to do with the net neutrality thing, and learn more about that, Ajit Pai was his name i believe. There were TONS of people calling him asshole for a while. Names Matt if you wanna give a shoutout ;)

Fuck Ajit Pai.

-MIKEY

(Great show idea, by the way.)

Is there someone you want to cover on the podcast, but the other hosts won't let you?

Great question!

We decided as a group to avoid politics as much as possible. First, because there are so many political takes out there already. No need to swim into that pool if we don't have to. And second, we don't necessarily agree on everything political-- believe it or not, we can be good friends and disagree on politics.

So, with that in mind, there have been times where I've been more ready to wade into the political pool but decided against it due to our agreement to steer clear of politics when possible.

​

-MIKEY

[removed]

The CIA is certainly problematic. Its foreign interventionism and failure to focus on intelligence gathering have created so many problems. One of those problems is systematic distrust which rots the core of civil society, in my opinion.

That being said, I don't think that 9/11 was an inside job. I think it was a failure of imagination and intelligence gathering. Nothing more, nothing less. I understand the motive that is considered for the "inside job" theory. But I think that's all it is-- a hypothetical motive. But that's just my opinion and everyone has a right to their own, I suppose.

-MIKEY

I've yet to listen to your podcast, so maybe you already have an answer for this one:

During your research did you find anything interesting about the relationship between OBL and Mohammed Omar Mujahid? On what level do you think they were connected?

Also, can you share some of the best/most informative resources (books, articles, documentaries, etc.) that you found along the way?

We don't get into Mohammaed Omar at all really. There was definitely some level of a relationship there-- fellow mujahideen in the Soviet war, commonalities in thought, and the fact that bin Laden had the blessing of Omar's Taliban to operate in Afghanistan. The question, I suppose, is how extensive their ties were. And I'm not really sure, to be honest. Would be interested to hear more about it though.

For me, the best informative resources are a tandem of Lawrence Wright's The Looming Tower and Tim Weiner's Legacy of Ashes. I give them both a shout out in the podcast too. Very informative looks at global jihadism as well as the CIA and the issues that led to 9/11. I've recommended these books to so many people over the past decade and will continue to do so.

Thanks for the great questions!

-MIKEY

Thanks! I've seen the looming tower tv adaptation but gotta get the book too. Omar is an interesting figure for me, as he seems to be a bit of a conflicting personality from what little I've read about him. Kuddos on your work and keep at it.

Definitely do! The book is INFINITELY better than the series. Not that the series was bad. It just couldn't possibly be as extensive as the book.

-MIKEY

Why did the Media share a fake picture of his dead body?

PS: I'm not into conspiracy theories, I'm sure the man is very likely dead and was indeed killed by US soldiers. It just that little detail that bugs me.

I'm honestly not aware of that-- not saying that it didn't happen, I just haven't heard that before. I'll have to look into it.

--MIKEY

I've read it in an article in Science&Vie (a french scientific magazine) back when it happened, where someone ran the picture through idk which analysis method and concluded it was fabricated. I'd post the article if I still had it

Cool. Please do. I'm intrigued.

--MIKEY

Update : so i did a quick run through my old magazines but couldn't find the one (paper copy, and it was in French anyway), but a quick google search yielded these two articles from back then that more or less state the same but with more context.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/02/osama-bin-laden-photo-fake

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/03/bin.laden.fake.photo/index.html

I find it interesting because i remember that picture became iconic for a while and no other pictures (real or otherwise) confirming the event were as widespread, if at all.

Either way, the man was a dark chapter in the world's history, with all his complexity, a serious reading into his life away from the glorification of some and vilification of others needs to be done if we hope to ever understand the phenomena associated with him. Best of luck to you guys.

Thanks for the links and the kind words! Will definitely take a look at this.

--MIKEY