Pages: (2) [1] 2  ( Go to first unread post )

 How Many **** Does It Take To Pull A 911
xtratabasco
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 02:15 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



Now before you censor me, hear me out. And no, I'm not anti-Jew or anti any religon for that matter, hell, just look at insane Christian Bush who is ruining this country.


Everytime I research 911 I keep coming up with Jews in key positions involving 911. We all know the Jews have a vested interest in the War on Terror for obvious reasons, and 911 was the reason we went to war in the first place.

We also know that 90% of PNAC are Jews like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol and good old Mr. Chertoff of Homeland Security is a dual citizen Jew. Then we got Silverstein the lease holder, he a Jew and Bush too? http://www.texemarrs.com/george_w_bush_zio...ouble_agent.htm



This article is long but worth the read, pay attention to Mr. Lewis Eisenberg.




another government lie about 9-11, building 7
Category: News & Opinion (Specific) Topic: Conspiracy: 9/11 - Alleged Coverups
Synopsis: World Trade Center 7 was originally meant to implode simultaneously with the North Tower on 9/11
Source: http://PositionToKnow.com/S-11/doc/...ein_Redux_2.rtf
Published: April 1, 2005 Author: Jeremy Baker
For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.


If I was a gambling man I’d bet the farm. WTC 7 was originally meant to collapse a few seconds after the North Tower hit the ground. Not seven hours later. I can’t think of a single reason that these guys would want to keep this World Trade Center complex building intact all day long.

9/11 skeptics, well versed in this esoteric field, know what I’m talking about. Something went very wrong that day. Some signal got crossed, maybe there was sabotage from within, we’ll probably never really know for sure. But if we accept, as most of these fine researchers, writers and activists do, that the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were finished off with preplanted explosives (the coup de grace in what was essentially an inside job), then it’s the only scenario that fits.

Think about it. How would it possibly benefit the perpetrators to wait hours, until late in the day, to finally push the button on Building 7? The whole world would be watching. That handy cloud of powdered debris that enveloped lower Manhattan would be long gone, your cover all but blown. Why draw out the spectacle any longer than necessary?

And it explains some things that have always needed explaining. For instance, we have several photographs of marginal, struggling fires burning on the 7th and 12th floors of Building 7, ones that, according to “official” reports, were supposed to have melted the building and brought it crashing down. But does that scenario really make any sense at all? Did it ever? Could it be, instead, that these inconsequential fires in Building 7 provide us with clues about what was really going on inside? Doesn’t the following scenario make more sense: when WTC 7 failed to collapse on schedule, the conspirators scrambled to bring the demolition system back on line. With their original plan in ruins, they finally made the decision to set fires in WTC 7 for the same reason they’d been set by the planes in the towers: to provide a plausible pretext for the building’s forthcoming demolition.

But the fires, set by desperate men in a tight spot, never quite caught on the way they should have. But why? If the original plan had been (for some inexplicable reason) to keep WTC 7 intact all day long and start fires in the afternoon that could be blamed for the collapse of the building, wouldn’t they have lit up WTC 7 like a roman candle to enhance the effect? We know that these guys can build a serious fire when they apply themselves. We have the photos of WTC 5 and 6 burning like blast furnaces to prove it. But the well planned and executed arson in these buildings required time and resources that the guys in Building 7, working on the sly, just weren’t able to produce on such short notice, especially when the building was surrounded by chaos, emergency workers and a moonscape of destruction. So they threw together what fires they could using whatever they had on hand and then beat feet for Fleet Street. The resulting blazes, barely discernable from without, took hours to grow to the size necessary to sustain the illusion (barely) that, like the Twin Towers, WTC 7 just couldn’t stand the heat. And then, late in the day and with lower Manhattan in lockdown, the Keystone Konspirators finally pulled the plug on 7 at 5:25 PM.

This revealing fact, that fires in Building 7 weren’t even called in until late in the day (approx. 3 PM), is a glaring 9/11 anomaly because of how harshly it conflicts with “official” reports that raging fires were ignited by debris from Tower One’s collapse that morning. But what kind of “raging” fire takes hours to build to even a modest size before finally getting “called in” late in the day?

Officials have offered speculations on WTC 7's (and the towers) unprecedented vulnerability to fire but nothing that’s ever held water. And this story about the 40,000 gallons of diesel fuel catching on fire and burning down the house, what nonsense. If that gas tank became involved there wouldn’t have been a fire, there would have been an explosion (a big one), and then a fire, a huge fire. And it’s for this reason that the perps would never have torched the diesel tank to set their little dummy blaze. That kind of inferno would damage explosive systems and cause all kinds of problems. Remember, their goal was the total destruction of the entire structure as planned, not an unwieldy blaze within. But these guys knew better and made sure to set their fires well above the huge diesel tank on ground level.

WTC 7 still on its feet hours after the attacks was problematic in other ways. The “official” story has always been that the North Tower’s plummeting debris impacted WTC 7 (which was one full city block from the North Tower with WTC 6 standing in between) and ignited a dynamic inferno that caused the 47 story, steel framed structure to suddenly drop like a stone hours later, a phenomenon unprecedented in the history of firefighting and one that occurred not once but three times on September 11th. But Building 7's longevity undoubtedly increased the likelihood of people noticing and possibly photographing the obvious lack of damage to Building 7 from the collapse of Tower One. Isn’t it extremely suspicious that absolutely no photographs of WTC 7's “damaged” face have ever been released to the public? The building was standing there all day long. Isn’t it more likely that when WTC 7 didn’t go down on schedule, Plan B became containment, much like it had been at the Pentagon (and Oklahoma city for that matter). What few photogs, film crews or onlookers that penetrated ground zero would have their materials confiscated for “security purposes.”

But there were also conflicting reports about a man said to have been the only person to die in the collapse of WTC 7. The US House of Representatives website posted a tribute to Secret Service Special Officer Craig Miller whose body was found in the rubble of Building 7. According to this posting, Officer Miller apparently died during the “rescue effort” that day. After the Towers were hit, Building 7 (the Manhattan HQ of the Secret Service) was quickly evacuated and everyone survived, all except this lone SS guy. Not a firefighter. Not a rescue worker or a cop. Other accounts record no fatalities whatsoever in 7. Why the confusion? There was either a body in the rubble or there wasn’t. Was an autopsy done on this man?

And who on earth was this SS guy rescuing? WTC 7 had been evacuated. Are Secret Service officers mandated to rescue people from (empty) burning buildings? The fires in WTC 7 were burning on the floors just above and below Secret Service offices on the 9th and 10th floors. Could this man have played a role in the days events that got him into trouble? Could he have been an amateur arsonist who got too close to his fire? The story of Larry Silverstein claiming to have ‘pulled’ WTC 7 is well known among 9/11 researchers. The only explanation that’s ever been offered in Silverstein’s defense was that he meant ‘pull’ the firefighters out of the “dangerously burning” building. But if that were true, why didn’t this Secret Service guy get the message? But then no nostalgic look back on WTC 7 (and the Trade Center in general) is complete without reacquainting ourselves with the inscrutable Manhattan real estate mogul Larry Silverstein. Sooner or later, history is going to have to decide how it remembers this guy. With all we’ve learned about September 11th there are still only a handful of actual, individual suspects. I’d like to nominate Mr. Silverstein to this elite fraternity.

World Trade Center 7, or the Solomon Brothers Building, was owned by Silverstein Properties and had been the headquarters of his development company, Westfield America, for years. But it also housed Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM), a reinforced, Arab proof control center oddly located at the number one terrorist target in the country (a baffling choice of locations considering that the WTC had already been attacked once in 1993). This incomprehensible (and very “unheroic”) decision proved its absurdity on 9/11 when, in the midst of an actual emergency, Giuliani was unable to access his control center for obvious reasons.

WTC 7 also hosted offices of the DoD, the IRS and the SEC, as well as a handful of private financial institutions. In addition, 7 was the storage center for millions of files on active cases involving organized crime, international drug dealing, money laundering and terrorism, all of which have demonstrable links to US intelligence. So a New York Times report that Building 7 was also the secret location of the largest domestic CIA station outside of the District of Columbia probably shouldn’t come as a surprise. The addition of “the agency” to this already scintillating list of tenants would appear to make WTC 7 a kind of nexus for what many researchers consider to be key entities in this sprawling conspiracy. But the fact that Larry Silverstein was the CIA’s secret NYC landlord for years is a point I made sure to jot down too.

Some researchers have made the shocking claim that the OEM was just a cover for its real purpose, the conspirators attack operations center (now that would explain the poor choice of locations). This recently armored facility, high on the 23rd floor, had a bird’s eye view of the unfolding spectacle, the perfect vantage point from which to guide the planes to their targets and fine tune the demolition strategy for the Twin Towers (when to detonate, which floors to blast first, etc.). But once you’ve cooly orchestrated the collapse of the safely distant South Tower (murdering hundreds of fleeing office workers and firefighters) and programmed the explosives in the North Tower, doesn’t it then make sense to set the timers, vacate the building, say a Hail Mary and then watch the North Tower and WTC 7 collapse at the same time, neatly wrapping up the mornings work? Whatever Giuliani’s control center had been used for, the evidence would be obliterated, along with years of CIA secrets, government files and the ghosts of WTC 7.

If this dizzying, Danté-esque spectacle is, in fact, a reality and does, amazingly, feature “America’s Mayor” in a leading role, what do we know about Giuliani’s movements at the time? Officially, he was at a makeshift command post at 75 Barclay Street until just before the collapses when he claims that he and his staff were evacuated from the building. He later told Peter Jennings, “We were told that the WTC was gonna collapse,” a prophetic remark considering the fact that no steel framed highrise had ever collapsed due to fire before. But WTC 7 is on Barclay Street, just at the evacuation perimeter, proving that Giuliani was indeed in the area at the time. But he was evacuating the area, not setting up shop in WTC 7 for a hard day of directing traffic from above.

This idea, that the mayor’s command bunker was meant to be used throughout the day before being demolished, I just don’t see it. The mayor of New York City (or whomever), orchestrating the aftermath of 9/11 in the upper floors of a burning building? And what would he (they) be doing up there? Seems to me that the day’s to-do list had already been checked off. And for the life of me, I just can’t imagine that the original plan would ever have included the re-entry of any of the structures after the devastation that occurred earlier.

There is, in addition, a compelling connection to be made between the mayor’s OEM and the fires in WTC 7. The lower of the two fires in WTC 7 was on floor 7, the location of the OEM’s emergency generators. If the arsonists were indeed OEM men, they would not only have had access to this floor, they would also have had a ready supply of accellerant (i.e. gasoline) at their disposal (the upper fire was on one of 3 floors used by the SEC).

So the mayor (and others) may have had access to his command bunker after all, but just long enough for it to serve its purposes that morning. And, as for being told that “the WTC was gonna collapse,” well, if you already knew this for a fact because you were gonna make it collapse, it’s as good an excuse as any to cover a timely exit.

As 9/11 researchers are well aware, Larry Silverstein took over control of the World Trade Center just a few weeks before the attacks of 9/11. After ramping up the insurance on the complex (an act of uncanny foresight considering what was to come) he then set to work replacing security personnel in a building complex that hadn’t changed hands in thirty years and had never before been privately controlled. His 2001 sweetheart deal with the Port Authority and the City of New York was for a 99 year lease worth much more than the $3.2 billion he and his firm had contracted for. And later, when he tried to sue the insurance companies claiming that two planes means two terrorist attacks, therefore twice the settlement (bringing the total, in Silverstein’s mind, to $7.2 billion), the courts cried foul and sent Larry packing (after the attacks, one WTC insurer sued Silverstein for apparently paying lobbyists to try to limit his liability to the victims families). Funny, I don’t remember the headline; “Manhattan Tycoon Exploits National Tragedy for Personal Gain” appearing anywhere after 9/11.

But the real specter haunting Larry Silverstein involves a growing body of evidence that Zionist extremists may’ve had a hand in the attacks of 9/11. There are some who believe that Mossad (Israeli intelligence) fingerprints are all over the attacks, and I’m not so sure I disagree. Israel has a well documented history of framing Arabs for attacks on Americans, a fact that never seemed to make its way into the mainstream mind in the months after September 11th. And the Zionist fanatics who’ve pulled off this kind of “op” in the past have a history of tapping the diaspora for talent. And Larry Silverstein is just their kind of guy.

Ex-president of the United Jewish Appeal (the largest Israeli fundraiser in the US) and a highly connected supporter of Israel, Silverstein has strong ties to the Israeli political and business establishments. His colleague, another UJA leader, Lewis Eisenberg — former chairman of the Port Authority, finance chairman for the RNC and former VP of AIPAC (American/Israeli PAC) — negotiated the deal that put the WTC in Silverstein’s control. Add to this the many examples of Israeli foreknowledge of and proximity to the attacks and the plot begins to thicken considerably.

There are a host of disturbing ties between Israeli hardliners and September 11th (too many to list in detail here) but none more compelling than the basic issue of motive. It simply cannot be argued that no single player stood to gain more from the attacks (or, more accurately, from the response to the attacks) than the Zionist hardliners who’ve been envisioning a Mideast under their control for decades. For many years before 9/11, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol and other powerful, highly placed American Zionists had advocated for increasingly aggressive US military actions towards a host of Muslim states. All that was needed to get the ball rolling was the Pearl Harbor-like event mentioned so often in their pre-9/11 literature. And it’s working. Our bludgeoning of Afghanistan and Iraq represent bold steps towards the fulfillment of the sulphurous neo-con agenda.

Given the fact that Silverstein’s name pops up in many dark corners of the 9/11 shadow play, is it really unfair to view him as a “person of interest” in the horrendous crime and coverup of September 11th? And if he was a player in a subterfuge of this magnitude, is it really such a stretch to imagine that he might have been “in the room” when the pseudo-hijackings were being planned? And if he was, might he have suggested tweaking the plan just a little to include a detour by Flight 175 south? Knowing that the Air Force would be AWOL that morning, the plane’s scenic side trip would surely be, at worse, a minor adjustment — but with major implications. This one, small alteration to the aircraft’s flight plan would not only result in the planes hitting from opposite directions, it would also increase the length of time between the first and second hits. And these two points combined might go a long way to supporting Silverstein’s claim of two separate terrorist events.

It’s a matter of record. Flight 175 (the second plane to strike the WTC) came barreling out of the north, flew south far past Manhattan before circling back towards the city, a peculiar deviation that took the plane a good fifteen minutes or so out of its way. This odd, time wasting and risky maneuver has never been explained. Certainly the “hijackers” wouldn’t have thought it was a good idea. Wouldn’t they want to secure the objective ASAP before the fighter jets showed up? It just doesn’t compute. But there’s one man who might’ve done very well by this short trip south if only his fortunes had unfolded according to plan in the courtroom. And all Silverstein had to do was give Dov Zakheim a call.

With close ties to the Israeli government and reported duel Israeli/American citizenship, Bush’s Texas buddy and undersecretary of state, Dov Zakheim, boasts a long list of impressive credentials. Ex-DoD CFO (chief financial officer), Zakheim joined the Pentagon staff in May, 2001, shortly before the attacks and at a time when the Pentagon couldn’t account for $3 trillion in spending. A longtime DoD consultant and neo-con insider, he’s also a senior figure at the Heritage Foundation, the Center for International and Strategic Studies and the Center for Security Policy — not to mention the Council on Foreign Relations and the PNAC. But before his Pentagon gig, he was also VP of Systems Planning Corporation and CEO of one of its subsidiaries. SPC is a high-tech outfit that specializes in, among other things, the remote control commandeering of aircraft and the technical support required for live flight military exercises.

This bizarre but entirely viable theory, that some or all of the “hijacked” passenger jets on 9/11 had been remotely commandeered and guided to their targets, has been (despite its Buck Rogers kind of aspect) a key speculation among the very best 9/11 researchers. This technology has been with us for decades and Zakheim’s SPC specializes in it. SPC’s Flight Termination System is a fully programmable tool to retrieve aircraft remotely. But this technology is also a key element in the kind of live flight war games the military was conveniently conducting on 9/11. These cold war drills in Northern Canada and Alaska drew interceptors away fron the Northeast US and, using false radar blips, effectively paralyzed defenders who might otherwise have reached their targets. But it also eliminated the need for a peculiar and very risky general “stand down” order from Pentagon brass during the attacks, a command that would create disbelief and suspicion among hundreds of patriotic military people.

A couple of years ago, PBS aired a program entitled “America Rebuilds,” a documentary detailing the cleanup effort at ground zero. The comments Larry Silverstein made in an interview in this program have become a “point of interest” among 9/11 researchers and I’ve enjoyed watching this story steadily gain a following. Specifically, he described being on the phone with the FDNY commander and coming to the conclusion that there had “been such terrible loss of life maybe the smartest thing to do is, is ‘pull’ it,” (referring to WTC 7). Then, according to Silverstein, “they made that decision to ‘pull’ and we watched the building collapse” (the same documentary quotes a demo worker: “well, we’re getting ready to ‘pull’ building 6" moments before demolishing its burnt out carcass, a comment that would appear to support the meaning of the industry term ‘pull’).

Many have asked how he could possibly have been so careless as to make such an admission publicly. But what if circumstances compelled him to do so? What if his comments were a discrete response to growing suspicions surrounding the botched attempt to ‘pull’ WTC 7 earlier in the day? The powers-that-be have brazenly used PBS programming to spin other aspects of 9/11. The NOVA program that espoused the theory of the “pancaking” of the Twin Tower’s floors is infamous in the 9/11 skeptics community. PBS programs relating to 9/11 typically feature “experts” who unanimously support the party line. I remember one such “authority” solemnly offering his professional opinion that the paper we saw falling like confetti as the WTC burned undoubtedly contributed to the raging fires within and played a significant role in the collapse of the towers!

With WTC 7's obvious demolition caught on film from at least three excellent perspectives, it’s an understatement to say that Silverstein and his cohorts had a big problem on their hands. Could it be that his comments about ‘pulling’ WTC 7 were a carefully choreographed “hang out” of the issue? Using Karl Rove-like sleight of hand, he offers a vague accounting of the anomaly delivered to us on an almost subconscious level. I’ve watched that video clip hundreds of times and to this day I hear only one thing: that he and his people made the decision to demolish WTC 7 citing the “terrible loss of life” suffered earlier that day. His body language, his wording, his tone, all seem to point to this one terrible conclusion. Paradoxically, his comments may have been intended to steer us in the exact opposite direction: that, despite how it may have appeared, heroes in high places stepped up and made the tough choices.

The expression ‘pull’ relates to the word ‘demolition’ the same way that the expression ‘wind up’ relates to the word ‘pitch.’ In both cases they represent one event occurring in two stages. In this sense, Silverstein’s use of the word ‘pull’ to mean ‘demolition’ seems clear and may also have served to cover the sudden and suspicious evacuation of rescue personnel from the disaster zone shortly before WTC 7's bizarre suicide — a necessity when you’re about to demolish a building. A photographer on the scene described the evacuation of firefighters as they “prepared for the collapse of Building 7...I was 150 yards away when I saw the firefighters raising the flag.” Excuse me? Steel framed highrises don’t collapse! Firemen, knowing this to be true, typically approach steelframed buildings (just like they did the towers that morning), especially if the structures are only marginally involved. Isn’t it highly suspicious that the firefighters seemingly just gave up on this exceedingly important and valuable government building that had only modest fires burning within? Doesn’t this fact support the theory that WTC 7 was essentially a crime scene that needed to be destroyed?

This man’s statement (which, by the way, proves that photographers weren’t barred from the scene and could very well have produced images of WTC 7's “debris damage”) describes the behavior of workers who were evacuating a building that was about to be demolished, not trained emergency workers worried about something that never happens. Silverstein’s remarks replace this problematic scenario with the tall tale of wise (and clairvoyant) public servants acting in the nick of time to save lives (not scatter potential witnesses). Either way Mr. Silverstein has some explaining to do.

The plan to obscure WTC 7's implosion with the billowing dust cloud created by the collapse of Tower One is too good an idea for these guys not to have considered. And it would have worked like a charm. The flattened 32 story Marriott Vista hotel (or WTC 3), nestled snugly between the towers, is long forgotten in a world that barely remembers the life and times of Building 7. If WTC 7 being ‘pulled’ when it was mostly hidden from view (and as chaos reigned on the streets below) wasn’t the original plan, it should’ve been. And considering all the hubbub created by its remaining intact, it makes sense that this was indeed the original idea.

The unintended survival of WTC 7, shortlived though it was, has proven itself to be a gift from providence to the good people of the world on a day when it seemed as though providence had abandoned us. Those of us who know that 9/11 was conceived, written and directed by, well, the usual suspects, find, in Building 7 and it’s dark pedigree, the Achilles heel in the “official” fairy tale sold us in the wake of the most vile deception history has ever recorded. Let’s hope we make the most of this gift.

If you can judge the substance of a new paradigm by how thoroughly it displaces an old one, than maybe we’re onto something here. Since this possibility occurred to me, I simply cannot remember the WTC disaster the way I used to; that for some inexplicable reason Building 7 just lingered for hours after the attacks before they finally ‘pulled’ it. And after years of sifting through this material and scrutinizing 9/11, I will never again see WTC 7 as anything other than what it surely was. A dud. An epic, 47 story, steel-belted dud that, later that day, blew up in Larry Silverstein’s hand.

Copyright 2005 Darkprints

For a video of Silverstein’s comments about ‘pulling’ WTC 7, go to: http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm

To see three excellent videos of WTC 7 imploding, go to: http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html


Top
FM258
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 03:38 AM


Unregistered









Excellent post. clap.gif
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 03:43 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (FM258 @ Apr 27 2006, 03:38 AM)
Excellent post.  clap.gif

Im really interested in peoples take on this subject. I sent it out to about 50 friends and have had some nasty replies back. I will post them when I get enough of them. It seems to be a touchy subject for some, but truth should not give way to uncomfertable areas of discussion.

Also, keep in mind that Im not accusing ALL Jews, however, Good Jews have a moral responsibility to fight evil Jews or Zionists who harm others in an evil way just as I have a moral responsibility as a Christian to fight those who use the name of Christ to harm others, as Bush and company have been doing.

Jews that sit on the sidelines and watch other Jews hurt people are just as guilty as those that actually do, just as I would be if I decided to ignore what is happening to this country by insane, evil Christians.

Jews, as far as I know have just as much access to information as the rest of us, so copouts arent allowed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today I can post this information, tommorow I may not be able to.





TOTAL EMERGENCY ALERT ! ! !

HATE BILL COULD PASS AT ANY TIME!

By Rev. Ted Pike

An extremely dangerous situation now exists in Congress.

Sen. Edward Kennedy says he can pass the federal "anti-hate" bill (approved by the House last fall) in the Senate. He wants to do it just as soon as the Sex Offenders Registration Act, S.1086, is introduced.

If the hate bill is passed, America will become an "anti-hate" bureaucracy, ending free speech. This is what has happened in Canada, Australia, and many European countries under similar hate legislation.

The Republicans could introduce the Sex Offenders bill at any time, giving Kennedy his opportunity.

It is vital that you call all 100 senators, protesting the hate bill!

Call toll free 1-888-355-3588, toll 1-202-225-3121.

For much more information and a list of the 100 U.S. Senators come to www.truthtellers.org.



This post has been edited by xtratabasco on Apr 27 2006, 04:40 AM
Top
dave3006
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 01:45 PM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 49
Member No.: 332
Joined: 27-February 06



xtratabasco, this is an excellent article. I am a Christian. I believe, based on the Bible, that Israel has the right to the land they occupy. It is not the Palestinian's land. God gave it to the Jews.

That being said, I think your statements are not anti-semetic. Although I support the Jewish state, they are capable of doing wrong. It, to me, seems that they had an incredible motive to get the USA to fight their battles for them by inciting us against the Arabs. You can be supportive of the Jews without giving them a free pass to do evil.

I think there is a chance that you are right about the Mossad connection. And, by the way, I think GWB is the worst president in the history of the USA. If he is a Christian, he is a very dumb one. I question if his "Christianity" is manufactured to gain Christian votes. Anyway, just because someone believes in Christ, it does not make them smart in other areas or a good leader.
Top
Roxdog
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 02:10 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 4,083
Member No.: 4
Joined: 10-February 06



QUOTE
God gave it to the Jews.

I simply cannot accept this. Which Jews did God give the land to? All of them? What about the ones that state the Torah does not allow for a Jewish State? Did God give the land to those Jews too? What about Israelites whose lineage does not trace back to Judea? Are they the same Jews God gave the land to? God-Approved Government...must be nice.

user posted image


xtratabasco, thumbsup.gif
Top
popol vuh
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 02:15 PM


Veteran


Group: Banned
Posts: 1,270
Member No.: 11
Joined: 10-February 06



I'm more interested in getting the responsible parties than I am in trying to decipher which particular group/subgroup/sect/etc they belong to. That's a moot point if they're brought to justice, wouldn't you say?

The question remains, what if whoever is really pulling the strings is trying to make it look like a particular group is responsible to draw attention away from themselves?

If they could pull of 911, they could sure as hell plan in advance who they wish to frame, too.

Just like I don't trust the "Arabs did it" blanket approach put forth by the government, I don't think the "Jews did it" angle is worthy of our consideration either.

If there are Jews involved, prosecute them, ditto Arabs, ditto White Americans males, ditto African American females.

I want the guilty parties held responsible even if they are sheepdogs.
Top
Sanders
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 02:46 PM


Unregistered









Larry Silverstein's faith really shouldn't be an issue, it is Circumstantial. His greed is enough of a motivating factor for participating.

The fact that certain people that have held top positions in the Bush administration are on record calling for the invasion of Israel's enemies however, is hard to ignore.

On a side note, the reason there is such a problem is not because these religions are so different, it is because they are so much the same and share the same roots. Christianity, Judeaism and Islam all derive from Abraham. Muslims believe in Moses and even Jesus Christ, and Jerusalem is a holy site not just to Jews, but to Christians and Muslims as well.

Top
dave3006
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 03:10 PM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 49
Member No.: 332
Joined: 27-February 06



I am not going to take the bait and turn this thread into a religious debate. My point was that I am a strong supporter of Israel and a Christian AND I do not think it is anti-semetic to question the possible role of the Mossad or other illegal Jewish roles in 9/11. I also can't even stand to look at GWB even though he claims to be a Christian.

It is not wrong to question.
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 05:04 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (dave3006 @ Apr 27 2006, 03:10 PM)
I am not going to take the bait and turn this thread into a religious debate. My point was that I am a strong supporter of Israel and a Christian AND I do not think it is anti-semetic to question the possible role of the Mossad or other illegal Jewish roles in 9/11. I also can't even stand to look at GWB even though he claims to be a Christian.

It is not wrong to question.

Your right and I dont think Sanders read the article. esp these points.


Ex-president of the United Jewish Appeal (the largest Israeli fundraiser in the US) and a highly connected supporter of Israel, Silverstein has strong ties to the Israeli political and business establishments. His colleague, another UJA leader, Lewis Eisenberg — former chairman of the Port Authority, finance chairman for the RNC and former VP of AIPAC (American/Israeli PAC) — negotiated the deal that put the WTC in Silverstein’s control. Add to this the many examples of Israeli foreknowledge of and proximity to the attacks and the plot begins to thicken considerably.


and


There are a host of disturbing ties between Israeli hardliners and September 11th (too many to list in detail here) but none more compelling than the basic issue of motive. It simply cannot be argued that no single player stood to gain more from the attacks (or, more accurately, from the response to the attacks) than the Zionist hardliners who’ve been envisioning a Mideast under their control for decades. For many years before 9/11, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol and other powerful, highly placed American Zionists had advocated for increasingly aggressive US military actions towards a host of Muslim states. All that was needed to get the ball rolling was the Pearl Harbor-like event mentioned so often in their pre-9/11 literature. And it’s working. Our bludgeoning of Afghanistan and Iraq represent bold steps towards the fulfillment of the sulphurous neo-con agenda.

Given the fact that Silverstein’s name pops up in many dark corners of the 9/11 shadow play, is it really unfair to view him as a “person of interest” in the horrendous crime and coverup of September 11th? And if he was a player in a subterfuge of this magnitude, is it really such a stretch to imagine that he might have been “in the room” when the pseudo-hijackings were being planned? And if he was, might he have suggested tweaking the plan just a little to include a detour by Flight 175 south? Knowing that the Air Force would be AWOL that morning, the plane’s scenic side trip would surely be, at worse, a minor adjustment — but with major implications. This one, small alteration to the aircraft’s flight plan would not only result in the planes hitting from opposite directions, it would also increase the length of time between the first and second hits. And these two points combined might go a long way to supporting Silverstein’s claim of two separate terrorist events.


With close ties to the Israeli government and reported duel Israeli/American citizenship, Bush’s Texas buddy and undersecretary of state, Dov Zakheim, boasts a long list of impressive credentials. Ex-DoD CFO (chief financial officer), Zakheim joined the Pentagon staff in May, 2001, shortly before the attacks and at a time when the Pentagon couldn’t account for $3 trillion in spending. A longtime DoD consultant and neo-con insider, he’s also a senior figure at the Heritage Foundation, the Center for International and Strategic Studies and the Center for Security Policy — not to mention the Council on Foreign Relations and the PNAC. But before his Pentagon gig, he was also VP of Systems Planning Corporation and CEO of one of its subsidiaries. SPC is a high-tech outfit that specializes in, among other things, the remote control commandeering of aircraft and the technical support required for live flight military exercises.





sometimes you gotta spoon feed the blind. flex.gif

To me its a no brainer.

you gatta have a motive, 3 trillion missing dollars, control of oil and pipelines, and freeing of Israel from thier eneimes and all the fingers go back to key players.



Top
DemolitionCrew
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 05:32 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,725
Member No.: 1,250
Joined: 14-April 06



Let us not forget this story...

http://www.sundayherald.com/37707

Top
FinalStrike
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 05:38 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,345
Member No.: 888
Joined: 29-March 06



they are not really jews-

its just to make you think "ITS THE JEWS"


nope thats just a viel for nasty mindset they all share.
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Apr 27 2006, 05:48 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (DemolitionCrew @ Apr 27 2006, 05:32 PM)
Let us not forget this story...

http://www.sundayherald.com/37707

Yes and just remember that Chertoff let them go.

CHERTOFF CREATED TERROR PRETEXTS FOR US POLICE STATE
Patrick Briley February 21, 2005 NewsWithViews.com

Michael Chertoff was appointed to continue the cover up of 911,and Not only was he instrumental in covering up the financials ties of Muslims in his defense as an attorney, he help deport the dancing Israelis who videod the burning trade center, later proved Mossad agents,and he also helped establish torture as pointed out in the Nation:








Five Israelis were seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 ...




Were they part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 9/11 hijackers and knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA? Neil Mackay investigates



THERE was ruin and terror in Manhattan, but, over the Hudson River in New Jersey, a handful of men were dancing. As the World Trade Centre burned and crumpled, the five men celebrated and filmed the worst atrocity ever committed on American soil as it played out before their eyes.

Who do you think they were? Palestinians? Saudis? Iraqis, even? Al-Qaeda, surely? Wrong on all counts. They were Israelis – and at least two of them were Israeli intelligence agents, working for Mossad, the equivalent of MI6 or the CIA.

Their discovery and arrest that morning is a matter of indisputable fact. To those who have investigated just what the Israelis were up to that day, the case raises one dreadful possibility: that Israeli intelligence had been shadowing the al-Qaeda hijackers as they moved from the Middle East through Europe and into America where they trained as pilots and prepared to suicide-bomb the symbolic heart of the United States. And the motive? To bind America in blood and mutual suffering to the Israeli cause.

After the attacks on New York and Washington, the former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was asked what the terrorist strikes would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said: “It’s very good.” Then he corrected himself, adding: “Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans].”

If Israel’s closest ally felt the collective pain of mass civilian deaths at the hands of terrorists, then Israel would have an unbreakable bond with the world’s only hyperpower and an effective free hand in dealing with the Palestinian terrorists who had been murdering its innocent civilians as the second intifada dragged on throughout 2001.

It’s not surprising that the New Jersey housewife who first spotted the five Israelis and their white van wants to preserve her anonymity. She’s insisted that she only be identified as Maria. A neighbour in her apartment building had called her just after the first strike on the Twin Towers. Maria grabbed a pair of binoculars and, like millions across the world, she watched the horror of the day unfold.

As she gazed at the burning towers, she noticed a group of men kneeling on the roof of a white van in her parking lot. Here’s her recollection: “They seemed to be taking a movie. They were like happy, you know ... they didn’t look shocked to me. I thought it was strange.”

Maria jotted down the van’s registration and called the police. The FBI was alerted and soon there was a statewide all points bulletin put out for the apprehension of the van and its occupants. The cops traced the number, establishing that it belonged to a company called Urban Moving.

Police Chief John Schmidig said: “We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side. Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down.”

By 4pm on the afternoon of September 11, the van was spotted near New Jersey’s Giants stadium. A squad car pulled it over and inside were five men in their 20s. They were hustled out of the car with guns levelled at their heads and handcuffed.

In the car was $4700 in cash, a couple of foreign passports and a pair of box cutters – the concealed Stanley Knife-type blades used by the 19 hijackers who’d flown jetliners into the World Trade Centre and Pentagon just hours before. There were also fresh pictures of the men standing with the smouldering wreckage of the Twin Towers in the background. One image showed a hand flicking a lighter in front of the devastated buildings, like a fan at a pop concert. The driver of the van then told the arresting officers: “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”



His name was Sivan Kurzberg. The other four passengers were Kurzberg’s brother Paul, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari. The men were dragged off to prison and transferred out of the custody of the FBI’s Criminal Division and into the hands of their Foreign Counterintelligence Section – the bureau’s anti-espionage squad.

A warrant was issued for a search of the Urban Moving premises in Weehawken in New Jersey. Boxes of papers and computers were removed. The FBI questioned the firm’s Israeli owner, Dominik Otto Suter, but when agents returned to re-interview him a few days later, he was gone. An employee of Urban Moving said his co-workers had laughed about the Manhattan attacks the day they happened. “I was in tears,” the man said. “These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, ‘Now America knows what we go through.’”

Vince Cannistraro, former chief of operations for counter-terrorism with the CIA, says the red flag went up among investigators when it was discovered that some of the Israelis’ names were found in a search of the national intelligence database. Cannistraro says many in the US intelligence community believed that some of the Israelis were working for Mossad and there was speculation over whether Urban Moving had been “set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists”.

This makes it clear that there was no suggestion whatsoever from within American intelligence that the Israelis were colluding with the 9/11 hijackers – simply that the possibility remains that they knew the attacks were going to happen, but effectively did nothing to help stop them.

After the owner vanished, the offices of Urban Moving looked as if they’d been closed down in a big hurry. Mobile phones were littered about, the office phones were still connected and the property of at least a dozen clients were stacked up in the warehouse. The owner had cleared out his family home in New Jersey and returned to Israel.

Two weeks after their arrest, the Israelis were still in detention, held on immigration charges. Then a judge ruled that they should be deported. But the CIA scuppered the deal and the five remained in custody for another two months. Some went into solitary confinement, all underwent two polygraph tests and at least one underwent up to seven lie detector sessions before they were eventually deported at the end of November 2001. Paul Kurzberg refused to take a lie detector test for 10 weeks, but then failed it. His lawyer said he was reluctant to take the test as he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.

Nevertheless, their lawyer, Ram Horvitz, dismissed the allegations as “stupid and ridiculous”. Yet US government sources still maintained that the Israelis were collecting information on the fundraising activities of groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Mark Regev, of the Israeli embassy in Washington, would have none of that and he said the allegations were “simply false”. The men themselves claimed they’d read about the World Trade Centre attacks on the internet, couldn’t see it from their office and went to the parking lot for a better view. Their lawyers and the embassy say their ghoulish and sinister celebrations as the Twin Towers blazed and thousands died were due to youthful foolishness.

The respected New York Jewish newspaper, The Forward, reported in March 2002, however, that it had received a briefing on the case of the five Israelis from a US official who was regularly updated by law enforcement agencies. This is what he told The Forward: “The assessment was that Urban Moving Systems was a front for the Mossad and operatives employed by it.” He added that “the conclusion of the FBI was that they were spying on local Arabs”, but the men were released because they “did not know anything about 9/11”.



Back in Israel, several of the men discussed what happened on an Israeli talk show. One of them made this remarkable comment: “The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.” But how can you document an event unless you know it is going to happen?

We are now deep in conspiracy theory territory. But there is more than a little circumstantial evidence to show that Mossad – whose motto is “By way of deception, thou shalt do war” – was spying on Arab extremists in the USA and may have known that September 11 was in the offing, yet decided to withhold vital information from their American counterparts which could have prevented the terror attacks.

Following September 11, 2001, more than 60 Israelis were taken into custody under the Patriot Act and immigration laws. One highly placed investigator told Carl Cameron of Fox News that there were “tie-ins” between the Israelis and September 11; the hint was clearly that they’d gathered intelligence on the planned attacks but kept it to themselves.

The Fox News source refused to give details, saying: “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” Fox News is not noted for its condemnation of Israel; it’s a ruggedly patriotic news channel owned by Rupert Murdoch and was President Bush’s main cheerleader in the war on terror and the invasion of Iraq.

Another group of around 140 Israelis were detained prior to September 11, 2001, in the USA as part of a widespread investigation into a suspected espionage ring run by Israel inside the USA. Government documents refer to the spy ring as an “organised intelligence-gathering operation” designed to “penetrate government facilities”. Most of those arrested had served in the Israeli armed forces – but military service is compulsory in Israel. Nevertheless, a number had an intelligence background.

The first glimmerings of an Israeli spying exercise in the USA came to light in spring 2001, when the FBI sent a warning to other federal agencies alerting them to be wary of visitors calling themselves “Israeli art students” and attempting to bypass security at federal buildings in order to sell paintings. A Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) report suggested the Israeli calls “may well be an organised intelligence-gathering activity”. Law enforcement documents say that the Israelis “targeted and penetrated military bases” as well as the DEA, FBI and dozens of government facilities, including secret offices and the unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel.



A number of Israelis questioned by the authorities said they were students from Bezalel Academy of Art and Design, but Pnina Calpen, a spokeswoman for the Israeli school, did not recognise the names of any Israelis mentioned as studying there in the past 10 years. A federal report into the so-called art students said many had served in intelligence and electronic signal intercept units during their military service.

According to a 61-page report, drafted after an investigation by the DEA and the US immigration service, the Israelis were organised into cells of four to six people. The significance of what the Israelis were doing didn’t emerge until after September 11, 2001, when a report by a French intelligence agency noted “according to the FBI, Arab terrorists and suspected terror cells lived in Phoenix, Arizona, as well as in Miami and Hollywood, Florida, from December 2000 to April 2001 in direct proximity to the Israeli spy cells”.

The report contended that Mossad agents were spying on Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehi, two of leaders of the 9/11 hijack teams. The pair had settled in Hollywood, Florida, along with three other hijackers, after leaving Hamburg – where another Mossad team was operating close by.

Hollywood in Florida is a town of just 25,000 souls. The French intelligence report says the leader of the Mossad cell in Florida rented apartments “right near the apartment of Atta and al-Shehi”. More than a third of the Israeli “art students” claimed residence in Florida. Two other Israelis connected to the art ring showed up in Fort Lauderdale. At one time, eight of the hijackers lived just north of the town.

Put together, the facts do appear to indicate that Israel knew that 9/11, or at least a large-scale terror attack, was about to take place on American soil, but did nothing to warn the USA. But that’s not quite true. In August 2001, the Israelis handed over a list of terrorist suspects – on it were the names of four of the September 11 hijackers. Significantly, however, the warning said the terrorists were planning an attack “outside the United States”.

The Israeli embassy in Washington has dismissed claims about the spying ring as “simply untrue”. The same denials have been issued repeatedly by the five Israelis seen high-fiving each other as the World Trade Centre burned in front of them.

Their lawyer, Ram Horwitz, insisted his clients were not intelligence officers. Irit Stoffer, the Israeli foreign minister, said the allegations were “completely untrue”. She said the men were arrested because of “visa violations”, adding: “The FBI investigated those cases because of 9/11.”

Jim Margolin, an FBI spokesman in New York, implied that the public would never know the truth, saying: “If we found evidence of unauthorised intelligence operations that would be classified material.” Yet, Israel has long been known, according to US administration sources, for “conducting the most aggressive espionage operations against the US of any US ally”. Seventeen years ago, Jonathan Pollard, a civilian working for the American Navy, was jailed for life for passing secrets to Israel. At first, Israel claimed Pollard was part of a rogue operation, but the government later took responsibility for his work.

It has always been a long-accepted agreement among allies – such as Britain and America or America and Israel – that neither country will jail a “friendly spy” nor shame the allied country for espionage. Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at Boston’s Political Research Associates and an expert in intelligence, says: “It’s a backdoor agreement between allies that says that if one of your spies gets caught and didn’t do too much harm, he goes home. It goes on all the time. The official reason is always visa violation.”

What we are left with, then, is fact sullied by innuendo. Certainly, it seems, Israel was spying within the borders of the United States and it is equally certain that the targets were Islamic extremists probably linked to September 11. But did Israel know in advance that the Twin Towers would be hit and the world plunged into a war without end; a war which would give Israel the power to strike its enemies almost without limit? That’s a conspiracy theory too far, perhaps. But the unpleasant feeling that, in this age of spin and secrets, we do not know the full and unadulterated truth won’t go away. Maybe we can guess, but it’s for the history books to discover and decide.

Top
Sanders
Posted: Apr 28 2006, 12:51 AM


Unregistered









QUOTE
Your right and I dont think Sanders read the article. esp these points.

Ex-president of the United Jewish Appeal (the largest Israeli fundraiser in the US) and a highly connected supporter of Israel, Silverstein has strong ties to the Israeli political and business establishments. His colleague, another UJA leader, Lewis Eisenberg — former chairman of the Port Authority, finance chairman for the RNC and former VP of AIPAC (American/Israeli PAC) — negotiated the deal that put the WTC in Silverstein’s control. Add to this the many examples of Israeli foreknowledge of and proximity to the attacks and the plot begins to thicken considerably.

and

There are a host of disturbing ties between Israeli hardliners and September 11th (too many to list in detail here) but none more compelling than the basic issue of motive. It simply cannot be argued that no single player stood to gain more from the attacks (or, more accurately, from the response to the attacks) than the Zionist hardliners who’ve been envisioning a Mideast under their control for decades. For many years before 9/11, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, William Kristol and other powerful, highly placed American Zionists had advocated for increasingly aggressive US military actions towards a host of Muslim states. All that was needed to get the ball rolling was the Pearl Harbor-like event mentioned so often in their pre-9/11 literature. And it’s working. Our bludgeoning of Afghanistan and Iraq represent bold steps towards the fulfillment of the sulphurous neo-con agenda


I did read the article. I understand what you are saying, those are valid points, and I clearly saw that you weren't just spewing, but backing up your statements with corroborating information. BUT, I stand by my position:

Let me try to explain what I was trying to say -
there is a fundamental difference between the relavance of Larry Silverstien's Jewery and the Jewery of Paul Wolfowitz/Elliot Abrams/Doug Feith and those people.

The fact that Larry Silverstien is Jewish, or that his friend Lewis Eisenberg who negotiated the deal is Jewish, or that Israeli companies inside the WTC were warned and got out, or that those facts may be connected, or even all of that taken together, does NOT neccessarily equal "Larry Silverstein did it because he is Jewish - It was a Jewish Plot " That MAY BE THE CASE but the evidence to back up what you are trying to get at is CIRCUMSTANTIAL. There is a disconnect. Please, you have to think like a Lawyer for a second to grasp my point, but there is an important distinction that we all need to understand.

On the other hand, Feith, Abrams, Wolfowitz, Libby, Shulsky, Pearle (and even Cheney) are members of all or some of the following - AEI, JINSA, the Likud party, and are ON RECORD - that means there is evidence - of calling for the "Creative Destruction" (to use Pearle's words) of Israel's enemies. I might be hard pressed to find a direct quote from Cheney along those lines, he's too careful for that, but I'm gonna lump him in there anyway because he was a bona-fide AEI member (neo-con) up until 1983 and is also a member of JINSA. (He may have quit that too by now as well, but that's politically motivated so I won't let him off just yet.)

Notice I haven't mentioned the PNAC. There is nothing in any of the PNAC's literature that says "we support Israel, SO we think the US should invade Iraq and Iran". You have to intimate it. Rebuilding America's Defenses is about American Military Power, Hegemony, and furthering America's interests. If it said ISRAEL's interests we'd have a smoking gun there, but it doesn't.

But the fact that the people that say those things are also members of JINSA etc., or that the countries that they call for invading are all enemies of Israel, IS relevant. Because these people are - members of the Likud Party or JINSA or they accept awards from the Zionist Organization of America or because they say things out-right that show them to be bona-fide Zionists - , AND that they had policy making roles in the US government, AND they used those positions to develop policy that would be beneficial to Israel. Their pro-Israel-ness supercedes the fact that they are Jewish, it is extreme and verifyable, and there is an obvious CONNECTION between that and the policy decisions they made.

And so I said this connection is "hard to ignore". Indeed, it is a verifyable smoking gun.

The "pod" theory is difficult to prove. Flight 175 probably DID have something attatched to it, those little flashes probably ARE some kind of incendiary device being shot into the building to ignite the fuel - but it's tough to prove. People can say, no, you're wrong it's the fairing, it's the light, it's whatever. And so the attention gets diverted to arguing about a teensy part of the whole that can never be resolved. Yeah, maybe the 9/11 plot was a jewish plot and Larry Silverstein lent his cooperation because of that, but we don't know that and no one can prove it. It's possible Larry just saw a way to make some money.

Now if Bush appoints Larry to be Deputy Secretary of Defense and he starts gunning for Syria, there will be a CONNECT and questions about his Israeli sympathies SHOULD be brought to bear (they wouldn't of course, but they should), in the same way members of the Defense Policy Board should be grilled for being directors at companies that are awarded contracts for Defense projects that THEY recommend (even if they are not employees of the US govenment). It's a conflict of interest issue. But without that "connect", those issues are circumstantial. For that reason only, making the point you are making, however close to the truth it might be, just opens you up to being attacked for making anti-semetic statements - specifically because there is no smoking gun and the argument is unwinnable, the energy spent on it just opens you up to accusations that your attack is religiously motivated, IMHO. Perception IS important in this battle - that's why I support the use of Occam's Razor.

End of rant.

BTW everytime I read your handle I get a craving for a slice of pizza.
Top
Sanders
Posted: Apr 28 2006, 12:58 AM


Unregistered









P.S. its good to have someone to debate these fine points with that obviously understands how and how not to construct an argument. I think if you think about the point that I am making, you'll see it for what it is, and that I am not in fact dissagreeing with you per se. The Sunday Herald piece looks interesting, too burned out on all this right now to read it... Cheers.
Top
FinalStrike
Posted: Apr 28 2006, 03:09 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,345
Member No.: 888
Joined: 29-March 06



there was something stuff wrong in that article.

1. isreali intelligence warning of attack outside US- when it was actually inside

QUOTE
This makes it clear that there was no suggestion whatsoever from within American intelligence that the Israelis were colluding with the 9/11 hijackers – simply that the possibility remains that they knew the attacks were going to happen, but effectively did nothing to help stop them.
duh!!

Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Apr 28 2006, 03:13 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (Sanders @ Apr 28 2006, 12:51 AM)
BTW everytime I read your handle I get a craving for a slice of pizza.




Is that a good thing? hmm.gif
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: May 13 2006, 10:38 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



Who Are The Controllers of the New World Order?

Is Is the Jesuits?
Is it the Zionists?

Listen to authors Eric Jon Phelps and Michael Collins Piper square off for two hours from 1pm-3pm on the Republic Broadcasting Network.


Tuesday May 16th 2006, 1:00 PM Central.
The Investigative Journal on RBNlive.com
Top
Alzxul
Posted: May 13 2006, 11:22 PM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 28
Member No.: 1,847
Joined: 8-May 06



QUOTE
I'm more interested in getting the responsible parties than I am in trying to decipher which particular group/subgroup/sect/etc they belong to. That's a moot point if they're brought to justice, wouldn't you say?

The question remains, what if whoever is really pulling the strings is trying to make it look like a particular group is responsible to draw attention away from themselves?

If they could pull of 911, they could sure as hell plan in advance who they wish to frame, too.

Just like I don't trust the "Arabs did it" blanket approach put forth by the government, I don't think the "Jews did it" angle is worthy of our consideration either.

If there are Jews involved, prosecute them, ditto Arabs, ditto White Americans males, ditto African American females.

I want the guilty parties held responsible even if they are sheepdogs.


I think I have to agree with popol vuh. Personally, I think trying to determine particular groups is a waste of energy; those who are guilty, are guilty, and if they happen to be part of a certain group then so be it.

It seems rather arrogant of me, to bring this up [as if it would make me a ruling body on the matter], but I was told by TheQuest that there wasn't much of a Jewish opinion on such things as this. I myself am a Liberal (the type, as opposed to political ideology e.g. Orthodox, Reformed etc.,) Jew, and so I'm not very religious or have a great plethra of knowledge on all subjects Jewish. However, I do not think that topics such as this are anti-semitic or that people should be worried about discussing them because of that. The only slight problem, or rather worry I have with them, is that a lot of ignorant people can take Zionism and Judaism hand in hand and not differentiate between one or the other; despite opinion that victimisation is part of the Zionist plan, I do find that with most people I know, a general dislike of Jews or Judaism is inherent, and it would be a shame to spread more dislike indirectly and by accident due to a blur of the lines between the two groups. Therefore my only feeling is that the difference between Zionism and Judaism should be clearly and explicility expressed.

I disagree with the pursuit of the theory, due to the reason I cited above [the one popol vuh makes]; however everything the OP said makes for an interesting read - nice post thumbsup.gif

(Oh, and apologies if I made more problems than I tried to solve with the stance from my perspective, I simply wanted to try and inform, not destroy this thread or start a big debate if it subsquently turns into that!)
Top
nycResident
Posted: May 14 2006, 12:32 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 19
Member No.: 1,921
Joined: 11-May 06



QUOTE (dave3006 @ Apr 27 2006, 01:45 PM)
It is not the Palestinian's land. God gave it to the Jews.

Definitely not a topic for this forum, yet since you seem to have a direct line to the alleged almightly, maybe you can tell us why they denied the land in previous years and then wanted it back at the cost of innocent lives?

From the Library of Congress:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/...d(DOCID+il0013)

At the end of the sixth century B.C., the Assyrian Empire collapsed and the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city of Jerusalem, captured the king, and ended the first commonwealth. Even before the first Exile, the prophet Jeremiah had stated that the Israelites did not need a state to carry out the mission given to them by God. After the Exile, Ezekiel voiced a similar belief: what mattered was not states and empires, for they would perish through God's power, but man.

From the time of the destruction of the First Temple in 586 B.C., the majority of Jews have lived outside the Holy Land. Lacking a state and scattered among the peoples of the Near East, the Jews needed to find alternative methods to preserve their special identity. They turned to the laws and rituals of their faith, which became unifying elements holding the community together. Thus, circumcision, sabbath observance, festivals, dietary laws, and laws of cleanliness became especially important.

In the middle of the sixth century B.C., the Persian emperor Cyrus the Great defeated the Babylonians and permitted the Jews to return to their homeland "to rebuild the house of the Lord." The majority of Jews, however, preferred to remain in the Diaspora, especially in Babylon, which would become a great center of Jewish culture for 1,500 years. During this period Ezra, the great codifier of the laws, compiled the Torah from the vast literature of history, politics, and religion that the Jews had accumulated. The written record depicting the relationship between God and the Jewish people contained in the Torah became the focal point of Judaism. [end]


And for those that insist that Zionism is anything but what it is... the creation of a mindset in order keep a separate culture from assimilating into the European cultures.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/...d(DOCID+il0016)

The vast majority of Jews in Western and Central Europe responded by seeking even deeper assimilation into European culture and a secularization of Judaism. A minority, who believed that greater assimilation would not alter the hostility of non-Jews, adopted Zionism. According to this view, the Jew would remain an outsider in European society regardless of the liberalism of the age because Jews lacked a state of their own. Jewish statelessness, then, was the root cause of anti-Semitism. The Zionists sought to solve the Jewish problem by creating a Jewish entity outside Europe but modeled after the European nation-state. [end]


QUOTE
Personally, I think trying to determine particular groups is a waste of energy; those who are guilty, are guilty, and if they happen to be part of a certain group then so be it.


Alxzul, I completely hear your plea to stay off this subject since it apparently rests close to your heart, but please understand that we can't investigate the massacre, until we see who benefits from it all. One major beneficiary is the Israeli gov't, who seems to be getting mixed up with the word 'Jews' and 'Zionists' on this forum. Let's stick to politics and International Corporations, and the business and political powers behind the forces that might benefit from such an atrocity.

One thing we can agree on I *think*, creating a world hatred for the muslim people benefits: the Israeli gov't, the US Oil corps, private businesses such as Haliburton that get the Afghanistan and Iraqi contracts to rebuild, regime change to someone willing to do business with the US. It does not benefit the muslims.


Top
xtratabasco
Posted: May 14 2006, 12:43 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



[QUOTE=Alxzul, I completely hear your plea to stay off this subject since it apparently rests close to your heart, but please understand that we can't investigate the massacre, until we see who benefits from it all. One major beneficiary is the Israeli gov't, who seems to be getting mixed up with the word 'Jews' and 'Zionists' on this forum. Let's stick to politics and International Corporations, and the business and political powers behind the forces that might benefit from such an atrocity.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree with what you say and its relationship with this forum, but I want to add this.



As I have said before, the good Jews have a responsiblilty to get rid of evil Jews just like true Christians have a responsiblity in getting rid of criminal, insane, dry drunck, evil Christians like bush.

In fact if you are a moral person you have a responsibility to stand up to evil no matter where it comes from.



No one gets a free pass esp. sideline sitters.

This post has been edited by xtratabasco on May 14 2006, 12:47 AM
Top
GrimHardaway
Posted: May 14 2006, 01:22 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 32
Member No.: 1,874
Joined: 9-May 06



QUOTE (FinalStrike @ Apr 27 2006, 05:38 PM)
they are not really jews-

its just to make you think "ITS THE JEWS"


nope thats just a viel for nasty mindset they all share.

Thats what I believe


Top
TheQuest
Posted: May 14 2006, 03:24 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 3,644
Member No.: 10
Joined: 10-February 06



Alzxul,

Even though many here are just learning more about our current mess regarding international politics and strife, you'll find that by and large the common thread that runs through us is a sense of justice and fairness for all. How to explain so many taking risks, making sacrifices, and using personal time, money and resources to get the word out? We have nothing to gain from this venture but justice and our dignity.

Just like we want justice for 911 and to pull out of the midlle east we would never let harm to ANY law abiding and decent person, no matter their religion or race.

Anyting other than that would be completely contrary to what we're trying to accomplish and we would protect the innocent.

We've got your back. thumbsup.gif
Top
JerryFletcher
Posted: May 14 2006, 05:23 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 756
Member No.: 1,458
Joined: 24-April 06



Bush is a proven satanist. No Christian would be part of the satanic skull and bones and bohemian grove.
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: May 14 2006, 04:54 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (JerryFletcher @ May 14 2006, 05:23 AM)
Bush is a proven satanist. No Christian would be part of the satanic skull and bones and bohemian grove.
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 05:15 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (nycResident @ May 14 2006, 12:32 AM)


One thing we can agree on I *think*, creating a world hatred for the muslim people benefits: the Israeli gov't, the US Oil corps, private businesses such as Haliburton that get the Afghanistan and Iraqi contracts to rebuild, regime change to someone willing to do business with the US. It does not benefit the muslims.

yep, and this government did it.


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2...6_b_Closing.htm

Project For New American Century May Be Closing Now That It's Goal Accomplished In Iraq...

Washington Post | Al Kamen | June 12 2006

The doors may be closing shortly on the nine-year-old Project for a New American Century, the neoconservative think tank headed by William Kristol , former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle and now editor of the Weekly Standard, which is must reading for neocon cogitators and agitators.

The PNAC was short on staff -- having perhaps a half-dozen employees -- but very long on heavy hitters. The founders included Richard B. Cheney , Donald H. Rumsfeld , Paul D. Wolfowitz , Jeb Bush , I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby , William J. Bennett, Zalmay Khalilzad and Quayle.





Prison Planet.tv: The Premier Multimedia Subscription Package: Download and Share the Truth!





Top
Gregy
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 11:38 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 89
Member No.: 2,529
Joined: 31-May 06



You should really put the fact that some ppl involved in 9/11 are jewishes. There are also christians, and muslims in the story. That is definitely not the point.

It's really a mistake to believe that jewishes as a whole are all conspirators. That's dangerous and stupid.

Please put the religions aside, it's not the problem here ! Really, you are just weakening the truth movement, namely in Europe for instance, il you put such non-scientifical and generalizing arguments.

This post has been edited by Gregy on Jun 13 2006, 11:39 AM
Top
Terrorcell
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 01:09 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 819
Member No.: 1,883
Joined: 9-May 06



If you have really put the time into researching 9/11 and haven't realized it was a Mossad operation carried out with the help of the highest ranking officials of our government then you are living in denial(or it was a US opertaion carried out with the help of the Mossad take your pick).
Top
Warmonger
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 01:35 PM


Regular Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 102
Member No.: 2,040
Joined: 15-May 06



Some of the participant of 9/11 had jewish names - that doesn´t mean it was a jewish operation. IMO 9/11 was staged by illuminati/freemasons - the persons behind this might appear to be jewish or christrian, but their real religion is satanism/freemasonry.
Top
xtratabasco
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 10:50 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Member No.: 587
Joined: 15-March 06



QUOTE (Warmonger @ Jun 13 2006, 01:35 PM)
Some of the participant of 9/11 had jewish names - that doesn´t mean it was a jewish operation. IMO 9/11 was staged by illuminati/freemasons - the persons behind this might appear to be jewish or christrian, but their real religion is satanism/freemasonry.

you didnt even read the post.

go back to square one, start over, redo.... smoke2.gif
Top
jessicajohnstone
Posted: Jun 13 2006, 10:56 PM


Unregistered









It always boils down to the one thing does it not!!

RELIGION

One side blames the other for their faults, kill each other it goes on and on the end is never in sight...

We are all doomed... unless someone give us all a hard kick up the backside and tells us all to stop hating each others religion..

And the hating should start At the top... Not ordinary christians or muslims or jews...

At the TOP...

But one supposes It is human nature to like, dislike or hate someone based on their religion...

Or by the way we are forced to conform to todays societies way of thinkin... whitch is imposed on us by our National Government as Well as Religious Leaders...

This post has been edited by jessicajohnstone on Jun 14 2006, 03:12 AM
Top
« Next Oldest | Under the Bridge | Next Newest »

Topic OptionsPages: (2) [1] 2 



Hosted for free by InvisionFree* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.2698 seconds | Archive