It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian General: International ''terrorism'' doesnt exist

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Russian General Leonid Ivashov was the chief of staff of the Russian armed forces when the september 11th attacks took place. He has come out now saying that the ''war on terrorism'' is a hoax, and is being used to create a world government body. Here is the link.

www.infowars.com...

I personally believe that this is the case, I have been saying that ever since it happened. Major leaders from all over the world have came out and verified this, but the american media is quick to shut that up.

Thank God there are people, like Mr. Ivashov, who arent afraid to tell the truth.

General Leonid Ivashov is the vice-president of the Academy on geopolitical affairs. He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union's ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation's Ministry of defense and Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies.


[edit on 24-1-2006 by LetKnowledgeDrop]




posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
While I am inclined to believe this to a degree, your source is about a biased as they get. The right wingers are gonna rip this up. Do you have any other links to powerful people echoing the same ideas?

You may have the beginnings of a nice little debate here.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Infowars.com is biased? The powerful sources are biased. They are more biased than anything!

Alex Jones, who created infowars.com, has continually stressed the fact that he is neither republican nor democrat. He is for freedom, and unmasking the New World Order.

And upon seeing many of his documentaries, as well as many others, plus my own personal 2 year research has led me to believe he is absolutly right.

But if thats not enough, than here.

www.rense.com...

It has the Russian Generals own words.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:45 AM
link   
You just replaced infowars.com with rense.com. Cute.

The front page is full of racist propaganda and anti-UFO pills. If you are truly interested in learning the truth, don’t look for it on sites like that.




Alex Jones, who created infowars.com, has continually stressed the fact that he is neither republican nor democrat.


Alex Jones is a deranged, paranoid scitso. I doubt many people here will disagree with me.




As far as "there is no terrorisim", you are going to need more than an off hand remark by a russion general. The exact quote is:


he now explains that international terrorism does not exist and that the September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up.


So, he is basing this statement based on what? There isn’t a single shred of legitimate evidence that anyone but those Saudis and Osama committed the 9/11 attacks. There are very few people who still buy in to the 9/11 conspiracies, or so I thought. There isnt even any evidence this guy actually said what the article claims.




edit: I just read the whole rense.com article and I didnt see one backed up quote. In fact the whole article was a train wreck of buzz words and talking points.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Yea, I hate to agree with Drone, cause we definately differ greatly as far as political stance, but rense is definately not an unbiased source.

I am not saying you are incapable of formulating your own opinions based on all of the biased crap out there, we all have to. What I am saying is if you want to rally people to your cause you have to find something written for people trying to gather info, and then make up their minds, not the other way around.

Just a thought...

[edit on 24-1-2006 by DaFunk13]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:53 AM
link   
How about we discuss the content and not the source? Why is it that anything on rense or infowars is automatically bunk? I'm not saying I can agree with the first post or not because I haven't read the articles. I guess I do the same thing. Anytime I see Faux news, I automatically think it's bunk.

As far as the NWO goes, I strongly believe that is where our planet is headed.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Have you ever listened to Alex Jones? Obviously not.

Yall will see in due time.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
How about we discuss the content and not the source? Why is it that anything on rense or infowars is automatically bunk? I'm not saying I can agree with the first post or not because I haven't read the articles. I guess I do the same thing. Anytime I see Faux news, I automatically think it's bunk.

As far as the NWO goes, I strongly believe that is where our planet is headed.


What content would we discuss? As far as I can tell this is nothing more than second hand information on a website that sells big foot hair and foil head caps to keep aliens away.

Are you saying that the seriousness of the accusation makes it worth discussing?


Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
Have you ever listened to Alex Jones? Obviously not.

Yall will see in due time.


With such a convincing argument, you have this debate in the bag!


but rense is definately an unbiased source


I think you mean biased.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek

Are you saying that the seriousness of the accusation makes it worth discussing?


I guess you're right. In this case it is worth discussing the source until we come up with different sources. The only thing is, fox news is not going to cover this or any other major news network in the US. So, what would be an unbiased news source that we can agree that if it's on there it's true?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Griff: Do you really think the US media wouldn’t jump on the chance to screw Bush, by telling the world there is no such thing as international terrorism? If there was any credible proof behind the allegation, the media would pick it up in a second. If not the US media, than other world media outlets. Infowars/rense are NOT media outlets. They are about as credible as a bazooka Joe comic.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
The media isnt controlled? Yea it is. CIA officials have said so.

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

Id believe a Russian general who has studied extensively about 9/11, than you, Drone.

This is a unbelieable source that this information is coming from....the former chief of staff of the Russian Army!

You havent seen the proof about 9/11 probably because you choose not to look. Its out there.

You must think Bush is some kind of god or something

[edit on 24-1-2006 by LetKnowledgeDrop]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:05 AM
link   
While Mr. Ivashov statements will bring a rage respond from people that support our administration war on terror.

It actually brings more fire to the people that believe in the conspiracy of the NWO.

The war on Terror is a US foreign policy Issue due to the events of 9/11.

But is very clear that the War on Terror is actually a fight against an ideology born by the Middle Eastern man so this war on terror only concentrated on the Islamic countries.

To say that is for the implementation of a NOW it may actually have some truth to it.

But more for the control and dominance of the number one energy source in the world Oil .

Taking in consideration that Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia holds the biggest amounts of it, is enough to make anybody wonder

But before that who was fighting terrorism in the world? Or international terror?

The last war that US were wagging was against Drugs I guess priorities have change quite a bit.

I will say the war on terror is nothing more that a war for oil control and to take it away from the countries that are not very friendly to the numbler one conusmer of it . . . . US.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
The media isnt controlled? Yea it is. CIA officials have said so.

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

Id believe a Russian general who has studied extensively about 9/11, than you, Drone.

This is a unbelieable source that this information iscoming from....the former chief of staff of the Russian Army!

You havent seen the proof about 9/11 probably because you choose not to look. Its out there.

You must really love Bush.



This is my last response to you because you are obviously not mature enough to discuss these issues with facts and references.

There is no proof that this general even said what you say he did. The only proof we have is someone writing that he said the quote. That is not enough evidence to lob the allegations you are.

As far as proof of 9/11, I have studied EXTENSIVLY. There are many threads on these very forums that do a good job of debunking the conspiracy theories. There have been countless official studies that have shown the official explanation is accurate.


I highly reccomend you check out this credible source:

This article goes point by point debunking:
www.popularmechanics.com...


I also suggest you check out the 9/11 threads on these forums. They are chuck full of smart people telling it like it is.

Now on to my "loving Bush". I don’t love anyone in our government. However I’m not just going to blindly believe every crazy conspiracy theory that comes around the pike, when there is so much credible information to the contrary.







[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Yes, oil is a major part, but by no means the only factor. They want all the natural resources. They want put all control of the region into the hands of the UN(world government in the making), which they have done.

Iraq and Afghanistan's new governments....installed by the UN. I wonder who controls that government?

Its not about oil only. Its about complete control. These people are control freaks.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
Iraq and Afghanistan's new governments....installed by the UN. I wonder who controls that government?


I may have the answer to that but I will leave it to your imaginations.




Its not about oil only. Its about complete control. These people are control freaks.


You are right is not only about oil . . . . But oil is still a very big factor of it, but no administration will come forward and expressed that way.

Now remember the reasons for attacking and invading Afghanistan, 9/11, al-qaida, but do you know that Afghanistan holds the biggest source of natural gas in the region?

Now remember Iraq invasion, MWDs, liberation, taking a tyrant government and to bring democracy.

But also is the fourth biggest source of oil in the world and most of it was without the reach of Oil base American companies because of Saddam, so sanctions were imposed so it would not fall in the hands of other foreign investors.

Also Saddam was going Euro meaning that it would have been a blow to the American economy.

Now Iran, while they have a stable government by Islamic standards and well structure, something that Saddam didn’t have they are a treat because their unwillingness to comprise and they are also supporters of terrorism or that is what the US said.

The are the third biggest source of oil in the world and also no willing to allowed US base oil companies to tap into it, they rather do business with China that is becoming a very fast growing consumer.

And this year they are planning to go Euro .

So fighting terrorism and controlling oil markets is like killing to birds with one shot.

Taking an international treat that can affect the US and at the same time hitting the jackpot is sounds very attractive and well founded.

Who control the oil markets will control the world.






[edit on 24-1-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Just to clear something up, the orignal posting is in rense, then inforwars replicates it. I find it odd, to say the least, the Ivashov is writting directly for/to Rense, but there is no other attribution on rense.


Originally posted by Griff
How about we discuss the content and not the source?

Because the article is meaningless if its a hoax. The weight of the article is that its written by someone very much in the know. If its not actually written by this guy or is just some 'quotes' he's made and that are slapped together, then its meaningless. Having him as the byline in it too, if he didn't actually write the article, is a lie and a misrepresentation, and it calls into question just what other lies and misrepresentations are in the article.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
International Terrorism does not Exist


Interesting considering that the Russian governemnt and Putin himslef have a different view.


President Vladimir Putin, have repeatedly stressed the involvement of international terrorists and bin Laden associates in Chechnya—in part, experts say, to generate Western sympathy for Russia’s military campaign against the Chechen rebels. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov claimed that a videotape of Khattab meeting with bin Laden had been found in Afghanistan, but Russia has not aired the tape publicly. Most experts put the number of foreign militants in Chechnya at approximately 200, out of several thousand fighters.

cfrterrorism.org...



Russia has been fighting a brutal war in Chechnya the past five years. Over the same period, Chechen militants have carried out multiple acts of terrorism on Russian soil. Yet to hear Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent days, the Russia-Chechnya conflict seemingly had little to do with the school hostage crisis in Beslan. In spite of claims by the hostage takers they were acting for an independent Chechnya, Putin -- instead -- pinned the blame on "international terrorists." RFE/RL reports Putin may be hoping to legitimize the Chechen war as part of the wider global struggle against terrorism -- and at the same time discrediting Chechens' aspirations for independence.

www.rferl.org...



Russian forces have killed two militants in the North Caucasus republic of Ingushetia close to the border with Chechnya. It was reported that the militants were obeying Al Qaeda orders.

One of the militants blew himself up during the fight, ITAR-TASS news agency reported, citing the local security service press center. A source in the Prosecutor General’s directorate in the North Caucasus was quoted by the RIA-Novosti news agency as saying the militants were linked to Al Qaeda....

.....In December 2004, Russian special forces killed an Al Qaeda operative fighting with the Chechen separatist movement in Ingushetia. He was a Syrian citizen and served as deputy to Abu Hafs, a close collaborator of Saudi mercenaries Hattab and Abu Walid, who were both killed by Russian troops. Abu Hafs, according to Russian intelligence, personally met with al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and was thought to have been the financial link behind last year’s bloody hostage siege in Beslan.

www.mosnews.com...


There must be some method to this generals madness, besides we all know he couldn't take a dump without Putins say so.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
That is another thing. How in the world could a russion beleive there is no terrorists when they are constantly dealing with Chechnya? There are international terrorists fllowing in to that place as much as they are flowing in to Iraq.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Good point about Chechnya (sp?). We all know that terrorism happens, so exactly why would this guy say such things? Unless everyone is correct and rense is making a fib. I don't think I've ever been to rense but I know a lot of people here don't like it. My original post was just asking why people distrust rense to begin with. I guess I got my answer.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Look at the stuff they sell on that website. What kind of people would buy that crap? The rense.com audience, that’s who! That website and most everything that comes from it is complete bull plop.

EDIT: Not to mention all the racist propaganda on that site. It might as well be stormfront.com.



[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join