Israel, Mossad & 9/11

Originally posted by rd123
... As for the phone calls received from Israel, Israel would never send texts or call people telling them not to go to work tomorow, for fear of the people telling people about receiveing the call.

Just to provide a bit of clarity here,

Source:
The next thing I researched was to see if there were any confirmed warnings to Israelis prior to the attack. I quickly found an article in Newsbytes, a news service of the Washington Post, titled "Instant Messages To Israel Warned of WTC attack."35 The Israeli daily, Ha'aretz, also confirmed the prior warnings to Israel and confirmed that the FBI is investigating the warnings.36 The articles detailed that an Israeli messaging firm, Odigo, with offices in both the World Trade Center and in Israel, received a number of warnings just two hours before the attack.


Instant Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack


Officials at instant-messaging firm Odigo confirmed today that two employees received text messages warning of an attack on the World Trade Center two hours before terrorists crashed planes into the New York landmarks.


But Alex Diamandis, vice president of sales and marketing, confirmed that workers in Odigo's research and development and international sales office in Israel received a warning from another Odigo user approximately two hours prior to the first attack. (From the Washington Post's Newsbytes)


So now we have powerful and convincing evidence from impeccable sources that Israel had foreknowledge of the attack. First, without a prior warning, there could not have been only a single Israeli victim at the World Trade Center. Secondly, there is clear confirmation that a company with offices in both Israel and the WTC received warnings immediately prior to the attack.

I'm not asserting Any stance here, but I did want to provide a better understanding of what you are obviously unaware of.

$.02

Oh but they were just there to document the events

I'll just leave this here...


www.youtube.com...

reply to post by WeMoveUnseen


So they were arrested and identified as Mossad by the authorities. What about their background. Have they been indeed art students, or was that just a cover?

Is 9/11 research "anti-Semitic"?

Jim Fetzer

Madison, WI (OpEdNews) June 16, 2009 – A kind of hysteria regarding 9/11 research has surfaced in multiple forms, the most blatant of which has been an assault by FOX host Glenn Beck, who has characterized students of 9/11 as “anarchists”, “terrorists” and “Holocaust deniers”. The comparison with Holocaust deniers is patently false, of course, because Holocaust deniers deny that the (German) government committed atrocities, while 9/11 investigators affirm that the (American) government committed them. They could not be more opposite. The use of the phrase can be politically potent, nonetheless, because it subtly conveys the prospect that anti-Semitism may be involved, no matter how faulty the analogy.

This is hardly the first time that students of 9/11 have been accused of that offense. At the “Accountability Conference” held in Chandler, AZ, February 2007, for example, the issue arose repeatedly during a press conference, parts of which are included in a 4:33 minute YouTube piece entitled, “Truthers Defend Holocaust Denier”, but none of us was defending Holocaust denial. Some of us, including me, were defending a scholar’s research on 9/11, even though he is very critical of Israel and may even be anti-Semitic, which is not the same thing. Suppose that is the case. If he were anti-Semitic, which I personally deplore, would that render his 9/11 research, which is principally focused on the physical destruction of the World Trade Center, of no value? Should it therefore be discounted, discarded, or ignored?

“Anti-Semitism”

That is a rather ironic claim to make, because “anti-Semitism” commits the same offense of discounting, discarding, or ignoring a person, their work or other attainments on the ground of their ethnicity, religion, or race. To contend that a person’s research on 9/11, for example, cannot be taken seriously because they are anti-Semitic is parallel to discounting a person’s opinions because they are Jewish. Either way, the conclusion (of dismissing their argument) because of other of their personal traits commits the ad hominem fallacy or, more broadly, the genetic fallacy. An argument can be well-founded regardless of its source, including the characteristics of the individuals who advanced it, who may be lacking in virtue in other respects. Arguments have to be assessed on the basis of logic and evidence, not the personal virtues of those who advance them.

We all have our own intellectual strengths and weaknesses, where we may not be as good in mathematics, for example, as we are in history. Our shortcomings with respect to mathematics do not diminish our excellence in history! Interestingly, a 9/11 researcher, Gregg Hoover, is filing a lawsuit against Glenn Beck for defamation, which appears to be entirely appropriate. Notice that Beck is not simply attacking specific research on 9/11 but the very idea of research on 9/11. Some of the most prominent students of 9/11 are widely admired scholars, such as David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott. Do their efforts to bring the truth about 9/11 to the American people make them racists?

For more, www.opednews.com...

I dont think quoting Glenn Beck, somebody who tries to make a living by saying outrageous things, is a representation of what people thing. Calling somebody an Anti Semite is an ad hominem attack, just like calling somebody any other name under the sun, a clear sign that person has no intention to partecipate in a discussion in a meaningfull way.

At the very least he gets confused and equates Mossad agents to all jews and sees therefore any negative talk about somebody who holds the jewish faight as anti semitic. But that is his or her personal mental problem, which he or she should seek help for.

Originally posted by WeMoveUnseen
I'll just leave this here...


www.youtube.com...

What is that about?