Ex-Italian President 9/11 An Inside Job

May I have your ATTENTION here:
For all of those NOT posting on topic, please read this before posting further in this thread:

Due to member demand, the 9/11 forum is now under close staff scrutiny.

I have seen enough articles and video's on this subject now. I shown friends and family and they all same the same thing "man this is awful but what do we do about it". Really does anyone know how to really get the change going? Its obvious it needs to happen but its like everyone is waiting for the big break or leak that pisses Americans off enough to do something. What if there never is one? do we just forget it all.

[edit on 4-12-2007 by alanbmac]

Let's just keep our fingers crossed and hope a mainstream debate gets started or some others begin to step out of line.

I don't know what this guys agenda is...it is interesting that the forged Niger documents came out of Italy. These bogus documents were part of the reasons given to invade Iraq even though the intelligence community knew they were forged!

I also note that this bit of important news was quickly derailed here on ATS...interesting indeed.

Originally posted by Jim_Kraken
reply to post by Haroki

 

Hm. That's odd. The 9/11 commission never identified who this manager was or what the newsletter was OR how the newsletter got so ridiculously improbably lucky OR why the manager would have believed what, under ordinary circumstances would have been a monumentally boneheaded trade to be advisable.

Well, they'd be in a heap of trouble if they id'd him, dontcha think? That's personal financial info, plus can you imagine the flack the dude would recieve if he WAS id'd?

Big time fund managers don't get lucky, they follow sound advice, or they don't last long in the biz. Believe me, the managers pay BIG MONEY for good advice to keep them in the game. It's a lucrative game, LOL...

And it wasn't bad trade advice, the airline industry was already in a downturn. It was excellent advice, and surely would have paid off handsomely even without 9/11. Matter of fact, there had been a LOT of put options exercised on the various US carriers prior to this, and the Sept 6 execution wasn't even the biggest for AA in recent history.

The whole point of this whole line of questioning is so lame that I believe that the last LC movie, even the dummies that made it excluded this. That should be a hint as to how dumb it is....

reply to post by Haroki


The LC artists are disinfoers extraordinaire, IMO. They pretty much single-handedly catapulted a cult hypothesis (no-planeism) into the mainstream.
But that's beside the point. Why was the volume of put options so frickin' high?

I'm sorry if I missed it, but what exactly was the PROOF that the former President of Italy supposedly has? All I heard out of him were accusations without hard proof backing his claims up. Hmmm, that sounds vaguely familar.....I wonder where I have come across that before? It wil come to me soon.

Till I see his proof, he is entitled to his opinon, that's all it is without evidence.

reply to post by pavil


We've already got enough proof from outside this man's statements, and his credibility and experience is relevant fields is high...I can't see any sound reason to NOT believe him.

Originally posted by Jim_Kraken
reply to post by Haroki

 

The LC artists are disinfoers extraordinaire, IMO. They pretty much single-handedly catapulted a cult hypothesis (no-planeism) into the mainstream.
But that's beside the point. Why was the volume of put options so frickin' high?

Cuz fund managers control 100's of millions, sometimes billions of dollars. This undoubtedly represented only a small portion of the money they controlled.

Remember the hedge of buying 115,00 shares? That's a tactic of biiiiig money or an extremely sophisticated private investor.

Anyways, off topic, last post about this.

reply to post by Haroki


Everyone admits the volume of trades was unusually high. I also find it interesting that people frequently use the off-topic excuse when they're losing the argument.

911research.wtc7.net...

14 mods... and not one is catching who REALLY keeps derailing this thread ehh?

Seriously... Action is needed here... Hell I'll take a Warn just to make sure it happens...

COME ON!

reply to post by coven


I thought I was on permanent ignore.

Does it really matter?
every single citizen/ex president/ex leader/ex sportsman can proclaim the obvious - that 911 isnt as we are told.

but, stupidity, ignorance and blind patriotism run rife in the States, so much so some people STILL... STILL.... believe the govenrments tale of 911 and Iraq.

Let them burn, for all I give a damn.
Someone so stupid doesnt deserve to be a part of the genepool.
Hopefully all the moralistic, and intellegent Americans will jump ship, wait for its demise and return to rebuild it the way the forefathers foretold.

This italian guys makes a good point though....

Looking at all the different aspects..

the tapes
the speaches
the evidence
the articles

The government is either in on it, the WHOLE WAY.. as in Osama is an actor, there's lines, rah rah rah rah..

or... they didnt have a single friggen clue...

Whats worse?

Originally posted by Jim_Kraken

We've already got enough proof from outside this man's statements, and his credibility and experience is relevant fields is high...I can't see any sound reason to NOT believe him.

I see..... So the actual proof of this man's comments means little. I thought we were supposed to deny ignorance here not embrace it. Taking someone on their word with no real support or proof of his statements hardly seems logical. Please give me one proven fact that supports his allegation.

Thank You,

reply to post by pavil


It's called "preponderance of evidence". Meaning that his statements, the public testimony of an informed expert should be considered alongside all of the other evidence saying the same thing. There is no reasonable argument that by listening to this man anyone is ignoring evidence. On the contrary, the Ex-Italian President's claims that 9/11 is known to have been an inside job are simply additional evidence.

What's surprising to me is that on Digg, though this article has more diggs than any of the "Hot topics", it doesn't even show up on the "Hot topics" list. What will get the news that reaches the masses to pick this up?

reply to post by lifestudent



An extremely valid and well put argument... The evidence is SLOWLY stacking up against the US. My only question would be is digg a part of the MSM now?
I understand they are an internet rating service, but is it really tied into the media?

(I personally don't digg digg... it's a good concept but as lifestudent pointed out there are too many influences on the net for this concept to take hold and open our eyes to the gist of the situation.)

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

. . . I was wondering at the time how Canada could stand up against Bush's will when so many other countries got bullied into joining an illegal war.

I just got back from work and haven't had time to catch up on the thread but I wanted to quickly throw this into the discussion.

Canada's relationship to the United States is complex. We are without question, the most important friendly country in the life of the United States.

This could become a kind of "let me count the ways" post if I were to try to enumerate all of the ways the US and Canada interact. Let's just take one issue, trade.

If you asked most Americans what country is the US's biggest trading partner, they probably would say Japan. Not so. Unless I am very mistaken, the US's biggest trading partner is the Canadian "province" of Ontario.

Let that one sink in for a minute.

I think it would be fair to say, not that we can "stand up to" America, but that we are such close members of the family that we probably have a little more wiggle room than many other countries, when Uncle Sam is having a fit.

But getting back to the intelligence community, one thing that might be overlooked is the heavy involvement of the Canadian Forces in NORAD.

A lot of stuff was going on with NORAD on 911. It's possible that both US and Canadian servicemen noticed anomalies. The US servicemen might have put two and two together and realized that somebody above them was pullling strings, but then who do you go to, to complain?

Canadian servicemen might have realized the same thing but could probably be sure that somewhere up the chain of command in Canada, there was somebody they could trust and tell the story to.

Originally posted by scientist
as sloppy as everything is, I can't help but to think it was meant to be exposed eventually. I'm beyond wondering if it was an inside job, now im wondering if the coverup was sloppy on purpose or not.

I am actually thinking the same thing.

Someone on the inside of the inside (lol), is making sure that the truth comes out.

So what we have to decide, is if this is meant to in turn manipulate us again into making the wrong descision.

Someone is manipulating all of us (even the ones who di it) & is hreding us towards some ultimate goal, making sure we take the bait & make the wrong (right) descisions each time.

So, do you vote for another Clinton or mabe the other guy. Who do you think you are being hearded towards?

If I were an american, I'd seriousely consider voting for Clinton (provided she agrees not to have oral sex in the oval office with an intern)..hehe

None of the others have trustworthy faces.

Fred Thompson keeps morphing into a Lizard during press Conferences & Bush has that strange lump on his back & Grays standing behind him telling him what to say...

but then again, mabe bush is the way to go, because he is being manipulated himself, deliberately manking him look bad so that he dosen't get back in (he's served his Purpose, so now onto the next phase)...

MAN I'd hate to be an American right now.... lololololol

This is gunna be one dificult Election.

[edit on 12/5/2007 by Ironclad]

Too many things i'd love to ask you questions about, but I'll pick the two that intrigue me the most.

As a Member of the ARA (Anti Racism Action Group) and a former ARA skinhead it would cause me nothing but pleasure to give you a curb smile via the internet. We ARE active in America... and we believe scum only belongs in one place... THE TRASH.

I find it really confusing that you guys would cut all your hair off, and try and look like skinheads, but oppose them? you even use the same style of propaganda, intentionally "lo fi" printed flyers etc. Just asking, how do you disprupt their little marches and stuff, does it get violent? Do you consider yourself just as bad as those people are? What are your opinions on free speech?

Just for the record I'm filled with bile just as much as the next sane thinking person, when i think about those neo nazi skinheads. I just feel uneasy about political correctness gone mad when it comes down to persecuting people who "insult" other's religion or lifestyle. Insulting another religion is just fine and dandy as far as i'm concerned, as long as it doesn't get violent it's fine. And if religious types cant avoid violence, well what does that say about them?

For the Record... if you are anti-zionist (wow sucks that people want to have a say so in the religion of their leadership [read sarcasm]) you are a Anti Semite... which in turn makes you a NEO nazi... If you think the MOSSAD were involved in the acts of 9-11 you are a sad excuse for an American.

Confusing, i see that you're being sarcastic, is the whole thing sarcasm? I mean Mossad were extremely helpful in organizing 9/11 You must know how tight the US is with Israel, how they cooperate in military and intelligence matters. It's not about who left the back door open (or turned the radars off and sent all the jets on a military exercise far far away) it's about who provided the information about the people who would be coming through the back door. Mossad provide detailed middle east intelligence to the cia, it's as simple as that.

[edit on 5-12-2007 by unnamedninja]

Originally posted by lifestudent
It's called "preponderance of evidence". Meaning that his statements, the public testimony of an informed expert should be considered alongside all of the other evidence saying the same thing. There is no reasonable argument that by listening to this man anyone is ignoring evidence. On the contrary, the Ex-Italian President's claims that 9/11 is known to have been an inside job are simply additional evidence.

Sigh... let's try this once again. Please give me one proven fact that supports his allegation.

His talking to a newspaper is not "testimony" especially when it can not be verified by others. I'm not sure where you got ignoring evidence from my post, I merely ask that you provide evidence to support his allegations. So far all you have said is that "well he's an expert, he should know". You are the one ignoring the fact that he nor anyone else has provided support of his claims. Quite a leap of logic you have going on there. You are so willing to trust a man who, by all accounts was waist deep up into deceptions, without even trying to verify his story. Amazing.

Please give me one proven fact or documented detail that supports his allegation. It's really quite a simple request, you should be able to provide it right?

Sorry to interject but I mentioned earlier, there can be no proof or facts so why do you people keep asking for them? You want documented proof? I'm pretty sure governments do not keep documents laying around saying "hey lets do a false flag, it'll be a hoot"

Even so, sometimes these memos do see the light of day, and are never considered fact in any case. If there were documents, you would say they are hoaxes. If there are witnesses you would say they are liars.

What I find most confusing is that people get accused of blindly believing in something, by people who say the evidence is insubstantial. How can you say it's insubstantial, how can you know this or that person has an agenda, or this or that memo looks fake? None of us are qualified to discount or approve any evidence as proof.

An example how how invalid the "Prove It" argument is: Say I was on trial for murder, there were 100 witnesses who saw me. I was also caught on security camera. And there was forensic evidence to prove I had done the crime. If I decided to say to the judge, those 100 people are liars. The security camera is doctored. And the police faked that forensic evidence. Prove that I am the murderer. I am pretty sure he would still put me in jail. Because no fool on earth would believe I didn't do it.

[edit on 5-12-2007 by unnamedninja]