9/11: The Mossad Connection

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Same reason that your contention that x amount of Muslim Militants carried out 9-11 since it's never been tried let alone proven in a court of law.

I feel a court of law would uphold that these roasted baby potatoes are sinfully delicious but heck for all I know the judge could be alergic to potatoes.

Very similiar in fact to the allergic reaction the entire U.S. Government seems to have come down with in trying the 9-11 crimes in a court of law.

The fact is Michael there are no facts anywhere that have met any reasonable or constitutional legal thresh hold or standard regarding 9-11. Just a lot of media speculation and courts of public opinion and a whole lot of pressure to buy a version of events that is pure garbage because it never has even been attempted to prove it in a court of law.

If what you contend could have been proven in a Court of Law they would have done so a long time ago. All the excuses not to bring these so called supposed facts before the public based on this fantasy and that fantasy are just that excuses based on fantasy.

The only real facts regarding 9-11 is a number of buildings were destroyed and a number of human beings were killed and not one person has been charged in an American Court of Law, let alone tried, let alone convicted.

There aren't wanted posters in Post Offices of bin Laden because he is not an American citizen. And he is not on the FBI want list. There are people dumb enough to think this means something conspiratorial.

I know ignoring the truth is favoured here. But here have been many people tried and convicted for terrorist activities in American courts, some related to 9/11. Others have been tried and convicted elsewhere.

Check out the legal fate of these fellas:

Richard Reid, John Walker Lindh, Yahya Goba, Shafal Mosed, Yasein Taher, Taysal Galab, Mukhtar al-Bakri, Sahim Alwan, Jeffrey Battle, Patrice Ford, Ahmed Bilal, Muhammad Bilal, October Lewis, Mike Hawash, Masoud Ahmad Khan, Seifullah Chapman, Yong Ki Kwon, Donald Surratt, Hammad Abdur-Raheem, James Ujaama, Iyman Faris.

If you want to comment on this aspect of legalities, a basic knowledge of military laws, international jurisdictions, etc is helpful.

At this point, with all the information gathered by independent investigators in 30 countries, endless documentation, confessions, convictions - anyone who still wants to somehow believe the US wasn't attacked by hostile Muslim interests is so deep into denial - it's impossible to communicate with them on an intelligent level.


M

reply to post by mmiichael


Here is the problem Michael, there is no Central Muslim authority.

The Pope speaks for Catholics. It could be argued that Netanyahu speaks for Hebrews.

There are different sects in Islam just like there are different sects in the Hebrew Religion.

One sect does not speak for the other as both sects are not on the same page.

Michael my friend, please don't take this as a demeaning insult to you as I adore you as a friend but what you are doing is religious and racial stereotyping as there really is no centralized Muslim authority.

All you are basically doing is using the circumstantial evidence gleaned from a shoddy and dishonest investigation to arrive at those very racially and religiously biased conclusions to basically ferment what is nothing but a thinly veiled religious crusade.

The fact is most people are undereducated and wholly ignorant by design and don't really know or care to know many things about the very diverse world we live in.

Often when people try to break out of that box these kinds of generalizations are used to force them back in the box, to stop their thinking, questioning and probing.

There are more than thirty countries on the planet; many of them haven't purported these suppositions of yours as fact...why? Because they are in no position to profit off of them being accepted as fact. No lucrative arms deals, no oil or copper contracts, no poppy fields are going to them.

I am not arguing that the MOSSAD or Israel was behind the attacks, I am not arguing that they weren't behind the attacks.

Remember Nuremburg? Don't kid yourself that the International Community and Military doesn't love to try people in open courts for the public when there is a clear advantage in doing it, and when the evidence actually can be proven.

None of the people you are talking about had anything to do with 9-11.

Columbian and Mexican drug lords who are not U.S. citizens are routinely on the FBI's most wanted list, so there goes that argument Michael.

Look I agree it's irresponsible to accuse Israel until a complete and honest investigation is carried out.

I also though believe it's irresponsible to vaguely indict the whole Islamic World that has no leader and is not a cohesive singular entity to ferment what is nothing but a religious crusade.

Honestly Michael I want to believe you are intelligent enough to recognize the implications of what you are saying, and how if not also why.

The American Justice System does not rely on other countries to try Criminals that's why we extradite Columbian and Mexican Drug Kingpins here.

Please stop trying to convince people to be so ignorant and uninformed.

The American people have a right to know the truth, and the right to an honest investigation and right to have who ever is deemed and accused to be responsible tried in an American court so guilt can be assessed.

Whether you can recognize it or not, I just destroyed every one of your arguments.

Justice should not be denied, and whether it was Israeli people or Afghani People, or Saudi People that carried out the crime or even American people, and entire people that aren't led or affiliated or beholden to these criminals whether they be Jews or Israeli Jews, or Afghanis or Afghani Muslims or Saudis or Saudi Muslims should not all be held to account for the crimes of a despicable few.



[edit on 24/10/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Proty,

You're incapable of a straight sentence issued on this.

I don't say there is a central Muslim authority. No one can speak for 1.5 billion people in many countries. Similarly the 14 million Jews in the world are not part of a collective conspiracy to control the world. What they do share is a hope that the attempts to destroy the one country where they are a majority will desist some time soon.

There is a loose alliance of Muslim regimes and their supported terrorist organizations. We know this, in part, because they tell us so, and substantiate their ambitions with the destruction of Western targets and killing of people. Endless amounts of intelligence and documentation from all parts of the world, much of it the very countries where this emanates from, elaborates on this in great detail.

Their biggest coup was the attack on the US on September 11, 2001. No connecting of factoids, disinformation, speculation, racist propaganda, will change that.

Why there are Americans so intent on denying there are Muslim groups wanting to harm them is a real question. It’s one thing to believe something, it’s another when you actively push your beliefs, and try to pretend it’s a hunger for justice.

I respect more the Nazis who said "We hate Jews and want to kill them all" At least they were honest. But the endless drivel of malign insinuations that come from self-declared truth seekers, absorbed in convincing people that Jews were responsible for attacks known to be and self-declared by the Muslim world is beyond contemptible.


M

reply to post by mmiichael


Michael even assuming that Osama Bin Laden carried out the attacks, and it is an assumption since he did initially deny it you would be incredibly hard pressed to find any significant numbers of Islamic people who claim that Osama Bin Laden speaks for the Muslim world or even any significant number that endorsed the attacks based on the unproven assumption that it was Osama Bin Laden who carried out the attacks.

Here you are imagining that everyone blames all Jews for a conspiracy to take over the world and reviling that kind of racial stereotyping when you feel it applies to you, yet in the same breath literally doing the same thing that you denounce and decry when you feel it applies to Jews but instead doing it to Muslims.

You did something similar in the thread by decrying White Supremacists only to turn around and blame all Muslims for terrorism against the West which guess what is exactly what White Supremacists do too.

I keep stressing to people again and again that it’s about nations not religions, yet many people like your self want to make it a broad religious thing. If someone from an Islamic country does something, suddenly all the decent law abiding peaceful Muslims are just as guilty as the few firebrands, zealots, fundamentalists and criminal ones.

At the same time if someone complains about something Israel does, the immediate retort is oh you hate all Jews, or you are just anti-Semitic.

Ultimately here is the problem; you can’t blame entire religions for what a few people who practice that religion might do. Whether they are Christian, Hebrew, Muslim, or Hindu fundamentalists they don’t represent the bulk of any of those religions they belong to when they carry out criminal attacks.

Further if no one can criticize Israeli politics without every Jewish person in the world evoking some ridiculous paranoia that everyone who criticizes Israeli politics hates Jews then it just further exasperates the problem.

Not only is it an unparalleled level of closed mindedness but it’s the same kind of infantile attempt at emotional domination a child would use…”I can’t talk about it Dad I am just too upset now”, “I can’t talk about it Dad, every body hates me”, “I can’t talk about now I am just so angry because so and so broke my slinky”.

Michael I hate to break it to you but this type of dysfunctional thinking you are promoting is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

You should consider being more honest with yourself because ultimately what you keep decrying others for supposedly doing, you are truly doing the same exact thing, just for a different team.

As Rodney King would say, “Why can’t we all just get along”.

The broody attempts at emotional dominance are either disingenuous or aimed at stifling the kind of meaningful dialogue that could achieve a broader understanding or peace, or they are a sign of a tremendous lack of maturity, compassion and empathy for others.

I am not a hater and I refuse to become one, whether it’s Muslims or Jews or guys named Fred who sing the blues.

It is ludicrous to hold an entire religion responsible for the poor choices and contemptible actions of a few.

All 9-11 evidence is purely circumstantial from a strictly legal standpoint in a court of law. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence to go around to quite a few different and disparate parties.

I refuse to be a racist Michael and I reject any notion that makes all of one type of people guilty of the actions of a minority of those people.

Further in relation to me, you know darn well I think it’s Rome trying to take over the world. Oye vey if only the Jews were that clever!

Smuck.

I don't know if this has been posted in the thread but i found it
interesting
This is the controversial old/new Massad Motto/Creed
from Yahoo! answers.


By way of deception thou shalt make war:
Mossad's original motto: be-tahb?l?t ta`aseh lekh? milkham?h (Hebrew: בתחבולות תעשה לך מלחמה, "For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety." - Proverbs XXIV, 6 or the more recognised translation "By way of deception thou shalt make war") was changed recently as part of the Mossad's public 'coming out' to another Proverbs passage: be-'鹮 tahb?l?t y?p?l `?m; ?-tesh?`?h be-r?v yo'鴳 (Hebrew: באין תחבולות יפול עם, ותשועה ברוב יועץ, "Where no counsel is, the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." - Proverbs XI, 14)

Interesting picture emerges here. In the wake of 9/11 the Bush junta scrupulously avoids mention of the fact that they are in bed with the Saudi royals, bin Laden family, Pakistan's ISI, Turkish intel - primary facilitators of 9/11.

Even the Bush admin's harshest critics, French journalists Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, Greg Palast, Sy Hersh also piece together that Bush & Co were taking explicit direction on Middle East affairs from the Saudis, and were palling around with the Pakistani ISI who promised them pipeline passage in Central Asia. As a policy, Middle East generated terrorism was to be tolerated as as aberrant mischief making.

And ironically, that's the exact same stance as the active arch-conspiracists. "What, friendly peace-loving Saudi Arabia and Pakistan wanting to hurt us? Must be someone else."

So really the question becomes why do the conspiracists go to such length to support Bush & Co’s apologist position on Muslim terrorism?
Do they share the same handlers?

As King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz said in Jeddah in 1993

"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed.

Truly, America is my favorite slave."


M

[edit on 25-10-2009 by mmiichael]

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by mmiichael
Interesting picture emerges here. In the wake of 9/11 the Bush junta scrupulously avoids mention of the fact that they are in bed with the Saudi royals, bin Laden family, Pakistan's ISI, Turkish intel - primary facilitators of 9/11.

Even the Bush admin's harshest critics, French journalists Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, Greg Palast, Sy Hersh also piece together that Bush & Co were taking explicit direction on Middle East affairs from the Saudis, and were palling around with the Pakistani ISI who promised them pipeline passage in Central Asia. As a policy, Middle East generated terrorism was to be tolerated as as aberrant mischief making.

And ironically, that's the exact same stance as the active arch-conspiracists. "What, friendly peace-loving Saudi Arabia and Pakistan wanting to hurt us? Must be someone else."

So really the question becomes why do the conspiracists go to such length to support Bush & Co’s apologist position on Muslim terrorism?
Do they share the same handlers?

As King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz said in Jeddah in 1993

"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed.

Truly, America is my favorite slave."


M

[edit on 25-10-2009 by mmiichael]

This is a bunch of unsubstantiated crap.It is only your biased opinion. What do you think about Mossad, the guys caught ON 911?
Care to hazard an OPINION!!!!!!!

reply to post by mmiichael

Originally posted by mmiichael
...

As King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz said in Jeddah in 1993

"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed.

Truly, America is my favorite slave."

America isn't his 'slave', no matter what he might think. This doesn't mean, however, that some of the things that Americans have done haven't pleased him; I'll say right now that I'm not very up on King Fahd so I'll leave it at that.

As to those critics of the Bush admnistration you mention, I'm not familiar with their work, but I will say this- it's certainly true that elements of the Bush administration had ties to certain Saudis and Pakistan's ISI; and I would be the last to deny that they were both involved in 9/11. But that doesn't mean that Mossad wasn't involved as well. There are many different pieces in the 9/11 puzzle.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by mmiichael

 

Michael even assuming that Osama Bin Laden carried out the attacks, and it is an assumption since he did initially deny it

There is a lot of evidence that the alleged subsequent admission(s) were fraudulent. In one video, it would seem that it wasn't Osama Bin Laden at all, but rather a poor imitation. Many believe Osama bin Laden died shortly after 9/11, and that the only reason he could escape Afghanistan at all is because the U.S. let him. I suppose someone will ask me to prove these assertions, so I should state right now that I don't have the links handy, but if someone is interested in seeing them, I may be able to ferret some out.

Originally posted by scott3x
As to those critics of the Bush admnistration you mention, I'm not familiar with their work, but I will say this- it's certainly true that elements of the Bush administration had ties to certain Saudis and Pakistan's ISI; and I would be the last to deny that they were both involved in 9/11. But that doesn't mean that Mossad wasn't involved as well. There are many different pieces in the 9/11 puzzle.

While the Web is flooded with uninformed speculation and dot-connecting, a more comprehensive picture of the planning and co-ordination of 9/11 has been assembled by solid credible investigative journalists worldwide. Just for starters, one has to read the ongoing analysis of Seymour Hersh, who has been criticizing successive US administrations since he first exposed the My Lai massacre up to his scrutinizing of Abu Ghraib. A number of Eurpoean journalists, working with Lebanese, Egyptian, Turkish, Iranian informants have further filled in with Middle East sourced detail.

At last count, there are over a hundred serious books on 9/11 in 40 languages. Some offer unique primary source material. An often dismissed American author, Gerald Posner, in his breakthrough book "While America Slept" was able to track down early 2002 information gleaned from bin Laden brain trust member, Abu Zubaydah, which was subsequently repressed by Bush & Co. As close to an inside scoop as you’ll ever read.

Bin Laden of course was dead by 2002. Both the terrorist networks and US intelligence give a pass on those phony messages that keep showing up. Keeping him alive serves their required need of a deflecting icon figure. With all the tracking of his activities, even down to warning phone calls made to his relatives, there has never been a question of his hands on co-ordination and fund-raising contributions to 9/11. He was project manager.

Bin Laden had become a national hero in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim world. He was given the green light to carry on his terrorist network activities on the condition they never compromised the Saud family.

They were stunned by the scale and effectiveness of 9/11. A lot of damage control scrambling by the US and the Saudis ensued. Attempting to expunge the public record, the Saudis practice what’s called “libel tourism” – scaring off publishers with multimillion dollar lawsuits activated by scandal ridden family banker, Khalid bin Mafouz. But you can’t keep everyone from talking or hide intelligence shared by a dozen countries for too long. The tow-faced duplicity of the Saudis and the active involvement of high level people in Pakistan, Turkey, Afghanistan, Yemen, et al - is now documented in print. Print is still where the most solid repository of history lies.

Also well documented, Mossad was actively tracking and supplying intelligence to the US on 9/11 participants and plans. How Israel could somehow have co-operated with Saudi princes, high level ISI personnel, factions of the Turkish military, bin Laden and his mujahidin vets, and various imams, is something we’d all like to hear.

M


[edit on 26-10-2009 by mmiichael]

reply to post by mmiichael

Originally posted by mmiichael
...

Also well documented, Mossad was actively tracking and supplying intelligence to the US on 9/11 participants and plans. How Israel could somehow have co-operated with Saudi princes, high level ISI personnel, factions of the Turkish military, bin Laden and his mujahidin vets, and various imams, is something we’d all like to hear.

I liked that post of yours a fair amount Michael. As to your question of how Israel could have co-operated with Saudi princes, high level ISI personnel, etc., first of all, I never said Israel; I mentioned Mossad. Mossad isn't really Israel, just like the CIA isn't really America. They're intelligence agencies, and such agencies have frequently done things that regular citizens would never contemplate doing. Furthermore, one must consider the benefits to them of helping 9/11 come to pass; Do you know that both Rumsfeld and the Israeli president expressed that 9/11 essentially gave them an opportunity to further their own goals? Certainly the arms industry benefitted immensely from it, something which "The Lone Gunman" pilot episode would occur if a 9/11 type event was pulled off, an episode that occurred months before 9/11. Aren't you atleast curious to find out what inspired the writer of that episode to write it?

Originally posted by scott3x

As to your question of how Israel could have co-operated with Saudi princes, high level ISI personnel, etc., first of all, I never said Israel; I mentioned Mossad. Mossad isn't really Israel, just like the CIA isn't really America. They're intelligence agencies, and such agencies have frequently done things that regular citizens would never contemplate doing. Furthermore, one must consider the benefits to them of helping 9/11 come to pass

Israel is a small country with a population 2% of the US's. It's intelligence agency's policies are directed from the top obviously.

While there were many countries and business who exploited the changes wrought by 9/11 it's a whole other thing to claim complicity. Oil prices started climbing and hit an all time peak in 2008. But no one claims 9/11 was done for that reason.

The destruction of the World Trade Center alone cost the US something like a trillion dollars in disruption of business activites, lost and displaced revenues, clean up and reparations, etc. It was the hub of financial activity for the Western world. Much moved to London as New York was incapacitated. Does this mean the British did it?

Stocks, financial instruments and services are what the West makes it's greatest profits on. The one week the stock market was closed alone meant more billions of dollars lost than the sale of armaments ever could.

As New York has the largest number of Jews in any one place, and many work in the financial sector, they'd be more hard hit than most.

Though 9/11 was massive in scale, it was the culmination of increasingly magnifying terrorist activities that were foreshadowed with the first attempt to bring down the WTC in 1993.

In the aftermath of the Cold War, the US under Clinton had pretty much dismissed Muslim terrorist activities as an unfortunate aberration rather than a serious threat. It came back to haunt them as the country's single largest source of revenues was hit at it's headquarters.

As for going into Afghanistan and Iraq, they were already on the table. Negotiations with the Taliban over security on proposed pipelines had broken down in July, and a retaliation was promised by Bush & Co. Iraq was in a truce with the US on condition of Saddam keeping to agreed terms, which he hadn't with his large scale under-the-table oil sales.

None of this exonerates the US admin's very bad decisions and self-serving policies. But one cannot dismiss the growth and effectiveness of Muslim terrorist activities worldwide, either. Bin Laden, miffed the Saudi royals had passed over his request to fight Saddam when he invaded Kuwait and was moving troops toward Saudi Arabia, pushed for a Western confrontation on his turf. He got it in spades.

All this is well charted in print for those interested.

This review of Posner’s “While America Slept” is interesting because in 2003, many Americans were still disbelieving on how deep in bed the US was with it’s attackers. Later investigative reports were to reveal much more.

www.time.com...

March 2002, the terrorist called Abu Zubaydah was one of the most wanted men on earth. A leading member of Osama bin Laden's brain trust, he is thought to have been in operational control of al-Qaeda's millennium bomb plots as well as the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in October 2000. After the spectacular success of the airliner assaults on the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, he continued to devise terrorist plans.

Seventeen months ago, the U.S. finally grabbed Zubaydah in Pakistan and has kept him locked up in a secret location ever since. His name has probably faded from most memories. It's about to get back in the news. A new book by Gerald Posner says Zubaydah has made startling revelations about secret connections linking Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and bin Laden.

Details of that terrorism triangle form the explosive final chapter in Posner's examination of who did what wrong before Sept. 11. Most of his new book, Why America Slept (Random House), is a lean, lucid retelling of how the CIA, FBI and U.S. leaders missed a decade's worth of clues and opportunities that if heeded, Posner argues, might have forestalled the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

[...]

The stuff that is going to spark hot debate is Chapter 19, an account—based on Zubaydah's claims as told to Posner by "two government sources" who are unnamed but "in a position to know"—of what two countries allied to the U.S. did to build up al-Qaeda and what they knew before that September day.

Zubaydah's capture and interrogation, told in a gripping narrative that reads like a techno-thriller, did not just take down one of al-Qaeda's most wanted operatives but also unexpectedly provided what one U.S. investigator told Posner was "the Rosetta stone of 9/11 ... the details of what (Zubaydah) claimed was his 'work' for senior Saudi and Pakistani officials." The tale begins at 2 a.m. on March 28, 2002, when U.S. surveillance pinpointed Zubaydah in a two-story safe house in Pakistan.

[…]

CIA men flew Zubaydah to an Afghan complex fitted out as a fake Saudi jail chamber, where "two Arab-Americans, now with Special Forces," pretending to be Saudi inquisitors, used drugs and threats to scare him into more confessions.

Yet when Zubaydah was confronted by the false Saudis, writes Posner, "his reaction was not fear, but utter relief." Happy to see them, he reeled off telephone numbers for a senior member of the royal family who would, said Zubaydah, "tell you what to do." The man at the other end would be Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz, a Westernized nephew of King Fahd's and a publisher better known as a racehorse owner. His horse War Emblem won the Kentucky Derby in 2002. To the amazement of the U.S., the numbers proved valid. When the fake inquisitors accused Zubaydah of lying, he responded with a 10-minute monologue laying out the Saudi-Pakistani-bin Laden triangle.

Zubaydah, writes Posner, said the Saudi connection ran through Prince Turki al-Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, the kingdom's longtime intelligence chief. Zubaydah said bin Laden "personally" told him of a 1991 meeting at which Turki agreed to let bin Laden leave Saudi Arabia and to provide him with secret funds as long as al-Qaeda refrained from promoting jihad in the kingdom.

The Pakistani contact, high-ranking air force officer Mushaf Ali Mir, entered the equation, Zubaydah said, at a 1996 meeting in Pakistan also attended by Zubaydah. Bin Laden struck a deal with Mir, then in the military but tied closely to Islamists in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to get protection, arms and supplies for al-Qaeda. Zubaydah told interrogators bin Laden said the arrangement was "blessed by the Saudis."

Zubaydah said he attended a third meeting in Kandahar in 1998 with Turki, senior ISI agents and Taliban officials. There Turki promised, writes Posner, that "more Saudi aid would flow to the Taliban, and the Saudis would never ask for bin Laden's extradition, so long as al-Qaeda kept its long-standing promise to direct fundamentalism away from the kingdom." In Posner's stark judgment, the Saudis "effectively had (bin Laden) on their payroll since the start of the decade." Zubaydah told the interrogators that the Saudis regularly sent the funds through three royal-prince intermediaries he named.

The last eight paragraphs of the book set up a final startling development. Those three Saudi princes all perished within days of one another. On July 22, 2002, Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially "died of thirst" while traveling east of Riyadh one week later. And seven months after that, Mushaf Ali Mir, by then Pakistan's Air Marshal, perished in a plane crash in clear weather over the unruly North-West Frontier province, along with his wife and closest confidants.

Without charging any skulduggery (Posner told TIME they "may in fact be coincidences") the author notes that these deaths occurred after CIA officials passed along Zubaydah's accusations to Riyadh and Islamabad. Washington, reports Posner, was shocked when Zubaydah claimed that "9/11 changed nothing" about the clandestine marriage of terrorism and Saudi and Pakistani interests, "because both Prince Ahmed and Mir knew that an attack was scheduled for American soil on that day."

They couldn't stop it or warn the U.S. in advance, Zubaydah said, because they didn't know what or where the attack would be. And they couldn't turn on bin Laden afterward because he could expose their prior knowledge. Both capitals swiftly assured Washington that "they had thoroughly investigated the claims and they were false and malicious." The Bush Administration, writes Posner, decided that "creating an international incident and straining relations with those regional allies when they were critical to the war in Afghanistan and the buildup for possible war with Iraq, was out of the question."

The book seems certain to kick up a political and diplomatic firestorm. The first question everyone will ask is, Is it true? And many will wonder if these matters were addressed in the 28 pages censored from Washington's official report on 9/11.

It has long been suggested that Saudi Arabia probably had some kind of secret arrangement to stave off fundamentalists within the kingdom. But this appears to be the first description of a repeated, explicit quid pro quo between bin Laden and a Saudi official.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by mmiichael]

There are posts above that are nothing but hog wash. There is not one mention of MOSSAD and it's history or it's agents on the day of 911. It is as if the poster is afraid to address the topic.
It is a constant reminder of those that over post irrelevant crap in an attempt to derail honest discussion.
The rhetoric of the posts above and previous posts by the same member should be put in a separate thread as they pertain not to this thread IMO.
I would suggest reading a book by Gordon Thomas "Gideon's Spies: Mossad's Secret Warriors," This guy knows the Mossad.

reply to post by Donny 4 million

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
There are posts above that are nothing but hog wash. There is not one mention of MOSSAD and it's history or it's agents on the day of 911. It is as if the poster is afraid to address the topic.

I don't see his post as 'hog wash' as you put it, but I agree that it's rather strange that he failed to address the topic of this thread- that is, Mossad's connection to 9/11. That, in turn, does indeed suggest that he may be avoiding dealing with this issue.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
It is a constant reminder of those that over post irrelevant crap in an attempt to derail honest discussion.

Donny, I agree that he's gotten somewhat off topic, but I don't think there's any reason to be insulting about it.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
The rhetoric of the posts above and previous posts by the same member should be put in a separate thread as they pertain not to this thread IMO.
I would suggest reading a book by Gordon Thomas "Gideon's Spies: Mossad's Secret Warriors," This guy knows the Mossad.

I would be interested in reading it; however, I'm currently even -more- interested in reading about 9/11; I'm currently reading David Ray Griffin's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking"- good stuff :-).

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
There are posts above that are nothing but hog wash. There is not one mention of MOSSAD and it's history or it's agents on the day of 911. It is as if the poster is afraid to address the topic.
It is a constant reminder of those that over post irrelevant crap in an attempt to derail honest discussion.
The rhetoric of the posts above and previous posts by the same member should be put in a separate thread as they pertain not to this thread IMO.
I would suggest reading a book by Gordon Thomas "Gideon's Spies: Mossad's Secret Warriors," This guy knows the Mossad.

Please provide us with all your "Jews did 9/!!" information. The world needs to know how Israel pulled off this operation to get the US into the Middle East. They were feeling lonely.


M

reply to post by mmiichael


Michael, I don't get it. The OP in this thread shows the evidence of Mossad involvement. It seems you're avoiding dealing with it...

Originally posted by scott3x
reply to post by mmiichael

 

Michael, I don't get it. The OP in this thread shows the evidence of Mossad involvement. It seems you're avoiding dealing with it...

Scott

I really don't want to go over the same information for the 11th time. For starters, the "enough explosives found to blow up a bridge" is a complete urban legend. I've asked you repeatedly for one shred of information or detailing of this and had no response.

It did not happen. I've provided more than one link that give the actual story. Once more - police within an hours of the WTC attacks stopped a van with Israelis and they were subsequently held for weeks. No explosives were ever found. They were released and have launched a case for unlawful confinement.

Disinfo websites and videos claim there were explosives. There were none.

It boils down to massive distortions of two of the hundreds of reported events on 9/11. A handful of Israelis were joking around and reported to the authorities by a neighbor as suspicious. Some Israelis were stopped in a van after the second jet impact, arrested, interrogated, let go.

Conflated by web conspiracists to direct involvement in the attacks. "Joooos did 9/11" lives on.

The mythology of Mossad direct linkage to the perpetration of 9/11 has been thoroughly debunked a hundred times.

As for the esteemed professor of theology, Dr Griffin, now claiming to be a demolition expert, you should know that even the Truth Movement has distanced themselves from his once popular claims.

A bit dated but a good analysis of his confabulations and distortions:

www.publiceye.org...

I recommend rather than investigoogling and limiting your horizon to hokey Truther sources, reading more up-to-date material on 9/11 from independent investigative writers with credible track records.


Mike


[edit on 26-10-2009 by mmiichael]