Northwest Flight 253: Mounting Evidence of U.S. Complicity in Terrorism

Here is an interesting take on recent events. Some stuff is new to me, even though I've been very much following as closely as possible.

Northwest Flight 253: Mounting Evidence of U.S. Complicity in Terrorism

Let's review what we know thus far:

Our terrorist traveled to Yemen to meet with terrorist there

The terrorists in Yemen had been in Guantanamo but had been ordered released by the Bush Administration though they were, perhaps the most dangerous detainees held

The government of Yemen tells us that Islamic terrorists there have been arrested who have proven ties to Israeli intelligence

Our terrorists father, though we are told is a retired "Nigerian banker" actually ran their defense industry in close cooperation with Israeli Intelligence (Mossad)

Our terrorist's visa to the US was never with withdrawn, though he was on a "terrorist watchlist"

Our terrorist, though flying from Nigeria, entered the Netherlands without passing thru customs, something impossible to do without assistance from an intelligence agency

Our terrorist, while at the Amsterdam airport, was being assisted by a man appearing to be Indian, who claimed our Nigerian terrorist was a Sudanese refugee with no passport (no passport was used entering the EU, something technically impossible)

However, Dutch authorities, the same ones who confirmed he entered the country with no passport also confirmed he had a valid US visa, though on a terrorist watch list that is shared with Dutch authorities.

Airport security in Amsterdam is contracted to an Israeli controlled company with, not only the most sophisticated technologies, but, in fact, the company that had developed the concept of security profiling.

The parallels between this case and the Richard Reid "shoe bomber" case are much more than admitted.

WHERE THE STORY IS GOING

We keep going back to 2007. Why were these terrorists released to Saudi custody? Why did Saudi Arabia release them soon afterward? With the 2nd major terrorist front in the world being Yemen and the terrorist operation there under the control of released Bush detainees, there is reason for suspicion.

While we have all of these facts, easily verifiable, we have a much stronger case against the Bush Administration or Israel than Al Qaeda. There is no real evidence that Al Qaeda would be operating in Yemen without American or Saudi help and even, as stated by the Government of Yemen, direct material assistance from Israel.

Why would such a thing be done, something against all reason unless terrorism itself was part of a larger regional plan and a "war on terror" was only a ruse.

When Pakistan comes to us and says that Israel and India are involved in terrorism there and we ignore it, is it because it isn't credible or because the US government has been involved, as we seem to be involved in Yemen?

I don't necessarily agree with everything written in that piece, but it does provide an interesting amount of additional material to verify.

[edit on 3-1-2010 by loam]

reply to post by loam

This recent case of "terrorism" by a suicidal islamic jihad zealot is very suspicious. The thing that makes me most suspicious is that as with 9/11 there is no rush to hold anyone (in the Department of Homeland security, in this case) responsible for the security breakdown. The lack of a "rolling head" is to me one of the surest signs of an inside job.

If you are going to guarantee the cooperation of the cogs in the machine that you are trying to foul up and guarantee their silence about what they see and what they know, you have to guarantee them 'safe passage' through the aftermath of any systemic breakdowns that you engineer, with no unsettling negative consequences for their careers.

It just makes good sabotage business sense.

Keep potential whistleblowers quiet and insure their cooperation in the plot, make them accomplices, in fact, by protecting them from all unwanted fallout caused by your skullduggery. It happened with 9/11 and seems to be happening here too.

It makes so much more sense than running around knocking off a lot of witnesses as the perps did after the JFK assassination.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by ipsedixit]

Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by loam

 

This recent case of "terrorism" by a suicidal islamic jihad zealot

is very suspicious. The thing that makes me most suspicious is that as with 9/11 there is no rush to hold anyone (in the Department of Homeland security, in this case) responsible for the security breakdown. The lack of a "rolling head"

is to me one of the surest signs of an inside job.

If you are going to guarantee the cooperation of the cogs in the machine that you are trying to foul up and guarantee their silence about what they see and what they know, you have to guarantee them 'safe passage' through the aftermath of any systemic breakdowns that you engineer, with no unsettling negative consequences for their careers.

It just makes good sabotage business sense.

Keep potential whistleblowers quiet and insure their cooperation in the plot, make them accomplices, in fact, by protecting them from all unwanted fallout caused by your skullduggery. It happened with 9/11 and seems to be happening here too.

It makes so much more sense than running around knocking off a lot of witnesses as the perps did after the JFK assassination.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by ipsedixit]

i agree!! That s why have gone through hell but in my case(to make sure otheres know not ot help) But theyre where also over12 suspect deaths..... both directions i guess.... The amsterdam airport is very controlled very CIA friendly.