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.

 

Hijackers - Proof that 9/11 wasn't a false flag to start Iraq war?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I thought I'd write the title to this thread in the now fashionable style.

What I'm wondering is why, if 9/11 was a "false flag" designed to provide an excuse for the Iraq invasion, why none of the fake hijackers was given an Iraqi identity?

Anyone?

Mod Edit: Changed to title to be less misleading.

1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate. You will not solicit personal information from any member. You will not use information gathered form this website to harass, abuse or harm other people.


[edit on 12-7-2010 by Gemwolf]




posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Because it wasn't about going into iraq.It was about going into afghanistan. And well guess what.... it worked, and osama bin laden was the scapegoat. Iraq came after, when they decided to take the war on terror and use it to their advantage to rule the world and take away our freedoms one at a time.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
That is a VERY interesting observation! I have also wondered why, if a false flag, they (the planners and shakers) didn't change their passports and the data used to find out who they were to prove the reasons for Iraq invasion!
Zindo

[edit on 7/11/2010 by ZindoDoone]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Iraq--hhmmm....

zionist agenda?? questions to ponder..

>>why were iraq's museums, which had unrivaled ancient artifacts looted?
>>was baghdad the place where we "got out bibles" from?
>>didn't saddam say he was about to unleash a weapon of mass destruction? which was knowledge not a nuke bomb
>>without all the bible brainwashed jesus freak kids from the south joining the military because saddam showed proof that the whole judeo/zionist/evangelical religion is a scam!!



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by xxshadowfaxx
Because it wasn't about going into iraq.It was about going into afghanistan. And well guess what.... it worked, and osama bin laden was the scapegoat. Iraq came after, when they decided to take the war on terror and use it to their advantage to rule the world and take away our freedoms one at a time.


Can you please explain to me what was so vital about taking military action against Afghanistan which justified the perps in laying their own lives on the line and murdering thousands of innocent civilians ?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


you are in negotiation, bargaining phase;

next step is depression,
if you are a man with a soul then will come acceptance of the truth about the lies

good luck

[edit on 11-7-2010 by ::.mika.::]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


I think it was about destroying evidence having to deal with finances of certain companies and how they were under investigation.

And how such information, when finished being investigated would have showed large amounts of governmental and corporation corruption and the financial bubble that we ultimately live in.

After such event, the end result was to have reasons to transfer large amounts of monetary value across boarders and dispersing it amongst certain industries and resources.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Because the Iraqi's had a government, a secret service etc.
Claiming they were Iraqi's, the Iraqi government would have piped up, denied it and proved it.

I mean, the guys they SAID did it have turned up alive in saudi.

Another thing, it would have been too obvious, we never accused them of being terrorist anyway, we accused them of having WMD's, that he could GIVE To terrorists.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


9/11 surely wasn't a false flag to start Iraq war. It was a false flag to start the war in Afghanistan which US (with UK) invaded in less than a month after 9/11. Main purpose of Afghanistan invasion was to fight Al Qaeda and to find Bin Laden. By the way, war in Afghanistan is now the longest war in American history.

EDIT: By purpose I meant the "official purpose". I think the real purpose of war in Afghanistan (and later the war in Iraq) was to encircle Iran.

[edit on 11-7-2010 by Etherguide]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Isn't it obvious Alfie? They used 9/11 as an excuse to go to afghanistan for a number of reasons. One reason being the drugs. The biggest opium producing country in the world is afghanistan. They account for about 80% of the worlds opium..... Ponder how much money is in that business for a second.....It makes more money than oil. Now the second reason they went to afghanistan is, look who is close enough to just make a base and get all comfy beside..... IRAQ. So they go back to the early 90's when they tried once, used the war on terror to go into iraq to get their supposed weapons of mass destruction. And bam there you have it, two wars, both possible with 9/11. Now they have their hands on the opium, and the oil, and causing havok in the middle east for whatever NWO plan they have. Oh and look who else is a neighbor..... IRAN.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
"Can you please explain to me what was so vital about taking military action against Afghanistan"

Yeah, what is so special about Afghanistan? I mean the U.S. has been there for 8 1/2 years and counting, funneling billions of taxpayers dollars to large corporations which are entangled with the Government.

What is so special about Afghanistan that another superpower, the USSR, fought a ten year war (1979-1989) with them?

What is so special about Afghanistan that the United States felt compelled to fund and organize the Afghani resistance against the Soviets at the time?

What is so special about Afghanistan that a historic figure like Alexander the Great even wanted to conquer their people and their land?

Could it be that Afghanistan is the largest opium poppy producer, leading to massive tax free profits for those who control the illicit drug trade?

Could it be that the Taliban was burning these poppy fields when they were in control, prior to the USA invading, cutting into profits, and making some very powerful people very unhappy?

Could it be that some very powerful people want to construct an oil/natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan and the only way to do it without cutting the Taliban into the deal was to take control of the Government and the land?

Could it be the $1 trillion of untapped minerals Afghanistan is sitting on?

Could it be that Afghanistan is strategically located for further American military intervention in the area?

Drugs, oil, minerals and military bases; all the powerful resources you need to wield a huge amount of economic, political and military clout can all be found in one country. What is so special about Afghanistan?


To answer the OP's question, the reason most of the hijackers were Saudi instead of Iraqi is because historically, Saudi Arabia has played ball with the USA, where Iraq has not.

If you were to set up something like 9/11, who would you be in cahoots with to ensure things go smoothly? A country which is a cooperative ally and has much to gain from 9/11 (skyrocketing oil prices, oil contracts, etc.), or a country which is an uncooperative enemy and has everything to lose, especially their sovereignty?

Now, the question I have for you is:

Since most of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, why did the USA invade Afghanistan as retaliation?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Well, I don't know the answers to all your questions, but this one is easy:



Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
What is so special about Afghanistan that the United States felt compelled to fund and organize the Afghani resistance against the Soviets at the time?


It wasn't so much about Afghanistan, but the Soviet Union. This was the chance the US wanted to bloody their nose and give them their taste of Vietnam. Which is exactly what happened.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:26 AM
link   
If invading Afghanistan happened to secure opium production, why is poppy cultivation declining?

If the idea wasn't to provide an excuse to invade Iraq, why did they, um, invade Iraq? Why did they expend so much energy trying to show that Saddam had some kind of tenuous connection with 9/11? Surely if they had invented the hijackers the easiest thing would have been to make a couple of them Iraqi? I'm not sure anyone would have cared what the Iraqi secret service said.

The conclusion to be drawn from this is that Iraq was an afterthought. If the NWO works on a whim like that I', not sure it's going to spend thirty years setting up 9/11.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ::.mika.::
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


you are in negotiation, bargaining phase;

next step is depression,
if you are a man with a soul then will come acceptance of the truth about the lies

good luck

[edit on 11-7-2010 by ::.mika.::]


I'm really not. Good luck with any future amateur diagnoses you make based on outdated psychological theory.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

Now, the question I have for you is:

Since most of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, why did the USA invade Afghanistan as retaliation?


So you agree that the hijackers were real. Otherwise they would have been Afghan. Or Iraqi.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   
old fashioned land grabbing is what it is, lets see what other difficult to defend, easy to take land is available and see who goes for it. Any suggestions?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by markygee
 


Afghanistan is difficult to defend? Easy to take? I'd have a brief look at the history of the place if I was you.

Besides, it can be a land grab and still 9/11 doesn't have to have been a false flag. Why no Iraqi hijackers? Why no Afghan hijackers?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 

The reasons for the false flag are legion. 9/10, Rumsfeld tells congress the missing $2.3 trillion from the D.O.D. IG investigation can not be found! 9/12 HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in phony bonds and t-bills are due. The Bush gangsters along with the neo-cons and big banks are up to their eyeballs in the fraud. The records of all the investigations of these and other problems including massive money laundering of drug money are in the trade center, or had been recently moved to the part of the pentagon where the remote drone hit. The death of 31 N.I.S. personnel and destruction of all the files re: the $2.3 trillion prevented any further action. Back in NY, WTC 6, the first building blown up as the second plane hit the south tower and WTC 7 had all the other records. The remotes that hit the towers just happened to hit Cantor Fitzgerald the largest bond dealer on earth and the two other bond companies that were involved in that fraud destroying all their records. Iraq and Afghanistan had been planned previously. The Patriot act was allready written. Does anybody think a law thousands of pages long was put together in two weeks?
Anyone who is undecided about any of this google 911/studies-911/photos. When you get the search page scroll down to the site where you see Jack Whites name and go look at all his pictures with the timelines etc. and see what you think then.
This all devolved from the JFK assassination. When the PTB got away with that the current situation is a natural progression. Psychopaths do not retire.

One of the main reasons we went to Vietnam was the Golden Triangle drugs. Is it a coincidence that the 60's were the beginning of the drug "problem". And then Reagan and the contras. Just happened to be the same time as the Cocaine deluge. And Crack Cocaine, an unknown drug in America or anywhere else, all of a sudden shows up in every inner city in the country and has 1 million people addicted in less than two years. Boy those uneducated people sure have an efficient discovery and world wide delivery program. Now we are in Afghanistan and there is heroin on every corner.

Your best hope is the psychopaths who run America, Israel and Europe do something that causes a spontaneous reaction from the great majority who will finally do something about it. That could be the Gulf. If it's not you won't have to wait long, we are in the fast lane to a historic end and new beginning.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by WATCHER.1
 


We're always on the very edge of something awful. Dark forces are massing - an apocalypse awaits. It was the same in the 50s, the 70s, and so on. None of it has ever come to pass. People are in two camps - goodies and baddies. And you've got the smarts to tell who's who, right?

You're welcome to your opinions, but they're paper thin. The treasury stuff's been done to death. You can't substantiate any of the sci-fi drone/remote contentions. And heroin suddenly on every corner? It's been there since the late 70s, since before crack. And it's production has fallen, not risen, in the last year.

I know it's comforting to think there's a grand design, even if it's malevolent. But believe me, there's no one steering this thing. And it's still probably going to crash.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
The 9/11 attacks were not used to precipitate the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein's alleged program of weapons of mass destruction were the primary legal and propaganda means to justify the invasion.

This is recent history. Or have you forgotten Colin Powell's UN speech, "curveball", the Niger Yellowcake, Condi Rice's mushroom cloud, the Valerie Plame affair, and so on?

While it is true that the war profiteers and their political and media lackeys trumped up and faked links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda in the run-up to the war, the primary casus belli leading to the UN authorization was Iraq's alleged violation of various UN resolutions and non-proliferation treaties. All lies, of course.

The lies linking Iraq and Al-Qaeda were just that, more lies, more fear-mongering, more war-mongering from a ruthless police state, yet even all these years later a sad number of people still believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11.

Just goes to show you how pernicious and insidious the official lies can be.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join