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.

 

BBC Correspondent says MOSSAD did 9/11 and Iran doesn't want Nukes

page: 8
121
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by raresf
 


You are probably right. Bush and Cheney have much to answer but they escaped thanks to James Yoo and Jay ByBee for violating their professional obligations. For now, We're curios how much Mossad involvement in 9-11 attack. We know Dominik Otto Suter fled to Israel. We know Dominik Otto Suter is FBI most wanted list but why does Mark Regev, refuse to turn over a terrorist? This article is interesting. You should read it:

Israel Harbors Prime 9/11 Terror Suspect

The suspect list is classified "Law Enforcement Sensitive" and is periodically updated. The list published on an Italian website was dated May 22 and was accompanied by two documents from February: an explanatory letter from the Italian state agency engaged in fighting money laundering, the Ufficio Italiano dei Cambi, and a distribution list from Assifact, an Italian association for factoring. A factoring company finances accounts of businesses. "If we deal with anybody on this list, we are obliged to notify the authorities," Liliana Corti of the Milano-based Assifact told AFP.

While Dominik Suter's name on the list, oddly his Israeli nationality is not. Three addresses, two in New Jersey and one in Sherman Oaks, California, are given, as is his Social Security number. The year 1970 is provided for his date of birth.

When AFP asked the FBI about the list, a spokeswoman said, "We're not going to validate your questions by talking about the list. You are not supposed to have it. It is not for public consumption." Asked about Israeli cooperation regarding suspects being harbored in the state of Israel, Bill Carter, Unit Chief of the FBI's National Press Office in Washington, told AFP that Israel was "under no obligation" to turn over suspects and that it did so only as a "matter of good will."

Carter told AFP to contact the FBI office in Tel Aviv for information regarding any extradition request for Suter. Robert Geeslin, an FBI agent, is referred to as the "deputy legal attach?and has an office in the U.S. Embassy in Israel. Geeslin's office, however, refused to discuss the matter.

Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli government in Washington, told AFP that the U.S. and Israeli authorities have "an intimate relationship" that is "excellent" and "on-going." The "close cooperation" between Israel and the U.S. includes sharing intelligence information. However, when AFP repeatedly asked Regev if Israeli authorities would cooperate by apprehending a terror suspect for questioning by the FBI, three times Regev avoided answering the question.


Perhaps you have better explanation regarding above article? Because I hate to google piles of webpages.


Below article relates to Mossad activities in US.

EIR has also learned that, in several Western European countries, including the Netherlands and possibly Germany, the Israeli Mossad is officially handling all visa background checks, for applicants from Arab and Muslim countries. According to a well-placed diplomatic source, the Israelis offered these "services," free of charge, to the European immigration agencies, in return for access to the unusually detailed information contained in the visa applications. The rationale for the deal is that the Israeli secret services maintain the most comprehensive watch-lists of suspected Arab and Islamic terrorists and criminals.

The source of this startling information, however, noted that, under this arrangement, the Israelis have access to the past travel itineraries of all the visa applicants, and would, therefore, have a profile of individuals—such as Mohammad Atta—who travelled back and forth to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and other al-Qaeda, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad hotbeds of activity. The source asked the obvious question: How much did the Israeli Mossad know about the activities of the so-called "Hamburg cell" of al-Qaeda terror plotters? And why, if the Israelis did, indeed, have the authority to turn down visa applications, did Atta and the others have such free access between Europe and the United States?

These are disturbing questions that need answering, if the full story of the events of Sept. 11, 2001 is ever to be known, and a serious crackdown on the actual authors of the horrific attacks achieved.


Thank you.




posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
I found an online listing of the areas of the web the Megaphone software targets.

ws.giyus.org...

It seems like they mostly target websites that are already Zionist. I don't see ATS anywhere, but they've targeted some Christian Science forums recently where a discussion about the Gaza blockade was taking place. I wonder if they've developed other ways of doing this that don't rely on volunteers.

You could check there or download the client that automatically tells you whenever they have a new place on the web for Zionists to mass and over-run everyone else.


A couple videos on the 9/11 dancing Israelis:






Listen to that nice, hateful, racist rant at the end of the 1st video. Have to love that especially.


Again I ask.... If they were Muslims celebrating and filming the attacks, do you think all these people would be here defending them and calling everyone else Muslim-haters? No, because Muslim-hating is apparently a good thing in the US and Israel.


I don't care where they're from, I'd call it exactly like I saw it. We know who the real racists are. One of them is in the first video above.


edit on 8-9-2010 by VirginiaRisesYetAgain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain

The BBC correspondent agreeing that Mossad was either involved or obviously had foreknowledge is not necessary for anyone else to reach the same conclusion. What if 5 Muslims had bee filming the attacks and dancing along with them? Would you be defending the Muslims? HELL NO.


What the flip does that have anything to do with anything? I'm asking you why you're taking this BBC report seriously when you conspiracy people are ALSO saying the BBC had foreknowledge of the WTC 7 collapse, which necessarily means they're involved in the conspiracy too. If they're truly involved, then they're not going to tell you the truth of who was really responsible for the 9/11 attack becuase it'd mean they'd be revealign their own involvement. The whole reason why you people don't accept the 9/11 report is becuase of inconsistancies and yet you're ignoring THIS inconsistency. I'm merely asking why.

Good grief, getting a straight answer out of you people is like nailing jam to the wall.



edit on 8-9-2010 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain

The BBC correspondent agreeing that Mossad was either involved or obviously had foreknowledge is not necessary for anyone else to reach the same conclusion. What if 5 Muslims had bee filming the attacks and dancing along with them? Would you be defending the Muslims? HELL NO.


What the flip does that have anything to do with anything? I'm asking you why you're taking this BBC report seriously when you conspiracy people are ALSO saying the BBC had foreknowledge of the WTC 7 collapse, which necessarily means they're involved in the conspiracy too. If they're truly involved, then they're not going to tell you the truth of who was really responsible for the 9/11 attack becuase it'd mean they'd be revealign their own involvement. The whole reason why you people don't accept the 9/11 report is becuase of inconsistancies and yet you're ignoring THIS inconsistency. I'm merely asking why.

Good grief, getting a straight answer out of you people is like nailing jam to the wall.

And never have I seen people bending over backwards so hard to try to deny everything a news article says, claiming that the news source doesn't explain itself well enough or provide more details, so therefore it must be wrong and it never happened. What a bunch of bull.


if im not mistaken, it wasnt a BBC report, it was a BBC correspondent on RT, as in, in an interview.

so what are you doing on here?



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
The BBC correspondent agreeing that Mossad was either involved or obviously had foreknowledge is not necessary for anyone else to reach the same conclusion. What if 5 Muslims had bee filming the attacks and dancing along with them? Would you be defending the Muslims? HELL NO.


What the flip does that have anything to do with anything?


What does the difference in your mind between Israelis and Muslims have to do with anything?


I don't know "Dave," why don't you tell me? Considering you didn't deny it, you must understand your own double-standard better than I do. It makes no sense to me, except that it's a racist double-standard.

And by the way, why so abrasive all the time "Dave"? Is it because you know you're on the wrong, immoral side of all of this, and so you can't possibly ever win?


I'm asking you why you're taking this BBC report seriously


I took it seriously before it even existed. Which is to say, the dancing Israelis are old news. It's not surprising that you still deny it after all these years, and what it implies, because you would also still deny that there were explosions all over the WTC complex even though we've known that since the day of 9/11 as well. What makes the difference for you isn't what's true, but what YOU WANT to believe.

So you have the option of taking truth seriously or not. Because of commitments I have made to what is right for everyone, I don't have that option.


when you conspiracy people


You could save yourself a lot of trouble by not trying to lump "you conspiracy people" into a single group. I know for a fact I haven't been going around saying "the BBC knew because they reported it early." Maybe they did, maybe they only knew what the teleprompter said.

You want to play this game where you accuse me of things I never said? Oh, man, really? Because I can come up with some good stuff for you, that you never said.



The whole reason why you people don't accept the 9/11 report is becuase of inconsistancies


Close! But I'll give you a second try.

Your spelling is inconsistent. The "9/11 report" on the other hand... Even the people who wrote it say it's complete garbage and they were stonewalled. So there really isn't much of a debate there.




Good grief, getting a straight answer out of you people is like nailing jam to the wall.


Well Jesus, considering I never made the claim you're talking about in the first place, it's little wonder! Like I said, you could save yourself a lot of trouble by getting straight who you're talking to in the first place. You have the choice to use a hammer and nails you know, but it's your choice to go about things in a more "special" way.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


If you are able to come up with some legitimate narrative which states that Israel are trying to engineer a war between the USA and (enter country of your choice) then please post. Please note legit sources and not some rehashed Youtube gibberish from some self-proclaimed "expert".

Regards



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


What's wrong with antisemiticism?


edit on 8-9-2010 by etcorngods because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


Again no proofs, showing me some web page that doesn't exist anymore and a video that doesn't provide any proof.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenshrew
 


Again, no proofs same propaganda-type translation.. a witness that saw a bunch of guys shocked acting crazy because they just saw a plane hit the world trade center.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Every time a new important story breaks to it is important to record as much media coverage as possible. At this moment, TBTB had not yet had enough time to organize their lines. They are not walking in step. Important aspects which are inconvenient to TBTB are not yet suppressed. In hindsight other interviews may look astonishing preplanned. This was true for Peter Powers blunder during 7/7. This was also true, when multiple bombs were reported in Oklahoma City and the explosives were found Middle Eastern driven vans.

Here are three clips right from 9/11.
Hyman Brown, was neither an architect nor project engineer for the twin towers, although he was presented as one on 9/11. The question is: “Why?” Here is a video, showing this liar on NBC, 9/11, 19:51. He uses the media to spread the first version of the official conspiracy theory (fire melted the steel). Normally an imposter and liar of this magnitude shouldn't get tenure as a reward. Brown now teaches in Ariel University Center of Samaria (Israel).


Further Information:

In an interview with me, conducted in June of 2008, Hyman Brown admitted that he held none of the titles attributed to him. “It was my first job out of college, I was 25 years old, and I was the guy who sharpened the pencils. . . . It was my job to open the trailer and make coffee in the morning.”

But even those modest claims are probably not true. When I asked him how he could simultaneously be in graduate school in Los Angeles and an engineer in New York, Brown told me that he “commuted” between New York and Los Angeles from 1967 through 1970, but is that credible? The typical salary for a novice engineer in 1966 was approximately $9,000, or $173 a week. The cost of a one-way ticket from Los Angeles to New York during that period was $217.65...

colorado911visibility.org...

Since we have no footage of the cheering Israelis from 9/11, I want to add a video showing someone, who seems to be everything but shocked. Arafat and his henchmen are quite a contrast to Ehud Barak, who seems to be fighting against fits of glee (perhaps this is just his normal sociopathic behaviour, but it seems nonetheless strange to me). During the interview Barak manages to address every warhawk talking point. He also shows, that he is quite a prophet, predicting that the identity of the perpetrators will be known within 12 hours.

Ehud Barak, interviewed on BBC an hour after the 9/11 attacks





In this post I mentioned Jerome Hauers preknowledge regarding the anthrax attacks. In this clip, he shows, that he is also quite a fast and accurate real-time analyst.


911 Clues EVERYONE MISSED






posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenshrew
 


Keep posting youtube videos without any proofs, or you can just admit already that you have failed to prove any connection between the planning of 9/11 and the mossad intelligence agency and you just want it to be true because of your fanatical views against the state of Israel.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by GodJudgesMe
a witness that saw a bunch of guys shocked acting crazy because they just saw a plane hit the world trade center.


"shocked acting crazy" ?


Your story is so much more believable than what was actually reported by the media.


Everyone was shocked by what happened. If there was nothing odd about the way they were behaving, why were the police called on them?

Why were they detained by police?

You think the media and police over here all hate Jews/Israelis and just make up all this stuff based on NOTHING? Get real. Do you live in Israel or something?



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
"shocked acting crazy" ?


Your story is so much more believable than what was actually reported by the media.


Everyone was shocked by what happened. If there was nothing odd about the way they were behaving, why were the police called on them?

Why were they detained by police?

You think the media and police over here all hate Jews/Israelis and just make up all this stuff based on NOTHING? Get real. Do you live in Israel or something?


That's why the police let them go after investigating them ? you are just giving me assumptions, you don't have any solid proof like the rest of this JOKE (i mean thread).

What are you going to do now that you have failed to provide evidence ? are you going to try to personally attack me? will be interesting to see your next step.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GodJudgesMe
reply to post by Drunkenshrew
 


Keep posting youtube videos without any proofs, or you can just admit already that you have failed to prove any connection between the planning of 9/11 and the mossad intelligence agency and you just want it to be true because of your fanatical views against the state of Israel.


It functions every time. Just use ad hominem attacks, ridicule and faked anger. No need for counterarguments. Just try to make those who honestly try to find answers angry. Let them get emotional and they will spend their time countering your snipping remarks and accusations. That is all you have to do to win. No more new information, ideas and sources will be added to the discussion.

You are entitled to your own interpretation of the witness testimony and the counterpunch article. I will not force my opinion upon you. But I will also not engage into an ideological debate.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenshrew
 


You are right it's obvious I'm not going to get any solid proofs around here, I'm wasting my time.

Keep on debating nothing, bye.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Are you retarded? If I am a correspondant for BBC and am interviewed on a different program as MYSELF I am not speaking on behalf of the BBC. Just cause he is/was a correspondant for them doesn't mean he speaks for them in every interview he makes for the rest of his life?

O.K. Accuse me of derailing the thread then re-write the crap you wrote in your previous post. I'm not assuming or accusing the BBC of anything and I am not assuming Alan Watt is a perpetual slave of the BBC and only does their bidding. Once again you simply state something 'All Conspiracy Theorists' beleive and go from there. I am not contradicting myself here. You are by accusing me of attempting to derail the thread whilst you attempt to derail this thread. You still have not mentioned anything on the actual thread topic and that is the interview. I'm betting you still havent watched it and are relying on your superior knowledge of everything and everyone to write your replies.

Ask me contradictions about what 'I said' and then go back to your theory of BBC is in on it one day and bearer of good news the next?

1) I never said that. That was you generalised assumption that 'all conspiracy theorists must beleive this'

2) This interview has nothing to do with the BBC other than Alan Watt has reported for them in the past.

3) I don't beleive the BBC is in on it on any functional level other than they reported on press releases given.

I have commented on what you ask, I see no inconsistencies here even though I understand there are inconsistencies in various conspiracy theories. I'll let you in on a secret, they're theories, they are not all encompassing, and they are beleived as possibilities rather than facts which must not contradict each other.

I guess when all you do is throw all conspiracy theorists in one bag and draw extremely broad generalisations about them like your word is god then you may beleive we beleive contradictory and inconsistant things. The truth is we are searching for answers and may come accross things that don't fit or don't add up, that doesn't mean they all have to be true or all false.

You on the other hand beleive inconsistencies and for you beleive the official story. You fail dude and now I'm late. I'm not gonna waste anymore time with you. What does the ignore function do? Does it mean I don't come accross your self righteous I AM GOD b#^@%hit posts? I'm gonna give it a go.



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


LOL its not a BBC report oh mighty infallible GOD?

Mate, didn't I hear you complain about people not listening on another thread?

Do you actually look at the content of threads of just shoot from the hip with your superior knowledge of everything. Oh and your uber cool theories and generalisations?



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   
To be honest, of all the 911 conspiracies, this one makes the most sense. It's pretty clear that the Israeli government hates Muslims, but they do realize they can't take 'em on all alone. Their prime goal is to expand their settlements and take full possession of Jerusalem. The US and the rest of the world has always pressured them into working towards a peace agreement...and that's NOT what they want. They want the whole cake, as in, keep building settlements and take possession of Jerusalem.

For years they've been trying to delay the peace process. However, they KNOW they can't keep on doing that forever, unless they turn the entire world against Muslims...which exactly what's happening right now.

And the sad part is, the Muslims are indirectly helping them. The Muslim extremists are just as bad, and their stupid Arabic honor thing (not a racist comment, I like most Muslims) made them take credit for 911.

What's even worse is that the last US government realized that they NEED energy resources...which come mostly from the Middle East. So even if they found out Mossad was against 911, they wouldn't speak out because getting a "carte blanche" to invade the Middle East was more valuable to coming out with the truth. They also realized that the truth coming out would have completely destroyed Israel...



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by misinformational
reply to post by hooper
 



You're right, you got me. Please Mr. Enlightenment, tell me what "Semites" are.


I'm not Mr. Enlightment, but here's the definition:


In linguistics and ethnology, Semitic (from the Biblical "Shem", Hebrew: שם, translated as "name", Arabic: ساميّ) was first used to refer to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages. This family includes the ancient and modern forms of Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew, Maltese, Phoenician, Tigre and Tigrinya among others.


Semites are much more than Jews.

Further, modern Israelis have little to no actual Semitic heritage as most are of European decent.

Ding.. Ding.. Ding - "The more you know."



[grammatical edit]

[edit on 7-9-2010 by misinformational]


"Ding.. Ding.. Ding - "The more you know."

Here we go again.

Nice that you know how to use wikipedia but there are other sources.Though the term "Semite" is used to identify someone from any number of peoples who came from southwestern asia the term anti-semite (Antisemitismus) has been used since the late 19th century to denote intolerance and denigration of Jews so the poster used the term correctly. As for the genetic roots of modern Jews we need look no further than:

"Common Genetic Threads Link Thousands of Years of Jewish Ancestry." ScienceDaily (June 4, 2010).

"The genetic, cultural and religious traditions of contemporary Jewish people originated in the Middle East over three thousand years ago. Since that time, Jewish communities have migrated from the Middle East into Europe, North Africa and across the world. ... This study shows that although Jewish people experienced genetic mixing with surrounding populations, they retained a genetic coherence along with a religious one. 'Previous genetic studies of blood group and serum markers suggested that Jewish groups had Middle Eastern origin with greater genetic similarity between paired Jewish populations,' says senior study author, Dr. Harry Ostrer... 'More recent studies of Y chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA have pointed to founder effects of both Middle Eastern and local origin, yet, the issue of how to characterize Jewish people as mere coreligionists or as genetic isolates that may be closely or loosely related remained unresolved. ... Yet the genomes of the Jewish Diaspora groups have distinctive features that are representative of each group's genetic history.' says Dr. Ostrer. 'Our study demonstrated that the studied Jewish populations represent a series of geographical isolates or clusters with genetic threads that weave them together,' added Dr. Gil Atzmon... The researchers identified distinct Jewish population clusters that each exhibited a shared Middle Eastern ancestry, proximity to contemporary Middle Eastern populations and variable degrees of European and North African genetic intermingling. ... The two major groups, Middle Eastern Jews and European Jews, were timed to have diverged from each other approximately 2500 years ago. Southern European populations show the greatest proximity to Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Italian Jews, reflecting the large-scale southern European conversion and admixture known to have occurred over 2,000 years ago during the formation of the European Jewry. An apparent North African ancestry component was also observed as was present in the Sephardic groups potentially reflecting gene flow from Moorish to Jewish populations in Spain from 711 to 1492. ... Dr. Ostrer noted, 'The study supports the idea of a Jewish people linked by a shared genetic history. Yet the admixture with European people explains why so many European and Syrian Jews have blue eyes and blonde hair.'"

You can research it if you want but the bottom line is that Jewish settlers, not arabs made the Negev prosperous. The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; (You can research it if you want but the bottom line is that Jewish settlers, not arabs made the Negev prosperous. ) 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham. Let's disregard number 4 and we still have international law and treaties, the very same thing that people say Israel violates (and let's not speak about the arab violations of al the UN resolutions.)



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by pacific_waters
Though the term "Semite" is used to identify someone from any number of peoples who came from southwestern asia the term anti-semite (Antisemitismus) has been used since the late 19th century to denote intolerance and denigration of Jews so the poster used the term correctly.


If he's using the term "correctly" then you're using the term "correct" very loosely.

Basically you are saying since this common misconception has been occurring since the 19th century, it's really not wrong anymore.

The fact remains that modern-day Israelis are mostly not Semites to begin with, while the Arabs they are fighting, that are native to the Middle East, are. So the term is being applied backwards and in a self-contradictory way, not far removed from other forms of infamous rhetoric like George Orwell's "doublethink."

So really the term "anti-Semitic" should more accurately mean "anti-Arab" since those people have been there the whole time, while Israelis are mostly descended from Europeans as noted. They were literally Europeans who were relocated there a few decades ago, so this only makes too much sense. The Arabs... never went anywhere. At least not since way earlier than the 19th century.




top topics



 
121
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join