Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

More Mossad Evidence for 9/11 Truth?

page: 8
28
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by BRAVO949

Here we can see and hear the Israeli men arrested on 9/11 talk about their arrest.





You should listen to what the policeman says at 1:00

They were not arrested.




posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

It was pretty funny though, according to the audio the van had exploded, and the picture they showed us was of a van that had not exploded. That was my first clue that the photo might be a fake. It's funny that no truthers were smart enough to pick up on that little detail.


Hey wait a minute. If the van exploded, then didnt anyone notice a huge explosion in the middle of a street? How can one miss a VAN EXPLODING in the middle of a block????



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Really amazing, isn't it?

The supporters of Israeli war crimes, Israeli terrorism and Israeli Apartheid post on ATS virtually nothing but name calling and denials.

Of course they are following the examples set by the masters in Israel.

President Sarkozy came right out and called Benyumin Netanyahu a liar and President Obama said nothing to contradict that assertion.

200 Israelis arrested or detained before or after 9/11



Here is another classic example of what Israelis do best.

Lie





Originally posted by Flyer
reply to post by waypastvne
 


Why were they deported if they didnt do anything?

Basically you and your little friend ignore a mountain of evidence and just scream racist at everyone.
Its so bad that its laughable.

Its quite clear to me a faked picture was thrown into the evidence so no one would believe anything else associated with it, a classic disinfo tactic.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by BRAVO949
We can understand why people who love Israel want to suppress the links between Israel and 9/11.


Except that there is no link, only people with a hatred for jews that try and blame them, trying to divert attention from the Islamic terrorists who really did 9/11


Prove that Islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11..
Two can play this stupid game.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Morpheas

Prove that Islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11.


It's already been proven in court.

And if you don't like or trust the US court system, then where is the right venue?



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by Morpheas

Prove that Islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11.


It's already been proven in court.

And if you don't like or trust the US court system, then where is the right venue?



I really don't think ANYONE in the media & general public knows who was really behind 9/11, so try not to say it was "proven in court".

Bush: Iraq, al Qaeda linked.......Saddam 'had no link to al-Qaeda'

U.S. District Court Rules Iran Behind 9/11 Attacks...Iran scouted NYC spots post-9/11, Congress told

Ex-Senators Say Saudi Arabia May Be Linked to 9/11



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by homervb

I really don't think ANYONE in the media & general public knows who was really behind 9/11, so try not to say it was "proven in court".




It WAS proven in court that 19 Muslims hijacked 4 planes and crashed them.

Therefore, they did it.

They may have had some degree of help from those you mention, but it does not detract from that fact.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
About a month after 911 there was this

www.aztlan.net...

ever been debunked?



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by homervb

I really don't think ANYONE in the media & general public knows who was really behind 9/11, so try not to say it was "proven in court".




It WAS proven in court that 19 Muslims hijacked 4 planes and crashed them.

Therefore, they did it.

They may have had some degree of help from those you mention, but it does not detract from that fact.


It does show that the court system is seriously flawed and has no intention of getting justice for those who lost loved ones on 9/11. Do you not see anything conflicting about these:




Saudis to remain out of 9/11 damages case -judge "The plaintiffs -- mostly the families of victims of the attacks -- had asked U.S. District Judge George Daniels to reinstate claims against Saudi Arabia and a related charity. They cited a November appeals court decision allowing similar claims to proceed against Afghanistan. But Daniels said the November opinion by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was not sufficient grounds to bring back the Saudis, who had been dismissed as a defendant in 2005."






Sarasota link to 9/11 terrorists prompts call for investigation

In the weeks to follow, law enforcement agents not only discovered the home was visited by vehicles used by the hijackers, but phone calls were linked between the home and those who carried out the death flights — including leader Mohamed Atta — in discoveries never before revealed to the public.

Ten years after the deadliest attack of terrorism on U.S. soil, new information has emerged that shows the FBI found troubling ties between the hijackers and residents in the upscale community in southwest Florida, but the investigation wasn’t reported to Congress or mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

Former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who cochaired the bipartisan congressional Joint Inquiry into the attacks, said he should have been told about the findings, saying it “opens the door to a new chapter of investigation as to the depth of the Saudi role in 9/11. … No information relative to the named people in Sarasota was disclosed.”





Questions Linger Over San Diego 9/11 Hijackers’ Ties to Saudi Government

Graham said a Saudi man named Omar Al Bayoumi helped the two hijackers find apartments in San Diego and introduced them to other Muslims in the area. Graham said before Al Bayoumi helped the men, he received $465 per month from a Saudi government contractor. Afterward, his monthly allowance jumped to $3,700. Enlarge this image Credit: Wikimedia Commons Above: Parkwood Apartments complex in the Clairemont Mesa section of San Diego. This is where 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar lived when they came to the United States in February 2000. “The interpretation we gave to it was that Bayoumi was a conduit of financing for the two hijackers while they were in San Diego," Graham said. "That wasn’t the end of it. It turned out that that amount of money was not sufficient to support the somewhat elaborate lifestyle of Al-Hazmi and Al-Midhar.” Graham believed the funding source was Saudi government officials. He says his staff tried to interview Shaikh, who had rented rooms to Al-Hazmi and Al-Midhar.



-Substantial evidence exists (government memos and documents) that shows Saudi Arabia was directly tied to 9/11

-A judge throws out the case stating that evidence is lacking

Do you not see the problem? Personally, if someone I love was murdered and there was direct links to the suspect and the court system claimed there was a lack of evidence and threw the case out, well...I'd be pretty damn enraged. But then again, I'd probably be labeled by the government as a "truther" (considering I'm seeking the truth behind why my family member was murdered, by who, and how it was done) and then I'd automatically be considered insane because everyone else believes whatever the judge says.

I'm sorry but I'm not going to straight up believe anything a US Court can apparently "prove". The US Court system can be manipulated as shown by what I've posted.

The official story comes from the government. The same government who apparently had the biggest occurrence of miscommunication in US government history, so big that 3,000 people are dead because of it. No one within any government agency suffered any type of consequences for it. And now you're going to believe every word from them? Whatever floats your boat man, as for me, I'm a skeptic.



edit on 9-4-2012 by homervb because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by homervb

Do you not see the problem?


Nope. I am not a conspiracy minded loon.


Personally, if someone I love was murdered and there was direct links to the suspect and the court system claimed there was a lack of evidence and threw the case out, well...I'd be pretty damn enraged.


IOW, you are not interested in justice, but rather, revenge by stringing somebody up. That's nuts.

But here's the problem..... there is evidence that indeed, 19 Muslims carried out 9/11. They died in the attacks. they might have had help from some Saudis, but it never was, and never will be policy of the ruling Saudi family. indeed, there was strong evidence that came out that 2 Saudi princes aided Al-Quaeda. Guess what happened to them? Less than a week after this info came out, they were dead. IOW, the Saudi guv executed some of the royal family cuz of their involvement. Sounds like you would like that kind of justice, eh?


...... then I'd automatically be considered insane because everyone else believes whatever the judge says.


No.

Everybody believes truthers to be mentally challenged cuz they lack critical thinking skills and knowledge, and yet claim to have learned all the secrets about 9/11 through University Google.


I'm sorry but I'm not going to straight up believe anything a US Court can apparently "prove". The US Court system can be manipulated as shown by what I've posted.


IOW, you have zero idea how the US justice system works and would prefer to kill 'em all and let god sort it out. How quaint.


The official story comes from the government.


It doesn't, but even if it did, who or what is "the guv"?

I'll tell you what it is. It's acollection of individuals that have families and kids and friends. The guv is not a single entity.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Nope. I am not a conspiracy minded loon.


Yep, cause a person who can find flaws within government testimony and documents is considered a "conspiracy minded loon". I've heard this from other ignorant people as well. Sounds like a conditioned response to me.


Guess what happened to them? Less than a week after this info came out, they were dead. IOW, the Saudi guv executed some of the royal family cuz of their involvement. Sounds like you would like that kind of justice, eh?


No, I'm not looking to kill anyone, I'm not even a supporter of the death penalty. GOOD JUDGEMENT CALL!




Everybody believes truthers to be mentally challenged cuz they lack critical thinking skills and knowledge, and yet claim to have learned all the secrets about 9/11 through University Google.


People who do seek the truth use government documents, media articles, and the works of professional architects and engineers. But you seem to totally overlook that fact. GOOD JUDGEMENT CALL!


IOW, you have zero idea how the US justice system works and would prefer to kill 'em all and let god sort it out. How quaint.


I have a pretty damn good idea of how the US justice system works and I've pointed out several flaws with the system in which you have yet to comprehended how messed up it really is. And yet again, not a supporter of war, the death penalty and any kind of life threatening violence. GOOD JUDGEMENT CALL!


It doesn't, but even if it did, who or what is "the guv"?

I'll tell you what it is. It's acollection of individuals that have families and kids and friends. The guv is not a single entity.


You know what dude, if you really think the US Government is nothing but sweet and nice then you really need a reality check. You need a drone to fly over your house, shoot a hellfire missile at it, and kill everyone in your family. This is what they're doing in Pakistan my friend, killing innocent people who they "think" are terrorists. But you don't understand that because you listen to what the US media tells you, which in turn is what members of the US government have told the media. Look outside the box, go through media from around the world, you will learn a lot about the government and their "concern" for innocent lives.



edit on 10-4-2012 by homervb because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by homervb

Yep, cause a person who can find flaws within government testimony and documents is considered a "conspiracy minded loon".


Nope. they are usually considered reporters

A conspriacy loon is one that looks at everything with a suspicious eye, believes in anything that supports their conspiracy beliefs, and handwaves away any evidence that refutes their position regardless of what others with vastly superior education and experience have to say on the matter.



People who do seek the truth use government documents, media articles, and the works of professional architects and engineers.


Ummmm no you don't. Truthers are unable to understand what those docs say if they are technical in nature. And again, any article that can be quote mined to support your belief is used, even if the conclusion of that article clearly is in opposition to your position.

IOW, delusional.



I have a pretty damn good idea of how the US justice system works


I seriously doubt that. otherwise you would understand why the points you have mean zero to rational people.


You know what dude, if you really think the US Government is nothing but sweet and nice then you really need a reality check.


Never said that brah. Don't think that either. the guv does f'ed up things all the time. But again... the guv is not some monolithic entitty. It is made up of people. People are fickle. They change their mind. They feel guilt. They spill the beans when they reflect on what they have done. They rat out others to save their own skin.

This is reality. Deal with it.


You need a drone to fly over your house, shoot a hellfire missile at it, and kill everyone in your family. This is what they're doing in Pakistan my friend, killing innocent people who they "think" are terrorists.


Uh huh......

So, this is your logic process then?

The military kills civilians, therefore 9/11 was an inside job.....

Delusional thought process there dude. grow up some. Get off the 'net. Live a little. Get a girlfriend. Get some friends.

You might return to normal.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Wow, Fluffaluffagous


You've managed to completely classify me based on your belief without knowing me what so ever at all. Without ever speaking a word to me or going through any of my posts I am automatically a "loon" who cannot comprehend government documents and ALWAYS uses things in my favor. I'm the loon? Dude you don't even know me, you haven't even seen my other posts. I am here to debate and I always state I'm not here to yell at people or cause a fight. When I have been proven wrong or things are pointed out to me I listen to them. I don't automatically consider people of opposing arguments a "loon". Maybe you are the one delusional if you can right off the bat generate a very false picture of the type of person I am. It sounds like your purpose isn't to defend the official story but to continuously classify people who question the events of 9/11. The more you segregate people like yourself from people who question the events, the more you stray away from the actual evidence us "truthers" have to offer. Isn't that the psychology behind labeling "truthers" anyways? Give them a separate label from those who believe the official story, and automatically they've become the black sheep.

It's much easier to call someone a loon then to take into consideration what they have to say. The difference between us: You are told the official story and find no problems with it. I am told the official story, can point out inconsistencies, and question it. You don't see me calling you crazy for believing it, do you? No. Maybe you need to take it down a notch, lower your hostility, and learn to talk to people with respect.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by homervb
 


This all started with your statement that it still needs to be proven that 19 Muslims hijacked the plane.

I pointed out that it has already been proven. That is fact.

Instead of answering my question about what venue should be used then, you go off on a tangent, spewing nonsense about how corrupt the court system is and how it can be bought.

IOW, you dodged the question, cuz you have no answer to it. You have not thought this out to a logical conclusion. You have not the process out. this is typical of a delesional truther.

the fact is, the court would indeed listen to strong evidence. but you don't have any. truthers have youtube as their evidence. Shoddy and false conclusions in Bentham. Quote mining. Lies.

there's nothing that you have that you can use that matters in the only venue that counts. Too bad for you, brah...



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous
reply to post by homervb
 


This all started with your statement that it still needs to be proven that 19 Muslims hijacked the plane.

I pointed out that it has already been proven. That is fact.



And OJ was innocent.


::face palm::



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Are us truthers really wrong in questioning the events of 9/11 if the 9/11 Commission themselves question it? Or are they just "loons" as well?





9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate. Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said. In the end, the panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted, officials said. "We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied." Although the commission's landmark report made it clear that the Defense Department's early versions of events on the day of the attacks were inaccurate, the revelation that it considered criminal referrals reveals how skeptically those reports were viewed by the panel and provides a glimpse of the tension between it and the Bush administration. A Pentagon spokesman said yesterday that the inspector general's office will soon release a report addressing whether testimony delivered to the commission was "knowingly false." A separate report, delivered secretly to Congress in May 2005, blamed inaccuracies in part on problems with the way the Defense Department kept its records, according to a summary released yesterday. A spokesman for the Transportation Department's inspector general's office said its investigation is complete and that a final report is being drafted. Laura Brown, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration, said she could not comment on the inspector general's inquiry. In an article scheduled to be on newsstands today, Vanity Fair magazine reports aspects of the commission debate -- though it does not mention the possible criminal referrals -- and publishes lengthy excerpts from military audiotapes recorded on Sept. 11. ABC News aired excerpts last night. For more than two years after the attacks, officials with NORAD and the FAA provided inaccurate information about the response to the hijackings in testimony and media appearances. Authorities suggested that U.S. air defenses had reacted quickly, that jets had been scrambled in response to the last two hijackings and that fighters were prepared to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 if it threatened Washington. In fact, the commission reported a year later, audiotapes from NORAD's Northeast headquarters and other evidence showed clearly that the military never had any of the hijacked airliners in its sights and at one point chased a phantom aircraft -- American Airlines Flight 11 -- long after it had crashed into the World Trade Center. Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold and Col. Alan Scott told the commission that NORAD had begun tracking United 93 at 9:16 a.m., but the commission determined that the airliner was not hijacked until 12 minutes later. The military was not aware of the flight until after it had crashed in Pennsylvania. These and other discrepancies did not become clear until the commission, forced to use subpoenas, obtained audiotapes from the FAA and NORAD, officials said. The agencies' reluctance to release the tapes -- along with e-mails, erroneous public statements and other evidence -- led some of the panel's staff members and commissioners to believe that authorities sought to mislead the commission and the public about what happened on Sept. 11."I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described," John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. "The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. . . . This is not spin. This is not true."



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by homervb
 
This has become the theater of the absurd, as I have yet to read a post from ONE debunker who can pass the 'smell' test. They are all plants, every single one of them. There's not a hint of intellectual curiosity contained in any of their posts, and they all have a nasty disposition. Only my belief that good will defeat evil keeps me here.





new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join