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.

 

Judgment against Iran for 9/11. NOT news from Iranian ally RT.

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Judging by the amount of people who believe the Official story the government gave on 9/11.
The same percentage will probably be falling for this load of Bull




posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
*****Anybody want to help me here? I don't understand your positions, and I want to.*****

I am becoming more and more baffled. I know I'm not terribly bright, but what am I missing here?

You say that "the judge is corrupt" is a valid reason to question the truth in this case. Who, associated with this story, has ever claimed the Federal District Court Judge is corrupt? You seem to be, but on what evidence?

The timing is bad? If it was outside the statute of limitations, the judge wouldn't allow the case to proceed. During what time periods is it acceptable to file a suit of this kind?

You don't like the testimonies of experts and three eye-witnesses? How many eye-witnesses are needed?


Other nations, such as Saudi Arabia and possibly Israel, are much more liable in the case of 9/11 but no one in the government will look their way.
No one in the government is looking Iran's way either. This suit is not being filed by the government. If it had been easier to make a case against Saudi Arabia, the lawyers would have filed suit against Saudi Arabia. This is not a government law suit.


So considering the environment in which this is occuring, I think it is a valid response to be very critical of any action taken against Iran when it has become very clear that tptb wish to enter Iran at any moment.
What environment? Do you think this law suit started last week or last month? You mean we have always been friendly with Iran and now that it's changing it's time to spring this law suit? Or do you think we have always been friendly towards Iran and this lawsuit is the justification for a surprise war we want to start?

Do you think we have been waiting for this law suit to be completed before we blow up Iran? I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


I think your antiicipated responses are the responses you feel are legitimate respnses anyway because you to can see the pattern of problem, reaction, solution by the US against any country they turn their attention to, which I might add, is well documented on this forum.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


"The judge is corrupt", "the timing is bad" and doubt in the witnesses are all reasons to doubt that Iran had anything to do with 9/11. There is no evidence to believe so, but it is well within the realm of possabilities. That is where the conspiracy-theorist in us all tend to takeover.




No one in the government is looking Iran's way either. This suit is not being filed by the government. If it had been easier to make a case against Saudi Arabia, the lawyers would have filed suit against Saudi Arabia. This is not a government law suit.


The judge, lawyers and the evidence is directly tied to the US government. The evidence is almost strictly hearsay, and consists of "defectors" from Iran. All of those involved could have easily swayed the evidence to implicate Iran.....all in the name of providing closure for 9/11 families.

Most of the hijackers and money that supposedly aided the hijackers in the plot were from Saudi Arabia. But since the US government is directly tied to SA, they leave them alone.




What environment? Do you think this law suit started last week or last month? You mean we have always been friendly with Iran and now that it's changing it's time to spring this law suit? Or do you think we have always been friendly towards Iran and this lawsuit is the justification for a surprise war we want to start?


We are in a current state of impending war with Iran. Things such as this story can easily be used to sway public opinion when it comes to justification of that sort of war. The timing and environment is highly suspicious to many.

This ruling could be completely true. It also could be outright bullpucky. People such as myself are not inclined to believe such rulings and "coincidences" given the current circumstances. I may be wrong, but the possability remains.

Good to talk to you again Charles!



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by bussoboy
 

Dear bussoboy,

I think you are telling me that I may be blinded by something. If that's what you intend, then thank you a dozen times over! I can't fix problems in my thinking until I know they're there. A real friend helps you spot them.

I think your antiicipated responses are the responses you feel are legitimate respnses anyway because you to can see the pattern of problem, reaction, solution by the US against any country they turn their attention to, which I might add, is well documented on this forum.

So, help me out. Are you saying that the US picked Iran to take the blame for this, so they rigged the court hearing to make Iran look bad? If so, and it is possible that they did, how is the US better off? Did the US have no cause for war against Iran before, but now they do?

I am trying to find an answer that makes sense. I hope you're not saying that there is no answer that makes sense.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
One general thing. I was looking through the documents on the case, and I finally found out why the 10 years.

The lawsuit was originally filed in 2002, in 2004 a federal appelate court ruled that their type of lawsuit could not be filed. That restriction was lifted in NDAA of 2008 (which happens at the end of 2008) So they started up again just three years ago. That's common enough in a massive civil suit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear sheepslayer247,

It's Old Home Week, good to hear from you. You've brought up something that I've worried about for some time now.


"The judge is corrupt", "the timing is bad" and doubt in the witnesses are all reasons to doubt that Iran had anything to do with 9/11. There is no evidence to believe so, but it is well within the realm of possabilities. That is where the conspiracy-theorist in us all tend to takeover.
See, I haven't been able to bring myself to do that. I think I have a failure of imagination. I have to have at least a little evidence to believe in something, unless it's just a mental exercise.

I'm envious of you. I wish I could pick up your ability somewhere. My big fear is that a committee of ATSers will show up at my door, remind me that ATS is a conspiracy website, tell me I have no imagination, and tear up my membership card. Will you be one of the committee, or will you ask that I be given propation and re-education?

With great respect,
Charles1952



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 




See, I haven't been able to bring myself to do that. I think I have a failure of imagination. I have to have at least a little evidence to believe in something, unless it's just a mental exercise.

That is completely understandable. Hard evidence is the key to believing what you are told. Where we all disagree is within the definition of what we individually accept as "hard evidence". What satisfies my definition may not apply to your's.

If something is possible, I will explore it. In this case, it is natural for people such as myself to explore it and then express it on ATS. Myself, I believe it is also possible that Iran may be responsible in some way, but I will refrain from passing full judgement until the evidence I deem acceptable presents itself.




My big fear is that a committee of ATSers will show up at my door, remind me that ATS is a conspiracy website, tell me I have no imagination, and tear up my membership card. Will you be one of the committee, or will you ask that I be given propation and re-education?


Some on ATS would be at your door demanding such things! Can't deny that! But I would never be one of them. You are welcome to your thoughts and level of imagination and I would never impose on it....just don't show up at my doorstep!






posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Interesting. I was concerned about the timing too, so I searched and found this.


9/11 Lawsuit Reveals Iran's Direct Involvement in 9/11 Plot

NEW YORK, May 19, 2011 /PRNewswire/
-- Attorneys representing families of 9/11 victims today are informing a federal court in Manhattan that they are filing comprehensive evidence that Iran played a key role in planning and facilitating the 9/11 attacks and called on the U.S. Government to declassify documents detailing what the U.S. intelligence community knew about Iran's relationship to al Qaeda prior to September 11, 2001.


More, from the NYT.



The 9/11 commission report said there was “strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of Al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers.” The report also said there was circumstantial evidence that senior Hezbollah operatives were closely tracking the travel of some of the hijackers into Iran in November 2000.

But the commission said that it had “found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack,” and that the “topic requires further investigation by the U.S. government.”

Thomas E. Mellon Jr., a lawyer for the families, said the suit, first brought in Washington in 2002 and later moved to Manhattan, sought to do that investigation.



edit on 17/12/11 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Does Obama pay any public attention to this case at all? ... My guess? He says it's a private civil lawsuit which he can not be appropriately involved in.

I agree. In fact, I think the administration will avoid making any public comment at all. "It was a private matter, in a different branch of government, and it may still be appealed. (I think. Can you appeal if you didn't bother showing up for the trial?) Any allegations regarding classified intelligence on Iran are just that, but feel free to file a FOIA request and we'll get back to you in 3-5 years."


Second point. I'm having trouble seeing this as a government operation because 1) it's too elaborate, 2) the payoff, if any, is too remote, and 3) they don't gain anything that they don't already have. The world will not pay much attention to a US court judgment against Iran, so any gain would have to be domestic. Americans already dislike Iran, so what's his reward?

If it is a government operation, they took their time with it. If they wanted to frame Iran for 9/11, they would've done it years ago through the 9/11 Commission. Or they would've waterboarded one of the IRGC operators we caught in Iraq until he confessed. Or they would would come up with something new and spectacular. They wouldn't seek out a civil suit in a district court and persuade the judge to rule in the plaintiff's favor--something the judge probably had to do, anyway.

One more thing--relying on the reporting of defectors is dangerous. They have their own agendas, and it is difficult to vet the information they provide. CURVEBALL was a defector, and we all know how that turned out.



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


No mate; Im not doing that, as others in this thread have said, the US never seems to be short of "evidence" agianst anyone they have in thier sights. Look what happend with WMDs, with OBLs undergound bunker.

Just in case your not aware of this but look up the death of the Weapens Inspector who accused the Blair goverment of Sexing up the evidence against WMDs.

Only just today I read a transcript of an interview on Proejct camelot called the Anglo Saxon Mission. I strongly recommend that you read this as its very illuminating in terms of the wests current issues in perspective. What the interviewee had to say is very chilling. The west wants to lure Iran into a nucular stike against Israel who will strike back. China will then hopefully, stike back at the west to protect iran. The real target here is China and the plan is send China back to the dark ages so that families in the west who have been in control of the world for hundreds of years can maintain their power. You have to read all of the interview to under stand how all this is planned to work.

Hope this helps



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by John0Doe
 


I don't know how you forge people. The judge found there were witnesses to the planning that gave their testimony as well as other experts and an extensive record.

Besides, this isn't the United States v. Iran, it's families of victims v. Iran. Please explain why Obama might think it's necessary to intervene with massive forgery and extensive witness tampering into a civil lawsuit? To make Iran look bad to Americans? That is silly, in my opinion. Americans aren't in love with Iran anyway.

The best argument I can see, and which no one has used, is that since this is a civil lawsuit only a preponderance of the evidence is necessary, not "beyond a reasonable doubt."


U dont forge people,u just tell them what and when to say,and u pay them good for it!
That judge could find those witnesses back in 2001/2002,if they just didnt destroyed evidence by throughing all remains from WTC into the bottom of river....
Many people will witness against anyone if they get payed good. So no need to come with those lies to me as i know how government works... All governments same...(i mean western governments)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join