Five Dancing Israelis

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
its a weird thing when some people celebrate new year maybe thats why they were dancing .have a look at when our hebrew/russian pals had one of many new year shin digs.all the gold underneath the towers that vanished does not get spoken about .ps it was voting time in new york thats why not many were in that morning .the head of barclays bank got a phone call telling him not to go o work that day his brother in law told me that one just after i had pulled the mick out of him by asking him what time he heard about 9-11 in the uk --maybe someone should start a thread on that i am sure you will get answers that will shock you the bbc fxxxxd up on more than wtc7 timeing nuff said




posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 


www.911myths.com is an information clearing house for the most part. It has links to the stories about that day and places for one to go and find facts. The gentleman who runs it, has also filed quite a few FOIA requests and then published the documents on the site so people can see them. People who think it is some sort of sinister government run website, believe that, only because they are afraid of the facts.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by chemistry
 



Originally posted by chemistry

and secondly, why are some people replying to this being so stupid????? Witnesses (plural) clearly saw the Israelis filming before the towers were hit. Also, since when did rational people like ourselves believe officail FBI (agents of the NWO) documents?


I think it hurts your credibility when you throw around unsupported statements. There's NO evidence that those five Israelis had any foreknowledge of the WTC attacks or that they were filming prior to the first attack. If you can provide such evidence, please do. Citing credible sources of info is a lot more effective than repeating rumors.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
after I saw this, I was convinced without a doubt that Israel was involved.

PLEASE watch this, it is very important evidence.



A mere few hours after the attack, Ehud miraculously knows the perpetrator to be Osama Bin Laden. Now how the F can he know that? Even the reporter confronts him and says "now were not saying hes responsible are we?".
He also mentions airport security getting tighter, a war on terror, Libya, Iran, Syria, Iraq... all countries which were invaded in the upcoming decade.
This man was clearly in a position of insider knowledge, it sounds as if he was prepped to say all this



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by knoledgeispower
 

How does he know it wasn't staged ?
Hmmm. Perhaps these Israelis appearing on Israeli TV to admt they were there documenting the event might be considered a clue.
So in all the time they were held did anyone bother to ask who had sent them to 'document the event'?
Did anyone ask how that person knew there would be anything to document?
Did they offer any explanation for the scent of explosives picked up by the dogs?
Is it true that while the whole world, even those countries accused of harboring terrorist, offered their sympathies, the Israeli PM said it was 'a good thing' for Israel?
Curiouser and curiouser



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
the zionist jews and their agency mossad were behind 9/11. the mossad had previous knowledge of 9/11 and probably planned the whole thing.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by seenavv
 

watch your video again the bbc reporter say 3 hours the attacks have been going on right at 4.59 in video you see a window top corner giving the time it is not 5pm uk time as it should be . look up my earlier post .stop the video when you hear the womans voice cut in. i heard about it at 11 am in the uk thats 6am over there lol good find



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by chemistry
 


I personally am more apt to believe Israel orchestrated 911 directly or indirectly rather than the US government. Although i think its possible they were just bystanders that knew ahead of time what would happen and chose to film it. They would be celebrating not the deaths of people that day but the assurance they knew what our response would be to wage war on their neigbbors and enemies.

I really think the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the arguments made by the truthers and OS'rs (hate those titles but using for clarity).
edit on 6/3/2012 by sputniksteve because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 


You make interesting points. I think it was a combined cia-mossad job. Here is what struck the twin towers:



Do people notice the odd things hanging from the belly of the 767? Most likely a remote control pod and one or missle(s) strapped on to each plane.

They were not normal boeing 767s. Sure they are based on the original designed but they were likely modified to accept these extra features for military use. Then paint the aircraft with the united or american airlines livery and everyone thinks it was hijacked planes. I remember reading somewhere that the planes took off from a military base in maryland, but I have no way of knowing if this is true or not.

And probably a predator attacked the pentagon a few hours later with a missle. This makes sense in that there was no pentagon footage released other than a very hazy "few frames per second" CRAP video showing some impact. The most secure facility in the world not being able to prove airplane attack as well as surveillance videos from neigbhoring business confiscated. And an airplane made from aluminum penetrating the bunker-like walls of the pentagon....um yeah right!




I feel confident the isreali government either had foreknowledge of the event or more likely played a leading role somehow. There is no other way so many jews would not show up for work that day and b)5 dancing israelis taking video footage from new jersey. How much proof do we really need?



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


What i dont understand about this theory is the "remote control pod". If you have an empty airplane why do you need to put anything on the exterior of the plane? Couldnt the equipment just be placed inside the plane? Especially if you are trying to hide the fact it is an abnormal plane. Just doesnt make any sense to me.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


What i dont understand about this theory is the "remote control pod". If you have an empty airplane why do you need to put anything on the exterior of the plane? Couldnt the equipment just be placed inside the plane? Especially if you are trying to hide the fact it is an abnormal plane. Just doesnt make any sense to me.


Well obviously some things had been attached to the plane's belly as is self-evident in the photo.

Sure with high-tech retrofitting I guess all the electronics could have been placed INSIDE the plane, which then means only missles would be protruding from the belly. Whatever those objects are, they are massively long!
edit on 6/3/2012 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


So this was a rush job? Meaning it was a spur of the moment idea to use a remote control plane and they didnt have time to move the remote control components inside for the largest terrorist attack against the US which they would then desperatly try and cover up? It was an over sight?

Also what good do inactive missiles do? Pretty sure they need to be armed before tbey are effective. And in that case wouldnt explosives in the plane be much more effective?

In order to prempt your reply, i believe even after a missile is armed and fired they have to travel a minimum distance before they explode in order to not blow up the aircraft that fired them, so I dont see how that theory makes any sense whatsoever.
edit on 6/3/2012 by sputniksteve because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by sputniksteve
 


To debunk your constant strawmen arguements I will say a plane traveling close to 500mph means only the best film and a lucky shot would guarantee the results. There are not that many good photos or videos demonstrating this. I struggled to find it!



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


My constant straw man arguments? Ive made 2 replies that i believe were legitimate questions. Im not attacking you im being civil and asking questions man. Dont act like we should just take your ideas on faith please, tbat does no one any good.

Is your answer really that they just assumed we wouldnt see it? How does that address the concerns about the supposed missiles?



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


My constant straw man arguments? Ive made 2 replies that i believe were legitimate questions. Im not attacking you im being civil and asking questions man. Dont act like we should just take your ideas on faith please, tbat does no one any good.

Is your answer really that they just assumed we wouldnt see it? How does that address the concerns about the supposed missiles?


Again I say it is very difficult to capture "a clear frame" of some things protruding on a modified 767 traveling close to 500mph. It takes very high quality film, very fast shutter speed and somewhat of a lucky shot by the cameramen.

I have attempted to take still pictures of cars going 50mph and they turn out to be hazzy.



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   
"Our purpose was to document the event"



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Ok i see. They assumed we wouldnt see it. I dont think that is sufficient personally but if thats your answer ill take it.

Now for the third time can you try and explain what purpose the missiles would serve? Im not trying to bust your balls but you certainly aren't the first to propose the missiles but we need an explanation for why they are there before we can figure out if they really were. We cant have them attaching missiles if they dont serve any purpose. That would be totally illogical.



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve

Also what good do inactive missiles do? Pretty sure they need to be armed before tbey are effective. And in that case wouldnt explosives in the plane be much more effective?



And what makes you think they were conventional missles?

Could have been special missles. All I know is what I see on the airplane. Why make up hypothesis when you can look at the pictures to see for yourself? Are you calling the pictures fake????



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Mark my words - when all is said and done - we will be at war with England and Israel, I dedicated over 3 years of intensive investigation into 911. and Israeli's did it, England was involved big time - MI6 and CIA with Mossad - all working together, Canada was also involved. US Military participated. *Air Force and Navy. If you want an eye opener - investigate the officers that got promoted after 911.

anyway - what we call the Hidden Government is this Secret Intelligence Forces - they are like a huge corporation w/subsidaries - where ever you see a US Base or US Protectorate - is involved in this hidden government,. where there are no secrets between Countries only Secrets against the people of those countries.
Thats what my research lead too.. its a World Wide Web and we the people are caught in it.
any system you subscribe to you become a slave to it.



edit on 4-6-2012 by 1BornPatriot because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join