Israeli Links to 9/11

Anyone who wants to read pretty much everything there is to read on the subject should try this.

Of course some of the "facts" that have been presented in this thread are fabricated (they weren't dressed up as Arabs, there was no explosive residue), some things are conveniently left out (they weren't just arrested and questioned, they were detained for months) and some of the insinuations are silly (what exactly is strange about a boxcutter in a moving van?).

But the important thing is this - everybody with a camera took photos of the WTC that day. That doesn't make them guilty of involvement in the attacks. There was nothing to tie these people to the attacks, so they were released.

 

Facts, not opinion:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34250,00.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/ketcham03072007.html

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0622-05.htm

 

You shouldn't believe everything Fox News says.

Fox added a remark about the cameras being set up prior to the attack that wasn't in the New York Times article.

What Fox said:

Friday, September 14, 2001

"The New York Times reported Thursday that a group of five men had set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack on Tuesday, and were seen congratulating one another afterwards." - FOX

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34250,00.html

What the NY Times said:

"Separately, officials said a group of about five men were now under investigation in Union City, suspected of assisting the hijackers. In addition, the officials said the men had apparently set up cameras near the Hudson River and fixed them on the World Trade Center. They photographed the attacks and were said to have congratulated each other afterward, officials said."

AFTER THE ATTACKS: THE INVESTIGATION; BIN LADEN TIE CITED
By DAVID JOHNSTON AND JAMES RISEN
Published: September 13, 2001
New York Times

Papers like the NY Times didn't have all their facts straight either in the days that followed 9/11. There were many stories and claims made just after 9/11.

.

 

Someone needs to post the article in The Forward and what their evidence was, if any. Journalists who write these articles need to start posting some evidence, not claims based on speculation and conjecture made by former officials and other jounalists.

.

 

The 'explosives in the truck' claim turned out to be false. There doesn't seem to be any evidence about the dancing either. As far as smiling, I haven't seen any photos that show them smiling during the attack. There was only the personal testimony of the woman who called the police on them who said they seemed happy and an 'unnamed source' who claims that their photos that were in possession of the FBI supposedly show that they were smiling.

.

 

"movers' vans are a common intelligence cover."

There must be a lot of intelligence covers out there riding around.

.

 

It has been my opinion that Nazi agents set fire to the Reichstag, blamed it on a communist, and used it as an excuse to concentrate their own power and abolish a variety of left wing opposition parties.

Van Lubbe was a communist who was really an anti-nazi and he claimed to have acted alone. But the extent of the fire was such that, how could he have done it alone?

So maybe the nazis had an agent provacateur?

Or maybe the communists really thought they would spark an uprising against the nazis?

I don't know very much about Weimar Germany, but the communist party was very powerful in the Reichstag before the fire, and they were the Nazis' main opponents, ideologically and politically. The Nazis printed lots of propaganda about the imminent communist revolution and seemed to really believe it. But, afaik, the only political violence involving the communists directly was immediately after WWI.

 

when it comes to rational thinking about this subject i think people need to understand what the difference is between rational critique and anti semitism

rational critique is an opinion not based in hate

anti semitism is

today any critique of israel's shennanigans and genocidal actions is immediately attacked as anti semitism.

the israeli people are bombarded with patriotic/ religious messages and zealous over reaction from birth. when the jews of the outside world visit the religious authorities try and infect them with a one sided jaundiced view of the world. over times it twists their minds. indeed i have met someone enthusiatically telling me about his brief meeting with ariel sharon in israel. the israelis against the "total war" approach to the rest of the world are called traitors.

anti semitism is practised by jews too. the assassination of yitzak rabin was the clearest action yet against the jewish people, yet very few people mention this. his assassination was no different than being killed by the zealots.

and exactly how successful has this message of hate for the rest of the world been for israel?

well the facts answer for themselves. israel has supposedly been waging a "successful" war on terrorism since 1948. yitzak rabin realised that the "war" couldn't be won militarily and decided to do what most other leaders did in that situation - find a compromise, look what happened to him.

 

Thanks Shaggie. The 911 myths link showed how Fox had made that mistake, but of course Rat didn't read it. His conspiracy websites never stop telling the same lies, even years after they have been proved wrong. But he likes it that way.

 

as an after thought..

wouldn't someone who was trained as a spy choose a position to film a little more discreetly rather than gain the angry attention of the local inhabitants?



one thing that isn't disputed is that they were happy.

 

Plenty of people were happy.

 

i'm sure they were

the happiest people were the people who had shares , directorships and jobs in weapons companies.

if there were few or no wars , how would anyone make any money?

this is probably why nuclear weapons wouldn't be used in modern wars. if you thoroughly crush a weak enemy how could you make money unless you were endlessly fighting them. it is best to permanently weaken an enemy rather than win outright because it allows you to always have justification to make money on the back of havoc and chaos.

there always "blowback" but what would you care? if you were reasonably wealthy chances are you would survive any major attack.

let the poor of america eat the bullet in iraq , they are always happy to serve a bad master.