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.
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by BRAVO949
we should be open to discussing Israel's involvement in the crime of 9/11.
As they were not involved any "discussion" you want is just a hate filled spew against jews, not based on any evidence or facts.
Originally posted by BRAVO949
but I think I can convince you just how evil Israel is and that 9/11 is exactly the sort of thing they love to do.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
Just goes to show the even "experts" will buy into conspiracy theories. One of your previous posts was so full of....inaccuracies...that it is easy to see why you believe the things you do. Is Israel innocent? No more so than the rest of our allies. Did they plan/execute 9/11? No.
And before you ask, one of your falsehoods was the assertion that ole Larry arranged for special terrorism insurance. That's an out and out lie.
Originally posted by BRAVO949
Larry Silverstein the radical Zionist admitted on a PBS special that he called for the destruction of WTC Building 7, though, right?[/QUOTE]
Wrong, just another of your many lies. care to show the exact quote you are talking about?
No, I did not think you could, just another of your hate filled anti jew posts.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by BRAVO949
And again, relying on innuendo and lies.
Silverstein tried to buy LESS insurance for the complex. His bankers forced him to buy more. In addition his policy had not even been issued on 9/11/01. All he had was the rider which the insurance companies agreed to abide by......before the legal fights started.
In addition, insurance companies paid for the damages suffered in the 1993 attack.
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by BRAVO949
Larry Silverstein the radical Zionist admitted on a PBS special that he called for the destruction of WTC Building 7, though, right?[/QUOTE]
Wrong, just another of your many lies. care to show the exact quote you are talking about?
No, I did not think you could, just another of your hate filled anti jew posts.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by BRAVO949
I'm positive. I've done the research, rather than relying on conspiracy sites.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
Excuse me, I got my words switched around. The Policy was still being negotiated, the insurance companies agreed to abide by the binder agreement.
www.nytimes.com...
edit on 3-12-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)edit on 3-12-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by BRAVO949
When I make a mistake, I own up to it.
And in this case, it makes the notion that Silverstein had anything to do with the attack that much more ridiculous. Willingly destroy property you are renting, without knowing if you will be covered? And don't bother to mention the "pull it" comment. That one has been demolished on here too many times.edit on 4-12-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by BRAVO949
And again you resort to innuendo and falsehoods. No, the insurance companies did NOT have to honor it. The policy was still being negotiated and was not in force.
And it was also pointed out that Zim, did not break their lease and still had employees and computer systems in the towers when they were attacked. The loss of the computers meant Zim had to briefly cease operations.........and yet, you still try to use it as "proof" of Israeli involvement.edit on 4-12-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)
If you mean a small group of radical Zionsts run Israel and the US then I agree with you.
An important point is that this same group is draining the resources of the US to prop up Israel.
Well over 100,000 American troops have been injured in wars for Israel.
I think we should all be upset by that fact and we should be open to discussing Israel's involvement in the crime of 9/11.
In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union. Those resources would subsequently be turned over to international bankers and corporations. On November 1, 2001, the second operative in the Bush regime, President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13233 on the basis of “national security” and
Initially, it is difficult to see a pattern to the destruction of September 11th other than the total destruction of the World Trade Center, a segment of the Pentagon, four commercial aircraft and the loss of 2,993 lives. However, if the perceived objective of the attack is re-defined from its commonly suggested ‘symbolic’ designation as either ‘a terrorist attack’ or a ‘new Pearl Harbor,’ and one begins by looking at it as purely a crime with specific objectives (as opposed to a political action), there is a compelling logic to the pattern of destruction. This article provides research into the early claims by Dick Eastman, Tom Flocco, V.K. Durham and Karl Schwarz that the September 11th attacks were meant as a cover-up for financial crimes being investigated by the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), whose offices in the Pentagon were destroyed on September 11th.1 After six years of research, this report presents corroborating evidence which supports their claims, and proposes a new rationale for the September 11th attacks. In doing so, many of the anomalies – or inconvenient facts surrounding this event - take on a meaning that is consistent with the claims of Eastman et al. The hypothesis of this report is: the attacks of September 11th were intended to cover-up the clearing of $240 billion dollars in securities covertly created in September 1991 to fund a covert economic war against the Soviet Union, during which ‘unknown’ western investors bought up much of the Soviet industry, with a focus on oil and gas. The attacks of September 11th also served to derail multiple Federal investigations away from crimes associated with the 1991 covert operation. In doing so, the attacks were justified under the cardinal rule of intelligence: “protect your resources”2 and consistent with a modus operandi of sacrificing lives for a greater cause.
Step 1 : anyone interested in 9/11, no matter what your views on who did it, should already have a DVD copy of the film "9/1...
Whoever you think was behind 9/11, we can agree a major aspect of it is government propaganda, and a major aspect of that, since the days of Eisenstein and Riefenstahl, has been film. This article is about named individuals who had roles to play in that part of 9/11, who knew what was going to happen, knew thousands were going to be killed, did nothing about it and have probably never had one twinge of conscience ever since. They didn't kill anybody, but their foreknowledge makes them legally liable. Reading this is a necessary step on the long road towards making them pay for it.