Who was inside flight 11? Is this an Israeli Hebrew accent?

reply to post by BRAVO949


By the way, what is the pronunciation of p in modern Egyptian Arabic? That would be the language of Mohammed Atta thought to be the Flight 11 hijacker.

On Page 2 you have native hebrews speaking English, I think on page 5 are clips of Arabs speaking English. A clip of an Egyptian speaking English would be ideal at this point.

Originally posted by Cassius666
On Page 2 you have native hebrews speaking English, I think on page 5 are clips of Arabs speaking English. A clip of an Egyptian speaking English would be ideal at this point.

Really? Just go on Google there must be thousand of them, literally. Remember the Arab spring? All those news interviews of Egyptians.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

To this moment we have several explanations that support the claim that the voice on the recording presented to the 9/11 Commission as having come from Flight 11 on September 11, 2001 is of an Israeli man speaking English with a Hebrew accent.

No one has presented any evidence to suggest that the accent is anything but that of a native Hebrew speaker.

I have provided audio examples of several native Hebrew speakers and an objective comparison of the Hebrew speaker on the 9/11 recording with the examples provided clearing shows the accents are the same.

It seems that the only objections to the evidence that the man on the 9/11 recording was an Israeli arise from those who will not accept the possibility that crimes of 9/11 were carried out in part or in whole by Israelis.

Five Israelis arrested on 9/11 and held for 10 weeks. Deported only after pressure from Israel to do so.



Remember, in a video interview with the so-called lead 9/11 hijacker's girlfriend she said he spoke Hebrew.

We all know Israel has spied on the US for decades.

60 Israelis arrested after 9/11 - some failed lie detector tests. Targeted and penatrated military bases. Explosive ordinance units.

The man the official story calls Mohamed Atta is not the same person as the Egyptian student who had lived in Germay.

There are at least two Mohamed Atta characters who have been merged into one to create a "legend" as it is called in covert operations.

The description of the M. Atta in Germany is totally different from the man in Florida.

Germany - en.wikipedia.org...

It is ridiculous to think that an urban planning graduate with no training could even dream of being part of a highly sophisticated military operation and it is an insult to the professionals who spend years training for such tasks.

Florida - www.american-buddha.com...

Whatever he was up to while attending U.S. flight schools, learning to fly could not have been his only -- or maybe even chief -- motivation, because Mohamed Atta was already a licensed pilot when he arrived in the U.S., Amanda Keller told us. An experienced licensed pilot.

One day while Atta was rummaging through his flight bag -- the same bag important enough to warrant its own room in Key West -- Amanda got a look inside.

"The thing the FBI was most interested in was his pilot bag," she told us. "They asked about it a lot. He kept it locked, and they wanted to know whether I had ever seen anything in it."

"I told them 'yes' one day he opened it briefly, and there were a lot of papers in it, and there was a blue log book in a different language. Mohamed was fluent in almost any language you can think of," she continued. "He had a kind of Day timer in there, too. And a folder with all these different I.D.'s in it. And that's when I saw one -- because it fell out -- a little blue and white thing the size of' a drivers license. It had his picture on it, and it looked like a mug shot, or a prison shot. And it didn't look like him, and I asked him, 'Who is this?"'

"And he said, 'that's me.' He told me it had been taken back when he was in some kind of militia- type deal, like a military-type deal, he said. He compared it to our military only they teach you different tactics. He didn't elaborate."

"He didn't say where it was from, either" she said. "But the writing looked like a cross between Hebrew and Arabic, those little frilly lines. He told me he spoke Hebrew. I said bull#. So he started speaking it, and I guess he did."

We longed for a fuller explanation of the "militia-type deal" to which Mohamed Atta belonged, and wished he had dropped the I.D. in front of an eyewitness who might have recognized the issuing organization.




Still, this is crucial information. What Amanda said next shed even more light: "He told me that he went to different countries and studied. He had pilot's licenses from several different countries. But all the pictures looked different. All the names were different. He had a license to fly from just about every country he had been to. He went to pilot's school in all these countries."

"He said no matter where he decided to live, he could always fly," she said, "because he said it was his path, he had always wanted to be a pilot."

reply to post by BRAVO949

It is ridiculous to think that an urban planning graduate with no training could even dream of being part of a highly sophisticated military operation and it is an insult to the professionals who spend years training for such tasks.

Have you even read Mohammed Attas background? His attendance of an extremist mosque in Hamburg? His visits to Afghanistan?

Amanda Keller has admitted that Mohammed Atta was never her boyfriend and that she made up her story.

Bravo wrote a piece about it.

reply to post by Cassius666

.....but on PAGE 6 BRAVO published material about the background of ATTA that might or might not be true, but is very compelling.

Oh that is a good one. May or may not be true but is very compelling. If its a lie are you saying its a compelling lie?

reply to post by hooper


Hooper you need to get out of war mode. I am merely pointing out, that I did not look into the information posted by Bravo in detail. If you have the third eye to determine what information you come across online is the one and only truth, kudos to you.

Originally posted by ZionSteel
I do not believe what the OP is posting, I do not believe what you people are speculating.

This is just awful, there should be laws against such &$#&Q#!!! arguments!

Nice way to justify your irrational antisemetic hate, losers.

Well I do not necessarily share your sentiment on restricting free speech nor do I think it is "awfull" .

Also relax if Americans or Europeans say America, or the CIA did this or did that, or England/the MI6 did this or that it does not automatically mean they want to wipe out America off the map or kill all white people or whatever ethnic or religious group they perceive as American or British. Of course I cant speak for everybody. You dont need to feel attacked about something you possibly know nothing about. Rather you should feel compelled to be an alert citizen, if you are an Israeli.

Calling people antisemites is akin to concede defeat in an argument JFYI.

Also this isnt about arguing. Look up the clips of native hebrew speakers speaking English on PAGE 2. Compare them to a clip of an arab speaking English on PAGE 5 or look up one on youtube. Then compare it to the audio of the OP and draw your own conclusions. It is offtopic, but on PAGE 6 BRAVO published material about the background of ATTA that might or might not be true, but is very compelling.

EDIT:

Originally posted by ZionSteel
The Temple will be built, and soon!

Those that oppose it shall know wrath. But it doesn't matter if you opppose it or not because it's coming!

Looks like I fell for an good ole forum troll.

reply to post by Cassius666

Hooper you need to get out of war mode. I am merely pointing out, that I did not look into the information posted by Bravo in detail. If you have the third eye to determine what information you come across online is the one and only truth, kudos to you.

So, it can be a complete fabrication but to you its a "compelling" fabrication? What other compelling fabrications should we consider? Should we first determine if a statement is compelling and then consider whether or not it is true? If the fabrication is not first considered compelling should we then ignore it?

You are looking for anything that will support your bias.

reply to post by hooper


Hooper you need to get out of war mode. I am merely pointing out, that I did not look into the information posted by Bravo in detail. If you have the third eye to determine what information you come across online is the one and only truth, kudos to you. I am merely saying out one should check out the information posted by Bravo himself.

On what else could be a fabrication? The NIST report for example, at least that is the conclusion of thousands of architects and engineers, who are experts in their relative fields and looked into the report and found many faults on it. They did so because they checked out the info provided for themselves. That kind of scrutiny should be applied to all theories presented and information as well. But of course "twoofers" understand that better than 911 deniers, who see skepticism as some kind of weakness to exploit apparently, except when it is their own skepticism. Its funny you are the one accusing me of looking for "anything to support my bias" when I am the one putting out material and presenting it so it can be debated without spin.

Originally posted by ZionSteel
I do not believe what the OP is posting, I do not believe what you people are speculating.

This is just awful, there should be laws against such &$#&Q#!!! arguments!

Nice way to justify your irrational antisemetic hate, losers.

Well I do not necessarily share your sentiment on restricting free speech nor do I think it is "awfull" .

Also relax if Americans or Europeans say America, or the CIA did this or did that, or England/the MI6 did this or that it does not automatically mean they want to wipe out America off the map or kill all white people or whatever ethnic or religious group they perceive as American or British. Of course I cant speak for everybody. You dont need to feel attacked about something you possibly know nothing about. Rather you should feel compelled to be an alert citizen, if you are an Israeli.

Calling people antisemites is akin to concede defeat in an argument JFYI.

Also this isnt about arguing. Look up the clips of native hebrew speakers speaking English on PAGE 2. Compare them to a clip of an arab speaking English on PAGE 5 or look up one on youtube. Then compare it to the audio of the OP and draw your own conclusions. It is offtopic, but on PAGE 6 BRAVO published material about the background of ATTA that might or might not be true, but is very compelling.

EDIT:

Originally posted by ZionSteel
The Temple will be built, and soon!

Those that oppose it shall know wrath. But it doesn't matter if you opppose it or not because it's coming!

Looks like I fell for an good ole forum troll.

reply to post by Cassius666


You need to quit copy and pasting your previous posts and then adding new statements. It makes them very difficult to read.

reply to post by Cassius666

On what else could be a fabrication? The NIST report for example, at least that is the conclusion of thousands of architects and engineers, who are experts in their relative fields and looked into the report and found many faults on it. They did so because they checked out the info provided for themselves. That kind of scrutiny should be applied to all theories presented and information as well. But of course "twoofers" understand that better than 911 deniers, who see skepticism as some kind of weakness to exploit apparently, except when it is their own skepticism. Its funny you are the one accusing me of looking for "anything to support my bias" when I am the one putting out material and presenting it so it can be debated without spin.

No wait - now its thousands? Even Gage, the ringleader, admits its less than two thousand. I think the latest number was 1500. That's not thousands, but I guess your hyperbole is "compelling" so we should let it stand. You think the NIST reports are fabrications, but do you think they are compelling? Any chance that someday one of those legions of architects and engineers will bless us with a detailed written analysis of the reports?

By the way, you pick and choose what material that you are so innocently putting out there and for some reason, of all the "material" at your disposal you so often pick "material" that indicts either Jews in general or the State of Israel. Such a coincidence.

ONTOPIC. Look up the clips of native hebrew speakers provided by BRAVO speaking English on PAGE 2. Compare them to a clip of an arab speaking English on PAGE 5 or look up one on youtube. Then compare it to the audio of the OP and draw your own conclusions. It is offtopic, but on PAGE 6 BRAVO published material about the background of ATTA. Crosscheck that information too if you want.

OFFTOPIC

reply to post by hooper


Hooper you need to get out of war mode. I am merely pointing out, that I did not look into the information posted by Bravo in detail. If you have the third eye to determine what information you come across online is the one and only truth, kudos to you. I am merely saying out one should check out the information posted by Bravo himself.

On what else could be a fabrication? The NIST report for example, at least that is the conclusion of thousands of architects and engineers, who are experts in their relative fields and looked into the report and found many faults on it. They did so because they checked out the info provided for themselves. That kind of scrutiny should be applied to all theories presented and information as well. But of course "twoofers" understand that better than 911 deniers, who see skepticism as some kind of weakness to exploit apparently, except when it is their own skepticism. Its funny you are the one accusing me of looking for "anything to support my bias" when I am the one putting out material and presenting it so it can be debated without spin. Try to stick to the topic from now on instead of derailing the thread. The topic is the audio in the OP.

Originally posted by ZionSteel
I do not believe what the OP is posting, I do not believe what you people are speculating.

This is just awful, there should be laws against such &$#&Q#!!! arguments!

Nice way to justify your irrational antisemetic hate, losers.

Well I do not necessarily share your sentiment on restricting free speech nor do I think it is "awfull" .

Also relax if Americans or Europeans say America, or the CIA did this or did that, or England/the MI6 did this or that it does not automatically mean they want to wipe out America off the map or kill all white people or whatever ethnic or religious group they perceive as American or British. Of course I cant speak for everybody. You dont need to feel attacked about something you possibly know nothing about. Rather you should feel compelled to be an alert citizen, if you are an Israeli.

Calling people antisemites is akin to concede defeat in an argument JFYI.


EDIT:

Originally posted by ZionSteel
The Temple will be built, and soon!

Those that oppose it shall know wrath. But it doesn't matter if you opppose it or not because it's coming!

Looks like I fell for an good ole forum troll.

We are still waiting for anyone to challenge the linguistic evidence presented so far that supports the original assertion that the voice on the recording played as part of the 9/11 Commission hearing represents a native Hebrew speaker.

The implication is that Israelis were involved in the crimes of 9/11.

Let us be clear.

* It is the voice of the Israeli man on the recording that implicates Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

* It is the actions of "The Five Dancing Israelis" that implicate Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

* It is the long history of Israeli false flag terrorist operations that implicate Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

The members of this forum who have supplied links to or quotes from the mainstream media or other researchers are just drawing attention to the numerous connections that Israel and its citizens have to the crimes of 9/11.

No one could possibly deny the fact that Israel has used false identities and has stollen passports countless times to commit acts of international terrorism. As such Israel can not be ruled out when it comes to blame for 9/11.



Israel caught stealing passports in New Zealand




Some claimed the hijackers were highly trained professionals. If that is true would they use their real names and provide such an easy path back to their friends and famly? Of course not!

When Israel carries out an act of international terrorism it never uses the real names of the criminal operatives. Israel always creates false documents and false identities for its terrorists.

In fact this was a Zionists M. O. before Israel was even created. When Zionists terrorists blew up the King David Hotel the took on the identity of Arabs to commit the crime in which they murdered innocent Jews, Imight add.

The pattern is clear and well established. Jews admitting they are terrorists and proud of it.

Originally posted by BRAVO949
Hooper, have you ever seen the YouTube video of the woman who claimed to be the former girlfriend of the prime Flight 11 hijacker in which she says he spoke Hebrew?

Hooper, can we agree that there was at least one Israeli on Flight 11?

Hooper, we all agree that former Israeli commando Daniel Lewin (captain) was on board, right?

Was there at least one more Israeli on the flight?

Was Edmund Glazer also Israeli? Mr. Glazer was sitting right beside the former memeber of the elite Israeli commando unit.

As I said, I don't think Daniel was the person speaking on the recording because he lived the first 13 years of his life in the US so he probably did not have a Hebrew accent in English.

Edmund Glazer was from Rhodesia originally from what I can gather so he would not have had a Hebrew accent anyway.

Now, we know that Israel has fraudulently used passports from France, Canada, the UK and New Zealand in some very high-profile international crimes so really any man on the plane could be the voice we heard.

In fact, the voice could not be Daniel Lewin, the one person we know was an Israeli because he would not have had a Hebrew accent.

Well, unless the Israeli operatives killed Daniel at some point and got on the plane using his passport.

That is something Israeli operatives would do but they probably didn't because they prefer to use non-Israeli passports when they commit crimes internationally.

There was a Philip M. Rosenzweig onboard but he was probably an innocent victim.

Robin Kaplan was a woman so the voice wasn't her's.

Paul Friedman was probably just an unlucky soul.

Alex Filipov another innocent man.

As everyone knows the first list of names released by the media included none of the name that were later said to be the hijackers. Daniel Lewin's name is listed as Daniel C. Lewin with regard to the flight manifest but in other places on the net including Israeli newspapers he is Danial M. Lewin.

One report says he was shot, one he was stabbed. There is some question as to when it happened as well.

Can you find the information that says flight attendant Betty Ong claimed that the person in Daniel's seat was one of the hijackers?

Now, if Daniel did have a Hebrew accent then he would become the prime suspect. His workmates could verify if he spoke English without an accent.

Daniel Lewin was the only person onboard who was a trained commando according to the information we have. he was fairly young so you would wonder how he could be overpowered and killed so quickly - if any of that is true.

Care to actually add anything scientific to the discussion?

So, after the above resume, who are you claiming was the owner of the recorded voice ?

Was he operating alone ? If not, with whom ?

Alfie, that is a seperate topic you whish to discuss. I already made a thread on just that topic. Lets keep this about presenting material of hebrew and arab accents, for people to compare to the voice recording of flight eleven and draw their own conclusions.

Originally posted by BRAVO949
We are still waiting for anyone to challenge the linguistic evidence presented so far that supports the original assertion that the voice on the recording played as part of the 9/11 Commission hearing represents a native Hebrew speaker.

The implication is that Israelis were involved in the crimes of 9/11.

Let us be clear.

* It is the voice of the Israeli man on the recording that implicates Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

* It is the actions of "The Five Dancing Israelis" that implicate Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

* It is the long history of Israeli false flag terrorist operations that implicate Israel in the crimes of 9/11.

The members of this forum who have supplied links to or quotes from the mainstream media or other researchers are just drawing attention to the numerous connections that Israel and its citizens have to the crimes of 9/11.

No one could possibly deny the fact that Israel has used false identities and has stollen passports countless times to commit acts of international terrorism. As such Israel can not be ruled out when it comes to blame for 9/11.

Israel caught stealing passports in New Zealand

Some claimed the hijackers were highly trained professionals. If that is true would they use their real names and provide such an easy path back to their friends and famly? Of course not!

When Israel carries out an act of international terrorism it never uses the real names of the criminal operatives. Israel always creates false documents and false identities for its terrorists.

In fact this was a Zionists M. O. before Israel was even created. When Zionists terrorists blew up the King David Hotel the took on the identity of Arabs to commit the crime in which they murdered innocent Jews, Imight add.

The pattern is clear and well established. Jews admitting they are terrorists and proud of it.

Interesting material you provided. With that being said, people shouldnt be mad at all Israelis, for something Israelis did, that most Israelis had no influence, power or even knowledge about. More on topic material can be found in the OP of course, on page 2 where you have Audio of Hebrew accents and on page 5 where you have audio of Arab accents.

reply to post by Cassius666


Most of my post was the quote from your pal Bravo's post. Didn't notice you complaining about that.

After all the waffle about accents I am calling you both out and asking you to name the owner of the voice and associates. It's obviously relevant to the topic.

Alfie - The point is that there was an Israeli on Flight 11.

He was not a shoe salesman from Haifa either.

He was a former captian in an elite Israeli commando group that was assciated with undercover operations including extrajudicial execution (Israeli terrorism), deep penetration / infiltration as well as counter-hijacking.

As mentioned it is not clear if he was part of the group that hijacked the plane as flight crew member Betty Ong claimed of if he was resisting the hijacking.

If he was 31 and a former captain in an elite Israeli commando unit trained in combat he was sure knocked out of the fight early on. Was he shot, stabbed or was his throat slashed?

The Israeli military looks very bad if a rank amateur can kill an elite Israeli commando - doesn't it?

All the information about the events of 9/11 point to a set of highly skilled, highly trained covert operatives not amateurs so either Dan was one of them or was killed by a man equally well trained.

The key point in all of this is that the voice on the recording is clearly Israeli. No one has proven otherwise.

The 9/11 Commission says this man whose voice we hear was the lead hijacker.

If you believe the 9/11 Commission then the lead hijacker was an Israeli.

Did Dan because he can speak Hebrew know what was going immediately and try to stop it?

The Israeli voice and the Israeli commando are key bits of evidence in this crime and they have not been explored to the degree that they should be.

As I mentioned it is very unlikely that Israel or Israeli individuals would pull-off a false flag terrorist operation like 9/11 using their real names.

This means that Danny was probably not one of the hjackers. Maybe he knew right away what was going on because he understood Hebrew and was trained in counter-hijacking. Maybe he acted right away and the Israeli hijackers killed him to get him out of the way.

There was no real investigation of the events of 9/11.

The Bush Administration did not want any investigation. They finally agreed to an investigation then did everything to hide information and turn it into a cover-up operation the key to that effort being Philip Zelikow.