Iran Attack Imminent With Accusation of 9/11 Role

reply to post by lokdog


"Obama", you have to put his name in question since no one knows for sure what his name is, is on the record for supporting Iran and Syria and is only interested in overthrowing moderates in Egypt, Israel and elsewhere. So it is unlikely that Obama, or what ever his name is, is going to attack Iran.

Originally posted by TheReturnisNear
Afterall, Obama built his adult life around fraud. Social Security # fraud, Birth Certificate fraud, and real estate fraud. The MAJORITY of Americans know this but their Congress and Judiciary and press will not touch the subject. So AMERICA, the leadership of it anyway, will do anything. They have no code of conduct, no constitutional law (rule of law) and Obama will not follow anything but what he himself dictates.

Maybe many Americans are simply tired of the partisan bickering that enables this kind of action and dont want to argue about his birth certificate. This isnt about Obama, other than he is the salesman pitching it to us. Bush would have done the same thing, McCain would have done the same thing, Palin would have done the same thing with some folksy stupid comments thrown in. Clinton would have done the same thing.

Maybe a lot of us are just tired of the dog and pony show, and are looking to the movers behind the scenes who pull all these peoples strings, and maybe some of us dont think those focusing on Obama and his birth certificate are helping matters at all.

I've tried to tell people all the uprisings we infiltrated and places we are currently occupied in Middle East/Northern Africa is posturing just to surround Iran. My personal opinion is that some of the insurance companies involved in the bank bailouts only received money because TPTB knew there would be some claims to pay in the future.

I still think they are going to take out their power plant in some way and Stuxnet was set to expire itself in June of 2012 so that could be a hint at the timeline. With the rhetoric about uniting it seemed one part to discredit any type of theorists, one part to try and lay the 9/11 story to rest, and one part pre-warning. Then again with theories sometimes you see what you want to see (like a Rorschach test).

I want to try and pinpoint where a false flag could occur based on the state of affairs. Chicago has signs pointing to it when you believe 9/11 was a false flag attack and Rahm Emanuel is now in place. Probably still full from his steak dinner last night. Detroit kind of seems like a city TPTB would like to forget, too. I've heard Houston, but don't remember the reasoning. Please share if you suspect it. NYC as well because I have my own personal feelings (that would probably go in the dreams & predictions forum).

Of course what is a war without allies. We've made fast friends with France. A country that basically provided the excuse for any attacks from terrorists by oppression of another culture (i.e. no veils).

reply to post by AmmonSeth

I do sincerely love the way you warp words and have a truely one sided perspective on the events of the world,
I forgot that most of you people are still incapable of seeing the world from an outside perspective,
And secondly, do not ever degrade me by insinuating a "we" between us, I am not an american, do not class me as belonging to any nation!
Thirdly, the fact that you did that only illustrates how inward thinking and perceiving you are, I wrote my passage completely ambiguious to coming from any nation, and yet your brain automatically decided it was being written from an american perspective. Re-read everything that I wrote and if you can't see that it is detached from bias & focuses on general form, then you child are indeed both the misinformed and the idiot you wrote of.

Now get back to the topic at hand, which is essentially a discussion on wether it would be right for A country to strike at a second country if it had found out that the second country had pivitol roles in training & encouraging terrorists to commit attacks in the original country.

You will find that if you discuss this as a thesis rather than using personal beliefs and country names & such, you will make much more progress.

Oh, and have a fun 14 years Mr. S, I do hope you enjoy yourself until that coming August.

In your retort you did not make one specific point or counter argument to what I said. Nor did you answer any of the questions I asked you.

You say "get back to the topic" like I ever went off of it. you are the one one a tangent my friend.

Yes, I realize you were speaking in a macro way, but I was using examples (U.S., Iran, 9/11) to make my point more clear. So I ask you again:

Does knowing about the attack and not saying anything count as an act of war? and if so how is bombing Libya or Israel expanding it's territory not considered an act of war?

Do you think merely saying you do not like a particular culture gives just cause for that country to be attacked? and why?

Or will you just dance around the questions more and not have a true conversation?


It's ok everyone, he's not disinfo just a pooly misguided soul

reply to post by jude11





Rubbish.

I bet they are like one of those "witnesses" who give the US convenient reasons to go to war.

www.msnbc.msn.com...
rt.com...

Funny how this happens shortly after the death of Osama... the alleged reason the war on terror started in the first place. TPTB need a new scapegoat to continue the war on terror.

whoever buys into this, hasn t learned anything whatsoever from the ten or so past years...

Even if the US goes to war over this, shortly after "mission" accompolished, we can expect to see another of these "witnesses" come up and say "Pakistan did it"... then Syria, then Libya... and so on.

The article [quoted by the author of the thread] accussing Iran of being involved in the 9/11 atrocity, is just another red herring being thrown around just so as to throw us off the trail of those who are really guilty of it. Based on my investigation it is my opinion that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by a highly secret compartmentalization within the military of the United States of America. It was all about the massive amount of Gold that was stored in the World Trade Centre basement complex. Obviously the guilty are just messing us about so as to create a pretext by which to, not only get the FBI off of their trail, but also by accusing other nations, to thus set up a situation where in it becomes possible to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that same "sect" within the military establishment are creating a situation such that they can then justify attacking Pakistan and Libya ... the list goes on and on. If the American public want justice over 9/11 then they need to start looking nearer to home. Nazi Germany had the same problem. It took the actions of World War Two to resolve that problem. Remember that originally the USA were not a part of the solution in that the USA was a defacto ally of the Nazi Axis. Only Pearl Harbour changed that. Or did it ? Remember that immediately the Russians won over the Germans, the USA stepped in with "Operation Paper Clip" so as to rescue their Nazi friends from a certain death at the mercy of the Neuremberg Trials. In my perception the USA was always a part of the Nazi war machine, and continues to be so. Nazi Germany accussing a Jew of burning down the Berlin Reichstag building is much like the USA accussing a Muslim of doing 9/11.

די אַרטיקל [ציטירטן דורך דער מחבר פון די פֿאָדעם] אַקקוססינג יראַן פון זייַענדיק ינוואַלווד אין די 9 / 11 אַטראַסאַטי, איז בלויז אן אנדער רויט הערינג זייַענדיק ארלנגעווארפן אַרום פּונקט אַזוי ווי צו וואַרפן אונדז אַוועק דער שטעג פון יענע, וואס זענען טאַקע שולדיק פון עס. באַזירט אויף מיין ויספאָרשונג עס איז מיין מיינונג אַז 9 / 11 איז געווען אַ ין אַרבעט פּערפּאַטרייטיד דורך אַ העכסט סוד קאָמפּאַרטמענטאַליזאַטיאָן ין דער מיליטער פון די פאראייניגטע שטאַטן פון אַמעריקע. עס איז געווען אַלע וועגן די מאַסיוו סומע פון ​​גאָלד וואָס איז געווען סטאָרד אין דער וועלט א צענטער קעלער קאָמפּליצירט. דאָך די שולדיק זענען נאָר מעסינג אונדז וועגן אַזוי ווי צו שאַפֿן אַ טערעץ דורך וואָס צו, ניט נאָר באַקומען די פעדעראַל אָפפיסע פון ​​ינוועסטיגאַטיאָן אַוועק פון זייער וועג, נאָר אויך דורך אַקיוזינג אנדערע פעלקער, צו אזוי שטעלן זיך אַ מצבֿ ווו אין עס ווערט מעגלעך צו באַפאַלן יראַק און אַפגהאַניסטאַן. איצט אַז זעלביקער "סעקטע" אין דער מיליטער פאַרלייגן זענען קריייטינג אַ מצבֿ אַזאַ וואָס זיי קענען דעריבער באַרעכטיקן אַטאַקינג פּאַקיסטאַן און ליביאַ ... די רשימה גייט אויף און אויף. אויב די אמעריקאנער פּובליקום ווילן יושר איבער 9 / 11 דעריבער זיי דאַרפֿן צו אָנהייבן זוכן נירער צו היים. נאַצי דייַטשלאַנד האט די זעלבע פּראָבלעם. עס האט גענומען די אַקטיאָנס פון וועלט מלחמה צוויי צו האַלטן אַז פּראָבלעם. געדענקט אַז ערידזשאַנאַלי די USA זענען געווען ניט אַ טייל פון די לייזונג אין אַז די USA איז געווען אַ דעפאַקטאָ אַליירט פון די נאַצי אַקסיס. בלויז פּערל האַרבאָור פארענדערט אַז. אָדער האט עס? געדענקט אַז תיכף די רוסישע וואַן איבער דער דייטשישער, די USA סטעפּט אין מיט "אַפּעריישאַן פּאַפּער קליפּ" אַזוי ווי צו ראַטעווען זייער נאַצי פריינט פון אַ זיכער טויט אין די רחמנות פון די נעורעמבערג טריאַלס. אין מיין מערקונג די USA איז געווען שטענדיק אַ טייל פון די נאַצי מלחמה מאַשין, און ווייַטער צו זייַן אַזוי. נאַצי דייַטשלאַנד אַקקוססינג אַ איד פון ברענט אַראָפּ די בערלינער רעיטשסטאַג בנין איז פיל ווי די USA אַקקוססינג אַ מוסלים פון טאן 9 / 11.

AVE RAEGINA CAELINA LA DEUS NOSTRA CAELI LA VERA DEUS

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Ummm, we are already attacking Libya.

We used the "airstrikes against his own people" to sell that line of hogwash.

I doubt very much if these allegations are true.
1. These guys are angry with Iran which is why they defected so they want revenge and getting the USA to attack Iran would be good revenge. Therefore making up something like this to get the USA to attack Iran is in their interests.
2. The USA is fed up with war. The people do not want go and attack another country after what has happened in Iraq and this has not finished yet.
3. Iran offered to help the USA after 911 so therefore it is extremely unlikely they helped instigate this attack.

How laughable... It looks like they are going along with an old plan that they know will not work. Everyone knows who was really behind the 9/11 attacks...

Nah, there won't be any attacks.

See how wonderful the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan went?

Obama won't start attacks against Iran with election coming up.

reply to post by Helmkat


It worked for Bush. Being at war can make people stand behind a leader they otherwise dont think very highly of.

Its a factor to consider, the upcoming elections, but its not a foregone conclusion that going to war would harm him. It really depends on how popular they can make the war.

reply to post by jude11


Nope were not Gunna attack Iran or north Korea. We got the operative i mean terrorist that was "responsible"

Originally posted by Helmkat
Nah, there won't be any attacks.

See how wonderful the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan went?

Obama won't start attacks against Iran with election coming up.

Exactly and thats why it is not imminent. Whoever wins the election will then start the war.

An attack on Iran has been 'imminent' for almost 10 years now. It's never gonna happen.

Originally posted by ispyed
I doubt very much if these allegations are true.
1. These guys are angry with Iran which is why they defected so they want revenge and getting the USA to attack Iran would be good revenge. Therefore making up something like this to get the USA to attack Iran is in their interests.
2. The USA is fed up with war. The people do not want go and attack another country after what has happened in Iraq and this has not finished yet.
3. Iran offered to help the USA after 911 so therefore it is extremely unlikely they helped instigate this attack.

I'm sorry, but I very much doubt 1 & 3, especially the latter.

Originally posted by jaydeePNW

Exactly and thats why it is not imminent. Whoever wins the election will then start the war.

We will see. The signs point to your being incorrect, however. As I interpret them, we are actually rushing to take advantage of the moment, and Obama will be sacrificed on the altar of public opinion to further this economic goal if need be.

Sure, they will try to use this to fluff him, but I think its highly likely they are seizing the day, (the whole Osama drama was rushed and sloppy) and so any attack will occur sooner rather than later. (Unless the factors that make Iran highly attractive at the moment change significantly and quickly) I think they see Iran as a sitting duck at the moment.

We just need to hope that in their haste to seize the day they have a better plan than they did with the Osama line of crap. Because if a military action blows up in their face as catastrophically as their propaganda action did, we will all pay a high price for that.

Attack imminent???? WW3? Isn't this blatant fear mongering?

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by jude11

 

Ive been saying since the day after the Osama thing that I think a lot of what is going on right now is a set up for an attack on Iran.

Or are we being head faked and Pakistan is the real target....

things will turn up that OBL not only had his last days sanctuary there in Pakistan
but it will be found out that even before 1995 OLB had living arrangements there in Pakistan too


OBL did not have anything to do with Iran, no -- not even the umberage of both Iran and OBL and the fighters of Afghanistan Mujahedeen all having the USA imperialists as a sworn enemy, would not have altered OBLs distancing himself from the Iranian Persians...
Pakistan was a long time haven as i had said many times in replies here on ATS...
we're just waiting for the propaganda machine to connect the dots