Israel and its history of false flag attacks

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Tell you what, I'll download and read that book, and you'll read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.

So you get to read something informative researched by someone with actual intellectual integrity and I get to read something that will certainly diminish my braincells at a rate that would leave me dead in a few minutes?
How about providing source material and actual evidence instead of nutty conspiracy sites that everyone knows are frequented by nut bags whose opinions I couldn't care less about?

Since when did you get to have all the fun?

'cmon, you can't REALLY be this much of a prick.

Oh, I can:

I'm ... a ... "Foreign toilet."

Cherry picking people's quotes and ignoring the context are fun.

[Plu]

My argument basically hinges on heuristics.

First, Al-Qaeda being slang for "the toilet," specifically a Western toilet, points to them being

1. Fake, since no serious militant organization would call themselves "The Toilet"

2. Of foreign/Western, not necessarily Israeli or American, origin

Can we give this guy an award for "dumbest argument of the week"?

I think he's got even our failed theist friends beat here.

[zarus tathra]

Tell you what, I'll download and read that book, and you'll read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.

So you get to read something informative researched by someone with actual intellectual integrity and I get to read something that will certainly diminish my braincells at a rate that would leave me dead in a few minutes?

How about providing source material and actual evidence instead of nutty conspiracy sites that everyone knows are frequented by nut bags whose opinions I couldn't care less about?

Since when did you get to have all the fun?

That link I posted has links to non-nutty sites, at least 1-2 for each of their claims. Stop making excuses.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

My argument basically hinges on heuristics.

First, Al-Qaeda being slang for "the toilet," specifically a Western toilet, points to them being

1. Fake, since no serious militant organization would call themselves "The Toilet"

2. Of foreign/Western, not necessarily Israeli or American, origin

Can we give this guy an award for "dumbest argument of the week"?

I think he's got even our failed theist friends beat here.

I've said it once, 9/11 truthers are nut jobs that do far more damage to society and the world than any terrorist attack ever could.

[zarus tathra]

I can't find the book to download, so I'll try to read every review I can find.

In the meantime, here's a sample.

Israeli instant messaging company, Odigo, admitted that two of its employees You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login warning of an impeding attack 2 hours prior to the first plane hitting.

This warning was not passed on to authorities, which could have saved thousands of lives.

Odigo has a feature on its service that allows the passing on of messages through a search feature based on nationality, such as Israeli. Knowing these two particular Israelis were forewarned, it is very likely they passed the message on to other Israelis considering that out of the 4000 Israelis believed to be in and around the WTC and the Pentagon only FIVE died. 5/4000 Israelis. Mathematically (if Israelis were not forewarned) about 10% (400/4000) would have died; even as low as 200-300/4000 would not really indicate foreknowledge. Yet only FIVE Israelis died and two of the five were actually aboard the supposedly hijacked flights; therefore only three Israelis died at the WTC on 9/11. An astonishing feat. We're talking about  'Israelis' here, not 'American Jews'. Many Jews died in the wtc on 9/11.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

That link I posted has links to non-nutty sites, at least 1-2 for each of their claims. Stop making excuses.

You're making all the excuses for me by posting nonsense. Really, it's not hard to dismiss unevidenced supposition masquerading as intellectual integrity.

I'll let you have the last word. Read that book, see what you think, and see if someone who has actually done real research can sway your wacky demented view.

But no doubt the appeal of believing that you've stumbled upon a big international conspiracy whilst the rest of us stumble around blind is far too appealing to you and, most importantly, your ego.

EDIT: If you can't find the book, buy or borrow it. If this subject is so important to you, then surely doing some real research should be extremely appealing.

[zarus tathra]

That site links to Haaretz, to Wikipedia, to The Guardian, to all kinds of mainstream sources. Every one of its main points is backed up by links.

I'm not reading a single chapter or review until you read at least one of the headings, like the one I posted.

[LikelyToBreak]

I don't know if the Israelis had anything to do with the 9/11 attack or not.  I do know there is good evidence that the FBI knew about the 1993 bombing ahead of time.  And let it happen.

I also know not all of the people on the 9/11 Commission Report agreed with it. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Like those on the commission, I don't think an adequate investigation of the incident took place.  Which is why we have the 9/11 truthers.  And there are things for which there are not adequate explanations.  You can declare all of us who don't trust the government nut jobs, but I think you should at least consider the evidence before labeling all of us.  We know for a fact the US government has lied to us before.  So, we are suspicious of them about this and just about everything else they tell us.  To me, it is being a good skeptic.  Yes, there are a bunch of fruitloop theories out there, but there are also some things which the government refuses to give answers about.  

Like how 7 of the 19 alleged hijackers are still alive.  Like how the BBC reported that Building 7 fell, while Building 7 was still standing in the background, during the report.  They never explained the molten metal still hot days after the buildings collapsed.  They just say eyewitnesses were just mistaken when they said they heard explosions just before the buildings fell.

I found a quote from Scott Huber, it reads, "I think there is one basic reason people choose to trust the government, especially the federal government: they no longer trust a sovereign God to look out for them."  This would explain why so many atheists are ardent supporters of government officials.  At least the Democrat part of it.  Being skeptical shouldn't stop at just the creationists' claims.  It needs to be applied to the government and the press as well.

[zarus tathra]

Charles Fourier stated that one of the "useful" traits of children is the "progressive attraction of the weak towards the strong."

[Colanth]

My argument basically hinges on heuristics.
...
Third, pretty much all the people involved with running the WTC towers and privatizing assets that would have been useful in preventing the attacks were Israelis/Zionists. Plus, they managed to avoid getting killed in the buildings they worked in.

Then your argument fails on heuristics - since the majority tenant in the WTC was the Port of NY/NJ Authority.  Which, BTW, employed a lot of Jews - who died in the attack.  As did many other Jews working in other offices in the buildings.

[Valigarmander]

Like how 7 of the 19 alleged hijackers are still alive.

...And?

Like how the BBC reported that Building 7 fell, while Building 7 was still standing in the background, during the report.

Miscommunications happen all the time, especially with breaking news in today's journalism environment, where news companies want big, enticing headlines and they want to be the first to break it. What exactly is the alternative to it being a mere mistake? That BBC was in on the whole plot too?

They never explained the molten metal still hot days after the buildings collapsed.

There is no documented evidence of this. As a poster on a forum for atheists, I assume you understand the dangers of relying on anecdotal evidence. Even if molten metal had been found, aluminum (which is what the planes were made out of) burns well under the temperature of jet fuel.

They just say eyewitnesses were just mistaken when they said they heard explosions just before the buildings fell.

There were definitely explosions as the towers fell, since the floors pancaking would have blasted air and debris out the windows. This does not suggest bombs were planted, or whatever else is being implied here.

It's good to be skeptical about things. But only if you're reasonably skeptical. You shouldn't respect creationism because it is "skeptical" of evolution, and you shouldn't respect global warming skeptics.

The reason truther claims fail is because they're all supposition, or just plain wrong. Like creationism, it's based on poking holes in the official story and then claiming that because so-and-so can't answer your questions, the official story must be false and whatever pet theory the truther has (Bush did it, Mossad did it, Lizard Men did it, etc.) must be true, ignoring the lack of evidence in support of these theories (and supposition about what Bush/Mossad/Lizard Men/etc. would have wanted or could have done is not evidence). There are many reasons to be skeptical of the government. And there are many things we don't know about 9/11. And we shouldn't stop asking (reasonable) questions about what really happened. But most of these truther talking points are bullshit. Just pure, stinking bullshit.

[zarus tathra]

My argument basically hinges on heuristics.
...
Third, pretty much all the people involved with running the WTC towers and privatizing assets that would have been useful in preventing the attacks were Israelis/Zionists. Plus, they managed to avoid getting killed in the buildings they worked in.

Then your argument fails on heuristics - since the majority tenant in the WTC was the Port of NY/NJ Authority.  Which, BTW, employed a lot of Jews - who died in the attack.  As did many other Jews working in other offices in the buildings.

Here's the quote that I posted literally on this page.

Israeli instant messaging company, Odigo, admitted that two of its employees received instant messages warning of an impeding attack 2 hours prior to the first plane hitting.

This warning was not passed on to authorities, which could have saved thousands of lives.

Odigo has a feature on its service that allows the passing on of messages through a search feature based on nationality, such as Israeli. Knowing these two particular Israelis were forewarned, it is very likely they passed the message on to other Israelis considering that out of the 4000 Israelis believed to be in and around the WTC and the Pentagon only FIVE died. 5/4000 Israelis. Mathematically (if Israelis were not forewarned) about 10% (400/4000) would have died; even as low as 200-300/4000 would not really indicate foreknowledge. Yet only FIVE Israelis died and two of the five were actually aboard the supposedly hijacked flights; therefore only three Israelis died at the WTC on 9/11. An astonishing feat. We're talking about 'Israelis' here, not 'American Jews'. Many Jews died in the wtc on 9/11.

[Cocoa Beware]

I'm out of octopus "nope.gif"

 :( But....but.... I love those.

[LikelyToBreak]

drunkenshoe wrote in part:

There are various sensible crazy scenarios about how US -like every other big players, it's just the biggest- has been using patsies, working with underground fractions, terrorist groups, all that Gladio business starting from (for some from Abraham Lincoln's death) generally from Nazis in WWII to Kennedy's death, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam...all that shabang and to 9/11 and everything in between but at least that madness have a certain one simple logic to it, be it is believable or not. And these theories do not have any 'propaganda' style to them about pointing out one specific nation or religion as evil doesn't matter how crazy they may sound. Just power, resources and economics. The usual evil.

So you would have us believe that the CIA doesn't exist?  That the American government didn't carry out genocide on the Native Americans? That the Bay of Pigs incident was all made up.  That Kennedy is still alive living in the Rivera.  That the Pentagon Papers were just a lie put out by the Democrats and Republicans to embarrass each other.  What other atrocity will you deny?

Here is a short list, of proven government atrocities at this site:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You don't believe a few key people could conspire amongst themselves to enrich all of them, by carrying out criminal acts?  If so, you must believe there is not such thing as organized crime.  

People see so called conspiracy theorists like David Icke who blame alien lizard people for 9/11 and then lump all of us who don't believe the government story as nut jobs.  Then attack us for wanting to have answers.  It is the same as pointing at Carlton Gary (a black serial killer) and saying all blacks are serial killers.  Does that make sense.  

drunkenshoe wrote in part:

That's the most common stupid thing that has been going around today. Thinking one party, nation or religion, one event is responsible from the current mess. I mean, how stupid you get.

After all of the lies which have been exposed which our government and our press have told us, people still have blind faith in both of them.  I mean, how stupid you get.

Do your own research.  Don't pay attention to the David Icke's and his ilk.  Look for source material.  Realize that not everything is a conspiracy, but there are some out there.  Then come back and debunk them.  But, no top secret eyes only, my cousin saw for himself debunking, just like you wouldn't accept it if we presented it, don't expect us to.

[Hydra009]

People see so called conspiracy theorists like David Icke who blame alien lizard people for 9/11 and then lump all of us who don't believe the government story as nut jobs.  Then attack us for wanting to have answers.

On the contrary, the oft-mocked nut jobs think they already have the answers.  And their answers are invariably whatever appeals to them (and their political beliefs) and strikes them as plausible, rather than what is actually supported by the facts on the ground.

The standard modus operandi is to point to known false flags and known secretive wrongdoing to float whatever conspiracy theory they wish to advance that day, hoping that public distrust alone will make it convincing.

David Icke is not a different breed, he just arrives at a disliked conclusion using the same broken methodology.