Some may think they did it before.
Would they set up A fake attack, trow the blame on someone and kill that someone.
this sounds so stupid. Its like punching yourself in the face, going up to someone And say: im gonna hit u back.

You guys attacked yourselfs.

I don't think the US would, but the Mossad can and would.

Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied: "It's very good." Then he edited himself: "Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy." - JYork Times

Are you referring to the NightClub bombing in Bali. I ask this becasue the "Muslims" there are claiming that since the attacks killed women and children(innocents), which the Koran forbids, that Muslims could not have done this attack, and therefore it is all a plot by the west to develop an excuse to wage war on the peaceful religion of Islam.

Fundamentalist terrorists have perverted the Koran to serve their human masters for years. The only thing which surprises me about the Bali bombing is that it was apparently at random, and managed to kill a large number of civilians from Western countries who were somewhat opposed to war.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
I don't think the US would, but the Mossad can and would.

---

I agree. But I don't think the Mossad did either the WTC or Bali (there are other attacks I'm not so sure of). As far as Bali and the nonsense people are spouting about the Quaran forbiding the killing of women and children, while true (the words of the Quaran), that prohibition has never stopped the Islamic fanatics before (or now). And UBL's perverted view of Islam allows him to rationalize his actions away by saying "Allah will sort it out".

Nox

About the Bali bombings:

According to news today, Al Qaida has made a statement on a web-site, claiming to have attacked nightclubs and whorehouses in Indonesia.

Indonesian police yesterday caught a suspect called Amrozi, who has admitted connections to Abu Bakar Baasyir, an Islamist who is an alleged leader of the terror network Jemaah Islammiyah. A network that many terrorism experts claim to be Al Qaidas branch in south-east Asia.

An other informant has claimed that Riduan Isamuddin, aka Hambali, who is a known leader of the same group, planned the bombings.

As a lot of this is from different sources, and in different parts verified by terrorism experts, it�s difficult to dismiss it as propaganda (as I know many would like to do).

If it was Al Qaida, it was a part of their Jihad, and then it�s not surprising that they managed to target western citizens; i.e. it was not at random, even if it seemed to be.

That they killed westerners from "countries somewhat opposed to war", is not surprising or strange in itself. Most western countries have tried, and are still trying, to avoid a war against Iraq. Many are also critical to USA�s war on terror.

FoxLeonard

[This message has been edited by FoxLeonard (edited 11-08-2002).]

The CIA have a history of doing such things. Even in the last week, the CIA have been proved to have launched a rocket at a bus in Yemen (teh details are probably wrong but the CIA is the operative word).And some time in the 80s British bobby got shot by a sniper from the Iranian embassy, but the ballistics report say it came from the Israeli embassy. So that points the finger at Mossad. There is one theory that the targets are un-islamic astablishments (bars and brothels) and therefore deserve to die as infidels, but Islamists are known to interpret the Qur'an frankly wrong.

The USA could do such a thing, and there is a lot of disputable evidence (I use the term loosely) to suggest the whole debacle since 9-11 was orchestrated by the CIA, or Mossad or whatever. It is unlikely but you can NOT rule it out. Osama Bin Laden is alleged to be an intelligent bloke, so why is he doing acts which he should know by now will only encourage more pro-US support? The obvious explanation would be, he isn't... While I do not blame CIA for 9-11, the subsequent attacks have been lame to say the least, nothing compared to 9-11, and never made any real sense. Unless you blame the CIA, who do have much more clear motives to commit the acts. They all have succeeded in increaing recruits in the "War on Terrorism". Do not take ANYTHING the news tells you, all news comes from the same source (a single company who gather the information and sell it to the media) and that source could quite easily be bribed by Bush, it is possible and quite likely. Once you take this into account, anything is possible.

You claim that the U.S is immoral and acts on its own violent whim. The question then is why would they need to drum up support when to paraphrase your own words: "they don't give a fuck about what the rest of the world thinks?" I would be interested to hear how you reconcile the rougue actions of the US with their own need to seek international approval.

Ya, and ill bet the CIA killed kennedy, and I ratted out Nixon, and space aliens gave us the bomb in 52 by the name of einstien, his whole history is fake. How did we get the bomb in the 40's? time travel of course! Till those damned aliens stabbed us in the back and made it look like we gave it to everyone else too.

LOL

The conspiracy theory falters when you realize that something of this magnitude cannot be kept under wraps indefinitely. Why do you think Mossad is capable of this? I assume because of their past operations which, to say the least, have been ruthless and shamelessly self-serving. In other words, you read about them somewhere. Do you think that when this crafty Mossad plot is discovered by a leak, or foreign intelligence services, or investigative journalists, the US would just say "good one," or "you got us?"

Perhaps the all-powerful Zionist conspiracy will keep it secret forever and ever, because it has that power.

So the Mossad cant keep it secret, but a gang of ragheads who live in the dirt can?

I said it was Mossad since before the first tower fell. Israel is the only party that could possibly win from 9/11.

Wouldn't Mossad have had a greater interest in framing the Palestinians?

quote:

---

That they killed westerners from "countries somewhat opposed to war", is not surprising or strange in itself

---

What is surprising is they chose a target full of Aussies rather than one full of Americans.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FuckOffandDie:
What is surprising is they chose a target full of Aussies rather than one full of Americans.

---

It�s NOT surprising if it is a part of the global Jihad, against the whole western (or westernized) infidel world, rather than a war on USA exclusively. More and more indicates that the former is more likely than the latter.

FoxLeonard

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
So the Mossad cant keep it secret, but a gang of ragheads who live in the dirt can?

---

The Mossad would be forced to try to keep it secret. If it came to public, USA and Western world, knowledge that Mossad were behind such a thing as the 9/11 attacks, Israel wouldn�t be "untouchable" any longer.

History has shown that information on most clandestine operations surface, sooner or later. In the case of 9/11 even a well enough substantiated rumour would hurt Israel significantly.

I guess the "gang of ragheads" are Al Qaida. They only have to keep their operations secret until it�s done, wich they seem to manage all too well. Afterwards, they have all to gain from admitting that they did it. But in practice they have time and again added to the fear by keeping the world wondering and guessing for a while. Then they have, in more or less convoluted ways, "bragged" about their deed (admitted their guilt, as we see it).

Bin Laden has spoken on al-Jazihra in terms of that he and Al Qaida were behind the 9/11 attacks.

Now a similar message (if not from bin Laden personally) has surfaced about the bombings in Bali.

quote:

---

Israel is the only party that could possibly win from 9/11.

---

I�m far from sure that the outcome of 9/11 is predictable enough to make it true that Israel could gain from it. But if some scenarios become reality, they will.

But they are not the only party that could gain from it.

There�s one party that can ONLY gain from it, and that party is the Islamist International and Al Qaida.

Saddam Hussein could also "gain" from it, as far as personal revenge on USA and Bush Sr goes. As Saddam trains Al Qaida troops and intelligence operationals, and also has a lot of "black ops" squads himself, it�s not implausible that he used the Al Qaida network and AQ operatives for his own purposes, and behind the backs of bin Laden and the leaders of the Islamists.

If so, this must have caused some confusion among the Islamists. But as they have had their minds set on global Jihad for a long time, they might as well go along with it, once Saddam got it prematurely started.

The Saddam theory is, of course, a theory, but based on facts, and in the case of 9/11, it�s a more plausible alternative scenario than the Mossad theory, not to mention "theories" involving CIA et al.

The most plausible theory is that it was Al Qaida who did it, and that they did it as a part, or start, of the Islamist International�s, since long planned, global Jihad.

FoxLeonard

well they bombed the australians in bali in order for australia to engage in war on terror. a few blocks away there was a disco full of americans.

this isnt bassed on any fats but still:
ppl keeping bin laden alive so he can claim the terrorist actions. And poff, richer he gets. He is used as a scapegoat for mossad's and maybe the cia's actions.

Yes, the CIA is a bunch of secretive assmunchers, but there is no way they would have ever flown a plane into the WTC. However, I do think there is a good chance that bin laden did not do it, neither did anyone from his group, and the CIA decided this would be a good excuse to get rid of Osama.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
well they bombed the australians in bali in order for australia to engage in war on terror. a few blocks away there was a disco full of americans.

---

Australia belongs to the Western world in every way except for its location. And the WHOLE western world is the target for the Islamist Jihad on the Western infidel world.

quote:

---

this isnt bassed on any fats

---

True! And that�s what makes it�s close to impossible to discuss this kind of conspiranoid theories.

quote:

---

but still:
ppl keeping bin laden alive so he can claim the terrorist actions. And poff, richer he gets.

---

In reality bin Laden has used up a lot of his huge personal fortune to fund all kinds of Islamist operations. But along the way he has invested money - in western companies among others - to be able to continue his work, fundings etc.

quote:

---

He is used as a scapegoat for mossad's and maybe the cia's actions.

---

Yes, you keep claiming that, without any facts to substantiate it (as you say yourself).

It�s not totally impossible, but very implausible, especially compared to other scenarios, that are substantiated with hard facts.

Believe it or not, but some things are, since long, known and proven about bin Laden, Al Qaida, the Islamist International et al.

FoxLeonard

A possibility is that the Mossad infiltrated these groups and kind of "helped them along" covertly, knew what was going to happen but didn't warn the US because they knew what happened is to their advantage. In other words, they might have greased up a few things to make it easier for the Arab militants to succeed. Mossad can inflitrate just about any group, since many Jews look like Arabs.

Mouse!

That is a much more plausible version of Mossad�s involvement. Not least because they have done similar things with Hamas et al. Infiltration that since has been proven, beyond any doubt, by Palestine and European intelligence.

On the other hand, the Islamists don�t excactly need someone to push them into action...

FoxLeonard

[This message has been edited by FoxLeonard (edited 11-09-2002).]

I thought the Mossad provided some warnings?

Here is one version of what Mossad did, or didn�t do in connection to 9/11.

www.antiwar.com/justin/j100402.html

FoxLeonard

And here is the conspiranoid version(s).
www.poppalon.com/indexA.html

Adults Only!!!

FoxLeonard



[This message has been edited by FoxLeonard (edited 11-09-2002).]

fox, unless ur some kind of a teleporting magician, you couldn't know shit about what happended on those planes on the mornin of
9\11. And since I doubt that you are some high ranked gouvernemnt agent wich knows all that goes on in the world I presume that all the information U have comes from the media. This applyes to many many people. but some of us actualy analise what we hear.
first thing id like u to think about: How come it took less then 2 days to find out that Al-quaida was behind this and they did not suspect those attacks from them before.
How come This jihad isnt going nowhere now? Id would seem logical to me that there should have been follow up attacks from terrorists. But we saw none. Oh wait... Exept Bali. The Usa needed something to refresh the terrorist memory. People were starting to think that it was only USA's problem. ( wich in a way it is )
Well they invaded Afganistan over trew the Taliban, placed their own hand puppet. ( is the construction of the pipe line started yet ? )and pretend they have made a huge step in war on terror. Here is what they did. killled some towel heads, bombed civilians, and locked up people in cuba. Did they capture Laden? Did they get rid the plannet of terrorism? no no no no.

People know that Bush is rediculous. He needs justification for his actions. Thats where the attacks come into play.
Dont u find it strange that only the plane heading for te white house didnt make it?
how could they know where it was going?
If anyone asked bush if he was behind the attacks he migth say: why would I be? would i send a plane on my house?
Is it Sharon who said: WAr will be won by deception.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
fox, unless ur some kind of a teleporting magician, you couldn't know shit about what happended on those planes on the mornin of
9\11.

---

In one sense you�re right. What surprises me is that you know excactly what happened!

Are you a teleporting - or telepathic, rather - magician, by any chance?!

quote:

---

And since I doubt that you are some high ranked gouvernemnt agent wich knows all that goes on in the world

---

Not even high ranked government agents knows all that goes on in the world. Much less do I know it all.

quote:

---

I presume that all the information U have comes from the media.

---

News-media, alternative news-media, expert analysis, experts who critisize the experts, SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) and other similar institutions, books written by the world�s leading experts on terrorism, and also by authors such as Noam Chomsky, web-sites, video etc

quote:

---

This applyes to many many people. but some of us actualy analise what we hear.

---

And you assume I don�t?

In summary:

I compare all the information I can get my hands on (see above), preferably from sources that usually disagree. Sometimes there actually happens to be one, 100% reliable truth. But more often, especially with things like terrorism, there are some questions left unanswered. If so, I decide what I find more plausible and less plausible.

I can�t get any further than that, and I don�t claim to do.

If you read my posts you�ll also find that I, for most of the time, speak about, and compare, plausibilities.

You, after your critical analysis, KNOW what happened.

quote:

---

first thing id like u to think about: How come it took less then 2 days to find out that Al-quaida was behind this and they did not suspect those attacks from them before.

---

Usama bin Laden and his organisation al Qaida, and the organisation that stands behind them, the Islamist International, were the most likely suspects. They were therefore under surveillance, as far as possible. and not only from USA.

US intelligence evidently got indications in advance, from their own and other sources. Something was about to happen, but they didn�t manage to find out what and when.

There are also claims that Mossad knew more, but didn�t tell CIA. So new to me, that you have to read for yourself:
www.antiwar.com/justin/j100402.html

In any case, the history of intelligence work shows that what happened is not unique. To have indications is one thing, to find out excactly what it�s all about, is much more difficult; sometimes impossible.

But once that what was supposed to happen, has happened, it is very easy to put the pieces together. Therefore it is plausible that they found it out in a couple of days.

quote:

---

How come This jihad isnt going nowhere now? Id would seem logical to me that there should have been follow up attacks from terrorists. But we saw none.

---

The Islamists and al Qaida got some severe blows in Afghanistan, among other things.

There are also indications that there should have been more attacks in Europe, within an hour of the 9/11 attacks in USA. This failed, but had they succeeded, the Jihad would have proceeded even more.

The 9/11 attacks are perfect propaganda for the Islamist cause in Arabia and Africa. They are most probably strengthening their positions there right now, wich is also an important part of their Jihad; to spread Islam world-wide.

But if my memory serves me right, there has been more terrorist bombings...

quote:

---

Oh wait... Exept Bali.

---

Exactly! You see, the Jihad has taken some more, if smaller, steps...

quote:

---

The Usa needed something to refresh the terrorist memory. People were starting to think that it was only USA's problem. ( wich in a way it is )[/B]

---

First you find it strange that there has been no more jihadist terror, and when we find proof that there has been, you say that USA was behind it...

After a critical analysis of what you heard in the news, I�m sure...

quote:

---

Well they invaded Afganistan over trew the Taliban, placed their own hand puppet. ( is the construction of the pipe line started yet ? )and pretend they have made a huge step in war on terror. Here is what they did. killled some towel heads, bombed civilians, and locked up people in cuba. Did they capture Laden? Did they get rid the plannet of terrorism? no no no no.

---

No, what they actually did was destroy the first, and only, new Islamist state. It was the victory in the Afghan war against the Soviet Union, that finally united the Islamists after decades of infighting. The Islamists were very proud of Afghanistan under the Taliban, and they used it in every way possible for their propaganda. In that sense it was their "show-room". Now that their only real Islamist state is gone, they once again stand and fall with their strong leaders; such as bin Laden.

Afghanistan under the Taliban was also a very important base for them, and bin Laden had his headquarters there (as he never moved them to Iraq in 1998, even if it was planned and decided).

Your last question and answer: "Did they get rid the plannet of terrorism? no no no no.", is to me strange, as you seem to know that there is no terrorism on the planet.

quote:

---

People know that Bush is rediculous. He needs justification for his actions. Thats where the attacks come into play.

---

You claim that Bush attacks his own fellow US Americans, and USA�s allys, because he needs justifications for his actions?!

And the "actions" you refer to are, I guess, the attack on Iraq, and the continued war on terrorism; a war against himself, according to your logics.

Wouldn�t it be much more easy for him to just attack Iraq, and take the fight in the UN afterwards?! The other member states would of course be outraged, but they would still aknowledge that he attacked a country and a man that they all agree is dangerous; i.e. they would find that his actions were, more or less, justified.

But what would you think will happen if the members of UN, the US people, and the rest of the world, find out that Bush was behind the 9/11 attacks and all terror after it?! Will anybody find that justified?!

If he was only half as reckless as you claim, he would have invaded Teheran by now, rather than attacked his own people!

quote:

---

Dont u find it strange that only the plane heading for te white house didnt make it?

---

Looking at what is said to have happened, no.

One of the planes didn�t make it because the passengers and the crew fought the terrorists, who were not heavily armed.

quote:

---

how could they know where it was going?

---

I�m not sure they do know. Perhaps an informant has told them. Otherwise it�s a qualified guess. You can for example look at the symbolics of the targets:

World Trade Center: a symbol for Western (rather than exclusively US) capitalism and its power.

The Pentagon: a symbol for, and the actual headquarter of, US military power, the strongest military power in the world.

What is missing? Political power; i.e. the White House or Capitol Hill. I have also heard Camp David, wich also symbolises the peace process in the Middle East.

quote:

---

If anyone asked bush if he was behind the attacks he migth say: why would I be? would i send a plane on my house?

---

As he was prepared to destroy the Twin Towers, and parts of the Pentagon, along with taking more than 3000 lives of his fellow americans, why would he care about the White House?!

Don�t you think he would have made sure that the fourth plane crashed into the White House, while he was in Florida?! Then he could have told the media that the terrorists believed he was in the White House at the time of the attack. Wouldn�t that have been a better deception?!

quote:

---

Is it Sharon who said: WAr will be won by deception.

---

I think he has used it, yes. But I believe it originates from one of the war philosophers of China or Japan (who�s names I can�t remember right now).

As you wondered about my occupation, and as you also asumed that I don�t analyze the Information I get from the media, I can admit that one of many things I do for a living is media analysis, in different forms...

FoxLeonard



[This message has been edited by FoxLeonard (edited 11-10-2002).]