U.S allegations against Iran: real or just fairy tales?

U.S allegations against Iran: real or just fairy tales?

Did an elite branch of Iran's military handpick
a divorced, 56-year-old Iranian-American
used-car salesman from Texas to hire a
hitman from a Mexican drug cartel to
assassinate the ambassador to Saudi Arabia
by blowing up a bomb in a crowded
restaurant in Washington?
U.S. officials say they are certain the bizarre
plot against Ambassador Adel Jubeir was
real.
But some analysts say they are not. They find
it unlikely that the Iranian government, or
legitimate factions within, would be involved
in such a tangled plot.
Iran slams plot allegations
They cite five reasons why:
1. The alleged plot doesn't fit Iran's style
In the 32-year history of the Islamic Republic
of Iran, its Quds Force -- the branch
implicated in the alleged plot -- has never
been publicly linked to an assassination plot
or an attack on U.S. soil. In cases where Quds
Force members have been accused of
plotting attacks, they had gone to great
lengths to cover their tracks and hire proxy
groups of the highest caliber, like the
Lebanese Hezbollah.
Hiring an Iranian-American used-car
salesman who, according to investigators,
openly talked about his connections to the
Iranian military and brazenly made a
$100,000 wire transfer doesn't fit the Quds
Force's modus operandi, analysts say.
"It would be completely uncharacteristic for
Iran to be caught red-handed," former CIA
operative Bob Baer told CNN.
"There are very few groups operationally
better than Iran's Quds Force. They know
what they are doing, The only proxies they
use are ones they've vetted. They don't let
their own citizens get involved."-CNN

Katsung keeps saying we're trying to go to war with Iran. RJH keeps saying that either the US or Israel or both are itching for war with Iran. Now we have reports that a beagle is getting his doghouse ready for another mid-air shoot-out. Should we confirm that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X76f-GgNSE

And you are perhaps right that the middle chair should have been empty Jaybro because the man in it was a sneaky git. He was so damn sure that he had secret meetings with Stalin behind Churchill's back because he thought 'cock of the walk' and that he could get the mass murderer to dance to his tune. Talk about being naive? Instead we got as Churchill aptly put it an Iron Curtain and wider dictatorships foisted on people. Don't know why you are moaning about WW2 after all you got well out of the Depression by making a financial killing.

However on the general principle of things America in the thirties and forties was determined that they would replace Gt Britain - good luck and all that's the luck of the game but unfortunately your country got carried away with itself and chest beating and it decided it would be the moral concience of the world and Heaven help anyone who denied the right. We might differ on issues but I do wish that the country would start back peddling a bit and let the world get on with itself. In that the American people might get a better deal internally but somehow it may be a long time coming. Now run by money kings, it's corporates have no intention of giving up power nor the men in uniform. They run the country and give you poor saps elections to make you feel you are running it. It is a throwaway and a con. It's what they decide you can have off the plate and elections are there to keep you happy and sitracted. No-one ever thoughtn that Empires would disappear or Imperial Russia or eventhe USSR. You need to accept that no-one can be on top for ever so stop bankrupting yourselves for what? Glory?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well Jaybro considering the width of military involvement which backs up American political and influence stances it is empirical. 

Obviously not in a having colonies in practice but a different type of wanting control over everyone else.  The country is in the business of extending the corporate interests and has the military to back it up. Anything specific? GM was bailed out to the tune of $8 billion. The military wasn't used, thankfully. If you don't succumb to US economic pressure or commercialism sure as fate there will be a damn excuse to ostracise the country being aimed at and underminded or invaded. Once again, a couple of examples would help, particularly cases where invasions ensued because of commercial interests. Why do you think America has such a big military budget and troops everywhere? Bad habits die, Oh, so slowly. Our silly involvement in Europe's affairs in WWII got the ball rolling. The USSR and your Lancaster bombers would have put Herr Hitler to rest nicely.

At any rate who would know more about empire than...well, you know.

It isn't even the usual fear they plonk into American minds it is more than that. There is utterly no good reason for such a big budget nor such a military presence. However you are right in that nothing will change in a lifetime as the military and corporate partners run the country not the people.

 

It could be that both Katsung and RJH are wrong. If it can be proven either that Iran has no nukes or that they're open to negotiations, we might be able to stay Israel's hand in the deal. In any case, it appears that President Obama is still very much on the "negotiations" trail, and I think he really doesn't want war with Iran no matter how much Katsung says otherwise. Right now it would be hard to imagine anything worse for Obama's chances for re-election if we got into a shooting match with Iran right now, and I'm certain as I can be that he's considering that. The price of oil would skyrocket within hours of shooting getting started, and that, plus the peaceniks in the Democratic Party who won't countenance war for any reason, would seal Obama's loss in November.

Obama wants peace

Oh we could all be wrong I dare say but my accusation is based on the situation mjsmsprt40. Every friction somehwere is an exzcuse for America to flag up "National Security" at risk. As I said months ago if there were people on the damn Moon the US would jump up with the nedd for a military base for "National Security". Unfortunately your country is run by those two big baron groups - the Cororpates and the Military via the Pentagon. How come the proprition of the super rich percentage has whittled down over the decades from in the twenties to 1%, eh? Elections are a sop to keep the mass of children happy. You media is controlled by the Coroprates and they dish up propaganda all the time worrying Americans about security or would-be threats. In a general sense with exceptions to be fair the bulk of the people are ignorant when it comes to politicval awareness and especially of outside the country. They rely on the Corporate media and the Generals out at that giant spider the Pentagon.

You do not need bases everywhere nor the huge costs that are crippling you. You bail out the banks that continue to use the systemt for their own ends. They do not give a damn to the million Americans losing a home every year or the tens of millions frightened to go to a doctor. They control the country and the elections are there as a formal Constitutional thing to give the appearance of democracy. The Americans I have met and meet tend to be friendly and reasonable family minded but they are usually vague on world affairs and a trifle naive. I think you border on that yourself in a way. Have a goodly military for home defence, spend more on the people and don't be put off by screaming nutters shouting "Socialism". Did the Banks? Nah it kept them going to get on with their fiddling your money. Even ex-miltary advisors are getting worried about this using the miltary all the time and espeically dragged into the ME mess.

As for your bosom buddie, Israel it is the giant Jewish lobby over the pond (amongst the biggest I understand) that you r leader has to fawn to and they along with the Israeli Prime Minister (a real war dog) are keen to get the jackboots and helments. Never mind the excesses of the Israelis in the ME that doesn't count in America and it is a ixture of that giant Jew lobby and the Messianic attitude of the Christian Rioght (that gives Christ a bad name) that ratches up the tension. Well if Tel Aviv attacks Iran I hope they retaliate but the Israelis will need to draw in the US military and the nearby fleet and is what they are counting on. However in that sad process a wider conflict and economic meltfown in the world at large would follow. You are basically a decent people but you have been taken over by your own kind of ruthless aristocracy that has no interest in elections, apple pie except as sweets for the people to keep them happy.

And Jaybro - what an unfortunate choice situ landed with. I would say go vote for Cameron?!

RJ, don't hold back--- tell us what you REALLY think. Now that it appears you've gone as far over the edge as Katsung has, I promise to pretty much take it with a large grain of salt.

After the elections, after the Inauguration, if one of the Republicans gets in (there are a couple of those guys who scare me) we may have more of a chance of war with Iran. Right now, though, it's in Obama's best interest to keep that from happening. Really, for a number of good reasons it's in the United States best interest to keep war with Iran from happening. So, I think we're going to seek negotiation if at all possible.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

If it can be proven either that Iran has no nukes

That's funny
It couldn't be proved that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction either. At least not before the 'mission was accomplished'
Fact is that even U.S Agencies admit that they see no move by Iran to build a bomb.
Besides, the Iranian uranium enrichment program at the stage as it is for now doesn't qualify for the build of a nuclear bomb.
Furthermore:

The Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons. There is no doubt that the decision makers in the countries opposing us know well that Iran is not after nuclear weapons because the Islamic Republic, logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Right now it would be hard to imagine anything worse for Obama's chances for re-election if we got into a shooting match with Iran right now, and I'm certain as I can be that he's considering that.

Agreed.
However long time interests might differ and have little if anything to do with the Iranian uranium enrichment program.
The US tries by all means (intimidation, isolation, economic sanctions/embargo, destabilisation and probably even military strikes as a last resort) to prevent the rise of a new geostrategical player that doesn't conform to its own interests.
Business as usual...

I may have to sneak into Canada, the land of my four-bears,

Momma bear, Pappa bear, Baby bear, and Jay bear.

The latest CIA cartoon?

Well you have to cae the obvious mjsmsprt40. I don't see where I am being wrong but your cop-out is to push my opinion into Katsung's corner as a handy excuse not to face up to what is the situation. The average America is dumb when it comes to international affairs (so if you are not average breathe a sigh of relief?!). He picks up news bytes on tv then rushes to work. On coming home he does the same thing again as he hasn't the inclination or be bothered to go into a situation. Instead the short bits of controlled coroprate media proganada fills the gap. Rather than sidestep my forthright opinion tell me where I am way out.

Of course I note that you are a bit queasy as the outside world is about the opposition who will not I submit solve the US's internal mess and only frighten the rest of the world by continuin to destabilise or destroy countries not like.

Oh-oh. Take away that turban and beard Jaybro and expect the Gestapo, oops, CIA goons to come a-knocking.

Why are there Hungarian MIG-29 in Israel?

English| We already dealt with this question once. The thing was brought up on the hook of why Israeli airplanes drill above Romania. We dissected the issue, that presumably they practice the high hill conditions similar to Iran, and with the Hungarian aircraft they are training under desert conditions, since Iran has this aerial flight at his disposal.

Carrying of MIG aircraft to Israel gained a more dangerous meaning according to the recent happenings. It appears much more logical that the Hungarian aircraft will be sacrificed. Iran is not that fool that he would leap into a war in such a way voluntarily that he attacks the American ships threatening him. The Israeli pilots will do this with the Hungarian aircraft.

They are transformed into Iranian aircraft supplied with colours and ensigns like that, as if they would be Iranian aircraft. A spectacular, well recorded attack against the american ships when Iranian ensign are visible on the planes would be enough for the public opinion to require immediate counterattack by NATO. One or two of them would be shot, and the TV reporters would be allowed to pass at a close range then they can see Iranian ensign on the planes - this would be the final, perfect propaganda of war against Iran.

Ejected and caught pilots would admit they were truly Iranian pilots and everyone would know about it. By this the war would be inescapable, and legally solid. Iran would expound the truth, but nobody would be interested on the West because they already are only waiting for some kind of minor excuse.

This may be easily the new Pearl Harbor case, and this is why those planes were carried just next to Iran.

http://www.jovonk.info/2012/02/10/why-are-there-hungarian-mig-29-israel

Originally posted by katsung47:

A thief planned to steal a car. When he committed the crime, he found there was a motercycle, so he stole that motorcycle along with the car. The main purpose of 911 was to passing through the Patriot Act and to justify the war on Mid-east. To pick up WTC as target was for side economic benefit. What I talked about was about a sub-factor of 911 which can repeat in coming Iran war. Nobody would think that Iran war originates from "saving money to decompose Enterprise". That's your misundersanding.

no. Your thinking money is a factor when in this isn't a money issue. This is a control issue. How can we make trouble for Americans to kill for us and make our lives easier?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well you have to cae the obvious mjsmsprt40. I don't see where I am being wrong but your cop-out is to push my opinion into Katsung's corner as a handy excuse not to face up to what is the situation. The average America is dumb when it comes to international affairs (so if you are not average breathe a sigh of relief?!). He picks up news bytes on tv then rushes to work. On coming home he does the same thing again as he hasn't the inclination or be bothered to go into a situation. Instead the short bits of controlled coroprate media proganada fills the gap. Rather than sidestep my forthright opinion tell me where I am way out.

Of course I note that you are a bit queasy as the outside world is about the opposition who will not I submit solve the US's internal mess and only frighten the rest of the world by continuin to destabilise or destroy countries not like.

Oh-oh. Take away that turban and beard Jaybro and expect the Gestapo, oops, CIA goons to come a-knocking.

RJ, I put you in Katsung's camp because you both operate the same way. With absolutely no proof whatsoever, you both assume the United States is itching to go to war with Iran. You assume, again with only the scantiest proof if any, that the big banks and the military are trying to engineer this war. Might as well throw in big oil too, seems they get blamed for everything else so we might as well pin war with Iran on them too.

Problem is, it's in nobody's best interest to stir up trouble there. If war breaks out with Iran, you can expect the Straits of Hormuz to be shut by default. Shooting wars and oil tankers aren't exactly friends, if you get my drift. So, nobody in the Gulf gets to ship any oil while the war drags on, which makes all the states bordering the Gulf unhappy. Nobody who depends on oil shipped from the Gulf gets any oil. That makes much of the rest of the world-- including the USA-- unhappy. In case you haven't noticed, the natives around here are already getting restless due to high fuel prices and war with Iran will not improve matters.

The only people interested in starting a ruckus there are the head honchos in Israel-- and we just might be able to talk them out of it if it can be proven that Iran has no nukes and no desire to build any. Israel's interest is based on their own survival, and the fear that if Iran has nukes it would use them on Israel. So, defusing that powderkeg is in everybody's best interest.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The average America is dumb when it comes to international affairs (so if you are not average breathe a sigh of relief?!)

The average anybody anywhere is dumb on most issues in any field of knowledge. How knowledgeable are you in string theory or cosmology? Calculus?

You shouldn't cast your net too widely, as we're all deficient in many areas. What does the "average" Scot know about Korea, Uigur unrest in china, or living conditions in Grand Rapids?

You know much less about Americans than you think you do, as I hinted earlier.

Originally posted by rjhowie: Well Jaybro considering the width of military involvement which backs up American political and influence stances it is empirical. Obviously not in a having colonies in practice but a different type of wanting control over everyone else. The country is in the business of extending the corporate interests and has the military to back it up. Anything specific? GM was bailed out to the tune of $8 billion. The military wasn't used, thankfully. If you don't succumb to US economic pressure or commercialism sure as fate there will be a damn excuse to ostracise the country being aimed at and underminded or invaded. Once again, a couple of examples would help, particularly cases where invasions ensued because of commercial interests. Why do you think America has such a big military budget and troops everywhere? Bad habits die, Oh, so slowly. Our silly involvement in Europe's affairs in WWII got the ball rolling. The USSR and your Lancaster bombers would have put Herr Hitler to rest nicely. At any rate who would know more about empire than...well, you know. It isn't even the usual fear they plonk into American minds it is more than that. There is utterly no good reason for such a big budget nor such a military presence. However you are right in that nothing will change in a lifetime as the military and corporate partners run the country not the people.

And the military runs the country, how? Corporations, how?

Verbal diarrhea, no substance.

How's this for reversing stereotypes? All Scots are cheap.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Verbal diarrhea, no substance.

Yes, from Americans only arrives enlightenment to the world...

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

And the military runs the country, how? Corporations, how?

American military only distributes love all over the world and American Corporations social redistributing...

What would be about the entire world if was not for such intelligent, enlightened Americans....

When Americans get miffed about the outside world not appreciating them they fall back on putting you in the corner as some kind of menatl leper. How can anyone of any sense over there not understand that the Corporate and military runs the damn place?! Proof? Let me remind you both especially our Chicagoan friend.

The financial community gets away with financial murder and impropriety continually and very few end up behind bars or chased up. Americans - the other 99% who don't control your system lose homes, work, health in the tens of millions. Lose out through no fault of your own - fleeced by corrupt morgage practice or fraud then - tough. The Corproates are so heavily influencing on what passes for a "democratic" parliament in DC it is a farce. For a land that bounces about the globe telling everyone about freedoms and rights your ownpopulation in that wonderful exam,ple of democratic Utopia has sen the population have to fight for the rights and freedoms wheezed about. The corproates lobby and the political masters on the 'Hill run the place to suit themselves. Liewise the military. You just have to mention that word and eyes glaze over about the wonderful military nachine. Yeah tell that to the poor mugs in Afghanistan repeatedly done in by the US military and those wonderful Marines. The military is now so big and in financial control because of once again the hand-in-hand situation with the builders of military equipment. Surprise, surprise the Cororpates there too. Electionsprocedures are a [icture of amusement to the real world outside. What pases for party conferences is a rally for the simple minded.

So the giant military and associated corporate interests work hand in hand. They brain dead the population with patriotic war cries. They constasntly create fear tactics to say the USA is undere threat. That gives the chance to maintain a giant military bunch and provide the money to start countles wars to justify and keep control. Even the recent French murder situation see the NYPD immediately rush into protection mode. It is so much of the parcel over there that fear issue and the constant need for more and more security. Recently whispers circulate that Iran may have hundreds of folk inside America ready to pounce if you go on another stupid damn war. Talk about child-like. It is your military and corporate giant brothers who run the place take the money and give you superficial elections to keep the bairns happy and think they are in control. Talk about how Lincoln's guff is exposed?! How come it is now down to 1% controlling the economy? You are fooled.

How come you need to spend half the world's military budget? How come your corporates get off with so much whilst the ordinary man loses everything? You are spied on by a myriad of your own agencies and as I portrayed a couple of years back more spying on your own people than the Third Reich. For a country that always boasted about how it set up the world's greatest democracy and broke the mould it is such a down right lie that the world knows and sees continually. Your history right up until today is folk having to fight for rights and freedoms and continually see them whittled away by that wee group of money men and the pariah military industry block.And once more for "security" blah, blah. How you cannot see that dear man from Chicago and even more so the returned Michiganian is beyond my ken. Many outside America will see what I see. Why I need to repeat the obvious to adults is really staggering. Try and refute what I say instead of trying to neutralise with simply ignoring the obvious and I put that down to the inability to do so.

That you put me in a corner with Katsung is not a problem for me it is only handy for you rather than answer the charges. As it happens I don't know Katsung but what I do know is that apart from the woolly comments from across the pond he is often hitting the mark. I don't whether there is an inherent naiviety over there or an inherent dumbness about trying to contend with honest charges that cannot be dismissed?

Have a nice day.......

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Originally posted by katsung47:

A thief planned to steal a car. When he committed the crime, he found there was a motercycle, so he stole that motorcycle along with the car. The main purpose of 911 was to passing through the Patriot Act and to justify the war on Mid-east. To pick up WTC as target was for side economic benefit. What I talked about was about a sub-factor of 911 which can repeat in coming Iran war. Nobody would think that Iran war originates from "saving money to decompose Enterprise". That's your misundersanding.

no. Your thinking money is a factor when in this isn't a money issue. This is a control issue. How can we make trouble for Americans to kill for us and make our lives easier?

"Conrol issue"? Control for what. The last purpose is still for money. Or in general - economic issue.

Defintely we are getting fairy tales on Iran. A Primary school child can see it.

About USA spending half of world's military budget. What if we'd calculate GDP with a method which counts amount of money spent on military, espionage, contracts and industry related to military as negatives, ie. the more money spent on those the more GDP falls? USA maintains largest military budget, is by far the largest weapons manufacturer, and has unparalled espionage organisations in size & funding.

I've been wondering for a while now would USA fall to second, third or even 4th place in GDP if it were calculated like that. As it is now, the USA has a ridiculous gap in GDP when compared to Japan & Germany, but coincidentally it also spends ridiculously more money on military and things related to it. Even more amazing that GDP gap is when considering how USA has the worst energy efficiency of so-called developed nations (excluding former east-block), which leads to severe handicap in export markets.

EDIT: Oops, originally I was just going to post this one but my mind wandered haha
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4212656,00.html
"Israel asks US for $700 million in military aid"
Jerusalem requests Washington to allocate funds for more Iron Dome, Magic Wand anti-missile batteries. Deal will provide Israel with near-complete missile defense until 2015
If US support for Israel is removed, just exactly how prosperous & powerful would it remain?

Originally posted by beiren:

EDIT: Oops, originally I was just going to post this one but my mind wandered haha
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4212656,00.html
"Israel asks US for $700 million in military aid"
Jerusalem requests Washington to allocate funds for more Iron Dome, Magic Wand anti-missile batteries. Deal will provide Israel with near-complete missile defense until 2015
If US support for Israel is removed, just exactly how prosperous & powerful would it remain?

I blame U.S. support for Israel on Germany. No Germany, no Holocaust, no Israel.

.....
From the BBC,

The Free Forces are attracting a new crowd, including students and middle-class professionals. Germans speak of a new generation of Kravattennazis, literally "Tie Nazis", as opposed to the traditional Stiefelnazis, or "Boot Nazis".

Apparently, it ain't over until it's over.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

I blame U.S. support for Israel on Germany. No Germany, no Holocaust, no Israel.

In other words, it's all Bismarck's fault

Yup.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Yup.

Sink the Bismarck in a cup of coffee. That'll show em.

Israel and Judiasm in general has well milked the second world war. Interestingly the figures Jaybro for Auschwitz have been reduced yet again but it won't stop the misuses of stats. There have other Holcausts elsewhere. Cambodia comes to mind with over a million. Then there is of course the USSR which can on a H of a lot more than the Nazi bunch. Those starved to death multiply the couple of million dead under the Nazis even before you get to the Kulags.

Will Israel get even more money and military aid than it already gets? Of course it will! The Jewish lobby is amongst the big boys when it come to lobbying on the 'Hill then throw in the fanatical evangelicals on the far rightist mob misusing Bible history and everything will be Kosha. Why stop at Bismarck? Let's keep going back to the Holy Roman Empire or the Huns.Yeah that sounds about right. Heavens the Yanks will be blaming us next for letting them win the Revolution and being responsible for the utter mess made of the place today. And before the Grand Rapids sage slips it in you can expect that to be the case.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Interestingly the figures Jaybro for Auschwitz have been reduced yet again but it won't stop the misuses of stats.

It sure won't stop your misuse of stats....

Originally posted by rjhowie:

There have other Holcausts elsewhere. Cambodia comes to mind with over a million. Then there is of course the USSR which can on a H of a lot more than the Nazi bunch. Those starved to death multiply the couple of million dead under the Nazis even before you get to the Kulags.

You didn't mention the British Empire, Mr Howie. Why not? It potentially killed more than Hitler and Stalin put together. Surely in a list of genocidal regimes, you'd have to mention the British Empire....

You're not embarrassed are you? Or was your education found wanting in this regards?

Originally posted by katsung47:

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Originally posted by katsung47:

911 did the same way. The insulator of the WTC was asbestos. It was forbidden by the later rule of construction. WTC thus became a hot potato in real estate market. The cost to tear down WTC would be high - equal to build a new one. Then we saw 911, they let insurance company to pay for the money.

no. just stop looking like a dumbfuck before you turn into a fucktard.
the reason 911 happened, it wasn't the "cancer" causing issue, it was the gov't wanting more control.

A thief planned to steal a car. When he committed the crime, he found there was a motercycle, so he stole that motorcycle along with the car. The main purpose of 911 was to passing through the Patriot Act and to justify the war on Mid-east. To pick up WTC as target was for side economic benefit. What I talked about was about a sub-factor of 911 which can repeat in coming Iran war. Nobody would think that Iran war originates from "saving money to decompose Enterprise". That's your misundersanding.

Are you implying that 9/11 was an inside job to destroy the world trade center because of the asbestos issue and so that they can pass the Patriot Act and declare war on the middle east. Great reasoning. Kill millions of people, incite a public scare, just so they can save money, snoop on people, and declare war. Did you know one of the targets is the Pentagon and the White House (possible target for the downed plane)?

Asbestos is still in hundreds of thousands of buildings across the States. Anything built before the mid 1980s probably has asbestos. If Katsung were right, it would take an apocalypse to bring down all the buildings in NYC alone that have asbestos, much less the rest of the country. The apartment I lived in in Carol Stream, IL was built in the mid-1970s, and amongst the instructions in the lease was a warning about drilling holes greater than a quarter-inch in diameter because of asbestos. So, asbestos as a reason for destroying the WTC simply won't do. It's in way too many older buildings, and to accept that as the reason is to have to ask why no other buildings are being hit with airliners, since that seems to be the accepted method for bringing down old buildings with asbestos.

(Funny thing: I've seen a high school recently being remodeled, and in the course of the remodeling asbestos removal was a big part of the job. Not an airliner in sight, but plenty of plastic sheeting and guys in hazmat suits removing the material.)

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Asbestos is still in hundreds of thousands of buildings across the States. Anything built before the mid 1980s probably has asbestos. If Katsung were right, it would take an apocalypse to bring down all the buildings in NYC alone that have asbestos, much less the rest of the country. The apartment I lived in in Carol Stream, IL was built in the mid-1970s, and amongst the instructions in the lease was a warning about drilling holes greater than a quarter-inch in diameter because of asbestos. So, asbestos as a reason for destroying the WTC simply won't do. It's in way too many older buildings, and to accept that as the reason is to have to ask why no other buildings are being hit with airliners, since that seems to be the accepted method for bringing down old buildings with asbestos.

(Funny thing: I've seen a high school recently being remodeled, and in the course of the remodeling asbestos removal was a big part of the job. Not an airliner in sight, but plenty of plastic sheeting and guys in hazmat suits removing the material.)

Strange that we are agreeing on something for once. It seems quite strange to think that September 11 was an inside job to destroy the World Trade Center because of asbestos. How about the Pentagon? No body mention that in this thread. Was it chosen as a target because as asbestos as well? Also, millions of people died due to the action of the terrorists. Iran may not be involved directly but their aggressive war like attitude is of concern. But the 9/11 attacks was carried out by the bin Laden's al quida terrorist group and not Iran.

On a side note, if aliens attack the Earth, can we count on Iran, North Korea, and the terrorists to help defend it or will they side with the aliens to destroy it.

Ever see them detonate a building? First, of course, the old tenants have moved out. Anything salvageable is stripped from the building. Anything that might create a hazmat situation will be removed. Then, explosives are carefully placed in the building. On the day of the blast, everybody in buildings surrounding the building to be brought down are evacuated, since even on the most controlled blast there's a chance of something going wrong.

You don't choose commercial airliners to bring down a building in a controlled demolition. Too many chances of something going wrong, too many chances of the situation getting out of control. You do not bring down a building with tenants still in it. Sorry, Kat-- this theory won't work.

Edit, add-on: Kat mentions having the Enterprise sunk in an "act of war" to justify war with Iran. I have doubts that this would be done. Ship-breaking in the yards is well established. The Enterprise has eight reactors (the only carrier with this many reactors, all the other carriers are powered by two reactors). Deliberately sinking this ship creates a huge atomic problem, with reactors at the bottom of the ocean that would have to be monitored forever. It's better to bring her into the yard, break her up properly, remove the atomic fuel and deal with it in a way that can be monitored as safely as possible.

These days, sometimes they may choose to remove the reactors, remove hazardous materials, and then sink the rest of the ship as a man-made reef. It's also possible, after the sensitive stuff has been removed, to turn the rest of the ship into a museum. Enterprise is one of the first nuclear-powered surface ships, and therefore historic.

It is interesting to note here that Americans seem just to accept in parrot fashion what they are told about Iran or swerve off into something else. One assumes that is because they cannot justify their political and media masters stupidity over Iran. What else can we do but assume that?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

It is interesting to note here that Americans seem just to accept in parrot fashion what they are told about Iran or swerve off into something else. One assumes that is because they cannot justify their political and media masters stupidity over Iran. What else can we do but assume that?

RJ, I reckon the same might be said about your parroting whatever nonsense Katsung cooks up because neither of you have much use for "the ex-colonies". These days, I figure you both for about the same degree of reliability concerning this kind of thing.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

It is interesting to note here that Americans seem just to accept in parrot fashion what they are told about Iran or swerve off into something else. One assumes that is because they cannot justify their political and media masters stupidity over Iran. What else can we do but assume that?

RJ, I reckon the same might be said about your parroting whatever nonsense Katsung cooks up because neither of you have much use for "the ex-colonies". These days, I figure you both for about the same degree of reliability concerning this kind of thing.

I wonder why rjhowie hates the US so much.

There are many many rumors about 9/11 and that it's an inside job.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories for ALL conspiracies regarding 9/11 .

Originally posted by wikipedian:

There are many many rumors about 9/11 and that it's an inside job.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Great reasoning. Kill millions of people, incite a public scare,...

Millions???
Did you plan in advance all victims of Iraq, Afghanistan and whatever might be on the to-do list as well?

Polls Show Widespread Doubt About Official Explanations

According to a survey from January 2011, conducted by TNS Emnid, one of the largest polling institutes in Germany, nearly 89,5 percent of Germans do not believe the U.S. government explanation of what happened on September 11, 2001.

Interesting the discrepancy with the findings for Germany at least, from the University of Maryland, College Park presented by Wikipedia.
However, the TNS Emnid survey was made 2 years later.

Originally posted by Krake:

Originally posted by wikipedian:

There are many many rumors about 9/11 and that it's an inside job.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Great reasoning. Kill millions of people, incite a public scare,...

Millions???
Did you plan in advance all victims of Iraq, Afghanistan and whatever might be on the to-do list as well?

Polls Show Widespread Doubt About Official Explanations

According to a survey from January 2011, conducted by TNS Emnid, one of the largest polling institutes in Germany, nearly 89,5 percent of Germans do not believe the U.S. government explanation of what happened on September 11, 2001.

Interesting the discrepancy with the findings for Germany at least, from the University of Maryland, College Park presented by Wikipedia.
However, the TNS Emnid survey was made 2 years later.

But you can't deny many people died that day. I was under impression that it was millions. Also, didn't the terrorists declare they did it? Are you saying the government hired the terrorists?

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Originally posted by Krake:

Originally posted by wikipedian:

There are many many rumors about 9/11 and that it's an inside job.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Great reasoning. Kill millions of people, incite a public scare,...

Millions???
Did you plan in advance all victims of Iraq, Afghanistan and whatever might be on the to-do list as well?

Polls Show Widespread Doubt About Official Explanations

According to a survey from January 2011, conducted by TNS Emnid, one of the largest polling institutes in Germany, nearly 89,5 percent of Germans do not believe the U.S. government explanation of what happened on September 11, 2001.

Interesting the discrepancy with the findings for Germany at least, from the University of Maryland, College Park presented by Wikipedia.
However, the TNS Emnid survey was made 2 years later.

But you can't deny many people died that day. I was under impression that it was millions. Also, didn't the terrorists declare they did it? Are you saying the government hired the terrorists?

Krake might have you on that one. I don't have exact figures, but I remember the death toll on 9/11 was somewhere between two and three thousand. Most of them died at the Twin Towers.


Edit, quickie update: The number was 2,996, including the 19 hijackers. 2,977 not counting them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

Originally posted by wikipedian:

I was under impression that it was millions.

Never bothered to look up during the past ten years?

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Also, didn't the terrorists declare they did it? Are you saying the government hired the terrorists?

What I think is nonrelevant. Rather important might be what people all over the world are thinking.

Yeah we all know about the master mind named Usama from our mainstream. That's why Afghanistan was bombed first of all. Wasn't it? Allegedly they didn't want to hand him over.

Now try a Google search for "bin laden never charged for 9/11" and see what you get.

Originally posted by Krake:

Originally posted by wikipedian:

I was under impression that it was millions.

Never bothered to look up during the past ten years?

I did and I forgot. I think I was doing some wars during my history class and must have mixed up the numbers

Originally posted by Krake:

Originally posted by wikipedian:

Also, didn't the terrorists declare they did it? Are you saying the government hired the terrorists?

What I think is nonrelevant. Rather important might be what people all over the world are thinking.

Yeah we all know about the master mind named Usama from our mainstream. That's why Afghanistan was bombed first of all. Wasn't it? Allegedly they didn't want to hand him over.

Now try a Google search for "bin laden never charged for 9/11" and see what you get.

What you think is relevent since you are wrong. Osama himself declare war on the west.

Also have you seen this video:


Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky2WKqmrnnI

715. War as a distraction in April 14 plot (4/14/2012)

The Feds used to create big events to distract the framed case as I always said. In this April 14 plot they prepared a war.

1. War crisis in Korea Peninsula. North Korea announced to launch a ballistical missile between 4/12 to 4/16. The core date is 4/14.

2. War on Iran.

World powers to hold talks with Iran on April 14:
BRUSSELS | Sun Apr 8, 2012
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/04/08/us-iran-nuclear-ashton-idUKBRE8370BD20120408

It's not a talk. It's an ultimatun. A war could have happened any time at US' will when April 14 talks started. Simply because Iran won't accept a "surrender" demand. Here is the rare report news:

US Gives Iran 'Last Chance' Warning

Obama demands concessions as crucial talks begin in Istanbul later this week

By Guy Adams

April 09, 2012 "The Independent" - -Iran must immediately close a large nuclear facility built underneath a mountain if it is to take what President Obama has called a "last chance" to resolve its escalating dispute with the West via diplomacy.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31029.htm

US Offers to 'Negotiate' if Iran Surrenders;

Thoughts on Negotiation Tactics; Obama Threatens War

By Mike Shedlock

April 09, 2012 "Information Clearing House" --- President Obama has stepped up the rhetoric against Iran with an offer to "negotiate". His offer is no offer at all, it is a demand to surrender.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31034.htm

3. Eliminate any possible anti-war voice. Based on his religious stance, Pope will certainly against any new war. At this time, if the Iran war happens, his voice will be absent. Watch the time coincidence.

Could it Be? Another Resignation? “Pope Benedict to step down April 15 2012″ from Kauilapele's Blog

Posted by Ram Arjuna on March 9, 2012 at 12:00pm

http://2013rainbowroundtable.ning.com/profiles/blogs/could-it-be-another-resignation-pope-benedict-to-step-down-april-

So all those events, INCLUDING 9/11 are orchestrated by the feds?

Originally posted by katsung47:

3. Eliminate any possible anti-war voice. Based on his religious stance, Pope will certainly against any new war. At this time, if the Iran war happens, his voice will be absent. Watch the time coincidence.

Could it Be? Another Resignation? “Pope Benedict to step down April 15 2012″ from Kauilapele's Blog

Posted by Ram Arjuna on March 9, 2012 at 12:00pm

http://2013rainbowroundtable.ning.com/profiles/blogs/could-it-be-another-resignation-pope-benedict-to-step-down-april-

Popes don't resign and when they die, another one is nominated. White smoke at the Vatican and habemus Papam.
The Feds will have to change their plans, unlike many others, Pope's voice will not be absent.

April 15, 2012 has come and gone. The Pope hasn't resigned. If he had, there's no possible chance the major media would have missed it. Everybody-- and I do mean everybody-- would know about it.

I guess Katsung is going to have to see the person who sold him that crystal ball and see about getting a refund.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

April 15, 2012 has come and gone. The Pope hasn't resigned. If he had, there's no possible chance the major media would have missed it. Everybody-- and I do mean everybody-- would know about it.

I guess Katsung is going to have to see the person who sold him that crystal ball and see about getting a refund.

You mean you haven't heard mjm? April 15th was cancelled by order of the industrial complex behind the US Government and a fake April 15th was substituted by one of their subsidiaries, the alqueda CIA LIasion Committee. The result was that April 15th came and went with no-one the wiser for it.

That is except thee and me and I'm not sure about thee.

None of you could survive even a cursory sniff test.

Didn't know the Papal white smoke could be sniffed...........gee.

Anyway had old Ratty resigned I would have been told.

Originally posted by wikipedian:

So all those events, INCLUDING 9/11 are orchestrated by the feds?

Of course, and the sole purpose is to inconvenience katsung and his wife

I say we have to find a way to make Kat's wife stay home! Every time she travels, the Feds cause earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and wars to distract from it. So, make her stay home and maybe we can have a bit of peace.

1: the pope resigns with death.
2: katsung your hopeless cause
3: anyone who puts faith in the pope or his insane aspects are only fooling themselves.
can anyone tell me the god of which the fools speak of?

Whatever you said, there is a pressure of resignation on Pope. That's rarely seen before.

Quote, "Should Pope Benedict XVI resign as he grows older?

Sun, Apr 15, 2012 12:01 PM EDT - FOX News 1:32

The Pope turns 85 on Monday

http://screen.yahoo.com/should-pope-benedict-xvi-resign-as-he-grows-older-28959398.html

Just for a wee change thought I would drift back to the actual thread.....

For me, I don't think that the USA will militarily attack as it is too stretched trying to rule or influence th rest of the world (250,000 peronell across the globe!). It does need to control Israeland there is no point saying that would be difficult. America funds not only their military but as it cannot finance itself through aid there too. If the Israelis are stupid enough to do an attack say in the summer they would have big problems and so would the USA. Firstly, Iran ' defence shiled is well protected and not eassy meat. Secondly, it would respond in kind. Thirdly thatfantical rightist nut who is the Israeli Prime Minister does not have all of his country behind him in any attack. American intelligencde agencies and indeed senior military men ahve actionally said that Iran does not have the bomb and not moving to it. However any attack by America's puppeteer in the Middle East could result in the Iranians maybe saying "Hell, let's just go for it." On a more local basis there are Iranian sleepers in the USA that could spread panic (usually quite easy there) by all sorts of outrages.

Not so long agao there was a daft report of an oil pipe vlown up in Saudi Arabia and you know what? The oild prices whent shooting up even before the truth came out. What the deuce do you thing would happen with any assault on Iran militarily? All Hell would break out across the world. This would effect the fragile economic state in America and other places. The final thing is that not all Iraniains want to go to war with Israel in return. They want to live reasonably normal lives, get on with life, get modern things and progre4ss. However an attack would unite them. Should any tragic happen before the US Presidential thing then there would be deep political upheaval in the land of the free.

RJ, i actually see Iran throwing the first punch. But not in a nuclear dawn of the sorts.