Are you referring to yourself in the third person, Wake up call? That’s either creepy or pretentious…
How many people really buy that Reagan had nothing to do with Iran-Contra?
Let’s not until you please do what I asked repeatedly in my last post: supply some sort of reason to think Israel DID IT. Israel did potentially have a lot to gain, provided they didn’t get caught of course. So did a lot of people. The fact that they had something to gain doesn’t mean they did it. You need some kind of evidence to make that leap. You could argue that ANYONE - left, right, or center - had something to gain from September 11th, or at least had the potential to turn it into a gain.
1- Bin Laden has always maintained that ISRAEL is the enemy. So, why shouldn’t Israel execute a plan that shows the Arabs are the “bad guys”.
2- Israel is a very small country. On the surface, there is no reason why they DID IT. But, then again, there is no reason why the US government (= US tax payer) has been giving billions of dollars to Israel for years, but ZERO to Palestinians.
3- Here are possible reasons why Israel could have done it:
Israel has the US legislative and executive branch in its pocket. Just count the number of Jews in the 3 branches of the US government. Whatever Israel wants to do, they first get the US Government’s OK.
Israelis don’t really like American Jews. All Israel is interested is the American Jew’s monetary contributions to Israel, and influencing the US government’s foreign policy through the very American Jews the Israelis hate.
So, they have their nuclear weapons and their own agenda. Fuck 3000 people in WTC and Fuck the sleepy Americans – Jews or otherwise.
MOSSAD understands Arab suicide bombers’ mentality. It is easy for MOSSAD to recruit these guys for whatever MOSSAD’s aims are.
Even in the US we do not know whether the CIA did or did not mastermind the Kennedy assassination. What makes you think that MOSSAD does not have the mind of its own (blowing WTC) over the Kenest or the Israeli Prime Minister? Remember, Israel has no official constitution.
I declare that all the above statements are nothing but pure speculations on my part. But as a scientist, I have learnt that unless I start with a hypothesis, I would never be able to come up with a credible theory. Given that the current international affairs make no sense to me, the above explanations are the best I can come up with.
Long live Israel and the Jews – and the rest of us.
In case anyone is bored, I’m going to summarize this post briefly: Wake up call, you missed my point entirely. It’s getting to the point where I think you’re doing it on purpose. I said I wanted EVIDENCE Israel was behind September 11th. Not speculation as to why it might have staged the attacks, EVIDENCE that they could have done it. Now, I’m going to respond to the previous post in depth, but that’s a summary of my comments. Skip ahead if you’re as tired of reading me repeat myself as I am of doing it.
How about “because it’s unnecessary”? It wasn’t necessary to stage September 11th to attract American support or demonize Arabs as terrorists. Suicide bombers were already attacking Israel. I suppose it did make the ‘bad guys’ school of thinking stronger, but the largest and most dangerous terrorist organizations were Islamic anyway. That’s old news. So why would they bother?
Oy.
There’s a reason for that. It’s called lobbying. (I don’t think the reasons the US gives tons of money to Israel are GOOD reasons, but they definitely exist.) And the US has even more Jewish people than Israel, which is quite unique. So there was already an audience in this country. Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims (etc.) aren’t nearly as assimilated into American culture or as powerful a political force. Also, America has strategic ties to Israel dating back 30 or 40 years that it is not inclined to break (because of lobbying and because it’s the strongest military force in a region that - because of oil - is very important to America).
These quotes are further reasons they would have done it, not evidence they could have, which is what I asked for.
I don’t understand this at all. If Israel already has the US government in its pocket, why would it stage a terrorist attack to get support??? Also, Sharon regularly defies Bush (who, it stuns me to say, is occasionally the voice of reason, if a weak one, on this issue). I know, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith and others are Jewish. Being Jewish doesn’t equate with fanatical support for Israel, however. There is something of rift in the American Jewish community about the Palestinian issue. My family is almost entirely Jewish; you should hear the furious rows I’ve witnessed over this subject.
My response to all this is “So what?” I have no idea how this relates to September 11th. I guess you’re suggesting the attacks ensured American and American Jewish support for Israel. This isn’t 100% untrue, although it’s become less and less unanimous. But again, that’s a motivation. I’m looking for means and opportunity: IF they did it, HOW was it done?
This is getting absurd, frankly. Israel is a very heavily armed country (nukes, thermonukes, Arrow missile shield) which already has large, long-term American monetary commitments (well into the billions of dollars). Why would they need to attack America?
It is? Cite? I’m sure Mossad knows a lot about these groups, but would you care to show me any instances in which they’ve recruited suicide bombers to do their dirty work? Show me SOMETHING, man!
My own opinion is that it’s pretty dopey to believe this. (I started a GD thread about the JFK assassination and found the objective evidence against Oswald totally overwhelming.) And again, this comment is evidence-free.
At first, you were arguing Mossad was acting on behalf of the Israeli government. Now you posit it’s acting on its own, in contradiction of the government. But you’ve offered nothing to support either idea. You’re just turning it into a catch-all, irrefutable speculation: if it makes sense from Israel’s perspective, Mossad did it for the Israeli government; if it doesn’t make sense, Mossad did it on its own. That’s a double bind. In other words, now you’re cheating. Pick a theory, or at least find some evidence.
Damn straight! And you must’ve misunderstood what I said in my other posts: I would like some EVIDENCE. Not “what might have happened,” or “why it might have happened.” I want to know HOW it could’ve happened. How could Bin Laden’s Islamic terrorists, who are bent on destroying Israel, have come to work for the Israeli intelligence agency, for example? When and where might this alliance have occurred?
If you’re a scientist, I’m a little disturbed that you don’t seem to find evidence very important. Isn’t the idea that, in the end, you choose the theory that best fits the available facts?
Are we talking about September 11th or JFK right now? Even the language you’re using (“eliminated”?) indicates a bias to me. How did you come to these conclusions if you’re admitting the evidence is weak or nonexistent?
Wake Up Call, there was a raving antisemite in my office who put forward the same sleazy innuendo that you’re putting forward; I’ll tell you the same thing I told him.
The United States is Israel’s most powerful ally. Already the US tends to side on world issues with Israel.
Israel didn’t have much to gain from launching such an attack: already the US sides with Israel the majority of the time.
If they launched an attack, Israel stood to lose everything. Absent US support, Israel would be overwhelmed by its enemies in short order – and we’re not talking about the US simply withdrawing support from the government that killed four thousand of our people. No, the United States would likely have gone to war agains Israel if there were the least bit of evidence that Israel were behind the attacks.
It is an insane, obnoxious, racist theory for which there is no support and no motive except to impugn Jews.
DanielWithrow. I am sure you have heard the term "plausible deniability’. Of course, the Israeli government would never do such a thing. But in the absence of any evidence, I look at the outcome. Somehow, Israel benefited from the outcome of the 9/11 in the following ways:
1- First, the financier of Hezbollah (Iran) and the supporter of suicide bombers (Saddam Hossein of Iraq) became the “Axis of Evil”.
2- Then 9/11 happened, and it was nailed on Osama Bin Laden, even though he has denied any responsibility or masterminding the event. If he did not mastermind it, who did?
3- Next, Saddam was removed – thanks to the American military might, supported by American taxpayers who paid the bill and lives of their servicemen/women. Israel did not spend a cent and had no military casualties in “Operation Iraq Freedom”. However, they got what they wanted at the end - scot free.
4- So, Iraq threat to Israel is gone. After Bush re-election in 2004, it will be the turn of Iran and Syria – all part of the backlash of 9/11, and all to the benefit of Israel.
5- Meanwhile with all the Ashcroft-designed Patriotic Act, there is such an anti-Arab feeling in the US that even Issa in California realized he was duped to spend a million dollars to cause the coup d’etat against Gray Davis. There is no question that the anti-Arab feeling in the US as a result of 9/11 benefited Israel. The “even-handed” policy of the US in the middle-east still gives billions of dollars per year of US tax-payer money to Israel and zero to Palestinians. Again, an Israel gain.
6- Meanwhile, Sheron continues to use US supplied military equipment to target the Palestinians. And now he has a perfect excuse. He says if the US can bomb the shit out of the terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq, why can’t Israel do the same with the Palestinian “terrorists”.
You see DanielWithrow, US is not going to stop supporting Israel no matter what. The very people who are supposed to see through any possible “Plausible Deniability” are knowingly or unknowingly part of the design of the US policy. There will never be any evidence against Israel, and consequently the US will never go to war against Israel.
Plausible deniability is real, no question. Unfortunately, you didn’t actually deal with what Daniel said. This reply essentially says “sure, you give a whole bunch of reasons why it would make no sense for Israel to fund September 11th. But the Israeli government just wants you to think there’s no good reason.” Thus you turn alledge that a bunch of perfectly logical objections to your case are, instead, ironclad proof of the same case.
In the absence of any evidence, I assume a giant, invisible white rabbit did it. :smack: “Cui bono?” is a legit question, but it can’t stand ALONE.
The term “axis of evil,” in itself, means nothing. It’s not as if these were nations that were previously allies of the US that became enemies only because it suited Israel. Hussein was an avowed enemy of the US - and Israel too, granted - and Iran was always at the top of the Sponsors of Terrorism list.
:mad: Oh, well, that makes perfect sense. I get it now. Osama Bin Laden denies he’s responsible! AND IF YOU CAN’T TRUST OSAMA FUCKING BIN LADEN, WHO CAN YOU TRUST? Wow. Just plain wow.
(I’m not aware of bin Laden ever DENYING responsibility, either. The tape where he admits he did it aside - we can’t trust it, apparently - ALL of his public comments praise the attacks and the attackers. If Israel can be fingered because IT had something to gain, why can’t bin Laden be blamed for the same reason? Even if his organization didn’t do it, they certainly supported attacking America, and benefited from it.)
True, true. But like I said, the fact that Israel benefits - by itself - is weak evidence. (Actually, it’s not evidence at all.) Iran benefits from Saddam’s removal as well, since it gives them more regional influence. They’ve lost an enemy, and gained a good chance of influencing the future government of Iraq because both nations are predominantly Sunni Muslim. That could expand their power considerably. Yet you don’t think they could’ve done it. Why?
It would benefit Israel if this happened, yes, although Bush’s re-election looks like less and less of a sure thing each day. (Have you figured out some way around this?)
Let me take a different route here. Let’s look at the Holocaust for a moment. Sure, a bunch of Jews died. But so did a bunch of Russians, whom Jews generally disliked (pogroms, state murder). A lot of Germans (who also persecuted the Jews) were killed, too, and both countries - along with several other nations not very friendly to Jews - were laid to waste. On top of which, the Jews were suddenly given Israel, the holy land they’d been denied for centuries. Jews benefitted a great deal from the Holocaust. Ergo, they must’ve planned it and then pinned it on Germany, which denied responsibility! (And if they deny responsibility, they must obviously be telling the truth.) Ta da! Wake up call, I dare you to find a flaw in my reasoning!
I’ve got no idea what the bit about Issa was. It seems he’s not as keen on the recall as he once was, because he’s not happy with the way it looks like it’ll turn out - I think he was upset McClintock didn’t withdraw and back Schwarzenegger - but I’m clueless as to the “duped” thing and how it relates to Ashcroft or September 11th.
I’ve already talked about the USA PATRIOT Act. It’s enormously unpopular, and it’s not going to last. A bunch of states and municipalities - despite your assertion that all of America was cowed into going along with it - have voiced their distaste for it. More importantly, the thing is going to expire. It has a sunset provision written in to it: it’s pretty much going to go away forever after 2005. As I said, it’s enormously unpopular, and Republican efforts to remove the sunset provision earlier this year were dropped (the Senate almost unanimously opposed it) and replaced with something a good deal weaker. This act, sucky as it is, will have a short lifespan.
Yes, he’s doing that. But he was doing it before without much complaint from America, and even fewer attempts to stop it. I think this would’ve been a ‘diminishing returns’ proposition at best: Israel had comparatively little to gain, and if caught, everything to lose. In a cost-benefit sense, it would’ve been moronic to stage these attacks.
By the way, why the quotes around “terrorists?” I think Sharon is a cold-hearted murderer, but there really ARE Palestinian terrorists. Or haven’t you noticed the bombs blowing up Israeli buses and cafes for the last few years? Maybe Israel’s doing it and I haven’t figured it out. Not to deny Sharon is hurting a ton of innocent people. Just a nitpick with the implication that there are no terrorists.
Granted, but show me some evidence that they were going to stop supporting Israel prior to September 11th. Can you find any?
Yes. Read me now and believe me later, fellow 'Dopers: if any of Wake up call’s explanation has appeared to make no sense whatsoever, it’s not because the arguments are flawed! It’s because you’re fallen for a super-mega-elaborate plausible deniability scheme the Israeli government has created. Everything that appears to be evidence to the contrary is just labelled “part of plausible deniability cover,” which conveniently makes it evidence for the conspiracy… despite the fact that there are zero pieces of evidence in the post beyond a few which could be dubbed, if one were feeling charitable, “really, really circumstantial.”
Pick a theory, or at least find some evidence.
