Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

FBI Report on "Dancing Israelis" declassified.

1234689

Comments

  • #152
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    davoxx wrote: »
    I'll make this very simple.
    you claimed my true story was false.
    prove it.
    Lol, straws and grasping.

    But it's clear that you realise that your claim is totally unsupported and are trying to distract from it.
    And I'll bet you'll still claim it's true even though yu know it's not.


  • #153
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol, straws and grasping.

    But it's clear that you realise that your claim is totally unsupported and are trying to distract from it.
    And I'll bet you'll still claim it's true even though yu know it's not.
    you sure are ... i mean really look at you go.
    i'd take a time out have a look at all the posts and then i'd reply if i were you, it would save me a bunch of time copying and pasting links because you did not read it or forgot it or misunderstood it.

    thankfully being clear is now the new evidence ...


  • #154
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    So can you explain why they could not have just bought this stuff and keep it in their van and offices?
    Or were they somehow not concerned about be caught and searched, yet also concerned enough to bring their own passports?

    Is the only possible explanation for not having this stuff in the van was they they were a front?

    No there are almost infinite reasons "why" but again it is consistent with something dodgy going on.

    Is that your only argument? Well other stuff is technically possible?


  • #155
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No there are almost infinite reasons "why" but again it is consistent with something dodgy going on.
    Well assuming that's true, then even the dodgy is far more likely than the conspiracy.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Is that your only argument? Well other stuff is technically possible?
    It's not. I asked you several questions which you avoided.


  • #156
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    meglome wrote: »
    Sigh... I said "movements are not consistent with foreknowledge, they don't move to a better location to see what happens".
    I'm sorry but that is a stupid thing to say when the FBI report is linked to in the very first post. In it both a) the dancing Israelis and b) the FBI both state that the move gave them a far better view of the second tower.

    Therefore, and this is very basic stuff the move was consistent with foreknowledge.
    meglome wrote: »
    Obviously they did move but they had no idea where they were going
    This is another absurd statement which you wouldn't make if you read the FBI reprort.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    King Mob wrote: »
    Well assuming that's true, then even the dodgy is far more likely than the conspiracy.


    It's not. I asked you several questions which you avoided.

    so i take it you finally see that you are wrong?
    just basing this on your avoidance ...

    and

    as much as i like unicorns, i have to go out and may not have internet access ... so if you do not get a reply, it does not equate to "silence means you're right"
    thanks.


  • #158
    meglome
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I'm sorry but that is a stupid thing to say when the FBI report is linked to in the very first post. In it both a) the dancing Israelis and b) the FBI both state that the move gave them a far better view of the second tower.

    Therefore, and this is very basic stuff the move was consistent with foreknowledge.

    This is another absurd statement which you wouldn't make if you read the FBI reprort.

    They were standing on the roof of their van to get a good look. Doesn't sound like the best vantage point to me. And of course that's ignoring they were drawing attention to themselves by playing around and loudly speaking a foreign language, on the roof of said van.


  • #159
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No there are almost infinite reasons "why" but again it is consistent with something dodgy going on.

    Is that your only argument? Well other stuff is technically possible?

    You're suggesting motive based on a preconceived bias...

    They moved because they "knew". You're not a mind reader. You're guessing....


  • #160
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    (...)


    It's "possible" not "probable". My mistake. But I've just read the thing twice to your none. I won't be doing that again.

    And again I can't see how all this conjecture and speculation about Urban Moving fits into a coherent rational about their part in a 911 conspiracy theory.


    I set up a thread explaining what I thought happened on 911, backed up with evidence.

    I'd challenge anyone who disagrees with the NIST report, to explain what they think happened on 911, in particular, referencing this thread.

    I had the courage of my convictions, I'm awaiting to see if any CTer on this thread has the cojones do to the same...


  • #161
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    meglome wrote: »
    They were standing on the roof of their van to get a good look. Doesn't sound like the best vantage point to me. And of course that's ignoring they were drawing attention to themselves by playing around and loudly speaking a foreign language, on the roof of said van.
    They were giving a smiling and high fives.

    What is a high five?
    The high five is a celebratory hand gesture

    Who is likely to celebrate an accident...?

    Who is likely to celebrate a succesful operation...?


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Di0genes wrote: »
    And again I can't see how all this conjecture and speculation about Urban Moving fits into a coherent rational about their part in a 911 conspiracy theory.


    I set up a thread explaining what I thought happened on 911, backed up with evidence.

    I'd challenge anyone who disagrees with the NIST report, to explain what they think happened on 911, in particular, referencing this thread.

    I had the courage of my convictions, I'm awaiting to see if any CTer on this thread has the cojones do to the same...

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

    If i wanted to discuss 911 overall i would post in your thread; I haven't. This is about a specific aspect. Let's stick to it. :)


  • #163
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    Di0genes wrote: »
    And again I can't see how all this conjecture and speculation about Urban Moving fits into a coherent rational about their part in a 911 conspiracy theory.


    I set up a thread explaining what I thought happened on 911, backed up with evidence.

    I'd challenge anyone who disagrees with the NIST report, to explain what they think happened on 911, in particular, referencing this thread.

    I had the courage of my convictions, I'm awaiting to see if any CTer on this thread has the cojones do to the same...

    The Saudis thread?:pac:
    Well done there Mr Couragous.

    Cojones?
    What's a cojone?


  • #164
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    Urban moving truck bombs in conjunction with CIA patsies.

    How does that grab ya?


  • #165
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Who is likely to celebrate a succesful operation...?
    Not competent deep cover agents in the middle of said operation for one.


  • #166
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    Well assuming that's true, then even the dodgy is far more likely than the conspiracy.
    Maybe, but, it has to be criminal and the criminal nature has to especially nasty because the Israelis risked being charged with terrorism offenses related to 9/11 by staying quiet. Something along the lines of organ trafficking -- the Organ trading Rabbis were based in NJ -- or sex trafficking. NJ is a US HQ for the Russian Mafia. Or Suter may have been involved in MDMA distribution. Israel has cornered the world market in this.

    Also they would need to have connections leading all the way to the highest echelons of Israeli society as it was these along with their Zionist brothers in the US who essentially sprung them from prison.

    And then they would have had to somehow accidentally intertwined themselves in the whole 9.11 thing along with a couple of others vans around NY/NJ that day.
    King Mob wrote: »
    It's not. I asked you several questions which you avoided.
    Ask away. I'll try to answer any genuine questions.


  • #167
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    Not competent deep cover agents in the middle of said operation for one.
    Middle? Their job would be done. Their job may have simply being observing Islamist terrorists and they (Mossad) knew it was going to happen bur stayed quiet which IMO is arguably worse than carrying out the attacks themselves.

    I'll just throw this in here. It's an FBI explosives dog. Looks pretty effective to me.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkO2clQlQ8I


  • #168
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Middle? Their job would be done. Their job may have simply being observing Islamist terrorists and they (Mossad) knew it was going to happen bur stayed quiet which IMO is arguably worse than carrying out the attacks themselves.

    I'll just throw this in here. It's an FBI explosives dog. Looks pretty effective to me.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkO2clQlQ8I


    So you think they were just observing but also had explosives in their van?

    Why would they have explosives then?

    And why is observing a terrorist attack that you know is happening worse than committing the attack?

    Would you think observing a murder is worse than carrying out a murder?

    And dogs are "pretty effective" but they can be confused and over excited.


  • #169
    Penn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,741 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Something along the lines of organ trafficking -- the Organ trading Rabbis were based in NJ

    Or Suter may have been involved in MDMA distribution. Israel has cornered the world market in this.

    Also they would need to have connections leading all the way to the highest echelons of Israeli society as it was these along with their Zionist brothers in the US who essentially sprung them from prison.


    Brown Bomber banned for 2 months.


  • #170
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    So there's one rule for one forum and a different rule for another?

    It's ok for a cat mod to say he doesn't like muslims then Barrington and if a poster alludes a similar thing inadvertantly he gets banned for 2 months?


  • #171
    meglome
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    ed2hands wrote: »
    So there's one rule for one forum and a different rule for another?

    It's ok for a cat mod to say he doesn't like muslims then Barrington and if a poster alludes a similar thing inadvertantly he gets banned for 2 months?

    Who said "he doesn't like muslims"?

    I've always found the mods to be very balanced even when they were giving me an infraction.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Penn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,741 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    ed2hands wrote: »
    So there's one rule for one forum and a different rule for another?

    It's ok for a cat mod to say he doesn't like muslims then Barrington and if a poster alludes a similar thing inadvertantly he gets banned for 2 months?

    If you have a problem with a moderator decision, don't bring it up on thread.

    PM the mod
    Use the CT Feedback thread
    Use the Help Desk
    Use the Dispute Resolution forum (if the decision was against you, not someone else)
    PM another of the forum mods
    PM one/all of the CMods
    Keep it to yourself.

    There's a bunch of options. Pick your favourite.

    Back on topic please.


  • #173
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    meglome wrote: »
    Who said "he doesn't like muslims"?

    I've always found the mods to be very balanced even when they were giving me an infraction.

    I withdraw that. No-one said it exactly like that.

    Have no problem with mods on this forum either. Apologies for that post.

    Have done what Barrington suggested.


  • #174
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    And dogs are "pretty effective" but they can be confused and over excited.
    do you have any evidence to say that trained sniffer dogs get confused and raise false positives?

    because you keep saying it like it is fact ... so i'd like to know why you think so.


  • #175
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    King Mob wrote: »
    Not competent deep cover agents in the middle of said operation for one.

    so they were competent ones, well that explains the dancing.


  • #176
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    davoxx wrote: »
    so they were competent ones, well that explains the dancing.

    Yup, that's an accurate, honest and astute summation of my position and the point of that post.
    Well done.

    Now you don't have to think about the rest of the points I and others made, so your worldview is safe and sound.


  • #177
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    do you have any evidence to say that trained sniffer dogs get confused and raise false positives?

    because you keep saying it like it is fact ... so i'd like to know why you think so.

    Yes.
    What the handlers were not told was that two of the targets contained decoy scents, in the form of unwrapped, hidden sausages, to encourage the dogs’ interest in a false location. Moreover, none of the search areas contained the scents of either drugs or explosives. Any “detections” made by the teams thus had to be false. Recorders, who were blind to the study, noted where handlers indicated that their dogs had raised alerts.
    The findings, which Dr Lit reports in Animal Cognition, reveal that of 144 searches, only 21 were clean (no alerts). All the others raised one alert or more. In total, the teams raised 225 alerts, all of them false. While the sheer number of false alerts struck Dr Lit as fascinating, it was where they took place that was of greatest interest.

    When handlers could see a red piece of paper, allegedly marking a location of interest, they were much more likely to say that their dogs signalled an alert. Indeed, in the two rooms where red paper was present and sausages were not, 32 of a possible 36 alerts were raised. In the two where both red paper and sausages were present that figure was 30–not significantly different. In contrast, in search areas where a sausage was hidden but no red piece of paper was there for handlers to see, it was only 17.



    The dogs, in other words, were distracted only about half the time by the stimulus aimed at them. The human handlers were not only distracted on almost every occasion by the stimulus aimed at them, but also transmitted that distraction to their animals–who responded accordingly. To mix metaphors, the dogs were crying “wolf” at the unconscious behest of their handlers.


    http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/02/animal_behaviour

    I own two working springer spaniels. The preferred sniffer dog for much of the UK police/emergency services/army. When my dogs were pups I regularly walked them with a member of the London Fire Service who was training his dog as a disaster search and rescue dog.

    It's not science. And it's not infallible a dog can bark for lots of different reasons and can get easily confused.


  • #178
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yup, that's an accurate, honest and astute summation of my position and the point of that post.
    Well done.

    Now you don't have to think about the rest of the points I and others made, so your worldview is safe and sound.

    see at least you understand what nonsense you are stating ...

    also now that you admit that they were operatives, how can my world view be safe and sound ...


  • #179
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    davoxx wrote: »
    see at least you understand what nonsense you are stating ...

    also now that you admit that they were operatives, how can my world view be safe and sound ...

    So we can add sarcasm to the list of stuff you don't seem to get...


  • #180
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    I own two working springer spaniels. The preferred sniffer dog for much of the UK police/emergency services/army. When my dogs were pups I regularly walked them with a member of the London Fire Service who was training his dog as a disaster search and rescue dog.

    It's not science. And it's not infallible a dog can bark for lots of different reasons and can get easily confused.

    it is a science, training dogs to respond is a science.

    k9.fgcu.edu/articles/Gazit-Terkel2.pdf
    Di0genes wrote: »
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/02/animal_behaviour
    fair enough, humans misread dogs alerts for meat as drugs 100% in this test, but they did not find any meat in the trucks ... unless they were a moving company that specialise in moving meat unrefrigerated.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    King Mob wrote: »
    So we can add sarcasm to the list of stuff you don't seem to get...
    who's we?? the royal we?? you suffer from dissociative identity disorder??


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement