• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mossad did 9/11? Alan Sabrosky on the Kevin Barrett Show

A-Train

Critical Thinker
A
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
432
Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College, appeared on the Kevin Barret radio show Tuesday and put forth the argument that it was the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, that carried out the 9/11 attacks.

alan_sabrosky.jpg


Excerpts from the show:

Fake IDs

"...the manufacture of false identities is child's play in the intelligence world."

WTC7 Controlled Demolition

"...what is clear...even if there were 19 Arab hijackers of some name in thos four planes, neither they, nor the remaining al-Qaeda apparatus on the ground had the expertise or access to wire a single building for controlled demolition. They could not have done it..."

Motivation

"...the only country to benefit from the exercise, is Israel"

US Government Involvement

"...what about the CIA and Defense Department? It's important to make a distinction between those departments and agencies and the individuals within them...."

Mossad

"When you look at the one thing that could have done it as an organization, Mossad is almost by default the only one left standing. When people in the 9/11 Truth Movement... ask, 'where's the beef'-- the evidence is there. The only piece of evidence lacking is a public confession by one of the architects of the operation, and that is not going to be forthcoming, any more than public confessions by serial capital murderers are common in criminal cases. It's not going to be there."

Israeli Approval

"For Mossad to have been the primary actor, given the target-- us-- there had to have been approval for this-- for the length of time involved, the location, the people who owned and ran security for the World Trade Centers-- there had to have been approval from the highest levels of the Israeli government."

Use of Arabs

"I recall a study that was published just a day or two before 9/11, it was by the School of Advanced Military Studies at Ft. Leavenworth, a student paper, and one of the comments was to describe Mossad as ruthless, cunning, capable of conducting attacks against Americans and making it look like the Arabs had done it."

Remote Flight of Aircraft

Barrett: "How would Mossad be able to remote fly the planes? Sabrosky: "RPVs. Dov Zakheim, whom I knew in the 70s and 80s, ran a company that specialized in RPV and drone technologies. I have been told by aviators, it's possible"

All Or Nothing Gamble

"There is such a thing as a target of opportunity, and their gamble paid off. It paid off...."
 
I thought the Israeli commandos hijacked the planes, set them on their courses, and then parachuted out of the nose?
 
Let's quote this post from a fallen brother:

Dr Adequate said:
Well, I can only speak to your conspiracy theory so far, since it seems to be in a somewhat flexible state.

Nonetheless, let's see if we can compare the two. I shall deal here only with the hijacking/remote takeover of the planes, since this seems to be the crucial element.

Let's put the two hypotheses side by side and see how they stack up.



The Accused

The hijackers were:

19 people willing to attack their sworn enemy and gain instant access to the most exclusive district of Paradise.

Each of them has been named and identified:

[qimg]http://www.danzfamily.com/pictures/pictures02/hijackers.jpg[/qimg]

The Mossad conspirators were:

An estimated 40-60 people willing to attack their sworn ally and keep quiet about it for ever. How the 40-60 estimate was arrived at I have no idea, nor whether it includes people who were subverted but not "in the loop".

Few names have been named. Occasionally a Truther will try to make out a case against Larry Silverstein on the basis that he once said "pull".



The Motive

The hijackers' target:

Al Qaeda's sworn enemy.

Mossad's target:

Israel's sworn ally.

Consequences for the hijackers if they're detected before the execution of their plot:

Al Qaeda loses nineteen operatives, causes some terror, is already at war with the US so has nothing to lose on that score, possibly attracts more donations.

Consequences for Mossad if they're detected before the execution of their plot:

Israel loses its best ally, probably all its other Western allies, and most likely its chances of survival.

Consequences for the hijackers if their identity is discovered after the crime:

None whatsoever.

Consequences for Mossad if their identity is discovered after the crime:

See above; only worse, because an actual atrocity is more shocking than a thwarted one.

The hijackers stand to gain:

Al Qaeda's greatest victory ever against the infidel, plus 72 virgins apiece.

Mossad stand to gain:

The support of the US for Israel ... which they already have ... and would lose instantly if they were found out.



Previous Record

Previous Muslim terrorist attacks or attempted attacks on American soil:

  • The Millenium LAX bomb plot.
  • The 1993 WTC attack.
  • The blind sheihk plan to bomb the NYC tunnels.
  • The plot to blow up a NYC subway in Brooklyn.
  • The murder of tourists on the top of the Empire State Building.
This list is not necessarily exhaustive, nor of course does it include attacks on Americans abroad, such as the attack on the USS Cole.

Previous Mossad attacks or attempted attacks on American soil:

  • I got nothing.


The Means

The hijackers needed:

  • Four trained pilots, which they had.
  • Knives, which they bought.
  • Airplane tickets, which they bought.
Mossad needed:

  • Nonexistent real-time voice morphing software which could imitate the voices of people who Mossad couldn't have predicted would be on the planes with such perfection as to fool their own families.
  • A nonexistent device which allows them to fly a jumbo jet by remote control.
  • Some way of smuggling nerve gas onto airplanes without getting on board themselves.
  • To fake all the actions, not to mention the appearance, of the nineteen "hijackers" for a couple of years, undetected by their family and friends, including one final tour de force where they manage to pretend to board airplanes while in reality "slipping out the side".


The Opportunity

The hijackers needed:

To get on the planes, which they did.

Mossad needed:

Sheesh, where do you start? Just how many people do they need to subvert to have any opportunity?



The Evidence

The evidence for the hijackers taking over the planes by force includes:

  • Their martyrdom tapes.
  • Further claims of responsibility by Al Qaeda top brass.
  • Their acquisition of piloting skills (with no subsequent attempts to become commerical pilots).
  • Their purchase of the requisite weapons, plane tickets, etc.
  • Evidence and witnesses showing that they checked in and boarded.
  • DNA evidence matching bodies from ground zero to vehicles and hotel rooms used by the hijackers.
  • The fact that five (or in one case four) of this group now known to be associated with one another and with al Qaeda were on each of the hijacked planes.
  • Cockpit recordings of men speaking in Arabic.
  • Eyewitness accounts from the planes.
The evidence for Mossad taking over the planes by remote control includes:

  • Zilch.
The evidence against the hijackers taking over the planes by force includes:

  • Nada
The evidence against Mossad taking over the planes by remote control includes:

  • It's technically impossible.
  • There's no evidence for it.
  • All the evidence that proves that the planes were actually hijacked, including tricky stuff like eyewitness acounts and DNA evidence and al Qaeda claiming responsibility.


The Plea

Al Qaeda:

Proudly claim responsibility.

Mossad:

Say that al Qaeda did it.



The Verdict

Well, 9/11-researcher?

Against whom is there the stronger case?

As has been pointed out to you, you are accusing people of mass murder, this is not a game.
Click to expand...
 
Why would Israel attack its one sure supporter? With the history of these things usually being found out what on earth would they have to gain when they would be risking everything?:confused:
 
A-Train said:
WTC7 Controlled Demolition

"...what is clear...even if there were 19 Arab hijackers of some name in thos four planes, neither they, nor the remaining al-Qaeda apparatus on the ground had the expertise or access to wire a single building for controlled demolition. They could not have done it..."

Motivation

"...the only country to benefit from the exercise, is Israel"
Click to expand...

this assumed that WTC 7 has been PROVED to be a controlled demolition. in fact, the opposite is true.

plus the fact that one could argue that the USA and various American corporations benefited greatly from 9-11.

clearly, this guy has an anti-Israel bias.
 
The evidence against Mossad taking over the planes by remote control includes:

* It's technically impossible.
Click to expand...

Thats not so. Its possible just very very very very (very to the power 10!) unlikely. Cruise missiles and tv bombs show that it is quite possible to RC a high speed aircraft. Getting that equipment on an commercial jet without anyone noticing would be so risky that no one would attempt it on one let alone four aircraft.
 
the backlash against Israel...if it turned out they simply knew the date and target of attack..and didn't tell the USA....would be huge.

i don't think Israel would take such a risk.
 
A-Train said:
Motivation

"...the only country to benefit from the exercise, is Israel"
Click to expand...

Nothing like a false premise, given that only conspiracy peddlers are claiming that a country was trying to benefit from 9/11. The rest of the sane, evidence-based world realizes that it's a terrorist group, not a nation, who undertook 9/11 for benefit.
 
The intention here, of course, is to imply that Sabrosky is an expert in his subject matter, and that his views should be considered strong evidence in favour of the theory that Mossad was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. This is the argument from authority, which is a fallacy in formal logic; see Wikipedia for a useful definition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I would draw attention to the following passage:

A person who is recognized as an expert authority often has greater experience and knowledge of their field than the average person, so their opinion is more likely than average to be correct. In practical subjects such as car repair, an experienced mechanic who knows how to fix a certain car will be trusted to a greater degree than someone who is not an expert in car repair. There are many cases where one must rely on an expert, and cannot be reasonably expected to have the same experience, knowledge and skill that that person has. Many trust a surgeon without ever needing to know all the details about surgery themselves. Nevertheless, experts can still be mistaken, wilfully deceptive, subject to pressure from peers or employers, have a vested financial interest in the false statements, or have unusual views (or views that are widely criticized by other experts) within their field (this makes the majority of experts right, and thus the renegade expert is wrong), and hence their expertise does not always guarantee that their arguments are valid.
Click to expand...

Sabrosky's views are certainly not shared by the majority of his peers, and would therefore qualify as being "unusual views". So, even if his statements didn't contradict reality - in that, for example, WTC7 was not demolished in a controlled implosion, al-Qaeda is entirely capable of having given nineteen men money and instructed them to train as pilots and buy airline tickets on specific flights, and there is no plausible evidence of Mossad involvement, this testimony would still be no more than speculation.

Dave
 
He is a paranoid idiot. Do you know why I know this? Because he believes the Mossad carried out 9/11. That alone qualifies him as a *********** moron.

NEXT!

TAM:)
 
military contractors and suppliers profited greatly, from 9-11.

Boeing did 9-11!!!!!
 
240-185 said:
Let's quote this post from a fallen brother:
Click to expand...

I may not have agreed with Dr. A's on everything, but man, some things he sure could nail dead on:
Dr Adequate said:
The Motive

The hijackers' target:

Al Qaeda's sworn enemy.

Mossad's target:

Israel's sworn ally.

Consequences for the hijackers if they're detected before the execution of their plot:

Al Qaeda loses nineteen operatives, causes some terror, is already at war with the US so has nothing to lose on that score, possibly attracts more donations.

Consequences for Mossad if they're detected before the execution of their plot:

Israel loses its best ally, probably all its other Western allies, and most likely its chances of survival.

Consequences for the hijackers if their identity is discovered after the crime:

None whatsoever.

Consequences for Mossad if their identity is discovered after the crime:

See above; only worse, because an actual atrocity is more shocking than a thwarted one.

The hijackers stand to gain:

Al Qaeda's greatest victory ever against the infidel, plus 72 virgins apiece.

Mossad stand to gain:

The support of the US for Israel ... which they already have ... and would lose instantly if they were found out.

Previous Record

Previous Muslim terrorist attacks or attempted attacks on American soil:
  • The Millenium LAX bomb plot.
  • The 1993 WTC attack.
  • The blind sheihk plan to bomb the NYC tunnels.
  • The plot to blow up a NYC subway in Brooklyn.
  • The murder of tourists on the top of the Empire State Building.
This list is not necessarily exhaustive, nor of course does it include attacks on Americans abroad, such as the attack on the USS Cole.

Previous Mossad attacks or attempted attacks on American soil:

  • I got nothing.
Click to expand...
 
stewieg said:
Has anyone verified if Dr. Sabrosky was ever employed at the US Army War College?
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to do so, but it's not critical. I'd like an answer to that myself, since I'm curious about it. But we all can admit that, since these are standard trutherisms, they fail for reasons that have nothing to do with whether this Sabrosky fellow was ever employed there or not.

This post is not intended to shoot down research into the question, though. As I said, I'm wondering about this association myself.
 
Hey everybody! A-Train's back!

To what do we owe the pleasure of this visit, AT?

Did a "joo" (or at least someone you think may have been a "joo") cut you off in traffic and you needed to vent?
 
I fired an email off to Professor Douglas C. Lovelace, Jr., Director of the Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College to verify this information.

Who knows if his staff will reply. I'll let you know.

And yes, I did mention the claims that Professor Sabrosky is making.
 
btw, I'm sure it's no coincidence that the interview took place on March 30, during Jewish Passover... really classy.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Hey everybody! A-Train's back!

To what do we owe the pleasure of this visit, AT?

Did a "joo" (or at least someone you think may have been a "joo") cut you off in traffic and you needed to vent?
Click to expand...

I think he is upset that 9/11 Investigator is cutting deep into his turf as the bigtime Jew Hater at JREF. After all, he already has to split the turf with MaGZ and A Train has decided to show the upstart who is boss in the bigotry department.
 
Motivation

"...the only country to benefit from the exercise, is Israel"
Click to expand...

Oh, and Iran of course, who not only saw the Taliban (murderers of Iranian diplomats and generally anti-Shia) swept out of power, but as a bonus looked on as Saddam got his marching orders, allowing massively increased influence for Tehran in its neighbours affairs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom