• Italian Supreme Court head calls for international 9/11 inquiry
    44 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Fernando Imposimato, the President of the Italian Supreme Court, has raised the call for a criminal investigation of 9/11, comparing the terror attacks to the declassified "false flag" incidents carried out by the CIA in Italy under Operation Gladio. "The 9/11 attacks were a global state terror operation permitted by the administration of the USA, which had foreknowledge of the operation yet remained intentionally unresponsive in order to make war against Afghanistan and Iraq," Imposimato declared in a letter published on Sunday by the Journal of 9/11 Studies. As a former state prosecutor, Imposimato has extensive experience investigating high-profile crimes, including the kidnapping and assassination of Italian Prime Minster Aldo Moro and the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II. He also worked on the Anti-Mafia commission as a Senator, giving him a wealth of knowledge on the inner workings of organized crime syndicates. "Italy too was a victim of the 'strategia della tensione' (strategy of tension) of the CIA, enacted in Italy from the time of the Portella della Ginestra massacre in Sicily in 1947 until 1993," he wrote, recounting the decades of clandestine violence carried out by Western intelligence agencies in the Mediterranean. These terror attacks, conducted under the codename "Gladio", were condemned by the European Parliament in 1990, but a criminal investigation has yet to be initiated. Imposimato pointed to a number of facts that contradict the official 9/11 story, including the free-fall collapse of WTC Building 7, the report that the CIA met with Osama Bin Laden in a Dubai hospital in July 2001, and the overwhelming evidence of insider trading before 9/11 that never led to criminal charges. In addition, Imposimato made a stunning revelation. "I have collected in Italy evidence that the Iraq War was decided on by the U.S. Government before the 9/11 attacks with the help of the Italian Secret Service," he wrote. "The only possibility for achieving justice is to submit the best evidence concerning the involvement of specific individuals in 9/11 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and ask him to investigate," Imposimato concluded. Will the families of the ten Italian citizens and thousands of other victims who were killed in the 9/11 attacks ever find justice? If the tragic events were assisted by criminal elements of the U.S. Government, as Imposimato alleges, then the perpetrators may still be on the loose -- and the "strategy of tension" may be far from over. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/332580#ixzz26UNiVKwY"]SOURCE[/URL] What the [U]fudge[/U]
lol
Apparently Italy is run by those crazies that believe 9/11 is a conspiracy.
As crazy and illogical as this sounds, I never felt right about 9/11, it always seemed a little fishy. Just lots of strange unexplained things. [editline]edited:[/editline] I'm not saying it was an "inside" job or anything or that explosives were used, just it all seems a bit odd
I thought this 9/11 conspiracy bullshit died ~05-06, but no; some morons have to keep on dragging it's dessicated equine corpse up and give it a few good whacks for old time's sake.
[QUOTE=geoface;37701161]As crazy and illogical as this sounds, I never felt right about 9/11, it always seemed a little fishy. Just lots of strange unexplained things.[/QUOTE] Ahem, this link should answer your questions, [I]period[/I]: [url]http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories[/url]
Well, as a president of the supreme court I guess he's bound to have some hard evidence prior to making an accusation like this, right? I don't believe he's going to find anything conclusive, though, but there's nothing that could get worse from a criminal investigation, aside the spending of a lot of (Italian) tax dollars.
[QUOTE=TestECull;37701126]Italy is run by crazies.[/QUOTE] ftfy
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;37701162]I thought this 9/11 conspiracy bullshit died ~05-06, but no; some morons have to keep on dragging it's dessicated equine corpse up and give it a few good whacks for old time's sake.[/QUOTE] Tragically shitheads like Alex Jones drag it up every other week, while simultaneously screaming about HAARP and the NWO.
Hmm.. perhaps there's a reason that the USA wants to 'create' a reason to attack the middle east all the time... This movie is just a theory anyways but very interesting to say the least. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4&feature=b-mv[/media]
[QUOTE=maurits150;37701264]Hmm.. perhaps there's a reason that the USA wants to 'create' a reason to attack the middle east all the time... This movie is just a theory anyways but very interesting to say the least. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4&feature=b-mv[/media][/QUOTE] That video makes me watch to punch babies it's so stupid. "Oh why would they attack Libya olol why would they have beef with Iran man like whats going on must be oil dude olol"
Come on guys, fucking really? Why are people so fucking stupid about this.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;37701325]Come on guys, fucking really? Why are people so fucking stupid about this.[/QUOTE] Because there are so many 'professionals' that wrote 'peer reviewed papers', show them to the public and a good portion of people don't have any idea why they're worth less the link they're embedded in. It's pathetic. You have people with PHd's in PSYCHOLOGY writing a paper about mechanical engineering showing how a plane couldn't have destroyed the tower. Despite the fact they got a diagram of a completely different building. :downs:
If I was Italian, I'd be ashamed right now. The head of the Italian supreme court is a truther, how embarrassing.
[QUOTE=markg06;37701251]Tragically shitheads like Alex Jones drag it up every other week, while simultaneously screaming about HAARP and the NWO.[/QUOTE]It's understandable for Alex Jones, since he makes money off people's utter idiocy; it's people who are critical to the good functioning of the judicial branch of a nation, or other people whom one expects to have some grasp of reality and logic, proposing it that's worrying.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;37701348]Because there are so many 'professionals' that wrote 'peer reviewed papers', show them to the public and a good portion of people don't have any idea why they're worth less the link they're embedded in. It's pathetic. You have people with PHd's in PSYCHOLOGY writing a paper about mechanical engineering showing how a plane couldn't have destroyed the tower. Despite the fact they got a diagram of a completely different building. :downs:[/QUOTE] But the jet fuel doesn't burn at a high enough temperature to melt the thermite in the cruise missile that was highjacked by Mossad to shoot down flight 93.
[QUOTE=maurits150;37701264]Hmm.. perhaps there's a reason that the USA wants to 'create' a reason to attack the middle east all the time... This movie is just a theory anyways but very interesting to say the least. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4&feature=b-mv[/media][/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/zuio4.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=FZE;37701790][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/zuio4.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Moar DDees: [IMG]http://www.r-sw.com/custimages/dd395-Obomb%20(site).jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.r-sw.com/custimages/dd395-light-site.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6wOYKTCKHl0/TNLpRGMchYI/AAAAAAAAAYI/jDjQowoI8_E/s1600/framed_dees.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.r-sw.com/custimages/dd395-santa-site.jpg[/IMG]
And they had to bring up the holocaust in those pictures, fucking hell.
And my faith in humanity drops another 20 points. How can some people be so stupid and ignorant? The conspiracies are not true. After all, one of the biggest reasons we are in debt is because of the war, which has caused way more problems then it solved. I seriously doubt that politicians wanted to LOSE money going into a war and so decided to blow up the twin towers. People are just looking for enemies among the rich and powerful these days, but it usually results in them ignoring the real enemies. So stop with the conspiracy bullshit, for the love of God.
[QUOTE=BananaFoam;37705427]And my faith in humanity drops another 20 points. How can some people be so stupid and ignorant? The conspiracies are not true. After all, one of the biggest reasons we are in debt is because of the war, which has caused way more problems then it solved. I seriously doubt that politicians wanted to LOSE money going into a war and so decided to blow up the twin towers. People are just looking for enemies among the rich and powerful these days, but it usually results in them ignoring the real enemies. So stop with the conspiracy bullshit, for the love of God.[/QUOTE] You might be in debt but the military contractors like Halliburton are rolling in dosh. Lots of people have made fortunes on the war. You are the one paying for it my friend. Open your eyes a bit :) Edit: Apparently stating a fact warrants a dumb rating now.
[QUOTE=BananaFoam;37705427]And my faith in humanity drops another 20 points. How can some people be so stupid and ignorant? The conspiracies are not true. After all, one of the biggest reasons we are in debt is because of the war, which has caused way more problems then it solved. I seriously doubt that politicians wanted to LOSE money going into a war and so decided to blow up the twin towers. People are just looking for enemies among the rich and powerful these days, but it usually results in them ignoring the real enemies. So stop with the conspiracy bullshit, for the love of God.[/QUOTE] Watch out, FP's resident truther gave you a dumb rating. Don't shatter his fragile fantasy world.
What would be the purpose of framing Saudi Arabians for the attack and then invading Afghanistan for some reason but then making an entirely new conspiracy with WMDs in Iraq and invading there and then never getting any oil or other resources?
Did anyone read in the article where it says "operation gladio" as "operation guido"?
This is going to be another one of those "Oh look it's this fucking thread again" threads isn't it?
[QUOTE=King Tiger;37706508]What would be the purpose of framing Saudi Arabians for the attack and then invading Afghanistan for some reason but then making an entirely new conspiracy with WMDs in Iraq and invading there and then [B]never getting any oil or other resources?[/B][/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp[/URL] [URL]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/blood-and-oil-how-the-west-will-profit-from-iraqs-most-precious-commodity-431119.html[/URL] [quote]amid the furore over civil war in Iraq and the hanging of Saddam Hussein, [B]the new oil law has quietly been going through several drafts[/B], and is now on the point of being presented to the cabinet and then the parliament in Baghdad. Its provisions are a radical departure from the norm for developing countries: under a system [B]known as "production-sharing agreements", or PSAs, oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to [U]sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil[/U]. [/B][B]PSAs allow a country to retain legal ownership of its oil[/B], but gives a share of profits to the international companies that invest in infrastructure and operation of the wells, pipelines and refineries. [B]Their introduction would be a first for a major Middle Eastern oil producer[/B]. Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world's number one and two oil exporters, both tightly control their industries through state-owned companies with no appreciable foreign collaboration, as do most members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Opec.[/quote] No benefit out of Iraq war? sureee Its only because of the deteriorating security situation that they havent been able to extract (currently [URL="http://arabnews.com/iraq-targets-6-mbd-exports-2017"]2.9 mbd[/URL]) as much as they wished. Saying they never got hands on any resources is a gross understatement. As for the topic, if they already have a wiki up for it, whats the fuss about. Let them go ahead with the case. It reminds me when the Taliban asked for proof and to deal with the matter in a civilized manner, giving the USA plenty of options to trial Osama in court in either Afganistan, a third neutral country, or even the Hague, but everything was rejected. [quote] [B]Firstly[/B], if America blames Osama bin Laden for the bombings in Nairobi and Tanzania, and can present any evidence for its claim, it should present all its findings to the Supreme Court of Afghanistan, and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will legally summon Osama bin Laden to court. If there is proof, he will be found guilty and will be punished according to the Islamic shari’a law. [B]Secondly[/B], if America finds the first suggestion unpalatable because it does not recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan or because it does not believe in the independent, unbiased and impartial stance of the Supreme Court of Afghanistan, the Emirate suggests that a new court be formed, chaired by the Attorney Generals of three Islamic countries, proceedings of which would be held in a fourth Islamic country. America would be able to present its evidence in this court and make its case against Osama bin Laden. Afghanistan will be a partner of the court and will ensure that Osama is present at the trial and stands to answer any questions and defend himself against any allegations. If Osama is unable to defend himself and is found guilty, he will be punished for his criminal deeds. [B]Thirdly[/B], if America does not trust a court that is set up by three Islamic countries and does not accept or recognize the Supreme Court of Afghanistan, we can offer to curb any and all activities of Osama. He will be stripped of all communications equipment so that his outreach will be limited to his immediate refugee life here in Afghanistan, and the Emirate will ensure that he does not use its territory for any activity directed against another country.[/quote] But everything was rejected and then they gave proof to Pakistan. [quote]T[B]he US ambassador to Pakistan had also handed over a secret file to Pervez Musharraf containing evidence about the 11 September attacks and the alleged complicity of the Taliban regime with Al Qaeda, thereby providing the General with a pretext to explain his government’s cooperation with the Americans in the invasion of Afghanistan.[/B] [B]It remains a mystery why the United States would give such proof to Pakistan rather than to Afghanistan, when our government had specifically asked for these documents.[/B] In reality, these were only the old confessions of an Arab called Ali who had been captured. The Americans claimed he had been involved in the Dar es Salaam attacks, and Ali disappeared, going crazy after he was injected with chemicals that meant he would never return to reality. This was a serious embarrassment for Musharraf, and his reputation was further tarnished.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;37701209]Ahem, this link should answer your questions, [I]period[/I]: [url]http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories[/url][/QUOTE] most of these accusations are so out there that you start to realize theres not even a point to some of this. Its like, do the guys who came up with this realize that it doesn't matter if the plane is what brought it down or not, as either side could have either used bombs/thermite/whatever OR used planes to bring it down? its beyond stupid. Whats important and what we know for a fact is that those in power in the US used 9/11 to further their own agenda. This is the main reason everyone feels uneasy about it, because whoever it was caused by it was used by the people in power to cause further damage and further their own self interests.
not gonna lie, theres holes as deep as the mariana trench in the official reports and a lot of clues and motives to suggest a false flag which sofar have neither been professionally and officially proven nor disproven so I'd say go ahead. I don't get why people are angry at people suggesting there might be a different side to the story. Truth doesn't fear investigation.
[QUOTE=Isuzu;37710735]not gonna lie, theres holes as deep as the mariana trench in the official reports and a lot of clues and motives to suggest a false flag which sofar have neither been professionally and officially proven nor disproven so I'd say go ahead. I don't get why people are angry at people suggesting there might be a different side to the story. Truth doesn't fear investigation.[/QUOTE] Please do post these holes you speak of
[QUOTE=C47;37709473][URL]http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp[/URL] [URL]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/blood-and-oil-how-the-west-will-profit-from-iraqs-most-precious-commodity-431119.html[/URL][/QUOTE] Thats fucking ridiculous. One of your articles assumes that the U.S. wields god-like influence in Iraq, and possesses domineering control over Iraq' ministry of oil. This is not only factually wrong, but preposterous. -China's CNPC made five large deals with Iraq, making China one of Iraq's largest oil partners. -Malaysian firm Petronas and the British firm Shell won the first oil contract ever awarded by Iraq. - The dozen other firms operating oil fields in Iraq including, India's Reliance Industries Ltd, Austria's OMV AG, Turkey's Genel Energy, France's Total, Norway's Statoil, and Russia's Gazprom. [QUOTE]With 45 international firms bidding on Iraq's oil, Iraq stands to rival both Russia and Saudi Arabia in terms of oil production.[/QUOTE] Two of those firms are American. Some one like you, who know relatively nothing about the situation could easily claim "HEY LOOK GUYS ITS FOR OIL, SEE THE US IS THERE." And maybe the ignorant would believe you. But anyone who knows anything about Iraq's oil industry would understand you don't know shit, Iraq has the the worlds third largest oil supply and every country, yes including the US, wants a slice. This is not even close to a U.S., or British monopoly on Iraq's oil. In fact completely contrary to your thought, Iraq recently banned and blacklisted Chevron, the U.S.'s second largest oil company from operating in Iraq. Not to mention how they have repeatedly punished Exxon, another U.S. company, for trying to make deals with Kurdistan. This past May, Iraq banned Exxon from doing exploratory drilling. That's not "benefit". That's not "profit". But go ahead and babble "WAR FOR OIL WAR FOR OIL WAR FOR OIL". [QUOTE] As for the topic, if they already have a wiki up for it, whats the fuss about. Let them go ahead with the case. It reminds me when the Taliban asked for proof and to deal with the matter in a civilized manner, giving the USA plenty of options to trial Osama in court in either Afganistan, a third neutral country, or even the Hague, but everything was rejected.[/QUOTE] Because the offer was fucking ridiculous, the Taliban was essentially trying to keep Osama out of the US's grasp but still reach an appeasement where they would not get invaded for assisting and abetting Al-Qaeda for almost a decade. Afghanistan was a state sponsor of terror, are you really going to say that any trial of Osama held in a nation which actively sponsored terror and was home to thousands of AQ operatives, where the leader of the nation was a close friend of Osama, and the nation was partially funded by Osama (yes, he did divert some of his vast personal wealth to the Taliban) would be a fair trial? This entire charade of "Oh we'll try him, we'll try him don't worry, just give us the evidence!" was widely viewed as a delaying tactic by the Pakistanis, the only country with diplomatic ties to Afghanistan. [QUOTE][URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/18/continuous/18CND-PAK.html?pagewanted=all"]Their demand was for documentary evidence, and for time to put the evidence before Islamic legal scholars, a stipulation that the Pakistani delegation viewed as a delaying tactic.[/URL] The clear implication of the Taliban's response to the Pakistani delegation seemed to be that they do know the whereabouts of Mr. bin Laden and would be in a position to hand him over if they decided to. But it also seemed possible that the Taliban were merely playing for time. [/QUOTE] They didn't want a trial, they wanted to buy Bin Laden as much time as they could. It is ridiculous that you think the United States of American would submit to a wanted international terrorist being tried outside of an American court, and in an Islamic one, a court where Afghanistan (the Taliban) would have a say. Are you really that gullible that you would allow Islamic fundamentalist terrorists to try Islamic fundamentalist terrorists under Islamic law? BTW you forgot to mention your source for that last quote, but don't worry I found it. It from the book [I]My Life With The Taliban[/I], authored by a bitter former Taliban official who backs up his claim with little to no evidence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.