Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Religious Charities as Terrorist Fronts; What's good for the goose...
Topic Started: Jan 17 2008, 09:49 PM (760 Views)
Hetware

Remember this?
Quote:
 
Cat Stevens Held After D.C. Flight Diverted

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 22, 2004; Page A10

U.S. security officials yesterday diverted a Washington-bound United Airlines flight and detained Yusuf Islam, formerly known as the pop singer Cat Stevens, after discovering that he had been allowed to board the plane in London even though he was on the government's no-fly list.

Islam was questioned in Bangor, Maine, by Customs and Border Protection agents. Dennis Murphy, spokesman for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said Islam is scheduled to be deported today on a flight to Europe. "He is being detained on national security grounds," Murphy said. He declined to elaborate.

Islam was denied entry into Israel several years ago out of concerns that his charitable contributions had funded militant groups. He denied knowingly contributing to any such groups.

Homeland Security officials worked with the Federal Aviation Administration yesterday afternoon to order the United flight to land in Bangor, the closest major airport on the East Coast, after learning that Islam was on board the Boeing 747. Islam, whose name is listed as "Usef Islam," is on several government watch lists, including the no-fly list, according to sources familiar with the event.

While the flight was over the Atlantic, Customs and Border Protection agents were routinely comparing the passenger manifest against the watch lists and realized that Islam was on board, these sources said. Airline agents conduct similar checks before flights depart; it was not clear yesterday why Islam was not flagged before he boarded.

Transportation Security Administration spokesman Mark Hatfield said his agency made the decision to divert the flight. "We did not want that aircraft to enter the Northeast corridor airspace," which would have taken it over New York and into Washington, Hatfield said. "We got information that led us to make a decision, based on the fact there was a confirmed individual on board."

United Airlines declined to comment on the incident yesterday but said that its Flight 919 eventually continued to Dulles International Airport yesterday evening.

Islam recorded 12 albums before abandoning his singing career in the late 1980s after he converted to Islam. He drew criticism in the late 1980s after he publicly supported Ayatollah Khomeini's death edict against author Salman Rushdie. After the terrorist attacks in 2001, Islam said he would donate profits from his CD box set to families of the victims of the attacks.

Staff researcher Don Pohlman contributed to this report.




Posted Image
Chairman of United Jewish Appeal Federation of New York

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

Is this an intentional lie? Larry Silverstein is a non-voting member of the Board of Directors of the UJA.

http://www.ujafedny.org/site/c.ggLUI0OzGpF/b.2055643/k.A700/Our_Leadership.htm

"Ofcourse its not an intentional lie!! Its just a mistake."

Right. And Bush simply made a mistake when he said there were WMDs in Iraq.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

My information says that he was the Chairman. I don't know when he stopped serving in that role. The reason I didn't add the word "fomer" was simply because I was trying to cut down on text in the caption. If you bothered to follow the links, there is plenty of clarification available.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

your caption read "chairman". that is present tense. now, whats wrong with the UJA? they send kids to camp and feed hungry people. are you also against the Salvation Army?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

Do leading members of the Salvation Army commit mass murder?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

please list the leading members of the UJA who have been found guilty of mass murder in a court of law. you do believe in "innocent until proven guilty" don't you? it is one of the foundations of our justice system and democracy. God help this nation when that changes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IVXX
Member Avatar
MDCCLXXVI
arbor
Jan 18 2008, 09:01 AM
please list the leading members of the UJA who have been found guilty of mass murder in a court of law. you do believe in "innocent until proven guilty" don't you?
You hold the same standard for Osama Bin laden??
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

Osama took credit for the attacks several times. But yes, he should have his day in court. As should have Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

But back to the topic. Why is a good organization like the UJA, which only tries to help people, being attacked? Who is next, Habitat for Humanity? The Red Cross? Amnesty International?

Jeeeez.
Edited by arbor, Jan 18 2008, 06:03 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

Usama bin Laden never claimed responsibility for the attacks, and repeatedly denied any involvement. The videos produced by Rita Katz and SITE are complete frauds.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

"repeatedly" denied involvemant? please provide further information as to these "numerous" denials of involvemant. lol.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

The burden of proof is on the accuser. You show any evidence that UBL claimed responsibility. It really isn't hard to find an authentic bin Laden interview if you try.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

Did you not see the video where he says he estimated the damage the planes would create and expected only the section above the impacts to collapse?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stundie

arbor
Jan 21 2008, 10:08 AM
Did you not see the video where he says he estimated the damage the planes would create and expected only the section above the impacts to collapse?
What did the FBI have to say about Bin Laden being wanted for the 9/11 attacks again?? :O

Rex Tomb of the FBI's public affairs unit said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11".

On 16 September 2001, OBL read a statement later broadcast by Qatar's Al Jazeera saying: "I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation"

As for the so called confession.....

On 20 December 2001, German TV channel "Das Erste" broadcast its analysis of the White House's translation of the videotape of OB confession. On the show Monitor, two independent translators and an expert on oriental studies found the White House's translation to be not only inaccurate, but also "manipulative". Arabist Dr. Abdel El M. Husseini, one of the translators, stated: "I have carefully examined the Pentagon's translation. This translation is very problematic. At the most important places where it is held to prove the guilt of bin Laden, it is not identical with the Arabic."

So where is the evidence to show OBL guilt then Arbor??
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

arbor
Jan 21 2008, 10:08 AM
Did you not see the video where he says he estimated the damage the planes would create and expected only the section above the impacts to collapse?
Yes, I have seen the video that bin Laden allegedly had made allegedly showing him allegedly boasting of the crimes. It's the biggest crock of shit thus far promulgated on the world in the 21st century.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

well, let me ask you. why do you consider the video where he takes credit bogus, but consider the message where he admits no guilt genuine?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hetware

Because the videos are obvious frauds. The guy is mega-rich, and all of a sudden, for his alleged pinnacle performance, he decides to use 70s vintage video equipment. Get a clue. That is nonsense.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gideon524
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
arbor
Jan 21 2008, 10:08 AM
Did you not see the video where he says he estimated the damage the planes would create and expected only the section above the impacts to collapse?
I wouldn't necessarily call that video, if it is indeed legit, "claiming responsibility". Claiming responsibility would be to go public with your admission. The tape, if it was legit, was not an admission. It was an "oopsie, I got caught talking about it on videotape." Bin Laden did not hand the tape over to Al-Jazeera to have it aired. It was discovered during the Afghanistan invasion by a stroke of good luck.

He has in fact denied involvement in the attacks.

Posted Image
Posted Image
Edited by Gideon524, Jan 23 2008, 02:38 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gideon524
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
Hetware
Jan 23 2008, 01:38 AM
Because the videos are obvious frauds. The guy is mega-rich, and all of a sudden, for his alleged pinnacle performance, he decides to use 70s vintage video equipment. Get a clue. That is nonsense.

Posted Image
It's risky to call ALL the Bin Laden tapes phoney, but it is interesting that MSNBC even raised the question of the legitimacy of the most recent video released around the sixth anniversary.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21530470/

I'm not kidding. The day that aired on TV, I was in Oneonta, NY and the very first thing that came to mind was, "that looks a LOT like the one released in 2004." And sure enough, that's what this report suggests.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

Al Jazeera thinks its legit. Al Arabiya thinks its legit. CNN, MSNBC, BBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, all think the video is legit.

Im sorry Gideon, but I have to say I take their judgemant on the authenticity of a video over yours.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lin Kuei
Member Avatar

arbor
Jan 23 2008, 12:56 PM
Al Jazeera thinks its legit. Al Arabiya thinks its legit. CNN, MSNBC, BBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, all think the video is legit.

Im sorry Gideon, but I have to say I take their judgemant on the authenticity of a video over yours.
And what is a common theme among those entities you just listed? They are ALL in a position to be controlled.

CNN, MSNBC, BBC, CBS, ABC and PBS try to suggest to me that Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan's lives are important to me and that I should vote for certain presidential candidates.

...would I take their 'judgment' over Gideon's if he told me news about Paris Hilton doesn't matter and that mainstream candidates can't deliver?

An abstract analogy, yet very true.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
arbor
Member Avatar

do the networks have opinions? yes. does that mean that their decision to accept the bin laden videos as legit. is somehow questionable?

no.

i mean, if you told me fox news and sky news were driven by ideology and compromised, i can accept that. but cnn, al jazeera, al arabiya, bbc, pbs?? give me a break.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lin Kuei
Member Avatar

At the end of the day, arbor, powerful interests/entities own nearly all of it.

The government of Qatar owns Al Jazeera.

AOL owns CNN

United Arab Emirates own Al Arabiya

and let's face it - the (now) corporate heads of the all independent (HA!) BBC would not dare go against the grain of the rest of the maintream media empire... Would it?

The others are self explanatory.
Edited by Lin Kuei, Jan 23 2008, 02:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Headspin
Member Avatar

arbor
Jan 21 2008, 10:08 AM
Did you not see the video where he says he estimated the damage the planes would create and expected only the section above the impacts to collapse?
I saw the video, unfortunately he was speaking some form of arabic which i don't understand. I also saw the subtitles overlayed onto the tape by the pentagon translators.

this is a quote from you recounting the events of the day from your perspective.
"i was pretty sure the 1st tower was gonna collapse. seeing the thing lean made me really worried of that. and low and behold, it happened"

if i wanted to fit you up for the crime, I would translate your quote to read:
"I hoped the tower would collapse. I was really worried that it would just lean, but behold allah, it collapsed"

have I mis-translated you? i could argue not.

arbor - are you absolutely sure he confessed in that tape? or is it enough to put your faith in the TV news companies that are owned by the same people who make the bombs and weapons. Corporate news media wouldn't lie to you would they?
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/080208Whistleblower.htm
Edited by Headspin, Feb 8 2008, 08:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Israeli/Mossad 9/11 Involvement · Next Topic »
Add Reply