9/11:
Civil Court Finds Against Arrested “Dancing Israelis”
“Dancing
Israelis” Arrested On 9/11 Later Sued The Govt, But Lost Their Case
—
By Martin Hill
LibertyFight.com
—Martin Hill will be my guest on Truth Jihad Radio next Monday, November 12. Listen live 3 to 5 pm Central on AmericanFreedomRadio.com. -KB
Many researchers have documented this as evidence of Israeli complicity in the attacks. But did you know that the Israelis later sued numerous government employees for civil rights violations? This is not widely known.
More Arrested Israelis…With
Explosives? (Ed)
There is a lot of information which outlines the initial
stories of the “Dancing Israelis”, including WhatReallyHappened
and KillTown.
The website 911Myths,
while defending the establishment’s story, also has a lot of good information
on the case. LibertyFight.com disagrees
with 911Myths conclusions and analysis but credits them with providing links to
some information that many other sites do not have.
This article will give an update on the “Dancing Israeli”
situation, with new information which hasn’t been reported by anyone
previously, to our knowledge. What has not been reported at all, either in the
mainstream media or alternative media, is the conclusion of their civil case.
The Israelis federal civil rights lawsuit was tossed out of court!
The viral youtube video “History they don’t Teach you
In school” covers a brief history of Israeli false-flag terrorism
operations. There is an amusing backstory about this. The video, made by ZionCrimeFactory, was the video that
spawned a call to police by a Texas Rabbi in 2010. Rice
University Jewish Studies Professor Shira Lander called the police after a
Houston man e-mailed her a link to ZCF’s youtube video.
The Rabbi had advertised a public lecture series entitled
“The History of Anti-Semitism” with a flier that asked “Why did some blame Jews
for 9/11?” and the man simply responded to her question via e-mail
correspondence. After that story broke, Dr. Kevin Barret invited Rabbi Lander,
his academic colleague, to engage in some “interfaith dialogue” on his radio
show regarding the matter, but she didn’t accept the offer for some reason.
Nevertheless, ZCF’s video features numerous mainstream
news reports of Israelis being arrested by police that day, including footage
of an interview with the New Jersey cop, Scott DeCarlo, who arrested the
dancing Israelis at gunpoint. We will recap a bit here regarding the “Dancing
Israelis”:
5 men in a van owned by URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS were spotted by New Jersey
residents following the 9/11 attacks dancing, laughing, posing for
pictures, smiling and exchanging high-fives. A woman named Maria called the
police. New Jersey police officer Scott DeCarlo told of how he had to arrest
them at gunpoint after they failed to comply with his orders. History
Commons has an excellent detailed account of events involving DeCarlo that
day with news links.
Ten years after the attacks, in September 2011,
AmericanFreePress later conducted an exclusive interview with DeCarlo, now a
Sergeant, who told AFP that this will be his first and last statement on the
matter: 9-11 Cop Breaks Silence
The actual police and FBI reports were declassified and
released in 2011, and can be read in their entirety through the following
links. (911Myths notes that they originally retrieved the 6 documents from
scribd.com.):
East
Rutherford police documents View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #1 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #2 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #3 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #4 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #5 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #1 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #2 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #3 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #4 View on Scribd
FBI Documents, section #5 View on Scribd
CBS reported “A truckload of explosives” and CNN reported
“a ton of explosives” in a van stopped “near the George Washington Bridge”,
with three men arrested and in custody. Later, CNN ran a press conference with
Mayor Rudolph Guliani and Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik in which Kerik
denied that any exposives were found. All three news videos can be seen at the
very bottom of this page.
An Irish news agency also ran the story ‘Three
arrested with van full of explosives’ (see video above that debunks
retraction..Ed) but later ran an update, ‘Police
confirm arrests but deny explosives find’. There is contention about
whether the van with reported explosives was the same van with the five
Israelis. However, as we will discuss berlow, note that the Jewish publication
reporting on the civil lawsuit on 9/14/04 ran the headline Israelis
detained on George Washington Bridge on 9/11 sue Department of Justice.
The Owner of Urban Moving Systems, an Israeli citizen named Dominick Suter, left the country immediately following the arrests, and abandoned his business entirely:
State Granted Access to Moving Company’s Storage Facility
The Owner of Urban Moving Systems, an Israeli citizen named Dominick Suter, left the country immediately following the arrests, and abandoned his business entirely:
State Granted Access to Moving Company’s Storage Facility
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
December 13, 2001
“NEWARK- The State Division of Consumer Affairs (“Consumer Affairs”) is asking all citizens who have goods stored at Urban Moving Systems’ Weehawken warehouse to immediately contact Consumer Affairs, Attorney General John J. Farmer, Jr., and New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs Director Mark S. Herr announced today. The State on Wednesday obtained a court order giving inspectors from Consumer Affairs access to the facility allowing consumers access to retrieve their goods and belongings. The State, at the same time, filed a lawsuit in Hudson County Superior Court against Urban Moving Systems and its owner Dominick Suter alleging violations of both the State’s Consumer Fraud Act and regulations set forth in the Public Movers and Warehousing Licensing Act. According to the complaint, on or about September 14, 2001, Suter departed from the United States and left no one acting as an agent for Urban.”
On September 15, 2001, ‘The Record’ of Bergen County, NJ), reported FIVE HIJACK SUSPECTS HAD LINKS TO N.J.; ‘MATERIAL WITNESS IN CUSTODY IN N.Y.C.; THE INVESTIGATION, which read, in part. “An employee of Urban Moving Systems, who would not give his name, said the majority of his co-workers are Israelis and were joking on the day of the attacks. “I was in tears,” the man said. “These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, ‘Now America knows what we go through.”
ABC’s TV News Program 20/20 did an episode on the matter June 21, 2002,: “Five Israeli men arrested soon after 9/11 might have been working for Israeli intelligence, but likely did not know beforehand about the attacks”.
December 13, 2001
“NEWARK- The State Division of Consumer Affairs (“Consumer Affairs”) is asking all citizens who have goods stored at Urban Moving Systems’ Weehawken warehouse to immediately contact Consumer Affairs, Attorney General John J. Farmer, Jr., and New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs Director Mark S. Herr announced today. The State on Wednesday obtained a court order giving inspectors from Consumer Affairs access to the facility allowing consumers access to retrieve their goods and belongings. The State, at the same time, filed a lawsuit in Hudson County Superior Court against Urban Moving Systems and its owner Dominick Suter alleging violations of both the State’s Consumer Fraud Act and regulations set forth in the Public Movers and Warehousing Licensing Act. According to the complaint, on or about September 14, 2001, Suter departed from the United States and left no one acting as an agent for Urban.”
On September 15, 2001, ‘The Record’ of Bergen County, NJ), reported FIVE HIJACK SUSPECTS HAD LINKS TO N.J.; ‘MATERIAL WITNESS IN CUSTODY IN N.Y.C.; THE INVESTIGATION, which read, in part. “An employee of Urban Moving Systems, who would not give his name, said the majority of his co-workers are Israelis and were joking on the day of the attacks. “I was in tears,” the man said. “These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, ‘Now America knows what we go through.”
ABC’s TV News Program 20/20 did an episode on the matter June 21, 2002,: “Five Israeli men arrested soon after 9/11 might have been working for Israeli intelligence, but likely did not know beforehand about the attacks”.
They also ran a news story titled The
White Van. ABC’s 20/20 interviewed a former CIA chief for the segment:
“Vince Cannistraro is a former chief of operations for counter-terrorism with the Central Intelligence Agency. Now he’s a consultant with ABC News. He says many in the US intelligence community believe that some of the men arrested in the white van were in the US working for Israeli intelligence. They speculate that Urban Moving was being used by Israel as an intelligence front.”
“Vince Cannistraro is a former chief of operations for counter-terrorism with the Central Intelligence Agency. Now he’s a consultant with ABC News. He says many in the US intelligence community believe that some of the men arrested in the white van were in the US working for Israeli intelligence. They speculate that Urban Moving was being used by Israel as an intelligence front.”
I suggest reading the entire transcript
of the 20/20 segment because it is very interesting and gives a lot of
details. The five Israelis were eventually released after lengthy
interrogations: “Sources tell 20/20, after high-level negotiations between
Israeli and US government officials, a settlement was worked out.” ABC
interviewed two of the Israelis, brothers Paul and Sivan Kurzberg. Paul is
quoted as telling 20/20 “(Through translator) I went to work over there
because, I don’t know, the situation here is not the best.” Sivan Kurzberg said
“(Through translator) They took away two months of my life. During that time I
was supposed to be on a trip that I had planned when I started my military
service.”
20/20 transcript excerpt:
20/20 transcript excerpt:
MILLER: (VO) This is Kurzberg’s younger brother, Sivan,
who was one of the three men on top of the van that morning. Although Paul and
Sivan would not talk with us about the incident, Sivan and two of the other
detainees did go on an Israeli talk show after their return. Oded Ellner denied
they were laughing or happy that today.
Mr. ODED ELLNER: (Through translator, from Israeli talk show) Nothing of the kind, the fact of the matter is, we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.”
Mr. ODED ELLNER: (Through translator, from Israeli talk show) Nothing of the kind, the fact of the matter is, we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.”
The mens’ defense attorney Ram Horvitz, who was also
interviewed by 20/20, denied all wrongdoing and denied the men were Mossad
agents: “This story about the five boys being connected with Israeli
intelligence is the most stupid and ridiculous story that I ever heard, and it
is nonsense. I don’t know who invented this story.” Mark Regav, the spokesman
for the Israeli embassy in Washington, also spoke with 20/20 and denied any
Israeli intelligence connection to the five men, claiming “The story is simply
false.”
Channel 4 in the UK later produced a documentary called
“The 9/11 Conspiracies”. They interviewed Maria, the woman who initially called
the police on the men, and also interviewed three of the Israelis. While the
Israelis didn’t talk to 20/20 about the incident in June 2002, they did speak
about it in the UK documentary. It is an excellent must-see segment and can be
found towards the bottom of the page here.
In 2004, four of the Israelis, Paul Kurzberg, Silvan
Kurzberg, Israelis Yaron Shmuel, and Omer Gavriel Marmari filed a federal civil
rights lawsuit against Attorney General John Ashcroft and wardens of the
Federal Bureau of Prisons. The four were represented by New York attorney
Robert Joseph Tolchin and Israeli attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner. They
claimed that their detention was illegal and that their civil rights were violated,
suffering racial slurs, physical violence, religious discrimination, rough
interrogations, deprivation of sleep, and many other offenses. The lawsuit also
stated “As Israelis and as Jews, plaintiffs themselves are sworn enemies of
al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden.”
Regarding the “dancing Israelis”, 911Myths.com notes “One
curious footnote to this story appeared three years later, when four of the
Israelis filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice. We’ve not yet
discovered what happened to the case, and the lack of information suggests it
never reached court. Still, bringing the case at all is hardly what you’d
expect if these really were Mossad agents somehow connected to 9/11. Surely
three years on they’d want to keep their heads down, not re-open the whole
affair?”
There are three archived news reports on the lawsuit from
September 2004. The first is an Kokhaviv Publications IMRA Newsletter titled
“Israelis detained on George Washington Bridge on 9/11 sue Department of
Justice” dated September 14, 2004. The 2nd is an archive of a Jerusalem Post
article titled Four Israelis sue Ashcroft dated September 14, 2004. The 3rd is
from the Jewish news weekly of Northern California, titled Four Israelis sue
Ashcroft, FBI director over 9/11 treatment dated Friday, September 17, 2004.
The Public can access Federal Court records by registering
with a system called PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) at
pacer.gov. There is a fee for this service and a charge for each paid viewed.
Sometimes, litigants or others may choose to post legal documents from civil
cases for the public on other sources outside of the PACER system, on their own
sites or websites such as leagle.com.
LibertyFight regularly reviews various legal filings and writes about interesting cases, such as the case involving the Oregon man who sued the police for falsely arresting him after he flipped them off (he won), the woman who was arrested for allegedly avoiding jury duty in Colorado, the lawyer from Los Angeles who beat her red light camera ticket, or the U.S. Department of Justice’s letter to the cops outlining the people’s right to film police.
LibertyFight regularly reviews various legal filings and writes about interesting cases, such as the case involving the Oregon man who sued the police for falsely arresting him after he flipped them off (he won), the woman who was arrested for allegedly avoiding jury duty in Colorado, the lawyer from Los Angeles who beat her red light camera ticket, or the U.S. Department of Justice’s letter to the cops outlining the people’s right to film police.
In the case of the Israelis arrested on 9/11, some of the
documents have been made public on leagle.com. The case is KURZBERG v. ASHCROFT
619 F.3d 176 (2010). The document is from the United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit. The Docket No. of the case is 07-0542-cv. It was argued on
November 17, 2009 and decided on August 30, 2010.
To put it plainly, the case was dismissed not because of
any of the issues involved or merits of the case, but because the plaintiffs
failed to serve the defendants properly as per the rules of the Federal Court.
Because the plaintiffs sued Attorney General John Ashcroft along with many
others working for the government, as the appeals court put it, “the plaintiffs
were required to serve process on both the individual defendants and -because
the individual defendants were sued for acts or omissions occurring in
connection with their performance of their duties – the United States.”
Ashcroft early in the proceedings actually waived his
right to be personally served, but the plaintiffs had to officially serve the
U.S as well. As the court explained, “by its plain text, requires service both
upon the individual defendant and upon the United States officially; one will
not suffice for the other.” They actually gave the plaintiffs numerous chances
to accomplish this, which was literally as simple as going down to any post
office and mailing a certified letter! As the court further explained in their
ruling,
“In order to serve process on the United States, the
plaintiffs were required to deliver a copy of the complaint to the United
States attorney for the district in which the action was brought and also send
a copy of the summons and complaint by registered or certified mail to the
Attorney General. Here, the plaintiffs failed to comply with Rule 4(i) because
they did not effect service on the United States. The plaintiffs failed to do
so despite receiving repeated reminders from the defendants that left the
plaintiffs with sufficient time to complete service.”
The court also noted:
“The time period for completion of service extended under
Rule 4(m) elapsed without the plaintiffs serving process on the United States
through service on the Attorney General by registered or certified mail. They did, however, attempt to serve the United
States three days before the time period expired by sending a copy of the
summons and complaint by first-class mail to the mailing address for the
Attorney General at the Department of Justice; the attempt was insufficient
because it did not make use of registered or certified mail.
After the time period granted by the court had expired,
several of the defendants, including Ashcroft, moved in the district court to
dismiss the action on grounds of improper service of process, including failure
to serve the United States through service on the Attorney General by
registered or certified mail. The district court (John Gleeson, Judge) dismissed
the case with respect to all of the defendants, including those who had not
raised an improper service defense by pleading or motion. See Kurzberg v.
Ashcroft, No. 04 Civ. 3950, 2006 WL 2738991, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68680
(E.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2006)…
…CONCLUSION
“Serving process on the United States through service by registered or certified mail on the Attorney General might seem, from a practical standpoint, to be nothing more than a formality inasmuch as the Attorney General, who is charged with determining whether the United States will provide representation to individual defendants, was himself an individual defendant in this lawsuit. That does not, however, excuse noncompliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The district court did not err in so holding. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
“Serving process on the United States through service by registered or certified mail on the Attorney General might seem, from a practical standpoint, to be nothing more than a formality inasmuch as the Attorney General, who is charged with determining whether the United States will provide representation to individual defendants, was himself an individual defendant in this lawsuit. That does not, however, excuse noncompliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The district court did not err in so holding. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
This seems like an unbelievable and absurd thing to happen
when there are at least two professional lawyers handling the case for the
plaintiffs. It might be understandable if a person was trying to wade through
the courts and represent themself. Federal court rules can be very complicated
and burdensome to the average person not versed in the legal system. Many
times, cases are thrown out even when plaintiffs do have attorneys, such as in
the case of when Jesse Ventura tried to sue the TSA or the ridiculous case of
when Ron Paul tried to sue a youtube user (that case was rightly tossed out).
Many times, the court will dismiss a case based on what
seems like a “technicality”, such as “standing”, “jurisdiction” “Venue”,
failing to respond on time, etc. Fred Rodell, Law Professor at Yale University,
wrote a classic essay in 1939 on the fraud and pig-latin type jibberish used by
lawyers and judges. It’s titled WOE
UNTO YOU, LAWYERS! and is an excellent, must-read treatise. (The phrase is
from Luke 11:46:“But he
said: Woe to you lawyers also, because you load men with burdens which they
cannot bear and you yourselves touch not the packs with one of your fingers.”)
But for a team of international lawyers in a high profile
case, to let the case be tossed out literally because they failed to serve the
U.S. Attorney general properly? According to press
reports at the time the case was first filed in 2004, the plaintiffs’ lawyer
Nitsana Darshan-Leitner said:
“The infamous arrest of these young Israelis on 9/11 has
been used by anti-Semites worldwide as ‘proof’ of Israel’s involvement in the
World Trade Center attack. Our clients are seeking compensation for the harm
they suffered in the MDC by prison officials. In addition, the law suit will
serve as an important public forum to debunk the lie that Israel or the Mossad
was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It will show that there was no Jewish
conspiracy as the Arab world continues to claim and put an end to this racist
blood libel.”
If it were so important to have a public hearing and “debunk the lie that Israel or the Mossad was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks”, why would the lawyers allow the lawsuit get tossed out for such an absurd and avoidable reason?! In 2004 when the suit was filed, many people across the U.S. and the world were researching and finding out the truth about 9/11. Could it be that the lawsuit was filed at a time to deflect attention away from Israeli complicity and paint them instead as the abused victims?
It was tossed out for not sending a certified letter. Do you know how simple it is to send a certified letter, with a return reciept? You can do it at any U.S. Post office for usually less than $5 bucks. Strange days indeed.
At the bottom of this page in the green section are some relevent excerpts from the Appeals Court’s 2010 ruling.
Martin Hill is a Catholic paleoconservative and civil
rights advocate. His work has been featured on LewRockwell.com,
WhatReallyHappened, Economic Policy Journal, Strike The Root, ZionCrimeFactory,
FreedomsPhoenix, Rense, Infowars, PrisonPlanet, National Motorists Association,
WorldNetDaily, The Orange County Register, KNBC4 Los Angeles, Los Angeles
Catholic Lay Mission Newspaper, KFI 640, The Press Enterprise, Antiwar.com,
IamtheWitness.com, BlackBoxVoting, and many others. Archives can be found at LibertyFight.com
Future speech by BARAQ OBAMA:
ReplyDelete"Today, fellow Americans have witnessed a great tragedy before their eyes. On 9-11, Dancing Israelis were caught and arrested yet our media networks chose not to report this defining event.
I have here video files showing criminal behavior and outright complicity in the 9-11 attacks. I have assigned it to my new Justice Department, for formal prosecution.
I promise to you today, these complicit traitors will be held accountable for their many crimes. In Europe, we also caught a group of Israelis dancing and arrested them. In my administration, anyone who would celebrate the deaths of our men and women in uniform will be prosecuted with or without due process. What occurred here was an act of treason, and with the State Department's approval we are interrogating those responsible."
*voice from the crowd*
"WHAT ABOUT KHALID SHIEK MOHAMMED & ISLAM WITH THEIR KILLING OF GOVERNOR PATAKI?"
*muffled noise on the T.V. set with armed guards removing the questioner*
"And likewise, anyone who would criticize a religion of peace such as Islam deserves the same fate. After all, this is a brave new world. Islam will no longer be demonized, and we need to start rebuilding our future together. Let us all hold hands for Allah."
*questioners disappear to Guantanamo Bay..*
AMERICA IS TRULY THE NATION OF THE SHEEP!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteGod has been thrown out in favor of feeling good.
They all worship Obama like their Messiah. When Russia turns against America it will be because of their embracing such evil religion.
Making everything they deserve that is coming, to be well deserved indeed!