There is a sense of poetic justice in this whole affairs. UAE allows Europeans and Americans in without visas and requires that from "fellow" Arabs. Isn't also funny that Shahar Peer was there to play tennis as a "guest" no doubt as well as Uzi Landau? What passport did Uzi Landau use to enter the UAE?

Mossad wouldn't let you see something they don't want you to see and you don't know who is on those pics and who they work for. You're trying to understand something that is beyond your understanding. This not some movie or crime novel. And you referring to cleaners as spies, is like confusing a florist with a barber. Not every cleaner knows who he/she works for, they don't really care. There are plenty of mercenaries and pay-per-hit assassins all over the globe. Calling this mission a fail is your uneducated conclusion. Let's see if you can prove it, then I will apologize.

the things is mossad has been doing this for years and EU countries have known it for years. why are they barking like this suddenly? of course we have passports printers, we even have money printers and we are collaborating with alien intelligence to rule the world!

Either you are a willing participant in ingorance or with a much more racist agenda. Are you insisting that from all the countries in the world, with all the spying technology, and with Post#11 about stolen information and passports from UK office in 2008....that only Israel could get the names? It might work in your conspiracy-theory mind, but the truth is there are many ways these names could have be taken. Because it is Israeli dual-citizens, it speaks more to a frame up than a trip-up by the Mossad. After all, this isn't some small time intelligence group, these guys are seasoned. Your post only shows your ignorance of this.

If any country cares to make issue about killing this murderous evil doer, than they are jew haters. If you target civilians you are a target. The liberals of the world like to see Jews die and feel that all moslems are a protected class. It just isn't so.

so the mossad either puts their agents at risk, or they have put innocent israelis/jews at risk by using their identities? do you think that islamic crazies around the world are going to care if the guy on TV is saying "that's my passport, but that's not me"? they'll believe anything and now those civilians are in danger. real professional. anyway, look how emboldened hamas and other islamic states are now over this. before, when a hit would happen and there was no trace of who did it, the muslim world freaked out in paranoia. the mossad took on legendary status, was everywhere and nowhere. now, in their eyes, mossad can eventually be uncovered. sure, they are still scared but nothing like before. the aura is not like it was, the clay feet have been exposed. mosssad pulled off the hit, but now a lot of agents/innocent civilians have to look over their shoulders from now on. that's not success, far from it.

You base your conclusions on Dubai's investigative reports as if they were true. You have no idea who these people were and that they are agents. You seem to think that spy, assassin and agent is all the same thing. You are pretending to know more than you do, even though you have no inside information. You seem to hold people too much to their words. Prove to me that Hamas is more emboldened because of this hit. Just because they say so? The truth again is that you don't know anything. If you think you will know the truth through journalism, you are seriously naive. You see this only from one point of view, but many others see that a Mossad hit discourages the enemy, whether or not they admit it in media. Anyway, all your speculation proves nothing. I don't believe at all that the enemy is more emboldened now than before. Normal people might be stupid to believe the media, but not Hamas. Hamas are not dumb and get emboldened by media. You are underestimating them, even though they know more than you.

the people whose id's were stolen have said on tv that they are worried - that is a blunder by mossad. how can putting anyone at risk by exposing identities be part of a plan? if you look at what arab press is saying now and compare it with, say, the hizbullah leader assassinated last year, the talk is different. last year they were freaking out and paranoid. not so now. none of that is speculation. and btw, how do you claim to know so much on this subject? not speculating are you.

nor do you have evidence it was a blunder or that those people were involved in the assassination. You are only going by what Dubai has reported to media. They way you judge what the terrorists are thinking based on what they are saying is also speculation. I have not claimed to know anything and have not speculated, so don't even try. Listen, don't make yourself out to be something you are not and just accept you don't know it all. I mean you don't even know the difference between a spy and a cleaner. Stop thinking you understand the game of the big boys and just go back to your ordinary simpleton life.

but do you have a more plausible suspect? for sure, whoever did it committed serious blunders, that's what i'm saying. if it was the mossad, they have diminished the brand. i understand the odd hired gun can kill anyone for any reason, but this highly-involved operation? who else has the 1) motive and 2) ability (intelligence info and organization) to pull something like that off? give me another entity that would have ability/reason to want to make such a hit and i'll reconsider. like i said, you got a more plausible explanation?

Now you say for sure that whomever did it committed a serious blunder. That's also speculation my friend. I'm a successful day trader and I trade momentum and what price is telling me NOW, not the news releases or speculation, because that would be gambling. So asking me to speculate goes against my nature. Just accept you know nothing and that you evidently don't even know the basics of intelligence operations, as you are confusing spy with hitman and hitman with agent. I can tell you one thing that I know for sure and you will have to take my word for it, there are very few people who work FOR Mossad and are agents. They train and prepare for months on there missions. A short notice hit is more likely to be paid assassins, Jewish or none Jewish. And again, we don't know who those people are on the photos. I can tell you that you don't have to be a trained pro to know there are cameras in the lobby and elevators, so a hitman accidentally being caught on camera with his true identity is very unlikely. Most assassinations are hired guns and they don't know who they are working for and don't care. More you don't need to know. Stop speculating who did it and stop speculating that it was a blunder. Just like Dubai, you know NOTHING.

Ok please help me out here the sexy dude who looks like Disney's the great mouse detective just managed to distort me, now please someone explain to me something , I mean i am no detective and no law student but this UGLY dude wearing a dishdasha said that Israel and he makes it sound like Israel is one person I guess he means jacob anyway this Israel person has a printer and he is runnin around printing passports right? I thought the Europeans said the passports were real and stolen, so now we have a nasty mean conspiring Jewish person called Israel who probably hijacked an EL AL flight and went all across Europe to steal passports at bars and cafe's then printed a new version in his backyard OMG this is hilarious, can we have this on UGLY BETTY please, please, hmmm well if your police are so good why dont they investigate the thousands of fake companies, mafias and the bandits who robbed that jewelry store which is located near the Raffles hotel shopping Mall??? or the thousands of Iraqi shiites that are in Dubai who are members of teh shiite mehdi army who attempt to create cells in dubai???? oh well i guess these topics are trivial but Dubai police managed to destroy Israeli reputation and has evidence incriminating europeans i mean Israelis who stole european passports and carry printers and make their own copy can I have a Papua New Guinean Passport please? where can I order one?

you can't even answer or refute anything i have said, other than point out that i'm speculating. what do i have to believe that you aren't speculating? nothing. which is why your comments sound like, wait, speculation. still, what is more plausible? if you know so much like you claim to, at least answer that. otherwise you are merely a naysayer who contributes nothing but his own self-verified opinion like everyone else on these talkbacks.

Your the one with opinions and speculations. Naysayer who contribute nothing? What have you contributed? Get off you high horse, you're still a nobody who knows nothing. And since I said I know nothing either, I think I'm a little bit more humble and objective than you. What's more plausible? Who says? You? And who are you? The fact that your entire premise that the mission was a blunder rests on the Dubai report being true. Yeah, and Arab authorities and media has never lied before. Jumping to conclusions the way you do shows poor character. Prove to me that it is more PLAUSIBLE that this mission was a blunder.

help me harmonize these statements of yours: from #45 - "And since I said I know nothing either, I think I'm a little bit more humble and objective than you" and from #42 - "I can tell you one thing that I know for sure and you will have to take my word for it" (as you go on and make other statements of unverifiable take-my-word-for-it factoids). also explain this: your #45 - "Jumping to conclusions the way you do" and my #44 - "whoever did it..." and "if it was the mossad...". seems i hurt your feelings by criticizing mossad/whoever for alleged mistakes. why overly sensitive? poor character?

OIL MONEY HAS BEEN GREASING THE WORLD'S POLITICIANS HIGH AND LOW FOR DECADES. OIL MONEY IS BUYING " JOURNALISTS " TO TAKE A DIFFERENT SLANT IN THEIR REPORTING. COMPANIES THAT BENEFIT FROM THIS OIL MONEY, ARE ALWAYS PRO- ARAB AND ANTI-ISRAEL. NEWS, COMPANIES, POLITICIANS , THE U.N. ...... MANY OIL BOUGHT VOTES AND GREASED REPRTING....... ABC, CBS, NBC, BBC, CBC, UK NEWSPAPERS, ECONOMIST MAG., AND MANY , MANY OTHERS ARE " OIL BOUGHT AND PAID FOR " ! SURE , DUBAI WITH OIL MONEY CAN EVEN MAKE IT LOOK LIKE MOTHER THERESA AND WILLIE NELSON DID IT AND GET THE U.N. TO JUMP INTO SESSION .

since you say the arab press lies itself into being of no use and you question the veracity of the report from dubai, who knows if this entire thing is completely fabricated? maybe no one was killed and all we are seeing is random video from some hotel who knows where? that starts to get completely absurd. when you start casting unwarranted doubt on everything, then everything becomes a meaningless exercise of relativistic narratives with truth found in the eye of the beholder. there is truth, there are facts, and there are ways to sort them out to a certain extent. otherwise, why even watch/read the news if you can't personally know for sure if what you're being told is true or a pack of lies?

"help me harmonize these statements of yours:" Piece of cake. "from #45 - "And since I said I know nothing either, I think I'm a little bit more humble and objective than you" and from #42 - "I can tell you one thing that I know for sure and you will have to take my word for it" (as you go on and make other statements of unverifiable take-my-word-for-it factoids)." Where's the contradiction here you claim you caught? I said I knew something about the Mossad, did not speculate about this specific case. Nor did I promise you verifiable information. Take my word for it, means that I don't want/can't share my source and you are free to take it or ignore it. So the harmony is there. I wish I could tell you "nice try," but that was way too easy. "also explain this: your #45 - "Jumping to conclusions the way you do" and my #44 - "whoever did it..." and "if it was the mossad..."." That was post #41 rather and the second part you (purposely) left out is indeed a conclusion: ...whoever did it committed serious blunders... You don't know who did it, but you are CONCLUDING it was a blunder. "seems i hurt your feelings by criticizing mossad/whoever for alleged mistakes." Here you ASSUME you hurt my feelings. "why overly sensitive?" Here you have CONCLUDED that you hurt my feelings. "poor character?" Here you are JUDGING me based on your CONCLUSION from your ASSUMPTION. That my friend is poor character. But I think poster #32 said it better. Now allow me to retort. Please explain the harmony between: "the entire globe knows these people are spies and they know what these spies look like." AND EVERYTHING ELSE YOU'VE WRITTEN HERE You refer to assassins as SPIES and then continue talking as if you were an investigator or a professional. It's hilarious how that doesn't even embarrass you. LOL!

It's amazing how you can build a chicken out of one feather. What a manipulative personality you have, twisting my words from questioning Arab media to it being of "no use." Hey, here the same stupid argument -- and I can say it with much fewer words than your redundant ranting -- EVERYTHING must be true what we read in the papers, because it says so in the papers and if we start questioning something from the papers than EVERYTHING must be untrue. Jeez, I had these talks when I was 12.

excuse me for not knowing the exact terminology for assassins/spies/agents/whatever. your getting hung up on a job title is one sure way to avoid the points i raised: 1) so the stolen passport identities that are being displayed by dubai of jewish individuals and the vidoe of the ________ (job title of people involved in the hit) that is broadcast all over the world - how can that possibly be by design? implicate innocent people and make your own ________ (job title of people involved in the hit) known - that is a good thing? 2) my #41 - who could do domething like what was done involving so many people and who would have reason to implement such a complicated hit? if not mossad, who could do it and why would they take the risk? this guy was a small fry except to israel. i still haven't heard anything on these. what is wrong with speculation and assumption on this subject? short of having the actual memo in out hands with irrefutable proof of who ordered it, do we just shrug our shoulders and say we can't know and isn't possible to know? is that reasonable in cases like this when there is at least some evidence? if you belittle the arab authorities and media has having "lied before" and the dubai report has only a presumption of being true as a means of dismissing my argument, then how can any of it be useful? i say it is useful (never said EVERYTHING was), you say no. some of it, all of it, none of it may be true, but what info we have at least this time has some credibility that has been at least partially corroborated by other governments - it's not nothing and at least deserves qualified consideration, like i have been giving. and "conclusions" i have allegedly "jumped to" (which i am only assembling a plausible scenario of what happened, hence all the "if"'s i used) is based on info that we have. why is that so absurd in your eyes? it is possible that i could very well be right and you completely wrong. you shooting down what i say and leave a void of explanation in its place doesn't strengthen your argument. sure, you can't convict on what i've suggested, nobody is saying that. but without a single plausible alternative, that leaves mossad as the undisputed leading suspect.

"excuse me for not knowing the exact terminology for assassins/spies/agents/whatever." Ah, so lenient and understanding towards your own flaws, yet yesterday you went through the entire thread after my flaws and fell flat on your face. Sorry, it's not minor mistake and not just a problem with terminology. It actually discredits you severely. Spy and assassin are two COMPLETELY different professions. A spy infiltrates and digs for information, may never kill anyone, whereas an assassin kills targets. Would you say a barber and florist have similar jobs, because they both use scissors? Answer to number 1: All we saw were passports photos and people caught on camera.The rest is speculation solely based on media reports. Today 15 new suspects were added to the list and the information keeps changing everyday. The investigation has yet to find anything solid. Did you verify that the same people caught on tape were the same people with stolen passports? Answer to number 2: I bet you're dying to know that. "what is wrong with speculation and assumption on this subject?" Nothing, except that it's stupid and boring. But as long as you admit that it's speculation and find a partner to speculate with (NOT ME) I don't see why not. Yet, you made conclusions based on your speculation and I just reminded you of that, which is driving you crazy. I am too much in love with truth and facts that I have the patients to wait for it until it's ripe and ready and not jump to conclusions. "i say it is useful (never said EVERYTHING was), you say no." Yes, I say you have nothing useful. You are not saying anything more than what media hasn't already said. Go find yourself useful somewhere else, only arrogance make you think you know something. "some of it, all of it, none of it may be true, but what info we have at least this time has some credibility that has been at least partially corroborated by other governments" The best liars always use some truth, whether it be gov't officials or individuals. "it's not nothing and at least deserves qualified consideration, like i have been giving." Go back to post #32. "and "conclusions" i have allegedly "jumped to" (which i am only assembling a plausible scenario of what happened" No you concluded that the hit was a blunder, which a definite. "it is possible that i could very well be right and you completely wrong." Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Is it possible that you're right for jumping into conclusions based on fluctuating reports, at an early stage of an investigation? No way. "you shooting down what i say and leave a void of explanation in its place doesn't strengthen your argument." I suspected this was your problem. You are an impatient person and can't accept the void like I can. You need that quick-fix and rather fill the void with speculation until the truth surfaces. Again, I have too much respect for the truth to do that. "but without a single plausible alternative, that leaves mossad as the undisputed leading suspect." Again, that was never the issue, whether Mossad was the prime suspect or not. I questioned your conclusion that the mission must've been a blunder.

i express an opinion you didn't like and freak out. are you this way with everyone you disagree with? i still say IF it was the mossad, they botched it big time. as more info comes out that informs, i'll modify what i think as it is pertinent. as it stands, IF it was the mossad, they screwed up. you may disagree, but what i have said is better than anything you can come up with = nothing. regardless, mossad is still the prime suspect, even you can't refute that. from what i've heard, there's not even anyone else under real suspicion. if that's the case and it wasn't mossad, i think someone out there that can frame mossad like that might prove to be the better agency. we'll see who's right.

"i express an opinion you didn't like and freak out." It wasn't merely an opinion, but a conclusion. You didn't like your conclusion being questioned and freaked out. "are you this way with everyone you disagree with?" No, most people I disagree with usually have better arguments than you and are able to stimulate my intellect more. You I just find boring and I guess it is showing. "i still say IF it was the mossad, they botched it big time." You can say that, but you are still making a conclusion based on poor information. "as more info comes out that informs, i'll modify what i think as it is pertinent." This is a sad way to rationalize. The truth may never come out and satisfy that void of yours and your speculations will eventually solidify and become the truth. E.g. we saw on tv big chunks of ice breaking off and falling into the Southern Ocean and to many this was sufficient evidence or (using your favorite word) more PLAUSIBLE that global warming was causing the polar caps to melt. Then we saw a skinny polar bear floating on a sheet of ice with a desperate look on his face and we were told that the polar bear is dying out and it's all our fault. For those who have more insight, know that Antarctica doubles in size every austral winter and then melts back to its normal size in the summer, so chunks of ice breaking off and falling is a completely natural and normal process. Then some of us learned that polar bear numbers are at an all time high. What's more PLAUSIBLE is simply just your uneducated opinion. "as it stands, IF it was the mossad, they screwed up." That's still a conclusion based on limited information. The void remains. "you may disagree, but what i have said is better than anything you can come up with = nothing." That's just simply your self-righteous opinion. Sometimes less is more. Less speculation now, more receptive to the truth later. "regardless, mossad is still the prime suspect, even you can't refute that." Never tried. Believe it's the 3rd time I've said that. "from what i've heard, there's not even anyone else under real suspicion. if that's the case and it wasn't mossad, i think someone out there that can frame mossad like that might prove to be the better agency." Wow, you're an addict, aren't you? One conclusion after another. Now you conclude that if it wasn't Mossad, they must've been framed, which is then the most PLAUSIBLE according to you, right? Your contributions are endless to this thread. What would the world do without you? "we'll see who's right." Who's right can already be determined as of now. Jumping to conclusions the way you do is never right. Secondly, you've taken so many swing in all directions, so when the truth surfaces, do you get credit for all your hits without any deductions for all your misses? :)

you might not want to read talkbacks on this site, seeing how you might go into a coma at all of the irrationality and undocumented opinion. besides, like i said before, why do you read the news about this hit when it is full of speculation and, according to you, jumping to conclusions? you seem to keep up with it even though, according to you, it is such "poor information". why bother? do you rant to the editors of news outlets and tv producers for them presenting dubious information and their commentators making their uneducated assumptions no different than what i've made? do you? if my opinion is so uneducated and my arguments are so bad, why waste your time with little ol' me? are you insistent on trying to change my mind or you can't let such poor characters go without setting them straight? i must be hitting pretty close to the mark to get you all riled up. anyone can be a critical naysayer with nothing positive to contribute. like i said before, there is only one suspect in this case. making assumptions based on that is entirely reasonable. it's no different that the prevailing thought that's out there and i've said nothing other than what most conventional thought on the matter has already said. and, guess what? if it turns out to have been the mossad which in all likelihood it was, feel free to come back and apologize. if it wasn't, i'll admit you're right. until then, it's a free world and you can keep obsessing over me. but it's rather creepy.

"you might not want to read talkbacks on this site, seeing how you might go into a coma at all of the irrationality and undocumented opinion." I haven't seen anyone act more irrational than you in this entire thread, so why throw out the baby with the bathwater? "besides, like i said before, why do you read the news about this hit when it is full of speculation and, according to you, jumping to conclusions?" No, you are jumping to conclusions. Why are you reading the news? In hope that you will always be told the truth, thus can remain intellectually lazy and never have to exercise your mind to think critically? "if my opinion is so uneducated and my arguments are so bad, why waste your time with little ol' me?" What I do with my time is none of your business and who said I'm wasting my time? Another assumption? I could be looking for inspiration for a screenplay character who's full of himself or perhaps you're a school assignment. Still none of your business. Why you reply to me, I haven't I asked you, because I simply don't care about your personal life. "anyone can be a critical naysayer with nothing positive to contribute" There goes the naysayer remark again. So I guess you want all your conclusions to go unchallenged? What a crybaby you are. "making assumptions based on that is entirely reasonable." You were making conclusions based on your assumptions. You keep forgetting that, but I don't. "if it turns out to have been the mossad which in all likelihood it was, feel free to come back and apologize" Great, then you owe me an apologize right now, since I never denied it was Mossad or that they are the prime suspect. I believe it's tjhe 4th time now I told you. You wanna go for a 5th? You're like a crocodile, small ears and big mouth. "until then, it's a free world and you can keep obsessing over me. but it's rather creepy." Says the guy who ferociously searched the entire thread looking for my flaws, but came out empty-handed. It is your over-sized ego and self-obsession rather that deludes you to think anyone would ever obsessed over you. You're still insignificant, know thyself and and don't overplay your hand. And you didn't answer the question: when/if the truth comes out, since you took so many swings in all directions, do you get credit for your hits without any deductions for all your misses?

Really? Haven't traveled much I see.

and you can have the last word since you must.

Yawn!