Friday, September 22, 2006

why 911 conspiracy theories persist

* damien:
"There's another reason why the conspiracy theories won't go away (aside from my rant about the absence of a recognisably independent investigation into 9/11 and the towers). This from Cannonball:

Before 9/11, R.G. Abbas, a key agent of Pakistan's ISI -- that nation's CIA, closely tied to our CIA -- told an FBI informant that "those towers are coming down," indicating the Twin Towers.

Now, think. Either Randy Glass made this story up about Abbas, or it's true. Abbas was the ISI's arms trader. He was their man. We know Pakistan assisted the terrorists, at least financially. On the face of it, Glass's reporting about Abbas' remarks are probably true. If what Abbas said is true then the bombs-in-the-buildings theory is back on the table. Why? How would Abbas-ISI-the 911 terrrorists know that the impact of the planes would bring down the towers? That's an ambitious engineering assesment for anybody to make - unless, of course, the group involved had studied the building plans closely - and decided to assist the process. After all, Silverstein wasn't buying a couple of lemons and taking out all that insurance on a maybe, was he?"
i think damien's general point is valid - but i think he is making some leaps of faith here that I wouldn't necessarily make. For one, if I'm not mistaken, I think this conversation took place in 1999 - and perhaps the plane plan wasn't fully conceived - and, again if I'm not mistaken, Glass was in the process of negotiating to sell nuclear material (heavy water?) to Abbas at the time (per Sander Hicks?). And we know (I may not have published this yet) that David Albright strongly suspects that 'al-qaeda' was trying to acquire plutonium from Pakistan - so it's conceivable that 'al-qaeda' literally wanted to nuke Manhattan.

Further, I'm not sure that we can equate "those towers are coming down," with "the planes would bring down the towers" - I know that the WTC was supposed to be able to 'withstand' a collision with an airliner - but I'm not sure what the plan was after that. Were they hoping that they could repair the building in situ post-attack? Or (more likely) were they simply hoping that the building would be ok till they evacuated everyone?

btw - Glass is in 911 Press For Truth - which you can still see here. Or buy the DVD. Host a house party. The film-makers have done a great service, and they are massively in hock - show them some love.

and once you've seen it, report back in here and tell me what you think, and show it to your friends, and take notes on their reaction, and post that info here too.


damien said...

You raise a number of good points Lukery.

think this conversation took place in 1999 - and perhaps the plane plan wasn't fully conceived.

I am not so sure about that. The twin towers were an ideological target for islamic terrorists for quite some time. El Sayyid Nosair was convicted of the 1993 WTC bombing. In 1991 the FBI raided his house and found maps and pictures of the WTC. Ahmed Refai stole the WTC building plans out of a dumpster in 1993. Ramzi Yousef was planning to use planes to attack the towers in 1995.

Further, I'm not sure that we can equate "those towers are coming down," with "the planes would bring down the towers"

Abbas may have been aware of attack plans against the towers of a more catastrophic nature but may not have known any details. The towers stood firm against the 1993 bombs, they're massive structures. Anyone who says they are "coming down" is either using language very loosely or knows something specific about the attacks imo.

Here's something else to think about: you're a terrorist and you want to attack the WTC using you choose Hani Hanjour (hahahahahahah....!!!)....the guy could barely drive out of the parking lot. Was bin Laden doing 9/11 'on the fly'? Was 9/11 just thrown together? Just seems too convenient that the distracting war games were on the same day. I find it hard to believe the perpetrators decided on the targets just months out from 9/11. I'm guessing though that most of the terrorists weren't told the specific targets until quite late - unless, of course, they were patsies told some different story (they were going to land the planes, exchange hostages etc)

But, yes, I am exhausted trying to prove that there were bombs in the buildings. I think I'll just go with the official account and save my energy...even though I suspect 9/11 was planned for a number of years and had many players.

Cannonfire has a great story about a guy who claims he saw three of the 9/11 hijackers outside Barksdale Air Force Base a year before the attacks. He tried to publish a book about it and ended up dying of unexplained poisoning. Barksdale AFB was the first place Bush touched down on 9/11 after leaving Sarasota. (I vaguely recall that Barksdale has a unique legal situation in that is situated on private property. Wonder who the owners are?...)

Oh, and keep Echelon happy will y'all.

noise said...

In the Khalid Sheikh Momammed deposition for the Moussaoui trial, Mohammed states that all the hijackers (pilots + muscle) knew it was a suicide mission. Of course, we don't really know if he wrote/spoke a word of the deposition. And of course the "Torture Compromise" ensures that Mohammed and al-Shibh will not be tried in a civilian courtroom.

I have wondered if the hijackers might have beent tricked. The suggestion being they weren't actually religious fanatics intent upon martyrdom but were intelligence assets of somekind.

Another consideration is Hopsicker's research. For example, if Atta was the ringleader, wouldn't there be a fear that he might not be able to hijack and crash a plane into the WTC strung out on cocaine?

LeeB said...

Web Tarpley says Atta, et al., were patsies, i.e. "intelligence assets of some kind." This linky goes to Amazon and something like 23 reader reviews that are quite informative. I heard his 2-and-a-half-hour interview with Mike Malone several weeks ago, and IIRC, Luke posted a link to the program's MP3 at White Rose. I'd be interested in your take on that.

lukery said...

damien - when i said: "and perhaps the plane plan wasn't fully conceived."
i wasn't arguing that they hadnt already selected the WTC, only that perhaps they hadnt decided on whether to do it with planes at that point. Generally I wasn't disagreeing you, only that I thought that you read too much into what you had written. (incidentally, I see that Cnnon used almost the exact same language that I used. odd.)

Hi Echelon *waves*

The suggestion being they weren't actually religious fanatics intent upon martyrdom but were intelligence assets of somekind.
i always thought that their wills and what not were planted.

noise said...

I haven't read Tarpley's book but I have heard some interviews with him (including the Malloy interview).

Tarpley suggests the actual planes were taken over by remote control or drones were swapped with the actual flights. Seems to violate the "keep it simple" rule of a criminal conspiracy. OTOH, there are lots of odd details that make one wonder if the 19 could have pulled off the attacks.

Then there is the issue of how much US intel really knew about the hijackers and the 9/11 plot. There are some accounts that suggest US intel was not incompetent at all in terms of tracking the hijackers. Tarpley's theory for this is that there were high placed moles in key positions of power who made sure that leads weren't followed.

LeeB said...

Noise, thanks for bringing up the remote control theory. On the surface, that does sound like it is overly complicated. However, I tripped over a website discussion forum populated by a bunch of engineering/aviation types who went into the issue in depth. I just snooped back in my bookmarks to grab the URL and the site has gone missing. However, Google is still its usual cooperative self, producing this one.

What I get from that is there is no complexity involved in equipping the planes - the device was already on board, so all that is needed is a 'team member' on the ground with access, which is significantly less complicated, IMNHO.

Adding fuel to this particular fire is also the television pilot episode aired on FOX entertainment division on March 4, 2001. Funny darned thing - it had a passenger jet under a hacker's remote control flying straight at the World Trade Center.

Poor Condi! No one could have imagined using a hijacked airliner as a missle?

Do tell!