Ten Questions About 9-11
The anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor seems like a good time to point to a new article about the 9-11 attacks.
There are plenty of people who argue that Pearl Harbor was not exactly a surprise. The same, of course, applies to the events of 9-11. There is practically an entire industry on the internet devoted to this theme.
For my part, I am more knowledgeable about the Kennedy assassination than the conspiracy theories regarding 9-11 (even though I was able to hear the explosion when the Pentagon got hit).
It is clear to me however, that even if the Bush administration had no direct hand in the attacks (I don't know one way or another), they have shamelessly exploited them in order to enact long-time goals of the national security state.
The story as told by our government does not hold water. I have been told that Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania. The debris pattern, spread over many miles, certainly indicates such an action. An amateur radio buff swears that one of the Air Force pilots reported back to Langley AFB that he had shot down the plane.
A new article in the Village Voice details and tries to answer ten questions of a suspicious nature regarding 9-11. These are:
The article works for both novice and experienced 9-11 investigators.
There are plenty of people who argue that Pearl Harbor was not exactly a surprise. The same, of course, applies to the events of 9-11. There is practically an entire industry on the internet devoted to this theme.
For my part, I am more knowledgeable about the Kennedy assassination than the conspiracy theories regarding 9-11 (even though I was able to hear the explosion when the Pentagon got hit).
It is clear to me however, that even if the Bush administration had no direct hand in the attacks (I don't know one way or another), they have shamelessly exploited them in order to enact long-time goals of the national security state.
The story as told by our government does not hold water. I have been told that Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania. The debris pattern, spread over many miles, certainly indicates such an action. An amateur radio buff swears that one of the Air Force pilots reported back to Langley AFB that he had shot down the plane.
A new article in the Village Voice details and tries to answer ten questions of a suspicious nature regarding 9-11. These are:
- 1. Where Was the "National Command Authority"?
- 2. Who Gave the Order to Try to Shoot the Planes Down?
- 3. What Exactly Were All Those Firefighters Doing in the Towers?
- 4. Did Anyone Think the Towers Would Collapse?
- 5. Why Was Giuliani's Command Bunker at Ground Zero?
- 6. Why Did 7 WTC Fall?
- 7. How Did the Twin Towers Fall?
- 8. How Dangerous Was - and Is - the Air at Ground Zero?
- 9. What Exactly Did Zacarias Moussaoui Plan to Do?
- 10. What's on Those Blanked-Out Pages?
The article works for both novice and experienced 9-11 investigators.
posted by Effwit at 11:58 AM
5 Comments:
I'm one who is not overly impressed with conspiracy theories, in general. But I DO believe that there was complicity - at some level - in the 9/11 attacks in order to guide the American people to support military action in the Middle East. Without such a dramatic catalyst of public opinion, the neo-con agenda would have festered on the shelf as they waited for something to happen. These are men and women of action, not patience.
Personally, I think there was complicity involving the Saudis, the Mossad and the U.S. There are too many disturbing ties between these parties and too many reasons for them to provoke a war in order to advance an agenda. The American people never would have supported military intervention in Iraq - other circumstances held constant - if 9/11 had never happened.
On another note, I've believed since shortly after 9/11 that flight 93 was shot down. A good friend of my former boss was a commanding officer in the Air National Guard. This person indicated to my boss, with 95% assurance, that the flight was shot down. That was the overwhelming scuttlebutt in the Air Guard. As far as I know, that belief has not changed. That doesn't mean it's absolute fact, but there seems to be a very strong suspicion among people who should be in the know.
DrewL:
Without such a dramatic catalyst of public opinion, the neo-con agenda would have festered on the shelf as they waited for something to happen.
Right you are. The famous PNAC document of 1998 said something about the United States needing another Pearl Harbor to spur us into military action in the Middle-East.
About the Saudis, notice how the touchy issue (to them) of the Americans who had been based in Saudi Arabia since the first Gulf war was magically solved shortly after 9-11? That happened to be Osama's big issue as well.
There are no such things as coincidences.
Speaking of the Saudis, I seem to recall hearing an interview with Paul Wolfowitz some time ago in which he indicated one of the reasons to oust Saddam Hussein was so we could get our troops out of Saudi Arabia. The Saudis were under pressure to get the "infidels" off of their holy land, and as long as Saddam was a threat, the U.S. troops couldn't leave.
Now, that may be somewhat reasonable, but there's no way most Americans would support regime change in Iraq on that premise alone. The U.S. knew it and the Saudis knew it. The Israelis, too. Saddam was a threat to the Saudis and the Israelis. Strange bedfellows, perhaps, but history is littered with examples of erstwhile rivals pooling resources to defeat a common enemy. And it's no secret, in spite of what the Bush administration would have us believe, that Osama bin Laden despised Saddam Hussein as much as anyone.
So, we have the motive, the money, the manpower, the intel network and the will to construct a catalyzing event that sets the dominoes in motion.
People talk about conspiracies involving JFK. The opportunity for conspiracy in the 9/11 attacks will make 11/22/63, in comparison, look like JFK shot himself!
DrewL:
The Israelis certainly had a motive to be rid of Saddam. It seems like half of Washington suspects that they were heavily involved in getting us into the Iraq quagmire.
The fact that many of the neo-cons are Jewish is part of this argument. The AIPAC spy scandal has also helped fuel this viewpoint.
I have always been suspicious of any claim that Israel proper was behind 9-11.
I also think that Israel would have been aware enough of the worst case scenario possible in Iraq not to have wanted to goad us into deposing Saddam. A crazed Muslim fundamentalist-ruled Iraq would have to be a bigger threat to Israel than the more normally belligerent Saddam.
I may well be wrong here. Holding fixed conceptions vis-a-vis international affairs can be a mistake.
I agree that there is a huge range of conspiracies and conspirators that may be responsible for 9-11.
Stonefruit:
The sheeple are so tightly wound that they could be presented with a signed confession by Bush and Cheney taking responsibility for the 9-11 attacks and they still wouldn't believe it.
Fifty-some odd years of mind kontrol will do that to people.
Post a Comment
<< Home