Iranian President suggests 9/11 foul play and cover up

[Donna Ferentes]

9/11 would not have been anything like the same if simply one plane had hit a target killing a few hundred. Creating the iconic, unthinkable shock-inspiring act of terrorism that 9/11 was required the hitting of three targets including two world trade centre towers. Not only that but they had to fall too.

Brilliant. If there'd only been one flight into a tower, it wouldn't have had the same political impact? Priceless, Jazzz.

Curiously enough, though, they didn't need all four planes to succeed, since one of them got brought down. Three was enough. I wonder - would two have done? What d'you reckon?

However, there's really little difference in terms of the number of people that would have to be cognisant of the affair if the plot involves one or four planes - after all, none are on them.

I beg?

Having addressed that perhaps you can have a go at this very simple one DF. Why on earth would the hijackers - concerned with maximising their chance of getting through, of course - allow flight77 to fly away from Washington for 40mins before hijacking it to return there?

Because rather than plots being perfect smooth operations as exist only in the imaginations of conspiracy theorists, they're actually not like that? Because people get nervous or confused or get their wires crossed or fail to get their act together?

Which - hurray! - means there tend to be Lots Of Unanswered Questions, doesn't it? Which keeps us all busy every day making up theories. Or refuting them. It's symbiotic, y'see.

 

[Jonti]

Why single out 'US wars'

Probably because The Truth About Suicide Bombers was written primarily for a US audience.

In partnership with the MIT Center for International Studies, AlterNet is pleased to present these Audits of the Conventional Wisdom.

This ongoing series of essays tours the horizon of conventional wisdoms that animate U.S. foreign policy and puts them to the test of data and history.

By subjecting particularly well-accepted ideas to close scrutiny, the series aims to re-engage policy and opinion leaders on topics that are too easily passing such scrutiny.

Look, I'd be happy (uhh, happier) to be persuaded that the attacks took place without any collaboration in the target country. I'd be happy to be persuaded that it took place without the knowledge of any operatives in any intelligence agency anywhere. That's the question. Again ...

September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?

I'm not interested in persuading you of anything. I'm interested in surviving the 21st Century and the ever-increasing increasing challenge of Hume's Horror.

OK? Take it easy.

Really, really gotto go

 

[kyser_soze]

DF - there's also the possibility that they were attempting to time all the attacks in some way and that in order to hit the Pentagon at the right time they needed to go 40 mins into it's flight in order to do so...

Or of course the hijackers were just human, as you say...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

DF - there's also the possibility that they were attempting to time all the attacks in some way and that in order to hit the Pentagon at the right time they needed to go 40 mins into it's flight in order to do so....

Indeed. A very plausible possibility. Truth is, I don't know, either way. But either is infinitely more possible than a Magic Plot With No Evidence.

I've got to go shortly, so just this point. I mentioned that if you were putting together a plot, you'd want to cut down on the number of people involved, so as to reduce the possibility of leaks (or mistakes). It should be said that the same applies to mulitple plots, as well as mulitple actors. You can maybe argue against the law of probability for one extremely unlikely plot (though I can think of no specific example and am proposing none). But one of the problems with conspiracy theorists is the way they always, or nearly always, propose a secret plot - be it 9/11 or 7/7 or David Kelly or the Madrid bombings or whatever. And the problem with this is that it just decreases the chances every time. It's like extremely unlikely to the power or extremely unlikely, if you follow me..

 

[Blagsta]

I'm afraid you'll have to talk me thro' your reasoning on this one.

Its your argument mate.

 

[Jazzz]

Why was it necessary that all 4 targets were sucessfully struck to make an impact Jazz? What actual evidence do you have to support this claim? Yes, hitting both towers and the Pentagon certainly increased the impact, but even one plane hitting the towers would have been enough to cause an impact on people.

4 targets weren't struck. Three were.

It is ridiculous to suggest that 9/11 would have had anything like the same impact on the human psyche had simply one target been hit. The reason we were all so shocked was the overwhelming nature of the multiple strikes including the heart of America's defences - and, crucially, the tower collapses - which hijackers could have had no idea about creating.

The fourth flight, flight93, sold the illusion and I would venture by featuring a 'real' hijacking. Practically all the public domain evidence (phone calls, CVR) that there was any hijacking going on comes from that flight. Without that, the cupboard is completely bare.

And having 4 planes was simple - redundancy. With 4 planes you have 4 times the chance of hitting at least one target, and you could create a single action plan for each plane. Fairly logical if you set your mind to it really.

And what exactly do you mean by your last line then? It reads as tho you are saying that no one was on the planes...or have you retreated from that specific position now?

DF suggested that far less people would have to be involved in the plot the less planes there were. What my sentence meant - to make it very clear for you - is this is not the case because the people that are cognisant of the plot are not going to be on the planes.

 

[Yossarian]

Just one plane hitting the World Trade Centre would have been by far the biggest and most spectacular terrorist attack in US history - I reckon the shock value would have been huge!

 

[kyser_soze]

September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?

Well AFAIK we know that internal US Air Defence hadn't been properly switched on for a few years (this from the 9/11 commission and caused a stink when it was released)...and in answer to the question, Yes it could.

I'd be happy to be persuaded that it took place without the knowledge of any operatives in any intelligence agency anywhere.

Ok, you need to define what you mean by 'knowledge of' here - intelligence is not an exact science and is largely interpretive. Would one agent from any group in the world have been aware that there might have been an attack? Probably - there were probably some in several who suspected something might happen, but then that's their job - gathering information and deciding whether it's true or not. And then they have to 'sell' it to their superiors by providing corrobarative evidence.

So picture this:

'Hey Senoir agent person - I've got a rumour that 'something' will happen on 9/11, and that it will be big'

'Can you be more specfic?'

'Wellllll...there are 16 Muslims who are going to hijack 4 planes and fly them into important buildings...you know, llike the Tom Clancey novel or that wargame we tried a few months ago that we all thought was a stupid idea cos no one would ever do that...'

Personally I don't doubt that someone knew or was more than 50% certain it was good intel - maybe even several - but i simply don't buy that there was an institutionalised, over arching conspiracy to cause 9/11.

 

[editor]

It is ridiculous to suggest that 9/11 would have had anything like the same impact on the human psyche had simply one target been hit. The reason we were all so shocked was the overwhelming nature of the multiple strikes including the heart of America's defences - and, crucially, the tower collapses - which hijackers could have had no idea about creating.

I though you claimed that they were invisibly wired by invisible operatives installing invisible explosives?

Make your mind up!

Without that, the cupboard is completely bare.

Well apart from the calls, the recorded cabin conversations and the disappearance of the plane, the pilots, the flight crew and all the passengers, of course.

Oh, and a dirty great big crash site.

 

[kyser_soze]

It is ridiculous to suggest that 9/11 would have had anything like the same impact on the human psyche had simply one target been hit. The reason we were all so shocked was the overwhelming nature of the multiple strikes including the heart of America's defences - and, crucially, the tower collapses - which hijackers could have had no idea about creating.

Why is it ridiculous? Yet again you are offering your opinion about what you imagine the affect would be - I was in the office when the news broke of the first plane hit and that silenced the entire office, as I would imagine it did pretty much anywhere, so to say that all 4 planes, or even 3, needed to hit all the targets in order to create the impact. The reason it was so overwhelming is because they successfully hit 3 targets - the towers collapsing was 'icing on the cake' for them.

DF suggested that far less people would have to be involved in the plot the less planes there were. What my sentence meant - to make it very clear for you - is this is not the case because the people that are cognisant of the plot are not going to be on the planes.

Right, well it wasn't exactly clear was it? And obviously there will be people cognisant of the plot on the planes - the hijackers for one - and most likely those who planned the operation in the first place...

 

[Jonti]

obviously there will be people cognisant of the plot on the planes - the hijackers for one - and most likely those who planned the operation in the first place...

How is it obvious that the planners and financial backers etc were on the planes?

 

[kyser_soze]

How is it obvious that the planners and financial backers etc were on the planes?

Not what I meant - what I meant was that of those cognisant of the plot the hijackers would be on board, not the planners/backers (who sensibly weren't going to be in a plane that was going to fly into a building).

But it's pretty obvious that some of those who know about the plot - i.e. the hijackers - would be on the planes. it being difficult to hijack something without being on it...

Incidentally, on another of your points about organising finance...Al-Q (for want of a better term to describe the association of Islamic groups who used the name) were, at the time, a pretty serious group who had access to a LOT of money from a wide variety of sources such as Saudi Arabia (and of course the money and resources the US had left them way back from the Afghan war against the USSR). Couple that with a system of banking that is almost impossible to trace (Islamic banking works on a very different premise and system to the Western model), and a ready made global infrastructure...

 

[Jonti]

... The reason it was so overwhelming is because they successfully hit 3 targets - the towers collapsing was 'icing on the cake' for them.

I think that's right. the cumulative effect was a masterwork of terror. Shit just kept on happening. I was at work and on a mainly US board at the time and it is not an experience I will ever forget. For one thing, I was announcing news faster than anyone else. Specifically the collapse of the second tower. Amazingly, there was confusion for a few minutes as to whether the second Tower had actually collapsed.

Total fuckin' confusion and mounting terror.

And yes, I tend to agree that the pancaking of the towers was something of a bonus for the planners of the operation. It took a while for structural engineers to work out how that took place, iirc.

* goes off to do interview preparation and will definitely not take another peek for a while *

 

[Jonti]

Couple that with a system of banking that is almost impossible to trace (Islamic banking works on a very different premise and system to the Western model), and a ready made global infrastructure ...

I was working for a European bank at the time. European banking secrecy certainly got in the way of the investigations, and the Americans have insisted on a lot of reforms since then. But, fwiw, I've no knowledge that reform was also forced on the Sharia banking system. Roughly, Sharia prohibits profit without risk (what we used to call usury). That makes things tricky for anonymous individuals to profit by renting out money for a guaranteed return.

The haven for dodgy money the world over remains Europe (Switzerland in particular). It's still where the thugs who sieze and asset strip countries tend to secure their loot.

*shit I'm still here *

 

[kyser_soze]

The Sharia banking system relies on trust - FWIR if A wants to transfer money to B instead of there being an actual movement of funds, B's banker takes on trust that the money is there (or something) but it's not globally trackable in the way that (in theory) the electronic systems used by Western banking are.

Irrespective of that, my point is that much of the actual groundwork you talked about - finance etc - was already in place and had been used before (WTC1 attack with the van for example). So they'd already got the money and personel...

 

[Balbi]

I can't be bothered to read the thread if it's Jonti posting the same thing that Jazzz does but, to be honest, like fuck is that a letter between two presidents and like fuck would they release it!



"Dear Readers Wives,

I didn't think your letters page was real until the other day when...."



Conspiraporn

 

[KeyboardJockey]

I can't be bothered to read the thread if it's Jonti posting the same thing that Jazzz does but, to be honest, like fuck is that a letter between two presidents and like fuck would they release it!



"Dear Readers Wives,

I didn't think your letters page was real until the other day when...."



Conspiraporn

Dear Readers Wives,

I didn't think your letters page was real until the other day when....I came home to find my wife dressed only in a masonic apron and cuddling a toy lizard....<snip>....I realised that some thing was up when she started spanking me with the antenna off of a remote control aircraft'

Yup Conspiraloonspudporn

 

[Jonti]

I can't be bothered to read the thread if it's Jonti posting the same thing that Jazzz does but, to be honest, like fuck is that a letter between two presidents and like fuck would they release it!

Well you won't know then will you? But here's that letter.



quick at least

 

[kyser_soze]

I can't be bothered to read the thread if it's Jonti posting the same thing that Jazzz does but, to be honest, like fuck is that a letter between two presidents and like fuck would they release it!

Welllll...actually it is. The Iranian president had it delivered to the Swiss to deliver to Bush and he released the text - it appeared on several newpaper letters pages and in several articles in the press.

 

[Jazzz]

Why is it ridiculous? Yet again you are offering your opinion about what you imagine the affect would be - I was in the office when the news broke of the first plane hit and that silenced the entire office, as I would imagine it did pretty much anywhere, so to say that all 4 planes, or even 3, needed to hit all the targets in order to create the impact. The reason it was so overwhelming is because they successfully hit 3 targets - the towers collapsing was 'icing on the cake' for them.

So, we agree the effect of the attack was much greater because of the multiple strikes.

The collapse of the towers was no 'icing on the cake' for those who planned the attacks. It was a main objective.

 

[Jonti]

The Sharia banking system relies on trust - FWIR if A wants to transfer money to B instead of there being an actual movement of funds, B's banker takes on trust that the money is there (or something) but it's not globally trackable in the way that (in theory) the electronic systems used by Western banking are.

You'll find international banks use the SWIFT system. What you've described in the kind of informal network a small shopkeeper may run, based on family networks rather than corporations as such.

 

[Jonti]

So, we agree the effect of the attack was much greater because of the multiple strikes.

The collapse of the towers was no 'icing on the cake' for those who planned the attacks. It was a main objective.

You know this how? It's not impossible, given that OBL is/was a very wealthy and successful engineer by trade, and the attacks were apparently planned over a period of years. But it's still something of a stretch to claim you know this for a fact.

 

[kyser_soze]

and, crucially, the tower collapses - which hijackers could have had no idea about creating.

The collapse of the towers was no 'icing on the cake' for those who planned the attacks. It was a main objective

Right, so what you are saying here is that the hijackers wouldn't have been told that the objective was to fell the towers, just fly the planes into them? Or is this simply a line into your 'The USG planned it all' stuff?

Would the planners have been aware that hitting the towers would cause them to collapse...welll that's speculative isn't it? Hell, flying the planes into the towers would have been enough of a blow, but let's assume they did, why would this have been kept from the hijackers? Surely telling someone who's prepared to kill themselves for a cause would be even MORE motivated to carry out something if they knew what the potential result could be that spectacular...

However, the psychology of the attacks would still have stunned the US and the world, regardless of whether there were 1, 3 or 4.

 

[kyser_soze]

You'll find international banks use the SWIFT system. What you've described in the kind of informal network a small shopkeeper may run, based on family networks rather than corporations as such.

I'm aware of SWIFT thanks.

It's these informal networks the intelligence agencies believe much of the money used to support such actions is transfererd around the world - the only reason I know anything about Sharia banking is because of the rash of articles in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 because the Yanks whining about Euro banking secrecy and it being gently pointed out that Sharia banking was equally impossible to track and a far more likely route for the money.

 

[Jonti]

I'm aware of SWIFT thanks.

It's these informal networks the intelligence agencies believe much of the money used to support such actions is transfererd around the world - the only reason I know anything about Sharia banking is because of the rash of articles in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 because the Yanks whining about Euro banking secrecy and it being gently pointed out that Sharia banking was equally impossible to track and a far more likely route for the money.

Understand. You had initially referred to the Sharia banking system which I took to include institutions like this one. It's not the expression I would use for the trust based kinship networks.

Terminology aside, bloody right. I have no doubt (and no proof) that very wealthy individuals were involved, and they almost certainly used trust based kinship networks to "move" funds around.

 

[ZWord]

It's the same Steven Jones, who, when he's not being an 'expert' on structural engineering, is an expert on how Jesus Christ visited the Americas in ancient times, as told in the Book of Mormon.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext and figures.htm

Presumably the university only rubbished his credibility as a scientist, after he got involved in the murky political territory of 911. Was that because they suddenly realised that he knew nothing?

Yossarian, you don't sound much like your namesake, maybe you should go and read the last few chapters of catch 22 again, I'm sure the real Yossarian wouldn't as arrogantly dismiss reports of the strangeness of the world after what he witnessed.

Thanks for the thread, jazz, I wouldn't have been able to read ahmadinejad's letter otherwise, and it wasn't a bad letter.

And it was kind of refreshing to read something by a politician that was actually genuine, and written by him, rather than someone else.

 

[Lock&Light]

I'm sure the real Yossarian wouldn't as arrogantly dismiss reports of the strangeness of the world after what he witnessed.

It was only fiction, you know.

 

[ZWord]

Well, yes, but the best fiction is always kind of true. And the truth is stranger than fiction.

I remember Cathcart and Korn's offer to Yossarian to let him go home, if he'd just like them a bit, and go home and say nice things about them.

What they said then. "You're either for us or against us."
Who else said that?

Jonti, I thought you were spot on with your series of posts

 

[Jazzz]

You know this how? It's not impossible, given that OBL is/was a very wealthy and successful engineer by trade, and the attacks were apparently planned over a period of years. But it's still something of a stretch to claim you know this for a fact.

When I said "the collapse of the towers was no 'icing on the cake', it was a main objective" I am not talking about any official theory. Apologies for any confusion.

There also appears to be a lot of confusion which is not my responsibility due to people picking up on points which were replies and taking them in isolation.

 

[Jazzz]

Would the planners have been aware that hitting the towers would cause them to collapse...welll that's speculative isn't it?

Speculative? It was beyond speculation. Steel columns easily trump the thin skins of aircraft. Skyscrapers have burned for 17+ hours, real raging infernos that make the fires on 9/11 look like a campfire, and none had collapsed as a result of fire before 9/11, or since.