Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageOp-Ed: The two conspiracies of September 11

By Alexander Baron     Sep 11, 2013 in World
New York - On September 11, 2001, America was the target of an audacious criminal conspiracy. That is the official story; the unofficial version is essentially the same.
Actually, there are numerous versions of this second conspiracy theory, but leaving aside the outrageously whacky stuff, like that peddled by Dimitri Khalezov, the dustification nonsense of Judy Wood, or the no-planers, the bottom line is that the wicked American Government orchestrated 9/11 as a pretext for turning America into a police state and/or to justify yet further intervention in the Middle East.
The far more plausible official narrative requires 19 men with boxcutters, a few facilitators beyond American shores, and relatively modest funding; one author who knows what he is talking about has suggested half a million dollars.
What does the alternative scenario require at the absolute minimum? According to mainstream Truthers, the Twin Towers collapsed due to controlled demolition rather than from the result of the two plane crashes, and Building 7 was brought down likewise rather than by fires and the considerable structural damage that was caused by the earlier collapses.
A screengrab from a video of Building 7 shot on September 11  2001. Note the penthouse beginning to ...
A screengrab from a video of Building 7 shot on September 11, 2001. Note the penthouse beginning to collapse. This alone refutes the claim that this building was brought down by a controlled demolition. In a controlled demolition, a building collapses from the bottom; although Building 7 appears to do that, the interior had already collapsed. What the unenlightened viewer may think is an entire building collapsing is only a shell.
Then there is the claim that the Pentagon was hit not by one of the planes but by some other kind of missile, and the plane that came down at Shanksville, that was not a plane either, at least not the plane that was hijacked.
The black box from American Airlines Flight 73 that hit the Pentagon that fateful day. A photograph ...
The black box from American Airlines Flight 73 that hit the Pentagon that fateful day. A photograph released by the FBI.
The people who postulate these last two scenarios are faced with enormous difficulties; in effect they have to brand all or most of the eyewitnesses liars or even shills and account for the vanished aircraft. Let's stay with the following: the four planes were indeed hijacked and crashed as generally credited, but, the buildings collapsed due to controlled demolition. What would this little lot entail?
If one accepts this, then one must also accept the claim that the four hijackings and the Twin Towers attacks were coordinated with the controlled demolitions weeks if not months in advance. Whoever was responsible must also have realised Building 7 would have been seriously damaged and/or set on fire. As the planes were hijacked from 3 different airports, the scale of any officially sanctioned conspiracy would have to have been breathtaking. Who could authorise such a conspiracy? In view of the multiple agencies involved, it would have to have gone right to the top, namely the White House.
One of the few intelligent things 9/11 Truther and Prince of Fools David Ray Griffin has said in this connection is that governments do have the capability to both carry out and cover up enormous crimes. There can be no doubt about that; there is the current situation in Syria, which although far from black and white shows its government killing not only combatants but women and children (collateral damage); then there are the revelations of Edward Snowden. A moment's reflection though will show these scenarios are not comparable.
David Ray Griffin  smiling like a fool and talking like one.
David Ray Griffin, smiling like a fool and talking like one.
Creative Commons
The revelations of Edward Snowden were revelations only in their detail; large scale state spying by Western governments was exposed by Duncan Campbell back in 1976, and was nothing new even then.
Likewise, governments have very often reacted with shocking brutality to violent challenges to their authority, a good example of this is the reaction to Mau Mau in the 1950s. The claims of the 9/11 Truthers are qualitatively different from this; they would have us believe the American Government murdered close to 3,000 totally innocent people in cold blood in order to implement a political agenda. Had George W. Bush and his gang been responsible for planning this, there must have been watertight secrecy. And look at the people who would have to have been involved:
security staff at the airports to allow the hijackers through
operatives to wire all three New York buildings and bring them down at the appropriate times
key security operatives: FBI agents, police officers and others to block or misdirect the resulting criminal investigations
and, according to some, Larry Silverstein, the Mayor of New York, and selected personnel at the BBC.
The attacks would have required meticulous planning - by whom? A budget - where did the money come from, and how much of it was there? Think about this for a moment, how much money would it have cost to buy the silence of everyone involved?
Let's not forget either that Barbara Olson was on one of these flights; she was the wife of the Solicitor General of the United States. Was he a party to the plot and therefore an accessory to her murder?
Last, but by no means least, where and how would the plotters have found 19 Arabs who were prepared to die for the New World Order?
Do these idiots ever consider the sheer logistics of such an operation while they are chanting "9/11 was an inside job" ? Do they have no idea just how ludicrous they sound?
Of course, we all know what happened in the wake of 9/11, the Bush Administration made political capital out of it and used it as a pretext to redraw the map of the Middle East, at a terrible price to Moslems, Arabs, and not least to the thousands of Western service personnel who lost lives, limbs and minds in this insane cycle of perpetual wars for perpetual peace.
By the same token, the usual suspects made massive capital out of the death of Trayvon Martin. Did Al Sharpton pay George Zimmerman to kill Trayvon Martin, or did he simply betray his true colours by ignoring all the other black victims of gun violence - most of whom are murdered by other blacks - in order to further a pre-existing political and racial agenda?
Blaming George Bush for the attacks of September 11, 2001 is nearly as silly as blaming Al Sharpton for the death of Trayvon Martin, nearly but not quite. In one sense the Bush Administration was responsible. However perverted their motives, Mohamed Atta and his fellow murderers rationalised their actions by blaming them on US foreign policy. Since the end of the Second World War, certainly since the Korean War, America's foreign policy has been responsible for earning it the hatred of much of the rest of the world. With the election of Obama, many people hoped things would change for the better. They are still hoping.
All that is another issue, the conspiracy cranks have adduced absolutely no credible evidence that any arm of the US Government was involved in any way in the atrocities of September 11, 2001, at best they have highlighted apparent anomalies in the many eyewitness accounts of that terrible day, and a few others such as the non-controversy over thermite.
In events of that scope it would be astounding if there were no such anomalies; some of them are discussed here.
For the conspiracy cranks - those who believe it was an American or similar rather than an Islamist conspiracy - it is not enough simply to point to and point out anomalies, they must produce their own narrative supported by tangible evidence. After 12 years they have not come close, nor will they in the next 12, nor the 12 after that for all too obvious reasons. Case closed.
Finally, there is another reason for this nonsense that should be addressed; many people have been using the misnamed 9/11 Truth Movement as a short cut to notoriety. At one time, bashing the government was not something anyone did willingly, indeed at one time it could have been fatal. It is not so long since bashing the American Government was considered un-American; today, self-confessed Communist Angela Davis rakes in the bucks by making vacuous speeches to packed halls railing at what she calls America's prison-industrial complex and structural racism while her braindead admirers hang on her every word.
Bashing the British Government was once considered un-British or unpatriotic, that is not the case today. Bashing the Israeli Government and its American lobby was not only foolish but positively suicidal, even for established politicians. Today, the de rigueur charges of anti-Semitism that enamate from shills like Abraham Foxman are ignored. At the moment, people and lobbying organisations are bashing governments over the Syrian crisis. Those that want to intervene are getting bashed along with those who don't want to intervene. The fact is that bashing the government, any government, has become rather fashionable, even when that government is manifestly in the right.
It is not brave to stand up in public and make wild charges of mass murder against the Bush Administration, the Illuminati or named individuals, it is simply idiotic - not to mention defamatory, and it makes no attempt to address the real problems posed by both international terrorism and the social injustices that lead to it in these interesting times.
Having said all that, today is a day for remembrance and solemn reflection; let us honour the dead and hope such an atrocity is never repeated, on American soil or anywhere else.
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of
More about September 11, 2011, Building 7, David Ray Griffin, 911 truth movement
More news from
Latest News
Top News