911 - Who really did it?

There has been lots of speculations by many people as to the true causes of the 911 attacks on the WTC and Pentagon. This speculation has also revolved around who the actual perpetrators really were, whether they were really from some Middle Eastern 'terrorist' group, and if so, which one? There has also been much discussion and theorizing as to whether these attacks were planned and executed by some government or a coalition of governmnets, even if it were only a small covert group of people from several different countries working together.

These have all been generally lumped together as 'conspiracy theories' and essentially designated as such by those who seem to have a large stake in seeing that the official-version of events is the one which people will accept as the actual truth about what happened on that day.

What physical evidence people have been able to gather, in spite of any apparent willingness by the US government agencies and bodies to investigate the events with any real intent to discover the truth and downright stonewalling of any attempts by the people to obtain any definitive evidence indicates very strongly that the story we were all told regarding the events is phony.

The following article and the commentary included shares some interesting insight about this situation.

From Signs of the Times:


Israel To Benefit From Sinai Bombings: Experts
October 8 2004
Abdul-Raheem Ali, IOL Staff

CAIRO, October 8 – A cohort of Egyptian security, political and diplomatic experts have concluded that Israel is the only party to benefit from the blasts that rocked tourist resorts in the Egyptian Sinai peninsula on Thursday, October7 , ruling out any possible Egyptian involvement.

Former Egyptian Assistant Interior Minister Mohammad Omar Abdel-Fattah said that while analyzing any such operation security experts should always seek an answer to the basic question of who stands to benefit.

"Israel is the only party to gain from this operation," the international security expert told IslamOnline.net.

He pointed out that the Israelis and their agents are the only people who have free access to the targeted area.

Abdel-Fattah said the booby-trapped vehicles used in the bombings do not carry the trademark of terrorist groups who usually resort to suicide bombers instead.

He stressed that the Israeli right has been cornered due to mounting pressures from the US on Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon after Washington had to wield its veto power to kill a resolution condemning Israel for the onslaught on the Gaza Strip.

Israel needed something to dodge such American pressures and throw the ball at the American court till the end of the elections, said the expert.

Targeting Egypt

Former Egyptian Assistant Foreign Minister Abdullah Al-Ashaal also agreed that several indications suggest an Israeli foul play.

"Israel’s ultimate goal to undermine Egypt’s regional role and force it on its knees," he told IOL.

"All indicators suggest an Israeli involvement, especially that the area is very close to the Israeli borders."

He also recalled the recent Israeli travel warning against visiting the Sinai peninsula.

Al-Ashaal said that by jumbling to heap the blame on Al-Qeada, Israel wanted to embroil Egypt in Washington’s so-called war on terror.

The Egyptian tourism sector, a main foreign currency earner, would bear the brunt of the bombings, he added.

Diaa Rashwan, an expect in the Islamic movements affairs in Al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies, an Egyptian think-tank, also agreed that Al-Qaeda was not a likely culprit.

According to American intelligence 70 percent of Al-Qeada leaders have been either killed or kidnapped while the rest are taking shelter on Afghanistan’s borders with Pakistan, he said.

"Sinai bombings carry the trademark of careful planning which means those involved had a hand-on experience on the area, which is already under tight security."

The expert suggested that "foreign intelligence" are directly or indirectly involved in such "dirty attacks."

Rashwan agreed with the other experts that Israel would be the only part to make gains from the attacks, especially that Israel would exploit them to associate itself with Washington in its so-called war on terror.

He also expected the Sharon’s Likud party to use the blasts to undermine the Egyptian role in the Palestinian cause.

Palestinians Suspected

Another group of expects did not rule out a possible involvement by Palestinian factions in the bombings and that they refrained from claiming responsibility to avoid a face-off with Egypt.

Political analyst Al-Sayed Yassin said the operation came in retaliation for the unparalleled state terrorism practiced by Israel against unarmed citizens in Gaza Strip.

He ruled out the involvement of Al-Qaeda in such bombings, as the network has no experience in working in the region.

The expert also undermined suggestions that the operation would be exploited to attack Egypt over security lapses.

"Egypt can not be accused of security lapses because those groups penetrate Israeli security on daily basis through operations committed not far from Sharon's residence," he said.

He also recalled that similar attacks have been mounted against targets inside New York and Washington.

Comment: The Egyptian Tourist Minister makes the case quite clear, and we note the VERY interesting last comment from the "political analyst" he says: "...similar attacks have been mounted against targets inside New York and Washington." A thinly veiled reference to Israeli involvement in 9/11? Apparently so.

Remember what we said yesterday?

The question each person must answer is:

"Do you agree that it is possible that the political, social or world views of a population can be influenced by "terrorist" attacks?

For example, if an attack was carried out which was later attributed to "communists", would your view of "communists" be affected by such information?

If you agree that this is indeed possible, you must then ask yourself:

"Is it possible that a government, or some section of government, understanding that public opinion can be influenced in this way, would fake a terrorist attack in order to achieve some political or social goal."

For most, the answer to the first question is a resounding "yes".

To the second question, most will probably answer that, theoretically, "it is possible that a government might sanction a fake terrorist attack in order to achieve some political or social goal." But having come thus far, most will qualify their assertion with all manner of rationalisations to avoid taking the next step of examining any evidence that holds the promise, or the threat, of transforming the theory into an explanation that is very distinctly possible, and even certain.