WTC Conspiracy theories

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 THE TIMES OF INDIA WORLD: AMERICAS POWERED BY INDIATIMES Indiatimes > The Times of India > World > Americas > Article After WTC, conspiracy theories abound CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA TIMES NEWS NETWORK ASHINGTON: The Israelis did it. No, it was the CIA. It was a Hindu-Jewish plot to pit the United States against the Muslim world. It was a devious scheme hatched by the US government to strike against some enemy, ratchet up the defence spending, and appease the military-industrial complex.

As thousands of people who have lost their loved ones in the world's worst terrorist carnage painfully search for answers, conspiracy theorists, a flourishing tribe that comes to life after every major world event, are spinning their usual yarns. Rumour, innuendo, distortion, falsehood and fabrication are the usual grist for the conspiracy mill.

With the arrival of the Internet, the world-wide-web has displaced the tabloid as the biggest dispenser of conspiracy theories (CTs). No theory is too outlandish, no scheme too bizarre for the plot peddlers.

Topping the list of CTs in the current tragedy is the Israeli plot. The 'evidence' proffered is as follows: Only the Israelis have the skill, sophistication, money and tools to undertake such a mission. The Israelis benefit most from the episode because they can now blame the Islamic world "without any evidence" and fulfil their objectives in the Middle-East. The Israelis were involved in a previously unexplained attack on the American ship USS Liberty in 1967 that killed 34 American servicemen.

Typically, the Jewish plot theories are peddled by the Islamic lobby through mass e-mail dispensed by outlets like the Information Times, a web newspaper run by Pakistani-American journalist Syed Adeeb, a former reporter with the Frontier Post. Most recently, Information Times gave currency to a particularly brilliant piece of deduction by Beirut's Al-Manar television pointing to an Israeli plot.

According to Information Times/Al-Manar, the international and Israeli media initially "hurried to take advantage of the incident and started mourning 4,000 Israelis who work at the two towers." Then suddenly, no one ever mentioned anything about those Israelis "and later it became clear that they remarkably did not show up in their jobs" on the day the tragedy.

So deep-rooted is the conspiracy theory that IT/Al-Manar now passes the burden of evidence to "Arab diplomatic sources (who) revealed to the Jordanian al-Watan newspaper that those Israelis remained absent that day based on hints from the Israeli General Security Apparatus, the Shabak. This fact, according to IT or Al-Manar or Al-Watan (it is not clear which) "evoked unannounced suspicions on American officials who wanted to know how the Israeli government learned about the incident before it occurred, and the reasons why it refrained from informing the U.S. authorities of the information it had."

It's not over yet. According to the conspiracy theorists "suspicions had increased further after Israeli newspaper Yadiot Ahranot revealed that the Shabak prevented Israeli premier Ariel Sharon from traveling to New York and particularly to the city's eastern coast to participate in a festival organized by the Zionist organizations in support of the 'Israel'. Aharon Bernie, the commentator at the newspaper, brought up the issue and came up with a negative conclusion, saying 'no answer'. He then asked about the clue behind the Shabak's position in preventing Sharon's participation, and again without giving an answer."

Next in the CT sweepstakes is the Americans-did-it-themselves plot. The evidence? A recent story based on a new book on the top-secret US National Security Agency (NSA) by journalist James Bamford. In the book "A Body of Secrets" Bamford writes about a U.S. military leaders' proposal in 1962 to commit terrorist acts against Americans and blame Cuba to create a pretext for invasion and the ouster of Fidel Castro.

"We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington," a document reportedly prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff is quoted as saying. "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document says. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of indignation."

Another idea was to shoot down a CIA plane designed to replicate a passenger flight and announce that Cuban forces shot it down. A third plot, titled "The Northwoods Plan" proposed that if the 1962 launch of John Glenn into orbit were to fail, resulting in the astronaut's death, the U.S. government would publicise fabricated evidence that Cuba had used electronic interference to sabotage the flight.

For the conspiracy mindset, all this is sufficient evidence to point the finger of suspicion away from the widely-believed Islamic-fundamentalists-did it theory. This is further buttressed by selectively giving currency to any story that would seem to implicate others. For e.g. a story in the Israeli daily Haaretz that five Israelis working for a New Jersey moving company were arrested by the FBI for "puzzling behaviour." They were videotaping the disaster from atop their building and "shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery."

I read "Body of Secrets" recently. I have a big problem with Bramford's allegation that the Joint Chiefs had plans to murder US citizens and blame it on Cuba in order to justify an invasion. The document Bramford sites does mention faking an incedent, but nothing of attacking US citizens or assets. They could have done this without firing a shot. After all, in Gulf of Tonkin - which authorized the Vietnam war - the destroyers involved may or may not have even been fired upon. There were no casualties in that incident. The archive's offical name is Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS). I found the archive on-line at www.state.gov (State Dept. website). The attached is from FRUS Vol X, section 19. It can be found officially at http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/frusX/16_30.html. This is the "proof" that the NSA Body of Secrets author James Bramford gives (Ref to page 70 of Body of Secrets) to show that General Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs of Staff secretly planned to kill United States citizens in order to provide just cause to invade Cuba. I think you'll find, as I did, that the proof was severely lacking. In fact, the only reference to such a "illegal conspiracy", as James Bramford put it, is subsection 14-D which states: "d. This course of action could also be justified if Castro attacked Guantanamo Bay or if such an attack were "staged". With prior propaganda effort by the U.S., Free World opinion could be sufficiently swayed, or the facts sufficiently "muddled", that U.S. unilateral action in response to such an attack, actual or "staged" would have less impact on U.S. prestige in the Free World. " Now, there certainly is an argument that the conversation (and remember, it is simply that - conversation recorded as hand-written meeting notes) is distasteful. But, to say as James Bramford has, that this discussion meant the murder of American citizens on their own soil is a far, far cry from what is stated above. In fact, his literary liscense is simple deception. As a result, I now must question every anecdote James Bramford has written about in Body of Secrets. After all, "staged" could mean a multitude of things. The U.S., if it really had wanted to, could have "staged" a Cuban attack on U.S. military assets without ever even firing a shot. Again, for decades there has been evidence given that the North Vietnamese Gulf of Tonkin attack on a U.S. military ship was probably staged and at most was a minor scurmish resulting in no casualties on either side. LBJ reported it differently, of course, Congress issued the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and the rest is history. By the way, history is also not on Mr. Bramford's side, as a Cuban attack on U.S. Citizens, "staged" or otherwise, never happened. Anyway, historians have a duty to site their material. If there is some other "secret" document expanding on the "staged" clause, then James Bramford is in error for not citing it. Something that would earn any college freshman and F, as well as the wrath of his teacher. On page 71, Bramford states that "according to documentation acquired for Body of Secrets, Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs proposed secretly to stage an attack on the American naval base at Guantanamo Bay - then blame the violent action on Castro." But, being that we are both US Citizens we theoretically have equal access to this "material." If it is a seperate document he should site it. Again, he does not do so. Historians have a duty to be factual when drawing their conclusions. Mr. Bramford knows that most people wouldn't take the time to look up his reference and would take him at his word. After reading the whole book, I think more than likely, he simply is a military-bashing liberal in conspiracy-theorist clothing. His distaste for General Lemnitzer and anything military is unhideable throughout the book. It's too bad. Had he simply been less biased in his writing and not have had a hidden agenda it would have made for a much more enjoyable book. - G

How about Serbia/Ygoslavia (Yugoslav Republic of Serbia? whatever...) If I were a Serb I would want some kind of vengence agains the US for all the bombings. The Serbs as the villin makes a great deal of sense in that they would not desire any credit. They would only want retribution.

The fact is that no one has claimed credit for this very skillful act of barbarism. I bet there are Serbs who could have passed for Arabs. Well maybe they would need a little hair dye but that's all. Three of the Saudi suspects have turned out to have been out of the US on 9-11.

So Serbs could have stolen the identity of some arabs and got on these planes. They hijack em. They demand that everybody get on the phone to their reletives and tell em about the AHY RABBS that are hijacking thier flights!

I still don't buy this pre-packaged villen bin Ladin. But maybe he's the one. He definetely should be taken out for his other terrorist acts.

But he say "I shot the Sherrif!! But I did not shoot no Deputy!" Or rather "I blew up the Cole! But I did not burn down the WTC."

I still don't buy this pre-packaged villen bin Ladin. But maybe he's the one. He definetely should be taken out for his other terrorist acts.

Me neither. I mean, think about it: If he's got all this money, why is he living in Afghanistan? Okay, weak maybe, but there has to be tons of countries he can live in that are easier to operate in. There's only so much he can control from a mountain in Afghanistan.

More to the point, what about the oh-so-convenient trail left by the hijackers? I mean, if you know how to fly a jet, what do you need a training manual for? Not to mention these guys went out of their way to be conspicuous days beforehand. And charging the tickets besides? Pretty sloppy for so-called pros, methinks.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.