So. We have a factual event. Stuff actually happened. Czech intelligence has reported contact between the two organizations. Do you have any actual evidence to the contrary? or at least a solid reason to doubt the Czech story? No, of course not. Instead, you just deny the reality of the report altogether because it conflicts with your "common sense", i.e. your mental model of how terrorists behave (anything which contradicts your thoughts or understanding of something, apparently, cannot be real). The terrorists may have had contact with Saddam, but to you, reality doesn't matter, because they "didn't need help" from him (even if they actually did request, get, and use help from him - for example, help in the form of money.) Well, I give in. Your "common sense" trumps reality. I see it all so clearly now. If I want to know whether Person X did Thing Y, I shouldn't look at the evidence and analyze it. I should ask you whether Person X "needed to" do Thing Y, according to your "common sense". That will provide me with the answers. Thank you!
[[why no terrorist would ever discuss their plan in a Prague cafe] Terrorists being such geniuses and all. ] The plan worked.
And with our airport security being so airtight, and with our pilots being so well armed, that makes those terrorists geniuses.
Never raised the issue of rationality.
You are presuming to speculate about and sound off about what a certain group of psycho murderers "would have" done in this or that situation, as if this were something which can be predicted and stated with 100% confidence. This conveniently glosses over the fact that we're still talking about, for the most part, brainwashed unstable murderers. That's what I meant. By doing this you are making way, way too many assumptions about the rationality level of the behavior of people who are, after all, psycho murderers.
However, I have studied terrorist organizations. [....] For example, most analysts believe that only the terrorists that flew the planes actually knew the plan.
And this means that, therefore, the terrorists would simply not have met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. CZECH INTELLIGENCE SAYS THERE WAS A MEETING. But you know better, because you've "studied terrorist organizations". In reality, CZECH INTELLIGENCE SAYS THERE WAS A MEETING. But you're too smart to look at reality, you prefer to focus on the "common characteristic of terrorist organizations" you've read about in your "studies".
Too bad you don't seem too interested in "studying" WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. For example, CZECH INTELLIGENCE SAYS THERE WAS A MEETING. Why isn't that factoid part of your "studies"? Odd. I guess it's just yet another case where your "common sense" trumps reality. I humbly suggest that you telephone Czech intelligence and calmly explain that they're all liars or delusional - not because you can actually prove them wrong or anything like that, but just because of the fact that you have "studied" terrorist organizations and you know better; terrorists "wouldn't have" done such a thing (even if they actually did, in that place called reality, which oddly enough doesn't seem to figure in to your "studies" too much).