Biweekly Discussion - Revisiting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Name: Biweekly Discussion - Revisiting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Start: 2022-09-11T13:00:00-04:00
End: 2022-09-11T15:00:00-04:00

Hosted by Brian B.

Super Organizer

Skeptics In The Pub - Philly

Details

This is going to be an online meetup using Zoom. If you've never used Zoom before, don't worry — it's easy to use and free to join.

Here's the link to the event: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82082379266?pwd=clA5Q3AyU2NpRXRCekRobXFBUkpQdz09

***

REVISITING 9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES

INTRODUCTION:

Since it's the 21st anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I figured it would be fitting if we reviewed and analyzed some of the wild rumors and conspiracy theories that have been circulating for decades about the "real" perpetrators of the attacks.

The first thing to note is that the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks is itself a conspiracy - i.e. the 9/11 Commission reported that an Islamic terrorist network named Al-Qaeda, led by Osama Bin Laden & Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was responsible. They planned the attacks starting in the mid 1990s, and sent 19 militants (along with some support staff) to the U.S. in 2000 to get flight training and begin surveilling the targets. Then on Sept. 11, 2001, these 19 men boarded 4 commercial airplanes (American Airlines Flights 11 & 77, United Airlines Flights 175 & 93), hijacked them mid-flight, and crashed them into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. The fourth plane (UA Flight 93) crashed in a rural field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, when passengers revolted - it would've been crashed into a federal building (either the Capitol or the White House) in DC. While Bin Laden initially denied any involvement in a videotaped statement released by Al Jazeera on September 16, 2001, he released another video prior to the 2004 presidential election where he claimed direct responsibility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_of_the_September_11_attacks

The second thing we need is a general way of evaluating the mainstream narrative of an event like the 9/11 attacks against the various conspiracy theories that claim the mainstream narrative is wrong and that there's been some sort of collusion to commit the act and cover up the truth. We had a meetup on this topic back in Nov. 2020 entitled "Evaluating Conspiracy Theories". The skeptic community often takes a "generalist" approach to debunking conspiracy theories, i.e. they look for general rules that govern their plausibility, such as:
(1) Hanlon's Razor, which is a special version of Occam's Razor that states that it is more parsimonious to "never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity [or incompetence]". This principle doesn't preclude the possibility of conspiracies, but it leads one to assume that crises are more likely to be accidents rather than conspiracies.
(2) Occam's Razor also implies that *reactive* conspiracies (i.e. not letting a crisis "go to waste") are, all else equal, inherently more likely than *direct* or *passive* conspiracies (i.e. spotting a crisis ahead of time & allowing it to happen), which are in turn, all else equal, inherently more likely than *indirect* or *proactive* conspiracies (i.e. causing a crisis to happen). This is because the less planning involved in the conspiracy, the less assumptions are necessary and the more probable it is.
(3) Scott Alexander's rule of thumb that conspiracies are inherently less likely to be exposed by whistleblowers when they match the official mission of the institution. Thus, for example, CIA operations to assassinate leaders of an enemy government would be inherently less likely to face whistelblowing from insiders than a CIA operation to assassinate an American leader.
(4) The mathematician David R. Grimes formulated a basic model for evaluating the probability of a conspiracy remaining hidden from mainstream sources. Base-level assumptions can vary, but the chances of exposure increase the more people that are involved and the greater the amount of time passes in which someone can intentionally leak it or slip up & unintentionally expose it. However, single-event conspiracies (like an assassination) can eventually be buried by the deaths of the only conspirators who knew about it - effectively reducing its chance of discovery back down to almost zero after 60 years or so - while the risk of exposure to ongoing conspiracies (like keeping the cure for cancer a secret) would not be lessened by the death of the original conspirators since there must be new conspirators carrying it on. Note that even single-event conspiracies in which every conspirator has died don't have their risk of exposure cut to zero because they may still be exposed later by other forms of circumstantial evidence (e.g. documents, video footage, ballistics, fingerprints, GPS data, DNA, etc.).
(5) Critiques of Grimes' model note that many conspiracies within intelligence agencies, military covert ops, organized crime, and terrorist networks use "information discipline" (i.e. you only get access to info on a "need to know basis") and involve "cell" structures where very few rank-and-file members know the full details of the conspiracy and thus can only leak a few parts.
(6) Other critiques of Grimes' model noted that not all attempts at whistleblowing are successful at gaining mainstream news media attention (e.g. Bill Binney, Thomas Drake, J. Kirke Wiebe, Ed Loomis, and Diane Roark all tried to report the NSA's domestic spying to congressional committees before Edward Snowden but were unsuccessful in getting attention), often because whistleblowers who stay within the system are ignored or punished and those who leak info to reporters find they're are afraid of legal sanctions, so this lowers the exposure rate.
(7) In terms of confirming the existence of "true conspiracies" (as opposed to mere conspiracy theories), there's the issue that "exposure" of an alleged conspiracy in the media is different than "verification" of a conspiracy through in criminal or civil court. Generally, reporting on a conspiracy in media outlets with a strong reputation for accuracy should lend more credence to it than reporting in alternative outlets like tabloids & random blogs with less of a reputation for honesty. And reporting on a conspiracy in the media should generally still hold less credence than conviction in a court of law, where criminal convictions (beyond a reasonable doubt) should hold more evidentiary weight than civil convictions (by a preponderance of the evidence). That said, even in cases of criminal convictions, we should still allow for a small chance the conspiracy isn't true and may later be disproven - e.g. the many people convicted in the "Satanic ritual abuse" cases of the 1980s.
(8) We should keep in mind that the truth or falsity of a conspiracy theory usually isn't an all-or-nothing affair. Most conspiracy theories involve multiple claims, each of which have their own probability of being true. However, the probability of the entire theory being true is less than one or some of its components being true.
(9) Linguistic analysis of disproven conspiracy theories versus confirmed conspiracies suggests rumors about the former often involve claims that range across several different domains (times/places/institutions), whereas confirmed conspiracies tend to involve claims that cluster in one domain. For example, a conspiracy theory involving 10 connected claims about one assassination are inherently more likely, ceteris parabus, than 10 connected claims about 10 different conspiracies in different times & places by different actors that were all somehow working together.
(10) We have to try to ascertain which conspiracy theories are mutually exclusive explanations of the same event(s), and make sure the sum of the individual probabilities of each conspiracy theory being true - along with the probability of the mainstream narrative being true - have to sum to 100%.
*NOTE: Michael Shermer suggested 8 criteria in an article in Scientific American entitled "The Conspiracy Theory Detector" and Carl Sagan suggested several more in his "Baloney Detection Kit" from his book The Demon Haunted World that roughly overlap with those listed above.

So why do bad things like terrorist attacks happen if they're not the result of intentional conspiracies within the U.S. government? Two alternative hypotheses are "intelligence failures" and "policy failures". Intelligence failures are breakdowns in what's known as the "intelligence cycle" — the process by which government agencies tasked with monitoring foreign actors collect, analyze, process, and disseminate critical information. Intelligence agencies cannot typically authorize military actions independently, so this opens up the possibility for "policy failures" when they give the President & his national security advisors accurate information but the administration makes the wrong decision. See the Wikipedia entry on intelligence failure for a basic overview:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_in_the_intelligence_cycle

The idea that bad outcomes in foreign policy generally stem from "intelligence failures" and "policy failures" conflicts with the idea — prevalent among conspiracy theorists — that the U.S. government is far too powerful, well-informed & well-organized to suffer from these types of problems. Conspiracy theorists typically believe that many of the terror attacks, military coups & popular uprisings we see on the news were actually engineered by the CIA or other intelligence agencies, usually at the behest of the military-industrial complex & policy elites (sometimes collectively referred to as the "deep state") who have a hidden agenda. However, civil servants who've worked in the government agencies & military for many years often report all sorts of bureaucratic inefficiencies that makes intelligence failures & policy failures quite plausible.

With all these principles & alternative hypotheses in mind, we can begin to look at the various different conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks and try to roughly gauge their probabilities of being partly or entirely true...

In the first section, we'll discuss what's known as the "MIHOP" conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks, where MIHOP is an acronym that stands for "made it happen on purpose". Specifically, we'll look at theories that a faction or cabal within the U.S. government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as a "false flag" event to justify wars in the Middle East.

In the second section, we'll discuss what's known as the "LIHOP" conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks, where LIHOP is an acronym that stands for "let it happen on purpose". Specifically, we'll look at theories that Islamic terrorists committed the 9/11 attacks more-or-less as reported in the mainstream press, but a faction or cabal within the U.S. government knew the attacks were coming an didn't try to prevent them because they knew they could be used to justify wars in the Middle East.

In the third section, we'll discuss the MIHOP theories about a faction or cabal within the Israeli government committing the 9/11 attacks as a false flag attack to blame on Islamic extremists, as well as the LIHOP theories the Israelis knew al Qaeda was planning the attacks & purposefully failed to notify the U.S. government.

In the fourth section, we'll discuss the MIHOP theories about a faction or cabal within the Saudi government committing the 9/11 attacks for revenge on America's various harms & affronts to Muslims, as well as the LIHOP theories the Saudis knew al Qaeda was planning the attacks & purposefully failed to notify the U.S. government.

RELEVANT MATERIAL FROM PAST MEETUPS:

Back in Oct. 2021, we had a meetup entitled, "Has Israel Conspired Against the U.S.?" where we discussed conspiracy theories about Israel perpetrating the 9/11 attacks, as well as rumors about the Apollo affair, the sinking of the U.S.S. Liberty, and Jeffrey Epstein's "Orgy Island". We also briefly touched upon Operation Susannah (a.k.a. the "Lavon Affair") and the spying cases of Jonathan Pollard & Ben-Ami Kadish, which as all confirmed conspiracies by Israel.

Back in Sept. 2021, we had a meetup entitled, "Were 9/11, Iraq, Libya & Syria Conspiracies?" where we discussed the LIHOP theory about the 9/11 attacks, as well as conspiracy theories about the U.S. military interventions in Iraq, Libya & Syria, and we contrasted them with more mainstream explanations about intelligence failures & policy failures that led to these debacles.

Back on Sept. 6th, 2021, the Danish skeptics Steen Svanholm & Claus Larsen (bloggers at 911facts.dk) gave a talk explaining the mainstream explanation of the 9/11 attacks as perpetrated by al Qaeda and why they find it highly credible. From 45:00 to 53:00, they go on to briefly debunk some of the most common 9/11 conspiracy theory claims about the WTC tower collapses (i.e. jet fuel can't melt steel beams, witnesses heard & saw explosions suggesting controlled demolitions, nano-thermite dust & pools of molten steel were found at Ground Zero, steel-framed high-rises have never collapsed from fire).

Back on Sept. 10, 2021, we looked at a screening of Michael Moore's 2004 documentary films "Fahrenheit 9/11", which espouses several conspiracy theories about the Bush administration and the Saudis in relation to the 9/11 attacks and Iraq invasion. Notably, he borrowed several theories from Craig Unger's book House of Bush, House of Saud that Bush had business links with the Bin Laden family, which induced him to allow them to escape from the U.S. in the aftermath of 9/11, and, secondly, to allow Osama himself to get away later in Afghanistan. Moore also claimed America didn't invade Afghanistan to kick out the Taliban, but rather so we could put an oil pipeline in Afghanistan. I posted some critique by Christopher Hitchens, Joe Scarborough, and The Guardian's David Leigh under the film description.

Back on Sept. 5th, 2021, we had a discussion entitled "Myths, Misconceptions & Conspiracy Theories about Afghanistan". In Part 2, we discussed the U.S. funding & training of the Mujahideen in the Afghan-Soviet War and the allegations that this led to the rise of the Taliban. We also covered concerns about the CIA operating in cahoots with Afghan opium traffickers. In Part 3, we discussed various conspiracy theories about the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the raid that killed him in 2011. In Part 4, we discussed the NY Times article in June of 2020 that claimed there were "Russian bounties" on U.S. troops in Afghanistan, as well as why that story began to look rather dubious by April of 2021.

We covered the influence of the "neoconservatives" and the "Israel lobby" on U.S. foreign policy in a meetup back in June of 2019 entitled "Neoliberals, Neocons, and NWO 2.0". The group of conservative intellectuals known as the "neocons" certainly had a lot of influence during the Bush administration and enthusiastically backed the 2003 Iraq invasion, as did the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, but as we discussed there were also a significant amount of support for the war among Democrats & U.S. foreign policy didn't change drastically under Obama, suggesting there's a much broader & bipartisan foreign policy consensus at work. Similarly, while Israel certainly has a strong lobby in the U.S. and plays a key role in helping shape U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, other allies like Saudi Arabia & Turkey play a major role, and the lobbies of the oil & defense industries do as well. Those who see U.S. foreign policy as a product of a Zionist conspiracy have to ignored a lot of other influences to maintain that belief.

***

DIRECTIONS ON HOW TO PREPARE FOR OUR DISCUSSION:

The videos & articles you see linked below are intended to give you a basic overview of some of the major conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks. As usual, I certainly don't expect you to read all the articles & watch all the videos prior to attending our discussion. The easiest way to prepare for our discussion is to just watch the numbered videos linked under each section - the videos come to about about 44 minutes total. The articles marked with asterisks are just there to supply additional details. You can browse and look at whichever ones you want, but don't worry - we'll cover the stuff you missed in our discussion.

In terms of the discussion format, my general idea is that we'll address the topics in the order presented here. I figure we'll spend about 30 minutes on each section.

***

I. THE "MIHOP" CONSPIRACY THEORY - WHY SOME PEOPLE THOUGHT 9/11 WAS AN "INSIDE JOB" PLANNED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

HOW POWERFUL WAS THE "PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY" (PNAC)? DOES PNAC'S "REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSE" PAPER FROM 2000 SUGGEST THE NEOCONS WERE POISED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A TERROR ATTACK - OR ACTIVELY PLANNING ONE AS A FALSE FLAG?
DO PROVEN CONSPIRACIES IN THE PAST LIKE THE TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENTS SUGGEST THE U.S. GOV'T WAS FINE WITH KILLING AMERICAN CIVILIANS? DOES "OPERATION NORTHWOODS" SUGGEST THE GOV'T IS WILLING TO USE FALSE FLAG ATTACKS, OR SINCE IT WAS SHELVED DOES THIS SUGGEST THE OPPOSITE?
ASSUMING FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT THAT A CABAL IN THE U.S. GOV'T WAS WILLING TO HIT THE TWIN TOWERS WITH PLANES, WHY WOULD THEY ALSO NEED TO PLANT DEMOLITION CHARGES? WOULD THEY THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE ANGRY ENOUGH TO GO TO WAR IF THE UPPER FLOORS MERELY BURNED?
IS PLANTING DEMOLITION CHARGES IN A HIGHRISE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE SURREPTITIOUSLY, PERHAPS AT NIGHT, OR WOULD IT HAVE BEEN VERY LABOR INTENSIVE & LOUD AND THUS NOTICEABLE TO PEOPLE WHO WORKED THERE?
IS IT TRUE THAT JET FUEL FROM THE AIRPLANES CRASHED INTO THE WTC TOWERS COULDN'T MELT THEIR STEEL BEAMS? IF SO, IS THIS IRRELEVANT, AS THE FIRES COULD STEEL WEAKEN THEM ENOUGH TO CAUSE THE SUPPORTS FOR THE DAMAGED FLOORS TO COLLAPSE, WHICH WOULD THEN CAUSE A CHAIN REACTION OF COLLAPSES ON LOWER FLOORS?
CAN WITNESS REPORTS OF EXPLOSIONS BE EXPLAINED BY THE FIRE CAUSING ELECTRICAL EXPLOSIONS RATHER THAN DEMOLITION CHARGES GOING OFF?
WHY WERE THERE SOME REPORTS OF "NANO-THERMITE" (A.K.A. IRON MICRO-SPHERES) AT GROUND ZERO? WAS THIS EVIDENCE OF A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, OR JUST STEEL PRIMER DUST & ALUMINUM PULVERIZED BY THE COLLAPSE?
WAS IT ODD TO FIND THE PASSPORT OF ONE OF THE HIJACKERS ON THE GROUND OUTSIDE OF THE WTC TOWERS AFTER THE CRASH (SUGGESTING IT WAS PLANTED), OR WERE LOTS OF PERSONAL EFFECTS OF PASSENGERS SCATTERED AROUND?
IS IT UNREALISTIC THAT WTC TOWER 7 WOULD COLLAPSE FROM AN INTERNAL DIRE CAUSED BY DEBRIS FALLING FROM TOWER 1, EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T HIT BY A PLANE?
WHY DID SOME PEOPLE INTERPRET LARRY SILVERSTEIN'S "PULL IT" COMMENT AS ADVOCATING A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION AS OPPOSED TO PULLING BACK?
WHY DO SOME PEOPLE THINK THE PENTAGON WAS HIT BY A MISSILE RATHER THAN AN AIRPLANE? IS THIS MOSTLY BECAUSE THEY SECURITY VIDEO FOOTAGE JUST SHOWED A WHITE STREAK THEN AN EXPLOSION (DUE TO LOW FRAME RATE), AND PICTURES OF THE AFTERMATH OFTEN SHOWED THE PENTAGON AFTER MOST OF THE WRECKAGE HAD BEEN CLEARED?
DO SOME PEOPLE THINK FLIGHT 93 WAS SHOT DOWN INSTEAD OF CRASHING INTO THE GROUND BECAUSE THEY DON'T SEE MUCH WRECKAGE AT THE CRASH SITE, AND THEY HEARD PIECES WERE SCATTERED OVER A WIDE AREA?
WAS THE LACK OF BODIES AT THE CRASH SITE SUSPICIOUS (SUGGESTING NO ONE WAS EVEN ON BOARD), OR TO BE EXPECTED GIVEN THE FORCE OF IMPACT?

1a) Verify, "Fact-checking 9/11 conspiracy theories" (video - 4:08 min.)

1b) Joe Features, "The Five Biggest 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Debunked" (video - 4:16 min)

1c) Data Demystified, "Conspiracy Theories Debunked with Math" (video - 8:31 min.)

Brian Dunning, "The Twin Towers: Fire Melting Steel - The Oakland freeway collapse was not a government ploy to prove that the Twin Towers collapsed from fire."
Brian Dunning, "World Trade Center 7: The Lies Come Crashing Down"
Brian Dunning, "The Pentagon and the Missile"
Popular Mechanics Editors, "Debunking the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: Special Report - The World Trade Center"
Phil Molé, "9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective"
Chris Mohr, "9/11 and the Science of Controlled Demolitions"
Mick West, "Making Iron Microspheres - Grinding, Impacts, Welding, Burning"
Jeremy Stahl, "The Theory vs. the Facts: 9/11 conspiracy theorists responded to refutations by alleging more cover-ups." (summary & response to claims by David Ray Griffin's Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon, Richard Gage's Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth)
Bethania Palma, "No, the Owner of WTC Building 7 Didn’t ‘Admit’ It Was Demolished After 9/11"
David Byler & Kate Woodsome, "False, toxic Sept. 11 conspiracy theories are still widespread [and more bipartisan] today"

.
II. THE "LIHOP" CONSPIRACY THEORY - WHY SOME PEOPLE THINK THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION ALLOWED THE 9/11 ATTACKS TO HAPPEN

DID U.S. INTELLIGENCE FAIL TO FORESEE THE 9/11 ATTACKS? IF SO, WAS THIS DUE TO OVER-COLLECTION OF DATA BY THE NSA AND/OR INADEQUATE INTELLIGENCE SHARING BETWEEN THE NSA, CIA & FBI (AS LAWRENCE WRIGHT SUGGESTER IN "THE LOOMING TOWER")?
DID PROJECT "ABLE DANGER" IDENTIFY SEVERAL 9/11 HIJACKERS AS SECURITY THREATS AHEAD OF TIME? IF SO, WHY WEREN'T THEY ARRESTED - WAS IT FEAR OF BEING FAULTED FOR RACIAL / RELIGIOUS PROFILING?
HOW CREDIBLE ARE FORMER FBI TRANSLATOR SIBEL EDMONDS' CLAIMS THAT THE FBI GOT A WARNING OF AN IMPENDING TERRORIST ATTACK IN THE SUMMER OF 2001 FROM AN INFORMANT? IS IT PLAUSIBLE SOMEONE IN HER POSITION WOULD ALSO KNOW ABOUT U.S. GOV'T INVOLVEMENT IN DRUG RUNNING, MONEY LAUNDERING, BLACKMAILING JUDGES, SPONSORING TERRORISTS, AND SELLING OF NUCLEAR SECRETS TO ROGUE NATIONS, OR IS THIS SO IMPLAUSIBLE THAT IT SUGGESTS SHE'S MAKING IT ALL UP? IF IT'S THE LATTER, WHY DID THE JUSTICE DEPT INVOKE THE "STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE" TO SILENCE HER?
DID THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IGNORE MULTIPLE WARNINGS OF AN IMPENDING ATTACK EARLIER IN 2001? IF SO, WAS THIS MORE LIKELY TO BE DUE TO CONFUSION ABOUT WHEN & WHERE EXACTLY THE ATTACK WOULD OCCUR, OR NEGLECT OF THE WARNINGS DUE TO ISSUES THAT SEEMED MORE PRESSING, OR BECAUSE BUSH DECIDED TO LET THE 9/11 ATTACKS HAPPEN TO CREATE A PRETEXT FOR WAR?
WHY DIDN'T BUSH APPEAR SURPRISED WHEN HE WAS FIRST INFORMED OF THE 2nd WTC ATTACK & CONTINUE READING A BOOK TO SCHOOL CHILDREN FOR ANOTHER 7 MINUTES? IS THIS PROOF HE KNEW AHEAD OF TIME, OR MERELY THAT HE WAS TRYING TO REMAIN CALM?

2a) Michael Hayden vs Glenn Greenwald, "9/11 as an intelligence failure" (video - 6:17 min.)

2b) David Pakman, "Docs Show Bush Warned Numerous Times Before 9/11, Ignored Warnings" (video - 3:53 min, listen to 3:25)

Wikipedia, "September 11 attacks advance knowledge conspiracy theories"
Wikipedia, "Able_Danger - Assertion that Able Danger identified 9/11 hijackers"
Jon Greenberg, "Fact Check: Donald Trump says CIA warned George W. Bush of Sept. 11 attacks" [Rating: False]
Adam Nyhan, "Why Did President Bush React Calmly When Told About the Sept. 11 Terrorist Attacks?"
Malcolm Gladwell, "Connecting the Dots: The paradoxes of intelligence reform" (response to John Miller's 'The Cell')
Muertos, "[Lawrence Wright's] The Looming Tower: Another Book Conspiracy Theorists Will Never Read"

.
III. THE "ISRAEL DID IT" THEORY & THE MYSTERIES OF THE "HIGH FIVERS" AND ISRAELI "ART STUDENTS"

DID ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE INFORM THE U.S. PRIOR TO SEPT. 11th, 2001 THAT THERE WAS AN IMPENDING ISLAMIC TERRORIST ATTACK? IF SO, HOW SPECIFIC WERE THEIR REPORTS?
IS IT TRUE, AS SOME 9/11 TRUTHERS ALLEGE, THAT NO JEWS WERE KILLED IN THE 9/11 ATTACKS? COULD THIS BE A DISTORTED VERSION OF THE TRUE STORY ABOUT LARRY SILVERSTEIN CANCELLING A MEETING HIS COMPANY WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE AT THE WTC ON 9/11?
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT "URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS" & THE FIVE ISRAELI MEN WHO WERE REPORTED TO BE "DANCING" & "HIGH FIVING" AS THEY WATCHED THE TWIN TOWERS BURN? IS THE FBI'S REPORTED EXPLANATION, I.E. THEY WERE PROBABLY SPYING ON LOCAL ARAB GROUPS & HAD NO FOREKNOWLEDGE OF 9/11, THE MOST PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION?
IS IT TRUE SOME URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS WORKERS WERE TRANSPORTING EXPLOSIVES AND/OR DRIVING A VAN WITH A MURAL DEPICTING A PLANE HITTING THE TWIN TOWERS? IF NOT, HOW DID THESE STORIES ORIGINATE?
IS IT PLAUSIBLE THAT THE ISRAELI ART STUDENTS WERE MERELY ART SCAMMERS, OR IS THIS RULED OUT BY THE FACT THAT THEY WERE CONTINUALLY APPROACHING FEDERAL BUILDINGS & EVEN THE HOMES OF FEDERAL AGENTS?
IS IT PLAUSIBLE THE "ART STUDENTS" WERE PART OF A DRUG TRAFFICKING NETWORK BRINGING ECSTASY IN FROM EASTERN EUROPE? COULD THIS HELP EXPLAIN WHY THEY KEPT APPROACHING THE DEA - I.E. TO BUG THEIR OFFICES & HELP THEIR SMUGGLERS AVOID GETTING CAUGHT?
IF THE ISRAELI "ART STUDENTS" WERE ACTUALLY ISRAELI SPIES, WHY WOULD ISRAEL SEND YOUNG RECRUITS, FRESH OUT OF MILITARY TRAINING, TO THE U.S. WITH SUCH A FLIMSY COVER STORY & HAVE THEM REPEATEDLY APPROACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES? COULD THIS HAVE JUST BEEN A TRAINING EXERCISE CONDUCTED IN A FRIENDLY NATION TO PREPARE THEM FOR LATER DEPLOYMENT ON REAL MISSIONS?
IS IT TRUE THAT ISRAELI "ART STUDENTS" APPEARED IN SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH IN 2010 & BEGAN ASKING ABOUT THE NEW NSA FACILITY?

3a) EvTV1.com, "Dancing Israelis on 9/11 Interviewed" (video - 1:55 min.)

3b) Fox News w/ Carl Cameron, "Pre-9/11 Israeli Spy Scandal (Part 1)" (video - 5:01 min.)

Guy McCardle, "Did Jews Bring Down the Twin Towers?"
David Mikkelson, "Fact Check: Thousands of Israelis Were Absent from the WTC on 9/11?" [Rating: False]
Mike Williams, "9/11 Myths: Odigo [received advanced warning of the attacks]"
Mike Williams, "9/11 Myths: Dancing Israelis"
Mike Williams, "9/11 Myths: Israeli Art Student Spies"
Metabunk Forum, "Needs Debunking: NYPD transmission, 9/11 Exploding Mural Van"
Wikipedia, "September 11 attacks advance knowledge conspiracy theories - Israel"
Whitney Webb, "The Dancing Israelis: FBI Docs Shed Light on Apparent Mossad Foreknowledge of 9/11 Attacks"
David Sheen, "Were the notorious ‘Dancing Israelis’ 9/11 plotters, spies, or just common scam artists?"
Christopher Ketcham, "The Israeli 'art student' mystery - For almost two years, hundreds of young Israelis falsely claiming to be art students haunted federal offices -- in particular the DEA. No one knows why -- and no one seems to want to find out."
Alex Safian, "AP 'Israeli Spying' Story an 'Urban Myth' According to Justice Department"
Matthew E. Berger, "Jews Worry That [Fox News's] 'Baseless' Report on 9/11 Could Be a Blow to Israel"

.
IV. THE "SAUDIS DID IT" THEORY, THE 28 REDACTED PAGES IN THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT & THE FBI'S OPERATION ENCORE

WHY DID THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION LET MANY SAUDIS LEAVE THE U.S. RIGHT AFTER THE 9/11 ATTACKS, INCLUDING BIN LADEN FAMILY MEMBERS?
WAS BUSH SO FRIENDLY WITH PROMINENT SAUDIS LIKE PRINCE BANDAR BIN SULTAN THAT HE MIGHT'VE BEEN WILLING TO OVERLOOK THEIR ROLE IN THE 9/11 ATTACKS?
DID THE 28 REDACTED PAGES IN THE 9/11 REPORT SHOW THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THE SAUDI GOV'T AIDED AL-QAEDA IN PLANNING THE ATTACKS? IF NOT, DOES IT SUGGEST THAT SOME PROMINENT SAUDIS MIGHT HAVE "GONE ROGUE" & HAD SECRET DEALINGS WITH AL-QAEDA?
WHY DID OBAMA VETO "JASTA" (JUSTICE AGAINST SPONSORS OF TERRORISM ACT), WHICH REMOVED THE SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY PROTECTING SAUDI ARABIA FROM BEING SUED BY THE 9/11 FAMILIES? IS IT PLAUSIBLE HE PROMISED TO PREVENT LAWSUITS AGAINST THE SAUDIS IF THEY DROPPED THEIR OPPOSITION TO THE IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL?
WAS OBAMA AFRAID OF SAUDI THREATS TO SELL OFF $750B IN U.S. INVESTMENTS? WOULD THAT DESTABILIZE THE DOLLAR, OR WOULD THESE ASSETS MERELY GET BOUGHT BY OTHER FOREIGN INVESTORS?
DID A SAUDI YOUTH GROUP IMPLICITLY THREATEN CANADA WITH A 9/11-STYLE ATTACK BACK IN 2018 WITH A TWEET SHOWING AN AIRPLANE HEADED TOWARD TORONTO'S CN TOWER, OR WAS IT INTENDED TO SYMBOLIZE THE RETURN OF CANADA'S AMBASSADOR AFTER BEING EJECTED FROM SAUDI ARABIA FOR COMPLAINING ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES?
WHAT NEW EVIDENCE DOES THE DECLASSIFIED REPORT FROM THE FBI'S "OPERATION ENCORE" TELL US ABOUT THE AID GIVEN TO THE 9/11 HIJACKERS BY SAUDI DIPLOMAT FAHAD AL-THUMAIRY & SAUDI DEFENSE CONTRACTOR OMAR AL-BAYOUMI? IS THERE A "SMOKING GUN" THAT PROVES HIGH-LEVEL SAUDI INVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 OR JUST MORE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT SUGGESTS SOME SAUDIS WERE FRIENDLY WITH ISLAMISTS BUT DIDN'T QUITE KNOW WHAT THEY WERE PLANNING?
WHAT DID JAMAL KASHOGGI TELL THE LAWYERS OF THE 9/11 FAMILIES SUING SAUDI ARABIA? COULD THIS BETRAYAL HAVE LED TO THE SAUDIS HAVING HIM TORTURED & KILLED?

4a) Trace Dominguez, "What Was Saudi Arabia's Role In 9/11?" (video - 4:35 min.)

4b) CBS, "9/11 hijackers received "significant logistic support" from Saudi national, FBI report says" (video - 6:01 min.)

David Mikkelson, "Did Saudis Fly Out of the U.S. While Airspace Was Still Closed after 9/11? Rumor holds that a secret flight whisked prominent Saudis and Osama bin Laden's relatives out of the USA during a ban on air travel."
Rachel Branson, "Did Bush Give the Saudis a Free Pass?" (reply to arguments from Craig Unger's book, 'House of Bush, House of Saud')
David Leigh, "These dots don't join up: Bin Laden funding Bush? If you have any respect for accuracy, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 will be a guilty pleasure"
Jeff Stein, "CIA and Saudi Arabia Conspired to Keep 9/11 Details Secret, New Book Says" (review of John Duffy's 'The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark')
Andrew Bowen, "28 Pages, Zero Proof of Anything"
Sasha Dudding, Brendan Nyhan & Heather Szilagyi, "The 'missing 28 pages' from the Congressional report on 9/11 won't stop conspiracy theories. Here's why."
Binyamin Appelbaum, "Saudi Threat to Sell U.S. Assets Could Hurt, but Mostly the Saudis"
Catherine Herridge, "Newly released video shows 9/11 hijackers with alleged Saudi intelligence operative [Omar al-Bayoumi]"
Branko Marcetic, "We Have New Evidence of Saudi Involvement in 9/11, and Barely Anyone Cares: The FBI has quietly revealed further evidence of Saudi government complicity in the September 11 attacks — and nothing’s happened."
Michael Isikoff, "Prior to his murder, Jamal Khashoggi offered to help 9/11 victims suing Saudi Arabia"
Ali Asseri, "Why America Must Own the 9/11 Terror Attacks: Former Saudi ambassador: the Saudi government cannot be made a scapegoat for the worst intelligence failure in U.S. history."

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Skeptics In The Pub - Philly

Biweekly Discussion - Revisiting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Skeptics In The Pub - Philly

Details

Related topics

You may also like