Posted by
William Bindy on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 6:36:56 PM
That the secret has not been divulged is the very best proof that it is, in fact, a secret. The
horrors of this dark deed are known to one, or two living human beings, and to God.
The Mystery of Marie Roget, by Edgar Allan Poe
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must
be the truth,
Sherlock Holmes, by Arthur Conan Doyle
All warfare is based on deception
Sun Tsu
And what is real? And how are we to know?
Bobby Gould in Hell, by David Mamet
The CIA has said there is, "no evidence," that Iraq had anything to with 9/11. In order to say so, they have had to overlook
a lot of evidence that Iraq had everything to do with 9/11. It is true that Iraq left no obvious evidence of its involvement with 9/11.
At least none that the CIA would recognize, as such. There was a reason for that. It was a secret. They deliberately left,
"no evidence." They left, "no evidence," on purpose. They planned it that way.
In their book "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal and the Selling of the Iraq War," Michael Isikoff and David Corn,
claimed that the Iraq war was based on, "a steady stream of dramatic (but false) stories about Saddam's weapon's and terrorist
connections."
As examples of, "false stories," the author's cite several regarding Iraqi defector, Sabah
Khodada, a former army captain and
what he revealed about the Salman Pak terrorist training camp. An op-ed by Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post, "reported
Khodada's claim that Salman Pak trained terrorists in airline hijackings and assassinations. Also labeled "false," a New York
Times front page story from October 21,2001, in which, "Khodada contended that non-Iraqi Arabs had been given training in
this camp. Finally, a PBS Frontline interview with Khodada where he said, "'all this training,' at Salman Pak was, 'directed
towards attacking American targets,' and that the 9/11 operation was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam,'"
is declared to be false.
However, Khodada's statements and the stories based on them were true.
Khodada had said that the hijackers had trained on a Boeing 707, parked there for that purpose.
Isikoff and Corn confirm that Salman Pak did have, "a derelict Boeing 707 aircraft on the site for training." There were,
"satellite photos of the site. U.S. officials believed that years earlier Salman Pak had been used to train Palestinian terrorist
groups. But U.S. intelligence agencies had a less disturbing explanation for what was currently happening there. Iraqi
security forces were using the aircraft to respond to a terrorist hijacking, not to conduct one--the precise opposite of what
Khodada was asserting."
This explanation may have been, "less disturbing," but it was also untrue. They had heard it from officials of Saddam's
regime. It was Saddam's cover story for Salman Pak. One that explained what was going on there without revealing it.
Iraq was, under Saddam, a totalitarian police state and an official state sponsor of terrorism. Saddam considered
himself at war with the United States, as he had stated publicly and privately many times.
Iraqi's were firing on Americans in the, "no fly zone." He had tried to kill former President, George H.W. Bush.
On February, 8, 1991, he had said on Baghdad radio, "We will chase the [Americans] to all corners at all times. No
high tower of steel will protect them from the fire of truth."
"Iraqi security forces were using the aircraft to respond to a hijacking." Who were the hijackers? Not the hypothetical
hijackers they were ostensibly training to protect Iraq from, but who were the hijackers in the training, itself?
During military training exercises, one group of trainees divides into two, one side defending, one side attacking, an objective,
in this case, an airplane. One side is learning to, "respond," to a hijacking. Simultaneously, the other side is training to hijack an
airplane, refining their techniques, as they learn what, "works," and what doesn't. As he described his hand-drawn map of the
camp, Khodada said, "this is a Boeing 707, where they trained how to hijack it. And also they were trained how to resist or
stop hijacking operation." Both sides are essential to the realism of a successful, "exercise."
Would Iraqi security forces train to, "respond," to a hijacking, without hijackers, on an empty 707?
Would terrorists train to hijack a genuine Boeing 707 with no one, "to resist or stop them?"
Khodada said that the training was done, by the Iraqi intelligence service, al-Mukhabarat.
He said the training was done in teams of six. "Two will sit in the front, two will sit in the back, and two will sit, for example,
in the middle." If divided evenly, the other six would play the, "crew," who would, "resist," the hijackers.
This adds up to a total team of twelve, with the rest of the trainees playing," passengers."
But we now know there were seven hijackers on three of the four planes. How does this add up?
On 9/11,
luggage supposedly belonging to Mohamed Atta, was found at Logan airport. It contained among other things,
a list of the apparent nineteen hijackers, cans of pepper spray, which if checked, would have been inaccessable to them,
prayers and exhortations for the hijackers, a Koran, and Mohamed Atta's will, all of which would have been destroyed in the
crash. There were a number of suspicious things about all of these items, but the most suspicious thing of all was that the luggage
was there, with no explanation for how it got there..
It did, however, leave a trail to be followed. The FBI followed it, and it led to the nineteen hijackers on the list of
hijackers that had been left for them to find.
A former high-level intelligence official told The New Yorker, "Whatever trail was left was left--deliberately for the
FBI to chase." He was right. That luggage and everything in it was Iraqi disinformation. The CIA and FBI believed the
disinformation and disbelieved the information from Khodada and other defectors.
Each team of hijackers consisted of twelve men. divided into two parts. One part were the hijackers, the others were playing
the crew in the exercise. Divided evenly, there would appear to be six on each side. However, if one of the six, playing the, "crew."
was a, "ringer," actually on the other side, then the count becomes, for training purposes, seven hijackers and five, "crew."
Either way you add them up, 6 + 6, and 7 + 5, both equal 12. Seven, is the number of hijackers meant to be on each plane, and
five just happens to be the number of men who were to appear to have hijacked each plane: the number of men who came
to America and left the false trail for the FBI to follow, when the list of their names was found in the luggage discovered at
Logan Airport, on 9/11. These men, were members of the advance team, they were decoys, a diversion designed to answer
the questions, the planners of 9/11, knew would be asked. Who were the hijackers and where did they come from.?
To be continued . . .