Two days after 9/11 anniversary: “Truthers” agree with Bush Admin

Two days past 9/11 anniversary it occurs to me that there’s a gigantic irony that may also be…strangely understandable. Simultaneously, 9/11 “truthers” and those in government who didn’t act when they had preliminary warning about the attacks on 9/11 believe, or believed, the same thing: that the idea of foreign originated amateur pilot hijackers taking over four planes the same day and crashing them into four buildings that day–seemed crazy, wouldn’t happen. (Three of the four happened.)

You see, there *was* warning about it, there was chatter; George Tenet and others tried to warn the Bush administration that there were indications terrorists were planning an attack and some apparently planned to hijack planes and crash them into significant American buildings. But apparently the reason people like Condie Rice didn’t take the warning seriously is that an attack of that kind seemed unprecedented, which made it seem improbable… it just sounded like something terrorists couldn’t pull off. But al-Qaeda had planned it for years, they had substantial financial backing from sympathetic Saudis and cover from the Taliban, they had trained for it using special software and small plane flying lessons, they were served by the element of surprise, they were fairly lucky…and apparently they were protected by the “nah, they couldn’t do that” factor.

So-called “truthers”–who are utterly mistaken–also cite, amongst other things, the “improbability” of amateur pilots pulling all this off on the same day. They *agree* with the pre-911 Bush administration’s dismissal of the possibility! That’s a huge irony.

US intelligence and military services learned from the event, however. The conspiracy theorists learned nothing.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2004/04/08/719/claim-vs-fact-rices-qa-testimony-before-the-911-commission/

 

Tags: , ,

Comments are closed.