From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: U.S. | Police State & Prisons
Confessions of a Conspiracy Theorist: 9/11 Revisited
by Mathias Brockers
Friday Sep 29th, 2006 5:09 AM
The mantra Osama was the one has become a dogma and his phantom-like band al Qaida has become the synonym for evil. Further questions or doubts are not allowed. Welcome to the Middle Ages of the 21st century! With an international investigations, the official legend would collapse.

Confessions of a Conspiracy Theorist

By Mathias Brockers

[This article published in the German-English cyber journal Telepolis 9/9/2006 is translated from the German on the World Wide Web,]

There are really only two possibilities regarding September 11, 2001:

a) A criminal band led by their boss in an Afghanistan cave gains control of four passenger jets with carpet cutters, flies complicated flight maneuvers with these jets, outwits the whole sophisticated air defense over the best-protected buildings of the world, makes them collapse and kills nearly 3000 persons in this spectacular terror attack.
b) A criminal band operating concealed within the US government and secret service outfitted with the necessary means, exercises where hijacking of passenger jets was simulated, and with the motives and possibilities for profiting politically and financially from the attacks used Band A as a scapegoat.

As to the first possibility with the boss Osama Bin Laden, there is a serious problem in the fact that no evidence was presented against him in the 9/11 case, at least from the view of the FBI investigating authority. In June 2006, an FBI spokesperson admitted that “no hard evidence” existed connecting Bin Laden with 9/11 [“Wanted, Dead or Alive” (1)]. The video from a training camp released around the election campaign does not seem to change anything in the unreliability of the “evidence” against Bin Laden [The Al Qaida video on its anniversary (2)}. A suspicion about a crime planned or committed by a band for which there is no evidence is called a “conspiracy theory.” Thus the thesis that Bin Laden is still hiding is a conspiracy theory if no evidence for his guidance and complicity in the 9/11 attacks is offered.

Concerning the second possibility,. The evidence is hardly any better. The leadership of a secret operation in military-= and secret service circles is just as unknown as the details of its execution. What is certain is that the air defense of the greatest military power of the world was paralyzed for 102 minutes and that anti-terror exercises with passenger aircraft “abducted” by hijackers occurred on the morning of 8/11. Some evidence suggests that vice-president Dick Cheney was responsible for these war games. This thesis is also a conspiracy theory since there is no hard evidence.

The real conspiracy that led to the crime is still unexplained after five years. Only these two conspiracy theories exist today. With different sub-groups, variants and varieties in the respective scenarios, the possibilities can be reduced to these two theses. If 9/11 were a simple criminal case and not an earth-shattering event, hardly anyone would criticize this judgment. But 9/11/2001 is not a simple case. Since then, everything that does not correspond to the announcements of the US government was branded as a “conspiracy theory.” The sober statement that no hard evidence exists for Thesis A and a conspiracy theory is involved here was regarded since then as heresy. Whoever cites evidence or traces for Thesis B is denounced as a “conspiracy theoretician.” As the rule “whoever does not believe in the devil must be possessed by the devil” was in effect for the demonology of the medieval Inquisition, a similar principle is in force in media discourse after 9/11: whoever doubts the devil Osama and his 19 terrorists as sole culprits is stylized as a possessed terrorist.

As power always comes from barrels of guns and the “invisible hand” of the market only governs thanks to the military fist, discourse power depends on media channels. Only what is reinforced in the echo chambers of the media is true. The repetition rate – the penetration rate – decides what is established as “truth,” not the substance of reality. Not surprisingly, conspiracy theory A is regarded as pure truth in large parts of the western world. At the moment of the crash in the South Tower (3), the government-friendly TV station “Fox News” declared Osama Bin Laden the “main suspect” which was immediately repeated ad infinitum on all channels. After Bin Laden clearly explained in a first interview (4) after 9/11 that he had nothing to do with the attacks and only turned up since then on dubious defective videos and unverifiable messages and no evidence is lodged against him according to the FBI, nothing has changed in that situation. The mantra “Osama was the one” has become a dogma and his phantom-like band “Al Qaida” has become the synonym for evil. Further questions or doubts are not allowed. Welcome to the Middle Ages of the 21st century!

Little doubt exists that agent Tim Osman (5) – Bin Laden’s CIA code name when he once purchased weapons and aircraft in the US for the holy war – was a terrorist. The FBI seeks him on account of the bomb attacks on different US embassies in Africa. But who staged the conspiracy if his involvement in 9/11 cannot be proven? In answering this question, we encounter two phenomena – the alleged “Al Qaida masterminds” allegedly arrested by the CIA, Khaled Scheich Mohammed and Ramsi Binalshib. In an extensive essay, the Canadian author Chaim Kupferberg reconstructs one of the greatest disinformation campaigns of history (6) and shows how these two figures were staged as chief witnesses. Christian C. Walther describes this process as marketing new terror masterminds. (7)

No person and no court have seen KSM and Binalshib for years. However their statements described as “useless” by German courts are still the basic platform of the “evidence” [The Planted “Confession” (8)] for the Bin Laden/Al Qaida legend.

The 19 concrete “hijackers” who carried out the horror remain when the question about the wirepullers of the attacks is only answered with unverifiable stories, not with real evidence. Still the evidence is in no way better. We meet a situation that must make the hair of every criminologist stand on edge. After five years, the identity of these 19 alleged perpetrators has not been clarified. Some of them used stolen passports. Whoever was hidden behind these false names was never ascertained. Others had doubles who traveled under their names and booked flights or hotels like the 9/11 researcher “John Doe II” (some authors prefer pseudonyms given the inquisition climate) documented in a meticulous article [Tracking the alleged hijackers and their doubles (9)].

For years journalist Daniel Hopsicker (10) researched Venice Beach/ Florida where Mohammed Atta and his mates lived and received flight training spoke to dozens of witnesses involved with the “hijackers.” Why the 9/11 commission avoided hearing even one of these witnesses is clear when one learns about some customs of these “Islamic” fanatics in Hopsicker’s report (11) (“Welcome to Terrorland”: Frankfurt 2004): striptease bars, pork, alcohol and cocaine. This matches western agents more than Islamic activists. For several months, Mohammed Atta lived with a stripper – Armanda Keller – “recommended” her to the FBI for reeducation after the attacks and did not speak with the press. Mrs. Keller’s statements were never recorded in the minutes. They would have put in question the whole legend of the chief terrorist and his mates, not only Atta’s “Testament” accidentally found at the Boston airport.

Some of the alleged “hijackers” – or several men with the same names – were trained at military bases of the US air force. Some lived with FBI informants (12) in subleases issued with statement prohibitions for reasons of “national security.” Some obtained new visas without problem although they were suspected of being terrorists for years and were on diverse “watch lists.” Mohammed Atta was observed since the beginning of 2000 in New York through the Pentagon’s danger-prevention program “Able Danger” [Pentagon blocks hearing through Able Danger (13)] at a time when he should still have been studying in Hamburg. In short, great lack of clarity prevails about the real wirepullers of the attacks. Inconsistencies exist with regard to the 19 perpetrators, their real identity, contacts and activities. All the witnesses (14), contradictions and traces ignored by the 9/11-commission point in the same direction. These 19 were not autonomous terrorists controlled from an Afghanistan cave but were under constant observation and surveillance in their residence in the US. Just before the act, they renewed their passports, regularly paid tickets for speeding violations, took roundabout ways and returned rental cars at rental stations instead of simply leaving them at airports. Mohammed Atta opened up a bonus-miles account with “American Airlines.” Logical behavior for suicide assassins on their last mission would suggest that the true character of their actions was unknown to the 19 hijackers on that day and that they only played the role of straw men and scapegoats. But for whom?

With this question, one inevitably lands at Conspiracy Theory B, a band of rogues within the secret services and the military that carried out anti-terror exercises on the morning of 9/11 [The War Games of September 11 (15)]. in which the hijacking of passenger jets by terrorists was simulated. These war games were only mentioned in a brief footnote in the final report of the 9/11 commission that described the execution of this crime in general and the absence of any air defense in particular as a series of breakdowns, failures and bad luck. Even the hair-raising fact that AA11 that crashed in the north tower of the WTC was long visible on the radar screens of the region’s air controllers – when over Manhattan – did not force the commission to a far-reaching investigation of these military exercises. The failure of “Quick Reaction Alert,” the standard operating practice in worldwide air traffic that puts interceptors in the air within a few minutes, is undisputed. The question how and why there was no reaction for 1.5 hours is still unanswered despite all Hollywood docu-dramas. The whole execution of the deed and the non-appearance of interceptors were obviously connected with these war games.

No one can deny there are fanatical Islamists ready for violence who plan terrorist attacks in their “holy war” against the West and are somehow or other capable of a mass murder. But “somehow or other” is not enough for solving a crime, particularly a world-shattering event like 9/11 that as a signal dramatically sets the points of the global politics of this century. The US government blocked this investigation from the beginning and first agreed to an investigation after 1.5 years after the pressure of the bereaved. Even the members of this commission hand-picked by Bush have admitted in the meantime that they pulled the wool over people with false statements. (16) Therefore the 9/11-commission report (17) despite its hefty volumes is an “omission report. (18) The basic questions like the identity of the culprits, wirepullers and leaders are still unexplained.

Half of all US citizens are convinced that facts in the 9/11 case were covered up; 36% believe the government itself is entangled in the crime. One could say 38% of these “crazy Americans” believe the government is in contact with aliens. What do such urban myths imply? In this case, there are two unproven conspiracy theories. Two hypotheses with their assumptions exist without any definitive proof recognized by the public. Hypothesis A is proclaimed ex cathedra by all the media channels and is passed off as official “truth” that is sufficiently proven and “self-evident.” On the other hand, Hypothesis B has gained acceptance from below and wins more and more followers because sufficient evidence for A has still not been presented today. Whether and when the critical mass will be reached that forces re-examination of the event is hard to predict. Personally I am rather skeptical that there will be a re-examination in the next five years. This is not because there aren’t enough reasons for a new investigation. On the contrary, everybody occupied with the gaps in Hypothesis A is overwhelmed while on the other side the amount of facts and traces seem to speak for the accuracy of B.

The barrier preventing a rigorous inquiry and enlightenment is psychological, not technical. The idea that a democratic government could be entangled in such a crime is simply unbearable for many. Politicians, in particular figures like George W. Bush, are blatantly corrupt and lie and deceive to gain advantages and keep power. But a mass murder of their own people – that is impossible! That this idea is only allowed hypothetically makes the question suddenly inscrutable and complex, shatters world-views and undermines the last remnants of trust in state authority and order. Before we dare consider such atrocities, we prefer believing in uncertainty to facing the monstrosities. We prefer not knowing instead of taking note of unpleasant facts. We repress them and project them on a suitable scapegoat. A catastrophic event like September 11, 2001 simply cries out for a culprit and Osama and the 19 hijackers filled this gap perfectly. A few minutes after the “surprise attack,” they were pulled from the hat and since then are permanently recycled. Whenever a trashcan burns anywhere today, the Al Qaida connection is not far away.

The truth about the conspiracy of September 11, 2001 is not known. Whoever claims to know lies or deceives himself. Whoever refuses to completely re-investigate this case is involved in the business of those who justify external wars and the internal police state with the 9/11 crime. A mad “war against terror” is promoted that does not contain terrorism. An enlightenment “from above” cannot be expected soon since governments brilliantly keep themselves in office with this policy of fear and the mainstream of journalists decay to stenographers of this policy. This enlightenment must come from below. Everybody is expected to form his or her own impression and heed an indispensable guideline: “Distrust authorities, think for yourself!” The grand success of the film “loose Change” (19) that millions have seen is an example for this independent thinking. If only half corresponds to the facts, the Bush regime belongs behind bars. That the regime is still firmly in control is because US democrats and the left-liberal establishment have not taken up the 9/11 theme. Bush & Co. have repeated the lies dozens of times.(20) People always take them at their word.

From the first day, I inclined to the side of unbelievers and presented detailed reasons in the Telepolis series, The WTC-Conspiracy (21). Since then, nothing has reduced or removed this skepticism. On the contrary, I am more convinced than ever today that the attacks could only have been carried out as an “inside job.” Unlike many US colleagues who put evidence for the detonation of the three WTC buildings in the foreground of their educational efforts, I urge treating this investigation as subordinate. The question “Who” comes first in criminal investigations, not the question “How” or the question “Why.” If an international investigating commission focused on this decisive point and explained the identifies and activities of the 19 hijackers and their helpers without contradiction, the official legend would collapse as fast as the towers of the WTC collapsed in themselves.

Telepolis Artikel-URL:

We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!


donate now

$ 95.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.


Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network