Thursday, September 03, 2009
I posted the following opinion on Democratic Underground in response to a thread about National Geographic Channel's "9/11: Science and Conspiracy".
It isn't an easy argument to make...
Of course, any argument that I'm capable of making here and now will not meet the definition of "conclusive evidence". But I'm willing to discuss the subject as patiently, honestly, and intelligently as I'm capable of - as long as you lay off the ad hominem. There's nothing crazy or stupid about not trusting all of the information the empire dispenses. And that, I believe, is what accounts for the genuine interest in these "theories".
Now, if I'm not mistaken, a double agent is nothing without a genuine enemy. It may be true that Al-Qaeda is responsible for the embassy bombings in Africa, and other crimes. But not necessarily true that OBL was personally responsible for every operation. Also, it may be true that some operations were allowed to proceed for a variety of reasons.
The perpetrators of a number of these crimes may be "...groups connected by little more than shared aims, ideals and methods". This article from the BBC also mentions OBL's possible ties to the CIA.
By the way, the US government worked with the Khmer Rouge AFTER they killed 2 million of their fellow Cambodians. Working with the worst people on earth is par for the great American course. Is it not?
The reason I favor this approach over the other conspiracy theories is that it involves the smallest number of people: OBL, his contact, and a select few from government and industry.
There are other things that make you go "hmm", such as the alleged ties between the Bush family and OBL.
And the evacuation of Bin Laden's family after 9/11.
And then there's the interesting interview with Benazir Bhutto, a month before she was murdered, where she talks about "the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden" and his ties to a certain member of Pakistan's ISI. Go to 6:00 in the video to skip to the quote. Of course, it may be that she misspoke, and meant to name Daniel Pearl.
Personally, I lean towards the theory of an American empire that earns its enemies. But who knows? There's also the matter of the pipeline, and the timing...