Reply #13: Division of arguments [View All]

[KJF]

I would break it down like this:

(1) Arguments I definitely don't agree with: e.g. the Pentagon's walls were made of reinforced concrete, hijackers still alive. I am suggesting we should drop these arguments.

(2) Arguments I think will not check out, but I'm not completely sure yet: e.g. hijackers trained at US bases.

(3) Arguments I think are interesting but not yet proved to my satisfaction: e.g. thermite.

(4) Good arguments that I see as the core: NSA surveillance, all those warnings, Saeed Sheikh, war games, etc.

I would put your PENREN idea in (2). I am sceptical of it, but if you want to continue to make the argument, then please feel free, although I might express my scepticism at times. FWIW, my understanding is that Hoffman agrees with you that the plane was deliberately flown into Wedge 1 of the Pentagon.

By "drop hijackers still alive" I mean that some people cite reports carried by the BBC, the Telegraph, Al Sharq Al Aswat, etc. as evidence that the people named by the FBI and 9/11 Commission cannot have done the operation, because they are still alive. However, after checking out the reports, it appears that the people who the FBI now says did it are not the people who were interviewed for the reports - they merely have similar names and details (for example both the Saeed Al Ghamdis lived in Delray Beach).

By "drop no Arabs on flight 77" I mean stop referring to the partial autopsy results from American 77 as though they were the full results. The fact that all but one of the other passengers were (allegedly) identified is not evidence that no remains were recovered that might come from the (alleged) hijackers. I think the DNA would probably match the hijackers, but there's no way to resolve this to anybody's full satisfaction at the moment. JackRiddler has a thread about it. We should continue to push for more details about the hijackers, including positive DNA identification of the (alleged) 12 sets of remains, publication of interviews with their relatives, etc.