Humint Events Online: A Diversionary Attack?

Monday, February 28, 2005

A Diversionary Attack?

One really has to wonder exactly what the terrorists had in mind when, according to the official 9/11 story, they decided to hijack several commercial aircraft and slam them into key symbolic buildings in the US.

While such an attack obviously was horrible, the most tragic and lethal part of 9/11 was when the WTC towers collapsed.

I have to wonder-- did terrorists really expect to bring down the WTC by hitting them with airplanes? It wasn't exactly intuitive that such a thing would occur. Ramming airplanes into the WTC without them collapsing would have been horrible, but seemingly something that would have been more bearable than the huge tragedy of those towers coming down.

The question is, did "someone" really want the towers to come down?

If so, slamming airplanes into them wasn't a guaranteed way to do it. But slamming airplanes into the towers was a classic "diversionary attack" if you were using bombs to bring down the towers. That is, everyone is focussing on the crashed airplanes, and ignoring the bombs that were planted and starting to go off.

Certainly, if someone had planted bombs in the WTC to bring them down, having airplanes hit the buildings completely took people's minds off the idea that someone had planted bombs, and thus whoever planted the bombs essentially got away. It's an alibi, so to speak.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger