Motives for the Strike

[simulcastfred]

OK...I am fairly new to this. I have seen the video and read the editorials and there are some convincing arguments and supporting evidence here.

However, I am missing one thing. The stated goal of the attacks, if committed/sanctioned by the US gov, would be to obtain support for invading 'terrorist nations' and to build support for Patriot Act type legislation to centralize more power in the hands of the people in charge. (my summary...pretty close, I hope)

The World Trade Center attacks complete these goals. No attack on the Pentagon (nor the other flight, wherever its intended target) were required to complete this agenda. In every article that I read on this subject, the motives for the attack on the Pentagon are lumped together with the other attacks...and I'm not buying that if it was 'US' who planned the attack. If it really was terrorists, well, sure..you would want a commercial/financial target, a military target, and presumably a government target (which failed) to show that you can hit at any point in American culture.

So, why hit the Pentagon (assuming the 'US' line of attack)? Hit a part of the building under renovation, with few occupants? My only thought goes toward the 'Tom Clancy' line of thinking...there was a single, human, target in that portion of the building. Now, if that could be proven (that being a powerful person of opposition to the current leadership was in that area at the time of the attack), it would go a long way to helping me buy into some of these theories. Or, if some other plausible motive could be put forward.

As it is, I am having a hard time buying *why* you would want to hit the Pentagon, if you were a member of the government who plotted attacks. Anyone help me out on this?

 

[Justin]

After reading Laura's book on the subject I have a couple of answers.

It was not necessarily the US that perpetrated the attack, although certain people within the US govt would have had forewarning. The Pentagon may have been targeted in order to destroy certain elements that were in the section that were hit by the attack. Also, hitting one of their own buildings casts them in a victim light and further "proves" that the attack could not have come from a US group. The Pentagon damage was not nearly as extensive as it would have been if an actual 757 had hit a large portion of the building. So with a precision attack they still get victim deniability, they destroy some key offices and computer files, and leave the majority of the building undamaged.

Here are a couple link with more info, in case you have not already seen them:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/coup.htm

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/boeing.htm

 

[chuck]

From what I understand, there are a couple of theories:

1. That the attack on a Pentagon was designed to divert suspicion way from the Pentagon.

2. The part of the building that was hit contained the new ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) communications centre. It was hit as a defensive move, because the ONI was involved in the attack and was co-ordinating from there.