Oxford Union Society: “Was 911 a Conspiracy”

K

kickstand

Guest
http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/oxford-union-society-was-911-a-conspiracy

Monday, January 23rd, 2006

RINF

Today one of the world’s most famous debating forums will consider the taboo question at the heart of the War on terror. Is the official Washington story of the 911 attacks correct, or is 911 a myth created by Washington’s military industrial complex to justify a generation of lucrative wars?

The Oxford Union has invited 911 sceptics David Shayler and Annie Machon, both ex-MI5 officers, Ian Henshall co-author of non-fiction best-seller 911 Revealed, and risk analyst Bill Durodié to discuss whether the attacks occurred in anything like the way the mainstream Washington news organisations claim.

Ian Henshall said today:

After the WMD fiasco, newsrooms have so far been unwilling to ask whether they were duped by their intelligence sources over 911 as well. So much evidence has been seized by the US authorities and never made public that it is impossible to say for sure how the 911 attacks happened. There are now several versions of the official story which stand in open conflict with each other. Many believe the attacks were manipulated or allowed to succeed and quite a lot of evidence has leaked out to support this.

Notes

for more details of this evening’s forum and the Oxford Union contact details see

http://www.oxford-union.org/termcard.php?PHPSESSID=babb6829c6917b573094c3304
cc68e2e

Ian Henshall can be contacted on 01273 326862 daytime. His book 911 revealed co-authored with Rowland Morgan was given favourable reviews in the Daily Mail and the Sunday Times, but although it is a non-fiction best-seller it has so far been ignored by the mainstream broadcast media, despite their legal obligation to due impartiality.

The official 911 story has never been tested in a court of law, while crucial evidence has been seized by the FBI and ferociously withheld from the media, and even from the families of the victims. The official 911 Commission whas been denounced even by pro-War Republican Senators after it emerged last year that alleged 911 ringleader Mohammed Atta had been known to the US authorities prior to 911, contrary to the assertions of the Commission’s final report. Recently Senator Barbara Boxer stated that the truth of the 911 attacks must be pursued wherever it leads.

Since the 911 attacks internet sites, books and alternative news media have criticised the official Conspiracy theory which holds that the attacks were carried out by a highly skilled terrist cell acting on the under the orders of mastermind Osama Bin Laden. Some hold that the attacks were a Pentagon organised hoax along the lines of the documented Pentagon 1960’s plan Operation Northwoods. This which would have used a drone aircraft to fake a shootdown of a passenger airliner over Cuba and create the pretext for a US invasion.

Most 911 sceptics however hold that elements in the US government took over one of Osama Bin Laden’s many half-baked plans, made sure it worked and possibly embellished it by a fake attack on the Pentagon’s only unoccupied section or controlled demolitions of the three World Trade Centre buildings. They cite the anthrax attacks purporting to be from Al Qaeda which heightened the War panic in 2001. The anthrax terror, aimed at Senators who were questioning the 911 War plans, was quickly forgotten after being traced to US biowarfare laboratories.

911 sceptics say it is absolutely predictable that with War looming against Iran and the Republicans facing meltdown in the midterms another fuzzy audiotape should have emerged last week with new threats from Osama Bin Laden, the man who US troops allowed to escape from Afghanistan. Even on CNN commentators recently agreed that the language purporting to come from Bin Laden is now quite different from his original statements. Software exists which, given a sample of a voice, can generate new speech apparently spoken by the same person.
 
Back
Top Bottom