Dave >Another conspiracy?
Frankly, I don't know what to make of it. If true, it would be the very first piece of "something" connecting somebody with the event. All the same, I do find it very far fetched that they were able to identify a few milligrams of human ash in those millions of tons of rubble, especially after the inferno which raged for days and which apparently was sufficient, in minutes, to melt the steel girders supporting the buildings. Makes the proverbial needle in a haystack look like a very large object.
Looking at the results I do see something strange (?suspicious), however. It seems the success rate for "ordinary" passengers, where presumably they could be sure of a match, was 1,465 / 2,792 = 52% but was 100% for the hijackers where the source of comparative DNA material had to be flimsy, at best.
It would be very interesting to see the opinion of a DNA expert. Makes me think of the O J Simpson trial where the DNA evidence of the blood drops was rejected by the court.
Whether this is considered evidence or not, it does not, however, provide an answer to the fundamental, unanswered question --- who were the terrorists? Even if the DNA of the burned remains matches the source material found in hotel rooms etc, in the circumstances of the unambiguous fact that the identities of at least six of the "terrorists" were stolen, we still do not know who the remains belong to. It does not follow, because there is a DNA match to something, that the terrorists were Arabs, or whoever the FBI says they were.
cnn.com
And, for what it's worth, it would be remarkable if an Arab/Muslim "terrorist" was to steal the identity of someone similar to himself. If I were to steal someone's identity before performing an evil or illegal act in that person's name I would steal the identity of someone I didn't like or someone who I wished to be put into trouble. |
