Panel debunks some 9/11 myths
Sunday, April 25, 2004
By Greg Miller, Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON --The hearings earlier this month on the Sept. 11 attacks produced a stream of revelations about the terrorist strikes and the government's failure to prevent them. But in addition to revealing details the public had not heard, the commission debunked others retold so many times they were widely assumed to be true:
Intelligence intercepts that foretold of the attacks with warnings such as "tomorrow is zero hour;"
The peculiar request of a Minnesota flight student who didn't want to learn how to take off or land;
The hijackers' use of box cutters as weapons;
And the planeloads of Saudis that were allowed to slip out of the country unchecked.
These are persistent pieces of Sept. 11 lore, serving as fodder for conspiracy theories and spreading with the help of everything from anonymous Internet postings to mentions in the mainstream media.
But in testimony and a series of interim reports, the 9/11 Commission has concluded that these claims and others that have cropped up over the last two years fall somewhere between minor embellishments and urban myth.
Al Felzenberg, a spokesman for the commission, said the panel doesn't consider it part of its charter to run down every rumor related to the Sept. 11 attacks, but that the investigative staff has made a point of addressing some of the most common erroneous claims.
"I won't say it's part of our mission, but part of what we're trying to do is tell the definitive account of 9/11," Felzenberg said. "As you go along, you discover things in the public discourse that staff research has indicated may have been incomplete or in some cases incorrect. When we see one of the more glaring omissions or misstatements we've taken the opportunity to correct it."
In some cases the commission has challenged assertions by high-level officials. In its first report, issued in January, the commission produced evidence that contradicted statements by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III that the hijackers had entered the country "easily and lawfully," doing nothing to arouse suspicion of authorities.
Since then, the panel has corrected or cast doubt on an array of other claims, some of which were of unclear origin.
In one recent report, for example, the commission devoted almost a full page to addressing allegations that Saudi nationals including relatives of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden were allowed to leave the country on chartered jets in the immediate aftermath of the attack, while all other flights were still grounded.
In fact, six chartered flights carrying 142 Saudis did leave the country in the days after the attacks, the report said, and one plane had 26 passengers, "most of them relatives" of bin Laden.
But the commission cleared the government of any wrongdoing, saying that all of the passengers were screened by the FBI and other agencies, and that none of the planes left before commercial airspace was reopened. The commission did not address reports in Vanity Fair magazine and other publications that Saudis were able to arrange flights within the United States before the ban was lifted so that they could gather at major airports for their overseas departure.
The panel did say it had checked all of the names on the flight manifests against current government watch lists, and found no matches.
The commission also devoted a portion of its latest report to dissecting the case of suspected terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen who was detained a month before the attacks in Minnesota after he tried to enroll in an area flight school.
The report disclosed a number of new details on the case making it clear that it was a botched opportunity to detect the Sept. 11 plot. Moussaoui probably was not intended to be one of the hijackers, but he had financial ties to some of them, and British intelligence knew that he had been to al-Qaida training camps.
Moussaoui did have a peculiar request for his flight school instructors, but it was not the one that is most frequently attributed to him. "Contrary to popular belief, Moussaoui did not say he was not interested in learning how to take off or land," the report said. "Instead, he stood out because, with little knowledge of flying, he wanted to learn how to take off and land a Boeing 747."
The commission has taken on a number of other apparently erroneous accounts.
It's true that U.S. intelligence intercepted communications on Sept. 10 in which suspected al-Qaida operatives said "tomorrow is zero hour" and referred to the beginning of "the match," another report said. However, the commission said it has received new information that suggests these were not references to the Sept. 11 attacks, but to a military offensive in Afghanistan.
In a report on aviation security, the commission cast doubt on the idea that the hijackers used box cutters to subdue passengers. Instead, the panel said it was more likely they used "Leatherman" utility knives that have multiple tools and a long, sharp blade that locks into position. Evidence shows that at least two of the hijackers purchased such knives, the report said, and FAA guidelines permitted people to carry them onto planes. Box cutters, on the other hand, were banned.
Skeptics of the commission's work and self-appointed Sept. 11 investigators say the commission still has failed to address an array of suspicious events surrounding the attacks.
They cite lingering questions about why U.S. fighter jets didn't shoot down the plane before it hit the Pentagon, and whether the CIA provided funding, training or other support for bin Laden in the 1980s when he was among Arab fighters seeking to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan -- a charge the CIA vehemently denies.
post-gazette.com |
