"The 9/11 Hoax: Pondering questions of strategy & opportunity" by Simon Shack
By Simon Shack, January 11, 2010
One question which naturally emerges from the study of the 9/11 memorials is : “Even if many ‘victims’ identities appear to be entirely made up by a computer database, could it still mean that a number of real people were killed on 9/11?"
Or did 9/11 claim no victims at all?
If we are to apply a logical thought-process to this particular issue, we need to look at questions of strategy and opportunity which the perpetrators must have prefigured. Surely, any sensible investigation must start by defining the type of crime that is being investigated. By defining the scope and the objectives of the crime, we should be able to rule out what the perpetrators themselves would have ruled out, in terms of unnecessary risks and liabilites. Was 9/11 designed as a barbaric murdering spree or was it more of a gigantic bank robbery? Let us make an’ educated guess’ and say that the latter is the case.
Bank robberies are considered terrible failures by the robbers themselves in the event of any bystander, guard/police officer getting killed; the sole objective of a bank assault is that of stealing money – never that of commiting murder. The penal aggravations of manslaughter is most unwelcome to any professional gangster – a grave mistake to be carefully avoided.
To be sure, there was no ‘added-value’ for the 9/11 perpetrators to commit a mass murder of some 3,000, mostly white-collar professionals. As we have seen, a large amount of alleged “victims” appear to be mock-up identities. Of course, precisely how many remains to be verified. Yet, consider this: if 300 deposit-boxes are emptied by a gang of bank robbers and fingerprints are found in just thirty boxes, would they be suspected only for robbing those thirty? Or would a court of law assume that they also robbed the other 270?
The idea that nobody was killed on 9/11 is, usually and predictably, rejected offhand by many folks as ‘outrageous’ or ‘unbelievable’. Others will accept that some simulation took place - but that a number of real people must have died. So let us imagine an ’intermediate’ scenario of, say, 1000 people being killed that day. If this were true, an immediate problem emerges: what if those 1000 families, at some stage, discovered that the other 2000 families were untraceable/non-existent? It is quite unlikely that the 9/11 planners would have run the risk of such a dire, worst-case scenario: Imagine a horde of angry families filing an avalanche of executive court orders, all demanding access to public records and official verifications! Truly a recipe for disaster… Surely, the 9/11 plotters didn’t want any of that? Thus, we may reasonably assume that every precaution was taken to ensure that NO civilian lawsuits might ‘spoil the show’; in all logic, the assassination of any number of people on 9/11 was a definite no-no, a stupid and senseless aggravation to be avoided at all costs. The chief directive of the Grand 9/11 Deception plan may well have been: “Zero casualties”.
“TOO MANY” PEOPLE INVOLVED ?
The almost unlimited resources of the 9/11 planners allowed for a multifaceted simulation which certainly involved a great many people by any conspiracy standards – only a few of which needed to be fully briefed about all details of the plan. A recurring objection skeptics keep raising is that “too many people had to be involved, therefore it would have been impossible to keep them all quiet.” Not so. Allow me to set forth a brief personal perspective on this issue: As the son of an idealist Norwegian sociologist who pluckily ‘fought’ the Sicilian Mafia with a typewriter, I often like to remind people of the concept of “omertà”; in Sicily, tens of thousands of honest citizens know perfectly well the names and whereabouts of the Mafia bosses – yet they are kept silent for decades with bribes and fear. Historically – and this is a nigh but undeniable fact - cold cash and hot threats have never failed to put a lid on people’s mouths.
A limited number of people were needed to pull off the 9/11 hoax – a hoax which relied on an incalculably larger budget than any smalltown Mafia hit. Needless to say, the US executive branch also firmly controls all key government-appointed agencies, an asset no criminal organization could ever dream of. Most importantly, every single major news corporation has been, in the last 50 years or so, thoroughly infiltrated and co-opted by the higher echelons of power. Today, their globalized monopoly of world news makes them the single most powerful persuasion-machine ever known to mankind. In fact, their unchallenged control of information was a crucial player in the 9/11 plan: Most lower-level operatives involved in the execution of the plan were induced - much as the average ‘Joe Public’ - to believe in the televised version of the events.
Hence, the “too-many–people-involved” argument fails on two counts:
1: It is effectively disproved by historical precedents.
2: It does not account for the wide, unprecedented range of assets available to the 9/11 planners.
End
--------------------------------------------------
I like Shack's theory.
Before he wrote this I was trying to figure out if the 'no victims or very few victims' on 9-11 theory made any sense... and it actually makes a lot.. the perps would probably not care to do this out of the kindness of their hearts, but for practical purposes.. why would they want family members, friends, and relatives devoting their lives to finding and demanding truth and justice? That would be too much risk and liability and an absolute nightmare.
I can believe there are many actors in this whole deception and those that will perpetuate disinfo by having someone say they know someone who 'died on 9-11'.... there may be more and more of this propaganda as the 'vicsim' idea starts to take hold...
Anyways.. I always wanted to cross check the names on the memorial with the Social Security Death index (which I think is 95%+ accurate), but I wanted to split up the work. I'm just going to use CNN memorial and go through last names that end in: A,B,C.... Anyone else want to help?
http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/
SEPT11th memorial: “3.181”
http://www.sept11thmemorial.com/all_names.asp
CNN memorial: “2.985”
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/lists/by-name/inde...
FOX News: “2812”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,62779,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,62151,00.html (full list)
La Repubblica ( Sept11,’09 ): “2.752”
http://www.repubblica.it/2009/09/sezioni/e...embre-2009.html
America Forever memorial: “2.467”
http://www.freewebs.com/god_bless_america/page10.htm




















I'm a "truther"
and the no victims hypothesis is stupid. My neighbor was on Flight 77. His kids were in elementary school back then, now they are on their way to college. He still has not come home. Stick to controlled demolition.
which one was flight 77?so i
which one was flight 77?
so i guess the "no planes" theory doesnt work for you? cause the little that i've looked into that line of thought has been pretty interesting.
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato
Flight 77
was the Pentagon flight. I think for the WTC there were most definitely planes, but for the Pentagon things get a little more shady. My neighbors wedding ring was actually found in the wreckage at the Pentagon and brought home to his wife though. I want the videos to be released.
look at the WTC buildings
look at the WTC buildings footage, there's a very good youtube video out there that shows some very intresting things abou those two buildings, strange video glitches, strange video coloring.
all stuff I knew from seeing it originaly (at least in the back of my mind) I couldnt understand how the footage of the WTC towers was so "strange" compared to all other footage that day. its a very interesting stuff there that i haven't spent time on, but it defiantly made me question the exsistance of planes at all, at ANY of the sites.
the pentagon is a pretty clear case of "no plane" the field in pensivania is also clearly a slam dunk for "no plane" and now I am questioning the twin towers.
anyway, I'm in the middle of a class so i cant link the video, but its out there, and worth a watch at least.
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato
Flight 77 was the one that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon.
Yes, there are some pretty interesting things that make me hesitant to reject the "no planes" theory.
...and just because there is not a determined explanation for the obvious question of what happened to the passengers, that does not rule out the possibility that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.
3,000 dead would mean at
3,000 dead would mean at least 2,800 or so families?
seems to me that there would be a lot more vocal input from these families and loved ones than there currently is, at least thats what I've always thought.
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato
?
.
I fail to see the point
Those who masterminded the 911 tragedy had no problem with mass murder, and mass murder is far easier to commit than an elaborate hoax. 911 is not even a particlularly well staged "false flag" operation, as there are too many easily provable lies. That's why anyone who questions what happened is pummelled by the mass media.
I dont know what to say
I honestly hope this post is a parody. If not, please see a doctor soon. I am damn serious. You have either a psychological or neurological problem. Please take my suggestion seriously and see a doctor.