Saturday, May 18, 2002

Isn't is odd that of all the airports passed through by the September 11 hijackers, the only airport security video pictures that we've been allowed to see are those of Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari (there's pictures of them at Portland airport, at a gas station in Portland, at a Portland ATM, and at Wal-Mart in Portland)? There's another 17 (if you assume that 4 flights were hijacked, which I am coming to doubt) hijackers who must have been recorded by airport security cameras. Why have pictures from these cameras not been released? One possible answer is that the photos we've seen of the hijackers came from the original stolen identities assumed by the hijackers, and the actors who played these roles don't resemble the pictures we've seen. If it turned out, for example, that the 'Jarrah' captured in an airport security camera didn't resemble a picture of the real Jarrah, the Official Story would fall apart. In the case of Atta, the picture we've seen may well be a picture of the actor who played Atta, and not the original Atta. Someone recognized Atta as being in Montgomery, presumably on the basis of his published photo, which indicates that the photo depicts the North American Atta. Atta's father has said that the security camera picture does not look like his son. It could be that it was decided to use the photos of the actors depicting Atta and Alomari just so they would match, and the security camera pictures could be released as 'proof' that Atta and Alomari were hijackers. DNA testing of the bodies recovered in the crashed Pennsylvania plane would confirm whether the hijackers in that plane (assuming there were any!) were who we've been told they were. It's interesting how the lack of video camera evidence of the hijackers parallels the lack of video camera evidence of the Pentagon 'crash'. The modern ubiquity of video cameras is making it harder and harder to stage a decent faked terrorist attack.