In section 20 of the Official Report, there is the statement:
However, further on in section 41, the report, completely contradicting the above paragraph, states:Hussain undertook a Hajj visit to Saudi Arabia with his family early in 2002. After this, he began wearing traditional clothing and a prayer cap and would wear white on Fridays. Some time after this it was noticed that he had written ‘Al Qaida No Limits’ on his RE schoolbook. He was open about his support for Al Qaida in school and said he regarded the 9/11 bombers as martyrs.
I was reminded of this confusing issue when I saw a blogger write earlier on tonight:Conspiracy theories also abounded, at least some of the bombers seem to have expressed the view that the 9/11 attacks were a plot by the US.
I can only assume that this sentiment is based on section 41 on the Official Report - although where the 'Zionist plot' aspect comes from I'm not sure, since the report definitely doesn't mention this. From "some of the bombers seem to have expressed the view that the 9/11 attacks were a plot by the US" to being "deeply into" conspiracy theories. I don't know if the blogger has seen some other evidence that the men held such views, but it seems inaccurate to say they were 'deeply into the 9/11 conspiracies' when the Report itself is ambiguous about whether they actually were."The 7/7 bombers were deeply into the 9/11 conspiracies that it was all a Zionist plot to discredit Islam, we're told, and it fits. And conspiracy theories are rife, still amongst some angry young Muslim men."
I have a couple of problems with this issue. Firstly, the Report has contradicted itself here, by first saying one of the men regarded the 9/11 bombers (actually I thought they were hijackers, and that there were definitely no bombs in the WTC but a trivial detail, I guess) as martyrs, then saying the men apparently didn't believe 9/11 had happened that way. Saying that the men 'seemed to have' expressed a view, is not the same as having certain knowledge that they did.
Secondly, if they did express this view, and felt that the 9/11 attacks were actually prepetrated by the US in order to discredit Islam, why commit an act which demonstrates an ideology that they themselves didn't believe in, that they believed had been contrived by the US?
If they really were 'conspiracy theorists' who believed that 9/11 was an inside job, there is simply no logic in reinforcing the stereotype of the 'suicide bomber' that they believed the US had fabricated. Labelling the 7/7 suspects as 'conspiracy theorists' doesn't really lend weight to the argument that they did what they believed the 9/11 hijackers didn't do.
Is anyone able to make sense of this?
By the way, I would have asked the blogger this via a comment on the post itself, but it is stated later that she doesn't want to hear from us because we're 'conspiraloons.' Since there is no way I can discuss this issue with her, and try and get some clarification as to what she meant when she mentioned this in her post, I was wondering if there was anyone here who could explain to me if I've misunderstood something fundamental here, or is this really as nonsensical as it appears to me? If 'conspiracy theorists' don't believe that terrorist attacks are carried out by extremist Muslims, then it doesn't make sense that a 'conspiracy theorist' would also be an extremist Muslim and carry out a terrorist attack. Why would the Official Report mention that some of the men were sceptical about the 9/11 attacks as some way of endorsing the likelihood that they were suicide bombers?