Thursday, May 11, 2006

Is Operation Northwoods a Good Comp for 9-11?

I'm surprised I hadn't thought of this part earlier. Loose Change V2 makes a big deal out of Operation Northwoods from 0:51 to 2:30; indeed it leads off the film. Here's what Dylan Avery tells us about Operation Northwoods: (Transcript cribbed from this excellent debunking)

March 13th, 1962 Lyman Lemnitzer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presents a proposal to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, named Operation Northwoods.

The document proposed staging terrorist attacks in and around Guantanamo Bay,
To provide a pretext for military intervention in Cuba.

The plans included:
Starting rumors about Cuba using clandestine radio.
Landing friendly Cubans inside the base to stage attacks.
Starting riots at the main gate.
Blowing up ammunition inside the base, starting fires.
Sabotaging aircrafts and ships on the base.
Bombing the base with mortar shells.
Sinking a ship outside the entrance, staging funerals for mock victims.
Staging a terror campaign in Miami, Florida and Washington, DC.

And finally, destroying a drone aircraft, over Cuban waters. The passengers, federal agents in reality, would allegedly be college students on vacation. A plane at Eglin Air Force Base would be painted and numbered as a duplicate of a registered civil aircraft belonging to a CIA front in Miami. The duplicate would be substituted for the real plane and loaded with the passengers. The real plane would be converted into a drone. The two planes would randezvous south of Florida. The passenger laden plane would land at Eglin Air Force Base to evacuate its passengers and return to its original status. The drone would pick up the scheduled flight plan and, over Cuban waters, transmit a "mayday signal" before being blown up by remote control.


Okay, got that? Now try to overlay that on the conspiracy theory proposed in Loose Change. What are the elements of comparability?

1. Use of drone aircraft (apparently, see below)
2. The passengers are offloaded from the flight before it is sent to its final destination (again, apparently).
3. The purpose of the conspiracy was to provide a casus belli, to provide a justification for war.

What are the elements of incomparability?

1. Operation Northwoods did not involve killing thousands of Americans; indeed it involved killing nobody.
2. Operation Northwoods did not involve destroying American buildings worth billions of dollars.
3. Operation Northwoods is clearly a far milder plan, to address what was apparently a far graver danger (see 1 and 2 above). Yet despite this, it was not put into effect. Of course the CT crowd would have an answer for that: This just shows how evil Bush is!

Note: I say apparently above with regard to drone aircraft, because the film does not explicitly lay out the conspiracy theory. Do they really believe drones hit the World Trade Center? They don't say so in so many words; indeed the word drone only appears in this section. We also don't know what they think happened to the airplane used for Flight 93. They do claim at one point (1:05:00) that it was seen at Chicago's O'Hare Airport in 2003, but that's just nutty--you don't think United Airlines mechanics take detailed notes of every plane they service?

This is one of the other problems. Most people when they think about this conspiracy theory for a second say "But don't too many people know?" The response that Avery and company give on the road is that no, many people don't have to know. But if you buy this nutty theory about the plane used for Flight 93 still being in service, with the same identification number, then a whole lot of people at United Airlines would have to be aware of it, right?

14 Comments:

At 11 May, 2006 16:14, Blogger Realist06 said...

So....can you disagree with Dylan's assessment of Operation Northwoods or not?

 
At 11 May, 2006 18:22, Blogger Pat said...

What exactly is Dylan's assessment of Operation Northwoods? I can infer what he wants us to think (that it's a blueprint for 9-11), but he doesn't come right out and say it, does he?

The elements of comparability are limited. Even the drone airplane part is not specifically tied into 9-11.

 
At 12 May, 2006 08:51, Blogger Realist06 said...

It wasn't supposed to be tied to 9/11. The part about Northwoods was dead on accurate. It gives us an idea of what governments do to deceive people. It doesn't matter what Dylan's opininion on Northwoods is.

 
At 12 May, 2006 13:24, Blogger Pat said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 12 May, 2006 13:25, Blogger Pat said...

Uh, it gives you an idea what governments don't do to deceive people, right? Because it didn't happen, remember?

 
At 15 September, 2006 10:16, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

Operation Northwoods was a pretext to justify the invasion the soverign nation of Cuba. It is a classic example of state sponsored terrorism against its own citizens and military in order to garner public and foreign support for a geopolitical goal. I suspect it was addressed in the video to prove to viewers that the possiblity does exist to counter the "they would never do that to us" arguement.

 
At 15 September, 2006 10:28, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

"Operation Northwoods did not involve killing thousands of Americans; indeed it involved killing nobody."

Wrong, re-read the document. We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at refugees seeking haven in the United States. (key word is could be pointed, not would be). Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires --naphthalene. Could innocent U.S. civilians be killed? Yes. Are they willing to take that chance? yes!

..involved killing nobody...how can you actually state that based upon the info in the document.

And more..

Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations. Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires(any chance some of our own might be hit and killed? Yes. Are they willing to chance it, yes.)

 
At 15 September, 2006 10:37, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

"They do claim at one point (1:05:00) that it was seen at Chicago's O'Hare Airport in 2003, but that's just nutty--you don't think United Airlines mechanics take detailed notes of every plane they service?"

Perhaps you should address the attendent who recorded the flight number as being nutty or at least unfactual, not those who pointed it out in the film. The claim was by the flight attendent, not the producers. The producers simply brought greater publicity to the claim. And yes, I've read the response by the attendent.

 
At 13 February, 2009 13:22, Blogger Wakeywakey said...

SO, what happened to flight 93? It certainly wasn't in that little crater!

All four incidents were linked, no matter who the perpetrators were. That said, if you find out there's lies surrounding one of the incidents, it necessarily follows that we could be lied to about all of them. A: a plane did not hit the Pentagon, squeeze through a 16ft hole and vapourize 12 tons of titanium and steel.
B: There was no sign of United 93 in the crater; no drag marks, no bodies, no luggage, no wings ... nothing. Even the coroner said "I stopped being coroner after 20 minutes when I realised there was no bodies".
C:Building 7 WTC& was not only left out of the official report, the owner, Larry Silverstein said on TV "we decided to pull-it" aka demolision. Then, they tell us it collapse through fire!! the first builiding in history!. Google Mandarin Oriental Hotel fire and see how a steel building withstands fire!.
D:Regarding the explosion in the bottom of WTC. We were told that the jet fuel explosion travelled down the elevator shaft and exploded out into the lobby. FDNY stated ... how can a fire travel down a hermetically sealed elevator shaft, decide to get off at the lobby (there were several floors below) then explode with all the characteristics of a solid explosive. i.e. no soot, unidirectional blast damage, no scorching etc. Fuel explosions engulf, leave soot, set things on fire! there was none of that, just blast damage. How? it was a lie!

There were several first in history that day. First time in history two whole planes were vapourised on the ground. First time in history people had held long conversations on mobile phones on a plane that several years later bosted ..."you can now use your mobile ...gumph" they didn't think that through. The first time in history a steel structure tower collapsed through fire (three times in one day!), first time in history a Boeing 757 performed a 500 mph turn without falling out of the sky. The list goes on. Prove one of the above, and you bring every single event on that day into question.

Open your eyes, stop being so ignorant, stop sucking your flag become a real patriot.

"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot. "

 
At 06 November, 2009 09:48, Blogger Unknown said...

Conspiracy theories are for some just an excuse to be condescending and possibly make themselves feel superior to other people. A look at some of the comments here demonstrates that.

I would love to hear any CT'er give a concise and clear version of events leading up to and including the attacks that is more plausible than: Islamic extremists with the support of the OBL organization, many of them educated (not so-called "men in caves" as Alex Jones has called them) studied and blended in for years in western society, received flight training, all to martyr themselves in the name of jihad. With the intention being: to strike a blow against the Jewish center of the US because of our support of Israel and draw the US into a long, and drawn out war in Afghanistan. A country that has been the graveyard of invaders for hundreds of years.

Just any one of you, come up with a version of events including the who, what, where, when, why and hows of the 9/11 plot that makes more sense than that.

 
At 27 January, 2010 08:49, Blogger Ex Pluribus Unum said...

The document urged the Secretary of Defense to "support a campaign of terrorism within the United States as a necessary evil". None of that going on now, though; it's really Israel doing it, I suppose.

"We could sink a boatload of Cubans..." [People are quite obviously expendable in service to state security goals.]

"... the release of prepared documents... would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government."

"our military posture throughout execution of the plan will allow a rapid change from exercise to intervention if...."

But there weren't any exercises on 9/11, right?

 
At 18 February, 2010 19:58, Blogger Unknown said...

Are you kidding me! People wake the f-ck up! I believe if Bush and Cheney admitted to this act on 911, there would still be some idiot defending these criminals, Oh they were tortured and forced to admit it. Look, the evidence is coming in more and more each day, and it does not look good for the real guilty ones. Note to remember; Cheney admitted to the torturing of people to get confessions, that is a criminal act in itself, but I bet that is ok since they were "KNOWN" terrorist... 911 was an inside job...

 
At 05 April, 2010 23:26, Blogger JAM said...

Seriously? Even the Communist here doesn't think 9/11 was an inside job. THE COMMUNIST BUYS THE OFFICIAL STORY.

After all, logic trumps sentiment.

 
At 21 April, 2010 17:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Operation Northwoods is demented. What kind of people do we have that think like this? Right-wingers

 

Post a Comment

<< Home