Hamburg Cell questions

[Hyperviolet]

Okay, just watched The Hamburg Cell and had a few quick questions that maybe some of you could fill me in on.

Atta stated that the White House was to be struck off the list of targets as it was too difficult a target. Yet, the Pentagon remained a target. Can someone explain to me what was too difficult about the White House?

Atta was reported to have gone to bars and bought drinks (giving generous tips also). Was the drinks he was buying alcoholic? If so, isn't that against his faith?

A lot of the details seems to be very intimate. Example being the meeting with Bin Laden and what was said between the men. What is the source for these details?

If any you people can help me out on these questions i'd be very grateful.

Thanks!
:)

[ref]

This is my earlier reply to a similar question concerning hijackers' lap dances and drinking:

While this kind of behaviour seems rather suspicious, a deeper look reveals that terrorists do not always act like one would expect.

Different sources report the following:

“Ziad Jarrah came from a secular Muslim family that was easygoing -- the men drank whiskey and the women wore short skirts about town and bikinis at the beach.”

“Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was a frequent visitor to Manila's red light district, including its karaoke bars and mirrored go-go clubs, where he introduced himself to women as a wealthy businessman from Qatar.”

“They must have assumed that the purifying nature of their approaching martyrdom gave them some sort of cosmic dispensation.”

"Their sense of dispensation was derived directly from the idea that they were engaged in jihad (holy struggle). Now you know, in jihad there are certain liberties allowed. I believe they took the liberty of making their own interpretation of these dispensations or liberties granted to the one making jihad."

It would seem, that so-called errant western behaviour does not exclusively mean that you cannot be a terrorist at the same time. Their suicide mission might be interpreted as a purifying event, making their earlier behaviour less damaging. And you have to keep in mind, that Islamic Law condemns the killing of innocent civilians. They were not following the strict rules of their religion there either.

http://www.911myths.com/html/strip_clubs.html (http://www.911myths.com/html/strip_clubs.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...042801315.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801315.html)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...906442,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,906442,00.html)
http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html (http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html)

[Kryptos]

Atta stated that the White House was to be struck off the list of targets as it was too difficult a target. Yet, the Pentagon remained a target. Can someone explain to me what was too difficult about the White House?



The White House is a fairly small building -- 55,000 square feet, tucked in a more "wooded" setting.

The Capitol is a much much larger building, and the Pentagon is the largest office building in the world (~6.5 million square feet). Both stand out much more as landmarks, more easily spotted from a distance, in the air.

[Hyperviolet]

This is my earlier reply to a similar question concerning hijackers' lap dances and drinking:

While this kind of behaviour seems rather suspicious, a deeper look reveals that terrorists do not always act like one would expect.

Different sources report the following:

“Ziad Jarrah came from a secular Muslim family that was easygoing -- the men drank whiskey and the women wore short skirts about town and bikinis at the beach.”

“Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was a frequent visitor to Manila's red light district, including its karaoke bars and mirrored go-go clubs, where he introduced himself to women as a wealthy businessman from Qatar.”

“They must have assumed that the purifying nature of their approaching martyrdom gave them some sort of cosmic dispensation.”

"Their sense of dispensation was derived directly from the idea that they were engaged in jihad (holy struggle). Now you know, in jihad there are certain liberties allowed. I believe they took the liberty of making their own interpretation of these dispensations or liberties granted to the one making jihad."

It would seem, that so-called errant western behaviour does not exclusively mean that you cannot be a terrorist at the same time. Their suicide mission might be interpreted as a purifying event, making their earlier behaviour less damaging. And you have to keep in mind, that Islamic Law condemns the killing of innocent civilians. They were not following the strict rules of their religion there either.

http://www.911myths.com/html/strip_clubs.html (http://www.911myths.com/html/strip_clubs.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...042801315.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801315.html)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...906442,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,906442,00.html)
http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html (http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html)





Thanks Ref!

You answer is sufficient indeed, however, i must say for radicalised islamists : obeying the faith rigidly i thought would have been a given.

[Hyperviolet]

The White House is a fairly small building -- 55,000 square feet, tucked in a more "wooded" setting.

The Capitol is a much much larger building, and the Pentagon is the largest office building in the world (~6 million square feet). Both stand out much more as landmarks, more easily spotted from a distance, in the air.

Understandable. However, from the low trajectory attack of the pentagon it would seem no easier than the White House. Unless, of course, these details were not already conceived among the men.

[Kryptos]

Understandable. However, from the low trajectory attack of the pentagon it would seem no easier than the White House. Unless, of course, these details were not already conceived among the men.

The White House is surrounded by numerous other buildings, least of which include the 555 ft tall Washington Monument.

Large image here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WashMonument_WhiteHouse.jpg


http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/images/thumb/2/24/Dcview.jpg/400px-Dcview.jpg

[The Doc]

The White house would have the same low trajectory as the Pentagon. Neither buildings are particularly high.

However, the Pentagon is a much clearer path with far less surrounding buildings and landmarks.

It makes sense that someone would target the Pentagon over the White House.

[njslim]

The Pentagon is the largest (by volume) office building in the world. It lies
in a valley near the Potomac. There are no trees around to conceal or
obstruct access to it. Even then the plane clipped a number of light poles
on the 395 Beltway as it came in. The White House by contrast is relatively
small and is surrounded by trees making it difficult to see and hit. The Capital
has a large white dome 160 ft over ground level and is positioned on a hill, the "highest" in Washington, making it easy to see and target.

[Kryptos]

Also, the West Wing is not in the main part of the White House.

[MikeW]

Re: the White House being a target, Yosri Fouda tells us: "The reconaissance teams also recommended that 'we forget about the White House for navigation reasons'. The comparatively small building was not easily spotted from the air and was known to be well protected, so it was replaced by another spectacular target: Capitol Hill". [Page 127, Masterminds of Terror]

[ref]

It is much easier to spot The Pentagon from the air, than The White House. Both are present on this aerial image. Try to spot them both. When using airplanes in the attacks, it's easy to see which target of those two is easier to spot from the air, and which they would choose.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_1363946556e3b1226e.jpg ('http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=5930')

[Hyperviolet]

Thanks guys, much appreciated.


Any one know about the other question regarding sources?

[Kryptos]

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/images/thumb/3/39/Dcview-ww.jpg/400px-Dcview-ww.jpg


And, of course the President was reading about Pet Goats in Sarasota, Florida.

[Kryptos]

Thanks guys, much appreciated.


Any one know about the other question regarding sources?

Not sure what meeting you are referring to, but there are numerous video tapes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15082633/

Also, Yosri Fouda (Al Jazeera journalist) interviewed KSM and Ramzi Binalshibh in 2002.

[Kryptos]

The Hamburg Cell is a semi-fictionalized dramatic account, so maybe some of the details of what was said are fictionalized.

http://www.hbo.com/apps/schedule/ScheduleServlet?ACTION_DETAIL=DETAIL&FOCUS_ID=612786

[Pardalis]

The Pentagon looks more like a target from the air doesn't it?

[T.A.M.]

Takfir....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfir

Used by certain islamic extremists as a cover I believe...

The act of "acting like infidels or Kafir", for the greater cause of Allah.

TAM:)

[Hyperviolet]

Takfir....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfir

Used by certain islamic extremists as a cover I believe...

The act of "acting like infidels or Kafir", for the greater cause of Allah.

TAM:)


Very informative, TAM.
Thank you.

Now - another point (well more non-point actually lol) stuck out to me. I don't know it just caught me off guard. Atta went to Pizza Hut for his last meal before Martydom? Seems like a very strange choice of destination, i thought a kind of ritual would have taken place saying prayers. Halal meat maybe, not pizza hut lol.

[Pardalis]

Where does it say in the Qu'ran that killing innocent people is alright?

[T.A.M.]

got a source for the Pizza Hut last meal quote? Like to analyze/critque/read it. Thanks...

TAM:)

[Hyperviolet]

Where does it say in the Qu'ran that killing innocent people is alright?

Pardalis,

I have virtually no knowledge in the Qu'ran, however, i have been told that killing in the name of Allah, or in holy war is permitted. Is this true, i have no idea.


Maybe someone can clarify?

[Hyperviolet]

got a source for the Pizza Hut last meal quote? Like to analyze/critque/read it. Thanks...

TAM:)


http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hz0S4Vwzb5c


If you skip to about the 8 minute mark, TAM.

First i have heard of it, actually.
:)

[aggle-rithm]

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/images/thumb/3/39/Dcview-ww.jpg/400px-Dcview-ww.jpg


And, of course the President was reading about Pet Goats in Sarasota, Florida.

If Gore had been elected, he would have been reading Plato's "Republic" to the kiddies.

[aggle-rithm]

Pardalis,

I have virtually no knowledge in the Qu'ran, however, i have been told that killing in the name of Allah, or in holy war is permitted. Is this true, i have no idea.


Maybe someone can clarify?

Any rigid religious code can be distorted to justify any action. It's been done throughout history.

It especially helps if the code of ethics is written in a book filled with contradictions.

[T.A.M.]

at work...cannot view...but thanks...

Without actually watching it, my initial response to the suggestion would be that they would choose to have what they like as their last meal...not sure. Certainly, at that point, the whole Takfir element of acting like the Kafir would be out the window, so I agree you would think they would have something more ritualistic, but I am no expert on pre-martyrdom meals etc...

TAM:)

[The Doc]

Where does it say in the Qu'ran that killing innocent people is alright?

I haven't read over this, but found it in a Google search. It may be quotes out of context, I'm not sure.

Just providing a reference point:
http://www.wvinter.net/~haught/Koran.html

[Pardalis]

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/100401.htm
8/9:00 pm Sometime between 8:00 pm and 9:00 pm, two Middle Eastern males were seen at Pizza Hut, 415 Maine Mall Road, South Portland, Maine, for approximately fifteen (15) minutes.

Not what I would call hard evidence that they actually ate at Pizza Hut.

Did they just have a coke and fries? Was it actually them in the first place?

Wow, not much to build a conspiracy on...

[T.A.M.]

Were the two MIDDLE EASTERN MALES positively identified as Atta and another of the hijackers?

TAM:)

Edit: Would the FBI have not obtained purchase info from the Pizza Hut? Unless they paid in cash, you would have a paper trail from the store confirming who they were.

TAM:)

[Pardalis]

It's not because they're the Hamburg cell that they actually ate hamburgers at Pizza Hut.

[insert laughs]

[Hyperviolet]

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/100401.htm


Not what I would call hard evidence that they actually ate at Pizza Hut.

Did they just have a coke and fries? Was it actually them in the first place?

Wow, not much to build a conspiracy on...

Errr... build a conspiracy on? I am doing no such thing.

This is a critical thinking forum, you are supposed to look at such oddities (regardless of point of view) and discuss them.

[Gravy]

The 9/11 Commission report, page 253, indicates that they ate pizza that night. I like pizza and think it would make a fine last dinner. Just not Pizza Hut pizza. (BTW, not a lot of Halal food stores in Portland, Maine, I reckon.)

[Hyperviolet]

The 9/11 Commission report, page 253, indicates that they ate pizza that night. I like pizza and think it would make a fine last dinner. Just not Pizza Hut pizza. (BTW, not a lot of Halal food stores in Portland, Maine, I reckon.)

lol gotta love how specific you are

[Pardalis]

The 9/11 Commission report, page 253, indicates that they ate pizza that night. I like pizza and think it would make a fine last dinner. Just not Pizza Hut pizza. (BTW, not a lot of Halal food stores in Portland, Maine, I reckon.)

They got delivery pizza?

ETA: I just read the page, they only state that they ate pizza, according to the FBI report of the middle eastern males.

Again, they could as well just have ordered a coke and fries, and it might not be them at all.

[Brainster]

I'm a little suspicious of the accounts of drinking and other carousing. Some of the reported drinking incidents conflict with other timelines about where the hijackers were at that moment (which the CTists claim shows the use of doubles). At least some of the more lurid stories (cocaine, pork, strippers) came from Amanda Keller, who has admitted she was lying about having a relationship with Atta. The 9-11 Commission report indicates two of the muscle hijackers were known to drink, but one of them had repented recently.

[beachnut]

Atta stated that the White House was to be struck off the list of targets as it was too difficult a target. Yet, the Pentagon remained a target. Can someone explain to me what was too difficult about the White House?

Atta was reported to have gone to bars and bought drinks (giving generous tips also). Was the drinks he was buying alcoholic? If so, isn't that against his faith?

Thanks!
:)
The White House is too small. Hard to find at 300 mph and then speed up to 600 mph. Pentagon is the largest building for miles, cannot miss. WTC towers stick up you can see them from far away. It would be hard to line up on the white house, there are trees etc, you need to fly and try it. White House does not stand out like the 1300 foot WTC towers, or the 1300 foot wide Pentagon. The core of the White House is only 168x80, kind of smaller than the bullet. You have 1300x207 WTC, 1300x1300 Pentagon, and you have 180x240 CapitolBuilding core. These guys were planning for years, I bet they could not hit the White House on flight simulator. (good sources and same ideas above)

Do you know any people who drink who are in a religion that does not drink? You are asking why suicide terrorist drink? I think being a terrorist is enough to prove they are twisted enough to drink when ever they want. Why would he break his religions drinking rules? Know anyone who breaks his or hers religion rules? Did you drink before you were legal?

[Hyperviolet]

The White House is too small. Hard to find at 300 mph and then speed up to 600 mph. Pentagon is the largest building for miles, cannot miss. WTC towers stick up you can see them from far away. It would be hard to line up on the white house, there are trees etc, you need to fly and try it. White House does not stand out like the 1300 foot WTC towers, or the 1300 foot wide Pentagon. The core of the White House is only 168x80, kind of smaller than the bullet. You have 1300x207 WTC, 1300x1300 Pentagon, and you have 180x240 CapitolBuilding core. These guys were planning for years, I bet they could not hit the White House on flight simulator. (good sources and same ideas above)

Do you know any people who drink who are in a religion that does not drink? You are asking why suicide terrorist drink? I think being a terrorist is enough to prove they are twisted enough to drink when ever they want. Why would he break his religions drinking rules? Know anyone who breaks his or hers religion rules? Did you drink before you were legal?

Cheers for the info, Beachnut.

As for the second comment.
I do know many people who break their religions rules. However, these people don't know anything about Christianity (their religion). Most christians i know don't even bother to go to mass, let alone kill themselves for their beliefs. Being fundamentalist and radical i would assume the hijackers would adopt a more strict lifestyle in accordance to their faith.

[T.A.M.]

unless your current is in the microampere range, then even a resistance of 0.8 Ohms would be significant...lol

TAM:)

[Kryptos]

Ziad Jarrah was from a "secular Muslim" family that "was easygoing -- the men drank whiskey and the women wore short skirts about town and bikinis at the beach." He had a girlfriend and was not particularly religious, though became more religious while in Hamburg. [1]

All of the hijackers were given a manual, "Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants" which gave instructions on how to behave and blend-in. The manual says anyone willing to "undergo martyrdom" should be "able to act, pretend and mask himself" behind enemy lines. [2]

-Do not address others with traditional Islamic greetings in which Allah's name is invoked.

-Do not cause trouble in your neighborhood. Do not park in no-parking zones.

-Do not live near police stations.

-Do not appear to be overly inquisitive.

-Burn letters immediately after reading them and get rid of the ashes, too.

-Rent apartments "in newly developed areas where people don't know each other."

-Use codes when talking on the telephone.

-Try not to be "chatty and talkative" in public.

-Maintain an appearance "that does not indicate Islamic orientation (beard, toothpick, book, long shirt, small Koran)."

Drinking alcohol is another way for them to "blend in".

Other behavior:
- Majed Moqued was spotted perusing adult videos in two Laurel, Md., stores. [2]

- While in San Diego, Al-Hamzi posted a personal ad on the internet, though got no responses.


[1] "The 9/11 Hijackers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801315_pf.html)'", The Washington Post September 14, 2001.
[2] "Terror Manual Is an A-B-C Primer for Attackers (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34874,00.html)", Associated Press September 21, 2001.

[aggle-rithm]

Do you know any people who drink who are in a religion that does not drink? You are asking why suicide terrorist drink? I think being a terrorist is enough to prove they are twisted enough to drink when ever they want. Why would he break his religions drinking rules? Know anyone who breaks his or hers religion rules? Did you drink before you were legal? [/COLOR]

Q: Why do you invite TWO Baptists on a fishing trip?
A: Cause if you invite only one, he'll drink all your beer.

[aggle-rithm]

Ziad Jarrah was from a "secular Muslim" family that "was easygoing -- the men drank whiskey and the women wore short skirts about town and bikinis at the beach." He had a girlfriend and was not particularly religious, though became more religious while in Hamburg. [1]


I think religion, nationalism, and idealism are far more intertwined in the Middle East than most westerners realize. They come together in a mush of ideologies and are impossible to distinguish from one another. That would explain how someone who is not particularly religious could give his life for "Islam" -- Because "Islam", as he sees it, is not merely a religion, but a social cause.

[CurtC]

Concerning the choice of the Pentagon as the target, remember how the attacks were done. The on-board nav systems were used to navigate the planes to the general vicinity of the targets, then when the planes were within a few miles, the pilot took over and brought it in visually. The three targets that were struck were all very easy to spot visually from miles away. The White House would be extremely hard to find with this approach technique.

[Hyperviolet]

unless your current is in the microampere range, then even a resistance of 0.8 Ohms would be significant...lol

TAM:)

Aw shhoosh, TAM.

lol only on the JREF forum would you receive a comment like that :D

[gumboot]

As others have pointed out, the "unislamic" behaviour of the hijackers is somewhat meaningless.

Here's my response to one of DRG's claims that Atta ate pork, drank alcohol, and enjoyed strippers:

(Most of this thanks to MikeW's 911myths.com)



2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta — such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances — that is in tension with the Commission's claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).

The report states:

When Atta arrived in Germany, he appeared religious, but not fanatically so. This would change, especially as his tendency to assert leadership became increasingly pronounced. (pg.160)

However:

After leaving Afghanistan, the hijackers made clear efforts to avoid appearing radical. Once back in Hamburg, they distanced themselves from conspicuous extremists like Zammar, whom they knew attracted unwanted attention from the authorities. They also changed their appearance and behaviour. Atta wore Western clothing, shaved his beard, and no longer attended extremist mosques. (pg.167)

The word “Atta” appears 293 times in the Commission Report, however there is no reference to a fondness for alcohol, pork, or lap dances.


The claim inherent in the allegation is that Mohamed Atta had a fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances.


This claim immediately poses a problem as it relies on Atta’s personal opinion. “Fondness” is entirely subjective and cannot be measured. However, for the moment I will consider the claim that Atta drank alcohol, ate pork, and received lap dances.

These claims originate from a single source – an interview with Amanda Keller – an American who claimed to be Mohammed Atta’s girlfriend in Florida. The interview was conducted by Mad Cow Productions researcher Daniel Hopsicker who alleges that Atta was running a heroin smuggling operation for Osama Bin Laden. The findings of Hopsicker’s research were published in his book Welcome To Terrorland, and this appears to be the only source for the claims made about Atta.

The interview can be watched here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7746174590105525480&q=amanda+keller).

It’s worth noting that Ms Keller makes no reference to pork or lap dances in this interview, and recounts that “Mohamed” frowned on her for drinking alcohol in public.

Similar general claims of drinking and un-Muslim-like behaviour were made about the hijackers. Some examples include:

The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/10/06/wbin106.xml)

Mad Cow Productions (http://www.madcowprod.com/issue09.html)

Free Arab Voice (http://www.freearabvoice.org/NabilaOnAttacks.htm)

The Boston Herald (http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/bostonherald101001.html)

Before the validity of these claims is examined, it is important to determine their significance. Although the allegation contains the inherent claim that Mohamed Atta had a fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances, it also contains an implied claim.

This is that Mohamed was not in fact, a religious fanatic as the Commission Report claims, and therefore did not carry out the September 11 attacks.

One of the flaws in this line of reasoning is that Religious Fanatics do not necessarily follow closely the religious teachings of their religion. The Qur’an states:

Whosoever kills an innocent human being, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and whosoever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. (5:32)

Clearly Islamic Terrorists who indiscriminately kill hundreds of civilians are in direct violation of their religion.

We have already seen from the Report that the hijackers made a conscious effort to blend in with other westerners – dressing smartly, shaving off their beards, and distancing themselves from other Islamic extremist groups.

Such “blending in” has been a standard aspect of covert military and intelligence operations for centuries. The Romans often employed spies, who would infiltrate the communities of their enemies and live amongst them, adapting their customs.

This appears to be an idea that some Islamic Extremists have embraced:

Atta has been associated with a sect called Al Takfir wal Hijra, run by al Quaeda second-in-command Ayman Al-Zawahiri. This is an extreme fundamentalist sect, however...

"A major element of Takfir religious practice is subterfuge. The threat of Takfir is that its cold, heartless killers could easily be the boy or girl next door. Takfir Wal Hijra members are permitted to disregard the injunctions of Islamic law in order to blend into infidel societies.

In other words, Takfirs can have sex with loose women, drink alcohol, eat pork and do whatever else they feel is appropriate to advance their mission...

Mohammed Atta, although puritanical in his behavior, was believed to be Takfiri. He's not the only al Qaeda operative you could point the finger at. Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed went to discos, drank alcohol and dated call girls. Yousef in particular is renowned for being generally unIslamic and non-observant of prayers and fasting. Although no one has suggested openly that Yousef and KSM were Takfiri, it's hardly a stretch".

Source (http://www.rotten.com/library/history/terrorist-organizations/al-takfir-wal-hijra)



Other sources paint a similar picture:

Here (http://www.answers.com/topic/takfir-wal-hijra)

Here (http://www.norwalkadvocate.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-embassyplot-lat,0,3646484.story?page=1&coll=sns-newsnation-headlines)

Here (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,182746,00.html)

Other sources of evidence suggest it wasn’t just this particular extremist sect whom followed these principles:

...In the mountain of documents left behind in al-Qaedas’ training camps in Afghanistan, one Yemeni, Khalid, wrote to his brother describing the people he had just joined:

I am in a whirlpool of contradictions. You cannot trust anyone here. Imagine that I might have to hide the copy of the Koran you gave me for fear it might get stolen like my watch. They train us here on how to mix with the Christians and how to emulate their life style. We have to learn how to drink alcohol and to shave off our beards.

Al-Majallh issue no. 1188, 23 November 2002, p. 24
cited page 20, Masterminds of Terror, Yousri Fouda and Nick Fielding


An Al Qaeda training manual recovered from the house of Nazih al Wadih Raghie by the Manchester Metropolitan Police on May 10, 2000 reflects the notion of “blending in”.

An Important Question: How can a Muslim spy live among enemies if he maintains his Islamic characteristics? How can he perform his duties to Allah and not want to appear Muslim?

Concerning the issue of clothing and appearance (appearance of true religion), Ibn Taimia - may Allah have mercy on him - said, "If a Muslim is in a combat or godless area, he is not obligated to have a different appearance from [those around him ].The [Muslim] man may prefer or even be obligated to look like them, provided his action brings a religious benefit of preaching to them, learning their secrets and informing Muslims, preventing their harm, or some other beneficial goal."

Resembling the polytheist in religious appearance is a kind of "necessity permits the forbidden” even though they [forbidden acts] are basically prohibited. As for the visible duties, like fasting and praying, he can fast by using any justification not to eat with them [polytheist]. As for prayer, the book (Al-Manhaj Al-Haraki Lissira Al-Nabawiya)quotes Al-Bakhari that "he [the Moslem ]may combine the noon and afternoon [prayers], sunset and evening [prayers]. That is based on the fact that the prophet -Allah bless and keep him -combined [prayers] in Madina without fear or hesitation."

However the document adds:

Though scholars have disagreed about the interpretation of that tradition, it is possible - though Allah knows best -that the Moslem spy combines [prayers ].It is noted, however, that it is forbidden to do the unlawful, such as drinking wine or fornicating. There is nothing that permits those.

The Al Qaeda Manual
Eleventh Lesson: Espionage (1) Intelligence Gathering Using Open Methods (http://www.disastercenter.com/terror/Al_Qaeda_Manual_ELEVENTH_LESSON.htm)


Other high profile Islamic Terrorist plots indicate blending in may be commonplace.

Such as this article about one of the Madrid Bombers:

Despite his reputation for fanaticism at the Madrid mosque he attended, Ahmidan also frequented discotheques and bars. He struck his Spanish neighbors as friendly and flashy. They remember him zooming by on a motorcycle with his long-haired girlfriend, a Spanish woman with a taste for revealing outfits.

Source (http://www.cannabis.net/articles/assass.html)

Even the Muslim world can find possible explanations for such behaviour. S. Abdallah Schleifer, the publisher and senior editor of TBS Journal (www.tbsjournal.com), and al Jazeeras Yosri Fouda give their thoughts here:

SAS: My own instinct is that just as they inhabited a psychic or psychological state that convinced them they were reliving the Prophet's experiences at the very moment they were about to violate both the very strict shari'a ("Islamic law") rules governing war and the Prophet's canonic sayings condemning the killing of civilians, so they must have assumed that the purifying nature of their approaching martyrdom gave them some sort of cosmic dispensation.

YF: Speaking of dispensation and states of mind, when I was in Karachi waiting to meet up with Ramzi and Khalid, my contact called me at the hotel I was staying at to arrange a meeting time. Since it was Friday I suggested we meet in the mosque either before or after the prayer and he said to me "No, no, no! Don't leave the hotel." And I said, "But it's Friday and there are the prayers," and he said, "No, no, no! God will forgive you." But I think their sense of dispensation was derived directly from the idea that they were engaged in jihad ("holy struggle"). Now you know, in jihad there are certain liberties allowed.

SAS: You mean like not having to pray in a congregational manner if that puts the believers in danger, or being allowed to say one's prayers on horseback if on guard or patrol and not having to dismount and pray, as one usually does, on the ground.

YF: Right. Well, I believe they took the liberty of making their own interpretation of these dispensations or liberties granted to the one making jihad.

Source (http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html)


It’s clearly not as simple as Dr Griffin presents it to be. Further investigation of the specific claims made about the hijackers suggests the argument may be weaker than it appears.

Soon after initial reports linking Amanda Keller and Atta, Ms Keller claimed that the man she had dated was another student at the flying school also called Mohamed.

Keller said comments attributed to her in the Herald-Tribune on Saturday, saying that Atta lived in her apartment, were wrong. She said that it was this unidentified fifth man, also named Mohammed, that stayed in her home.

Keller again changed her story for her December 2002 interview with Daniel Hopsicker, however after the interview she retracted her claims.

In September 2006 the Herald Tribune reported that the FBI had confirmed Amanda Keller had not known Atta.

But the former Venice stripper now says her boyfriend was another flight student not connected to 9/11. And, for the first time, federal investigators say she's right.

"There's nothing there to corroborate the relationship between the two," a New York-based FBI counterterrorism agent said recently after reviewing 9/11 case files.

…

Among other things, the government checked Atta's phone records and found the two had never called each other.

Source (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060910/NEWS/609100466/1007/BUSINESS)


Other accounts suggest discrepancies in Ms Keller’s testimony. She has stated that she only ever knew Mohamed by the name “Mohamed Arajaki” – even spelling out the name in the interview. Although the 9/11 hijackers often employed aliases, there is no evidence that Atta ever used the alias “Arajaki”, and the FBI did not list it as one of his aliases in any of their press statements.

Other eye witness accounts of Ms Keller and her partner “Mohamed” further suggest it may not have been the leader of the 9/11 plot, for example Tony and Vonnie LaConca, the couple who owned the house rented by Keller and Mohamed. They were interviewed by the Sun Herald.

An FDLE agent working in conjunction with the FBI arrived at the LaConca home around 10:30 a.m. Thursday and questioned the couple for two hours concerning a man they knew only as "Mohamed."
The couple told the agent the man was about 25, 5 feet 10 inches, 160 pounds, had "dark, perfect" skin, and was clean cut and "very polite."
"He was a very handsome guy," Vonnie LaConca said in an interview. "He had beautiful, unblemished skin."

Is this Mohamed the 32 year old 5 foot 8 Atta? Perhaps not. The FDLE agent showed them photographs of four suspected hijackers;

"The first photo they showed us was the pilot who crashed into the first building," Vonnie LaConca said. "It was not Mohamed or his friend. But the last picture they showed us was very close, but I could not say 100 percent that it was him."

Source (http://www.sun-herald.com/NewsArchive2/091401/tp4ch14.htm)

The article also suggests this Mohamed was training for his commercial pilot’s license in 2001 – weeks after Mohamed Atta acquired his, in December 2001.

And it appears this other Mohamed may actually exist, with evidence coming – oddly enough – from Mad Cow Productions.

A mysterious French-Arab man resurfaced last week who authorities had dubbed the ‘5th terrorist pilot’ and a ‘Second’ Mohamed in Venice, FL. In an email, he alleged that a number of eyewitnesses, including the girl who had lived with him, had all mistaken him... for Mohamed Atta.
It was he they'd known in Venice, not the terrorist ringleader, he asserted. And he suggested the confusion might owe something to their common name, "Mohamed."

Source (http://www.madcowprod.com/05022005.html)

There’s certainly plenty of doubt that Mohamed Atta was the man Amanda Keller knew, which would undermine accusations that he in particular enjoyed drinking, pork, and lap dances.

But what about other articles? At the head of this section we saw numerous articles recounting three of the hijackers – including Atta – enjoying alcohol and lap dances at a strip club called the Pink Pony. But what does the original article, in USA Today, say?

MIAMI (AP) — The night before terrorists struck New York and Washington, three men spewed anti-American sentiments in a bar and talked of impending bloodshed, according to a strip club manager interviewed by the FBI. John Kap, manager of the Pink Pony and Red Eyed Jack's Sports Bar in Daytona Beach, said the men made the claims to a bartender and a patron. "They were talking about what a bad place America is. They said 'Wait 'til tomorrow. America is going to see bloodshed,"' Kap said.

Source (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/14/miami-club.htm)

There’s a number of things to note in this version of events. First, the bar manager is recounting events that other people witnessed – a bartender and another patron. This is second hand information. Secondly, in this article the bar manager makes no mention of the three men being any of the nineteen hijackers.

There are other examples of the hijackers drinking as well, such as this story from The Telegraph:

Tony Amos, the manager of Shuckums Oyster Bar and Restaurant in Hollywood, just north of Miami, was interviewed by the FBI and he and his barman and a waitress all identified Atta and his cousin as some hard drinkers who propped up the bar last Friday.

Atta's bill for three hours of vodka drinking came to $48 (£33). When he drunkenly disputed the charge, Mr Amos intervened. "Of course I can pay the bill," Atta told him. "I'm an airline pilot."

Source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/14/whunt114.xml)

That certainly supports the contention that Atta enjoyed alcohol, but it’s not the only version of events. The Washington Post recounted the story a little differently.

Last Friday night, Atta, Shehhi and an unidentified man spent 3 1/2 hours at a sports bar, Shuckums, in Hollywood, Fla. While Atta played video games, the other two had about five drinks each and appeared resistant to paying the $48 tab. The manager, Tony Amos, recalled yesterday that he inquired whether they could not afford the bill. Shehhi "looked at me with an arrogant look," Amos said. "He pulled out a wad of cash and put it on the bar table and said, 'There is no money issue. I am an airline pilot.' "

Source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A28194-2001Sep13&notFound=true)

The story is a little different in this version, and Atta doesn’t appear to drink at all.

We know the Commission Report didn’t mention these activities by the hijackers, but Dr Griffin’s allegation is that these things really did happen, and that by not mentioning them the Commission were lying by omission. However on closer inspection, these stories don’t seem to have much weight behind them after all.


The inherent claim that Mohamed Atta had a fondness for alcohol, pork and lap dances is rejected.

-Gumboot

[Slayhamlet]

If Gore had been elected, he would have been reading Plato's "Republic" to the kiddies.

And, what is more, in the original Greek.

[Slayhamlet]

One of the flaws in this line of reasoning is that Religious Fanatics do not necessarily follow closely the religious teachings of their religion. The Qur’an states:

Quote:Whosoever kills an innocent human being, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and whosoever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. (5:32)

Clearly Islamic Terrorists who indiscriminately kill hundreds of civilians are in direct violation of their religion.

I think this is a bit overstated. Do we know the whole context of the word "innocent" here in this verse of the Koran, or rather the context of the original Arabic word that has been translated to "innocent" in this particular English translation of the Koran? There is rarely one-to-one correspondence of meaning between two roughly equivalent conceptual adjectives in separate languages. I don't know what shades of meaning the Arabic word might have which could possibly validate (in terms of Koranic textual interpretation) a Muslim's targeting of civilian New Yorkers. Even the use of the English word "innocent" to us in a Western, post-Enlightenment frame of mind could mean something else entirely to a fundamentalist Muslim. To many of them all American citizens are godless heathens who through taxes support a military which they feel is oppressing them.

[LashL]

Hyperviolet,

This is based solely upon my personal experience so it is not in any way presented as or intended to be representative of followers of Islam as a whole, but I thought I would share it because it is an example of the "unislamic" behaviour of some who are, on the surface, strict adherents to their faith.

During the few years that I travelled around the world working for a charter air freight company, I had occasion to fly with various and sundry flight crews from all over the world, including some with devout Muslim crews. One in particular that stands out in my memory was a ZAS Airline of Egypt crew. Among the flight crew, the first officer, the flight engineer, and the loadmaster were particularly devout and would conduct their prayers on the tarmac, in airport lounges, anywhere and everywhere really, in keeping with their faith. On particularly long flights, the three of them would take turns laying their prayer rugs down on a tiny patch of available floor space in the cockpit or in the galley (since they could not all be absent from their posts at the same time while in flight and since there was not sufficient room for them to do so all at once, in any event) to conduct their prayers in keeping with the five times a day schedule that they adhered to.

Yet, when we were on the ground between flights for a few days, those same devout followers engaged in all manner of "unislamic" behaviour, including drinking, carousing, eating whatever they felt like, picking up women, going to strip clubs, and in one instance, two of them hired prostitutes.

I asked them about the apparent contradiction at the time because it was rather surprising to me even then (in the mid 80s), and they told me that it was accepted that they had dispensation from the strict rules to which they purportedly adhere when they were away from home. Thus, they felt perfectly justified in their actions and were adamant that their actions were not contradictory to their purported following of their faith.

As a result, I do not find it surprising in the least to hear that the terrorists responsible for the events of September 11, 2001 may have engaged in similar "nonislamic" behaviour while in the U.S. despite their commitment to their faith.

As I said at the outset, I write this only as a glimpse into a personal experience related to the subject matter and do not purport that it is representative of any particular group as a whole, but there it is for what it's worth.

[gumboot]

I would imagine Radical Muslim terrorists are about as devout as medieval knights on the Crusades were devout Christians.

-Gumboot

[aggle-rithm]

Hyperviolet,

This is based solely upon my personal experience so it is not in any way presented as or intended to be representative of followers of Islam as a whole, but I thought I would share it because it is an example of the "unislamic" behaviour of some who are, on the surface, strict adherents to their faith.

During the few years that I travelled around the world working for a charter air freight company, I had occasion to fly with various and sundry flight crews from all over the world, including some with devout Muslim crews. One in particular that stands out in my memory was a ZAS Airline of Egypt crew. Among the flight crew, the first officer, the flight engineer, and the loadmaster were particularly devout and would conduct their prayers on the tarmac, in airport lounges, anywhere and everywhere really, in keeping with their faith. On particularly long flights, the three of them would take turns laying their prayer rugs down on a tiny patch of available floor space in the cockpit or in the galley (since they could not all be absent from their posts at the same time while in flight and since there was not sufficient room for them to do so all at once, in any event) to conduct their prayers in keeping with the five times a day schedule that they adhered to.

Yet, when we were on the ground between flights for a few days, those same devout followers engaged in all manner of "unislamic" behaviour, including drinking, carousing, eating whatever they felt like, picking up women, going to strip clubs, and in one instance, two of them hired prostitutes.

I asked them about the apparent contradiction at the time because it was rather surprising to me even then (in the mid 80s), and they told me that it was accepted that they had dispensation from the strict rules to which they purportedly adhere when they were away from home. Thus, they felt perfectly justified in their actions and were adamant that their actions were not contradictory to their purported following of their faith.

As I said at the outset, I write this only as a glimpse into a personal experience related to the subject matter and do not purport that it is representative of any particular group as a whole, but there it is for what it's worth.

I think the psychology isn't that different from Mafia hit men who are careful to go to Mass every Sunday.

[LashL]

I think the psychology isn't that different from Mafia hit men who are careful to go to Mass every Sunday.

Indeed. I meant, er, um, the Mafia does not exist.