19-03-2011, 04:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 19-03-2011, 04:24 PM by Charles Drago.)
And, I think, a brilliant one.
The False Sponors you catalog were "in" it to the degree that they could A) sow confusion among pre- and post-attack investigators (of all stripes), and B) provide specific, limited logistical support.
We are in agreement, I think, that these individuals/groups had absolutely NO IDEA of the deep conspiracy structure and their TRUE roles in it.
As for your speculation regarding Asian-based operatives in the plot, know that you've ventured into very intriguing terra incognita. If you haven't already done so, look at Pakse Base (southern Laos), a certain "Jim," the confusion regarding a "Major Lopez," and the controversy surrounding Humberto Castillo-Leon.
There is a good chance that most, if not all, of the above was created to lead "serious" researchers off on a dead-end trail. No matter how you cut it, these are under-researched leads.
The False Sponors you catalog were "in" it to the degree that they could A) sow confusion among pre- and post-attack investigators (of all stripes), and B) provide specific, limited logistical support.
We are in agreement, I think, that these individuals/groups had absolutely NO IDEA of the deep conspiracy structure and their TRUE roles in it.
As for your speculation regarding Asian-based operatives in the plot, know that you've ventured into very intriguing terra incognita. If you haven't already done so, look at Pakse Base (southern Laos), a certain "Jim," the confusion regarding a "Major Lopez," and the controversy surrounding Humberto Castillo-Leon.
There is a good chance that most, if not all, of the above was created to lead "serious" researchers off on a dead-end trail. No matter how you cut it, these are under-researched leads.