I was waiting to see if CT's will pick that up. It was published on Israeli media a while ago. Yes that Ali Jarrah guy was arrested for spying and yes, he's related to Ziad (they are from the same tribal family) although this is first time I read that he was his uncle.
As dtugg said, so what?
If Mohammed Atta was really
just an Al Queada guy, and if he had been married, do you think that if the CIA found out that his wife was also a member, that they'd be interested in her as a possible 911 co-conspirator?
What about if Mohammed Atta had a brother who was a member of Al Queda? Would they be interested in him as a 911 co-conspirator?
What about if Mohammed Atta had an uncle who was a member of Al Queda? Would they be interested in him as a 911 co-conspirator?
If you say "no", then I don't see the point of continuing any discussion with you. You're either very , ahem, unclever, or else are deliberately playing dumb to derail this thread from the path of significance and rationality.
If you say "yes", then you should be able to
easily infer why Mossad connections with a close relative (if these uncles are, indeed, close relatives) would be of interest. Such connections would not prove anything, in and of themselves, any more than a Mrs. Mohammed Atta being a member of Al Queda would prove anything, in and of itself. However, to a CIA agent (as well as to your typical 10 year old child), trying to understand 911, the existence of such relationships constitute
ground for further inquiry. As I have pointed out elsewhere, the word "investigation" implies an iterative process - clues are followed, associations are probed, etc., etc., and in so doing, further clues are generated.
The abortive thought process implied in even asking such a question (I assume you're at least 10 years old) may reflect a psychological disposition, or else it may reflect a desire to derail from the path of significance and rationality, as mentioned above. However, another thought has occurred to me. Maybe debunkers suffer from abortive thought processes because of a complete inability to empathize. I don't mean in an emotional sense. I mean in the sense of they have great difficulty even imagining things from another person's perspective, where the other person is either an official enemy or even a "conspiracist". This is a hypothesis which could be tested by psychologists, I would think.
