The bombing of the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman, Jordan was followed by a presentation on the normally party-line Tucker Carlson vehicle "The Situation" of Prof. Stephen E. Jones and his wild and somewhat wacky theories on the WTC 9/11 event, his main premise being that the CIA and other traditional shadowy government persons were responsible.
So you have a catastrophe - Jordan - and then you have an easily dismissable theory about the agencies and individuals responsible for another, primal, iconic, catastrophe - 9/11, showing up on a major news outlet right after.
That means anybody saying "Hey, this looks mighty hinky" about the Amman bombings has to sign up with Prof. Stephen E. Jones.
The article linked below presents a lot of pretty reasonable ideas about the bombings.
Notice that not long after the event there was a nearly identical bombing in Iraq, involving a suicide bomber a hotel and dozens of victims, which further diluted the Amman bombings' immediacy.
Nearly everything the media reported as official statement about the Jordanian event stinks of duplicity.
an awkward dilemma:
"Of course, there is nothing to information emanating from 'al-Qaeda' other than websites that could be being run by conceivably anyone. (That such websites are allowed to operate with impunity is clear evidence that they are not what they purport to be. In any case, who has actually seen the webpages in question? I haven't seen anywhere a single link to the website on which al-Qaeda supposedly issued its communiques.) But the alleged al-Qaeda websites are now in the convenient position of being able to confirm everything that the authorities have been saying. This would seem to be a godsend not for 'al-Qaeda' but for the authorities 'investigating' the atrocities, authorities who are no doubt under great pressure at the moment to reach politically acceptable conclusions.
Al-Qaeda's sudden co-operativeness in helping the investigation speed towards a predetermined conclusion is as deeply suspicious as its solicitude for the Israeli Jews staying at the Radisson, who were escorted to safety several hours before the attacks.* (Interestingly, the only Israeli citizen who remained behind was an Israeli Arab.) Who can seriously believe that attacks on three hotels - of which two (including the Radisson) are owned by Palestinians - in an Arab country that killed 'two high-ranking Palestinian security officials, a senior Palestinian banker and the commercial attache at the Palestinian embassy in Cairo' while Israeli Jews were allowed to escape could be anything other than an Israeli terror operation? Especially when the Israeli authorities who evacuated the Israeli hotel guests did not share their concerns with Jordanian or hotel security?"
