I still insist, 9-11 was SUPPOSED to happen, any new converts?

[mopaul]

why else would they refuse to investigate it for 2 1/2 years?
why did they ignore the obvious warnings from over a dozen countries?


9-11 was at the very least, allowed to happen, but it's not much of a stretch of the imaginatiion to suggest that they caused it to happen.

4 successful hijackings of jetliners, in only 2 hours?

bush's 'odd' reaction to the announcement of an attack on the u.s.?

why are they tripping all over themselves to cover their own asses and deflect blame?

i haven't changed my mind about 9-11......have you?

[liberalhistorian]

1. I agree, I just don't see how they

couldn't have known, and it was a perfect cover for invading Iraq, which is what they'd been wanting to do since the moment Shrub stepped into the WH.

He was also sagging badly in the polls, and they knew it would be the perfect way to lift him up and to pass laws or get rid of laws and do things they never, ever would have been able to do otherwise. It all fits perfectly. Now, if I could just get others to see the same thing!

[yowzayowzayowza]

40. Another thing frequently forgotten...

is that the Fla Recount report was due out that day as well. IIRC, the Newsweek issue on the NORC report was pulled because of 9/11. * is jus TOO LUCKY. Wadda coincidence....

[MsFlorida]

2. I believe it was supposed to happen too

and there are more than a few of us believing it, not to mention a few converts along the way especially when you throw out the timeline and take a look at what happened the day BEFORE.

[Abe Linkman]

3. Impossible for it to have happened WITHOUT active assistance

The events of 9-11 could not have happened without ACTIVE assistance.
If ACTIVE assistance hadn't occurred, the events could NOT have unfolded in the manner in which they did.

No such thing as LIHOP. Only MIHOP is possible to explain 9-11.

[PATRICK]

9. Still digging at the edges

Of course I share the same interest in terms of 'what if". For example, in July when the warnings were supposedly Hoyt and heavy, officials were all away from Washington for the holiday. Bush went to the Statue of Liberty- which could he admit without getting more grief than praise might have been considered a bold move. at that point then the main targets would have been empty buildings and national symbols.

That is the one- though kept secret- that they chose to take seriously and give Intel a bone. Ever after the notion of attacks with about "monuments" with keen avoidance of Al Qaeda's constant threat of heavy human casualties. It might have been some comfort to the WH team that no mention was made of harder personal targets in the leadership hierarchy. It could be a slipup that the subsequent discussion of threats refers almost exclusively to a July 4th type of assessment, not the the inevitable symbolic date that would primarily suggest an attack upon the President or Congress- being the anniversary of George I's victory address. The style of the one, notably different for the wordings and September circumstances and the attempt to utterly absent ALL hint of the August 6th memo has been something that has completely gone by the media.

Too late to get back to the simplest most innocent coverup- or is it tied to the most wicked opportunism ever practiced against the people of America? The Saudis should have provided and likely did PRIVATE warnings- or conversely, assurances- to the Bushes that the CIA might not even have known. Were they upset or disappointed? No, they spirited them out of the country perhaps as if they had something mutual to hide.

Rice has been caught out in bold print, but the accusations are lacking. When the Bush knew, planes flew story broke out she was visibly shaken as the premier person in a position of blameworthy responsibility and false claims. Yet no one was to be blamed though all were in a position to take criticism. It was frozen in limbo into a mighty stonewall dam against ANY critical examination. Even when the heat and blame IS being slowly meted out, it has become more important to act as if there is more to hide of vaster importance. To bluff that out would suggest the ticket is indeed worth the price of admission.

The behavior on 9/11 bespeaks confusion only in the instance of the whole darned thing dragging out because of the fourth plane- like watching someone reaching into a magician's hat, delaying, sweating, delaying and coming up with nothing- only we didn't know we were looking for something more dramatic to happen. Instead of a speech, for the first time that day Bush was too stunned to get into a script and was shuffled off to Nebraska by Clarke- like an idiot. Like rather- he had been expecting to react in another fashion that particular day- and not with people other than his inner circle in charge.

I am far from proving or even theorizing anything for anyone's angry edification. Yet I dare hazard a guess that things had an air of planning where plans fell out a little different than expectations- as plans will do- and not as an unexpected crisis will unfold out of whole cloth. Which means LIHOP in detail with full court press to manipulate the following course of events toward total realization of the agenda.

As Cheney could offhandedly dismiss ruinous deficits, global warming or political opposition so too without much loss of sleep they could keep focus on doing their thing, not trying to defense the nation and perhaps carry that step by step to projecting a secret innocence
and placing themselves and planning for the "what if" attacks.

Maybe 9/11 was a sure fire deal. However, they have reacted tellingly AFTER 9/11 in also positioning themselves for possible attacks, pregnant with planned foreign policy and domestic gains- which never panned out except for the miserable capture of Jose Padilla and the fringe loopiness of Ashcroft.

While the dots of 9/11 from the terrorist picture are constantly being fogged and erased, no one at all is trying to draw a picture of all the dots concerning the WH. Well, is it malign indifference and stupid obsession, incompetence- or some of that and profiting from an attack they never tried to stop?

I suppose with all the books(replacing the yawning vacuum of an AWOL media)some examination of the details might SUGGEST these things in a more compelling way. Evidence is another problem altogether.

But to have faith in presuming goodwill, diligence and innocence in this WH is dangerously absurd. That itself is an unsubstantiated and irrational theory with no proof and much evidence to the contrary regarding all other issues they have ever handled with utter disregard to human life and the real work of government and its Intel services.

[Steely_Dan]

4. I dunno...

While Bush is the worst president in my lifetime (and perhaps, in history)and while I would put nothing past him or his "people," I simply can't believe that someone could be that evil...not even Bush.

-P

[mopaul]

5. i know my son, & he just couldn't have committed murder....

that's what all mother's say when confronted with the fact that their son is accused of murder. it never fails. the mind simply can't accept it. during the lizzie borden murder trials in the early 1900's, no one could accept that a woman could actually kill anyone with an axe.

there are people that evil, and just because it's never happened before, doesn't rule out a first time.

in other words, one has to get past the notion that no one could be that evil. we disagree on this, but there really are men who are this evil. and i'm afraid they are in the white house.

utlimately though, i don't know for sure one way or the other, the jury is still out, so i will speculate.

[Steely_Dan]

6. I understand your point...

...and the fact that there are so many weird things associated with this event, does make me wonder.

I think most who are left of center tend to want to see the "good" in people and have a general belief in the goodness of man. However, perhaps that is my failing...to not recognize that which indicates the existence of "evil."

I mean, after all, Osama would be a good candidate.

-Paige

[webDude]

7. If you simply can't believe that someone could be that evil...

then how will you ever catch it when it happens?
You MUST force yourself to logically look at all the evidence, and then choose what to believe. Personally, in this case, I tend to believe LIHOP and probably MIHOP. I urge you to look at the "9-11 timeline page", and take it all in.

What if you had used the same logic during the third reich?

[LeahMira]

11. Other possibilities?

If you simply can't believe that someone could be that evil...
then how will you ever catch it when it happens?

This is true, but at the same time let's not be too quick to rush to that particular judgement. There's evil aplenty in the current administration, but there's also stupidity aplenty. When the head of National Security admits that all the pieces were there, but no one knew what to do about it there could be another explanation for what happened, i.e. they knew something was imminent but they had no clue about how to prevent it from happening.

Or, there could be other explanations that no one has even imagined as yet. Or it could be a mix of everything.

[Flubadubya]

8. Don't kid yourself....

This creep has already referred to 9/11 as part of his Trifecta, i.e. great good luck! How creepy is that? He has used this tastesless joke at several "champagne" GOP meetings where he has gotten the audience to simply howl over it.

What kind of demented mind is that? I used to only believe in LIHOP... but I am becoming increasingly convinced of MIHOP! :grr:

[Steely_Dan]

10. Quick Question

I'm still pretty new here...
What does LIHOP and MIHOP mean...I mean I know what IMHO, etc means....but...

-P

[Flubadubya]

14. Well, sorry....

Has DU been down for awhile? I haven't been able to get in for several hours. Anyway...

LIHOP = Let it happen on puprose. (BushCo re 9/11)
MIOP = Made it happen on purpose. "

I think they knew something was coming and were willing to let it happen so they would have their rationale for invading Iraq. I just don't think they realized it would be so grave.

However, you really should check into the Trifecta story, it's disgusting. I'll try to find a direct link rather than to try to explain it, I'm sure I'll botch it.

Oh, by the way, welcome to DU. :hi: :party:

[drumwolf]

12. Oh? Look at history. PLENTY of people have already been that evil.

I've been in the LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) camp for quite some time now. I absolutely agree that BushCo are, from a moral standpoint, evil enough to MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose) if they were sure they could get away with it. The only reason I don't believe in MIHOP is that I find it very hard to believe that such a plan would be feasible to pull off without getting caught.

[AntiCoup2K4]

13. Key here is massive denial.

Most Americans refuse to believe that "our" government could ever do something so evil. Some would still deny it even if confronted with irrefutible evidence, because "George Bush is such a good Christian" :puke:

Sad truth is this family operated crime syndicate has been selling out America for three generations now, and because of the mass denial, they continue to get away with it. :grr:

[hang a left]

52. Who said noone got caught.

I see them all as pretty much busted.

[worldgonekrazy]

17. Its a classic "failure of imagination"

This is always cited whenever the question of why genocidal events were not stopped by the international community in a given instance. With the Holocaust, Americans said they just couldn't believe the reports of concentration camps because they were too ghastly. With regard to Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge, the press simply refused to believe refugees' accounts for a long time because they were just too horrific to be true. And so on.

Not to say 9/11 was a genocidal act (no intention to target one specific race or culture), but it is similiar in that it is just too tough to comprehend that someone could have allowed this to happen.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

19. The target?

The middle class, perhaps? :shrug:

[smirkymonkey]

23. I must be incredibly cynical, because

it is SO EASY for me to believe it. I put nothing past them - they are truly Machiavellian, the end justifies the means.

[ComerPerro]

36. It's not a matter of being "evil"

To the Bush administration, allowing 9/11 was simply a necessary means to an end. It had to be done, because it was the only way to accomplish their goals.

Sure, it is completely sick and wrong. But they don't see themselves as being evil, I assure you. To them, they are probably heroes.

I mean, really.


3,000 American citizens are dead because of their decision.

But think about it.

What the fuck does the administration care?

They sent over 600 Americans to their deaths in a war that was based on a lie, and they joke about it now.

These people are sick motherfuckers.

So, yes.

They are very capable of doing this.

[Zorra]

51. There have been many evil leaders throughout history......

Hitler and his henchmen, PolPot and Stalin, for example.

And there are plenty of psychopaths around today.

[Doctor_J]

15. Been there all along

he admits that he's a "War President" - without 9/11 there would be no war, and his approval rating would be lower than his grade point avg.

[Selwynn]

16. Nope. And questions != proof, or even evidence, no matter how many.

And a lot of you are going to be in for a huge disappointment when the 9/11 report claims to "exonerate" the Administration, instead placing blame on law enforcement and intelligence agencies whose hands were tied by those pesky civil liberties laws... the report will basically be a case of stripping us of even more of our personal freedom and not one person from the administration will suffer negatively because of it.

And once again, in textbook classic conspiratologist form, a slew of questions are presented and then treated like evidence from which a conclusion can be drawn which any any rational person speaking for a position of logic and reason can tell is not correct.

What worse about these questions is you act as though it is somehow theoretically impossible to imagine a different plausible explanation when it really isn't at all.

"why else would they refuse to investigate it for 2 1/2 years?"

Countless other reasons aside from "because they orchestrated and implemented it" are possible. One could be because it would detract attention and support from their Iraq war effort. Another, more probable one is because they didn't do everything right, and some information would be embarrassing to the Administration (as has been proven) and affect them negatively.

Frankly if I was President, and I didn't have a soul, and 9/11 happened on my watch, even if I had nothing to do with it whatsoever, I wouldn't want an investigation, because inevitably I would be afraid that the public would perceive that I was somehow to blame which might affect my chances of getting reelected. I would probably do everything in my power to resist an investigation for that simple reason, if I didn't have a soul.

Any one of those things could be true.

"why did they ignore the obvious warnings from over a dozen countries?"

One possibility is because they wanted something bad to happen but didn't not actively plan something to happen. Another possibility is because they planned for this to happen. Another possibility is because they did not take the threat of a domestic attack of that magnitude seriously enough. Another possibility, tying in with that last one is that they were blindly fixated and completely obsessed with their own little agenda: invading Iraq, re-building Star Wars, tax cuts for the rich. Any one of these explanations is possible and while some may be more likely than others, none have yet been ruled out by any clear reasoning.

"4 successful hijackings of jetliners, in only 2 hours?"

Since there has never been anything of this scope and magnitude executed before (i.e. a terrorist plot involving the hijacking of four aircraft) we really have no frame of reference from which to claim that 2 hours seems "real quick" or "real slow."

"bush's 'odd' reaction to the announcement of an attack on the u.s.?" Honestly, when are Bush's reactions not odd. But more formally, his reaction is really impossible to pin as evidence for any one particular thing. He could have been thinking "finally, my presidency will now go down in history as I become the cowboy hero who leads the charge against evil!" Or he could have been thinking, "shit I had 35 warnings about this, but didn't think they were serious, so much for my missile defense shield." Or he could really be stupid enough to actually have been thinking "man, that was one bad pilot." OR, he could have been thinking "perfect, right on schedule, right according to our master plan." The problem is, any one of those explanations is equally plausible.

"why are they tripping all over themselves to cover their own asses and deflect blame?"

Asked and answered. But, to extend my answer, there has never been an Administration in the last 100 years that hasn't tripped all over itself to cover everything in order to save their own asses - administrations cover up things that are damaging to them, the cover up things that are not damaging to them but might be construed or perceived by others as damaging to them, they cover up variables in the equations or potential risks, whether or not they are guilty of wrong doing. Cover up is the name of the game, because you never want to leave yourself vulnerable to attack, truthful or fictitious.

"i haven't changed my mind about 9-11......have you?"

Nope, not at all. Depraved Indifference still seems to be what we have come closest to proving, aka. a "weak" LIHOP in which the Bush Administration had enough evidence of a threat that it should have taken more action, but did not in part because it didn't take the threat seriously, in part because it was fixated and preoccupied with its own agenda (Iraq, Star Wars, Tax Cuts) and in part because the administration had a mindset wherein if an attack like that ever were to occur, it wouldn't really be back for their agenda, bad for their administration, or bad for the country "from their point of view." Depraved indifference. But, I want to stress - I can't prove all of that. I can prove incompetence. And I can prove they had advanced knowledge of a threat. But that's all I can prove so far. However based on all the evidence to date, and taking into account the unanswered questions and demand an explanation, I think the weak LIHOP/Depraved indifference answer is most plausible at this time.

[Sterling]

28. I don't think many will be disappointed

I think we all expected the whitewash that is the 9-11 commission. I think the fact they chose not to address most of the widow's list of questions proves it to be a whitewash and only reinforces to me that their is a huge cover up of 9-11 and the trail seems to lead to complicity rather than incompetence.

I don’t see how anyone that has followed the commission and is familiar with the widows grievances can believe that this commission has done anything to debunk the idea that 9-11 as we understand it is a lie.

[Generator]

43. Selwynn

I want to say that was a beautifully thought out post. It seems like saying great post isn't done around here, but hey that was a great post.

Depraved indifference.

I agree whole heartedly and even though I suspect more, I think that alone, added to the fictions for war in Iraq is enough for impeachment.

[hang a left]

54. Your post does not address one serious question.

Why didn't the FAA notify NORAD?

[Selwynn]

58. I don't know, but see - neither do you

Because we don't have an answer to that question, I think we should keep pressure high to get an answer, to uncover the truth. However, the fact of rational conclusion drawing is, if we can't get a factual answer to the question, then we can draw factual conclusions, only speculative ones.

That doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't suspect certain conclusions, and it doesn't mean we can hold personal beliefs about what we think what conclusions the evidence really would lead to if we had it - as long as we never ever mistake that for absolute fact.

I have no problem with someone who holds beliefs about what happened - but I have a huge problem when that person tries to speak with more authority than any of us have with out conclusive answers to extremely important questions such as this one.

But unlike some people I guess, I also accept the reality that we may - perhaps - never know for certain. What I refuse to do, is manufacture a false sense of certainty based on the irrational and emotional human need for closure and definitive conclusion drawing. By all means we should keep rigorously pressing for full, open, honest disclosure. But if that never happens, I will not "invent" a definitive answer just to fill the void. But doing that, I'm guaranteed to skew truth. Instead, I'll live with a void of uncertainty, even if I hold my own personal opinion about what happened rather than try to speak absolutely and authoritatively without all the facts.

So again, I don't mind differing opinions and personal interpretations of what a person believes most was most likely to have happened (sheesh, holy verb issues.) I do mind people who treat those conjectures as absolute and ridicule other, more honest, more integritous truth seekers with higher, more appropriate standards for making objective statements.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

18. I'm hard-pressed to seriously consider any other alternative.

[Zinfandel]

20. From the moment it was happening, watching it on TV...Soon afterwards

I stopped watching television news!!!!!

I knew as I was watching it occur...that this was a great event for Bush and the facist!

[Zero Gravitas]

21. not really

The LIHOPers and MIHOPers still don't have any evidence to support their claims, just non sequiturs like "He sat in the class room for 7 minutes after being told of the second plane & the only explanation is MIHOP!" :wtf: Seems to me that the more likely explanation is that the stupid clueless bastard didn't know what to do.

HOWEVER

It seems to me that at the very least they were criminally negligent in not responding to the threat of al Qaeda, and I do not rule out that a greedy heartless bastard like Cheney could be aware of the possibility of attacks and deliberately not do anything about it for political reasons. However I do not believe that they had any advance information that anything of the scale of 9/11 was coming.

Frankly the more bizarre claims of the MIHOPers (remote control planes with pods on their sides shooting missiles into buildings rigged with explosives) make it harder for the milder forms of LIHOP to get their points across. Lunacy by association. I think there are legitimate questions as to just why they did so little about al Qaeda. Given their total incompetence in every field (except for lining the pockets of their rich buddies) the "let it happen through incompetence" explanation still is the most likely IMO but there are still legitimate questions that border on LIHOP that need to be answered.

[drumwolf]

22. Difference between believing in LIHOP vs. believing in MIHOP

For both LIHOP and MIHOP, you have to believe that the Bush administration is evil and amoral enough to knowingly sacrifice the lives of innocent American citizens in order to solidify their power. I think the majority of us, including myself, believe that they are perfectly capable of doing this from a moral standpoint.

But in order to believe in MIHOP, you also have to believe that, in addition to the moral depravity, BushCo would have also had the logistical capability of executing such a plan without getting caught. And that's the part I have a hard time believing -- especially given the incompetence they've displayed in so many of their other ventures.

[TexasBushwhacker]

24. Yeah, I was a LIHOP from the beginning

It's quite easy to let something happen by just doing nothing in response to something that obviously requires action, but to get the cooperation of many people, I don't know. I don't think it's impossible and considering the Bush families long history with the House of Saud, I think they could have just set the parameters (no nukes, specify the target, no more than X number of casualties, etc.) and told them "Make it happen". For the time being though, I'm still LIHOP.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

26. Caught by whom?

The fbi? The doj? The MEDIA?? hahaha laughable

[Sterling]

30. I think they have been "caught"

But who is going to hold them accountable?

[NecessaryOnslaught]

32. Indeed

[Cleita]

25. I'm thinking more and more about MIHOP these days as a

probability. LIHOP in my mind is a fact. Even if it wasn't deliberate, there was negligence there in not following up on the intelligence the Clinton administration briefed them on when they took power and not giving the Hart-Rudman Act serious consideration. This is fact and they cannot deny it.

[Tellurian]

60. Yes, and that is the ONLY question left unanswered. n/t

[Wapsie B]

27. Operation Northwoods, v2.0

n/t

[ComerPerro]

29. i'm with you, still, mopaul

[Avalux]

31. I'm definitely LIHOP

but every now and then I venture into the land of MIHOP. With all the horrible atrocities committed over the centuries, I know it's possible. The more I hear, the more I wonder.

[ComerPerro]

38. I am with you

I would consider my view LIHOP, but with a MIHOP twist.

MDSIWH

They

Made
Damn
Sure
It
Would
Happened

That means that they didn't plan it or anything like that.

I believe 9/11 was planned and carried out by religious extremists looking to force their warped view of their religion on the world. I mean, that isn't hard to imagine. Just look at Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell...

But, I also believe that the Bush administration caught wind of this, and decided that such an attack could save their asses politically and let them get their wars.

So, what did they do?

They took a month off, and in the meantime did everything they could to pull funding and call off investigations so that no one would alert the media with tons of evidence of an imminent attack.

And then they waited, making sure that nothing would obstruct the plans of the terrorists who attacked us.

Once the first plane hit, they sat back and watched the fun.

[Hippo_Tron]

33. I'd say possible but unlikely...

Incompitence of Bush and senior administration officials is a more convincing story. I would almost believe it to the extent of "pff so what if a terror attack happens? big deal."

[Sterling]

37. Funny how that incompetence lead to the fulfillment of the PNAC agenda.

Odd how that “failure” lead to the fulfillment of an agenda written by the Bush team that they had not even campaigned on.

Then low and behold an attack predicted in the plan they never bothered to promote as their policy during the 2k election?

Yes funny how by accident the “hit the trifecta”.

People can only live in this kind of denial when you look at the facts separately and selectively. If you can manage to keep it all in your head at the same time it is clear we are being lied to and rather obvious by who and why.

[ComerPerro]

39. Why do you think they are hyping up the "incompetence" angle

Why do you think that the media keeps saying "was the Bush administration prepared to deal with 9/11" and "did we drop the ball?".

Because, the administration is betting that the public will forgive them.

It is much less sinister to say that they just fucked up and weren't paying attention than to say that they knowingly allowed us to be attacked.

The administration is in deep shit, and they are trying to get off as easy as possible.

They are hoping people will just write 9/11 off to general incompetence.

[Beam Me Up]

34. "they," "they," "they," who the hell are ***THEY***?

The problem is everyone keeps talking about "THEY" as if we know who THEY are. We have NO IDEA who THEY--the 9/11 perps--are.

For damn sure IT WAS NOT OSAMA BIN LADEN. That particular "THEY" is nothing but a patsy--one of the many layers of the covert onion needed to create the NECESSARY MYTH OF 9/11. That is, the necessary myth of "the terrorist threat"--the REASON we NEED a "war on terrorism", etc.

How could a band of womanizing, beer guzzling "Muslim Fundamentalists" many of them trained AS MERCENARIES at military instillations right here in the US, manage to:

   * Be OVERLOOKED by the FBI, AVOID airport security and hijack FOUR PLANES simultaneously--and yet have their faces shown on TV by the FBI as the "identified terrorists" only a few hours after the event
      * EVADE our National Air Defense Systems and fly unchallenged to their targets in the most heavily patrolled air corridor on the planet, including the Pentagon itself (we assume one of the most secure buildings in the world), ON THE VERY SAME DAY THAT FAA AND NORAD WERE TO HAVE PERFORMED A DRILL TO TEST AIR DEFENSE STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH HIJACKINGS--ALL COMMAND FOR WHICH WERE, AS OF JUNE 1 2001, RE-ROUTED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, DONALD RUMSFELD
      * CRASH three of those planes into their intended targets while demonstrating TOP GUN flying skills that not one of them had acquired learning to fly piper cubs at that CIA front masquerading as a flying school in Venice Florida
      * Creating such havoc that THE LAWS OF PYHYSICS were temporarily suspended allowing jet fuel to melt steel, Mohamad Atta's passport to escape the inferno unharmed to be picked up on the streets below, black boxes to be so heavily damaged that their records were ERASED and a 747 jetliner to DISAPPEAR WITHOUT A PHOTOGRAPHABLE TRACE inside the walls of the Pentagon
      * And do ALL THIS without the News Media or Congress or the 9/11 Commision or anyone other than "conspiracy theorists" ASKING ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE FLAMING HELL IS REALLY GOING ON!!

The point is, WE DO NOT KNOW WHO THE HELL THEY ARE! Clearly this is COVERT OPS, it has all the earmarks, and clearly it could not have been done without some assistance from INSIDE our own government. But that STILL begs the question.

[Sterling]

35. That is why you consider motive.

It seems clear who gained (at least up to this point) from 9-11.

[demodewd]

62. here here

Thank You.

[zatoichi]

41. absolutely not a new convert...

I was on to this tragic scam about 3 days after the "attack". At first, I was like everyone else -- lock up the Ay-rabs! Put 'em interment camps! But, on the third day, I thought to myself, "Why does this feel eerily like the Kennedy assassination?" And that was all she wrote. I don't need no stinkin' proof! (Of course, they are still welcome to step forward and tell us just how they knew bin Laden dunnit. But I'm not holding my breath.)

Nope! I was on to them from the giddyup. The only thing this stinking cabal can do now, is to get down on their knees, and beg to be given hard time for the rest of their miserable lives.

[yella_dawg]

42. My favorite MIHOP smoking gun...

The entire scenario reads like a TV movie script, complete with recorded heroic deeds by ordinary guys, heart rending phone calls, and dramatic special effects. There was even a nail-biter with flight 93. An lo! the baddies were identified overnight. Just like on TV.

Things just don't work that way.

[Insider]

44. another link in the chain

the apparent expertise of those hijackers. even the flight schools where they trained said they could not have learned to do what they did with full size jets. and the flight over dc had eyewitnesses thinking the 270 degree turn was extraordinary.

combine the 'luck' the hijackers got on the very same day the bush admin was so very 'unlucky' and it is almost unbelieveable.

[TomNickell]

45. ROFLMAO!

>>why else would they refuse to investigate it for 2 1/2 years?

Obvious. They screwed up big time. They didn't want everybody to know.

>>why did they ignore the obvious warnings from over a dozen countries?

That's part of screwing up!

------

Just how do they 'allow it to happen?' or 'Cause it to happen?' What agencies participate? If the FBI/CIA had details, how do they -stop- them from catching the hijackers?

Exactly what can a dumbass bureaucrat sitting in the W. House do to help a lunatic hijack a plane?

----

But, you guys keep trying.

ALWAYS GOOD FOR THE OLD HORSE LAUGH.

[bobbyboucher]

47. FYI

A hijacked plane hit the PENTAGON an hour plus after two hijacked planes had slammed into the WTC.

I don't know about you, but calling that incompetent, irrespective of all the known warnings, is not only the understatement of the century, but is completely outside the realm of possibility.

Horse laugh (whatever the fuck that is) all you want.

[Beam Me Up]

56. Thank you bobbyboucher

At what point does INCOMPETENCE fail as an explanation for events that are so "coincidental" that they strain credulity.

Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11built around a plane crashing into a building
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/08/21/national1518EDT0686.DTL
JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, August 21, 2002
(08-21) 15:08 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --
In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, one U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings. But the cause wasn't terrorism -- it was to be a simulated accident. ....

They just COULDN'T HAVE IMAGINED that a thing like 9/11 would occur.

Mineta: "I don't think we ever thought of an aircraft being used as a missile. We had no information of that nature at all."
Rice: "All this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking."
Bush: "Never did anybody's thought process about how to protect America did we ever think that the evil-doers would fly not one, but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets - never."

http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/Contingency_Planning_Photos.html

Come on folks WAKE UP!! 9/11 was a COVERT OPERATION designed to do PRECISELY WHAT IT DID: Terrorize the US population into accepting the "Patriot Act", the invasion of Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq and the "endless war on terrorism" that follows from it.

IT DID NOT HAVE TO BE ORCHESTRATED FROM WITHIN THE WHITE HOUSE. This was a COVERT OPERATION most likely carried out by quasi-military MERCENARIES with aid from a VERY FEW PEOPLE in very key positions.

[TomNickell]

57. ROFLMAO!!

The military deliberately let a plane hit their own headquarters! Wow! THAT certainly proves the case!

That's a good one! Hee, Hee, Hee.

FYI, A HorseLaugh is a good belly laugh occasioned by a completely ridiculous assertion.

ROFLMAO!

But, keep trying.

[Beam Me Up]

63. Keep on laughing, Mr Nickell

Enjoy yourself as our nation slides further and further into the clutches of fascism by way of FAUX terrorist attacks. We--and thereby those responsible for 9/11--have already been forewarned by General Tommy Franks that the next such event will be met with the institution of martial law.

Let me be clear: It may very well be that THE ONLY THING THAT CAN SAVE OUR REPUBLIC is for persons within our armed forces, intelligence agenices and department of justice loyal to the Constitution, find out WHO WITHIN THEIR OWN RANKS had a hand in subverting our National Air Defenses on the morning of Setptember 11, 2001. Failure to uphold their oaths of office to defend the People and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic by arresting such persons for treason and bringing them to trial and courts-martial is nothing short of dereliction of duty.

I do not doubt that those responsible for this offense against Man and God may truly believe that the sacrifice of 3000 citizens was NECESSARY for matters of National Security. However that may be, I am equally certain that they are WRONG in this acessment: The same aims of National Security could have been met by OTHER LESS VIOLENT MEANS. Those who are responsible for the decisions that led to the events of 9/11 have created conditions that have subverted and are subverting the rule of law. The consequences of this for our society are easily foreseeable and unacceptable. Justice must be reestablished, yet may the heavens fall.

[bobbyboucher]

65. Have you seen that

Tommy boy's replies are all virtually the same, almost like he is just phoning it in? Maybe he gets points for the effort, but, certainly not style points.

[Beam Me Up]

67. Yes, I did notice.

"nobody home" perhaps?

[bobbyboucher]

64. Obviously unoriginal. And a strawman at that.

It's obvious what your motives are, Nickle. But can't you get more creative, I mean, just for the sake of entertainment? You are so, so boring in your protestation.

Who the fuck ever heard of a horse laugh? I've lived in the US of A all my life, in many different regions, and have never, ever heard that term before. So, in your too-simple protestations of everything 9/11, could you use another term, please. That one is just too fucking obscure to have any real meaning.

46. The stock market turned on august 6th, and went down until sept 11

This needs to be investigated.

[myomy]

48. Just kind of feel it in the bones, like your joints start to ache when

a big rain is coming.

[RBHam]

49. Mo

It's what Bush DIDN'T know...

Think about it, it makes sense that the neocon puppet masters would keep Junior in the dark as to the specifics ON PURPOSE...

Out of the loop, plausible deniability etc. etc. etc.

Good article here...

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2298

[shanti]

50. of course it was planned

it's all in PNAC. how anyone can think these demons couldn't pull all of it off is beyond me. they set it up.

[freeforall]

53. Preaching to the choir here

As soon as I saw the first tower on fire I figured it was MIHOP. Have not changed my mind since.

Only thing that puzzles me is how people can still believe that the government was not involved somehow.

Too many "coincidences." And I don't believe in coincidence.

[Pax Argent]

55. Complete arrogance and incompetence are still options

This is an administration that notoriously feels that everything should happen on their agenda. For whatever reason they seemed to have felt that the world would just stop while they enacted their new agendas in the ME and Korea.

It also follows that if they believed all terrorism was state-sponsored, no state would allow terrorists to attack us here in the US while our studly Lord Bush sat astride the throne. What state leader would want to face the wrath of the US and likely the world?

My belief is that the Bush Administration never took the whole non-state sponsored terrorism thing seriously until 9-11. I think their plan was if they could have just enacted their master PNAC strategry, the war vs. terrorism would just fall into place, as the terrorists would have no funding or locale to establish bases. Unfortunately grand stategries take time, and UBL didn't give it to them.

I also believe that they didn't want to let the cat out of the bag regarding hijackings due to the difficulties the airlines were already having in 2001. A panic about terrorism would be bad for business. Its kind of like JAWS in the air.

[skeptic9]

59. I agree. Was it LIHOP or "LIHTSS"? (Let It Happen Through...

... Sheer Stupidity).

maggrwaggr used this catchy phrase in another thread, at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1392380

How can you talk about the possibility of LIHOP without dealing with the possibility of LIHTSS? Don't you think many more people would "connect the dots" to conclude LIHTSS than would go all the way to LIHOP? And wouldn't virtually all evidence consistent with LIHTSS also be consistent with LIHOP? The only exceptions I can think of would be "smoking gun" incriminating tapes where Dubya, Cheney, Rove, Card, etc. would be heard saying, "Wouldn't it be better just to do nothing, and let this happen? Let's just protect OURSELVES!"

[bywho4who]

61. Hell no

I knew as soon as i found out about the put options somewhere around 6000 of them on united and AA follow the money, I also might add that before the towers fell Bush had the image of an idiot but after he was some kind of hero. think that had anything to do with it


:smoke: :hippie:

[reformed_military]

66. Shnay

Not here.