Is Randi LIHOP or MIHOP?

[GreenPartyVoter]

[FlaGranny]

1. She used to be neither. Over the last couple

of years she has gradually become LIHOP, I believe. At first she believed "incompetence."

[soleft]

2. I think she's LIHOP

I know she often says "the only thing they didn't would happen is the buildings fell down". She could be MIHOP, but definitely LIHOP

[BlueEyedSon]

3. I think she's IHOP

I get the feeling she likes to eat....

[buddy22600]

4. What the heck is LIHOP and MIHOP?

[codegreen]

5. 'let it happen on purpose' or 'made it happen on purpose'

shorthand for Bush complicity with 9-11

[freeminder]

7. well, easy

LIHOP = Let It Happen on Pupose
MIHOP = Make...

What's your flavor?

Me, I'm IHOPNACP

[cornfedyank]

8. let it happen on purpose maybe it happened on purpose

she said today that paine stewert's learjet was shot down. i have always heard it ran out of gas over dakota.

[RC]

17. Whose Dakota ya talking about?

Theirs or mine?

[cornfedyank]

19. mina, south dakota

http://www.airsafe.com/stewart.htm

[strategery blunder]

11. LIHOP=let it happen on purpose, MIHOP=made it happen on purpose

LIHOPers believe that when the * administration found out about imminent attacks, it deliberately ignored the threat. When the attacks happened, they could then claim "Terra! Terra! Invade Iraq!," and generally use the attack as an excuse to ram otherwise unpalatable policies down the world's throat. According to this view, *'s refusal to address the threat amounts to complicity in the attack.

MIHOP goes a bit further than LIHOP, arguing that the * administration actually planned (or took part in planning) the attack, for much the same reason as LIHOP. MIHOPers point to the suspicious collapse of WTC 7, arguing that it was a demolition, etc.

Both LIHOPers and MIHOPers believe that * wanted the attacks to happen because he could then use it as cover for imperialism. The Project for a New American Century urged Clinton to invade Iraq to set up US hegemony in the Middle East. PNACers believe that a 'new Pearl Harbor' would be necessary to catalyze political sympathy for such policies; googling PNAC and Pearl Harbor might serve you well.

Edit: used wrong preposition

[TheWebHead]

6. we need an acronym guide

put it along the top menu or in the FAQ...

I'm more of the HMWYBS.. or 'Hit me with your best shot' or Rope a dope... but they figured an attack on American soil would have at most few hundred casualties/deaths in line with their previous and subsequent attacks, and they could use it to politically justify going into Afghanistan, then Iraq, then...

They wanted an attack, they did what they could so plots coulnd't be uncovered, but didn't comprehend the size of the attack they'd get.

[freeminder]

9. there is this DU dictionary, maybe a nice donor will post it again? <eom>

[LittleApple81]

12. No donor here but I do have the address:

http://dug.seattleactivist.org/

somebody gave it to me some time ago.

[freeminder]

16. thanks for the link, LittleApple

there's some funny reading there :-)

[RC]

18. We need something right on the Home page.

I understand the Powers here are working on it.

[strategery blunder]

13. Here you go

http://dug.seattleactivist.org/#top

:hi::D

[buddy22600]

10. Thanks for the definitions

[HooptieWagon]

14. Someone here on DU posted an interesting take a few days ago

They basically said it was LIHOP, but the Bushies thought it was just going to be a single plane being hijacked. The multiple planes and crashing into buildings was far beyond what the WH imagined. This theory explains quite a lot of the administrations actions prior to and after 9/11. I'm inclined to go with this.

[musiclawyer]

15. After seeing Frontline again last night

I am firmly in the LIHOP camp, and agree that they got much more than they bargained for.

[PATRICK]

20. That would almost be exoneration

from my point of view. It still looks disturbingly like the reason the WH looked a bit befuddled and footdragging that day was because Washington had not been hit enough. Namely that the delay in the second play was the providential fly in the ointment that left "the great unmentionable target" the Congress unscathed.

Cheney was in DC with others to look like heroic survivors to provide assurance and continuity while Bush probably had some great speech in his pocket about THAT tragedy that never happened. Subsequently he was speechless and disoriented even as before he was calmly waiting for the attacks to unfold.

My LIHOP is worse than most people's MIHOP even if the WH was not sure how the details were going to unfold. The inexplicably obtuse cover story of expecting attacks on "monuments" deflected all speculation away from the biggest people target of them all. The monuments warning was a remnant of a CIA assessment for July 4th, when Bush was positioned(uncomfortably) in NYC with even a trip to the Statue of Liberty.(Oh yeah, what was air security like then? A presidential visit is better than a human shield for the amplified security it brings. Were they watching specifically for errant planes in NYC on July 4th?) He probably vowed never to get THAT close to ground zero again.

As a theory I think this covers some of the bases in much the same way that knowing Bush wears an earpiece explains some of his weird speech behavior. This implies special knowledge perhaps the US Intel never knew or assessments BUsh/Cheney made in private while pretending to blow off terrorist warnings. The significance of the date 9/11 involved Bush's father and Congress. Only the Congress was exposed on 9/11. Those in the know at this highest level? Only Bush/Cheney and their closest goons. And perhaps the Saudis.

But I know what a theory is and only wish to see to actual proof.