Another reason to believe 9/11 was LIHOP or MIHOP...

[KansDem]

Why haven't we heard or read or seen ANYTHING about the Charters of Freedom on 9/11? The Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, and Bill of Rights are housed in the National Archives in DC. They are kept in protective viewing cases to both preserve them and protect them. The cases are mounted on elevators so that they may be lowered into a bomb-view vault in time of national disaster such as an attack. (See where I'm going with this?) So why haven't we been informed as to their status on 9/11? Were proper procedures followed? Were the Charters ordered to be to lowered? Was there any communication between the White House and the National Archives to lower the Charters? Did the persons responsible for this precaution actually perform their duties that day? In short, was there any attempt by the authorities to see to it that the Charters were safe?

Or...was it known that the Charters were not a target, so there was no need to follow through on this...

[ixion]

1. yeah, I stick to the physics and chemistry

that fly in the face of the 'offcial' story.

But every bit helps. :hi:

[Pierre.Suave]

2. What does

LIHOP and MIHOP stand for?

[El Fuego]

5. Let It Happen On Purpose

and

Made It Happen On Purpose.

[KansDem]

6. "Let it happen on purpose" and "made it happen on purpose" (eom)

[Marnieworld]

7. LIHOP and MIHOP

Let it happen on purpose
Made it happen on purpose.

Welcome to DU!

[SteppingRazor]

3. Yes, but...

I think that maybe people had other things on their mind than the National Archive that day. I am, it's an interesting point, but it can esaily be explained by simply saying that, in the hour-long window between first attack and last attack, there were a lot of other tings on people's minds -- getting help to NYC, for example. Or reading My Pet Goat.

[bryant69]

4. Maybe they were

Do you have any evidence that they were't lowered to safety? It seems most likely that they were handled properly as the National Archives were closed and people were kicked out - but in the flurry of stories around 9/11, the biggest story wasn't the proper handling of these documents.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Marnieworld]

9. I'm more interested in why SOP wasn't followed

by NORAD and the Pentagon. I'm more interested in how when it was known that planes in the air were highjacked that they ever reached any destination considering all of the warnings the govt had. It's quite a puzzle that the Pentagon was hit, the very center of our defenses when they had so much ample warning. How do relatives of those lost deal with these questions I wonder?

[bryant69]

I hear there's a new book coming out

put out by popular mechanics or something like that? Maybe you should pick it up.

[Marnieworld]

15. huh?

:shrug:

[bryant69]

16. I'm sorry I took you for a seriuos LIHOP/MIHOP enthusiast

I'm talking about this book --> http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog/911mythsblog

Bryant

[Marnieworld]

22. I have questions about that day

but I'm not examining fuzzy pictures of the pentagon for missile shrapnel if you get my drift. ;-)

My only point here is that, as much as I love and cherish those documents there are bigger questions about what happened on that day.

[wildbilln864]

55. More government propaganda IMO!

No thank you on that Popular Mechanics book! Especially if Ben Chertoff had anything to do with it's production. I don't think I'll trust Michael Chertoff's cousin to tell me the truth about 911. You go right ahead though! Just saying!

[BootinUp]

58. You keep repeating this bogus "fact"

At the very least it is unproven by the conspiracy theorists that they are related at this point and very suspect.

http://www.911myths.com/html/benjamin_chertoff.html

[Jazz2006]

59. They aren't cousins. nt

[BootinUp]

13. I think this is some good info

on the planes and why they were not stopped, written by an air traffic controller at Daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/13/3335/57833

[Marnieworld]

27. Much of this is refuted by Will Pitts post on the front page now

The fact that this person writes that the scenario wasn't imagined by the military makes me doubt their a)sincerity b)actual expertise that they are portraying.

Just saying.

[BootinUp]

29. I looked at Wills post, Good stuff

I saw nothing that conflicts with the post at DKos. Can you be more specific?

As to the difficulty believing what he says, you should consider that whats now available (the audio tapes of all the communications between NORAD and FAA) fully supports his description. Check the Vanity Fair article (linked at the DKos page), the author listened to all the tapes from that morning and reconstructed events more acurately than the 911 commission report which he discusses as well.

cya.

[Marnieworld]

30. That no one imagined it specifically eom

[BootinUp]

31. A question

You think Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, or Dubya, one of them revamped the air defenses that the poster described so expertly? Especially when Dubya took the threat from Al Qaeda so seriously. not. Anyways I sense this discussion will not convince you to increase your reading on the subject.

[wildbilln864]

56. Marnieworld..

Marnie,
I think the reason SOP wasn't followed was because part of the plan was to have millitary exercises that day to confuse ATCs and others responsible for acting in such emergencies. Helps reinforce the incompetence ruse you see.

[Marnieworld]

60. Yep that was quite a coincedence eom

[KansDem]

11. It would seem to be considering the magnitude of the attacks...

That someBODY, someWHERE would have assured Americans that their most cherished documents were safe. I don't think that's too much to ask for.

If I have to write or call the National Archives to get an answer, so be it. But I would've thought that making this information public would have been paramount in the days following the attack...

[bryant69]

14. You've googled it? Searched the NYT archives?

Gone to the library and looked it up? Used Lexis Nexis?

You are certain that there is no record of this happening?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[KansDem]

17. I have looked for an accounting that day...

No stories, no reports. Nothing. I even went to the National Archives site and found nothing. Here is a description of what would happen to the Charters during an attack:

When not exhibited, the Nation's most precious documents are secured in a fireproof, shockproof, bombproof vault, which is constructed of steel and reinforced concrete and is located below the shrine under the floor of Exhibition Hall. An electrical mechanism automatically lowers them into the vault and raises them back to their positions in the shrine. Other machinery then closes a massive lid of metal and concrete over the vault. These mechanisms can be activated in the event of danger; and, during a power failure, may be operated manually.

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/constitution/history.htm

Were they lowered?

[bryant69]

19. So let's run this down.

They know there is going to be a terrorist attack. They know it's not going to target the National Archives. So rather than say nothing, and just let things happen in an unsuspicious manner, the Bush Administration in, what, a flight of thrift, calls up teh National Archive, talks to the head guy and says "Look you are going to see some news reports later on saying that the twin towers and the pentagon will blow up. NOrmally we know you'd get our national documents out of harms way. This time there's no need to do that, right? Just leave 'em up."

Even if I believed in MIHOP/LIHOP (which I don't), that seems like a bizarre turn of events.

Bryant

[jobycom]

21. That was my interpretation, too. nt

[KansDem]

23. No, if they did not know about the attacks beforehand...

They would have responded according to standard procedure, which is to lower the Charters during an attack. Did they? I don't know, and there appears to be no reports that they were; no reports to indicate proper procedures were followed. I would think considering the effect this attack had on Americans, that a reassuring statement describing the Charters' safety would have been forthcoming. I don't recall such a statement.

If, on the other hand, there was knowledge that the Charters weren't targeted, then it wouldn't have been necessary to notify the National Archives when it was evident we were under attack.

Sort of like Bush's performance on that day...no reason to do anything. Very suspicious.

[bryant69]

24. So how did the people in charge of the charters know

not to do anything? How broadly was it known that there was really nothing to worry about?

And if that many people knew there was no real threat, how did they keep this secret?

Bryant

[KansDem]

28. Is it the National Archivist who decides when to lower the charters?

Or does some other agency inform him when to do so?

And did that agency inform him on that day? And if no, why not?

[bryant69]

32. As it turns out the situation doesn't apply

They weren't on display at that time because the National Archives was undergoing a facelift/renovation. They had not been on display since July 5, 2001. http://democraticwhip.house.gov/media/articles.cfm?pressReleaseID=287

In the two years since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a period marked by arguably the largest resurgence of outward feelings and displays of American patriotism since the early days of World War II, the Charters of Freedom — which include the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights — have not been available for public viewing.

The three documents, which form the basis of American government and a model for democracy worldwide, have been stored away in the vaults of the National Archives and Records Administration building since July 5, 2001. Since that time, the building has been undergoing a $110 million-plus facelift.

So the documents weren't on display anyway. Which I suppose is further proof that the Bush Administration knew September 11th was coming (or were planning it).

[KansDem]

35. So when it was determined we were under attack...

Whoever was responsible for informing the National Archivist said "Oh, wait...if I remember correctly the Charters of Freedom aren't really on display so there's no need to call the National Archies..."

Yeah, sounds pretty far fetched.

Maybe they were in the "up" position while techs worked on the elevator system as part of the restoration process. I don't know. It's not unreasonable to believe that the party responsible should have called the National Archives to make sure they were safe...

[bryant69]

36. And then wrote a huge story about it

and covered the new York times front page with it so you could remember it.

Yeah you are right - LIHOP is the only answer.

Sorry i doubted you.

[KansDem]

38. No need to apologize...

But you are right (to a certain degree). A news release from the White House stating that the most cherished documents in America were kept safe from this attack should have been forthcoming. The documents that separate the United States from any other country. The documents that Presidents, Senators, Representatives, members of the armed forces, et al swear to uphold. I'm not saying it should have been a Bush-with-his-bullhorn moment, but at some time, someone high up in government, like the President, should have let us know our Charters were safe. They didn't. Why?

[BootinUp]

39. You're reaching

But they would have let you know if they were damaged, or ever really in danger no doubt.

[KansDem]

40. You think so?

Look, there appears to be a set of procedures in place to assure the safety of the Charters in case of attack. I have not seen, heard, or read that those procedures were followed. I don't think its too much to ask "Why?" And if the procedures weren't followed, then "why not?" And did this failure to do so have anything to do with foreknowledge of the attacks?

[bryant69]

43. Because the documents were already in the safe

Didn't you read that article? The Documents were already in a place that the National Archives puts them when they want to keep them safe. They had been there since June.

"We might be in danger; better but the charters of freedom in the safe."

"Remember sir, the building is closed for renovation adn they are already in the safe."

"Oh yeah. OK, I guess just leave them in the safe. But let's issue a press relief reminding everybody we are doing nothing."

There was no foreknowledge of the attacks, or if there was this certainly doesn't prove it.

And people wonder why i don't put much stock in MIHOP/LIHOP

Bryant

[KansDem]

45. Even if it were common knowledge that the Charters were locked up

...due to the restoration, these documents are simply too important to be left to a PR release or something someone said...

"We might be in danger; better but the charters of freedom in the safe."

"Remember sir, the building is closed for renovation adn they are already in the safe."

Yeah, well let's call over there TO BE SURE...

Not an unreasonable request. Was this call made? And if not, why not?

[bryant69]

47. Why stop there?

I mena is there any evidence that someone called all 9 supreme court judges to see if they were safe? I certainly haven't seen any. I haven't read any articles about that or anything - and if not, why weren't they called?

Bryant

[BootinUp]

44. You can ask, sure

but I would not make any MIHOP or LIHOP conclusions based on any answer I can conceive of.


You might want to skip the following, its a rant on LIHOP MIHOP.

To me this is an example of how people don't think conventional evidence and investigation should apply to these so called investigations. However there are people, everyday people who will tune you and other Democrats out if you are jumping up and down about LIHOP and MIHOP with no real basis for the claim.

Another poster in this thread claimed that the air defenses must have considered this type of terrorist attack, and therefore, any excuse with regards to the number of interceptors, or lack of modern radar to track commercial aircraft, or lack of good precedures between FAA and NORAD to perform multiple intercepts of hijackings simultaneously in less than one hour, or that air defenses have been decreased since the cold war period, are just excuses to enable a coverup and not worth considering. This is real information that directly explains how the planes got through. ITS ON TAPE ALL 3 HOURS OF THE ATTACK. But this supposedly interested poster was not interested.

Ok. So what should someone like me who is extrememly skeptical of MIHOP LIHOP think? We know from Richard Clarke that Bush did not prepare for a terrorist attack. Whats the big shock? I really don't get it.

[KansDem]

46. To summaize...

There appears to have been no concern whatsoever that the Charters were safe. Why?

The argument, "Well, this guy told me they were in storage 'cuz there's this restoration going on over there and the documents were safe 'cuz the National Archives website said they're in their vaults in a PR release dated June, and... and..." If this is the best the Bushistas can offer, it seems pretty mealymouthed...

[BootinUp]

48. Where they stored in a building that was attacked?

If the answer is no, I am not too overly concerned then.

[KansDem]

25. Also, you said...

NOrmally we know you'd get our national documents out of harms way. This time there's no need to do that, right? Just leave 'em up."

So who issues the order? Who informs the the National Archives that we are under attack? How do "we" know "you'd" get the Charters out of harm's way?

[deaniac21]

8. I lay awake every night thinking about this.

[Grateful for Hope]

26. ROFLOL!

:rofl:

[BootinUp]

10. You might also want to post this

in the September 11 forum also called the dungeon.

[QuettaKid]

18. they won't need to post it there.

the mods will see it gets there in no time....you can count on that.

[BootinUp]

20. you were right.

lol.

[Balbus]

12. Now I'm convinced...

I was a bit skeptical of the whole holographic planes and invisible demolition teams putting dynamite into the towers with no one noticing, but now you've sold me.

[JuniperLea]

34. Why do you bother reading this stuff

If you're only going to piss in everyone else's Wheaties? A closed mind has no place here.

[Balbus]

37. Because this drivel was in the wrong forum when I posted.

Believe me, if the OP put it in the correct place to begin with my eyes would have been spared this obscenity.

[JuniperLea]

41. Yet you couldn't resist the condescention post

nice

[KansDem]

42. Obscenity?

I wanted to know if the Charters of Freedom were safe on 9/11 and if the proper procedures were followed to assure they were safe. We were under attack. If those procedures weren't followed, I want to know why. And I observed that any deviation from standard procedure could be an indication that the attacks were known beforehand: Charters not a target, then no need to inform the National Archivist, when it was determined we were indeed "under attack." Bush sat and did nothing when told we were under attack, so did perhaps the person responsibility for the safety of the Charters. Why? Considering all the other irregularities committed by this administration that day, why is my specific observation an obscenity?

[mirandapriestly]

53. Unfortunately, it seems that it does.eom

[DemInDistress]

33. its funny they lowered dick cheney into a bomb proof vault but

not the nation's most valuable documents..how strange is that? Cheney is nowhere near the value of those documents (lol)..

[Sinti]

49. I would take the risk of assuming the archivist made sure they were safe

SOP was followed and so on. They would not need a call from any one to do so. I doubt anyone working at the National Archives would have known the Charters were not a target. The Archivist (or person in charge of this procedure) would have no reason to know if LIHOP or MIHOP were the case. They should have seen it as a real terrorist attack. Some kind of code red went through the government that day, the city was basically shut down and they sent all non-essential personnel home - I know, I was on my way to the Pentagon when the fecal matter hit the rotating air producing device. I got lucky to have missed the bus.

I think the fact that * sat reading My Pet Goat and looking undaunted, then lazily prepared a speech while still waiting at Booker (making himself a target), then once they finally decided he needed to leave there stopped to wave at the reporters/photographers before getting on Air Force One, and the fact that Air Force One took off without a fighter escort (they met him in the air later) are all more damning than the behavior of the persons in charge of the National Archives.

There are more AWOL stories such as *'s to be found. Pretty alarming IMO.

[BootinUp]

50. one comment

Bush was not undaunted he was seriously scared and unsure of himself.

[Sinti]

52. Fair enough. I don't think either of us can say what he was thinking

I can't read his mind, and wouldn't want to. I assume neither can anyone else, or maybe I'm just impaired on the psychic channel. He didn't look phased to me when Andy Card supposedly said "we're under attack." The color in his face doesn't seem to fade, and so on. For instance, people with a gun in their face tend to go white and perspire slightly, they may even shake ever so slightly.

His eyes don't belie fear to me, they don't shift, he doesn't look like he's thinking and so on. People when they're thinking move their eyes up and to the left, generally. FWIW, it's a good way to tell if someone is lying when they're on the spot, they look up and to the left (thinking) figuring out what story to tell.

Other people say he looked scared silly. Those folks may well be right. I may just be reading him wrong. I don't know the guy and how he reacts to emergency situations, other than to do nothing. He does seem to just sit, read books, eat cake, play guitar, wave to the cameras and so on while American people are dying. I guess it's just a bunch of OFUs (one fodder unit) to him anyway.

I suppose that particular comment could have been uncalled for. :shrug:

[wildbilln864]

54. I've always wondered why...

Andy Card didn't wait for some reply from shrub. That seems odd to me. How did he know Bush wouldn't want to ask him anything? I can't read his mind of course but to me Bush didn't look the least bit surprised! I think he expected it.

[Sinti]

57. And why didn't the Secret Service even try to intervene and pull him

out of there, and off to a safe place. They didn't even try. Perhaps Card said, "the second plane has hit, sir".

[Make7]

51. The terrorists hate us for our Charters of Freedom. ( n/t )

[planeman]

61. That is the most important motivation behind the attacks by alquida.

Democracy and freedom are alien concepts in much of the Arab world.