Do you believe that Al-Queda terrorists crashed the planes on 9/11?

[MercutioATC]

Poll question: Do you believe that Al-Queda terrorists crashed the planes on 9/11?

There's a thread in the 9/11 forum dealing with the issue (actually, just one of many). There's at least one poster who calls the idea that Al-Queda was involved the "Wacky Caveman Theory". It seems there's some doubt as to whether the majority of DU'ers believe our government made the entire thing happen or Al-Queda was responsible (with or without the averted eyes of the U.S. government).

Here's one of the threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x10112

There's plenty more there if you look.

SO...the question is:


Do you believe that AL-Queda-based terrorists flew the planes and crashed them on 9/11 (except United 93 which was either crashed by the passengers or shot down, depending on to whom you listen) or do you believe that the government crashed/diverted the planes and blew op the buildings and used Al-Queda as a scapegoat?

[seventhson]

1. It was MIHOP - but it was the fraudulent "shadow" government

of the Bushzis

I also believe it was done by remote control

[jayctravis]

86. remote control

theory - the hijackers could have been there to distract from the plane being remote piloted.

[MercutioATC]

87. It's technically possible, but what leads you to that conclusion?

Granted, the government is collecting all of the pieces, but no pieces of any remote control device were found. I'm not denying the possibility, I just see no proof.

[jtb33]

2. There NO QUESTION...

...that the gov't did NOT do it, or have any hand in planning/carrying it out. "Al Queda" did it - end of story. Now, whether or not BushCo could have prevented it - that's another story.

[leesa]

57. Where is your proof? Seems a lot more plausible that they were involved

To this day we still don't know who was in the plane. Many of the alleged "terrorists" were found alive and well within days.

Is this your belief system in action?

[King_Crimson]

59. Check this out...if you would please...

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

[kysrsoze]

60. Yes, Al Qaeda did it, but they knew it was coming and looked the other way

That's pretty obvious.

[MercutioATC]

79. It's not obvious to about 66 people here so far...

...which is why I ran this poll. I agree with your assessment, but I wanted to see what kind of reactions I'd get. Even the non-voting people who comment are providing insight into how the average DU'er views the event.

[Wonk]

3. Both. Al Qaeda is/was an offshoot of the CIA.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&timeperiod=1979%20-%202000

[MercutioATC]

6. Agreed. But the poster I mentioned claims that "cavemen" like Al-Queda

couldn't have (or would have been hard-pressed to) pull off a job like this.

SO, the question remains...did Al-Queda (funded and trained by the CIA or not) do this or did the government do it and just blame Al-Queda?

[BeFree]

13. The "Caveman theory" is the official theory

And that is all it is - a theory. A conspiracy theory at that.

There are WAY too many questions that remain unanswered, still, two and a half years later. You'd think that the official theory would have been proven - beyond a shadow of a doubt - by now. At least any reasonable thinking person would.

Still, it remains a possibility that 19 'cavemen' could have done the dirty deed, right? That against all odds, everything went as planned and that the armed forces of the US completely and utterly failed that day. Could have happened just the way they say.

Could also be that 19 people who work black-ops in a shadow government did the deed. And the armed forces failed to protect us.

We just don't know, and anyone who claims to know is fooling only himself.

[MercutioATC]

14. I'm not disagreeing with you. There are many questions to be answered.

Your "black ops" scenario is possible too. Until we know the actual facts, you're right, it's foolish to claim we "know".

However, I don't feel that it's a stretch to think that 19 people, with good financing and intelligence, could exploit the weaknesses that existed in our security and done this, be they "cavemen" or not.

Hell, when I was about 10 I walked onto a plane with a hunting knife that I forgot I had in my carry-on. Before 9/11, security was sporadic at best...still is, at times.

Most of the conspiracy theories start to unravel when you look at facts instead of people's perceptions of what "should have been". It's an interesting mental exercise, but I don't think it's much more than that.

[BeFree]

20. What facts?

I haven't seen any facts except for the obvious physical ones. Why are there so many unanswered questions? Why the stonewalling of the 9/11 Commission? Those are two facts that must give anyone pause...

Until all the facts are laid out by this administration, all they have offered us is a conspiracy theory, a theory too many people have accepted as fact.

Isn't it odd that most of those people usually dismiss other conspiracy theories?

Why? Why do they accept one theory as gospel and dismiss all others? Fear. They can't handle the possible truth.

[MercutioATC]

28. Well, maybe because the "conspiracy theories" make less sense than

the "official story".

I have yet to see one that doesn't include "facts" that I know to be false. Personally, I believe that the government did have knowledge of the probability of a terrorist attack and were just too incompetent to handle it. That's a far cry from the "drones and holograms" that some purport, though.

[Sterling]

32. So what are the official "unofficial" theories?

It seems like your making a strawman argument here. There are certianly commonly acknowledged facts that people develop theries based on but I dont think the fact that some of these personal theories include faulty reasoning or poor research exonorates anyone from accountabilty on the information that has been vetted.

I think that when people try to get into theories about the actual attack, for example did a plane hit the pentagon, they divert attention away from the fundamental big picture questions. Like understanding PNAC and peak oil for example. If you start there then you can understand the thinking of the people who helped make 9-11 and the PNAC agenda a reality.

[MercutioATC]

35. Hey, I'm in agreement with you.

I'm addressing calling the official version the "Wacky Caveman Theory" (because OBL is rumored to be living in caves and couldn't have pulled off an event like 9/11). I disagree. I think that Al-Queda, trained and funded in the past by the CIA, turned on us (as do most of the groups we train and fund)...but I still believe they were involved.

Others seem to believe that Al-Queda had no involvement, but that the government perpetuated the entire event and simply blamed Al-Queda.

That's what this poll is about. I'm not questioning the accuracy or completeness of the official version...it's obviously innacurate and incomplete. I AM addressing the theory that Al-Queda wasn't involved at all.

[BeFree]

34. Official story?

What is the official story if not a conspiracy theory?

You say the government was too incompetent to handle it....
Ok, let's go with that. The beginning of the incompetence was at the Air Traffic Controllers (ATC) level, right? I mean, the ATC were the first line of defense. From all indications the incompetence started right there. The ATC's should have made sure the hijacking info was acted upon, and acted upon quickly. Instead it took forever to get defense planes up and flying.

Now some might say that the ATC's are nowhere near to be blamed. But they are the first line, and it sure looks like incompetence, as you say.

[MercutioATC]

36. Have you READ the 9/11 forum?

...I know you have, and I've dealt with the ATC issue numerous times there (hint: just search for my handle as "author"...you'll find 'em).

[Sterling]

39. So you know a RW opperative destroyed tapes of the ATC from 9-11 right.

All the recent news about the ATC and Airforce response has benn very damaging to the official theory.

[MercutioATC]

45. No, I know an FAA employee destroyed an interview tape.

That hardly makes him/her a "RW operative". If it WAS a conspiracy, why leave the taped controller(s) alive and free to tell their story to whomever they like?

I don't know all of the issues surrounding this. While I admit it looks suspiscios, I fail to see how it made any difference.

[Sterling]

47. I think it was pointed out in the original source he was a RW partisan.

maybe you have the link? The fact is that important evidence was destroyed in the most important case in history. That is not OK.

[Sterling]

48. So can we go interview the person?

Or any of the pilots involved that day? Have they started making them available to the press yet? Last I checked everyone was unamed and forbiden to discuss the subject in the press.

[MercutioATC]

50. Well, Tom Brokaw interviewed the controllers on national TV...

...that's hardly forbidding them to discuss the subject.

See, THAT is an example of the misconception I'm trying to address. The controllers HAVE been interviewed.

[Sterling]

56. The pilots?

And would be very grateful to get a link to a transcript to the interview. Or even a name of the ATC's? Now that would be making a real contribution to the board and not just making a strawman poll for jollies.

[MercutioATC]

78. I have no idea where to link, but Dateline NBC's site sells transcripts

for $12/each. I've made plenty of "real" contributions. As I explained, this poll is to see what the average DU'er believes.

[tinanator]

58. IN OTHER WORDS

The Pentagon is defenseless from attack? Or do they actually have surface to air missile defenses? Not to mention considerable reinforcements nearby.
There is only one correct answer here, and a quick clue for ya.
The Pentagon is NOT defenseless.

[Sterling]

23. Yes both. Could you ad the option plz?

nt

[MercutioATC]

31. I didn't add that option for a reason...

...the thread I posted a link to doesn't make that argument. The poster in question states that Al-Queda is a "caveman" organization that couldn't have done this. That's what I'm responding to.

If you believe that Al-Queda operatives actually piloted the planes, the vote is #1. If you believe that Al-Queda had no involvement, but were just scapegoats, the vote is #2.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Sterling]

40. Well if you believe the racist propaganda that underlies

the official story and the "WAR ON TERRA" then you would have to consider that these guys are cave men that are stupid and do not value life as much as white christians.


I think that is just way to simple and black and white and wonder why you would decide to focus so much attention on a flawed theory instead of discussing something less obvious and more interesting?

[MercutioATC]

46. I'll try to make my polls more enlightened for you in the future...

As for the present, had you read the posts in the link I supplied, you'd understand that there was a question about how many DU'ers believed that Al-Queda was involved.

That's the reason the post was worded as it was and the reason for the topic.

[Sterling]

51. And I think that is why someone said it was a dumb poll. lol

I just think its a little below your skills thats all. It seems like awaste when you seem to already have a more developed sense of the issue than the people you are making fun of.

I also think you are in effect creating or promoting a strawman view of 9-11 scepicism by holding those two options up as the only possibilties and givin such a shallow definition of the questions.

[MercutioATC]

52. Thanks for your opinion.

I'll take it under consideration.

:eyes:

[Sterling]

55. I think you should.

It seems to be a popular view of the thread. Maybe there is something to it after all?

[MercutioATC]

84. I still see plenty of people voting, Sterling...

That was my reason for the post.

I'm not afraid of criticizm. I really do want to know how this issue is seen by the average DU'er (not that I'm calling any of you "average").

:)

[Khephra]

4. Choice 3

I'm agnostic...anything is possible, but lacking all evidence, I have no real clue.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

5. My biggest problem with the Al Queada theory is... how come

they always seem to help out * more than anyone else?

[Nlighten1]

7. Same here...

It sure is strange that Al Qaeda attacks liberals and benefits the Republicans.

You would think it would be the other way around.

[Mika]

24. Not strange at all. They know neocons do the most to destroy the USA

Keeping Bush in power will do more to destroy America as we knew it than anything.

[sangh0]

80. That's not true

The train bombings in Spain didn't help Bush*. And the attacks the other day in Saudi Arabia isn't helping him either.

[Nlighten1]

83. You are right.

They caused Bush to lose an ally in the war in Iraq. That isn't exactly a victory is it?

[Servo300]

8. sheesh - right up there with the proverbial Black Helicopters

[frylock]

12. or black box voting..

or , or , or..

[MercutioATC]

85. I think there's a SLIGHT difference between the BBV issue and

saying that the government did this on their own and just blamed Al-Qaeda. BBV concerns have been verified by professional security firms who were contracted to evaluate the systems. I've yet to see any proof that supports theories like this.

[LARED]

9. kick it n/t

[oblivious]

10. All I know for sure is that the official conspiracy theory doesn't hold up

As for who did it? I don't know. But your question does not allow for the possibilty that a very small renegade element within the government made it happen. That is not the same as saying the government did it.

[ramblin_dave]

11. What if Al Qaeda operatives had help?

Suppose Al Qaeda operatives had inside help? Like being recruited for this task and provided with covert assistance. Such as when FBI got suspicious their pleas were ignored and FISA warrants not granted. Such as more sophisticated training than we've been told they had. Maybe even technical help in flying the planes. Such as exercises scheduled for 9/11 designed to cover for or confuse the planning and execution of the attacks. Such as noisy diversionary operations designed to keep FBI and others wasting their resources.

The Al Qaeda boys could have believed they were just good or lucky and not even realized they were just pawns.

[oblivious]

18. Right. And even getting visas for the hijackers

J. Michael Springmann, formerly chief of the visa section at the U.S. Embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, claims that he rejected hundreds of suspicious visa applications, but the C.I.A. officer overruled him and ordered the visas to be issued. Springmann protested to the State Department, the Office of Diplomatic Security, the F.B.I., the Justice Department and congressional committees, but was told to shut up. Springmann observed that 15 of the 19 people who allegedly flew airplanes into buildings in the United States got their visas from the same CIA-dominated consulate in Jeddah.

http://www.hermes-press.com/keys9_11.htm

[libhill]

19. Somewhat like -

the Japanese who were snookered into attacking Pearl Harbor, to rouse American fury and justify entry into World War 2. The ships that were hit at Pearl were older, World War 1 era vessels. And, they were quickly replaced. For example, the U.S built something like 16 carriers after the Battle of Midway, the Japanese produced a total of six. Could be the P.N.A.C. boys had inside info when they made their remark about "another Pearl Harbor".

[mithnanthy]

21. Ramblin_Dave

I agree with you! I've felt this way from the start...it's a sickening feeling!

[Alerter_]

15. OTHER

This poll is stupid.

[MercutioATC]

17. Thanks for your vote...and you assessment of the poll.

...anything to say relative to the issue, or is "This poll is stupid." your entire thought?

[Alerter_]

27. I need to explain why the poll is stupid?

Who is Al Qaeda? Who is the "government". You may as well have asked "Did you take the blue pill or the red pill".

[Sterling]

29. yes this is not a black and white kinda thing.

and not one that can be broken down in 25 words or less.

[MercutioATC]

30. Ok, I'll make it simple for you.

Did Al-Queda operatives, funded and trained by the U.S. or not, perform these acts or did the U.S. government, independant of Al-Queda, make it happen and blame Al-Queda?

I agree that the U.S. has esentially funded and trained Al-Queda for some time but that doesn't make them the same entity. Had you explored the link I posted, you would have seen that the argument is different than what you present.

[Alerter_]

37. who is "Al Qaeda"? who is the "Government"?

If you give me some names, I can answer the question. Otherwise, it's just crap.

[Sterling]

38. I lean towards....

a faction ofthe MIC/Gov/RW cold war relics are the "US" you are talking about? They seem to have benifited the most from the ordeal, would you not admit? Can I name names or tell you how the opperation was executed? No. No one can at this point.

I can tell you since 9-11 that the current leadership has done nothing but convince me that 9-11 was an expected pretext to a plan that was unthinkable pre 9-11 and we now seem to have no choice in diviating from that plan. Throw in the plan lines the pockets of said leadership and cronies you have a great RICO case.

I also think that if you want to have a "theory" or an opinion of the spectulation of others you have to be willing to do the kind of research I never rely see from would be debunkers. If you really expect to debunk effectively you have to go beyond blaket accusations and get as specific as the speculators.

[MercutioATC]

41. Well, we seem to disagree.

...and my statements (as far as ATC is concerned) come from firsthand experience, not something somebody else concocted that I've read on a web page somewhere. That explains the lack of links, in my case at least.

[Sterling]

42. well you personal expirience is one thing.

But not really related to the issue. The facts are available for all to see and make an informed judgment on without the benifit of your personal knowledge. Unless you were one of the ATCs that day you are really not a primary source of interest on this topic.

[MercutioATC]

49. I'll disagree, but that's O.K....

Your statement is like telling a doctor that it doesn't matter that laypersons don't always understand medical procedures, they can make up their minds based on a reporter's (layperson) view of events and so his comments are irrelevant.

Seriously, if you'd like to make a determination whether I have something pertinent to add to the conversation, perhaps you should see the misconceptions I've addressed on the 9/11 forum over the last few months.

[Sterling]

53. Yes but you are not a doctor.

The information was made avialable in the press as well as the 9-11 comish.

It was not writin in latin and does not take 8 years of school to understand. Dont get me wrong I am grateful that they dont just let anyone be an ATC but to say it is like a doctor is not realistic.

Besides didnt Reagan fire all the ATCs and replace them back in the 80s? I dont think you could do that with MD's.

[MercutioATC]

82. Actually, the technical jargon is one of the things that confuses people.

As an example, when we say we've "lost radar contact" we don't necessarily mean the the primary target disappeared from our scope. The media doesn't understand this, however, and reports that the plane "disappeared". That's the type of issue I'm talking about.

Just because the media reports something doesn't mean it's true. They frequently misunderstand what we say.

Some of what they report is downright false, like saying that a plane 15 degrees or two miles off course is handled as an emergency situation. That's untrue. In fact, Center radar is only accurate to within about two miles, so a plane that displays as two miles off course wouldn't be an issue at all. That doesn't stop them from reporting that we hit the "panic button" when we see things like this. The public doesn't know the difference and forms all sorts of theories as to why we don't react as we "should".

ATC is generally outside the average person's field of experience. The language is technical and doesn't always mean what it seems. Our equipment capabilities and procedures aren't understood by the layperson. In that was, we ARE like doctors trying to explain what we do and why.

[fortyfeetunder]

16. I still have problems believing the timing

(donning tinfoil hat):tinfoilhat:


I still can't comprehend there was NFW any military fighter planes stationed on the East Coast could not have intercepted any of those commercial jets.

I figure the truth about 9-11 is just like constipation, all the shit will come out in the end....

[Sterling]

26. We also have anti Aircraft all over the place.

The kind of stuff that takes down planes from hundreds of miles away. Think about it. If someone wanted those planes shot down all the had to do was push a few butons.

[Alerter_]

43. we're the world's superpower and have billion dollar high tech weapons

and 19 religous fanatics can defeat our entire defenses, hijack four planes with boxcutters and fly around for hours and destroy the entire WTC complex and then hit the PENTAGON.

Talk about bullshit conspiracy theories. Some people will believe anything.

[Sterling]

54. Yes the whole thing just seemed like BS from the moment I watched the

2nd plane. Iwas like, now how the fuck did they let that happen?

[tinanator]

61. but they got the passports of the guys that did it

luckily they survived the burning wreckage and landed on top of the building's debris. Sometimes luck just goes your way.

[LagaLover]

68. We do, huh?

What types and where? What active AAA and SAM units do we have on alert in CONUS; where are they located?

[PretzelWarrior]

22. it was the one-armed man

or the "not me" ghost. still haven't made up my mind.

[Fescue4u]

25. Robots did it.

Evil ones that were programmed by Bush and Cheney in the whitehouse basement.

Unfortunately, Bush has lost control of them and now they are hell bent on taking over the world (you see, since they are robots, they surived the crash)

[TomNickell]

71. Oh, I thought it was Space Aliens....

who had made a secret pact with Bush.

But, I could be wrong.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

33. Other.

They're interconnected. For nefarious reasons, or otherwise.

[librechik]

44. I can't say "B" cuz I don't regard BushCo as the US government

but they did it all right. I'm just undecided about whether there were people on the planes. Someone I work with had a stepson who was killed on Flt 77 so I'm pretty sure those people died, one way or another. I've read a lot of (all of ) the theories. But where did they die? I'm just not emotionally ready to go there yet. I can't even think too hard about the towers yet.

[LARED]

62. Kick it n/t

[drfemoe]

63. soooo unscientific ...

Al-Queda operatives flew the planes
The U.S. Government did it and used Al-Queda as a scapegoat

Nothing excludes (a) from being a subset of (b) therefore both could potentially be "true". Not even a poll question. Soz.

[Jose Diablo]

64. I think the government came out too quick

with the list of hijackers. It was like it was all scripted. Then after the list came out, it was shown many of the hijackers were still alive.

So if it wasn't Al Qaeda, then that only leaves 2 groups that could benefit and are able, Mossad or PNAC. Even a tinfoilhat like myself cannot believe Mossad would risk being caught doing 911. But then again, who would benefit the most if the fingers pointed to Saudi nationals. And Mossad has pulled 'false flag' operations in the past.

Frankly, I don't know who was behind it, however it seems to me, PNAC stood to gain the most from 911.

I know all this is speculation, but without a serious investigation and then the stonewalling by our own government, my conclusions are all that I am left with. This cloak of 'national security' and partisan politics is preventing justice in resolving the identities of the perpetrators of 911. The Bush* administration has been shown to be unworthy of our trust and for us to just trust them to bring closure and justice to 911 is nuts.

The backing of the war in Iraq only came because of the American anger over 911. Thus, high on my list of suspects is Bush* himself in setting 911 up. A look in the flow of the money at Riggs bank is in order. I am questioning the idea that Bush* is just a "useful idiot". His uncle Jonathan is the CEO of Riggs bank.

I think the BFEE did 911, using ideologues from the middle east.

[TomNickell]

65. About 63 Loonies....

There are about 63 people here who are accolytes of the Conspiracist Worldview.

But they spend a lot of time on the computer.

[Jose Diablo]

66. A google search on "Conspiracist Worldview" yields

www.publiceye.org/conspire/conspiracism.html

I was wondering what I was. But I do take exception to being also called a "Loonie". I presume a "loonie" is a derivative of the word "Luna" meaning insane.

Paranoia is a high survival trait in a hostile environment

Screw you and the horse you came in on.

[oblivious]

67. He'll be gone when his 8-hour shift is over. (eom)

[LagaLover]

69. More conspiracy....LOL

[Redhead488]

81. A Loonie?

[TomNickell]

70. Paranoia Strikes Deep. Into your life it will Creep

Buffalo Springfield.

Thanks for the link. Some quotes...

>>Conspiracism as a Flawed Worldview


by Chip Berlet

Every major traumatic event in U.S. history generates a new round of speculation about conspiracies. The attacks on 9/11/01 are no exception. The tendency to explain all major world events as primarily the product of a conspiracy is called conspiracism.
..
Populist conspiracism sees secret plots by tiny cabals of evildoers as the major motor powering important historical events. Conspiracism tries to figure out how power is exercised in society, but ends up oversimplifying the complexites of modern society by blaming societal problems on manipulation by a handful of evil individuals. This is not an analysis that accurately evaluates the systems, structures and institutions of modern society. As such, conspiracism is neither investigative reporting, which seeks to expose actual conspiracies through careful research; nor is it power structure research, which seeks to accurately analyze the distribution of power and privilege in a society. Sadly, some sincere people who seek social and economic justice are attracted to conspiracism. Overwhelmingly, however, conspiracism in the U.S. is the central historic narrative of right-wing populism.
...
The conspiracist blames societal or individual problems on what turns out to be a demonized scapegoat. Conspiracism is a narrative form of scapegoating that portrays an enemy as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good. Conspiracism assigns tiny cabals of evildoers a superhuman power to control events, frames social conflict as part of a transcendent struggle between Good and Evil, and makes leaps of logic, such as guilt by association, in analyzing evidence. Conspiracists often employ common fallacies of logic in analyzing factual evidence to assert connections, causality, and intent that are frequently unlikely or nonexistent. As a distinct narrative form of scapegoating, conspiracism uses demonization to justify constructing the scapegoats as wholly evil while reconstructing the scapegoater as a hero.
....
*All conspiracist theories start with a grain of truth, which is then transmogrified with hyperbole and filtered through pre-existing myth and prejudice,

*People who believe conspiracist allegations sometimes act on those irrational beliefs, which has concrete consequences in the real world,

*Conspiracist thinking and scapegoating are symptoms, not causes, of underlying societal frictions, and as such are perilous to ignore,

*Scapegoating and conspiracist allegations are tools that can be used by cynical leaders to mobilize a mass following,

**Supremacist and fascist organizers use conspiracist theories as a relatively less-threatening entry point in making contact with potential recruits,

*Even when conspiracist theories do not center on Jews, people of color, or other scapegoated groups, they create an environment where racism, anti-Semitism, and other forms of prejudice and oppression can flourish.

[ChrisW]

72. Come on!

Let's get seriuos here about these conspiracy theories. I am no George Bush fan but to say the USA had something to do with crashing planes into the WTC is absolutely insane.

[LagaLover]

74. Incoming!

Hope you have a flack vest...

[Padraig18]

75. LOL!

He can borrow mine, as well as my :tinfoilhat: , since I'm going fishing today. :P

[LagaLover]

76. Good luck

Hope you catch a mess!

[Jose Diablo]

73. More but a different slant

http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/Repression-and-ideology.html#TopOfPage

<Two Flawed Theories
Theory One: Countersubversion Theory

Countersubversion theory was influenced by nativism and took shape as a form of government repression during nineteenth century industrial struggles and early twentieth century scapegoating of immigrants.2 Faced with a rising tide of militant labor activism, corporate elites and state agencies blamed the unrest on a few ringleaders conspiring to foment criminal subversive activity and eventually armed revolution. Following WW1 and the Bolshevik revolution there was a backlash against immigrants to the US from Italy, Russia, and other countries. These immigrants-seen as diluting the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant essence of the culture and nation-were scapegoated for purportedly bringing subversive "alien" ideas such as socialism and anarchism into the country and thus threatening law and order and even national security.3

Countersubversion theory emerged as the analytical model favored by corporate elites and private security firms to enlist state agencies in an effort to repress strikes and civil unrest aimed at industrial worksites and mines. Countersubversion theory later expanded beyond its early focus on alleged labor agitation and organizing by communists and anarchists to see all dissident social movements arising not from any real social or economic conditions, but as the creation of outside agitators who comprise a cadre at the epicenter of the movement. These leaders use the movement as a front to hide their plans for criminal subversive activity and eventual violent armed revolution.4

A key feature of countersubversion identified by author Frank Donner was the focus on individual ringleaders, outside agitators, foreign agents, hidden conspirators, and master manipulators. "The emphasis on individuals-cherchez la personne!-plays another quite separate role in the intelligence schema. It personalizes unrest and thus detaches it from social and economic causes. Under this view the people are a contented lot, not given to making trouble until an `agitator' stirs them up. As soon as he or she is exposed or neutralized, all will be well again."5 The solution is to use widespread surveillance and infiltration to penetrate to the core of the movement, expose the criminal cadre, and restore order as the larger movement collapses without the manipulators to urge them to press their grievances which were never significant to begin with.

Countersubversion has been used to guide government intelligence agency policy, provide a mission for organizations and groups, and as an ideology that mobilizes a mass movement. Countersubversion theory, for instance, has been a guiding ideology of the FBI in its campaigns against the left, and in its occasional efforts to investigate the far right. >

Conspiracist Worldviews can and have been used by the government to suppress dissident views.

Look at Countelpro.

There have been many threads here in DU about what happened in the 60-70's to change the populist movement and how that movement seemed to die-out into the Reagan 'new economics'.

Well, there is the answer. The government suppressed that movement, just like they did at the turn of the 19th century.

It is an old battle and to say a conspriracy worldview is insane is not looking at the whole picture.

The point I am trying to make is that conspiracies do exist and to throw-out and debunk any theory without looking into the underlaying 'facts' is just as wrong as holding a theory that has been proved false.

There are underlaying 'facts' about the operation of the Riggs bank and its funding ties to the terrorist operations. It remains to be seen if those terrorist organizations funded through Riggs are CIA or Al Qaeda.

[PATRICK]

77. The simplest plot

for the simplest minds(Bushco). The reason to jump at the government "doing it all" is mainly related to the unaccountable LIHOP details. To make something happen another, more difficult way, presumably because to make very sure the experts had to do it themselves is way too big a stretch.

Why bother when you need stooges to blame, distance from the crime and a small non-leaky loop? Things go wrong anyway, namely not killing off Congress, the botched last plane. The pattern of behavior that we see plainly(now that inner circle leaks are getting Bush involved in smaller crimes we could add more) shows a pattern of hiding, need to know distance, total readiness to EXPLOIT, total resistance to AVOIDING convenient terror attacks.

Because of the other patterns of lies, secrecy and dirty work done by various other government entities, cobbling together the other option is possible. Not necessary, not rational, not successful. As more info comes out, such as the large scale terror exercise that emptied our air defenses ON A SYMBOLIC TERRORIST DATE, it shows big time LIHOP with a lot of distraction and incompetence by anyone trusting or looking to the inner circles of the Bush WH for guidance.

You can argue for any theory before the evidence or truth makes all moot, but a betting man would lay money on: special knowledge and goals by the Bush/Cheney innermost circle separate from most government Intel(which was kept uncoordinated and offbase by Cheney), steering obtusely toward their goal of LIHOP and subsequent exploitation, going the extra step of steering "preventive" measures like the air defense exercise which is naked impeachable 100% LIHOP if you only breach the cover of the plans of the inner circle. Strangeness in their actions after show: distraction away from details leading to LIHOP, clumsiness because the Congress was not hit in a timely fashion, total coverup when other explanations and headtaking would have been a normal and expedient way to set aside suspicions and culpability.

Morally, they have crossed every line. LIHOP first degree is as bad as MIHOP but easier and sneakier. They stood our defenses down deliberately on the day they knew what was going to happen, by whom and at what targets. That is the "theory" I am guessing at. Going so much farther seems unreasonably extreme- for them- as cowards.

[Liberal Classic]

88. This is right up there with

All the Jews taking the day off.

:eyes: