To the LIHOP, MIHOP people...

[Fight_n_back]

I believe that there have been many political conspiracies, i.e, if you think that Oswald acted alone then YOU are the one clinging to a fantasy. I also believe that the Senate conspired to kill Julius Ceaser.

But with regards to 9/11...I think you guys feel more comfortable with the idea that the current resident of the White House is an evil genius rather than what most of the evidence points towards, he is retarded.

If the Bush people had planned 9-11 then they would have missed the buildings. Most likely someone would have bragged about it on "double deep background".

He is an exceedingly stupid man surrounded by mean dullards and chickenhawks. And traitors, don't forget traitors.

But planning something covert? Not gonna happen. What has he planned that worked out the way he planned it?

Don't think "Seven Days in May" think "The Mouse That ROared" If he was going to pull a stunt like 9-11 then it would have backfired somehow and ended up with Canada winning New York in a card game or something.

[lostnfound]

1. Is Cheney retarded? Is Karl?

No. Definitely not.

There's little doubt that they are lying to us. Is it to cover up their stupidity or worse? I don't know. But we all can be sure that they are lying through their teeth.

[Fight_n_back]

88. Yes they are

Cheney is mean but not bright and nothing his career shows him to be smart.

Rove outted a CIA agent which is pretty dumb especially considering the circumstances.

[Al-CIAda]

2. Um, no.

"I think you guys feel more comfortable with the idea that the current resident of the White House is an evil genius rather than what most of the evidence points towards, he is retarded."

Bush IS retarded, the PNAC however, is not.

[napi21]

3. I never believed in the MIHOP, but LIHOP....

I think ShrubCo had such hatered for the Clintons, that anything they were told or warned about was immediately dismissed. I think they deliberately put the Osama subject on the back burner, assuming that Clinton was exagerating, and maybe they'd take a look at the situation next year sometime.

In a way, that falls into the LIHOP.

[Fight_n_back]

6. I repeat my challenge

other than election politics, point to one thing EVER that worked out the way any of the people you hold in such high regard had planned....

I don't think you can. They all have a long litany of absolute failure at every level they have served.

[chalky]

12. I dunno...seems plan #1 was to fill Halliburton's coffers.

Seems they succeeded at that.

And let's not forget how neatly Executive Order (EO) 13303 exempts US corporations from legal ramifications for their actions in Iraq.

[driver8]

13. They didn't have to plan anything...

They got the warning that Al Queda was planning an attack on the US. All they had to do was sit back and let it happen. We know from their actions on 9/11 that they sure were not in any big hurry to stop the attack.

I'm not saying this is for certain, but let's not be to hasty in calling these guys innocent.

[fujiyama]

79. This is sort of the way

I see it as well.

It's clear the administration ignored evidence of an impending attack. The intelligence was there to stop it. Instead the administration was focused on "star wars"/missile defense and China. International terrorism was not the least of their worries.

Whether they willfully ignored this evidence or they did this out of incompetance is a matter of debate. That's also why I won't really argue against LIHOP, but that's where things get sketchy. It's pure speculation as to whether there was actual government participation. The evidence just isn't there to support those claims. I also dislike ridiculous claims that don't have ANY evidence whatsoever to back them up - missile pods, holograms, controlled demolitions, and anything other than Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

At the minimum, this president should have been impeached, along with Rice and several other top officials for not doing their job.

[Talismom]

18. Far as I can see, everything worked just as they wanted it to!

Haliburton was swimming in red from asbestos claims and, like most of their buddies, is now swimming in taxpayer $$$. They don't care about how long it takes or even if the US ever "wins" the "war" or about the state of the US economy that they're bleeding dry! The rich are getting richer, everyone else is getting closer and closer to being their servants...they're bringing back the Gilded Age that they feel the New Deal underminded and THAT is mission accomplished for these guys!

I consider everything they've done to be a failure, but their goals are clearly not the same as mine!

[teknomanzer]

34. Indeed...

they have succeeded in making a small group of people a very tidy profit.

[Ishoutandscream2]

24. Agreed. That about sums it up for me

It was "Operation Ignore" concerning the Clinton administration. And because of that, 9/11 happened.

Simply between LIHOP and ignoring the problem, in my opinion.

[AX10]

48. That makes sense. I would consider it LIHOP even if....

because Bush has no interest in anti-terror efforts. from Jan 2001-Sept 11, 2001, Bush was yapping about Tax Cuts, Missle "Defense", and pulling the U.S out of Treaties.

[teach1st]

4. Well...

...I'm undecided, but there are many unanswered questions. There's also an alternate theory that takes in to account stupidity. That is that the Bush administration misinterpreted or were misfed the details of the attack and decided that it would be politically expedient to let some measly hijackings occur.

I'm not saying that's what happened. I try to look, read, and learn and I'm not decided, but I lean toward a LIHOP by stupidity.

[Beaver Tail]

5. Bush LIHOP

He is by no means a master mind but he is in bed with them. IT took quite a few people to pull this off and frankly I think that Paul Wolfowitz was a key player.

[Fight_n_back]

10. Based on what evidence?

I think it was Madonna that did it based on her misreading of the Kabbalah.

Everything Wolfowitz has ever touched has turned to shit. If he had a hand in 9-11 then they would have hijacked the wrong planes and ended up running out of gas in Maine somewhere.

P.S. The pilots were training before this crew was in power. And Wolfowitz has never actually DONE anything. Plus someone would have bragged about it to one of their gay escort friends.

They were all clueless. That is what the EVIDENCE actually suggests.

[Beaver Tail]

22. Based on this

First, based on teh fact that just LOOKING at the guy creepes me out but the main point is

Wolfowitz wanted the war against Iraq and he needed a reason (Wolfowitz was not the only one but he was one of them).

Wolfowitz as Under Secretary of Defense would have been (correct me if I am wrong) responsible to call on NORAD to shoot down the high jacked flights if Rumsfield was not available. If Rumsfield WAS available it would have been the responsibility of Wolfowitz to call out the fighters of Rumsfield did not.

He also stated the ties between bin Laden and Iraq. When the war against the Taliban started, Wolfowitz manipulated a letter of UN-Ambassador John Negroponte (who was involved in the Iran-Contra affair) and added, that also other strikes against Iraq, Syria or Sudan might be possible.

[Fight_n_back]

29. That only points to

his blind ideology.

The most pressing question I would like to see answered is that of the planes not being scrambled but I still point to it being the fact that they are all idiots and are mostly covering for the fact that Bush fled the scene and hid because his vagina hurt.

[Al-CIAda]

37. NORAD & War games

The non-response of NORAD and lack of defense of the Pentagon.
Testimony of Sentor Dayton and an interview with Dr. Bowman (Lt. Col. Ret. USAF) by Micheal Kane. He discusses the war games planned that very morning at the exact time the event occured.
Powerful 15 min....must see imho

http://innworldreport.net/video/2004-08-04/dayton.html

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Junkdrawer]

7. ..or they used a Cut Out. See: Saudi Arabia...

Better yet, read:



http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400063523/qid=1120739508/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_ur_1/103-8084588-0031822?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

[driver8]

8. Bush is an idiot -- the people around him are not...

They could have totally allowed 9/11 to happen to push the PNAC agenda.

If you think that these people are not capable of an action such as this, you have not been paying attention.

[Fight_n_back]

15. I do not hold them in as high regard as you

None of them can point to a single success in any of their careers. Not a single one. Other than election politics they have all proven to be miserable failures.

[driver8]

20. My line of thinking is that they didn't HAVE to plan anything or do

anything. All they had to do was sit back and let it happen. There was no way they could fuck things up because all they had to do was to do nothing. Nothing is what they did.

[Gay Green]

50. And they could have LIHOP with Shrub completely in the dark

Shrub probably played with the August 6th 2001 PDB as a paper airplane - which then most likely crashed into a model skyscraper on his Lionel toy train set-up.

[Steven_S]

9. OK, so you're not the MIHOP sort.....

Would you concede LIHOP?

It has become inconcievable that they didn't know something was coming. The FBI was told to back off the Saudis. The Aug 6 PDB. Warnings from foreign intellegence agencies. A long list of facts that lead to them knowing something was coming.

AND THEY DID NOTHING.

They let it happen to enact their agenda.

Please lead me, if you can, to another conclusion.

[Fight_n_back]

14. Show me evidence

What the evidence shows is that they were exceedingly stuoid. What about this administration disabuses you of the notion that they are smart? Please point me to evidence that they have any idea at all what they are doing.

[Steven_S]

23. You are correct, sir...

Only profound stupidity would let them think it a good idea to allow an attack to happen.

That they did nothing to stop an attack speaks for itself. If you read my post as I wrote it you would see that nowhere do I even imply that they are smart.

Correct also in your statement that they have no idea what they are doing.

I think we're on the same team.

[chalky]

32. Then let's talk about the PBS scare.

"Hmmmmm...how can we get RW control of that nasty liberal institution? I know...let's tell everyone we're getting rid of it!"


Suddenly everyone's up in arms--Big Bird's going away! Don't get rid of Clifford!
Question is, why would they get rid of PBS if they'd just appointed the notoriously conservative Kenneth Tomlinson as the head?

Well, they decided to fund PBS.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-23-pbs-funding_x.htm

PBS president Pat Mitchell called the vote "a huge moral victory for public broadcasting."

And there was much rejoicing...

EXCEPT...

While Mitchell was happy about the outcome of the funding issue, she expressed reservations about an announcement earlier in the day, when the CPB named Patricia Harrison, a former co-chairman of the Republican National Committee, as its new president and CEO.

Dude, we got played like a cheap violin on that one.

[LSK]

11. well you can say he is doing a good job of robbing taxpayers

Its possible that Bush wanted an Iraq quagmire that would drain the budget for quite sometime. He did a good job of that, didnt he.

And thats assuming Bush had a say in any of it, whos to say he actually makes any decisions?

[Skip Intro]

16. Well, that's one way to look at it all

But if you follow who benefits from each "incident," a map emerges.

And if you saw 2000 stolen like I saw it stolen, and the nation transformed into a "blind faith" war mentality, and Chrisianity hijacked, and Democratic Senators and the media come under Anthrax attacks, and the Patriot Act, and Iraq, w/ those opposed labeled terrorists the whole time, co-inciding with the 2002 "elections", and the draining of the treasury, and the gross misuse and degredation of our military, and the so conveinently timed terror alerts (day after Dem convention), and 2004 - if you saw all this like I saw all this, and if you can add 2+2+2+2+2+2, then I find it hard to see how you can dismiss it all as a case of lucky incompetence.

I see something much smarter, much more sinister.

[Fight_n_back]

25. Those things are not all cause and effect

JFK was probably killed over Cuba not Vietnam. The fact that Vietnam happened after makes it look like the two are related.

The fact that Rove and his minions know how to play the politics of fear doesn't mean he planned 9-11. Bin Laden said he was going to attack long before these cats knew they were going to be running for President.

Whire people aren't in control of the wholoe world. there are other actors involved.

The CIA didn't cause AIDS, the French did, by accident. Popeys Chicken does not make black men sterile.

The Russians do not have an earthquake machine.

The neocons are not very good at anything except making things up. It would be easier for me to believe that 9-11 never happened at all than iot would be for me to believe La Bushinostra had anything to do with it.

Was he happy about it? Yeah, but now its going to bring down his whole party because...he ...is...an ...idiot.

[Skip Intro]

54. Nobody thinks w is making these decisions

I don't think so, anyway.

Either way, to dismiss all but the obvious, insisting there is no ulterior reality, based solely on the fact that bush is clearly idiotic at times, is folly. Realistically, incomptetnce doesn't just "happen" into the most powerful position in the world.

this reminds me a little of someone telling me there's no need to worry about fire, all the while we're choking on the smoke

[Gay Green]

57. And don't forget the outing of the Al-Qaeda member who turned double agent

right after the Democratic National Convention. Caused the Brits to arrest a dozen suspects before they had their evidence in.

[TankLV]

61. You forgot to mention the "see nothing here" "investigation.

That was RESISTED and EXPRESSLY limited on focusing on what we should do to prevent it from happening again, not WHO CAUSED IT, and WHO'S TO BLAME.

Oh, and bunkerboy and his dick got to appear TOGETHER to get their stories straight, had questions in writing IN ADVANCE, and WERE NOT UNDER OATH!

Nope, no conspiracies here!

Nothing to see here!

Move along now!

Shut up and sit down!

[Al-CIAda]

90. The poster is obviously being intentionally obtuse IMO- waste of time. n/t

[Fight_n_back]

94. With all of the evidence you have shown me

oh wait,,,you haven't produced any evidence. Just assertions. So which of us is being obtuse? the person looking for facts that lead to the truth or the person blinded by ideology and using no facts to support their position?

When did Al Queda begin attacking the US? Was Bush involved then? Why won;t you answer those questions?

[DemInDistress]

17. I haven't seen enough documentation to prove

M.I.H.O.P. but there is a wealth of evidence it was L.I.H.O.P.
Let's look at who stood to gain from the 911 attacks..
1.Carlyle Group--18 billion dollars
2.Halliburton --20/30 billion dollars
3.Pentagon--400/500 billion dollars
4.all defense contractors
5.Intelligence Agencies {Patriot and Real I.D. Acts]
6.Oil Giants
7.others still to be named

[Endangered Specie]

19. ive been of the opinion that the owsald theories

arent much better than the MIHOP ones... yes, there is more 'evidence' about Oswald having different motives, but, as is the problem with conspiracy theories, there are so many, and only one or two other organizations could have shot JFK..

I remember a great ONION headline "JFK, shot 98 different times, by 37 different people, all the theories are true" or something to that affect.

[Fight_n_back]

27. You don't have to know who killed Kennedy

in order to know who didn't. I know I didn't do it but that doesn't help me know who did.

Ask yourself this. Were there other people in the book depository that day? If there were then where did they think the shots came from? Just one of the questions that make one go hmmm.

The government is not saying that one plane hit both towers and the pentagon. The government doesn't have to make up evidence in this case because the truth lets them do what they wanted. The rest was a failure of democracy, not grand conspiracy.

[Endangered Specie]

33. 3 shots, 1 gunmen, 1 video...

simple enough, no :shrug:

[Fight_n_back]

39. Evidently not

since the three shots don't make forensic sense and the video sure seems to imply more than three shots and most people at the scene think the shots came from somewhere else and the gun that Oswald didn't own wasn't capable of firing those shots in the time frame needed for that theory beside the fact the gun he never owned didn't work properly in the first place.

In the very least, the government covered up the fact that Oswald was, at one time, a government agent. Also, in 1949 a low level Chicago mobster named Jack Rubenstein was going to be called before HUAC to be grilled about communist infiltration of labor unions (which is kind of like grilling someone about feminist infiltration of NOW) but young Congressman Richard Nixon sent a note to the commitee asking for the witness to be excused because "he is an informer for me". You probably guessed before you got this far that Jack Rubenstein changed his name to Jack Ruby and shot Oswald. Thats weirder than anything that ever happened in the OJ case.

[Zynx]

97. The three shots make excellent forensic sense in the real world

Oswald was using a 6.5mm rifle with FMJ ammo. This is a supremely good penetrator, although the rifle was generally junk, so Oswald can't have picked it for its lethality.

He still came up with a very good penetrating rifle by accident. It's quite possible for a 6.5mm FMJ bullet to penetrate MORE than the "magic" bullet did.

First shot = miss.

Second shot = "magic" - actually just ploughing ahead in a straight line.

Third shot = to the skull from the rear, blows out the front of the skull. Kennedy is probably dead before he slumps over.

~~

What I think doesn't make sense is (a) how quickly Oswald would have decided he wanted to kill the President of the United States once the route was announced and (b) that Kennnedy supposedly took an hour to actually die with half of his head blown away.

[Warren DeMontague]

113. You call that a "straight line"?

Yeah, right, Oswald did it.... in 3 shots.

And there was no weirdness around any of it, just a "lone nut".

Sure thing, Posner. :crazy:

[Endangered Specie]

122. well, its quite possible they didnt pronounce death

until they got to the hospital, sometimes doctors 'wait' to try various revival methods b4 declaring death, and people have survived headshots.

[Octafish]

21. One name involved in both 9-11 and JFK Assassination: BUSH.

Here's the Official FBI document from November 22, 1963 detailing what George Herbert Walker Bush did and said when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Poppy ratted out Parrott then he said he went to Dallas. (Kind of explains that photo, I guess.)



SOURCE:

http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm

[iconoclastic cat]

26. Why LIHOP works: Even the VERY stupid can just sit back and let it happen.

[gumby]

28. "Stupidity Theory"?

That's right up there with "Coincidence Theory."

"His" plans have worked out quite well. He has managed to purposely bankrupt this country so 'social spending' will dry up. This is like a hand in the glove of 'faith-based-initiatives.' Want food, education, etc? Get Jesus.

"He" has successfully created the Orwellian fantasy of perpetual war. The benefits of which are many, including funneling the National Treasury to war profiteers (friends and family) and keeping the population completely mailable through perpetual fear.

Bush is not stupid. He knows what he wants. And he is getting it. Just because his goals seem stupid or insane, that doesn't mean 'He's' not achieving them. Insane leaders have caused great harm precisely because of their intentions and goals.

Stupidity is not an excuse. Stupidity is not a "theory." Bush's policies and actions speak for themselves. They are not "stupid." They are intentional.

As for 9-11, who knows who planned it? Bush, however is right in the middle of it, and has benefited mightily from it. "Stupidity Theory" is no reason to excuse his potential complicity.

[journalist3072]

30. I subscribe to the LIHOP theory in regards to 9/11, and here's why

1. Clinton's outgoing National Security Adviser (Sandy Berger) briefed Bush's incoming NSA (Condi Rice). He told Condi Rice she would spend more time on terrorism in general, and Al Qaeda specifically, THAN ANY OTHER ISSUE.

2. Of course, we all know that in January 2001, shortly after the inauguration, Richard Clarke asked for an urgent and important meeting to discuss terrorism and Al Qaeda. He was rebuffed and told it was inappropriate of him to ask for a principles-level meeting. (He finally got his meeting days before 9/11---coincidence or not?)

3. In spite of receving an 8/6 PDB entitled "bin Laden determined to strike in the US" Bush stayed on vacation at his Crawford Ranch, doing absolutely nothing to prevent the attacks.

So yet, by their INACTION, they let in happen, and on purpose I believe. Bush's approval ratings were in the toilet early in his presidency.

[journalist3072]

38. And one more thing I wanted to add....

Author Mickey Herskowitz said that in 1999, as Bush was running for President, Bush told him: "One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief."

He also said Bush and Co. "had a fixation on the political capital that British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher collected from the Falklands War. They were just absolutely blown away, just enthralled by the scenes of the troops coming back, of the boats, people throwing flowers at and her getting these standing ovations in Parliament and making these magnificent speeches."

[Fight_n_back]

41. That certainly explains

why he lied about Iraq, as all EVIDENCE suggests that he did.

It doesn't explain why those planes hit those buildings.

[journalist3072]

42. It explains that he LET 9/11 happen...

I'm not saying Bush planned 9/11 (that would be MIHOP). I think it was more LIHOP. Bush and Co. had the evidence that bin Laden was going to attack us, and they let it happen.

That's my theory.

[Fight_n_back]

46. Thats not a "theory"

it is a question. A Theory would be backed up with evidence. Gravity is a theory and I can back it up with a lot of evidence.

Bush saying he wanted a war doesn't mean he planned 9/11. He woulod have invaded Iraq with or without it. That seems to be what everyone is missing.

[journalist3072]

58. Here's what I think you are missing

Bush knew that if he wanted to invade Iraq, he needed SOME type of justification.

And I believe that he LET 9/11 happen, so that he could justify the Iraq vision. Just as he has done......put Iraq into the context of the ongoing war on terror.

He wanted to invade Iraq, so he LET 9/11 happen, to give him justification.

That's what I believe--that's my theory.

[Fight_n_back]

66. That isn't a theory

that is a belief, like intelligent design is a belief not a theory.

A theory requires evidence.

He wanted to invade Iraq, yes, we know that because there is ample evidence to support it.

Why would someone leak Downing Memos but not memos that 9-11 was planned?

Bush found justification for invading Iraq. He invented it even after 9-11 happened. He would have done so anyway. Iraq is a debacle and did not work out the way he planned. There is evidence to support my position. It is not just a belief.

[Gay Green]

63. Oh, Puh-lease.

The PNAC THEMSELVES admitted that they needed a "catastrophic, catalyzing," "Pearl Harbor-type event" to enable the whole program of conquest that they set out for us. Read the PDF.

[driver8]

69. Exactly! They wanted something like this to happen so they

could begin the process of taking over the world.

[Fight_n_back]

71. Therefore they planned it?

that is evidenc that they are cowardly, craven miscreants but not evidence that they actually did anything.

What evidence do you actually have that shows they did anything?

Do you have evidence of American's meeting with the hijackersw when they were in Hamburg? Was the pilot school a CIA front operation? Were explosives found at the scene of the WTC?

If Bush or Bushista planned it then why did he run like a pussy rather than appear to be a resolute, strong daddy here to resuce you from the evil one. He didn't do that did he? He crawled under a desk and hid. the reaction of someone who was afraid because he wasn't expecting what was happening.

[driver8]

64. Explaining why those planes hit the buildings is not LIHOP...

The administration got information about the attack and did nothing...NOTHING! They cannot make a mistake or fuck things up because they didn't do anything! They sat back, let shit hit the fan, and then used it as an excuse to put the PNAC ideals into play.

It is mentioned in one of the PNAC documents that a "catastrophic event, similar to Pearl Harbor" was needed to put their plan into action. They had this dropped in their lap and used it to their advantage.

[mattclearing]

31. That's the funniest shit I've read in weeks.

"If he was going to pull a stunt like 9-11 then it would have backfired somehow and ended up with Canada winning New York in a card game or something."

[Fight_n_back]

35. Thanks

this board seems to have a collective lack of the ironic.

[SpiralHawk]

40. MIHOP

For the record. My opinion has been formed the old-fashioned way, with "hard work."

[zann725]

98. Agreed. MIHOP.

Why all the sudden denial...backlack against the obvious?

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fight_n_back]

44. Well

that sentence sure changed my mind.

[mattclearing]

45. Yeah, no one has ever explained this.

In fact, outside of boards like this, no one even discusses it.

[Fight_n_back]

47. There is a reason for that

it isn't worth discussing.

[chalky]

49. Keeping your parameters in mind of not going back to the election and

going outside of the realm of MIHOP and LIHOP, please refer back to my posts #12 and #32.

[mattclearing]

51. Yeah, cause skyscrapers fall perfectly at all four corners all the time.

That's a hell of a "small fire."

[Fight_n_back]

55. Without any actual evidence to the contrary

then you would have to assume that they do fall that way.

In fact I am willing to state that 100% of the buildings I have witnessed being hit by hijacked airliners have fallen in such a fashion.

Do you have evidence that would convince you that it was planned if you did not know who the subject of your investigation was?\

In other words, looking at what you think you know, would you accept it if it were Clinton or Gore that it happened to?

[mattclearing]

60. That's a straw man. It wouldn't have happened in those circumstances.

Because they both knew and cared about bin Laden and his capabilities, and would never have signed off on something like this, in either event.

WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane.

Think about it for awhile.

[Fight_n_back]

72. Im not going to "think about it for awhile"

Im not a structural engineer. Are you? What actual evidence do you have to support your notion?

The Bush administatrion paid NO ATTENTION to Al queda or Bin Laden.

Look how they built up to Iraq and how they are building up to Iran. there was no ramp up to an Al Queda threat. They were shocked when it happened and the cover up was of the fact that they were shocked.

[mattclearing]

107. It's clear that you've made up your mind.

The video that was linked above is evidence enough.

Your original post looks more and more like flamebait with the way you refuse to acknowledge any possibility other than what you have already decided on.

If you aren't trying to learn something new, then why did you entreat the entire LIHOP/MIHOP community into a discussion?

[pauldp]

76. It would still be impossible under any President.

Buildings don't fall like that unless it's controlled demoliton. Ever. Add on top of that the fact that NONE of the steel was tested for explosives even though FEMA said they didn't know what caused the collapse.

But you gotta hand it to Rove's buttboy minions they must be working night and day to cover this one.

[Fight_n_back]

78. I have no embarrassement at all

about admiiting that I have no idea what makes buildings fall.

Who planted the explosives? Were they tied to the hijackers? Golly, had the WTC ever been targetted by explosives before? Did Clinton plan that attack?

[pauldp]

85. Well it sure would have been nice to have a real investigation huh?

And maybe they could have tested at least ONE steel beam for explosives.

[TankLV]

65. Then you haven't read my extensive responses to such questions.

None of which involve intentionally blowing up a building.

But, hey, I'm only an architect, who does this thing for a living, for over 30 years now, as have OTHERS who have commented and agreed with me on this, who are all EXPERTS in this field.

[Fight_n_back]

81. Could you link us to it then?

I don't know much about architecture but I know what I like.

[pauldp]

83. Oh really? Maybe you should talk to FEMA because they couldn't figure it.

No need to test for explosives? Happens all the time right? Got any other video footage of anything similar? Give me a break.

[bpilgrim]

92. CLEAN-vs-DIRTY - only 2 types of collapses KNOWN to mankind Mr. Architect

which one does this fall into...

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc7.swf

nuttin DIRTY(random) about that collapse and there is NO official theory on it yet yet everyone "knows"...

gotta an excerpt with a link? :shrug:

tia :toast:

peace

[AX10]

70. thanks

[Zynx]

86. WTC1 and WTC2 smashed down right next to it

Each of those towers has energy equal to a decent tactical nuke just from gravity and their mass. The energy is obviously released in a much slower fashion, but it is still being released.

The other WTC buildings and the subway lines underneath the towers were all destroyed by these collapses. With how close to that WTC7 is, I don't find it hard at all to picture shock damage crippling the tower.

Btw, buildings *will* fall straight down unless they are very tall and damaged like a tree under an axe. It is exceedingly hard to get the amount of mass contained in even a single floor of a building to move off-axis. The floors have enormous gravity-based inertia on a vector that is straight down to the ground.

This is why WTC 1 and WTC 2 fell straight down, and this is why WTC 7 fell straight down. There isn't any force short of an actual nuclear weapon that could knock one of them over.

[pox americana]

95. I'm sorry, but that is complete nonsense

or magical thinking or both. Highrises do not fall into their basements unless their foundations have been destroyed, which can only be done with high explosives, not by small seismic events such as those caused by nearby demolitions.

[Zynx]

102. How are you going to push a high-rise to one side?

The thing weighs tens of thousands of tons, and is constantly being pulled downward at 9.8m/s every single moment it is upright. If you take away what is supporting it, it is more or less going to go straight down.

This is Physics 101. The only thing that can cause it to tilt is if its supports fail at different rates - one side before the other. This has to happen at the base. Even so, the tilt won't be that dramatic - a few degrees, not anything that would come close to dropping a building on its side.

Other than that, if you want to knock a building significantly off-axis, you better get a nuke. Or a tsunami. Or a very large earthquake that can cause the building to sway.

~~

The reason they take great care in demolitions to blow supports at the level of each floor isn't to get the building to drop, it's to help the building pulverize itself for ease of removal of crap and to ensure that it doesn't drop with the top half still largely intact, then have that fall over - which it will if it is just dropped on an uneven pile of rubble.

However, with a very large building such as the WTC towers - or even WTC 7, which is far larger than just about any non-stadium building ever demolished with explosives - there's more than enough energy with the mass of the building to just smash it to pulp on its own. Won't be quite as clean, though.

And the WTC site was not clean at all. Those are certainly not controlled drops. The entire complex was destroyed and dust and fallout crap spilled over much of Manhatten.

[pox americana]

104. WTC 1, 2, and 7 fell into their basements.

WTC 7 was not struck by an airplane. I believe that's an undisputed fact. WTC 1 and 2 had fires on their upper floors which would have had no structural effect on their foundations. That is my opinion. And my conclusion is that all three buildings were demolished, in a very conventional way, with explosives.

[Fight_n_back]

52. Did Clinton plan

the embassy bombings?

Or Oklahoma City?

Or Waco?

Or Bosnia?

Or the USS Cole?

Did Reagan plan the Lebanese bombing?

Did Arafat plan Black September?

Did Blair plan London?

Did Churchill invent Hitler so he could be a great war Prime Minister?

Did Lincoln fire on Fort Sumpter?

[chalky]

53. Again, I refer you back to post 12 & 32

If you're looking for proof of this administration not being as stupid as you think they are.

[Fight_n_back]

56. Do posts 12 or 32

answer the questions I just asked?

Do you think Clinton planned the Al Queda activities that happened during his administration?

[chalky]

59. I believe they answer the question " What has he planned

that worked out the way he planned it?" That you placed before us in your initial post.

And maybe, just maybe if they're smart enough to pull off those scams, well....

[Fight_n_back]

62. Do you think that Clinton planned

the Al Queda activities that happened when he was President?

[chalky]

68. What does Clinton have to do with your thesis? Your entire thesis was

based on the stupidity of this administration.
Obviously, they're not as dumb as you think.

Let's resolve your first argument before you go on to another.

[Fight_n_back]

75. They are probably dumber than I think

Did you know that Bush didn't even know that there were Kurds in Iraq two months before he invaded? Thats bone dumb. I know that kind of stuff and I don't even get briefed on shit.

The point is that Al Queda didn't appear out of nowhere on 9-11. They blew shit up before. Were those attacks planned by the US government? If you don't think those were why do you think 9-11 was? Because you would prefer it that way. You have no actual facts to back you up, just conjecture that is as thin as those who think Hillary killed Vince Foster.

[chalky]

84. You keep saying "they" when you mean "the Chimp in Chief".

Bush is obviously an idiot. But he's not the only member of this administration, is he?

And no, Al Quaida didn't appear out of nowhere. Yes, they blew shit up before. Why? Well, those goes back to a little thing about a base built on his holy land and the reneging on promises made to him.
(hint: Those promises WEREN'T made by Clinton.)

But let's get back to your NEW argument that Bush couldn't have had anything to do with it because Clinton didn't.

Let me ask YOU some questions:

Did Clinton have ties to the Bin Laden Family?

Did Clinton blow off Richard Clarke when he told him about Al Qaida?

Did Clinton make sure Bin Laden's family was rushed from the US after the initial WTC bombings?

[Al-CIAda]

74. PNAC love notes-

In 1998 this organization sent a letter to President Bill Clinton asking for the US to begin a pre-emptive war with Iraq. They requested an increase in defense spending and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests. Bill Clinton refused them.
---
In Sept. 2000 this group published a document called Rebuilding America’s Defenses. An 89-page document that reads like a blueprint for pre-emptive war on many nations. The first of the wars to be with Iraq followed by Iran, Syria and many other Middle Eastern states to in their own words “control their resources” for America. Additionally the document outlines plans for China’s “looming threat”. It reads in some respects remarkably like "Mein Kampf." The document makes such sweeping statements as:
· The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.
· Iran is perhaps a far greater threat to U.S. oil hegemony
· Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars to establish American dominance for all to see
· The United States will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia
· Demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations
· Advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool
· The need to provoke terrorists to attack in American cities
· Use of fear to rally the American people
· And finally, "The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor."

On September 11th, 2001 the PNAC saw their “New Pearl Harbor”, a door of opportunity that opened and they stormed right through it.
-
On September 20th 2001, NINE days after 911 the National Security Strategy of the United States of America also known as the Bush Doctrine.was released by President George W. Bush. It is an ideological match to the PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses report issued a year earlier. In many places, it uses exactly the same language to describe America's new place in the world.

====

See LunaC's extensive posts on the subject, but I don't think you will -or do you have any desire to.

[Fight_n_back]

91. Whats your point?

That isn't evidence of complicity. that is evidence of being really awful people.

Being able to imagine something isn;t the same as knowing someone did it.

[chalky]

99. It's called MOTIVE.

Part one in building a case.

Read above for examples of "OPPORTUNITY".

[applegrove]

67. I think the fact that Caesar had a knife in his back proves beyond

a doubt that it was a crime. No hidden there.

As to Oswald - just a sorry little squirt. Pathetic man. Trying desperately to find a way to be a 'big man'. Oswald went out on his own and shot at some Southern Politician's home months before he killed Kennedy. He had already decided to be an assasin and was just looking for the right target.

[Fight_n_back]

77. A pathetic man

who learned Russian at the second most secret Naval Base in the country, Monterrey and then served at the MOST secret base in Japan before defecting to the Soviet Union before defecting back with no questions asked.

Not very pathetic actually, Russian is a hard language to learn plus he married the niece of a high ranking KGB official and got her back into the country after giving up his citizenship at the height of the cold war. Hard shit for a "loner".

Ceaser was killed by a lone knifeman with several knives.

[applegrove]

80. Right and Oswald's handlers wanted him to do target practice on

some southern politicians home. Yup!

The people who debreafed Oswald after he came home from Russia thought he was a looser - looking for attention - too.

[Fight_n_back]

87. Really?

Then why did they continue to employ him? Why was he even allowed back in the country? Why did he work for a CIA front group? Why did he associate with people who were later proven to be CIA operatives? Including Felix rodriguez who was involved in everytihng from the Bay of Pigs to Watergate to Iran-Contra? The reason is that most of the guys doing that kind of work are losers seeking attention. Who else would trade guns for drugs or the other weeird shit that CIA guys do?

[applegrove]

93. You are assuming there is some law that says you have to be

arrested if you have no job, immigrate to Russia. Get bored. Immigrate back.


Unless you can explain the target practice a few months before Kennedy. Wouldn't target practice take place in some closed facility? Why would he practice on a famous southern politician? That is not CIA protocol. That is a looser looking for somebody else's power.

He is a little twerp.

Sorry. We will just have to let this one lie.

[Fight_n_back]

96. Not assuming, there is a law

He didn't emigrate to "Russia". He emigrated to the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. Made a public display of renouncing his citezenship and then came back with no questions asked.

Let it lie indeed. I don't think you have looked at many sources.

[applegrove]

112. He got interviewed when he came back. They made him for a looser

and didn't care. He had no secrets. Just language training. And lots of people moved to the US from Russia at the time. And they were given interviews and if found to be useful - perhaps kept tabs on. The Oswalds were not useful in any way.

anyways...I'm guessing we will not be learning anything from each other on this. So as you say - let it lie.

[Zynx]

89. Russian's actually very easy to learn from English - same word patterns

It takes long to get GOOD at it, but not that long to learn how to speak it roughly or passably.

Oswald's importance is generally grossly inflated by conspiracy theorists. Among other things, his CIA/KGB connections require BOTH agencies to be in on the plot - and they could certainly find someone better to do the job between them.

Otherwise, he would have been shot or disappeared - you don't go up to the KGB with CIA credentials and act like you want to work for them. In point of fact, the KGB was EXTREMELY suspicious of Oswald when he defected, for obvious reasons.

[Beam Me Up]

73. MIHOP may have nothing what so ever to do with *Bush

The events of 9/11 were not accidental. SOMEONE(s) MADE IT HAPPEN ON PURPOSE. The question is, who? The whole "War on Terrorism" ™ is predicated on the assumption (so far as I know not backed up by much evidence) that we already KNOW "who". We already know how and we already know why (they 'hate us for our freedoms' or whatever).

In my book one does not have to postulate that *Bush was the 'mastermind' behind this. I doubt that as much as you do. Still, he comes from a family with sinister international connections and he is surrounded by men such as Rumsfield and Cheney who have been deeply imbedded within the National Security State apparatus and infrastructure most of their adult lives. If any one would know how to pull this off and get away with it, they would.

[Kazak]

82. To me, it's more like the neo-cons and the "terrorists" are in league...

in an effort to both start a war and keep it going.

[Rude Horner]

100. You keep asking for evidence but have you ever ...

actually looked for any yourself?

Read the book "The Terror Timeline" or "The New Pearl Harbor" before you just go giving this administration the old "too stupid to pull this off" crap.

To assume that the whole administration is a bunch of morons is to underestimate them, and that's dangerous. Do some background digging and keep in mind - 9/11 has allowed Bush and Co the leverage to do things that he would only DREAM about, had it not happened.

Read those two books I've mentioned, and then afterwards tell me that they couldn't pull this off.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chalky]

106. Welcome, shiva2999.

:hi:

Looks like you're getting your feet wet early!
This thread is kinda like boot camp for newbies. Glad to say you're definitely holding your own.

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

103. .....so when does this thread get moved to the 9/11 forum?

that's where all the others end up....

:shrug:

[WI Independent]

105. LIHBEPJ or LIHDTGI

"Let it happen by exercising poor judgement"
"Let it happen due to gross incompetence"

Personally, my vote is: DNSICDTAIOFA "Did not see it coming due to arrogant ignorance of foreign affairs". :D

Really... if this were all "fixed", why wouldn't we have "discovered" the hijackers were from Iraq?

[Al-CIAda]

109. 9/11 Links To Global Drug Trade

State Dept. Quashed 9/11 Links To Global Drug Trade
 -FBI Whistleblower

Sibel Edmonds- FBI Whistleblower, interview
SE: Everything – from drugs to money laundering to arms sales. And yes, there are certain convergences with all these activities and international terrorism.
CD: So with these organizations we're talking about a lot of money –
SE: Huge, just massive. They don't deal with 1 million or 5 million dollars, but with hundreds of millions.
CD: From your previous testimony and the examples I want to bring up next, it would seem that organized crime with terrorist links is really holding the reins inside powerful governments, even the American one. No?
SE: That may be, but I don't know. I didn't get high enough up on the ladder to find out. With all of this suspicious and unprecedented "state secrets" obstructionism from Ashcroft, it might seem that way, but I don't have any direct information.
CD: But what do think, within departments such as the Pentagon and the State Department. Do you suspect certain high officials may be profiting from terrorist-linked organized crime?
SE: I can't say anything specific with regards to these departments, because I didn't work for them. But as for the politicians, what I can say is that when you start talking about huge amounts of money, certain elected officials become automatically involved. And there are different kinds of campaign contributions – legal and illegal, declared and undeclared.
CD: Could this apparent toleration of dangerous criminal groups in the midst possibly be interpreted to mean that American policy is driven by the "ends justify the means" philosophy?
SE: But how are the ends possibly met by such activities? To this day, I just can't see how. What is happening does not benefit 99.9 percent of Americans – just a very small elite.
I'm no expert, but from what I have personally seen I can say that our national security is being compromised every day, because important investigations are being stopped, and potentially important clues are being overlooked. It's absolutely incredible that even after 9/11, certain individuals, foreign businessmen and others, among others, are still escaping scrutiny.
Okay, perhaps talking about the pre-9/11 world they could get away with saying "we didn't know," but to continue doing so – I mean, what if we are attacked by nuclear or chemical weapons, what will be their next excuse? That "we didn't know" it could happen? Come on! I can prove they are lying, because they know."

http://www.breakfornews.com/Sibel-Edmonds-Story.htm

[Hello_Kitty]

114. DNSICDTAIOFA !!

That's my theory too but that acronym is a bit of a mouthful!!

[Redneck Socialist]

108. "...you guys feel more comfortable with the idea that the current...

resident of the White House is an evil genius rather than what most of the evidence points towards, he is retarded."

Dude, that fucking rocks! :headbang: :rofl:

I think much of the LIHOP, MIHOP stuff I've read is a little bit nutty, but hey, if some folks get off on it that's OK by me.

[pauldp]

110. He was puppet boy on 911. He's daddy's little puppet.

Check out www.wtc7.net The clear controlled demolition of that building and the subsequent destruction of the evidence is prima facie evidence of a crime.

[pauldp]

115. HIHOP - Help it happen on purpose.

Covers both LIHOP and MIHOP.

[pox americana]

123. Bingo

Start with a totally implausible scheme, take every conceivable precaution to make sure it happens, and add sadistic flourishes in NYC.

[lonestarnot]

116. MIHOP

[Ladyhawk]

117. Interesting that I don't believe in a JFK conspiracy,

but I am pretty close to believing LIHOP. :shrug: One person's truth is another's "nutty conspiracy theory." No one has the right to dictate what can and cannot be said. Hopefully, during the course of debate, the truth will come out.

[Lannes]

118. What no talk of the IHOP conspiracy?

:P

[pauldp]

119. Oh you must mean the bogus "Pancake Theory"...

to explain the collapses.

[Lannes]

120. Lol.

Even found a conspiracy there. :)

[pox americana]

121. IHOP is the official theory.

Progressive collapse in five flavors of baloney.

[leftofthedial]

124. follow the money

follow the business partnerships

[JackRiddler]

125. "Bush did it"

This is an increasingly useless shorthand that I don't think any serious researcher ever meant literally.

Shrub is a guy for whom things are done.

The role of the administration would be LIHOP, or simply to feel pleasantly surprised (lucky me, guess I hit the trifecta).

People whom you've never heard of are the ones taking care of the "engineering" details.

Operative command centers are almost certainly privatized, or else a very well concealed compartment of the Pentagon a la "P2OG" (Rumsfeld's preemptive provocation planning office, draws terrorists out to catch them in the middle of the act... let one happen, stop the rest?)

And you can bet the planning, at least of the various components, extends to periods loooong before Jan. 2000.

[rman]

126. good old incompetence theory

-