STRAWMAN! Who cares about Saddam/Al Qaeda? What about the 9/11 LIHOP?

TruthIsAll

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 02:49 PM
Original message

STRAWMAN! Who cares about Saddam/Al Qaeda? What about the 9/11 LIHOP?

Edited on Sat Jun-19-04 02:51 PM by TruthIsAll

How convenient. The NY Times is critical of BushCheney concerning the bogus Saddam/Al Qaeda/911 links. They want proof. Right.

STRAWMAN. CHANGE THE TOPIC. DISTRACT. MISLEAD. AVOID. COVER-UP.

They conveniently ignore the REAL unanswered questions of 9/11. They ignore the obvious coverup. They ignore the victims.

This is the Warren Commission DEJA VU.

But this is much worse. We KNOW they are covering up and we KNEW they WOULD a year ago.

In 1964, we believed the government would try to find the truth. We were naive then.

But no longer. The only question is: MIHOP or LIHOP?

They are lying to our face and only Michael Moore has the guts to stand up to them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

stickdog

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 02:53 PM
Response to Original message

1. Is it my imagination or do they seem more concerned with telling us

who WASN'T at fault than who WAS, who DIDN'T fund than terrorists than who DID, who DIDN'T sell short and make a killing than who DID?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

boxster

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. Yes and no.

Yes, they've shifted the blame, but they've also shown little hesitancy in pointing the finger at Clinton, Tenet, FBI, CIA, etc., when they want someone else to take the fall.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

boxster

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 02:58 PM
Response to Original message

2. Would you prefer that they NOT talk about the bogus claims?

Frankly, we have to convince the American people that Bush, Cheney, et al, lied about the reasons for going to war, first.

If they don't even believe that Bush, et al, lied (and half of them don't, even now), they're certainly not going to consider MIHOP or LIHOP claims realistic.

Patience, TruthIsAll. We need to take what we can get and build the case as we go along. The fact that major newspapers are saying BushCo lied about the Iraq claims is a good thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mad As Hell

(203 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. MIHOP? LIHOP?

What do these mean?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

boxster

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. Made/Let It Happen on Purpose

Edited on Sat Jun-19-04 03:28 PM by boxster

MIHOP - Made it happen on purpose
LIHOP - Let it happen on purpose

Those terms refer to theories that the Bush Administration either made 9/11 happen or knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it, primarily for political advantage.

Edit: for the record, I'm not convinced that MIHOP is all that likely. I think that LIHOP is slightly more realistic, though I suspect it's also very possible that the Bush Admin is just utterly incompetent and short-sighted and didn't put the available pieces together prior to 9/11. Or didn't care. Which is as bad as LIHOP.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MajorFlaw

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-19-04 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #4

6. MIHOP=Made it happen on purpose, LIHOP= Let it happen

on purpose.

Welcome to DU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:30 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.