Convince Me of LIHOP

It's something I'd like to believe, but can't due to lack of convincing evidence.

watching.

So this is just not discussed in the US Media.

not the we have a right wing GOP controlled media - they just act that way.

but yes, the Imperial Family and their allies are immune from such speculation, or anything even remotely like it.

Many threads on DU have dealt with the "untouchable" subjects to be covered in Corporate TV Pravda.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/index.html

One thing you can do is print out the timelines, from 1979 to the present, and go through them methodically. If at the end you still believe it was an intelligence failure, then nothing will persuade you otherwise.

Pretty Allah-damned convenient for "Al Qaeda" to attack a British interest in a country which turned down a $35 billion bribe to be a parking lot for the Iraq invasion, at the exact time that the Idiot Son of An Asshole is getting his ass handed to him by British protestors, and badly in need of a media distraction.

I tend to hold back on my conspiracy theories, except when I see others think the same way.

This whole 911, Iraq war thing seems to be a great planned distraction for Bush. How much he is involved in LIHOP or MIHOP is unclear, but I generally suspect the worst.

The Langley Productions Inc. version of OBL doesn't count.

Bush was warned by

Clinton
State Department
9 Different Countries
FBI
CIA
Interpol

The FBI knew precisely who the hijackers were and had their photos on the web and in papers within hours of the event.

And, various states in the middle east made public their knowledge that the bush regime was intent on invading Afghanistan back in May/June of 2001, 4 months prior to the event.

And, why didn't the jetfighters launch to track and take out the DC or PA planes? It takes 19 minutes to get off the ground and en route to errant planes. Took them over 1.5 hours to get airborn on that day.

Why?

fall down' while watching coverage of WTC isn't taking credit eh???

i forgot...the film doesn't fit into the LIHOP/MIHOP so it's obviously faked. :eyesroll:

THEN he took credit for it. You are right of course, anything caught on film must be real!

:eyes: <----notice my eyes actually roll, unlike yours! :P

trying to put words into other people's mouths.

it's a really lame trick. it's friday and this shit ain't worth fussing with again.

there are real issues related to 9/11. pm me if anyone gets around to talking about them....or not

habit of running away when a fact is presented to them, it's a really lame trick, it's friday yadda yadda...

Good luck with the pms.

tape for more than two months before it was released.

Not credible at all.

And why shouldn't he be happy about it? there is no law says he can't be happy to see hell broken loose on that which he hates the most.

Doesn't mean he planned it or perped it and he STILL hasn't taken credit for it.

Think for yourself.

It's Osama's word against the BFEEs. How do you pick between the two?

So my recollection of Osama finally fessing up to doing the deed comes from the tape of him 'yukking it up'?

specifically said he had nothing to do with it. The tape was an obvious fake.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html

See for yourself. What gets me is, how did this lowgrade crap come out. I mean with all the technology we have, couldn't they have made a better fake? Its so bad its shameful. But, after all, it worked didn't it, as the average american can't see past his beer bottle.

but 4 hijacked planes got zero, for over an hour

sorry, at this point I challenge anyone to convince me it was NOT LIHOP

but because of the time difference it appears like 30 minutes.

I still want to know about the planes, though. Somebody's hiding something. It could be simple incompetence, bad decisionmaking, or something more.

Do you have a link about the 30/90 thing?

incompetence, bad decision making, why has no one been disciplined? Why are Bush and Cheney actively blocking the investigation? Both spoke directly to Daschle and told him not to investigate 9-11. Both have said they did not want to find out the cause. Why would they do and say these things?
Their is a wealth of information that points to the Bush Crime Family involvement and Saudi involvement and extremely little information pointing to any group called Al-Quaeda. There has never been ANY proof presented that OBL had anything to do with it.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAB0001.pdf

One of the F16 pilots from TUL is a friend of mine (not the first one there, but had been notified, he says, about half an hour before making contact with the Lear)

In any case, that's pretty good response for what was clearly not perceived as any sort of threat...nothing at all like 4 known hijacked airliners near NYC and DCA.

I'm unaware of this particular issue being raised specifically with the Shrub administration, or any satisfactory answers...although I admit I might have missed it in the megatons of information and misinformation involved.
:eyes:

There are so many acronyms and abbreviations floating around, I can't keep up with them all. I'm familiar with IHOP - their pancakes are OK.

I want to know as well...

there is also a school of thought, MIHOP, or 'made it happen on purpose.'

MIHOP means "made 9-11 happen on purpose". I believe in the "DHACAIAFUM" theory.

(Didn't have a clue and is a moron)

although I'm still partial to Bush MIHOP

....

Let It Happen On Purpose

:tinfoilhat:

dypas

The huge dollar amount of abandoned airline futures proves conclusively that people with lots of money knew not only the date but the specific airlines that would be hijacked.

Whatever your beliefs about the planning and execution, they have to take into account those futures. A lot of money was very well informed about the attacks.

Do you have a link to more information, or institutions and individuals involved?

I'll bet that aspect of 9/11 was let out because someone assumed that it was the terrorist financial network tried to make a killing by shorting those airline/insurance stocks....but then it led to the bank of a former CIA director and, suddenly, no ones talking.

That is outrageous....

In Google I'm finding lots of links about the airline stock shorts, but nothing so far on the conclusion of the investigation.

And I remember it in LBN...

and too many lies used to prevent a full hearing regarding 9/11

http://www.guerrillanews.com/after_math/

http://www.unansweredquestions.org/

I saw on show in the JFK assassination a few nights ago, and they were talking about all the conspiracy theories. One person mentioned how the huge impact it had on the whole world make it hard to accept it was caused by a lone gunman.

I wonder why the general public isn't more into the LIHOP or MIHOP options. Could it be that it is too scary to think the sitting resident actually is that evil?

Will people become more willing to face the facts as the election gets closer, and it is less frightening to realize we've been screwed?

1. People can't handle the truth.

2. Most Americans are simply stupid.

3. Many Americans are brainwashed with patriotism; they think merely asking questions that implicate Bush is unpatriotic or anti-American.

4. The word "conspiracy" has been tainted. Even left-wing media whore Geov Parrish has gone to great lengths to trash conspiracy theorists - why?

5. The establishment is actively fighting against conspiracy theorists. Operatives constantly ridicule conspiracy theorists, remind the public that criticism isn't patriotic and manipulate the news and events.

both these groups were hoping for some type of catalyzing event that would enable them to justify a massive imperial mobilization, which is
exactly what we have today.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward255.htm

Suggestion: When starting threads that use an abbreviation in the title, define it for newcomers.

That said, I'm a strong believer in LIHOP. The Republicans had the motive and the means, they lost no time in reaping 9/11's rewards, and George W. Bush even joked about hitting the Trifecta. (When I first heard that story, I was a bit skeptical, until I discovered the evidence - on the White House's website!)

One of the most powerful pieces of evidence is the video of George W. Bush in an elementary school on 9/11. When Andrew Card informed him of the tragic events in New York City, Bush just sat there, with virtually no expression on his face.

Aside from the fact that he shirked his duties as commander-in-chief, how could he not show any emotion? Any normal human would be horrified, frightened and/or amazed. I was riding a bus to work, when someone with a miniature TV started ranting about a terrorist attack. I was glued to his gizmo and felt very emotional after arriving at work. I was desperate to learn more.

Buth acted as if he was PREPARED for the news and had been over-coached; his handlers apparently wanted him to appear calm and "presidential," but the big dummy overplayed his hand, looking STUPID.

The excuse that Bush didn't leave the classroom because he didn't want to upset the children is also STUPID. Should the commander in chief be held hostage by an elementary class? What about children in the shadow of the World Trade Center? And what kind of MORON could not simply remind the class that the President has a lot of important duties and he had tend to business?

Other things that stick in my mind:

> The terrorist's passport that was somehow plucked out of its owner's wallet or pocket, magically survived the fireball, then survived the collapsing World Trade Center and was magically plucked from the rubble when entire bodies were missing.

> The story about the terrorists going out bar hopping the night before, causing a commotion and leaving their ID behind. For crying out loud, these were devout MUSLIMS! It sounds like someone used the media to broadcast a phony story designed to connect the terrorists with the events of 9/11 - further evidence that these particular terrorists were NOT involved.

There's more; much more. I haven't yet figured out if the Republicans simply let it happen or if they actually helped plan it. But anyone who believes that 9/11 was nothing more than a band of Islamic terrorists catching the federal government by surprise is a fool.

> The story about the terrorists going out bar hopping the night before, causing a commotion and leaving their ID behind. For crying out loud, these were devout MUSLIMS! It sounds like someone used the media to broadcast a phony story designed to connect the terrorists with the events of 9/11 - further evidence that these particular terrorists were NOT involved.

That story doesnt bother me, as I know many "devout" muslims who behave like some "devout" Christians. Total hypocrites.

But the story that they got in an altercation with another passenger over an effing parking spot at Logan on the morning of the attacks was too much for me to handle. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

And like you the reaction of Bush to America under attack (as in right now!its happening right effing now!) was what cliched LIHOP for me.

..

because I don't know what to make of them, I really don't. perhaps i'm naive. i don't have all the info that LIHOP believers have.

but concerning Bush just sitting there with a blank expression on his face.....

I think he's just too ignorant and too self-centered to realize the significance of what he's just been told. Someone has to tell him. His mind is kind of a jumble at that moment. See my speculative version of Bush's thoughts in that classroom:

Bush: "Gee, this is good video, hope the TV stations use all of it. Cute kids. Gawd I'm bored. But this is good video."

Andrew Card: Mr. President, a large commercial airliner just crashed into the side of one of the World Trade Center Towers in New York City. (speculating here) There is a fire raging and it appears there will be heavy loss of life.


Bush: New York? We didn't carry New York. Liberals, huh! Selfish bastards. A fire? Well, I'll have Karl and Ari write me up a statement, something with a lot of concern and stuff. Gawd, I'm bored. But the TV stations are getting some good video this morning!"

Standard Operating Proceedure was not Followed
by the Pevtagon to intervene in Aircraft that
Gone off Course , and that one day was Sept 11th.

No One Has Been fired or reprimanded for not
Following Standard Operating Proceedure .

Investigations into what went wrong that terrible day
have been Stonewalled and Obstructed every step of
the way .

Lobbyist from the Negligent (Airlines etc.)
Started Lobbying Law Makers on SEPT 11th
while bodies were burning .

In July of 2001 John Ashcroft stopped flying
public flights and moved to private jets because
of a "percieved threat"

The Head of the ISI(Ahmed) was in Washington D.C. the week
of Sept. 11th meeting with Cabinet members of the WH
and Pentagon . It was later found out (Ahmed) the head of
the ISI wired 100,000 dollars to none other than Atta
the supposed leader of the Sept 11th Hyjackers .

http://cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/

not sure what will!

Now that I understand what LIHOP and MIHOP mean, I believe in LIHOP at the very least; I also think there's strong evidence to up the ante to MIHOP. I think the corporate whores that run this country and the weirdos that work for them are capable of virtually ANYTHING. Witness Bill Gates' endless assault on consumers, his willingness to blackmail schools and on and on. Consider the bloody deeds that resulted after Big Business launched the Spanish American war and Chilean coup. Or consider the post-9/11 anthrax attacks.

One problem with LIHOP is that there was an awful lot going on to leave to chance - attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and a possible attack on the White House. If they simply let it happen, then they were probably in control to such a degree that they might as well have planned it.

There were simply too many things going on to leave to chance.

One of the biggest problems with all this LIHOP/MIHOP stuff is that no one has spilled the beans. You'd think a conspiracy of this magnitude would touch many people, some of whom would come forward due to a guilty conscience, after being double-crossed, a touch of patriotism or humanity, etc.

But who came forward and fessed up after the Spanish American War? Vietnam? For that matter, who has spilled the beans about the corporate takeover of public education, one of the biggest scandals (and conspiracies) in American history?

Here's another thought: Conspirators obviously have to limit their numbers. This may have a negative impact on some of their operations. For example, if they could have solicited input from 1,000 experts, someone might have said, "Make sure George W. Bush looks surprised and concerned when Andrew Card tells him what he already knows on 9/11."

Instead, a small group of handlers stupidly told him to look completely unruffled. The stories about the magic terrorist's passport and the bar-hopping terrorists were other glitches. I think some of the chinks in this story may be seen as the result of limited intelligence caused by too few chefs in the corporate kitchen.

Operating Procedures followed on 9-11. When planes go off course calls are made between various agencies about it, particularly Norad and there are operating procedures followed. Instead, in Washington, D.C. approximately 1 and 1/2 hours after it was known we were under attack, there was no air defenses over Washington, D.C. and the pentagon was struck. Who was in charge of Norad? Richard Meyers who was awol that day. What happened to Meyers? He got promoted to Chairman, Joint Chiefs.

A big big clue to me is that the administration came out and said "no one knew they would use hijacked planes to slam into buildings." The implication being, they thought it would be a "regular" hijacking.
The reason this is a clue is they had SPECIFIC information that planes would be used to slam into buildings. Hell, they had just attended a summit in Italy in July in which the same threat was made and Italian Air Space had been closed off. Why lie about something like that?

Third, go back and look at Bush as he sat in that class room. He already knew about the first plane having hit when he was told we were under attack. What did he do? Sit there like an idiot, Mister fucking Top Gun, and wait, like everyone else, for the whole damn scenario to play out. No body wanted to move too soon for fear of foiling the damn thing.

I could go on and on and on, like how a guy can go to peddle pusher school for a few months, and learn how to drive a 747 or 757 into the pentagon at such speed at such a low angle after executing a tight 270 degree turn.

The first thing that turned me off was the showing of the pictures of the hijackers within 48 hours. They didn't know shit before, but now all of a sudden, they got all the names and pictures. And this with none of the names on the plane manifests. And don't forget how these devout muslims went out of their way going to bars and making noise the night before so that they could be seen. They even left Korans in the bars and flight manuals in the rental cars. Where are the airport photos of these guys.

Arrrrghhh. Let me stop. It would take a book to go through it all. I just cringe everytime I hear people say "they were caught off guard, or they were asleep at the wheel". Is this all the faith these people have in the most renowned military and intelligence system in the world? They drill for this shit everyday but somehow when the real thing happens, everybody is asleep. What I want to know is why these people didn't get fired. Nope. Some got promoted for goofing off.

What about the stock trades. Oh yeah I forgot. That was Bin Laden. Seems like it would be the easiest thing in the world to tell us who profited from the trading. They have that information. Why not show us? Greedy bastards.

It still hurts me to my soul that people are gullible enough to believe some man with a towel on his head sitting in a cave in the middle of the most god forsaken place in the world, could pull this thing off. And without a hitch.

Arrrgghhhg! Stop me please. Before I go let me say this LIHOP is the same thing as MIHOP. There's no appreciable distinction.

The only bone I can give Bush on this one is that he may have been double-crossed. He may have thought it would be a couple of "regular" hijackings using the boxcutters which means they could have recovered those planes without too many dead and come out the big heroes. But unbeknownst to him, someone on the inside saw a far more sinister opportunity.

I'm informed that there was a drill that very day about hijacked planes crashing into buildings. Could this have been the cover which
provided the sleep at the switch excuse?, i.e. don't do anything, its just a drill.

Okay Okay. I'm stopping for real now. You got my blood pressure up.

Your following paragraph is one of those things that got me and I have never received a legitimate response to:

"It still hurts me to my soul that people are gullible enough to believe some man with a towel on his head sitting in a cave in the middle of the most god forsaken place in the world, could pull this thing off. And without a hitch."

Doesn't it strike anyone else as bizarre that an attack of this magnitude and sophistication, or even half, has not been carried out since?? If the "terrarists" really wanted to take us out and had the capability to pull off something like 9/11 why has nothing even remotely comparative occurred since?

If you had the capability of knocking off a major bank heist and were successful, would you go back to robbing 7-11's??

"attacks"

Like a month before, right?

And Cipro is not recommended as a preventitive medicine, so someone must have known it would be making the news shortly.

This was far before any anthrax attacks. Sounds kinda like somebody knew before hand all about the planned anthrax attacks.

I think that the anthrax thing was planned to be part of the 9/11 scenario, but something screwed up the plans and they had to put the anthraz off for a while. Then they picked the democrats as an alternative target of opportunity.

As bad as 9/11 was, I believe that the airliner attacks were just a part of the plan. As well as the anthrax, remember that the plane shot down over Pa was on a flight path that would have taken it within just a few miles of two or three working nuclear power plants. That would have been a true disaster. Not only killing masses of people, but a 747 flown into a working nuclear plant would have caused massive radiation and that would have been swept by the winds onto the vast east coast megalopolis.

I believe the bushes considered themselves lucky that at least the three aircraft plan worked.

One other question: If this had happened in almost any other country, with all the information that we here at DU have been able to gather, do you think that the administration would still be in power, or do you think that they would have been executed within weeks of the information being made public?

I't funny, but it also made me think for a second: What the hell happened to the emergency broadcast system?! Geez, if there was ever an emergency....?! When your favorite show is on, they're sure to interrupt with that annoying beeping, but if a couple of towers in NY get blown up, nothing!

For what it's worth -- LIHOP

Here's a very indepth article that shows how the government has changed the roles of the key players in 9/11....particularly the terrorist who funneled the money to Atta through the Pakistani general who was meeting with Grham and Goss on 9/11.....

Teryang posted this article on another thread last night (thanks).....it is very long (85 pages), but it drives to the heart of the whole 9/11 issue and how all explantions of the event (Israeli's, Saudi Arabia, the Bush administration) are part of a unified field theory. This is the most enlightening and disturbing article I have read about 9/11 and how the story was changed after the reporting of Omar Saeed as the conduit between Atta and the ISI. I also understand now why an investigation was delayed.....the story was still in progress until a few months ago.

This really challenges EVERYTHING you think you know about 9/11/




There's Something About Omar:
Truth, Lies, and The Legend of 9/11
by Chaim Kupferberg

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP310A.html


It was almost an afterthought. On March 1, 2003, the War On Terror had finally served up the alleged paymaster of 9/11 - a shadowy Saudi by the name of Mustafa Ahmed al-Hisawi. Yet his arrest just happened to coincide with the capture of a much bigger fish - the reported 9/11 mastermind himself, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed - thus relegating Mustafa Ahmed to the footnote section of the "official" 9/11 Legend. But there was another, more explosive side to this tale. Only seventeen months before, a former London schoolboy by the name of Omar Saeed Sheikh was first exposed as the 9/11 paymaster, acting under the authority of a Pakistani general who was in Washington D.C. on September 11, meeting with the very two lawmakers who would subsequently preside over the "official" 9/11 congressional inquiry. Omar Saeed, as reported back then by CNN, was acting under the alias of...Mustafa Ahmed. So where is Omar now? Sitting in a Pakistani prison, awaiting his execution for the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl - while another man fills the shoes of his pseudonym. What follows is a reconstruction of one of the most extensive disinformation campaigns in history, and the chronicle of a legend that may now shine a devastating spotlight on some of the cliques behind 9/11 - and the FBI Director covering the paper trails.

<snip>

In short, Clarke and O'Neill would theoretically be conducting their activities in "plain sight." Under the cover of counter-terrorism, O'Neill would be building a terror legend fit for the New World Order - in the same manner that Oliver North in the '80s employed the cover of counter-terrorism to conduct, on behalf of Vice-President Bush, the illegal arms dealing operations popularly known as Iran-Contra (for which North took a decidedly light rap as the designated patsy). The main difference would be that where North would eventually be tagged as the moron of Iran-Contra, O'Neill would take his place as the martyr of 9/11.

<snip>

This relatively recent campaign to subvert the left with visions of a Jewish neocon/Zionist conspiracy dovetailed nicely with a more longstanding covert campaign - dating back more than thirty years - to build up a small but powerful right wing contingent of Jews to wean the rest from their knee-jerk liberalism (and thereby sap the strength and vigor of the traditional Democrat wing). The species of the Jewish "neo" conservative is best represented by Irving Kristol, a self-admitted former Trotskyite who had been a member of the "left-wing" Congress of Cultural Freedom (later exposed as a CIA front) before making a "sudden" right turn in the late sixties, bringing along with him a few other like-minded "disillusioned" Jews from CIA-funded "leftist" groups. The typical neo-conservative was "neo" in the sense that he would continue to hold liberal social values while espousing hard right (i.e. pro-corporate) economic views and a hawkish foreign policy - pretty much the course that American society has taken in the thirty-odd years since Kristol made his ideological "shift."
Though the history is far more complex and detailed than indicated above, the crux of the point is this: in order to neutralize the influential American Jewish community on the subject of civil rights and domestic dissent (where they historically predominated), it was not sufficient only to wean the Jews from the left, but to turn the left against the Jews by now slurring them as right wing, Zionist "imperialists" (best exemplified by Richard Perle, who is actually more a product of the national security community than of the Jewish community).
In concert with this strategy was a plan - also dating back more than thirty years - to wean the South from the Democrats by promoting a fundamentalist Christianity that grew in counter-point to the overall loosening social values. The typical fundamentalist Christian Republican would hold conservative social views while espousing hard right (i.e. pro-corporate) economic views and a hawkish foreign policy (best exemplified by John Ashcroft, who is actually more a product of a deeply cynical political community than of the community of belief).


more, much more.........

and vice versa - just google 911, WTC, Carlyle etc etc...basically do your own homework.

I do believe it but wish to God I didn't have to think about such a thing.

Anyway the evidence is overwhelming and others have linked it on this thread and indeed for years on DU and elsewhere. If you choose to keep your head in the sand, well, at least you'll sleep better than me.

throw up. And I haven't stopped wanting to throw up since.

I swear, it doesn't feel good, walking around with this inside me.

Answer me this:

Please cite an example of how the events of 9/11 have hurt Bush or his interests. And saying that "people died" doesn't count, because he doesn't care.

Also, please show me evidence of Bush being willing to co-operate with any investigations into 9/11.

this was a terrorist act, Washington D.C. was left COMPLETELY defenseless from the air!! That is beyond an ABERRATION - this is an IMPOSSIBILITY unless it was intentional! By this time, it was known that FOUR planes had been hijacked!! Could Bin Laden, sitting in a cave somewhere have directd ALL U.S. air defense on the East Coast to stand down?? RIGHT! Easily as ridiculous as the "magic bullet"!

seems to have disappeared...

Without doubt to check all the links provided. ;-)

I've asked this question before on this board. If they knew a plane was coming for the Pentagon, then why would Rumsfeld have stayed in the building?

I remember reading two conflicting reports (one from a secretary and another from a staffer) on where Rummy was for about 30 minutes. No one knows. He magically appears on the scene AFTER the crash to help carry people out of the Pentagon (it made a nice photo-op).

hit the pentagon. The key to a successful conspiracy on this level is for the master to never let the players know what roles they are playing in the thing. More than that, most of the players themselves don't know the extent of their involvement. For all you know, we could've hired the so-called "arab hijsckers", told them where to live what schools to go to, etc. and they could have thought they were working for "Al Qaeda". Easy patsies.

They may have thought they were doing a "normal" hijacking too, not knowing themselves that the planes would smash into the buildings.

Who the hell knows who's working for who? Doors are purposely left open for things to happen. And when you're a Rumsfeld who doesn't sit at the top of the scheme and gets a surprise like that missile or whatever it was, you stay the fuck in line.

And to think about it. Why did the pilot struggle to make that hairpin turn so as to strike the building on the side directly away from where Rumsfeld sat.

or rather didn't react!

In the event of a national emergency these are the three men in charge. They are very specific procedures that they are supposed to follow during a NE. As soon as 4 airplanes went off course and the FAA knew, then these three would have been notified. As soon as the first plane hit the WTC all 3 knew that a major attack was under way.

So under the circumstances what did they do? Bu$h sat in an elementary school class reading a book and then went and prepared to make a statement.

Rumsfled was in a meeting in a very secure part of the Pentagon with Wolfowitz and others. When they were told that the WTC was hit, they did nothing. Instead they continued with their meeting until the Pentagon was hit.

General Myers, well I'm not sure what the heck Myers was really doing. He's contradicted himself numerous times.


So if you believe that actions speak louder than words, I think each one of these men should be on trial for crimes against humanity just for their inaction on that morning. The scary part is that once you realize that these men are capable of ignoring the imminent death of 1000's of Americans in order to advance their cause, then you will realize that they are capable of even greater horrors.

He was acting CJS that day, I forget who (Shelton?) was going in the air to Europe that day I believe. Very interesting transcript of his confirmation hearing the following week. He basically responded back to the hearing members with "I'll have to get back to you" on every question pertaining to the events of 9/11.....for some reason, I doubt he ever did.

He was acting CJS that day, I forget who (Shelton?) was going in the air to Europe that day I believe. Very interesting transcript of his confirmation hearing the following week. He basically responded back to the hearing members with "I'll have to get back to you" on every question pertaining to the events of 9/11.....for some reason, I doubt he ever did.

He was acting CJS that day, I forget who (Shelton?) was going in the air to Europe that day I believe. Very interesting transcript of his confirmation hearing the following week. He basically responded back to the hearing members with "I'll have to get back to you" on every question pertaining to the events of 9/11.....for some reason, I doubt he ever did.

eom

1. "Operation Northwoods"
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html

2. Smirk's facial expression and lack of response when informed by Andrew Card of the second WTC attack.

These two things should convince any rational-thinking individual.

and prepare to be convinced. (Warning: disturbing images)

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/true911.html

Speaking of, has anyone seen Symbolman around in awhile or heard from him? Hope he's well coz he does such fine work.

Ask yourself this Durutti:

After being warned specifically that al-Queda planned to attack the US soon by hijacking airliners with terrorist pilots and crash them into buildings (said recently by Max Cleland on the 9-11 Commission), WHY did the President of the United States see the crash of the first plane into the WTC on TV, then still go into the photo-op in the classroom? Then WHY o WHY did the President of the United States get told by his Chief of Staff that a second plane had crashed into the other WTC tower

AND THEN SIT THERE FOR ANOTHER 25 MINUTES LISTEN TO A CHILD READ HIM "THE HUNGRY GOAT" WHILE 700 PEOPLE WERE JUMPING OUT OF THE TOWERS AND 2 OTHER PLANES WERE KNOWN TO BE HIJACKED AND WERE STILL IN THE AIR????

Is "The Hungry Goat" really that good a read?

OR WAS IT REALLY THE FACT THAT TO LIHOP, THE PRESIDENT SAT THERE BECAUSE ONLY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS THE POWER TO ORDER THE SHOOTDOWN OF AN AIRLINER AND THE POWER TO COUNTERMAND HIS OWN OBVIOUS ORDER TO EBERHARD TO STAND DOWN NORAD AND NOT EVEN INTERCEPT THE JETS ON TIME????

Now if you were President of the United States, Durutti, wouldn't you have seen the first atttack and then told the children "there's an emergency and I have to go but I will come back sometime and read a story with you? Then you would have gone out and immediately dealt with the situation of your own country being UNDER ATTACK.

Especially telling was Andrew Card telling him the 2nd plane had hit, the look on Bush's face on the video and then BUSH ASKED HIM NOTHING!! (he didn't have to)

CARD NEVER EVEN CAME BACK IN THAT FATEFUL 25 MINUTES TO GIVE HIM THE MANY UPDATES ON THE DEVELOPING CRISIS. WHY? HE KNEW HE WASN'T SUPPOSED TO. FINALLY, AFTER THE HUNGRY GOAT HAD EATEN HIS FILL, DID THEY RUSH OFF TO LEAD THE NATION IN THE TIME OF NEED?? NO!!!!!!!!!
THEY FARTED AROUND FOR ANOTHER 20-30 MINUTES SAYING GOODBYE AND SHAKING HANDS WITH EVERYONE FROM THE TEACHERS TO THE JANITOR!! PLUS DON'T FORGET BOOKER IS 5 MINUTES FROM SARASOTA AIRPORT. WHY DIDN'T THE SECRET SERVICE IMMEDIATELY MOVE HIM FROM A PUBLICIZED PHOTO OP WHERE HE COULD BE DIVE-BOMBED TO A SAFE LOCATION???

I hope Dean or Clark ask him these questions in the debate, because there is no good answer at all to any of them except Bush LIHOP.

This is how normal people reacted:




edit: added pic and text

:evilgrin: (I mean the question, not the post -er)

Until the next doubter comes along. :toast: