9/11: Are "Let It Happen" theories debunkable?

[Jason]

What happened after the attack?

Almost immediately afterwards the Patriot act was passed. 2 wars sprung up from this.

Over 3000 people died on 9-11, and 4500 or so soldiers died,and almost a million others in Iraq. People seem to believe the US benefitted from the Patriot act or going to war.
How so? Look at the cost of life it cost us, financial impact, and not too mention America's Perception. If anything, the way our government responded to the 9-11 attacks has left us in worse condition. So no one besides Iran and the terrorist living inside of Iraq benefitted from the 2 wars. American citizens didn't benefit from the Patriot act nor has the government. Unless you consider our government's ability to listen in on our phone calls as real benefit.

We can never prove they knowingly let this happen? Having intel that says something might happen, doesn't guarantee it will happen. Can you imagine how many threats the NSA and FBI comb through everyday against our President and our nation? I'd imagine a great deal, but how many of them ever come to fruition. It's a sad day, and from where I sit we certianly didn't benefit from what happened on 9-11

 

[jaydeehess]

Hijacking airliners _ from one of dozens of large airports in the USA? From one of 20 large airports in Canada? From hundreds of international airports that send flights to the USA?

Training for suicide piloting_ At which of hundreds of flight schools around the world?

Targets in the USA_ Literally tens of thousands of possibilities.

In September of a specific year?_ Which of 31 days?

Where do you begin?

 

[jaydeehess]

There seems to be a greater push in the USA for limiting the military budget than before 9/11. The Conservatives call for spending cuts but hold that defense spending is sacrosanct. Sure reduce education, reduce unemployment benefits, infrastructure spending but keep buying multi million dollar tanks that even the army says they don't need. That's the way to get votes.

In fact, how about those last two Federal elections that worked out so well for the conservative agenda of the previous president.

 

[Myth Crusher]

MythCrusher, you responded to my post yet did not actually address any point I made.

Yes, the attacks were used to further an agenda. That does not mean that agenda drove the attacks.

If I were to be killed in a traffic accident would the fact that my wife will collect on insurance insinuate that she had something to do with it?

Your last post also indicates you are supposing a probable conspiracy.

It is a conspiracy. Like the many instances before it. It just wasn't orchestrated by them to the fullest extent. It was a conspiracy in that fact that they conspired to allow the attack to take place to further an agenda. That's my point.

 

[Svartbjørn]

It is a conspiracy. Like the many instances before it. It just wasn't orchestrated by them to the fullest extent. It was a conspiracy in that fact that they conspired to allow the attack to take place to further an agenda. That's my point.

What IS the fullest extent?

The only real conspiracy I can find, is the "I need to make sure I dont get fired because ppl are looking for someone's head to roll" type.

 

[WeedWhacker]

...in that fact that they conspired to allow the attack to take place...

The choice of word there ("fact") is not in evidence, nor substantiated. It is an opinion, yes...based on a mistaken understanding of a couple hundred or so actual facts. Leading to a "conspiracy opinion" that simply doesn't survive a logical examination.

Or, more succinctly: "Cart before the horse". Might even qualify as a "Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy".

 

[Myth Crusher]

The choice of word there ("fact") is not in evidence, nor substantiated. It is an opinion, yes...based on a mistaken understanding of a couple hundred or so actual facts. Leading to a "conspiracy opinion" that simply doesn't survive a logical examination.

Or, more succinctly: "Cart before the horse". Might even qualify as a "Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy".

John Farmer said there was a cover up. Who is he? Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission. Along with the 6 of the 10 other 9/11 Commision members who have come out saying that info was withheld to hinder their investigation.

If you had read all of my previous post you would know this.

Now like I said, you have nothing left to debunk. So if all you're going to do is deflect from facts I have no other purpose in this thread.

 

[Jason]

It was a conspiracy in that fact that they conspired to allow the attack to take place to further an agenda. That's my point.

How can you actually prove this?

 

[Myth Crusher]

How can you actually prove this?

Have you read my previous posts? All the insiders you ignore is something I can't deal with. I have opened my mind and come to realize many conspiracies not true. I am a realist and spot the truth when I see it.

Until you can open your mind and realize something as blatant as this in front of your face I can no longer debate. I am doing nothing more than repeating the same facts over.

 

[Svartbjørn]

John Farmer said there was a cover up. Who is he? Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission. Along with the 6 of the 10 other 9/11 Commision members who have come out saying that info was withheld to hinder their investigation.

If you had read all of my previous post you would know this.

Now like I said, you have nothing left to debunk. So if all you're going to do is deflect from facts I have no other purpose in this thread.

We all agree that there was a conspiracy.. to save their asses from getting fired when the country went from AMG to WTF and started looking for ppl to blame and hold responsible.. but I havent seen a single piece of evidence in any of your posts to suggest that there was a conspiracy to "let it happen" in the first place.

 

[WeedWhacker]

John Farmer said there was a cover up.

I realize this. "Some" info was withheld certainly.

Know the acronym 'CYA'?

More likely because there were a lot of failures, in many aspects of the Intelligence "community". And, a LOT of people stood to lose their careers, livelihood and possibly their freedom too.... (prosecutable mistakes).

NONE of that equates to a full-blown 'LIHOP' scenario, nor claim.

Because, the only other "logic" in your assertions is that the Bush/Cheney administration decided that it would be "OK" to knowingly sacrifice innocent U.S. civilians?

NO, completely out of the question. Frankly, it's absurd.

Oh, and any other "cover-ups" likely related to the plans that Cheney/Bush (had to have been Dick's ideas...maybe Rummy as well) to enter Iraq at some point during the administration.

9/11 was MIS-USED to accelerate those plans (it appears). 9/11 was NOT an "original story idea" to provide an "excuse" to go into Iraq.

I mean....the Saudis were more to blame!! Iraq had nothing to do with it.

 

[Myth Crusher]

We all agree that there was a conspiracy.. to save their asses from getting fired when the country went from AMG to WTF and started looking for ppl to blame and hold responsible.. but I havent seen a single piece of evidence in any of your posts to suggest that there was a conspiracy to "let it happen" in the first place.

Such an intelligence failure is remarkable. You know as well as I do, dozens of warnings and pieces of evidence showing for knowledge proves this to be a cover up. I understand letting a few slip but this is ridiculous!

 

[WeedWhacker]

I'd say after reading a majority of opinions such as "Myth Crusher"s (along those lines) and then looking at more actual facts, well i have an opinion that comports more closely to how it likely actually "went down":

Chatter about possible attacks, and a miscalculation as to the timeline, by various 'ABC' intelligence agencies, all competing to be the "Big Heroes" and gain a coup...(and therefore, not "always sharing")...thinking they could let it go on, then swooping in at the last few hours and getting all the accolades....

Hubris. As in, "We're smarter than they are, we can handle this".

 

[Jason]

Such an intelligence failure is remarkable. You know as well as I do, dozens of warnings and pieces of evidence showing for knowledge proves this to be a cover up. I understand letting a few slip but this is ridiculous!

So what should they have done instead. Warn the entire nation there is about to be a terrorist attack, and that they are planning on using planes to fly into buildings. How do you think that would've gone. These were warnings that they had months in advance. It would've crippled the airline industry, even after putting in all the security. And then if nothing happened and people lives were disrupted over it and airline companies could've went bankrupt for scaring the nation, people wouldn't have taken future terror threats seriously. Much in the same way the suitcase dirty bomb scared everyone initially, and then fears over it subsided with time and it was never discussed again. They get terror threats on a daily basis, and have to decide which ones to act on and which was not too. It's not as simple or straight forward as you might imagine. They have to take an entire NATION into consideration, companies, transit, police, etc etc, while we have single minded emotions. Hind sight is 20/20...

 

[jaydeehess]

But my goal is not to find a conspiracy, but find the truth. For this (9/11) the evidence is staggering. Far too many pieces that don't add up correctly to just attribute this to "Coincidence".

It wouldn't be the first time our government has manufactured an act of terror to further some purpose they might have had. (Think of the Gulf of Tonkin or the innocent lives lost in Iran during Operation AJAX when they staged many attacks, killing hundreds).

You aren't out to find a conspiracy, but it is a conspiracy.....

That a confusing position.

 

[Svartbjørn]

Such an intelligence failure is remarkable. You know as well as I do, dozens of warnings and pieces of evidence showing for knowledge proves this to be a cover up. I understand letting a few slip but this is ridiculous!

Thats an argument from incredulity Myth.. thats not evidence of anything intentional. The ONLY intent that we've seen is the typical response you see from anyone when there's a fuck up.. CYOA, throw someone else under the bus. The real issue is lack of accountability and panic rather than trying to really figure out WHY the intelligence failed. Thats the only cover up and conspiracy.. I still havent seen anything youve posted that provides evidence to the contrary.. and we ALL agree that it was a case of ass covering when the investigations into 9/11 happened.. but it was to keep from getting fired, not to 'bury the evidence' of letting it happen.

Im open minded, if you have anything other than your personal feelings on the matter, then PLEASE post it.. seriously, provide it so that it can be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I can promise you that if your evidence holds what you say it holds, then you'll get a total consensus from everyone that posts on this site.

 

[jaydeehess]

Such an intelligence failure is remarkable. You know as well as I do, dozens of warnings and pieces of evidence showing for knowledge proves this to be a cover up. I understand letting a few slip but this is ridiculous!

What, given the intel that the agencies had, should have been done. Try to be specific.

What did Cheney, whom you cite as having benefitted as evidence of this conspiracy, do, exactly?

 

[jaydeehess]

As I said on another thread,
There's connecting dots and there's connecting dots to smudges, watermarks and the dust motes on the lens of your glasses.

 

[Pete Tar]

There were many lessons to learn from 9/11 including how absurd some of these tall buildings are... really death traps. Officials and engineers and so on allowed these sorts of buildings to be erected with inadequate protection for the occupants.

Are you saying the building's were death traps and had inadequate protection before planes exploded into them and weakened the structure, or are you saying that because the buildings weren't built to cope with that then they were negligent and should never have been built? Because it seems like a lot to expect of a building. They stood up fine before then didn't they?

 

[Pete Tar]

This seems to be what Farmer said on the matter - if there's a more pertinent quote someone should post it.

John Farmer, Jr., senior counsel to the Commission stated that the Commission "discovered that...what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when — was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue." Farmer continues: "At some level of the government, at some point in time … there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened...The (NORAD) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public."[20] Thomas Kean, the head of the 9/11 Commission, concurred: "We to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth."[21]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission#cite_note-Farmer-21

Content from External Source

ETA...

Also found this (alleged) quote

John Farmer says "Well, let me just say that I think the [9-11 Commission] report is extremely accurate and sets forth the facts of 9-11, and actually we did point out in the report the discrepancies between the accounts that we were given and what we actually found."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154486

Content from External Source

 

[WeedWhacker]

Appears as if NORAD really effed it up in their response, and THAT was indeed a "cover-up". Their command-and-control failures.

Obtaining 30 hours of never-before-released tapes from the control room of NORAD's Northeast head-quarters, the author reconstructs the chaotic military history of that day—and the Pentagon's apparent attempt to cover it up.

Content from External Source

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608

Unfortunately, again another example of CYA (pretty stupid, when you consider that the pentagon surely knew that all records and tapes of NORAD communications and responses would eventually be seen).

 

[deirdre]

Appears as if NORAD really effed it up in their response, and THAT was indeed a "cover-up". Their command-and-control failures.

Obtaining 30 hours of never-before-released tapes from the control room of NORAD's Northeast head-quarters, the author reconstructs the chaotic military history of that day—and the Pentagon's apparent attempt to cover it up.

Content from External Source

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608

Unfortunately, again another example of CYA (pretty stupid, when you consider that the pentagon surely knew that all records and tapes of NORAD communications and responses would eventually be seen).

so Farmer is only talking about the DAY of 9/11? Then what is @Myth Crusher talking about?

 

[WeedWhacker]

so Farmer is only talking about the DAY of 9/11?

Yes, but what I've seen from the CTs (since following the "debates" from about 2007 or so) is a misunderstanding and exaggeration of actual facts.

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

Are you saying the building's were death traps and had inadequate protection before planes exploded into them and weakened the structure, or are you saying that because the buildings weren't built to cope with that then they were negligent and should never have been built? Because it seems like a lot to expect of a building. They stood up fine before then didn't they?

I think... one man's opinion... that at least in the case of the Twin Towers... decisions were made which prevented people from surviving and escaping fires in those buildings. The fire suppression systems seem rather mickey mouse... gypsum walls for enclosure of fire stairs and what appears to be a reliance on a sprinkler system which was unreliable!
Other tall buildings probably have been life safety systems. These towers seemed have sacrificed these concerns in the interest of economy/profit for the developers. Putting people really high up creates some real problems for getting them down when something happens. Extreme high rises seemed to evolve because of the high cost of land and maximizing its use. Of course there are the egotists who want the tallest bestest building...

 

[Pete Tar]

So better methods and failsafes for evacuation rather than any structural problems is more your point - just wasn't sure what you meant.
I think tall buildings are probably a necessity with population numbers, but a way to get people out quickly without having to funnel them all through a single point would be good.

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

So better methods and failsafes for evacuation rather than any structural problems is more your point - just wasn't sure what you meant.
I think tall buildings are probably a necessity with population numbers, but a way to get people out quickly without having to funnel them all through a single point would be good.

In the case of the twin towers... the structural system was also part of the calculus to save money and ignore the life safety issues. It was also insane to build a building on top of a main power station.

My main point is that the tragedy was the culmination of all sorts of decisions made by people who worship at the church of profit not people.

There is really no reason to push the sort of density we see in urban centers... In fact, in recent years corps have been moving away... because of the almighty dollar and greed driving up real estate prices...

The entire event was a nexus of extremely complexity spanning decades... and it all fell apart on 9/11.

 

[Pete Tar]

The entire event was a nexus of extremely complexity spanning decades...

Yeah.
But so is everything.

My main point is that the tragedy was the culmination of all sorts of decisions made by people who worship at the church of profit not people.

What would it look like if were the church of people not profits, what practical difference to the outcome do you envisage? (given the buildings would still exist and the attack would take place)

 

[Myth Crusher]

So what should they have done instead. Warn the entire nation there is about to be a terrorist attack, and that they are planning on using planes to fly into buildings. How do you think that would've gone. These were warnings that they had months in advance. It would've crippled the airline industry, even after putting in all the security. And then if nothing happened and people lives were disrupted over it and airline companies could've went bankrupt for scaring the nation, people wouldn't have taken future terror threats seriously. Much in the same way the suitcase dirty bomb scared everyone initially, and then fears over it subsided with time and it was never discussed again. They get terror threats on a daily basis, and have to decide which ones to act on and which was not too. It's not as simple or straight forward as you might imagine. They have to take an entire NATION into consideration, companies, transit, police, etc etc, while we have single minded emotions. Hind sight is 20/20...

This is where your excuses come in to save you. That's why I can't debate you people. You are an advocate of not warning of the attack. So therefore you are condoning the attack. Since there was no warning, 3000 Americans died.

And just like every false flag before it, the truth will come out. Just I like it did with Iran in 53'. Just like it did with Vietnam. Just like Northwoods was declassified. Just like all the other admitted false flags carried out by other countries. We know this was a cover up. The gig is over guys. I'm out of this thread

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

Yeah.
But so is everything.


What would it look like if were the church of people not profits, what practical difference to the outcome do you envisage? (given the buildings would still exist and the attack would take place)

Well... not really. The way I look at this from a very long view and this is MY view... the WTC came into existing to promote "world trade"... code word for glorifying trans national capitalism... which is about profit, resource extraction and clearly not about quality of life for the little guy. Scores of small businesses were run out of the area so the big development could go forward for the large international economic players In the process it further distorted and bloated real estate which another non productive part of the economy.... remember the house bubble bursting? Here real estate speculation was what all sorts of business piled on to cash out... including the home owner who believed that they too could make money without working... investment... I digress.

So part of 9/11 and the part rarely discussed and never by the truthers was that the seeds of blow back/terrorism is sewn by the policies of the USA and EU and even Asian giants who go around exploited the world's resources and people for profit... nit development of quality of life for the average person. And increasingly we see over time some of those average persons get sufficiently pissed at the exploitation and seek some sort of redress. They have no standing in "accepted" diplomatic environments and so non state average disgruntled persons become "terrorists" and use tactics for struggle which the nation states are not see up for with their fighter jets... carrier groups and ICBMs.

Sure "intel" was supposed to be watching the enemies of "the state"... USSR or PRSK... or Cuba... although it is absurd to think any of these enemies would attack of invade or attempt to conquer for ideological reasons. You don't change people's minds with war, really now do you???

So what more iconic symbols of US hegemony and domination than the WTC and Pentagon... Who knows what the 4th target was... the Capitol as the seat of a hypocritical nation who doesn't act on its founding principles... or maybe the CIA which engages in all manner of extra legal foreign policy initiatives for the corporate interests in the USA... Seems to me the targets tell the story... America you've been abusing people around the world with your foreign policies and activities... for too long.

Disaster capitalism rules... turn any incident into a windfall for a corps and capital... and so they did... off "we" went into those profitable no bid outsourced to private contractors for profit wars.

As far as "false flag" excuses go.... the guys could have produced an easy peasy one by simply sinking some empty warship in the Gulf... not unlike the USS Maine... and got their wars of plunder. But 9/11 was such an easy play for Madison Avenue and when there's money to be made Madison Avenue is right there cheering on the capitalists and greasing the way.

The layers of irony in 9/11 is staggering... from the use of the freedom of personal travel... to staging of war games of the actual and very predictable event which was perhaps used as cover for the real word event (these war games could not have been secrets... so the terrorist guys were given perfect cover to further humiliate and confuse.)

This attack was rather brilliant on so many levels... especially that it was so low tech... and stuck as the very high tech US national security apparatus... Of course the truthers with their understandable contempt for US policies and blame 911 of insiders of the state... can't seem to see that these very policies were what caused the non state actors to act...

Terrorism is rather cruel because it harms innocent people... intending to send a message to the policy makers who have a fiduciary responsibility for the welfare of the public. Getting at the system is rather difficult isn't it? You knock off one ideologue and another the same pops up.

In the end not much was accomplished by the terrorists... maybe... some of their fellow disenfranchised little guys were emboldened to believe that there may be a way to destroy the great Satan. But that's really a false belief... Knocking down buildings will not change ideology... and in the case of the West with its lapdog media the important policy issues were never even discussed...

The truth movement has sucked up way way too much energy debunking their nonsense as the world continues to spiral down to hell in a hand basket. Thank god no one is really paying too much attention to them...

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

This is where your excuses come in to save you. That's why I can't debate you people. You are an advocate of not warning of the attack. So therefore you are condoning the attack. Since there was no warning, 3000 Americans died.

And just like every false flag before it, the truth will come out. Just I like it did with Iran in 53'. Just like it did with Vietnam. Just like Northwoods was declassified. Just like all the other admitted false flags carried out by other countries. We know this was a cover up. The gig is over guys. I'm out of this thread

9/11 was not a false flag... it was a case where the US national security apparatus was caught helpless by surprise... and to the rescue came the capitalist to turn it into a money maker and excuse to further suppress individual freedom and rights. US citizens now have a taste (however small) of what state oppression may feel like. Free speech zones anyone???

 

[WeedWhacker]

And just like every false flag before it, the truth will come out.

Calling 9/11 a "false flag" is ridiculous.

This shows a mindset that prefers to have an almost religious fervor behind it, rather than a desire to examine actual facts. Very sad, indeed to remain ill-informed.

We know this was a cover up.

No, "we" do not. (Unless "cover" refers to peoples' asses). I posted the actual facts in the Vanity Fair article. I am surmising that you did not read it?

It delineated precisely what John Farmer meant in terms of any dissembling the 9/11 Commission received from certain military officers' testimony prior to hearing the actual NORAD tapes.

 

[Jason]

This is where your excuses come in to save you. That's why I can't debate you people. You are an advocate of not warning of the attack. So therefore you are condoning the attack. Since there was no warning, 3000 Americans died.

And just like every false flag before it, the truth will come out. Just I like it did with Iran in 53'. Just like it did with Vietnam. Just like Northwoods was declassified. Just like all the other admitted false flags carried out by other countries. We know this was a cover up. The gig is over guys. I'm out of this thread

I am an advocate for warning about the attack. Who wouldn't be? All I'm saying is if our government warned us of every single terror threat posed at our nation, No one would ever feel free in this country, no one would ever leave their homes, people definitely wouldn't fly, curfews would be in place, and the USA we love to call home would resemble a much different place in the world.

I'm not about scaring the public over every single threat that comes across their desk. I don't like to live in fear, so I accept the trade off. I don't think people consider the alternative ever. If they warned about planes being used to fly into buildings. Take the suitcase bomb I mentioned up above for example. If you remember searches on transits in NY came about from that. Police set up #'s to deal with "bags left behind". We saw less people riding the trains and buses after news like that broke, but there was never a dirty bomb suitcase. So people forgot about the it, and the city searches on trains and buses became about discrimination now.

So all I'm saying is, if they had real actionable intelligence saying this was a 100% possibility, then yeah they should've warned the public. So don't confuse that with receiving intel on a daily basis with possible terror plots that never pan out. The public shouldn't be warned about that because it would change our lives for ever. The government has the NSA listening to our phone calls to try and thwart terrorism, and that was the result of 9-11.

And for those who think the gov benefited from 9-11 because of the patriot act, don't you think our government would benefit even more by scaring the public on a daily basis about terror plots aimed at our country. I think that would serve "their secret agenda" even more to be honest with you if an agenda even existed..

 

[Hevach]

All I'm saying is if our government warned us of every single terror threat posed at our nation, No one would ever feel free in this country, no one would ever leave their homes, people definitely wouldn't fly, curfews would be in place, and the USA we love to call home would resemble a much different place in the world.

For a while in late 2001/early 2002, they did warn us of every single threat.

Here in mid-Michigan, the armpit of America, we had the Zilwaukee bridge closed several times for terrorist plots (yet pieces literally fell off and we were lucky to get a yellow cone or two), one school district had to extend a school year to the last week of June because of how many times the police had locked down the high school, and the state offices were locked down enough times in January of 2002 that my plates expired before I could get in to renew them. And that's ignoring all the random inconveniences we had to deal with until about mid-2003, like police checkpoints outside of Wal Mart.

It didn't make people feel unsafe or unfree. It made them numb to the idea of a threat. Boston's bomb squad detonated an Adult Swim advertisement. Los Angeles secured a six block radius because a kid brought a baking soda volcano to the school science fair. Saginaw closed a school for a week over a bottle of rum in the teacher's lounge. Every airport in the country had a false alarm and comical overreaction involving a sex toy.

Eventually every warning and alert became a joke, with people trying to guess what silly, mundane little thing set off the national security system this time.

 

[Pete Tar]

This is where your excuses come in to save you. That's why I can't debate you people. You are an advocate of not warning of the attack. So therefore you are condoning the attack. Since there was no warning, 3000 Americans died.

And just like every false flag before it, the truth will come out. Just I like it did with Iran in 53'. Just like it did with Vietnam. Just like Northwoods was declassified. Just like all the other admitted false flags carried out by other countries. We know this was a cover up. The gig is over guys. I'm out of this thread

That's a disappointing response, you didn't even acknowledge the information showing that your 'insider' was talking about something pretty specific and not what you presented it as.
To accuse people of condoning the attack when they offer a different view to you is a pretty low tactic, and a leap of logic not supported by what they actually said.

 

[jaydeehess]

I am all for warning and intercepting of terrorist attacks. AGAIN though, there is no evidence that enough specifics were known to do either. I asked MC if there was, did not see a response.

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

What would a prevention or intercept look like? Grab these guys in the homes at some point and charge them with conspiracy to hijack planes? Or maybe grab them at the gates... assuming they had detailed intel at that level... which I doubt. Don't you think at the time making a conspiracy case against international terrorists was a pretty huge hill to climb? I suppose post 9/11 they simply sent drones to assassinate suspected terrorists... no trial necessary. But to many this seems rather "unAmerican".

 

[jaydeehess]

What would a prevention or intercept look like? Grab these guys in the homes at some point and charge them with conspiracy to hijack planes? Or maybe grab them at the gates... assuming they had detailed intel at that level... which I doubt. Don't you think at the time making a conspiracy case against international terrorists was a pretty huge hill to climb? I suppose post 9/11 they simply sent drones to assassinate suspected terrorists... no trial necessary. But to many this seems rather "unAmerican".

Uh, yes, that was my point.

 

[Keith Beachy]

I pointed out who he was. He was Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission. His book is titled "Ground Truth".

Here you can see multiple quotes from insiders disputing the official narrative - http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php

Gordon Duff? The article is BS. I can't find anything useful for LIHOP. Is LIHOP like coming over a dip and the road is blocked so you have to leave the road not to kill the people sitting in both lanes; you were warned of hazards in the road by mom and dad, so you should have known people were in the road, but you LIHOP. Are all crimes LIHOP? Did the sources warn us 4 to 5 nuts would rush the cockpit killing crew and pilots to take the aircraft and crash them? Oops, there goes LIHOP down the drain. There were no specific claims made, no details; even if we expected a hijacking, how do you read minds except in movies. LIHOP is nonsense because it exists only in minds, and there is no evidence. What is the claimed evidence? Coincidences and BS, which are opinions to sell books and for Gordon Duff to spread nonsense.

I can see it now, I walk into the store to rob it and I am stopped as I enter because they know I am going to rob it. If they let me rob it, it is LIHOP. How did they know?

Anyone in the CIA for FBI who figured out 911 before it happened would have stopped it. Ironically anyone who says we/they should have stopped it, or there was coverup 911 are endorsing all the BS they now complain about the government has done to try and stop the next surprise - what will it be, radical islamic families tailgating with a explosives... how can people who don't go around killing understand how 5 nuts can cut the pilots throats and kill so many - oh, we LIHOP.

The people who imagine there is a coverup, must be good at covering up their deeds and mistakes.

 

[JeffreyNotGeoffrey]

The problem with the LIHOP idea as a whole is intentions and mind reading. One cannot fully know another's intentions unless that person vocalizes it or puts it down on paper. One can guess at intentions, but that is it, guessing. Further when people say Bush et all masterminded or allowed 9/11 to happen, I just have this to say. Really???? Bush? That whole crowd was none too sharp, and they were horrible at keeping secrets. As others have stated I think the veil of secrecy they tried to put over their actions and reactions to 9/11 were more of a CYA move.
So yeah, until someone finds scraps of writing in which the Bush administration admits to that, or some other real evidence, there is no way to prove their point, unless they start reading minds.

 

[skephu]

A new report from Human Rights Watch certainly puts things in a new perspective:
US: Terrorism Prosecutions Often an Illusion

“Americans have been told that their government is keeping them safe by preventing and prosecuting terrorism inside the US,” said Andrea Prasow, deputy Washington director at Human Rights Watch and one of the authors of the report. “But take a closer look and you realize that many of these people would never have committed a crime if not for law enforcement encouraging, pressuring, and sometimes paying them to commit terrorist acts.”

Content from External Source

Unfortunately, this finding somewhat increases the prior probability of 9/11 conspiracy theories as well.