The Saudis knew the date in advance (though not the operational details), and it's unimaginable that Bandar Bush would not have let the Bushies in on this. by the KISS priniciple, only a few (or even just one person) could have ordered up the air exercises to confuse the attack. It is completely unnecessary for them to have known any of the operational details.
Although Bush was grossly incompetent, I do not believe he knew specifically that that particular attack was going to take place. So in a sense they "let it happen," but saying they "let in happen on purpose" is going a bit far, in my judgement.
I don't believe FDR let Pearl Harbor "just happen" either, for the record.
I tend to be quite skeptical when it comes to conspiracy theories.
17. No if I wanted to get flamed I'd go to the 9/11 dungeon.
I'm just curious about what percentage of DUers think that. I didn't want to get too specific because I know that 9-11 posts aren't really welcome in GD. People have a million reasons for being MIHOP, LIHOP, or OS.
Sometimes you just like to know if you're alone or if you've got pals.
I know which way I lean. As of yet, I'm undecided. Still reviewing evidence.
My old electronic teacher yelled at me once during a test : Don't change the G*d D*mned answer!, your first shot is the best.
My first impression when I heard the news across the radio was that it was staged, the neo cons' burning of the Reich stag. I've seen a lot of images that would indicate things were as we've been told. But it just doesn't fit...
26. Its really interesting to track that the themes in that thinking...
I was reading about Nazi doctors who were involved with US intelligence after WWII, supposedly on some shady stuff, and it all fits the theme of things like operation Northwoords. If MIHOP or LIHOP happened, you could certainly see it as a having been a long time coming!
20. None of the above. But until I see an "-IHOP" theory that doesn't require
Until I see an "-IHOP" theory that doesn't require the Bush administration to know what the fuck they're doing from one minute to the next, I'm just not going to believe any "triple-bank-shot" theory that expects me to believe that they could see the impact that this event would have and not at least try to pin it on Iraq beforehand instead of their old buddies in the Taliban.
Nope, leopards can't change their spots and Bushies can't accurately predict the outcomes of foreseeable future events. Never have, never will.
24. I wouldn't mind it if they actually posted real information.
I'd LOVE to find out that my government didn't cause 9-11 and that the big bad terrorists did it. That would make me sleep well at night. I wish that more of the OS folks would stop insulting us and start showing us some proof on why they think the story is correct.
28. I've seen a lot of problems with MIHOP things I've heard.
Edited on Wed Jul-26-06 05:35 AM by lvx35
I remember people were saying things like "jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel" and pointing to scientific papers, which freaked me out. But then I looked closer and saw these arguments break down, because its like saying wood doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel, which is true in certain conditions, but not generally because nothing burns at a set maximum tempurature, that's how house fires reach 1000 degrees and blacksmiths used wood fires in forges to soften steel in the old days.
anyway, that's how I sleep. But I still don't know :(
I don't think these arguments broke down at all. The fireballs in the WTCs only lasted a short time. And in one case the fuel was mostly burned in a fireball outside of the WTC. In the old days, blackssmiths had to constantly apply air through a bellows or some other way to get the fire hot enough. And mostly they used coal I think. And it took a long time for the fire's temps to rise high enough for the smith's purpose. The WTC fires didn't burn long enough to weaken much steel IMO, and that doesn't account for the buildings giving way below the damage where the structure was still completely intact.
conversation or be "nice" and they do not respond or they hurl an insult in return. It is obvious that they have an agenda and that discovery or exchange of ideas is not the goal. Notice how they never defend any of the OCT positions. Can you imagine how ridiculous their threads on "the hijackers" and how they "fooled" Norad would be?
Jul-25-06 04:35 PM - Poll starts (link) Jul-25-06 08:49 PM - OFFICIAL STORY = 11% of votes (link) Jul-26-06 02:50 AM - OFFICIAL STORY = 11% of votes (link) Jul-26-06 03:55 AM - Poll moved to September 11 forum (link) Jul-26-06 04:07 AM - OFFICIAL STORY = 13% of votes (link) Jul-26-06 04:54 PM - OFFICIAL STORY = 11% of votes (link)
Do you believe that the poll result for the OFFICIAL STORY went from 11% to 13% in twelve minutes at 4:00am in the September 11 forum?
Even if you do, 13% is the 'final result' as declared by the person that started the poll. Exactly the same as what it was at the time of my last post - more than a day and a half after the poll was moved here. (It was in GD for about half a day.)
Do you fail to see my point? Or do you actually feel a 2% difference is significant in a poll with less than 150 votes?
.... in the 60% figure given for the estimate of the OFFICIAL STORY believers populating the September 11 forum.
There has been more than 40 additional votes since the poll was moved here. If the 60% figure was accurate, the OFFICIAL STORY should now be around 26% - approximately double what it is. That's weird.
Why isn't this working out right? Oh, I'll bet my calculator isn't functioning properly. I am using the one from Microsoft - their shit is always buggy. Wait... hold on... found the problem - I had the checkmark for the FPU processing algorithm in the OCT box instead of the CT box. Oops. Let me just redo these calculations now that it's working....
34. I think it is more indicative of the views of the people interested enough
... to respond rather than an overall indicator of the DU membership in general. Considering the number of votes for a poll that was in GD, the interest level may not be very high for the average DU member.
If anything, those who believe "inside job" don't make themselves known. Every single time 9-11 comes up, those who push the Bush administration's lie make themselves very known again and again. They try to create the illusion of a majority view by screaming loud and often. Every time there is a 9-11 thread that sneaks into GD, it gets a large number of rec's and an overwhelming majority of support with a tiny, but vocal minority hurling ridicule and saying "not you kooks again!" . The "moderators" hide the thread from view and put it on the only place on DU where abusive posters are not only allowed but they seem to be encouraged. The opposite of what you are saying is true. You can not provide ANY support for your statement.
58. Those threads also only get responses and rec's from interested posters.
If anything, those who believe "inside job" don't make themselves known.
See quote below.
Every time there is a 9-11 thread that sneaks into GD, it gets a large number of rec's and an overwhelming majority of support with a tiny, but vocal minority hurling ridicule and saying "not you kooks again!" .
I see, the MIHOP/LIHOP crowd doesn't want to make itself known by voting in this anonymous poll, but they overwhelmingly support and recommend threads about 9-11 in GD by presumably posting responses in those threads and voting to recommend them.
The opposite of what you are saying is true. You can not provide ANY support for your statement.
My point isn't which contingent of posters interested in 9-11 are more likely to vote in polls or respond to threads. It is simply that far more people in GD do not respond at all to 9-11 polls or threads, therefore a poll that gets around one hundred votes while in GD for that amount of time is not indicative of the actual views of all DU members in general. It only reflects the views of those that bothered to respond.
GD averages approximately 4,000 posts in the amount of time the poll was left there, I think that would suggest that there were probably more posters that chose to ignore the poll than posters who bothered to vote. If the poll only reflects the votes of those interested enough to respond, it isn't an accurate indicator of what all DU members think on the subject. A truly random sample would be required to be able to claim that the results represent all of DU.
Or to look at it another way, a non-random sample of about one hundred DU members out of thousands (tens of thousands?) of active members is not going to accurately reflect what the majority of posters think on the subject. ________
As a side note, I'll add the fact that having only three options does not reflect a reasonable range of views that have been expressed in this very forum concerning this topic. ________
"Being in the minority never proves that you're wrong." - SENATOR WAYNE MORSE
It seems the most likely to me at the moment, because I don't really buy pods, missiles and plane swapping, but the official story is just full of holes and it looks like the CIA (and the NSA) knew more about the hijackers than they are letting on.
What I'd really like to see is the transcripts of the calls from the hijackers in the US that the NSA intercepted before 9/11. AFAIK not even the 9/11 Commission saw them.
Oh well, if you get a red x it's a cartoon of cheney holdiing a bush puppet. The punchline? Bush and Cheney testify before the 9/11 commission. Here is the page where the cartoon originated. I think Bush knew something was going on, but didn't want to know exactly what. One reason I believe he had to fly around the country for a day and a half before confronting the public. Just an opinion. Thanks. quickesst
49. Besides, this is DU, not GOPU. RWers wouldn't have any reason to come
Edited on Wed Jul-26-06 09:28 PM by BuddyYoung
here in some kind of disguised way. Why would anyone think THAT? And another thing. The alleged "multiple accounts" people are the ones here that are open-minded, tolerant, not interested in having the search for truth deterred by minor details or anything else that would distract from a discussion of the implications arising from the fast-spreading awareness that 911 was an inside job.
64. after hearing the massive synchronized explosions prior to
the collapse of all 3 WTC buildings heard on the video "Eyewitness to 911" I voted MIHOP. Absolutely no doubts in my mind the 3 buildings were wired with explosives (disappearing steel/China) and all the was needed for cover of those explosions were let's say,"2 commercial jets crashing into the Twin Towers" it really amazes me to know WT7 collapsed without even being hit. WOW !!!
911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB... The 21st Century Reichstag Fire. Bravo scumbag Neocons (you got away with MURDER thus far)... But we're closing in on you and you'll be found out.
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.