To the LIHOP MIHOP people, what's your case? I think so too.

[texpatriot2004]

I wonder if you have a list or a thread or two that chronicles the case for this lying lunatic * intentionally ruining the country. I don't really have a case, just a conclusion from reading and researching then comparing it to the current state of affairs. I think it's a logical conclusion that makes sense of all the chaos and ruin he's created.

If I tried to convince anyone though, I am not sure I have what I need to do that. Do you?

[Carolab]

1. I usually use the Skull & Bones and New World Order stuff.

And I get a lot of it from Alex Jones' prisonplanet.com or infowars.com because he always backs his stuff up with links from "hard news" and credible sources.

[texpatriot2004]

6. Thanks for the sources. How does skull & bones tie to LIHOP or

MIHOP?

[Carolab]

7. In many ways and Alex's information is voluminous on this.

Here's a link for you:

http://www.store.yahoo.com/infowars-shop/911roadtotyr.html

P.S. I have watched parts of "The Road to Tyranny" on the net and I recommend his 48-minute version of it on this page.

Plus, this interview with Ray McGovern from Oct. 19th is illuminating concerning possible future LIHOP/MIHOP:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2005/191005McGovern.htm

[ixion]

2. I just talk about the chemistry and physics

and the apparent suspension of many of the laws of both during this event.

The most basic argument is this: Jet fuel simply cannot melt commercial grade steel. If you have ever worked with metal, you know this. But get a 1" thick metal plate sometime and poor jet fuel on it and watch how it doesn't turn to molten steel.

That's the fundamental reason given for the tower's collapse, but the point is that there are so many 'coincidences' and basic suspension of disbelief required, simply to believe the official story that by my thinking the 'official' story makes less sense than many of the so-called 'conspiracy' theories.

[LSparkle]

3. Not to mention that we were all in SHOCK

That was the most useful tool for them -- it was there on TV for millions to watch and be traumatized by. Traumatized, compliant, receptive to anything that soothed the fear.

[ixion]

4. yeah, everything they do is based on fear... it was that (convenient)

event that put the public in the proper frame of mind to allow them to proceed to dismantle our republic. :grr:

[texpatriot2004]

5. I find that's true too, the "conspiracy" stories make more sense.

I don't buy the 9-11 tower collapsing story at all. I watched Mr. Griffin's 90 minute presentation at U of W and it sealed the deal for me. Mind you, I never believed it but his presentation validated my instincts. Then again, I didn't buy the "magic bullet theory" either.

[Spinzonner]

8. You really need to get the story straight

The theory does not claim that the jet fuel melted the girders or anything else. It is too volatile to have lasted that long after the impact.

It did set fire to the building's contents and other construction materials and the crash/blast was responsible, in part, for blowing the protective materials off the girders.

The blast and the ongoing fire softened and weakened the pins that connected the cross-girders that connected the inner shaft to the outer shell and eventually allowed the shell to distort (what hadden't been destroyed by the impact) sufficiently that it could no longer adequately support the weight of the floors above. That started a chain reaction an the collective weight of the upper floors and the shock of their collapse successively caused the shell of the floors below to fail.

It's no suprise that your simplistic interpretation fails the credibility test be cause it's not the scientific one that was determined.

[Carolab]

9. Hey, that's not what the expert from Underwriters Labs said last year.

Kevin Ryan--who promptly got fired for it. In fact, today is just one day past the one-year anniversary of his report.

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Kevin-R-Ryan22nov04.htm

http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-11-11-ryan.php

[Carolab]

11. In fact, a former BUSH Labor economist says it was an inside job.

http://www.globalnewsmatrix.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1350
June 12, 2005
By Greg Szymanski

A former chief economist in the Labor Department during President Bush's first term now believes the official story about the collapse of the WTC is 'bogus,' saying it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7.

"If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an 'inside job' and a government attack on America would be compelling," said Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D, a former member of the Bush team who also served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX.

Reynolds, now a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, also believes it's 'next to impossible' that 19 Arab Terrorists alone outfoxed the mighty U.S. military, adding the scientific conclusions about the WTC collapse may hold the key to the entire mysterious plot behind 9/11.

(more)

[AZCat]

20. Your post is misleading.

While Ryan is an expert, it is in water testing, not fire protection or metallurgy. He did not work in the Fire Protection Division, and his statements should be considered on their merit alone and not granted any extra weight.

[Carolab]

21. What about Morgan Reynolds? n/t

[ixion]

13. sorry, but no go on that theory

you can call it science if you want, but I call it bogus.

[pox americana]

14. Bogus squared.

For one thing, the automatic fire sprinklers brought the secondary fires under control, and for another the structural cores held up the floor trusses, not vice versa.

[truthisfreedom]

10. he brought chaos and failure to every single other venture he was involved

in except for the rangers, but then again he did trade away Sammy Soza.

[Carolab]

12. Oh, GREAT. I knew this would get moved over here.

Why can't we discuss this OPENLY?

Why the CENSORSHIP?

This is all over the Internet so why can't we stop BURYING these threads here at DU?

[texpatriot2004]

16. I started this thread and I did NOT mean it in Re: to 9-11. Why

was it moved?

[Carolab]

18. It seems that LIHOP/MIHOP are automatically assumed to be 9/11

related.

I understood what you meant.

Others jumped in here and started tying it to 9/11 directly and the collapse of the towers and things just started rolling off from that.

[texpatriot2004]

19. LIHOP MIHOP were terms I thought applied to the broader

destruction of our gov and economy. I guess I shouldn't have used the terms though.

I am glad you knew where I was coming from on this. Thanks.

[reprehensor]

15. MIHOP LIHOP

LIHOP
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/LIHOP

MIHOP
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/MIHOP

[philb]

17. complicity is documented by testimnony to 9/11 Comm. & other evidence

Dr. D.R. Giffin's books and
http://www.flcv.com/index911.html

[Jon Gold]

22. STOP WITH THE LABELS

Both LIHOP and MIHOP can co-exist. In my experience, LIHOP eventually turns into MIHOP anyway.

A lot of people have a hard time accepting that our Government would have a hand in it. It's until they see all of the evidence that they eventually follow suit.

I just think of my own experience with 9/11. At first, I wanted to carpet bomb the entire Middle East. Then, I started to see the reactions of our Government, and although I originally agreed with the idea of invading Afghanistan, I now know it was wrong.

Then I saw how the families had to fight for the creation of the Commission... Because the Bush Administration opposed it. It's not rocket science at the point. "Hmmm... what are they trying to hide.", and generally at that point, most people are "off to the races" as they say.

Other people research differently, and other people require different amounts of information. They get to a certain point in their research where they've been convinced, and make a decision that the truth must be told. For some, it's a different point than others. For others, we have to know everything.

The point is... just because someone isn't as far along as someone else in their research, doesn't mean we can chastize them. As I said, most LIHOP turn to MIHOP eventually. It's about having patience with other people around you. We don't have to get along, and we don't even have to like each other. We do, however, have to have a common goal, and that has ALWAYS been absolute truth, and absolute accountability. No matter where it leads.