MIHOP-ers: If you were them how would you have gotten job done?

[Sinti]

I'm not trying to incite any verbal aggression, I'm genuinely curious to know, rather than looking at the wealth of evidence and disinformation that's out there and saying what "they" might have done, what would "you" have done, given the tools at their disposal. Tools: Defense black ops, CIA, compartmentalization, methods for plugging any potential leaks, technology at hand, alliances needed to achieve your goal, perception management techniques. Consider also, the penalty for failure. Could you feasibly get away with it?

(I personally think if it was well thought out enough someone could, but that's just my opinion. Whether or not they did has yet to be proven.)

This is not meant to be an actual and factual recounting of what anybody did, more of an exercise in imagination. Could you do what they did, without defying the laws of physics, of course?

Any Takers?

[Woody Box]

1. Quick answer

Here's my take:

Set several wargames to take place on the same day.

Make sure these wargames involve fake hijackings ("live-fly exercises").

Make sure the different agencies (FAA, FEMA, etc.) and the lower military have no or only limited information on the scope of the wargames; i.e. some don't have a clue at all, others know roughly about the wargames, but not how they play out.

Talk with your buddy at the CIA to prepare some patsies and scapegoats to stage (conventional) hijackings the same day - these are your later suicide pilots. Tell the CIA if they have some agents from Saudi Arabia with a licence to fly commercial airliners to prepare these guys to play the "attacker" part in a wargame.

If all of this has been prepared thoroughly, you only have to slightly modify the wargames; the "live-fly exercise" planes with the Saudi CIA agents as pilots do as they were told - they fake a hijacking, but land at an evacuated airport. Make sure they turn off the transponders so the identity of the planes can be changed in the air.

Now you have to start a drone for each building from one of your bases, crashing at the WTC/Pentagon. This is the easy part.

After landing, the passengers of the live-fly exercise planes, still thinking they are part of a wargame, are evacuated to "secure" locations as part of a terror drill.

The result: Noone knows what has really happened and who is responsible.

[Sinti]

2. Not bad, the devil is in the details - but it's a starting scenario :)

[Woody Box]

3. Thanks

This was just an overview. I'm ready to support this scenario (I think it's more than that) with plenty of details. But to write down all details and bring them into the right logical order will take hours, days of work. I'm working on that.

One example: the evacuated airports are Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Washington DC (Reagan). Maybe some others too, but here the evidence is striking.

[libhill]

5. Or perhaps

a military airbase somewhere -

[libhill]

4. And -

the passengers are terminated. Of course you script it to make heroes of some of them, the "let's roll" red blooded Americans who fought to regain control of the hijacked plane. Nothing but collateral damage to these murderous bastards -

[Debunking911]

6. Small nuke

in the towers garage. I would then say Saddam used his WMD (Which he never had) using Al Qaeda to deliver. We would have been able to go into Iraq and Afghanisan the next week.

Benefits:

1) Uses much much less people than the present conspiracy theory. Just the high level officials, some scientist and the driver to pull it off.

2) Ties Al Qaeda to Iraq

For the present theory you need teams to install the bombs, the pilots, the NYC fire department, the local government to sell the steel, the FAA, NORAD, FEMA, NIST, media, structural engineers to keep quite, CIA, FBI, the Silvertin group, people at United and American Airlines, etc...

[rman]

7. re

As for AQ installing Saddam's WMDs, you might have a hard time convincing people there's a connection between AQ and Saddam that early on. The govt managed to get some people to believe there is only after AQ did 9-11 by itself (supposedly).


> For the present theory you need teams to install the bombs
Not very many, and they didn't need to know what the charges would be used for. They could have been told it's for when the towers are up for official demolition. Moreover if it was a Black Op, keeping quiet is what those people do. It's not like they were randomly picked off the street just for the occasion.

> the pilots
No pilots in the RC planes/drones. Any pilots of real planes with passengers that were involved simply followed instructions in the context of the 9-11 wargames.

> the NYC fire department
Just doing their job. Their reports of explosions they heard can be suppressed (are being suppressed). No need for them to be in on it, except perhaps a few high level people.

> the local government to sell the steel
So what's the problem there? Are you saying the steel was not sold?

> to keep quite:

> FAA, NORAD, FEMA, NIST, CIA, FBI,
These organizations already have been compromised, mostly at the top - they facilitated the operation and subsequent coverup. Most were involved in the 9-11 wargames.

> the Silverstein group, people at United and American Airlines,
I'm not so sure they need to be in on it, and if they were then only a few high level people.

> media,
March to the tune of their corporate owners, and are compromised by the CIA (see Op. Mockingbird)

> structural engineers
Most haven't bothered to investigate, those who did are not all keeping quiet but they can be suppressed/discredited/ridiculed.

[Debunking911]

9. Good, now we can argue the facts...

>> For the present theory you need teams to install the bombs
>Not very many, and they didn't need to know what the charges would be used for. They could have been told >it's for when the towers are up for official demolition. Moreover if it was a Black Op, keeping quiet is what >those people do. It's not like they were randomly picked off the street just for the occasion.

Real demolitions take months of prep work. They would have had to cut into the walls to fix the thermite to the columns. A box with thermite could burn down and not on the column. They HAD to be fixed to every floor to create the effect you say needed to be created. (Cut enough columns to take down the building) At least up to the middle of the building. Taking out one or two columns would have done nothing. They needed a team with more than a ton of thermite. This isn't done with a few guys.

>> the pilots
>No pilots in the RC planes/drones. Any pilots of real planes with passengers that were involved simply >followed instructions in the context of the 9-11 wargames.

You still need pilots of the RC's right? You need the people involved in rigging the remote controls on 757's. You need people who see these large jets missing and saying nothing.

>> the NYC fire department
>Just doing their job. Their reports of explosions they heard can be suppressed (are being suppressed). No >need for them to be in on it, except perhaps a few high level people.

That's just a flat out myth. No firefighters are being suppressed from talking to reporters and such. They could come out and say what ever they want.

I had an E-mail from Steve Spak, a photographer for the NYC fire department. He said they made they right call when they pulled everyone back from building 7.

"Two water mains that supplied lower Manhattan were damaged leaving little or no water pressure in the area. Hours before the collapse of 7 WTC, Fire Chiefs at the scene advised all units to stay away from 7 WTC because of the collapse dangers. They had no water to fight the blaze and the building was damaged from the collapse of the North Tower. I believe that the Chiefs made the right decision in letting 7 WTC burn. Steve Spak stevespak.com"

That is just Steve Spak but there are more who agree with Steve and NONE who agree with CD. In fact many of the fireman's quotes of hearing explosions are being cut to remove what the fireman thought it was. They said it could have been electrical explosions or steel rivets/bolts popping. There is a NYC fire department civil engineering professor who explored the CD idea and says it never happened.

All those fireman who you say they heard explosions yet NONE have come out for CD. I say again, there is 0 gag order on them an I challenge anyone to produce evidence of one outside a conspiracy theory site. It just doesn't exist. That is good proof you can't trust those sites.

>> FAA, NORAD, FEMA, NIST, CIA, FBI,
>These organizations already have been compromised, mostly at the top - they facilitated the operation and >subsequent cover up. Most were involved in the 9-11 wargames.

Yet many of these orgs have people who have come out for much less. Just recently an agent exposed the secret wiretapping going on. There are many others who came out against the rush to war. Those are real conspiracies which need our attention.

How do they do something like that? Gather everyone in a room and say "We need a new Perl harbor and we have a plan to blow up the towers. Are you in or out?" How do they filter out all the liberals who are part of every org in government? The logistics alone are mind boggling. How do they plan such a web of perfection across state lines with so many people involved? Why not chose a simpler plan?

>> the Silverstein group, people at United and American Airlines,
>I'm not so sure they need to be in on it, and if they were then only a few high level people.

Some people in each airline would have to be in on it including the higher ups. What's in it for them? You need the ticket takers who saw the people getting in the planes, you need all the people involved with the plane from landing to take off because this would be an easy way to prove the plane never existed.

>> media,
>March to the tune of their corporate owners, and are compromised by the CIA (see Op. Mockingbird)

This is what I mean, everyone in the media who knows about this and doesn't do a story on it. There is no one who wants a Nobel prize in journalism for this? And I don't see how operation mockingbird applies here. They weren't covering up a mass murder or even ONE murder. You can get people for propaganda but to be complicit in a murder I think is very, very different.

>> structural engineers
>Most haven't bothered to investigate, those who did are not all keeping quiet but they can be >suppressed/discredited/ridiculed

Why have the truth seekers not bothered to educate the SE's? They have the money and manpower to do it. I don't buy that argument. Also, you can't even get structural engineers from countries that hate us.

[Chomp]

15. Excellent post

Keep up the good work. These posts can take ages to write and get no response, but they are noticed!


Peace.

[Sinti]

8. You're absolutely correct that for every person you add the risk goes up

probably exponentially. You cannot over-estimate what a huge risk MIHOP really entails. Getting caught=death penalty, and the destruction of a huge apparatus in our nation's infrastructure, therefore no second chance. It seems the safest route, though I strongly disagree that the FBI, FEMA, NIST, airlines, media, or structural engineers would have to be "kept quiet."


Nuke sounds the most tidy, and direct method of achieving the same effect, and one could have been bought on the black market from former Soviet stock.

It does lack the human component to some degree, and I don't know how people would react to that kind of cold death on the TV as well as the human voices, the "Let's Roll" moment. They might have had an even more drastic reaction.

A nuke, the smallest one I've ever heard of (the M-388 Davy Crockett recoilless rifle) would likely have a lethal radiation scope of about a quarter mile, that's a hell of a lot of humans in Manhattan or any other major city. It would, however, not be enough to destroy the building, if that was desired. Destruction of the buildings would not be necessary, IMO.

Edited to add:
Damn, one other thing, a nuclear detonation would very likely result in an immediate international investigation, by a lot of terrified Western countries. Really good cover could reduce the risk of being caught here greatly, but it does add back a great deal to the risk factor.

You do have to wonder why the hell they chose planes (very risky, regardless of who planned it) instead of something like a nuke, though, don't you. :shrug:

Certainly a terrorist could buy a nuke just like anybody else, right? It's all about the Benjamins to the Russian mafia, and the terrorists appear to have them, via their wealthy hyper-religious benefactors. Truth is stranger than fiction, I guess.

[libhill]

10. No stranger

than the Government story. A handful of Arab terrorists (many of whom later turned up alive and well) who probably couldn't fly a Piper Cub, (one instructor referred to two of them as "Dumb and Dumber") hijack 4 gigantic aircraft, and fly them with precision, except of course Flight 93, to their targets, under the noses of our myriad intelligence agencies, and the U.S.A.F., not to mention Norad. All on the instructions of a bearded ass Mullah operating in a cave in Afghanistan. Bull fucking shit. We won't even mention how fast the controlled media had the names and faces of the alleged hijackers plastered all over our TV screens, within hours of the attacks. Despite the fact that the Government was (supposedly) caught completely by surprise, and didn't have a clue these attacks were coming. They sure pulled it together mighty damned fast didn't they? God damn amazing! Come on people - get your heads out from between your legs and do your own thinking...

[Sinti]

11. Well, that's why we have so many questions, isn't it.

A lot of the official story makes people go :boggle:, no way, a dude in a cave, you've got to be kidding. This is especially true, I think, for those of us who grew up during the Cold War, with a very large, and powerful enemy, with nukes, and all kinds of killing technology.

That said, how would you do it, libhill? How would you manage to accomplish this, and get away with it, if you were them?

[libhill]

12. For one thing -

Listen and listen well. And I don't mean that in a rude, put down kind of way. But I understand that there are a lot of people in this country, who just can't wrap their minds around the concept that our own Government could pull off an atrocity like 911. You have to understand, as another poster put it in a different thread, that there are people in certain agencies of the Government, who kill for a living. It's their job, their livelihood, it's how they pay the bills. Whether they do it because they are psychopaths who enjoy killing, or out of some perverted sense of patriotism, is not for me to say. They receive an order, "do it on the grounds of National Security", and they do it. On a lower level, you have the Military, who are indoctrinated to follow orders. Don't question it, don't ask why, do it. No questions asked. Once a plot like this is fabricated at the very highest levels,it doesn't take a lot of handling to pull it together. You can have dozens, hundreds of people, "technicians", involved to do your bidding, who don't have a clue what as to what they are doing, or why. Many of these "techs" are not a part of any conspiracy, at least not that they are aware of. They go to work, they do what they are told. Nor do they need to be let in on the scheme. These things are handed down on a need to know basis. Example: some folks believe Flight 93 was shot down, for whatever reason. So let's say for the sake of argument, that you're a U.S.A.F. pilot, you get and order to fall in with such and such a flight, and shoot it down. You don't philosophize about it, you don't agonize over it, you do it. You don't have to be told the why or wherefore of it, it's not your business. Another example. You're a commander of a military base. You receive an order to "stand down". You may be given a cover story to explain why, or maybe not. But you are conditioned to follow orders, so you do it. It doesn't make you a wacko or a conspirator, it makes you an individual following orders. The idea that 9/11 would had to have involved hundreds of people being "in the know" is bull shit. The people on top create the plan, the "techs" and the day to day working stiffs carry it out, many if not all of them totally clueless about what's really going down. Not all that difficult. Does that make sense?

[Sinti]

13. It makes absolute sense to me.

My father was in AF/DIA. If his superiors had told him to kill me (or 100 people he knew), he would have without blinking, immediately and with great prejudice. He would also have never spoken another word about it. I know this for certain. Additionally, given the degree of compartmentalization required in all black-op/int operations, the vast majority of people doing the "grunt work" would never know they did anything wrong. Putting 2 and 2 together is much simpler than putting .00002, and .0001, ad infinitum.

I think it would take years of planning, and some very smart men in some very key places to get the job done, but I think it could be done. Whether it was done has yet to be proven. I'm really looking for some outside the box thinking.

[libhill]

14. Thank ya kindly -

that's the way these things come together and happen, and they do happen. I am convinced that 9/11 was an inside job. And it had been planned many years in advance. These people don't just get out of bed, kick back with a glass of orange juice and bowl of corn flakes, and decide to go murder 3,000 + fellow citizens. Research "Project for a New American Century", and focus on the remark about "what is needed is a new Pearl Harbor event". These are cold blooded, self centered, driven people with an agenda, and they will stop at nothing to achieve that agenda. The rest of it is smoke and mirrors and window dressing.

[Chomp]

16. The point is not

whether BushCo has the moral degeneracy to commit murder.

It is whether they have the logistical competance and ideological backbone to do it.

They have neither. They are cowards, and stupid cowards at that.

If I was offered the choice of who commited 9/11, OBL or GWB, I'd have to say that only one of those 2 guys has the smarts and guts, and it ain't Junior.

[Sinti]

17. I would never suggest that * did it. He not only lacks the intelligence

he lacks the apparatus to get it set up. There are many questions about OBL, also, that are too complex to fit within this topic.

The important question here is, how would they get away with it. Doing it is one thing, getting away with it is quite a different matter. I thought the CT was "a rogue element" within our own government /military, perhaps in cooperation with some industrialists, * just happened to be there at the time. Maybe I'm wrong. I can't always keep up with the current stuff :)

[libhill]

18. It's called

"plausible deniability". Honestly, I believe what the previous poster said is partially true. Shrub doesn't have the brains or the guts, and he's too stupid to be trusted. He was probably kept in the dark during the planning phase, whether or not he was informed afterward is anyones guess. As far as getting away with it, they obviously did. Three factors involved here: 1) they control the media, who don't have the spine to question the official story, and who smear doubters as "conspiracy theorists". Not unlike the aftermath of the Kennedy Assassination. This panders to the fact that the average American is in a state of denial, and can't face the fact that their Government is capable of this type of action. 2) As stated earlier, many of the actors involved in 9/11 were either intelligence operatives who do what they are told to do without question, and who will never under any circumstances talk about their actions, perhaps like the team who planted the explosives inside the WTC (with a cover story of course) or ordinary working people who thought it was all just another day on the job, who wouldn't be involved in the loop anyway. Radar operators, or air traffic controllers, for example. 3) Plausible deniability for the major perps, Read: Cover Story. Example- "where were you on the day Kennedy was killed - were you in Dallas?" "I can't recall". Or, "I was in Podunk Idaho getting a manicure". These fuckers cover all the bases.

[Sinti]

19. Plausible Deniability - and no available evidence

[libhill]

20. That's the way it works -

n/t

[Sterling]

26. Wow.

You really underestimate the powerful interests that made Bush king. Why do people think he is the brian trust here? I do agree they do fuck up a lot and I think the 9-11 MIHOP was as poor of a plan as the rest of the PNAC, that does not mean they do not have the resources to go through with it.

Personally I think 9-11 did not go as planned, thus all the unanswered questions. However from a Bushco perspective, they can "manage" the inconsistencies and mistakes as they do indeed have all the power they need to pull it off whether we see through it or not. So what if many people do not believe the lie? They have the means to manage that probability, that part they have done well up to this point but like Iraq, people get tired of being lied to and 9-11 may come back to haunt these people, or it may not, regardless it does not take a lot of guts to do anything when you have so much in terms of resources behind you.

[Debunking911]

22. I don't buy this...

USF pilots are just robots thing. All the people in government are just regular folk like you and me. Most people are in the armed forces because they want to DEFEND the constitution from both FOREIGN and DOMENSTIC enemies. Are there people who would use 911 for a war for greed? I have no doubt. I think Bush installed a govenrment of croanies who saw gold on 911. Are there people who would make money on the death of 3000 people? You betcha. But that's a FAR cry from actively killing 3000 AMERICAN people. People who are in the very government which you say killed them. We are to believe the government placed airliner parts around the pentagon and no one saw them? None of the people targeted that day saw trucks pull up with airliner parts? It's one thing to say "A pilot" could have bombed the pentagon but another to include all the people who were interviewed by the media who saw an airliner. They would all have to be in on it. There are just too many from too many different news outlets. Out of the hundreds if not thousands of people involved there isn't a moral person between them? Not even the wives of the people involved?

It's not a question of not believing it's possible. I have been at this for some time now and have yet to see any evidence which stands the test of scrutany. Easy google searches and an ocational E-mail will refute just about every claim. This is not about me not being able to believe, this is about me finding evidence to draw a conclution. Most of the evidence conspiracy sites have are logical fallacies. Others are staw men and quotes taken out of context.

There are those who believe the official story without question but there are also those who believe the conspiracy theory videos and sites without question as well. I fall into a different catagory. I double checked everything myself. For instance I read almost ever firemans interview myself. You will note my quotes are full and in context. I don't cut out parts like the conspiracy sites do.

Example:

“ we heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. . . . We then realized the building started to come down.” -- Firefighter Craig Carlsen

You know what the (...) is? Look at the full quote...

I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. (Here is where they put the '...') At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110505.PDF

Why would they cut around that?

As you can see I dig deeper than the average joe.

I also have had E-mails with firefighters who were there like Steve Spak. Would I go through such lengths if I already believed the government without question? On the other hand I haven't just watched a video with convicted con men as evidence and believed it outright. Don't believe things just because they are against the administration. I hate them too but I'm not going to be like the republicans accusing clinton of murder just because I hate him.

[Debunking911]

21. There is a difference between

take off, landings and flying. There is no evidence they didn't have the skill to fly the airliner once it was in the air.

"Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said"

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/Newsday_com.htm

Conspiracy sites are purposely leaving things like this out. They are quick to point out any quote which they take out of context in order to push their agenda. I ask, why don't they mention this?

The comments of Arabs somehow being to dumb to pull this off shouldn't even be on a liberal forum. Arabs are just as intelligent as everyone else. Especially the hijackers and Osama. Many of the hijackers are college grads and Osama has a civil engineering degree. How many here have a degree in civil engineering or anything else for that matter. If you do you know it's not pee and shake. They also weren't in a cave. They were here.

Anyone who's flown a flight sim game knows it's not that hard to learn the instruments. There are kids who know every dial and screen on a 767. If you think it's that hard to learn buy Microsoft flight sim and put the 767 add on. Sure it's not the same thing but the instruments are the same. They only needed to know how to turn off the transponder, some VOR skill and point the plane. It may look impossible to a laymen but it isn't.

There is a pilot who says it's impossible but he also says planes never hit any of the buildings. Nonsense. My brother in-law saw the second plane hit from the roof top of his apartment building in lower Manhattan. He was just one of what must have been tens of thousands. He was close enough he swears he saw he building sway.

I remember seeing a show about jet fuel fires where they crashed a plane in the desert by remote control to see if this new fuel would burn on impact. One of the reasons the test failed was this veteran pilot had trouble pointing the plane. If anything it's much harder for a veteran pilot to remote control an airliner than it would be for a poor pilot to point it into a building.

As for doing my own thinking, I'm not the one repeating conspiracy site propaganda verbatum. There are only a few debunking sites on the internet and I have one of them. I dug deep into this before I concluded anything. I see you haven't because your arguments have been told to me by many and are easily refuted by just a small google search. Out of the hundreds of conspiracy sites they all seem to be carbon copies of the other. Others are grasping for the slightest bit of information they can twist. Learn both sides and make up your own mind as I have. I have shown you conspiracy sites only give you half the story.

[libhill]

23. Half the story?

The "conspiracy sites" cover a shit load of questions that the MSM and Government won't touch: the airline put options that were traded/sold in advance of 9/11, proving that SOMEONE had advance knowledge of what was coming. The fact that Karl Rove and other Administration bigwigs stopped flying commercial airlines in advance of 9/11, proving that SOMEONE had advance knowledge. The Mayor of San Francisco was warned not to fly the week prior to the attacks, proving SOMEONE had advance knowledge. FEMA officials arrived in New York City in advance of the attacks, proving SOMEONE had advance knowledge. What was up with the five Israelis who were caught high fiveing and celebrating even as the aircraft slammed into the towers - wtf? The passport of one of the "hijackers" that was mysteriously, or should I say conveniently, found in the rubble -wtf? The fact that the building remains were carted off and sold or destroyed before an investigation could even begin - and on and on it goes. When the Government and MSM start to take an honest look at the evidence, then maybe people won't be so quick to jump on the conspiracy theory band wagon. So far, they're not showing me shit. And there's no way in hell that Osama's Bin Forgotten and his little crew of box cutter wielding "terrorists" could have pulled all these stunts off.

[Sterling]

25. That would seem like too much damage to DT NYC.

limited damage would be key. Take down the towers without fucking up the rest of the area. There are good reasons the towers needed to be replaced, taking out everything else around them would not be the ideal situation IMHO.

[Sterling]

24. How about not do it at all?

It was a shitty plan and has not accomplished what they hoped it would in a big picture sense. It was also done poorly IMO as there are too many obvious holes in the cover up.

[Sinti]

27. I would beg to differ on the "has not accomplished" statement.

Look at how much money is going into their World War III (as Bush now calls it). We were living with virtually no enemy, now the enemy is everywhere. Nobody complains, at least not meaningfully, about almost anything they do, because it's for our own good, to defend us from terrorists. The oil companies are raking in incredible profits. Cheney's stock went up 3000 percent, that's three-thousand not a typo. There are many holes, but very few people seem to care. If they did it, they seem to be getting away with it, just like the Reichstag fire.

[Jara sang]

28. Massive pay offs, bribery, extortion and hit teams.

All you would have to do is pay people off with exorbitant bribes. Once that person takes the bribe, then they are "in on it" and talking would implicate them as well. For those that are thinking of talking out of some moral obligation, you just rub them out with hit men. But those "in the know" who know the over all plan would be very, very, very few and would have to stand to lose a lot before they talked, family prestige and fortunes, high powered positions, etc. D.C. establishment are like gangs fighting each other for turf. And as far as the American public "figuring it all out", most Americans don't even know who there Congressperson is. The ones who "try to figure it out" you just label as "kooky conspiracy theorists" and that immediately nullifies any evidence they may bring forward whether it's true or not. Most people do not want to believe that their government is capable of committing such atrocities, but we all know it happens. Think about the Holocaust, your average German citizen had an idea that Jews and others were being killed, they knew they were going to concentration camps yet they did not know the exact how or where Jews were being exterminated on a massive scale. They had to parade Germans in front of the bodies just so they understood the scale of the atrocity that took place right under their noses.

[greyl]

29. Ot: Your sig line is a bogus quote.

There is no record of Thomas Jefferson saying that. It's just something that has unfortunately spread on the internet because many people don't check their sources.

[Sinti]

30. Okay

It seems appropriate ATM, as I am also something that has unfortunately spread around the Internet, because many people don't check their sources. The sig may change some day, the intent will not.

:hi:

[greyl]

31. It doesn't bother you to have a bogus sig? ok.

You could search for a replacement here some day...

[Sinti]

36. Nope, I'm cool with it.

It's attributed to Jefferson in writing the draft Constitution of Virginia. Being a Virginian breed, newly and rather uncomfortably transplanted into Idaho, and given it's content it seems apropos. Sounds like him at least. I will add "attributed to" and it will be all better, yes?

Thanks for the link, don't know that I'll use it.

I think I might use the good old "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" or perhaps Patrick Henry's "If this be treason, make the most of it," or something similarly radical sounding in this day and age of thought police. ;)

[greyl]

37. Jeez man, no it's not all better.

It's falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson.

Add that word to your sig, and it would be all better. Actually, it would become better than ever. Then, you could rightfully claim that you were contributing, in a small way at least, toward the irradication of bullshit.

[Sinti]

38. Done! LOL n/t

[greyl]

40. Haha, very cool man. :) nt

[mirandapriestly]

45. Oh, so it's ok to believe everything you see

on THAT site. LOL

[mirandapriestly]

32. Where did you see that greyl

I searched around and I found dozens if not hundreds of attributions of that statement to Jefferson, and I can't find anything about it being fake. :shrug:

[Debunking911]

33. Logical fallacy

Just because you see it alot doesn't mean it's real.

[dailykoff]

34. Translation: just because it's obvious doesn't mean I have to believe it.

Jefferson aside, I've noticed that's the basic premise of most "debunking" arguments.

[mirandapriestly]

46. What's funny is, he uses as his proof

a quote debunking web page. Like it's OK to believe everything you see as long as it's on a "debunking" webpage.

[greyl]

39. Yes, technically "argumentum ad populum"

The legitimacy of a statement depends not on its popularity, but on its truth credentials.

[mirandapriestly]

43. Yeah, kind of like how

religious fundamentalist hijackers pulled off 911.

[greyl]

41. Where do you see that it's authentic?

Check the documents in which Jefferson was supposed to have said that.
You won't find that statement.

[mirandapriestly]

44. I doubt that you have read everything that Jefferson ever wrote

checking for that statement. There are 1000s of quotations attributed to people online, do you assume they are all false because the page number is not written next to them? I assume that you have some sort of source for your comment, what is so hard about saying what it is? Is there a Jefferson Quote debunked .com page?
Never mind, I looked and there is, lol..

[greyl]

48. You are wise to doubt that, miranda.

Wait, maybe you aren't exactly. I never made that claim. I did, however, provide a link to help in the search for the truth of the matter.

You act like you're surprised that I don't believe everything I read. I can't imagine why.

For a fun exercise, who said this: "A lie can get halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on" in one form or another?
Kennedy, Twain, Madison, Judas Iscariot, or Plato?

[mirandapriestly]

49. So why did you believe the site that said it wasn't his?nt

[greyl]

50. I didn't at first.

Balancing all the sources I found during my active search for objective knowledge, that was one convenient link to provide. Especially because it deals with the 2nd amendment, which was the point of having that quote in the sigline to begin with. I was trying to provide a way to locate a replacement sig with the same intent, but with more authenticity.

Linking to the Library of Congress wouldn't have had the same quick effect.

"Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle."

Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, June 11, 1807
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/

For some reason, I doubt that you listen to The Thomas Jefferson Hour every tuesday on NPR.

edit: Btw, the person I addressed my OT comments to responded to new information in an intelligent, rather than obtuse way. Do you have difficulty changing course when new information presents itself?

[Jazz2006]

47. Greyl... Re: your #41....

Therein lies the problem. Among a certain segment of the population - the tag team currently spewing their ill-informed and misinformed invective here included - actual source documents, books, paper, legal documents - whether historical or current - simply do not exist to them unless they can find them via a 30 second Google search on the internet.

Pretty sad, that.

[dailykoff]

35. They got everything they wanted and more

including 2004 and maybe 2006, and nobody's the wiser except a few cranks on the internets. That's what eight years of planning and a blank check from Congress will get you.

[Bushknew]

42. That’s right, they don’t need our help.