DIES IRAE
Reprehensor Wed, 10/18/2006 - 1:32pm
First I've seen of this comic, but it's been online for a while... DIES IRAE.
- Reprehensor's blog
- Login to post comments
First I've seen of this comic, but it's been online for a while... DIES IRAE.
LIHOP through and through
Some of the sites he links to are also very shilly. Whether or not people want to admit/acknowledge it, there seems to be a large contingent of the truth movement who are here to water down the truth with hardcore insistence on nonsensical LIHOP scenarios.
It's time to call Bull!
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
*sob*
i liked the artwork
the artwork is keen
but alas, that does not a powerful truth statement make...
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
LIHOP is not shilly. The
LIHOP is not shilly. The evidence of foreknowlege is very solid and when this foreknowlege is considered along with the stated ambition of the PNAC, the failure to intercept, the obvious cover-up commission, and the suppression of pre-911 investigations into the hijackers LIHOP is reasonable.
of course LIHOP seems reasonable on the face of it
But when you get down to it, it seems more reasonable that LIHOP is damage control and a true distraction from the clear fact that these events did not require any hijackings, for which there is precious little evidence anyway.
Besides, everything you cite is reasonable evidence of an effort to engineer ready-made "proof" for a hijacker scenario to disguise the demolition of the towers and give it the necessary geopolitical oomph.
So you REALLY think Ata REALLY just happened to pack a Koran a flight manual and his will on a suitcase and that it was strangely enough not put on the plane he boarded... dude. duuuuude....
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
I think, but do not know,
I think, but do not know, that Atta and company were being monitored in the US and were allowed to hijack four airplanes. Planting evidence is not inconsistent with LIHOP.
based on what evidence do you believe this to be true?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Just remember
who coined the term LIHOP.
something which shows how
something which shows how flimsy the official story is is not necessarily LIHOP, it is just showing how flimsy the official story is.
from my personal experience the best method of turning someone on to 9/11 skepticism is to shoot the official story so full of holes that it can no longer stand, only at this point will the person you are talking to even be willing to listen to any arguements you might have, they will just outright reject them.
we should never cut out interesting arguements like that in this cartoon, this cartoon alone may in fact turn on people to a new line of thinking, and in turn go much further than just the 'no plane hit the pentagon' theory which they may have already seen/heard and completely dismissed.
again, i dont think this cartoon is LIHOP or MIHOP, it is just pointing out a very valid hole in the 'official story'.
Yup...
...
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I'm talking about the guy's site and his links
The cartoon above is right on--I've used this line of argument very effectively, especially with hard skeptics--it does get them thinking. So does Norman Mineta's testimony. It also doesn't really invoke the official anti-Muslim fairy tale which I am strongly opposed to, especially given the absence of real evidence. One of the most tragic consequences of 9/11 was the villification of Muslims and I see part of my work as fighting that stigma by requiring that any mention of the hijacking plot be backed up by actual evidence of hijackings such as we have not seen or heard. Remember that 9/11 is the major reason that 600,000 plus Iraqis have been killed, and why.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Watergate started as a minor burglary
I don't think LIHOP arguments should be so haughtily dismissed as they tend to be on this site. The criticism is usually that LIHOP suffers from a slippery slope into complicity: it is all too easy to turn LIHOP into apology for the official story.
I would say a similar logistical problem faces MIHOP, which all too easily gets summarily dismissed by those who need their dots to be connected with more substantive lines than many MIHOP people can provide. In other words, MIHOP occasionally suffers from the same debilitating deficiencies as LIHOP. Why can't we all get along?
The question, "How on earth could something hit the Pentagon, especially when Cheney apparently knew it was approaching for at least 20 minutes before impact?" is a legitimate question, not to be thrown out because it might be transformed by our opponents into an apology for the official story.
You never know which of these apparently innocuous questions might start an investigation, or provide a thread to something else. Remember, Capone got booked for tax evasion, and Watergate started as a minor burglary.
Look, if people want to use LIHOP to ease people in...
that's dishonest, but if it's effective and all you're willing to try then go for it. When it comes down to what we actually believe though, absent considerations of what is best to get as many people as possible interested, I will have to constantly caution newcomers and others about the peril of allowing LIHOP to become anything more than a tactic. It preserves the evil arab muslim fairy tale and as far as I'm concerned the creation of that fairy tale is as bad as the murder of 2700+ innocent people in the towers. I hope people can respect where I'm coming from. I will not let LIHOP claims go unchallenged, sorry. If it works for you to gain converts to a skeptical position that's up to you. But I've done quite well with the truth--just sayin'. :)
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
I agree 100% and have stated
I agree 100% and have stated it before. If you have done your research and concluded it was NOT MIHOP, that's fine and dandy. But to advocate LIHOP as a method to waken people, without also offering evidence for MIHOP, I consider it to be unethical.
This is about 9/11 Truth, not 9/11 Half Truths