NYC Activist resurrected as full on LIHOPer
This internet persona who once upon a time pretended to be a CD skeptic has been out of action for awhile, perhaps the Harrit paper caused too much of a truth shock and required a regrouping. Yesterday she/he/they decided to resurrect herself as a full on LIHOPer.
"...I’m no longer inclined to believe in WTC demolition theories, for reasons I’ll explain in another future post. Also I’m no longer inclined to believe that “9/11 was an inside job” in general.
I don’t rule out certain limited kinds of “inside job” hypotheses as possibilities, but I now think other possibilities are more likely, such as a possible coverup of involvement by officials of one or more “allied” foreign governments such as Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, to which the U.S. government has deliberately turned a blind eye for whatever reason, possibly just diplomatic reasons. Also I think we should take a good hard look at the past history of U.S. government support for Islamist terrorists, which continued after the well-known example of the Soviet-Afghan war. (See US Intelligence Links to Islamic Militancy and Al-Qaeda in the Balkans on the History Commons site.)"
- juandelacruz's blog
- Login to post comments
LaRouche a LIHOPer too
http://mathaba.net/news/?x=621081
a common thread among LIHOP spin
From Jon Gold, to NYCActivist, 911Blogger, Kevin Ryan and all other LIHOP promoters I can think of, the most common thread besides demonizing Arabs or Muslims is a minimized if not total absence of Israeli involvement.
The early promoters of LIHOP wanted to deny CD because a CD theory would ensnare the building lease holder. So AlQuaeda was front and center while the US Gov was just mostly icompetent. I think for the same reason that Israel would be implicated by full on USGov involvement, the LHOPers were more cautious about throwing Bush and Cheney under the bus although they did so too because CD promoters were gaining traction. Denying US Gov involvement would have made LIHOP promoters lose all credibility.
Kevin Ryan's take on LIHOP is closer to MIHOP in that the USGov is an active participant. By advancing his list of possible perps he highlights how stupid this LIHOP meme is. He now points a finger on the Bush family, Muslim Govs and a long list of WTC tenants, but he left out Silverstein the lease holder, the Mossad who were caught filming/celebrating, and the various dual US-Israeli nationals such as Chertof and others in key positions at the time of 9-11. Obama is still covering up 9-11 truth, is he beholden to the Bush family? Not that I know of. So why the continued cover up. What we do know is that he has a chief of staff who is a die hard Zionist and he is now expanding the war in Afghanistan into Pakistan, both of which lie on an oil pipeline route from Turkmeni gas fields linked to an ex Mossad agent.
If the Kevin Ryan version of LIHOP takes hold I predict Obama will suddenly take to 9-11 truth (of the LIHOP kind). He is the new pet dog of the Zionists running the show.
the other possibility
is that by blaming BushCo, they set up a nice fat pitch for the debunkers to slam out of the park, which of course is what you alluded to--if Bush done it, why on earth would Obama be covering it up? Or, another possibility, which is to suggest/imply that the new administration has no remaining connections to the perps (because the perps in this bogus scenario don't include Zionists...)
"if Bush done it, why on
"if Bush done it, why on earth would Obama be covering it up?"
Alternatively, if JFK was assassinated by something more than a lone nut, why did RFK cover it up? It's very rare that factions of the upper class fail to cover up any potential conspiracies which occur within their own ranks. That simply means that they fear public exposure of dirty work more than they do any possible conspiracies within their own ranks. It doesn't actually imply that everyone is a partner to a conspiracy.
No doubt this is one of the
No doubt this is one of the main reasons RFK wasnt allowed to ascend to the presidency. Its much easier to look into your brothers murder as President than as a Senator or even Attorney General.
no no, RFK was killed by a crazed Palestinian, didn't ya know?
And that crazed Palestinian was surely just upset that JFK had tried to prevent Israel from developing its nuclear arsenal. And evil Bush conspired with evil Arab Muslims to attack America. Uh huh.
And its evidence like that
And its evidence like that which causes me to question if it was more than a rogue faction in the CIA who did the Kennedys in(along with Angletons presence in the CIA). I still havent read Pipers book but plan to at some point. I still think Poppy Bush was involved though, its why he was fast tracked to head the CIA in my opinion. Not saying hes any kind of "mastermind" but his fingerprints are on both hits.
James Jesus Angleton was a
James Jesus Angleton was a puppet of Mossad according to John Loftus & Mark Aarons, THE SECRET WAR AGAINST THE JEWS.
this is also the claim in Final Judgement
by Michael Collins Piper. That book even has a picture of a memorial plaque in Angleton's honor in Israel...
Because Piper's source is
Because Piper's source is Loftus & Aarons.
that's odd...
because in my copy of Final Judgement, Chapter 8 which deals with Angleton's Israel connection doesn't have a single footnote from Loftus and Aarons. He does cite them elsewhere though. I'll check my copy of Secret War Against the Jews (yes, my library is vast--bwahahaha!) to see what they have to say about Angleton, thanks.
btw i'm suggesting what will be said, not what i believe...
To plenty of people that argument will make plenty of sense--they really believe that the two parties are sworn enemies--they also believe that Rowdy Roddy Piper and Hulk Hogam were sworn enemies, as well as Andre the Giant and Big John Studd...
Obama is not from a rich
Obama is not from a rich clan like Bush or Kennedy. He does not appear to have enough bones in his closset to be concerned about exposure. What I think is making him act to protect the status quo is that the people who funded his presidential run are connected to the same group that perpetrated 9-11. That group is calling the shots on Obama's appointments, foreign policy and the decision to turn a blind eye to 9-11.
I don't think we can know what skeletons he may have...
...in his closet. Just remember Eliot Spitzer, and how "no one could have imagined" that he of all people would be caught up in a prostitution scandal. We just don't know whether certain people act (or don't act) based on their own agenda as opposed to bribery as opposed to blackmail. We are not meant to know these things and so we don't. What we *can* know is what we can extrapolate from what we know based on objective analysis--there is a cover-up of the truth behind 9/11, and people like Obama are not part of the solution.
True, i do not know that.
True, i do not know that. However, I was just responding to someone who similarly did not have proof on his side, and I was just presenting a more plausible opinion.
"So why the continued cover
"So why the continued cover up."
Because the national security of the USA depends on the official myth of 9/11/2001. Could you imagine if a US president actually moved forward with the prosecution of a former president for helping and planning to kill US citizens on 9/11/2001?
All of congress would would be associated with the investigation.
There's probably some spooky Presidentially approved covert action to control 9/11 Truth for national security reasons.
nonsense.
the national security of the United States depends on the truth being exposed, not covered up. moreover, the security of the American people themselves, and of the people of the world generally, also depend on the truth coming out. The elites are not one large united front by any stretch. Most of them however have a great deal to lose and are therefore conservative and pragmatic. since it stands to reason that the world's elites did not all sign up for the 9/11 hoax, regardless of whether they have chosen to be heroes by speaking out or not, many of them would benefit from one particular faction of elites being exposed and discredited.
Their loyalties are first and foremost to the perpetuation of...
the state, and hence, their corrupt power status. If someone like Obama were to blow the whistle on 9/11, he would be participating in the collapse of the legitimacy of the system, a system of elite rule with corruption and manipulation, not concern for democracy, which all high level elite politions are invested in too heavily to risk a sudden breakdown and possible "anarchistic collapse" (with the possible exception of a very few honest people like Kucinitch). It's the same reason why other governments, like Russia, don't want to blow the whistle on false flag ops by other governments. They want to be able to continue having the option of using false flag ops themselves. Obama doesn' give a rats ass about the national security of the American people, at least not compared to his concern about the "national security" (i.e. Job security) of their own elite class.
That makes a lot of sense,
That makes a lot of sense, specially as it applies to Russia and other countries. I do think in Obama's case that it is not just a perpetuation of the state system. I think there is an element of co-option of Obama by the perps. The very rapid escalation of the war in Afghanistan and the expansion in Pakistan really clashes with Obama's campaign for 'change'. A person who is just concerned about preventing a collapse into chaos would I think have waited longer before implementing such unpopular and expensive policies. I think they reveal instead a prodding by power brokers behind the scenes to get their agenda moving as soon as Obama got into office. What applies to the war probably applies to 9-11 as well.
"clashes with Obama's campaign for 'change'."
This depends on what you define as "change." Obama has backed off of Bush's attempts to place missiles in Poland and Czechoslovakia, he has sought better relations with both Russia and Iran, and he has called for Israel to submit to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. All of this certainly a major shift from Bush. Though it may not be satisfying to people who had hoped for even wider changes, that doesn't mean that it clashed with Obama's electoral statement.
The biggest expectation from
The biggest expectation from Obama was a rapid US withdrawal from the unpopular war in Iraq, and I suppose the public did not expect a corresonding escalation in Afghanistan.
Obama's adviser on Iran policy advocates engagement for the purpose of having the initiative when the opportunity to attack arrives so I would not consider that a real change just as retaining 130,000 US troops in Iraq is not a real withdrawal.
Stopping the missile shield deployment in Poland is perhaps the only real change I can appreciate among a few others.
It's not about preventing "collapse into chaos"...
as much as it is about preventing an unpredictable shift in the power structure that the current power elite and political class have controlled for so long. They just don't want to risk such an unpredictable and messy outcome if the credibility and moral authority of the current system should suffer a sudden and total loss of legitimacy if the general public were to discover the real level of unbelievable corruption and evil that their leaders and institutions are involved with. There are many among the power elite and mainstream political class who were not complicit in 9/11, but who know more than they let on and who just want to sweep it under the rug and not rock the boat..."shhhhh...just don't...no, no, no...don't even go there...HOW DARE YOU!...HOW DARE YOU!"
After the Church Committee Hearings (about CIA assassinations/misdeeds) issued its final report in the mid 1970's, which contained information about CIA atrocities and crimes way worse than anything discussed in the public hearings, most Senators/Congressmen did not read it. According to one Congressman, none of his colleagues would read it because "they did not want to know" about the CIA's worst crimes. There's really nothing in it for them to delegitimize the system on such a total scale as things like 9/11 truth would.
all reasonable points...
but don't forget that we have some say in this as the public. we can absolutely do an end around the controlled media and force the issue. then, their fear over losing legitimacy works in *our* favor. we simply have to keep at it, playing it cool and smart and *never* quitting. then we will win.
"I'm no longer inclined to believe in WTC demolition theories"
Well, Diane, I'm no longer inclined to believe you are a "NYC activist". In fact, I'm now fairly certain that you are pushing a hidden, but nevertheless transparent agenda. You don't get to pretend to be a 9/11 activist for a few years and become thoroughly familiar with the scientific evidence for controlled demolition, and then suddenly do a back flip and pretend that you don't see any cd evidence just because your absurd islamofascist myth you are now openly peddling depends on denying controlled demolition to sound remotely sane, and then expect to be taken seriously. You are as transparently phony as they come, Diane. Who do you think you are going to fool with this crap, Diane?