Accoring to a Zogby poll, 46% of Americans think that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. How did they reach that conclusion? Bush himself said there was no links in September of 2003, and Cheney blamed it on the media, two years ago. So why do these notions still persist?
What's more, where did these notions originate? Could it have been from The White House itself?
The effort to discredit the 9/11 truth movement in the corporate media is an attempt to again force notions on people without actually prepondering the evidence.The two main theories Let It Happen On Purpose(LIHOP) and Made It Happen On Purpose(MIHOP) are dismissed as crazy "tinfoil hat" conspiracies (as opposed to the racist "official" conspiracy theory), but never address some of the issues raised by the movement.
First piece of evidence (which falls into the MIHOP category) is the presense of explosions caused by bombs being placed in the towers that caused them to collapse like a controlled demolition into their own footprint. Moreover, they point to the collapse of WTC 7, which was not struck by a plane, as evidence that explosives were used on September 11. As Steven Jones ( a physics professor) says:
As you observed, WTC 7 collapsed rapidly and symmetrically -- even though fires were randomly scattered in the building. WTC 7 fell about seven hours after the Towers collapsed, even though no major persistent fires were visible. There were twenty-four huge steel support columns inside WTC 7 as well as huge trusses, arranged asymmetrically, along with approximately 57 perimeter columns. (FEMA, 2002, chapter 5.) A symmetrical collapse, as observed, evidently requires the simultaneous “pulling” of most or all of the support columns. The Second Law of Thermodynamics implies that the likelihood of complete and symmetrical collapse due to random fires as in the “official” theory is small, since asymmetrical failure is so much more likely. On the other hand, a major goal of controlled demolition using explosives is the complete and symmetrical collapse of buildings.
Professor Jones has also said this was the only evidence in history, before or after, of fire bringing down a steel framed building.
Another incident that fits both the LIHOP and MIHOP scenarios is the death of Payne Stewart in his Lear Jet, which had depressurized shortly after take-off in Florida and was shortly intercepted by fighter jets when the cockpit was "unresponsive". Standard operational procedure of NORAD is to send planes to intercept a flight when it goes off course (which is filed before take-off). Yet this was not followed on 9/11, which would have prevented any planes from hitting the towers and the Pentagon. This leads to the theory that someone had issued a "stand down" order on that day. Now consider the testimony of Norman Mineta, Former Transportation Secretary for the Bush administration, to the official 9/11 Commission:
Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"
The MIHOP theory claims that 9/11 was a "false flag" operation, that is, an intelligence operation carried out by one group to be blamed on another. They point to the Project For a New American Century's "Rebuilding America's Defenses", which called for reshaping the Middle East to better fit corporate America's interests. In order to catalyze the support they would need to start their aganda, a "New Pearl Harbor" would be needed to rally the American people behind the agenda. MIHOP supporters point to the fact that 7 of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were still alive after 9/11, (as well as evidence no Arabs were found on the autopsy list) that 9/11 was a false flag operation designed to frame Arabs in order to enable the Bush administration (most of them signees on the PNAC) to start their agenda. As former MI5 agent David Shayler stated last year, in his opinion 9/11 was an inside meant to " bring about a permanent state of emergency in America and pave the way for the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and ultimately Iran and Syria." Guess which countries the Bush administration is starting the propaganda campaign for invasion of next?
Of course, another conclusion could be that the US government under the Bush/Republican regime has become so incompetent that it can't function at all. The failures in Afghanistan and Iraq certainly point to that, as well as their botched handling of a response to Hurricane Katrina. It does appeal to those of a partisan stripe who feel that these pathetic bunglers aren't capable of pulling off such a complex scheme (neglecting, of course, their capability of pulling off two election frauds).
Another example of incompetence or complicity is the actions of the Secret Service on September 11. With an airport four miles away, untold numbers of hijacked planes in the sky that day, Bush's location at the time being made known days in advance, the secret service allowed the number one terrorist target to sit in plain sight, surrounded by children, instead of immediately whisking him away to safety. But they didn't. Was it merely incompetence, or did they know that Bush was not a target (MIHOP)?
And yet, the only defnse that people can muster up against such theories is the insanity defense. You know, you must be wearing a tinfoil hat to believe the government would lie to us and kill their own people. The same government that deliberately manipulated intelligence to start a war in Iraq causing the deaths of over 12,000 soldiers (who, the last time I checked were people too)and gave defense contractors, construction companies, and oil companies billions of dollars in no-bid contracts. It's an old ploy, when you can't refute the evidence you must therefore attack the ones presenting it.
And what of Osama? You know, the one that Bush blames for the attacks, even though it's not on his official FBI 'rap sheet'? The guy who turns up on audio and video tapes almost conveniently timed to benefit the agenda of the Bush administration? The one Bush claimed we had no idea where he was or how to capture him, without carpet bombing Afghanistan? He recently turned up again on another videotape just as the GOP needed him for their fall election strategy, which is based on selling fear to the masses.
It's the fear that got the PATRIOT Act passed. It's the fear that keeps people from questioning the actions of the Bush administration lest they be bundled with the 'terrorists'.
When a crime is committed, the usual investigative techniques involve finding out who committed the crime by determining who benefitted the most from it. Did alQaeda, whose goal is to remove the American infidel presence from their lands, as well as having Israel leave Palestine, benefit? Not really, as the attacks brought more US troops to the Middle east. The PNAC benefitted by having their agenda of "creating a new Middle east" advanced. Israel benefitted because, in the words of Binyamin Netanyahu on 9/11:
"It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)"
allowing them to build a "security" wall through Palestinian territory, as well as perpetuate collective punishment against the Palestinian people without much outcry from the US. Defense contractors, Halliburton, they certainly benefitted.
So excuse me if I think the government at least LIHOP, if not MIHOP. I've looked at all the evidence, too much to go into here, and reached my conclusion. You can think I wear a tin foil hat if you wish. But I hope you don't mind if I call you an anal ostrich. You know, hiding your head up your ass in fear of the truth.