Dear MIHOPers...

[Bucky]

How come Bush and his Skull and Bones cohorts didn't try to frame Saddam for it instead of bin Laden? Or, if you prefer, how come they did such a bang up job pinning the terror attacks on bin Laden and such a suck ass job pinning 9/11, WMDs, or any sign of an international threat on Saddam Hussein?

[DenverDem]

1. I'd chalk it up to INEPTITUDE.

They can't even commit treason right.

[Sterling]

14. Yes their plan is flawed and imature.

They are going to get us all killed trying to take over the world.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Wh osays they did a bang-up job at anything other than lying to us 24/7?

[matcom]

3. they didn't count on places like DU to hold them to the truth

they thought FOX was the ONLY "news" organization.

the Internet is killing these fuckheads

aint' it grand?

[Minstrel Boy]

4. Osama gets them all war, all the time.

He's a McGuffin who can lead them into any country in the Middle East.

Saddam would have been a one shot deal.

And they got him too, didn't they?

As for the phantom Osama, Zarqawi and the rest... I think they're in Iran now, aren't they?

[DemBones DemBones]

8. Ding, ding! We've got a winner!

Osama is the all-purpose boogeyman! Is he alive? Who cares!

[Solomon]

43. Emanuel Goldstein.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Last We Heard He Was Operating Out Of Planned Parenthood Clinics...

n/t

[leesa]

21. That's exactly right. He's the new communist. The invasion excuse

for the new century.

[maggrwaggr]

29. you rock as usual, Minstrel Boy

nailed that one right on the head.

Eternal war is all they care about.

[dudeness]

37. absolutely spot on !!!

where else can you get a 50 year war..you require a elusive bogey man..

[StandUpGuy]

5. They didn't need to

They needed to invade Afghanistan first.

An even more run down military deprived country than Iraq.

The propaganda for Iraq was ready to go once the country had been victorious in what appeared a just war.

Iraq was the extension.

Your question although an attempt to silence your MIHOP critics is actually the answer.

Ask Paul Wolfowitz why the US chose WMD and not 9/11

[soundfury]

9. Very well said, you get the gold star! NT

[Sterling]

11. Ding Ding Ding

Correct you are sir. OBL is an all purpose boogie man that gives the US the right to invade any country that looks at us wrong. OBL was and I think still is an asset that can be controlled by his US masters. Saddam however is a real Bush family enemy.


OBL and 9-11 will be used far into the future to justify agressive military policy on the part of the US> Blaming Saddam would not have that effect.

OBL and AL CIA DUH in the minds of Americans is the entire Muslim world not just one country. If Saddam did 9-11 then we invade Iraq and thats all we can justify. This way we have more flexibilty. Genious in a way, but some how imature and retarded thinking at the same time. Typical RW think tank type stuff.

[Old and In the Way]

13. A Presidential order for military action on Afghanistan and the Taliban

was awaiting GWB's signature before 9/11. Remember those energy meetings and pipeline? All they were lacking was a reason...

[democraticinsurgent]

6. Start with "Bandar Bush"

Umm, because Bush and the Saudi's are f**kbuddies. Bush 41's affair with Saddam was fleeting and long ago. Bin Laden was a convenient guy. He's secretly on their team, a disgruntled Saudi black sheep and a perfect patsy.

As far as the Iraq war, they haven't done a good job of anything really. They've screwed up nearly every aspect of it.

They've also majorly screwed up the frame-up of 9-11. Bush 41 must be quite nostalgic for the good old days when there was no internet and only 3 TV networks.

The neocons have done a nice job of owning most of the major media, but the internet (thanks, Al Gore) is going to bring them all down.

We here, and our brethren bloggers, are the future of journalism.

And of truth.

[Pastiche423]

7. Plans to bomb Afghanistan

were already on whistle ass desk prior to September 11, 2001. The neocons wanted a pipeline constructed from the Caspian Sea, through Afghanistan, to the gulf. The Taliban did not.

OBL hung out in Afghanistan. :think: Let's blame him!

[DemBones DemBones]

10. Yes! Why has everyone forgotten the pipeline

to transport oil and gas from the Caspian Sea?

[Sterling]

12. It is important but not the main reason.

The main reason is we are going to control the world or we are going to destroy it trying.

Bush and friends have said that much in their policy documents related to foriegn policy and military affairs.

For PNAC it is all or nothing and I truely believe they are willing to sacrifice a whole lot of us to get where they want to go.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. No, not the main or only reason, but it needs

to be mentioned. Not that the coincidence theorists will listen.

[davekriss]

17. "Carpets of gold or carpet bombing"

Such was the purported threat made to the Afghani's prior to 9-11. (Was 9-11 their pre-emptive response to our imminent threat?) Bush needed to clear the way for establishing Caspian Basin military bases first before playing the Iraqi card. And on the latter, Bush needed to find a better home for Persian Gulf bases in face of a destabilizing and declining house of Saud. Iran is next. Then Saudi Arabia falls from its own weight with USG troops at the ready to step in. The Grand Game played to its conclusion.

(Just one way to look at it...)

[maggrwaggr]

30. the US planned the attack on the Taliban BEFORE 9/11

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm

[stickdog]

15. Because Saddam wouldn't supply the patsies. The Saudis would.

[Octafish]

16. bin Laden and Bush families "more than friends" for decades.

It didn't just start with James R Bath. Smirko's family goes where the money is. In the 70s, that was the Middle East, where the price of black gold skyrocketed and the beneficiaries were very generous with the loot.

Remember Poppy Bush almost became preznit after two months. Who is said to have put the bullets into Rawhide Pruneface? Family friend John Hinckley.

Don't forget Dallas, either. George De Mohrenschildt had his eye on Lee Harvey Oswald for somebody. Funny, the guy also was longtime friends with George Herbert Walker Bush. Both names were in his address book.

No such thing as conspiracy. Right.

[Sterling]

19. Kick for an unintentionally great thread.

I know this was meant to debunk but an important question has been addressed here.

[leesa]

20. Because they needed the pipeline in Afghanistan. Next question.

They didn't do a bang-up job of pinning it on anyone. They lied and their courtesan media made the lie bigger and better. And YOU fell for it. You've been conned BIGTIME man.

[Zidane]

22. There is only one way to prove MIHOP IMO

And that's to see what happens between now and november. And between november and when kerry takes office.

If anything happens in between (terror related) in a way that gives bush a major advantage... well it would be suspicious to say the least...

[Minstrel Boy]

23. Some people will never be persuaded.

It violates their paradigm of how the world works. No amount of evidence will be enough. It will always be "tinfoil hat stuff."

And it shouldn't need to take another attack to persuade anyone. There are already stacks of damning evidence and testimony, virtually all ignored by the commission, that make the case for official complicity.

[Zidane]

24. I agree

but I won't be convinced unless anything happens before Bush leaves office.

I think if they really MIHOP they would be willing to do a hell of a lot more stay in power.

[Sterling]

25. Maybe but PNAC has a lot of fans in our party as well.

I am not sure that this is a Dem Rep issue. Only McKinney has brought it up at all and the party screwed her.

I won't relax with Kerry in office if he does not pursue Bush criminally.

[TrustingDog]

28. I'm with you on that...

This is Not a good guy/bad guy fight. They're all stained.
Just too much explosive material against the Bush clan the Dems have dropped the ball on, and now this lameass 911 'investigation' feh....

Trust no one, (except the McKinney types, the ones who really put their asses on the line, not the script reading treasonists.)

[Octafish]

38. Like Wellstone's plane going haywire on approach?

And Wolf the Talking Turd Blitzer saying, "It was snowing," even as the correspondent on the scene was saying, "No it isn't. Other planes were OK." Yeah. Right. And there goes the White House's biggest critic and his wife, daughter, campaign aids and pilots (one of whom crossed paths with Zaccarias The 20th Hijacker Mousaoui).

BTW: A hearty welcome to DU, Zidane! Where ya been?

[Warren DeMontague]

46. Well, it certainly interesting -- some of the noise coming from the right

when they first started talking about "terror before the election"... From John Ashcroft to George Will, was to the effect of "Gee, whiz.. We REALLY don't want a terror attack before the election. Why, look what happened in spain. If Al Qaeda was to hit us like that, we just don't know WHAT would happen, Mr. Osama, sir!"

In short, they sounded like a masochist, saying "please don't spank me.. especially not with THERE!"

[LunaC]

26. Here's a couple of reasons.....

1) They TRIED to blame it on Saddam immediately after 911 but it didn't pan out. Afghanistan was the next logical choice.

2) Afghanistan was a ripe target and handy to exploit for two reasons: a) "Pipelinestan" was a potential money-maker and b) it was the world's foremost opium and heroin supplier. U.S. control over this veritable gold mine could help finance their special military operations without accountability to the prying eyes of the public, reminiscent of the Iran-Contra Affair.

3) Bin Laden had long been associated with the Taliban and he had been on the CIA payroll for a long time too. He was in on the game and had an extensive worldwide network of operatives at his disposal. He could keep the pot stirred so there would always be some act of "terroriasm" in play, fear being the operant psychology to create a maleable public.

4) Afghanistan was within spitting distance of Iraq - the intended target - and the best "launch point" for a Mideast takeover.

Read "The Whispering Campaign" link below for the Big Picture.

[LunaC]

27. BTW - It's not about Skull and Bones but the PNAC!

You might want to get your "Who's Who" in order.

[maggrwaggr]

32. Hey Luna. I just quoted you below from your other post

In my zeal to post it, I didn't notice till now that you'd already posted on this thread.

:)

Hope you don't mind! If so, I'll edit it out.

[LunaC]

33. When in doubt - POST IT!

I want the info out there as much as possible so don't ever worry about "stepping" on my toes. (But thanks for asking!)

[maggrwaggr]

31. because it was all planned BEFORE 9/11

Check this out.

Original poster LunaC:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2045979&mesg_id=2047113&page=

(snip -- if links don't work, please go to original above. I can't get one of the PDF urls to copy)

So far, no one has offered a plausible explanation for the following sequence of events:

In May 2001 the U.S. State Department met with Iran, German and Italian officials to discuss Afghanistan. It was decided that the ruling Taliban would be toppled and a "broad-based government" would control the country so a gas pipeline could be built there.

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/7969.pdf

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/features/fex20867.htm

Even as plans were being made to remove the Taliban rulers from power, Colin Powell announced a $43 million "gift" to Afghanistan.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-091701scheer.column

http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-02-02.html

Meanwhile, the U.S. Embassy in the UAE received a call that Bin Laden supporters were in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives. It was rumored that Bin Laden was interested in hijacking U.S. aircraft.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf

In June 2001 the decades-old procedure for a quick response by the nation’s air defense was changed. NORAD’s military commanders could no longer issue the command to launch fighter jets because approval had to be sought from the civilian Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing7/for_the ...

In July 2001, the private plot formulated in May for toppling the Taliban was divulged during the G8 summit in Genoa, Italy. Immediately after the conference, American, Russian, German and Pakistani officials secretly met in Berlin to finalize the strategy for military strikes against the Taliban, scheduled to begin before mid-October 2001

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,55...

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/features/fex20867.htm

In September 2001 the "catastrophic and catalyzing" modern-day Pearl Harbor envisioned years earlier by the White House members of the PNAC came to pass when the WTC and Pentagon were attacked with U.S. aircraft as Rumsfeld sat passive and unresponsive. Immediately, the finger of blame was pointed at Osama bin Laden, a former CIA operative with ties to Afghanistan. Suddenly, the U.S. "gift" of $43 million to the Taliban in May was cast in a new light. Coincidentally, Pakistan had participated in the plan to attack Afghanistan and the chief of Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence agency was later linked to a 911 hijacker after wiring him $100,00 just days before the WTC fell.

http://cryptome.org/rad.htm

http://www.observer.com/pages/story.asp?ID=8830

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=1454238160

In October 2001, with flags waving, crowds cheering, and anthems playing, the "War On Terror" and the hunt for Osama began when Afghanistan was attacked right on schedule of July's secret meeting

Shorrtly afterwards, public focus was diverted to Iraq. You already know the rest of the story.

For details on the PNAC coup of the White House see "The Whispering Campaign" link below.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=976762

[redqueen]

34. Oh stop. n/t

[Sterling]

35. Bucky, you there?

It's kinda rude not to respond to your own thread.

[Bucky]

39. Oops, sorry. Didn't mean to be rude. My take on the whole thread

I'm still not buying it. For any chosen enemy you can put together a rationale. But I still don't see how the MIHOP scenario tracks. From before the 2000 PNAC report, they wanted to get their greasies on Iraq's oil. If they were going to stage an attack to justify a war with Iraq, why frame the Saudi organization run by a half brother of the president's long time buddies in the bin Laden clan?

They practically fell over themselves looking for a way to pin it on Iraq. If it's planned from the gitgo, why create a self-defeating distraction like that? But more to it, why plan it out where 3/4s of the hijackers are Saudis? Surely they could find more convenient dupes.

Now I'll admit that al Qaeda gives them "all war all the time" as another poster pointed out. But if that's what they wanted, they could have dragged out the Iraq thing a LOT longer. In fact, it's pretty clear that Bush rushed to war so that he could get his war on wihtin the very narrow window of opportunity that he had, before people started asking real questions and before Saddam could get around to showing that he really was complying with the UN resolutons.

But the biggest damner of them all for the conspiracy point of view on this administration (other than their general incompetence) is the complete absense of WMDs. If they were in the business of doing big-assed set ups like 9/11, why weren't they careful enough to have a few throwdown kegs of sarin or mustard gas? For months they had total control of the field over there. The fact that they never found a damn thing tells me they lack the core skills to plan any sort of conspiracy.

Everyone expected something to be there; finding something would have raised zero suspicions.

Nope these clowns just aren't up to the task of running a wide ranging insidious conspiracy. All they can do is spook little old grannies in swing states into voting for them. And they don't even seem to be very good at that.

[Sterling]

40. OK Bucky think about this stuff again plz.

"If they were going to stage an attack to justify a war with Iraq, why frame the Saudi organization run by a half brother of the president's long time buddies in the bin Laden clan?"


They did NOT stage an attack to justify a war on Iraq. You are the only person that has suggested that. Others have quite plainly explained they believe 9-11 was meant to serve as a pretext for unlimited invasions not just Iraq. In fact if you remember the first stop was Afghanistan.

"They practically fell over themselves looking for a way to pin it on Iraq. If it's planned from the gitgo, why create a self-defeating distraction like that? But more to it, why plan it out where 3/4s of the hijackers are Saudis? Surely they could find more convenient dupes."


Why did Runmmy want links to Iraq right after 9-11? Why was he arm twisting to get that intel? Probably the same reason they are casting a shadow on Iran for alledged 9-11 ties. It was known to them that Iraq would be stop # 2 on their crusade.

They tried to make a direct connection because it was easier than what they ended up doing which was infer to the public iraq was in on 9-11 and then trump up false WMD charges to the international community. Ad to that most Americans lump all "Arabs" together and which country was actually involved in 9-11 is a lot less important than who the President is telling them was involved.


"In fact, it's pretty clear that Bush rushed to war so that he could get his war on wihtin the very narrow window of opportunity that he had, before people started asking real questions and before Saddam could get around to showing that he really was complying with the UN resolutons."

The WMDs were a secondary pretext to invade Iraq nothing more. After we went in the WMD's were not important to the agenda. If you have noticed it's not like we are leaving Iraq as a result of not finding them and I assure you we won't be forfiting Iraq's oil as payment for the mistake either.

"If they were in the business of doing big-assed set ups like 9/11, why weren't they careful enough to have a few throwdown kegs of sarin or mustard gas? For months they had total control of the field over there. The fact that they never found a damn thing tells me they lack the core skills to plan any sort of conspiracy."

The can't "fake" a WMD find. It is very easy to trace the origin of a WMD and the international comunity has teams of people who vet this stuff. W and PNAC could not control that aspect of their pretext. Like I said it mattered not at all as we can clearly see now.


"Nope these clowns just aren't up to the task of running a wide ranging insidious conspiracy. All they can do is spook little old grannies in swing states into voting for them. And they don't even seem to be very good at that."

If you think it is Bush in charge or actually doing these things you really need to take a step back and take in some more info before you form such set in stone opinions.

All this stuff has been posted in threads I have seen you on. Either you have really bad reading comprehension or you are wasting our time as a joke. I really hope you are here for a good faith exchange of information and are willing to learn as well as express your opinions.

[Minstrel Boy]

41. Nice post, Sterling. n/t

[Sterling]

42. Thx I hope Bucky is really trying to learn something.

Or at least paying attention.

[Sterling]

36. Kick

One last chance for "Bucky" to respond.

[milkyway]

44. It was a lot easier to use bin Laden because he actually wanted to atack

the U.S. Saddam would never be stupid enough to attack the U.S., so if they tried to frame him they would have to fabricate the whole thing. But with Osama, all they had to do was make sure he wasn't prevented from doing it.

Also, a great point that was mentioned above is that if they framed Saddam, he's one guy leading one country. All we would need to do is invade Iraq and depose Saddam--no more terrorist threat. But what good would that do the bush cabal? Al Queda, like communism, could be everywhere and anywhere. It used to be said by leftists that if communism didn't exist, the U.S. would have to invent it (because anti-communism became the pretext for our imperial wars). What a coincidence that around the time of the Soviet Union's demise, terrorism rises up to take its place as the boogeyman, led by an employee of the bush cabal.