NYT BOMBSHELL: Significantly MORE 9/11 NEGLIGENCE Than Has Been Disclosed

[William Seger]

159. LIHOP and MIHOP are very different

Last edited Tue Sep 11, 2012, 12:55 PM - Edit history (1)

Besides being completely contradictory, there's about three orders of magnitude difference in plausibility between LIHOP and MIHOP, not to mention the evidence gap that's nearly as wide. If you must have a conspiracy theory, LIHOP has the advantage of at least being somewhat plausible, since it only requires that a fairly small group of people do nothing, whereas the standard MIHOP/Rube Goldberg scheme of fake hijackings and controlled demolitions has hundreds of people actively doing outrageously complicated and risky things (when something far less complicated and risky would have produced the same presumed result), which doesn't even tickle the needle on any rational plausibility meter. Furthermore, LIHOP is at least supported by some circumstantial evidence such as the failure to act on the PDBs, whereas standard MIHOP theory is directly contradicted by credible evidence that "truthers" blithely declare to be faked for no reason whatsoever except that it directly contradicts their beliefs.

The only equivalence between LIHOP and MIHOP is that most "truthers" are willing to believe just about anything except the "official story." This is the direct result of starting with the assumption that the government was involved somehow or other, and then trying to rationalize that belief as if it were a valid conclusion.

The telling feature of the "truth movement" is that after 11 years, they haven't found enough "truth" to even convince each other what happened.

(Edit: I didn't mean to imply that you are a "truther.&quot