Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] bin Laden video is a forgery!

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Vern Green wrote:

> OK, thanks for the clarification. In the world of politics I would say 
> that this explanation is reasonable sounding enough to be plausible.
>
> I cannot blame Bush for making his statements, but I can clearly see 
> where you are coming from now.


Similar idea with regard to 9/11:  I don't think that Bush made the 
attacks happen, that he or Cheney were involved in planning them.  That 
seems crazy to me and I think that most people promoting the idea probably 
are a little crazy.  But, I do think that they did not take the 
appropriate actions that could have stopped the attacks from occurring. 
It is even possible that they wanted some kind of attack to occur and they 
knew that it was possible if they just didn't push hard to stop such an 
attack.

We all know about the PDB and the repeated warnings that were ignored.

You might not know about the goals of the neocon "Project for a New 
American Century" (PNAC).  Dick Cheney was a signatory to their "Statement 
of Principles."  One of their major concerns was expressed in the form of 
this question:  "Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new 
century favorable to American principles and interests?"  They had some 
doubts, but they did note that an attack on our country could help them to 
achieve their goals:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

   "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings
   revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some
   catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor"

The original document from which that line was taken is available here:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Cheney is not listed as a contributor to that one, but Wolfowitz and Libby 
both are listed.

To clarify:  Some of Bush's neocon friends knew that a catastrophic attack 
on the USA could help them with their nation building plans.  Bush did 
little or nothing to prevent such an attack.  Immediately afterword, the 
PNAC group wrote to Bush suggesting that they should topple Saddam and 
replace his government.  A series of flimsy and phony excuses were 
concocted (WMD, etc.) and we went into Iraq a couple of months later.

It all makes sense.  It isn't Bush or any American orchestrating an attack 
on the US, but it they knew we were in constant danger of attack and they 
did not prevent the attack.  They also knew that an attack could help 
their cause and when it did occur (it was inevitable because people always 
want to attack us), they knew exactly how they could capitalize on the 
attack and they did so.

Is this a conspiracy theory?  Sort of, but we knew who the conspirators 
are because they write papers together.  We know what they did.  It isn't 
a secret, hidden conspiracy.  I can understand why people come up with the 
idea that goes a step farther and accuses Bush and others of planning the 
attack.  I think that is very unlikely partly because it is such a 
horrible thing to do that they wouldn't risk it, and maybe they wouldn't 
want to do it, but mainly because they didn't have to do it.  People are 
constantly trying to attack us, all Bush/Cheney had to do was nothing -- 
just let them attack.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion