Incompetence, LIHOP or MIHOP-- a Clarification
Incompetence, LIHOP or MIHOP for the Bush administration and 9/11 seems to be a raging discussion on Democratic Underground lately.
Basically, in its purest form, the question refers to the Bush administration-- did 9/11 happen because they were incompetent, because they let it happen (LIHOP) or because they MADE it happen (MIHOP).
While I have tended to strongly believe in MIHOP, I realize that this may not be the best description for the Bush administration's role in 9/11.
That is, the 9/11 attacks were in the works for years before 9/11, before the Bush administration was in power. Thus, we simply can't say they MADE 9/11 happen out of the blue.
I strongly think however, that elements of the US government-- the non-elected officials comprising the national security state-- indeed MADE 9/11 happen. These people would act through groups such as the CIA and DIA and ONI, as well as the various private agencies and companies affiliated with these agencies.
The key point is that while 9/11 was certainly MADE to happen, by these clandestine groups along with Al Qaeda patsies, it wasn't made to happen by the Bush administration.
Rather, the role of the Bush administration was to LET IT HAPPEN. The Bush administration for instance likely insured wargames kept NORAD planes distracted during the hijackings. The Bush administration ignored all warnings of the attacks and simply LET IT HAPPEN. The Bush administration is very culpable. But they are not the ones who made the attacks happened.
So, really, 9/11 was the result of both MIHOP and LIHOP-- the difference being which people in power. Non-elected officials MADE it happen, elected officials LET it happen (or made sure it happened).
This way of viewing this issue removes some of the confusion with these terms.
Basically, in its purest form, the question refers to the Bush administration-- did 9/11 happen because they were incompetent, because they let it happen (LIHOP) or because they MADE it happen (MIHOP).
While I have tended to strongly believe in MIHOP, I realize that this may not be the best description for the Bush administration's role in 9/11.
That is, the 9/11 attacks were in the works for years before 9/11, before the Bush administration was in power. Thus, we simply can't say they MADE 9/11 happen out of the blue.
I strongly think however, that elements of the US government-- the non-elected officials comprising the national security state-- indeed MADE 9/11 happen. These people would act through groups such as the CIA and DIA and ONI, as well as the various private agencies and companies affiliated with these agencies.
The key point is that while 9/11 was certainly MADE to happen, by these clandestine groups along with Al Qaeda patsies, it wasn't made to happen by the Bush administration.
Rather, the role of the Bush administration was to LET IT HAPPEN. The Bush administration for instance likely insured wargames kept NORAD planes distracted during the hijackings. The Bush administration ignored all warnings of the attacks and simply LET IT HAPPEN. The Bush administration is very culpable. But they are not the ones who made the attacks happened.
So, really, 9/11 was the result of both MIHOP and LIHOP-- the difference being which people in power. Non-elected officials MADE it happen, elected officials LET it happen (or made sure it happened).
This way of viewing this issue removes some of the confusion with these terms.
posted by spooked at 11:34 PM
1 Comments:
Disinformation and the Misleading and False LIHOP/MIHOP Dichotomy
Accuracy in language is important. Reality is often far more complex than can usually be understood with simplistic terminology. By definition, labels and phrases like “9/11 was an inside job”, “MIHOP”, “LIHOP”, “conspiracy theories”, and “War on Terror” are frequently used to simplify reality into small and easily comprehensible packages. While often helpful, translating reality into black and white labels is often misleading and inaccurate. This can even be purposeful and deliberate as frequently seen in politics and the mainstream media. The events of 9/11 are controversial and misunderstood by many and one significant culprit for this situation is the misleading and inaccurate usage of language to describe what happened.
Post a Comment
<< Home