+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: 911 (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Two new articles - Hopsicker and Hicks on Jeb Bush and the 9/11 cover-up (/thread-14102.html)
Pages:
1
2
Two new articles - Hopsicker and Hicks on Jeb Bush and the 9/11 cover-up - Peter Lemkin - 10-09-2015
Anthony Thorne Wrote:Hopsicker has been LIHOP for a while, and I doubt he's ever looked too closely at the building evidence. His work remains very valuable however, and I honestly think the movement would benefit if a few more activists would put down their petitions and footage of Building 7 and dug into some of the leads that Hopsicker uncovered in Florida.
Jeb airlifted the documents from Huffman on September 12th. What was the big hurry? The answer seems obvious, but itself poses a question that I'm not sure many have considered. If Jeb moved to courier those documents out of there on September 12th, was he unaware who the hijackers were until FBI 'leads' (and obviously those had been prepped to spring on the public beforehand) pointed to that same group of people on 9/11?
Hopsicker's work points towards links between the 'hijackers' and the drug trade. Was that group chosen to be the patsies simply because the various Iran-Contra and CIA figures who were protecting the drug trade would move heaven and earth to prevent any cracks developing in the official story, to avoid anyone looking deeper into who those people were, and what they were linked to? Any federal officials linked with the previous cover-ups of the drug trade would be very compliant in preventing any further investigation into that same milieu. I recall Lee Oswald was a useful patsy as his various CIA and FBI links were enough to encourage a complicated cover-up from day one. The 9/11 'hijackers' - before they participated in what was probably, to some of them, a much anticipated 'drill' with a big payday promised at the end of it - might have served a similar purpose.
I think Hopsiker has a ridiculous position, but his research has been great on unstudied-by-others aspects of the case. He admits his life would be in danger if he had a voice that could be generally heard. He readily talks about government and personal involvements of notable Americans with the 'hijackers'. He just seems to be naive about what went down on the day. It is as if he has the puzzle pieces, but can't put together the puzzle correctly. Strange, but I don't sense this is some operation to mess up other 911 researchers, just a person with a blind spot due to his stated 'love of America'. He, like so many others, can believe in incompetence, in corruption, and even in individual treason, but NOT in a planned-from-the-top conspiracy of this magnitude. Again, I think an illogical conclusion, but hey, we all have our different takes on Dallas and 911 and all the other false-flag operations that make up the real warp and woof of U.S. history. As long as he is doing his valuable research, I for one will just shake my head and hope he sees the light of how the puzzle pieces fit.
Interesting that Atta's girlfriend is now working at a military base. They probably want to be able to keep an eye on what she says and be able to silence her if others ask the 'wrong' questions. The two flight instructors are in prison, so they also can't be further questioned. To me, almost the hallmark of a false-flag operation, is more energy expended on the cover-up aspects than on the EXTENSIVE original planning and operation. And the cover-up begins BEFORE the operation. Oswald is the text book example of that, as Anthony has reminded us. He was likely chosen because he forced even those not involved to go along with the cover-up, due to their involvement with him prior in other operations/associations they didn't want known publicly.
Actually, when one looks at 911 now, it was a very sloppy operation, IMO, but the cover-up is so massive and the media so controlled, many people still can't see the forest for the trees. However, even with that, a majority or Americans, naive as most are, don't buy the 'official version' in one way or another of either Dallas or 911...but most can't go the whole obvious way of a top-down conspiracy and cover-up.
Two new articles - Hopsicker and Hicks on Jeb Bush and the 9/11 cover-up - R.K. Locke - 10-09-2015
Anthony Thorne Wrote:Hopsicker has been LIHOP for a while, and I doubt he's ever looked too closely at the building evidence. His work remains very valuable however, and I honestly think the movement would benefit if a few more activists would put down their petitions and footage of Building 7 and dug into some of the leads that Hopsicker uncovered in Florida.
Jeb airlifted the documents from Huffman on September 12th. What was the big hurry? The answer seems obvious, but itself poses a question that I'm not sure many have considered. If Jeb moved to courier those documents out of there on September 12th, was he unaware who the hijackers were until FBI 'leads' (and obviously those had been prepped to spring on the public beforehand) pointed to that same group of people on 9/11?
Hopsicker's work points towards links between the 'hijackers' and the drug trade. Was that group chosen to be the patsies simply because the various Iran-Contra and CIA figures who were protecting the drug trade would move heaven and earth to prevent any cracks developing in the official story, to avoid anyone looking deeper into who those people were, and what they were linked to? Any federal officials linked with the previous cover-ups of the drug trade would be very compliant in preventing any further investigation into that same milieu. I recall Lee Oswald was a useful patsy as his various CIA and FBI links were enough to encourage a complicated cover-up from day one. The 9/11 'hijackers' - before they participated in what was probably, to some of them, a much anticipated 'drill' with a big payday promised at the end of it - might have served a similar purpose.
I agree. Hopsicker's work is very valuable, irrespective of his (highly) dubious overall opinion of 9/11. I have posted his articles on here in the past. I also agree that the question of how the buildings fell is largely a distraction - especially since the physical evidence has been destroyed. It's the same problem that we still face with the Kennedy case 50+ years later. It's not that there is nothing to be learned from studying the building collapses, but there are clearly more fruitful avenues that could be pursued where the evidence is still extant.
Two new articles - Hopsicker and Hicks on Jeb Bush and the 9/11 cover-up - Drew Phipps - 10-09-2015
Hopsicker says the FL. flight school records were "diverted" from the FBI in WDC to the CIA in McLean,Va..... I'm curious. There's no separate airport for McLean. AFAIK, the only airports nearby are Dulles and Reagan. If you went to an AFB, it would be Andrews, but that's closer to WDC than McLean. What does he mean by "diverted"?
Two new articles - Hopsicker and Hicks on Jeb Bush and the 9/11 cover-up - Peter Lemkin - 11-09-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:Hopsicker says the FL. flight school records were "diverted" from the FBI in WDC to the CIA in McLean,Va..... I'm curious. There's no separate airport for McLean. AFAIK, the only airports nearby are Dulles and Reagan. If you went to an AFB, it would be Andrews, but that's closer to WDC than McLean. What does he mean by "diverted"?
No one has said, nor has Hopsicker or his informants stated, IMO, that a plane was used door to door. To the plane and from the plane some vehicles were used. I don't see what airport in the D.C. area matters. That said, I don't know what he means by diverted. Why not ask him in an email.