Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Creative Speculation

In reply to the discussion: Evidence of LIHOP [View all]
 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
5. Yes Pearl Harbor
Tue Sep 11, 2012, 10:25 PM
Sep 2012

I can't believe even with that evidence, we still have doubters among us. Dead set "terrorist" who didn't fly out of NY even though they planned this for years. LOL! Good terrorist don't need weapons. And this was pre 9/11 so carrying fake plastic dynamite would have been possible. But for some reason flying over 1,000 miles, over military bases, was much safer I suppose. No reconstruction of any kind of the planes. Remember flight 800 to Paris and the hell they went through to get as many parts as they could.

The whole thing stinks.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Evidence of LIHOP [View all] Bonobo Sep 2012 OP
Yup. NYC_SKP Sep 2012 #1
Or of gross negligence Bolo Boffin Sep 2012 #2
Well, there is that then. n/t zappaman Sep 2012 #3
They needed their "new Pearl Harbor" -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2012 #4
Yes Pearl Harbor Politicalboi Sep 2012 #5
And once the attacks took place, we are faced with the realization that our Secretary of Defense... . . Sep 2012 #6
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Evidence of LIHOP»Reply #5