Several years ago, the terms “LIHOP” and “MIHOP” were coined
to describe two camps of the 9/11 truth movement.

“LIHOP”, for those who don’t know, stands for the theory that elements
of the U.S. government Let It Happen On Purpose. “It”, of course,
is 9/11. People who believe in LIHOP stress that the intelligence services had
been tracking the alleged hijackers and had ample warning of the attacks in
advance, standard air defense procedures would have stopped any hijacked jets
from crashing into both the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, the anomolies in the
funding of the attacks, the people involved, the interference with investigations
and prosecutions which could have stopped the attacks, and the cover-up by the
government all point to the conclusion that elements of the U.S. government
intentionally allowed the attacks to happen on purpose in order to promote the
imperial agenda laid out previously by the Project for a New American Century
and elsewhere.

“MIHOP”, on the other hand, stands for the theory that the U.S. government
Made It Happen On Purpose. People who believe in MIHOP stress physical evidence
which tends to contradict the official theory about 9/11, such as the strange
“collapses” of the Twin Towers and WTC7, and may stress anomolies
in the attack on the Pentagon, the way that Flight 93 crashed (or was shot down?),
and perhaps even the impact of the airplanes on the Twin Towers. MIHOPs believe
that the physical evidence is the “smoking gun” which is so irrefutable
that it will convict the perpetrators. MIHOPs believe that if we ignore the
smoking guns, we will pass up our best chance to prove that 9/11 was an inside
job, since “letting it happen on purpose” is hard to distinguish from
mere negligence and mistake.

It has become clear that, whatever their original usefulness, the labels lihop
and mihop now create more confusion and division within the truth movement than
clarity. Why? Because mihop advocates think that lihops are “limited hang
out” gatekeepers who are intentionally supressing the most damning evidence
of complicity in the attacks, as a way to stall the 9/11 truth moementum. And
many lihop advocates think that the mihop proponents are stressing crazy or
at least non-provable physical evidence theories which distract and waste energy,
cloud the waters, and divert attention away from the most solid evidence of
government complicity which will be believed by the most people.

Moreover, the lihop/mihop labels divert attention and energy from doing the
hard work to persuade people to bring the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice. Instead,
countless hours and countless words are spent in the arcane fight between the
lihop and mihop camps. Indeed, instead of presenting a unified front, we often
look like a bunch of raving lunatics due to all of the insults (“idiot”,
“disinfo agent”, etc.) that the two camps hurl at each other.

Do you think this is a trivial issue, and that I am making a mountain of a
molehill? Maybe. But labels and the “framing” of an issue have been
proven to be extremely important in determining whether a political effort is
successful or not (just ask linguist George Lakoff or any political consultant).
Using the wrong labels can destroy a movement before it gets off the ground,
and the lihop/mihop labels are doing just that: dividing the 9/11 truth movement
to the point where it can’t “get off the ground” and get a new investigation,
criminal prosecutions or any other real action or justice in relation to 9/11.

So what’s the answer?


We have to focus on the fact that the people who carried out 9/11 should be
given a judgment of GUILT by a criminal court or war crimes tribunal. That is
the end goal.

To help us focus on that goal, let’s use the label GUILT.

Thinking out loud, the GUILT acronym can stand for:

Government Unfriendlies Intentionally Launched Terror

Here’s what I mean . . .

“Government” stands for people within the U.S. government. Sure,
the U.S. might have subcontracted parts of the attack out to Pakistan, Saudi
Arabia and/or the Israeli Mossad. But, at the very least, elements of the AMERICAN
government were involved. This was state-sponsored terrorism, not a lone wolf

“Unfriendlies” is a term sometimes used in the military for people
hostile to the U.S. or U.S. soldiers. The people who carried out 9/11, even
those that were employees of the United States government, are hostile to the
U.S. constitutional form of government and government of, by and for the people.
They have a very different agenda from the rest of us and from the founding
fathers, so they are unfriendlies.

9/11 was “I ntentionally” made or allowed to succeed. Indeed, there
were multiple, parallel fail-safe mechanisms that the perpetrators used to ensure
that the attacks succeeded: setting up patsies, protecting the patsies by preventing
pre-attack investigations and prosecutions, failing to notify the public of
warnings, routing money through Pakistan’s ISI and elsewhere, training patsies
at military bases, conducting multiple war games including plane-into-building
exercises and false radar injects, standing down the military, potentially using
controlled demolition of the world trade center, etc.

The perpetrators “Launched” the attack. They took active steps, some
of which are dicussed above, to make sure the attacks succeeded. Even under
the old lihop theory, active steps had to have been taken — normal national
security procedures had to have been actively interfered with in a manner which
involved treasonous action rather than mere passive non-action. As Colonel Bob
Bowman says “If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal
procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be
standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive.” And as
the person who created the lihop and mihop labels said, if you really look at
lihop, you HAVE to become mihop. So the lihop label is meaningless. The fact
that the attacks were intentionally launched is the important thing.

The goal of “Terror” is to make people afraid. The perpetrators of
9/11 intentionally killed U.S. (and foreign) citizens in a terrifying way, such
as making or letting the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center collapse
in a horrifying manner. 9/11 is a textbook example of false flag terror. It
is also the most spectacular terrorist attack in history.

So let’s put aside labels that distract us. Let’s stop counting how many angels
can dance on the head of a pin. Let’s stop arguing over pet theories of what
did and didn’t happen on 9/11.

Let’s focus on the GUILT of the perpetrators of 9/11. And let’s bring the guilty
to justice.

My formulation of the words making up G.U.I.L.T. might not be the best. But
if we’re going to use any simplistic labels, let’s at least focus on guilt and
justice as the most important concepts.

My intention is to staunch the huge loss of energy being focused into the lihop
versus mihop debate, the huge in-fighting and secterianism those labels have
caused, and the drain on the ability of 9/11 truthers to focus our eyes on the
prize: bringing the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice, and educating people about
the secret history of false flag attacks so that they won’t happen again.

Anything else is mental . . . you know what.

Source URL:
This excellent blog is linked from the front page at

Previous articleMohamed Atta’s Best Friend Caught in South Pacific:
Next articleManuel Garcia Sees Physics That Don’t Exist

Since 2004, 911Truth.Org has educated the public about the suppressed realities of the September 11 attacks.

We worked with the 9/11 Families to pressure the Bush administration to convene an investigation into the deadliest attacks on US soil since Pearl Harbor. We attended many of the commission hearings and questioned commissioners and bird-dogged elected officials to get answers to the Unanswered Questions that remain so to this day.

We reported the contradictions, lies and omissions on the public record. 911Truth.Org staff have given hundreds of interviews on radio and mainstream network TV.

We cover a wide range of 9/11-related issues in publishing academic papers, original research, and opinion pieces.

We wish to thank our donors who have kept us on the web since 2004! We appreciate your continued support!

We continue to update the website to make the nearly 3000 articles easier to find, read and share. Thanks for visiting us!