http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/11/disinform...
Disinformation and the False MIHOP/LIHOP Dichotomy
By Arabesque
Simplification is often achieved through the use of labels. Though they are helpful, labels and descriptive terms can lend themselves to misuse, over-simplification, and distortion when used in a misleading context. The most significant example of this within the 9/11 truth movement is the false "Made it Happen on Purpose" (MIHOP) and "Let it Happen on Purpose" (LIHOP) dichotomy. What is a false dichotomy? George Bush gave us this famous example in his response to the 9/11 attacks: "You are either with us or against us in the fight against Terror. " [13] Also known as the false dilemma fallacy, the false dichotomy creates a false binary either/or choice [...]
The MIHOP and LIHOP labels were purportedly coined by Nico Haupt in 2002: " I invented the acronym 'LIHOP' at the same time [we] created [the] '9/11 Science and Justice Alliance'." [15] Consequently, these terms were widely adopted and "MIHOP" was popularized in the book 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA by Webster Tarpley:
"This book argues the rogue network MIHOP position. That is to say, it represents the analytical point of view which sees the events of September 11, 2001 as a deliberate provocation manufactured by an outlaw network of high officials infesting the military and security apparatus of the United States and Great Britain, a network ultimately dominated by Wall Street and City of London financiers. It is our contention that any other approach… misrepresents what actually happened in the terror attacks. " [16]
Explained in this way, MIHOP is a coherent thesis that can be analyzed and critiqued. However, the terms MIHOP and LIHOP themselves are also easily misused when they are employed in the wrong context. When left without definition or clarification, these terms are vague, misleading, and open-ended as will be demonstrated below. Discussing his book in an interview with Alex Jones, Tarpley explained that:
"This is the only book that gives strong MIHOP… There is the negligence theory, not wearing well. Then there is LIHOP, Let it happen on purpose, like the Arab hijackers have some kind of independent reality. Like Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon. This also has not worn well. Then MIHOP, Make it happen, that the patsies are controlled assets, they don't make it happen, the professionals make it happen under the cover of drills. " [17]
In the second edition of Synthetic Terror, Tarpley repeats the charge that "The LIHOP view of things has been vociferously and voluminously defended by Mike Ruppert , whose book features the constant refrain borrowed from Delmart 'Mike' Vreeland, 'Let one happen. Stop the rest!'" [18] In these examples, a comparison is made between LIHOP and MIHOP by referencing the book Crossing the Rubicon by Michael Ruppert. [19] Because the terms MIHOP and LIHOP can be inaccurate and clumsy, they often lend themselves very well to straw-man assertions. Is Ruppert's book "LIHOP"? From page 1 of Crossing the Rubicon :
"While these attacks were arguably one of the most serious homicides ever committed, the investigation and 'prosecution'… has never even approached the legal and logical standards governing all such investigations. Regardless of whom the suspect(s) turns out to be, these are the basic questions every homicide investigator must seek to answer in the course of the investigation… In the end the only 'suspects' found to meet all of these criteria will not be al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. They will instead be a group of people operating within certain government agencies, including the White House, for the benefit of major financial interests within the United States and in other countries ." [20]
Ruppert's passage is very similar in content to the one seen in Tarpley's book above—how can Tarpley make the charge that Ruppert is arguing "LIHOP"? Noted 9/11 researcher Jim Hoffman comments on Ruppert's research that he "has done a great deal of work on documenting the role of government agencies, such as the CIA, in the September 11th attack." [21] If Ruppert's suspects include members of the White House and the CIA and do not include the alleged terrorists as cited in the above passage, how could he be promoting "LIHOP" if he is not blaming the alleged hijackers as Tarpley suggests? Not surprisingly, if Tarpley can make a stunning mischaracterization like this, lesser researchers and rank and file activists are even more prone to do the same. Clearly, LIHOP and MIHOP can mean different things to different people, but their meaning can easily shift when they are not clearly defined or clarified. On their own, the words "made" and "let" are as simple and basic as exist within the English language.