refuting popular mechanics 9/11 lies...?

imind · 08-13-2006, 10:30 PM

link

Popular Mechanics' March 2005 front cover story was entitled 'Debunking 9/11 Lies' and has since become the bellwether reference point for all proponents of the official 9/11 fairytale.

Following the publication of the article and its exaltation by the mainstream media as the final nail in the coffin for 9/11 conspiracy theories, it was revealed that senior researcher on the piece Benjamin Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

...

Commenting on his own interview for the magazine piece, Alex Jones said that initially he thought it was a fake interview or a crank call. Jones has given hundreds of TV and print interviews and thousands of radio interviews but his experience with Benjamin Chertoff was like no other.

"People from school newspapers sound more credible and serious," said Jones.

Jones had to call Popular Mechanics' office and verify that Chertoff actually worked for them. In the course of doing so he was erroneously told by Editor in Chief James Meigs that the story was not going to be a hit piece and that it was simply intended to explore the different theories surrounding 9/11.

the plot thickens.

what can i add of my own feelings without having read the book? uh, i find it peculiar that no clear consensus exists among engineers regarding the fall of these 3 buildings.

7960 · 08-13-2006, 10:37 PM

Alex Jones......

I stopped reading right there. Conspiracy or not, he is the worst possible advocated for the anti-government crowd if they want to be taken seriously.

kinggovernor · 08-13-2006, 10:42 PM

Benjamin Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

what does this have to do with anything?

7960 · 08-13-2006, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

what does this have to do with anything?

It obviously means he conspired with the govt to spread disinformation and keep the public in the dark about what the moloch-worshiping bildeberger illuminati dark lord 33rd level masons are doing.

thomez · 08-13-2006, 10:50 PM

I think the site is something like... debunking911myths.com or something like that, ran by the head cheese at Popular Mechanics

kinggovernor · 08-13-2006, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

It obviously means he conspired with the govt to spread disinformation and keep the public in the dark about what the moloch-worshiping bildeberger illuminati dark lord 33rd level masons are doing.

actually he is a jew

imind · 08-14-2006, 01:43 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

I stopped reading right there. Conspiracy or not, he is the worst possible advocated for the anti-government crowd if they want to be taken seriously.

he is but a piece of the puzzle. read the article.

what does this have to do with anything?

potential conflict of interest?

anyone actually read the article?

Comrade Ramius · 08-14-2006, 02:06 AM

Honestly, even if there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 (which I'm not saying there is), uncovering it would really be nothing but horrible for the country. Sad enough to say it, but it's better to let sleeping dogs lie.

7960 · 08-14-2006, 02:47 AM

Originally Posted by imind

he is but a piece of the puzzle. read the article.
potential conflict of interest?

No. Definite fucking asshole in alex jones. I'd bet a year's salary that if there was no family involved he'd somehow twist that into the conspiracy.......... "with the size of their family and the size of the govt it has to be part of the plan that *none* of his family works for the feds" or some shit like that.

Alex Jones is for any cause what Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse are for civil rights.

Nonphixion · 08-14-2006, 04:47 AM

Unfortunately Popular Mechanics is just a dumbed-down engineering publication for the dumbed-down interests of the American people.

This magazine is by no means a highly-credible scientific journal.

kinggovernor · 08-14-2006, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

Unfortunately Popular Mechanics is just a dumbed-down engineering publication for the dumbed-down interests of the American people.

This magazine is by no means a highly-credible scientific journal.

well it is called Popular Mechanics, and all popular magazines aren't peer reviewed journals

ballz2wallz · 08-14-2006, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by imind

he is but a piece of the puzzle.

what puzzle?

7960 · 08-14-2006, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

Unfortunately Popular Mechanics is just a dumbed-down engineering publication for the dumbed-down interests of the American people.

This magazine is by no means a highly-credible scientific journal.

And it didn't give a highly detailed scientific version of the evidence. It told it in layman's terms but explaining it so a 6th grader can understand certainly doesn't mean that it's wrong.

Conspiracy people said bombs brought down the towers (proof, molten metal pouring out of the hole in the tower). PM went through the conspiracists' evidence and explained it all away (PM, it was aluminum). Jones's "evidence" back to them is to yell louder and wave his hands higher ("It wasn't aluminum and we all know it, what is the govt hiding?")

I don't believe there were any bombs/thermite in the towers but if there was and there was irrefutable proof of it, you'd better have someone besides Jones present it because given his history of lying and callling it "proof" there's no way I'm believing anything he says.

Stylerod · 08-14-2006, 10:23 AM

Hell. Bush can't even have prisoners pile up in a pyramid without the press finding out about it. How can he arrange the destruction of the Twin Towers? He's a moron, right?

Let's face it. There has been no major event in American history that some nut hasn't "proved" it was a conspiracy. From the attack on Pearl Harbor to the moon landing to Ron Brown dying to an airliner being shot down by a missile off the coast of New York etc, etc, etc.

It's a detective game for some people to try to find pieces THEY feel don't fit and then insert their own. Hell, you can say the sky is blue and people will prove you're wrong.

beez · 08-14-2006, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

I don't believe there were any bombs/thermite in the towers but if there was and there was irrefutable proof of it, you'd better have someone besides Jones present it because given his history of lying and callling it "proof" there's no way I'm believing anything he says.

Do you have any links to examples of him lying in the past? I know a group of people who worship that guy like a god and it would be nice to have something solid to bring at them. Granted it'll be dismissed as 'propaganda' but it beats having the same discussion about the Thermate in the dirt from the steel crosses over and over.

imind · 08-14-2006, 12:04 PM

Bush can't even have prisoners pile up in a pyramid without the press finding out about it. How can he arrange the destruction of the Twin Towers? He's a moron, right?

the pyramid was bush's idea?

if it was orchestrated by our govt, i wouldn't suspect bush to be running the show, just as i don't think he is running this country, even as president.

Stylerod · 08-14-2006, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by imind

the pyramid was bush's idea?

if it was orchestrated by our govt, i wouldn't suspect bush to be running the show, just as i don't think he is running this country, even as president.

You get the idea. Secrets don't seem to stay secret very long anymore. To think something as big as 9/11 was "faked" by the government is just retarded. But for many people, it's fun to play with the idea.

beez · 08-14-2006, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

You get the idea. Secrets don't seem to stay secret very long anymore. To think something as big as 9/11 was "faked" by the government is just retarded. But for many people, it's fun to play with the idea.

Just say it was done by the shadow government which runs the US and other western nations. That one's way better at keeping secrets.

imind · 08-14-2006, 12:36 PM

You get the idea. Secrets don't seem to stay secret very long anymore...

hence, this book.

i understand where you're coming from, but it would be much more effective to refute the evidence rather than presenting semi-fallacious arguements (ie, its too stupid to be true).

Ardentfrost · 08-14-2006, 12:46 PM

Regardless of Popular Mechanics' bias (or lack of bias, whichever), until conspiracy theorists can provide something more than circumstantial evidence, pics/vids/personal accounts from GOOD vantage points (pics taken from the wrong side of the smaller building that fell doesn't prove anything), and provide people who actually know something, what they believe has to be taken with a grain of salt.

I mean, I can misquote engineers and make it look like they're saying something I want them to say.

I'm not saying we know everything that happened on that day... and I'm sure some things were kept from us. But the big things, the main parts, the whole hijacking a plane and running it into various buildings thing... I just don't see how that could remain a secret for very long if it were staged. If this were 100 years ago, maybe, but in a time where information can get from someone's fingers to my screen in a matter of seconds, I just don't see it happening.