Debunking 9/11 With Robert Fisk’s Popular Mechanics
THE 9/11 Arab-based truthers are like the Holocasut deniers: it never happened but wouldn’t it be great if it had have. Not that it did. But great though if it did.
Dizzy looks:
I forgot to mention that on Saturday I read the single most hilarious Robert Fisk article ever. The piece was titled “Even I question the ‘truth’ about 9/11″ in which Fisk hilariously asserts,
Let me repeat. I am not a conspiracy theorist. Spare me the ravers. Spare me the plots. But like everyone else, I would like to know the full story of 9/11, not least because it was the trigger for the whole lunatic, meretricious “war on terror” which has led us to disaster in Iraq and Afghanistan and in much of the Middle East. Bush’s happily departed adviser Karl Rove once said that “we’re an empire now – we create our own reality”. True? At least tell us.
“I’m not a conspiracy theorist but….”. Seriously, read the whole thing, it really is hilarious. He talks about all the conspiracy theories but frames them as “serious questions”. What I find a strange is that a journalist who acts like he’s well informed has not read Popular Mechanics or purchased their publication (cover pictured) which comprehensively rips apart every single one of the mentalists’ theories about the supposed “questions” around 9/11.
I mean, I’m not a fan of the Independent’s angle on the news generally. But what on earth is Simon Kelner and the Comment Editor playing at letting their paper be used to promote idiotic conspiracy theories that don’t stand up to scrutiny? I mean, it didn’t like being attacked by Blair as a “viewspaper”, but on Saturday it published an article that made it something else entirely.
August 27th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Hey I got BIG NEWS for you:
Popular Mechanics DOES NOT “comprehensively rip apart every single one of the mentalists’ theories about the supposed “questions” around 9/11.”
You should do some research on this.
August 27th, 2007 at 10:17 pm
I trust you have read the rebuttal to Popular Mechanics at http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm.
And the rebuttal to NIST here: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/
These are not ridiculous rebuttals. The author wants to know why the question of how the twin towers fell is explained in a single nearly useless sentence.
And how is it that what is complex to NIST is a piece of cake to you?
Here’s NIST on the progress of their WTC7 progress report as of June 2007:
“NIST’s investigation of WTC 7 includes an extremely complex analysis that incorporates detailed information about the building’s structure and construction, as well as data about fires, damage sustained from falling WTC 1 debris and other technical factors to determine its probable collapse sequence.”
AND..
“This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.”
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_062907.html
This is six years later.
NIST should wait until the next election to publish their report. By that time, the complexity will have eased off.
I have given you a false email address (and I apologize to whomsoever’s I used). When we know for sure who toppled the towers, I’ll give you my real one, or not.
August 27th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
You have to be pretty stupid to believe the Bush administration’s account of 9/11. I mean, how many lies can they tell before you figure out that they are a bunch of crooks.
Robert Fisk was trying to break some very harsh news to his readership as gently as possible.
The terrorists wear little American flag pins on their lapels and are at this very moment trying to whip up an attack on Iran.
August 28th, 2007 at 12:17 am
Oh, you mean the article in Popular Mechanics edited by Michael Chertoff’s nephew?
August 28th, 2007 at 3:15 am
Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Corporation. You should google “Yellow Journalism” and see what name comes up. Then you should check out David Ray Griffin’s book “Debunking 9/11 Debunking”, which comprehesively rips apart the PM article.
August 28th, 2007 at 7:07 am
Dear 9/11 nut jobs, please check out these links and piss off and stop bothering the sane,
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
[a new mega-site, with links to many, many clear technical publications; a good place to start your research project; A+]
Fire Safety Engineering & the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering&theperformanceofst
August 28th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Hi - hilarious article!! But do you really believe the stuff you write? “comprehensively rips apart every single one of the mentalists’ theories about the supposed “questions” around 9/11.”
PopMech does not address every single theory, they attack strawmen & offer rationalizations, they don’t prove anything. Check out the Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth and the Pilots for 911 Truth. These people are the real unbiased experts, not paid hacks.
I’m a licensed structural engineer, and I’ve known from the moment of the collapse that carefully planned demolition techniques must be involved. I assumed this would be found during whatever investigation, I didn’t think it was an inside job then. When the investigation was stonewalled, evidence destroyed, and nothing ever came out, I had to wonder. You really ought to open your mind & educate yourself beyond just believing everything PopMech spoon feeds. Good day.
August 28th, 2007 at 10:36 am
You say you are not a conspiracy theorist. The government’s story is a conspiracy theory also. They all are. The 911truth conspiracy theories are much closer to facts than the governments story.
People writing these hit pieces are rapidly losing their effect on brainwashing the sheeple. The MSM does a good enough job at that.
Americans that do not question our government and elected “I should say selected” officals are traitors to their country. Its that simple.
Be not afraid of the terrists “aka W” be afraid of those who do not question our government.
By the way Bin Laden has never been charged for 9/11. Go to the FBI’s most wanted and read the rap sheet.
7/7/05 London Subway bombings were also a staged event as well as OK City, but that may be a little too much for you. Just go shopping and forget it.
August 28th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Regional FBI investigations were obstructed
Allied governments warned us in detail
Our national chain of command was AWOL
Our national air defenses failed for a period of nearly two hours
The Secret Service failed to protect the President
Insider trading occurred
Three tall buildings collapsed from fire
Multiple false stories for the major elements of the story…
…and we’re the conspiracy theorists. What a crock!
Hope you’re getting well paid. You’re gonna need it.
August 28th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
And so, like the fictional Winston in Orwell’s 1984 who is confronted by a state-sponsored reality directly antithetical to the truth, we must all become historians in a sense, because when clarifying the historical record becomes a revolutionary act, we have become a society in dire need of a revolution!
“Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime” may very well be the most compelling film yet outlining the disturbing and heavily censored facts associated with the worst terrorist attacks in American history. And while a grassroots movement worldwide continues to grow, and demand answers to the many unanswered questions, the public outcry for accountability and transparency makes this film, perhaps, the most important film of 2006”
WATCH:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6757267008400743688
http://www.crisisinamerica.org