<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Debunking 9/11 With Robert Fisk&#8217;s Popular Mechanics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html</link>
	<description>Tabloid news for broadsheet readers</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 11:25:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alfer Packer</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-31193</link>
		<dc:creator>Alfer Packer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 21:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-31193</guid>
		<description>The 9/11 truthers are a bunch of rabid, frothing and the mouth moonbats.  

They are scientifically illiterate, sexually anorexic, and logically challenged.  

I laughed out loud at the claim that the PM editor is the nephew of the Homeland security director.  The “yellow Journalism” post was about as out there as you can get.  

Remember, you need TIN foil, not aluminum foil.  LOL LOL LOL LOL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 9/11 truthers are a bunch of rabid, frothing and the mouth moonbats.  </p>
<p>They are scientifically illiterate, sexually anorexic, and logically challenged.  </p>
<p>I laughed out loud at the claim that the PM editor is the nephew of the Homeland security director.  The “yellow Journalism” post was about as out there as you can get.  </p>
<p>Remember, you need TIN foil, not aluminum foil.  LOL LOL LOL LOL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Cunningham</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29855</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Cunningham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29855</guid>
		<description>And I quote "George Monbiot argued a few months ago that the 9/11 conspiracy cult had turned some opponents of the Bush administration into gibbering idiots. He is not refuted by the case of Robert Fisk."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And I quote &#8220;George Monbiot argued a few months ago that the 9/11 conspiracy cult had turned some opponents of the Bush administration into gibbering idiots. He is not refuted by the case of Robert Fisk.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rose White</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29673</link>
		<dc:creator>Rose White</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:40:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29673</guid>
		<description>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

www.crisisinamerica.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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!</p>
<p>&#8220;Everybody&#8217;s Gotta Learn Sometime&#8221; 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”</p>
<p>WATCH:<br />
<a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6757267008400743688" rel="nofollow">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6757267008400743688</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.crisisinamerica.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.crisisinamerica.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29613</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29613</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regional FBI investigations were obstructed<br />
Allied governments warned us in detail<br />
Our national chain of command was AWOL<br />
Our national air defenses failed for a period of nearly two hours<br />
The Secret Service failed to protect the President<br />
Insider trading occurred<br />
Three tall buildings collapsed from fire<br />
Multiple false stories for the major elements of the story&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8230;and we&#8217;re the conspiracy theorists.  What a crock!</p>
<p>Hope you&#8217;re getting well paid.  You&#8217;re gonna need it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: logan</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29541</link>
		<dc:creator>logan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:36:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29541</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You say you are not a conspiracy theorist. The government&#8217;s story is a conspiracy theory also. They all are. The 911truth conspiracy theories are much closer to facts than the governments story.<br />
People writing these hit pieces are rapidly losing their effect on brainwashing the sheeple. The MSM does a good enough job at that.<br />
Americans that do not question our government and elected &#8220;I should say selected&#8221; officals are traitors to their country. Its that simple.<br />
Be not afraid of the terrists &#8220;aka W&#8221;  be afraid of those who do not question our government.<br />
By the way Bin Laden has never been charged for 9/11. Go to the FBI&#8217;s most wanted and read the rap sheet.<br />
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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: newj</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29525</link>
		<dc:creator>newj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 08:51:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29525</guid>
		<description>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 &#38; offer rationalizations, they don't prove anything.  Check out the Architects &#38; 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 &#38; educate yourself beyond just believing everything PopMech spoon feeds.  Good day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi - hilarious article!! But do you really believe the stuff you write?  &#8220;comprehensively rips apart every single one of the mentalists&#8217; theories about the supposed &#8220;questions&#8221; around 9/11.&#8221;</p>
<p>PopMech does not address every single theory, they attack strawmen &amp; offer rationalizations, they don&#8217;t prove anything.  Check out the Architects &amp; Engineers for 911 Truth and the Pilots for 911 Truth.  These people are the real unbiased experts, not paid hacks.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m a licensed structural engineer, and I&#8217;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&#8217;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 &amp; educate yourself beyond just believing everything PopMech spoon feeds.  Good day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Cunningham</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29507</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Cunningham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 06:07:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29507</guid>
		<description>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 &#38; the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering&#38;theperformanceofst</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear 9/11 nut jobs, please check out these links and piss off and stop bothering the sane,</p>
<p><a href="http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home" rel="nofollow">http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home</a><br />
[a new mega-site, with links to many, many clear technical publications; a good place to start your research project; A+]</p>
<p>Fire Safety Engineering &amp; the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires<br />
<a href="http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering&amp;theperformanceofst" rel="nofollow">http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering&amp;theperformanceofst</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: johnny</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29490</link>
		<dc:creator>johnny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 02:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29490</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Corporation.  You should google &#8220;Yellow Journalism&#8221; and see what name comes up.  Then you should check out David Ray Griffin&#8217;s book &#8220;Debunking 9/11 Debunking&#8221;, which comprehesively rips apart the PM article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gimmeabreak</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29473</link>
		<dc:creator>gimmeabreak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29473</guid>
		<description>Oh, you mean the article in Popular Mechanics edited by Michael Chertoff's nephew?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, you mean the article in Popular Mechanics edited by Michael Chertoff&#8217;s nephew?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJ Fan</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29463</link>
		<dc:creator>AJ Fan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:56:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29463</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have to be pretty stupid to believe the Bush administration&#8217;s account of 9/11.  I mean, how many lies can they tell before you figure out that they are a bunch of crooks. </p>
<p>Robert Fisk was trying to break some very harsh news to his readership as gently as possible.</p>
<p>The terrorists wear little American flag pins on their lapels and are at this very moment trying to whip up an attack on Iran.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ICGREEN</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29440</link>
		<dc:creator>ICGREEN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:17:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29440</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I trust you have read the rebuttal to Popular Mechanics at <a href="http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm</a>.  </p>
<p>And the rebuttal to NIST here: <a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/" rel="nofollow">http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/</a></p>
<p>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. </p>
<p>And how is it that what is complex to NIST is a piece of cake to you? </p>
<p>Here&#8217;s NIST on the progress of their WTC7 progress report as of June 2007:</p>
<p>&#8220;NIST&#8217;s investigation of WTC 7 includes an extremely complex analysis that incorporates detailed information about the building&#8217;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.&#8221;</p>
<p>AND..</p>
<p>&#8220;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.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_062907.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_062907.html</a></p>
<p>This is six years later. </p>
<p>NIST should wait until the next election to publish their report. By that time, the complexity will have eased off. </p>
<p>I have given you a false email address (and I apologize to whomsoever&#8217;s I used). When we know for sure who toppled the towers, I&#8217;ll give you my real one, or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wally</title>
		<link>http://www.anorak.co.uk/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29415</link>
		<dc:creator>Wally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anorak.co.uk/news/back-pages/176148.html#comment-29415</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey I got BIG NEWS for you:</p>
<p>Popular Mechanics DOES NOT &#8220;comprehensively rip apart every single one of the mentalists&#8217; theories about the supposed &#8220;questions&#8221; around 9/11.&#8221;</p>
<p>You should do some research on this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
