Loose Change vs Popular Mechanics

[Myth1184]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stVmEmJ666M

Here ya go 9-11 Conspiracy nuts, watch as the Loose Change guys get pwned by Popular Mechanics.

Myth1184 Reviewed by Myth1184 on 10-17-2006. Loose Change vs Popular Mechanics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stVmEmJ666M Here ya go 9-11 Conspiracy nuts, watch as the Loose Change guys get pwned by Popular Mechanics. Rating: 5

[Great Spirit]

Didn't you already post this? Your Hearst owned publication has been debunked already! That magazine is part of the Establishment.

Yes Virginina, there is a 9/11 conspiracy! Accept it.

Hmmm....no fighter jets allowed to defend Amerika on 9/11? Dick Cheney taking personal command of NORAD? Multiple high profile people being told not to fly to New York on 9/11? Building 7 just being "pulled" demolition style when it takes weeks or even months to plan a demolition? Detonators going off in the WTC towers? No plane wreckage found at the Pentagon??

Smells like fascism!

Hey Myth, do you work for the US government????

Let me guess...your next post will be about how there were WMDs in Iraq. lol.
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html

The Hearst-owned Popular Mechanics targeted the 9/11 Truth Movement (without ever acknowledging it by that name) with a cover story in its March 2005 edition. [1] Sandwiched between ads and features for monster trucks, NASCAR paraphernalia, and off-road racing are twelve dense and brilliantly designed pages purporting to debunk the myths of 9/11.

The article's approach is to identify and attack a series of claims which it asserts represent the whole of 9/11 skepticism. It gives the false impression that these claims, several of which are clearly absurd, represent the breadth of challenges to the official account of the flights, the World Trade Center attack, and the Pentagon attack. Thus it purports to debunk conspiracy theorists' physical-evidence-based claims, without even acknowledging that there are other grounds on which to question the official story. Indeed many 9/11 researchers don't even address the physical evidence, preferring instead to focus on who had the the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out the attack. I summarize some of this evidence at the end of this article.

While ignoring these and many other facts belying the official story, PM attacks a mere 16 claims of its choosing, which it asserts are the most prevalent among conspiracy theorists. PM groups these claims into four topics, each of which is given a richly illustrated two- or four-page spread. Since nearly all the physical-evidence-based challenges to the official story fall within one or another of these topics, the article gives the impression that it addresses the breadth of these challenges. However, for each topic, the article presents specious claims to divert the reader from understanding the issue. For example, the three pages devoted to attacking the Twin Towers' demolition present three red-herring claims and avoid the dozens of points I feature in my presentations, such as The Twin Towers' Demolition [2]

The article brackets its distortion of the issues highlighted by 9/11 skeptics with smears against the skeptics themselves, whom it dehumanizes and accuses of disgracing the memories of the victims, and repeatedly accuses of harassing individuals who responded to the attack. More important, it misrepresents skeptics' views by implying that the skeptics' community is an undifferentiated army that wholly embraces the article's sixteen poisonous claims, which it asserts are at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario. In fact much of the 9/11 truth community has been working to expose many of these claims as disinformation.

Besides trashing the skeptics, and conflating this country with its corrupt leaders, Meig's attempts to legitimate PM's investigation, saying:
We assembled a team of reporters and researchers, including professional fact checkers and the editors of PM, and methodically analyzed all 16 conspiracy claims. We interviewed scores of engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses and members of the investigative teams who have held the wreckage of the attacks in their own hands. We pored over photography, maps, blueprints, aviation logs and transcripts. In every single instance, we found that the facts used by the conspiracy theorists to support their fantasies were mistaken, misunderstood, or deliberately falsified.
This sounds impressive, but the article provides no evidence to back up these claims. It provides no footnotes to source its many assertions, and despite the scores of experts listed in its final section the article cites only a handful of them, and mostly to refute its straw-man claims.

Moreover, bold unsubstantiated claims in the article -- such as PM's assertion that there was only a single interception in the decade before 9/11/01 -- don't inspire confidence in PM's professional fact checkers. It echoes the discredited assertions of official reports such as FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study and the 9/11 Commission Report. It provides no evidence PM investigated the attack -- only evidence that it investigated the 9/11 Truth movement in order to determine how best to discredit it through misrepresentation.

Superficially, the four topics appear to address the major physical evidence issues brought up by the skeptics (while ignoring the mountains of evidence of foreknowledge, motive, and unique means possessed by insiders). However, the sixteen most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists which it attacks are mostly specious claims, many of which were probably invented to discredit skepticism of the official story in the first place. The article debunks the more specious claims, and uses distortion and falsehoods to counter serious claims.

Thus the approach of the article is to set up and attack a straw man of claims that it pretends represent the entirety of the skeptics' movement. The list includes many of the same claims that were debunked in 2004 by the websites 911review.com, oilempire.us, and questionsquestions.net.
PM provides no evidence for its assertion that the claims it attacks are representative of the army of conspiracy theorists. It cites at least one website for each of its claims, but the websites are not representative of the 9/11 Truth Movement. It makes no mention of 911Research.wtc7.net, the highest-ranking 9/11 Truth website returned by a Google search using "9/11". Several references are anonymous posts to sites that don't exercise editorial control. To my mind, the 17 websites PM mentions fall into four categories:

# Sites with a high profile in the 9/11 Truth Movement that maintain a high standard of factual accuracy: emperors-clothes.com, OilEmpire.us, and StandDown.net.
# Sites with a high profile in the 9/11 Truth Movement that post a wide range of articles or endorse positions without carefully vetting their accuracy: Prisonplanet.com, Rense.com, WhatReallyHappened.com, reopen911.org, and AttackOnAmerica.net.
# Sites that I've never heard of or don't focus on 9/11: sandiego.indymedia.org, BlogD.com, ThinkAndAsk.com, ForbiddenKnowledge.com, and WorldNetDaily.com.
# Sites that have actively promoted hoaxes: 911inplanesite.com, LetsRoll911.org, 911review.org, and PentagonStrike.co.uk.

While entirely avoiding the most prominent 9/11 Truth sites, PM repeatedly mentions the least credible. For example, it repeats LetsRoll911.org three times.

Before proceeding to its 16 points, the article's introduction levels more insults at the skeptics -- extremists, some of whose theories are byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. It begins by asking you to type "World Trade Center conspiracy" into Google.com, and claims that More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published -- an incredible claim.

The sixteen "claims" attacked by the article are described here under the headings taken from the article, which indicate either the claim, the counter-claim, or a broader issue.

............................................READ THE REST ON THE LINK ABOVE!

[Bong30]

GS the WMDs were Radical Islam..........



Ohh BTW are you calling people goverment agents again?

You naughty boy.............

[Great Spirit]

GS the WMDs were Radical Islam..........



Ohh BTW are you calling people goverment agents again?

You naughty boy.............

Wait a sec....didn't Hitler....I mean Bush lie to the Amerikan people by saying there were WMDs in Iraq....yet the proof says that there were none? That alone is grounds of impeachment. Now you say WMDs is radical Islam and not real weapons?? lol.

If you want to get technical, the real WMDs are Bush and his Illuminati cronies.

I never called Myth a government agent. I asked him though :smokin:

[polo420]

Great Spirit. I have NEVER said this to ANYONE before. "Put the fucking pipe down, retard" To say 9/11 was a conspiracy is ridiculous. You are doing harm to the memories of the victims,fallen soldiers,and Ones still fighting. For that, You are an asshole. You are the worst kind of asshole. My suggestion to You is, if you want to spread conspiracy theories, start with JFK. Grow up, get a job. I see Blockbuster in your future. You are a sick and twisted soul. I hope one day You grow up.

[Bong30]

didnt Saddam use WMDs on Iran During the Iran -Iraq war?



Come on GS...


He must have had them at some time...... HUH?


How did we know that he shipped them out of the country?



Come on GS spin it........

[Great Spirit]

didnt Saddam use WMDs on Iran During the Iran -Iraq war?



Come on GS...


He must have had them at some time...... HUH?


How did we know that he shipped them out of the country?



Come on GS spin it........

Ya Bong..Saddam had them BECAUSE YOUR LOVELY GOVERNMENT SOLD IT TO HIM!!! But you see my fascist friend, a WMD can't magically reappear after it has been used in war, soooooooo how did Saddam get all of these magical WMDs after the Iran-Iraq war and the Gulf War to justify another invasion? Hmmm????

Oh wait...as you said...the WMDs were radical Islam! No chemical or biological ones. MY BAD!! :dance:

If you guys wish to believe the official fascist propaganda that Arab hijackers hijacked airplanes, then so be it. The Illuminati just laugh at you more and more!

The proof shows time and time again that 9/11 was indeed an inside job used to bring about a fascist dictatorship.

[Bong30]

Ya Bong..Saddam had them BECAUSE YOUR LOVELY GOVERNMENT SOLD IT TO HIM!!! But you see my fascist friend, a WMD can't magically reappear after it has been used in war, soooooooo how did Saddam get all of these magical WMDs after the Iran-Iraq war and the Gulf War to justify another invasion? Hmmm????

We did supply weapons to Iraq during the Iran Iraq war.... THat is how we know he had them

Oh wait...as you said...the WMDs were radical Islam! No chemical or biological ones. MY BAD!! :dance:

My point was we went there to fight Radical Islam OVER THERE.... We had sold him weapons in the 80s so we knew he had them.

If you guys wish to believe the official fascist propaganda that Arab hijackers hijacked airplanes, then so be it. The Illuminati just laugh at you more and more!

The Muslims Think 19 freedom Haters did it why dont you?...ding ding cause you hate america

The proof shows time and time again that 9/11 was indeed an inside job used to bring about a fascist dictatorship.
^^^^ please Just put in your sig....save your self some time ^^^^^^

GS If you were my son I would help you see the light. Maybe your Moms offer is a good one.

[Hamlet]

The proof shows time and time again that 9/11 was indeed an inside job used to bring about a fascist dictatorship.

Sorry GS, you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. Give up the fantasies, and start seeking the 'real' truth. You'll be less frustrated and a lot happier.

It's not a sheep thing.....it's just the 'facts are facts' thing. And that bullshit trash those two pimply teenagers on 'Loose Change' are preachin' just isn't factual.

Aren't you tired of looking over your shoulder for boogiemen who aren't really there? Just let it all go and live life with some peace of mind for a while. There's always going to be bad shit going down, but it doesn't mean your life can't be a happy one.

[polo420]

Douche. Okay.I WAS harsh and I deserve that. Open minded to his opinion? GTFOOMFWTBS. Facts are facts. My OPINION is that You are living in a B movie world where the President and his "Henchmen" are destroying anything but Tax Dollars. We, as Smokers, have enough on our plate. (Legalization of Marijuana)If You want to preach propaganda, join the DEA. Theres plenty of room for doomsday bullshit there. If You want to be involved and make a difference, get educated, learn FACTS, organize and make your voice heard. The "Bush was behind 911" stuff makes You look foolish. That is a fact. I truly hope that if You are going to continue with this tirade, You DO NOT tell anyone that You are a Marijuana smoker. This will feed into the stereotypes and set us further back in an already difficult battle. Does this make sense to You? I certainly hope so. As far as Bush: Yes, He does say some really dumb stuff. He is a Texan! (JK) But he did not "plan" or "mastermind" ANYTHING. Jesus Christ.....Bush and mastermind in the same fucking sentence........