9-11 truth mainstream project - help needed.

karsey · Minor Poster Joined: 11 Feb 2006 Posts: 17

Hi.

I hope you can help.

I am currently doing work on the 911truth movement. I was wondering does anyone know of any individuals (stature) who have dismissed the movement as 'conspiracy theorists' and believe the 'official line' ?

A few people, well quite a lot refer to the 'Popular Mechanics' magazine in March 2005 where the 'conspiracy' was 'debunked', but there is nothing substantial in the argument the magazine decides to address and also considering it has political links with the US Administration and organisations such as the CIA i believe its worth ignoring.

Or perhaps relevant statements from Official American figures giving there side of the story which can be seen as an outright lie

thanks

Graham · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 6:09 pm Post subject:

my MP "refuses to beleive any ( Shocked

) of the conspiracy theories".

although I think she might have had a change of heart recently, after a few emails about st911.

ian neal · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:30 pm Post subject:

There's no end of people 'debunking' us, but none of stand up to scrutiny IMO

This is another common reference that debunks Ian henshall's book (again not very well)
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Sep/16-241966.html

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject:

Specifically regarding the Popular Mechanics (PM) Article, this is what I have said to a couple of people:

All the official reports about the destruction of the towers are flawed. The Practical Mechanics article's analysis is flawed (see http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/indexg.html and http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm) . Ask yourself this - why are so many people quoting an article in a hobbyist magazine about trucks and cars etc to rebut the fact that the WTC was demolished? If PM is right, why hasn't this article, or a version of it, appeared in Scientific American, New Scientist or some other more appropriate journal?

brian · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:29 pm Post subject:

Scientific American did publish a piece on it hyping the Popular Mechanics article.

Quote -

"The single best debunking of this conspiratorial codswallop is in the March issue of Popular Mechanics, which provides an exhaustive point-by-point analysis of the most prevalent claims."

It was another powder puff piece easily demolished.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/sciam_reply.htm

Andrew Johnson · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:56 pm Post subject:

Brian Ah yes - thanks for the note -forgot about that! Funny how they refer to it and don't reproduce and improve on it...

ian neal · Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:24 am Post subject:

Ian Henshall's rebuttal of the State department attack

ian neal · Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:43 am Post subject:

This Popular Mechanics cover must have been under different editorship I guess Wink

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1