Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics

* amy goodman (via john):
"EXCLUSIVE...9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths"

September 11, 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites, articles, books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the government's account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called "Loose Change." Now, a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics, it's called "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts." In a Democracy Now! national broadcast exclusive, we host a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 9/11.
I haven't looked at the interview yet. I haven't even seen Loose Change - what's the consensus on that? Kooky or reasonable?

13 comments:

profmarcus said...

definitely download and view loose change... i'm not a conspiracy theorist but, at this stage of being lied to for nearly 6 years, my state of mind is this - i believe everything and i believe nothing...

Uranus said...

Nicely researched and assembled. I concluded it was either a complicated black op at most or the government was guilty of a glaring act of omission in not stopping it. In other words, government complicity is certain.

«—U®Anu§—» said...

Hey, I'm not letting these guys off the hook! I'm testing my display name on a Blogger account I made a few months ago and had forgotten. Some imposter is using the name "Uranus" so I used one of my old chat room versions. I have the goods on these dirty killers now, and they're by God gonna pay. You just wait. But now I have to go uptown and run errands, and go argue with Cox cable about my bill.

«—U®Anu§—» said...

Fixed it.

damien said...

"The Bush Administration cancelled or cut back Operation CATCHERS MITT, the highly classified ongoing CIA and FBI operation that tracked al-Qaeda operatives known to be inside the U.S. during the summer of 2001."

damien said...

There's also an outstanding but lengthy series of articles by Mark Levey entitled "The Crimes of 9/11" for anyone interested that covers the whole range of 9/11 intelligence failures. (link)

oldschool said...

Wasn't the principle author of the original Popular Mechanics report named Chertoff? As in son(?)/nephew(?) of Michael Chertoff?

Doesn't that go an awfully long way toward at least the beginning of a de-bunk? Especially if Chertoff-kin's argument is still the main one propounded?

Damien?

lukery said...

uranus - happy erranding.

D - thnx for those.

OS - i never actually saw it confirmed that the chertoff's were related - but yeah, same name, and that 'rumour' (or fact) was certainly floating around. it's very dodgy, if so. (and stupid!)

oldschool said...

PrisonPlanet.com has him pegged as a cousin of Michael Chertoff, confirmed by the mother of Benjamin Chertoff. Benjamin, however, wouldn't talk/confirm.

I dunno.

The guy's *mother* confirms, though....

I'll take it.

(okay, so I was thinking son/nephew, or something - I missed it - he's evidently Michael Chertoff's cousin)

I can't make Blogger link - is it just me? Simple Google search will find what I did w/in 2 pages.

rimone said...

'... American Free Press revealed that Benjamin Chertoff, the 25-year-old senior researcher who authored the 9/11 article, is related to Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The PM article illustrates how a propaganda method, used by dictatorships, is now being employed by the U.S. government: controlling mainstream media outlets to promote its version of 9/11.

The actions of Michael Chertoff concerning the events of 9/11, the non-investigation that followed, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the propaganda being disseminated in PM, are strikingly similar to actions attributed to the Nazi ministers Joseph Goebbels and Hermann GĖ†ring...'


from here and written to refute this piecashit

oldschool said...

Benjamin Chertoff, the 25-year-old senior researcher who authored the 9-11 article....

Excuse me?

You'll perhaps pardon me while I call, meekly, quietly, respectfully - BULLSHIT!!

Popular Mechanics, which has been around since, I dunno, didn't they critique Fred Flintstone's new ride, has a 25 year old "senior" researcher?

Or perhaps this is just my own problem, knowing that, at 25, I was still monosyllabic (I'm from central Indiana, where it was considered a sign of strength or 'deepness') and that, at that age, the only things I was "senior" at involved getting the booze, babes, drugs and location for the Tuesday night party. Other than that - miniumum wage, baby. And then I moved to Los Angeles, which began another saga...., but I digress.

A 25 year old senior researcher at Popular Mechanics?!?

Ummm... that didn't even feel right to type, so I'll try again.... A 25 year old SENIOR researcher at Popular Mechanics....

Named Chertoff.

Okay, I got no problem with that.

LeeB said...

Oldschool, you took the concept right out of what remains of my brain. Very well said! LOL!!!

lukery said...

oldschool - be careful with that concept, LeeB has been sick