"Loose Change" & Other Conspiracies Get OWNED!

world

The new issue of Popular Mechanics just got released. It takes a few shots at "Bush/Halliburton/Zionist/CIA/New World Order/Illuminati conspiracy for world domination" type people.

"Popular Mechanics has been fact-checking such claims since late 2004, and recently published a book on the topic. We've pored over transcripts, flight logs and blueprints, and interviewed more than 300 sources - including engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses and members of investigative teams."

"In every single case, we found that the very facts used by conspiracy theorists to support their fantasies are mistaken, misunderstood or deliberately falsified."

link: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/conspiracy_cranks_opedcolumnists_james_b__meigs.htm

I know, some of the conspiracy guys will find out that the janitor of the building that Popular Mechanics is edited in has a relative that lives next to someone who owns a corporation so Popular Mechanics is part of the conspiracy. But, some of the sheeple will still ignore facts just because they hate Bush. I dont like Bush, but I'm not stupid. Poll after poll about how Europeans think Bush was behind 9/11 just make Europeans look worse then Americans.

monkey spanker

some people just don't want to accept that sometimes things just happen as presented. these are the same people that think elvis is still alive, and doing heroin with kurt cobain in the caymen islands. the theories are entertaining, but should not be taken seriously.

Collin

monkey spanker wrote:

some people just don't want to accept that sometimes things just happen as presented. these are the same people that think elvis is still alive, and doing heroin with kurt cobain in the caymen islands. the theories are entertaining, but should not be taken seriously.

Are you sure these are the same people? Where did you get those facts buddy?

Anyway, I think this is a good thing. I think now people can focus on the real questions i.e. why your government failed miserably.

farfromglorified

An excellent article.

pushmepullme

How is this article any different from what the loose change people are saying? Their engineers say they fell because of the planes, the loose change engineers say they didn't. This article doesn't prove anything.

farfromglorified

pushmepullme wrote:

How is this article any different from what the loose change people are saying?

For starters, this article is researched. Secondly, this article is not built around its conclusions but rather its facts.

I've asked this question before and I'll ask it again:

Do you understand the difference between listening to a preacher and a researcher?

jsand

farfromglorified wrote:

For starters, this article is researched. Secondly, this article is not built around its conclusions but rather its facts.

I've asked this question before and I'll ask it again:

Do you understand the difference between listening to a preacher and a researcher?

Hey. Let him be. He's staying in those towers...

sonicreducer

if all these people are being influenced by conspiracy theorists, wouldn't the government want to prove 9/11 wasn't an inside job once and for all? maybe, like, release some "irrefutable evidence"! i mean, if it's a global conspiracy theory, wouldn't they want to protect their name and their country. people think we are a joke. i know i would want to prove those fuckers wrong. but they don't. and they are shady and misleading. until they change, people will continue to make those claims.

jsand

sonicreducer wrote:

if all these people are being influenced by conspiracy theorists, wouldn't the government want to prove 9/11 wasn't an inside job once and for all? maybe, like, release some "irrefutable evidence"! i mean, if it's a global conspiracy theory, wouldn't they want to protect their name and their country. people think we are a joke. i know i would want to prove those fuckers wrong. but they don't. and they are shady and misleading. until they change, people will continue to make those claims.

I think the idea is that these theories are being promoted by a lunatic fringe element that does not deserve any time or resources being used to disprove such nonsense.

A Surprise Left

I like how on one hand people say Bush is a moron and he should have done this or he can't do that. But on the other hand they say he and his cronies are behind 9/11. So is he a moron or is he an evil genius? Which one is it lunatics? I find it hard to believe a guy who can't speak in public at a decent level could be behind (or even involved) in such a brillant plan.

farfromglorified

sonicreducer wrote:

if all these people are being influenced by conspiracy theorists, wouldn't the government want to prove 9/11 wasn't an inside job once and for all? maybe, like, release some "irrefutable evidence"! i mean, if it's a global conspiracy theory, wouldn't they want to protect their name and their country. people think we are a joke. i know i would want to prove those fuckers wrong. but they don't. and they are shady and misleading. until they change, people will continue to make those claims.

That won't work. These theories are anti-fact. They can't be eliminated by more facts or more evidence. They will always thrive in the perpetual vaccuum of those things.

Milhouse VanHouten

world wrote:

Poll after poll about how Europeans think Bush was behind 9/11 just make Europeans look worse then Americans.

I don't care either way about the conspiracy theory thing, but I'll say this:

How can Europeans look worse than Americans when a recent CNN poll showed that 42% of those Americans questioned believe that Sadaam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks?

ledvedderman

A Surprise Left wrote:

I like how on one hand people say Bush is a moron and he should have done this or he can't do that. But on the other hand they say he and his cronies are behind 9/11. So is he a moron or is he an evil genius? Which one is it lunatics? I find it hard to believe a guy who can't speak in public at a decent level could be behind (or even involved) in such a brillant plan.

I think Bush is basically a PR guy for Rummy, Cheney, and Wolfie. He's a good people person and comes across well with people.

farfromglorified

ledvedderman wrote:

I think Bush is basically a PR guy for Rummy, Cheney, and Wolfie. He's a good people person and comes across well with people.

Yeah, he's doing a hell of a job:

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

chopitdown

good read. thanks for posting

Meatwagon

I'll have to pick up the book ,because that article didn't say a damn thing. Everytime I read it, it just sounds like a damage control type of publication.
My hearsay beats your hearsay......Now I'm not jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon just yet, but this whole mess just smells fishy!!! We know that intelligence was ingored prior to the attacks. Did our Gov't do this on purpose to gain more power??? The Bush household had a score to settle with Mr. Saddam, which was no secret. You telling me you wouldn't go after the guy that put a hit out on your oldman???
Either way you look at it, we are always going to be in the dark. Have we figured out who was behind JFK's death??? Or what about Robert Kennedy??? Martin Luther King???? Put 911 in that same group, cause we all know something isn't right.

pushmepullme

farfromglorified wrote:

For starters, this article is researched. Secondly, this article is not built around its conclusions but rather its facts.

I've asked this question before and I'll ask it again:

Do you understand the difference between listening to a preacher and a researcher?

The same way Bush researched Iraq's WMD's hey? Lol. You suckers sure fell for that old bag of shit didn't you?

El_Kabong

A Surprise Left wrote:

I like how on one hand people say Bush is a moron and he should have done this or he can't do that. But on the other hand they say he and his cronies are behind 9/11. So is he a moron or is he an evil genius? Which one is it lunatics? I find it hard to believe a guy who can't speak in public at a decent level could be behind (or even involved) in such a brillant plan.

bush is barely told anything...i remember at christmas when they made a few cuts to programs like school loans and medicare/aid <to help pay down the deficit> at a speech a student asked him how he cares about education when he just made a big cut in student loans and bush didn't even know what she was talking about!!! he kept asking if she was sure and looking from side to side

anyway, even rummy said a missile hit the pentagon and that the plane over pa was shot down.

i think george bush had nothing to do w/ it. i think it was a group of ppl, tho...either they helped carry it out or they helped create a situation for it to happen...like 2 months before 9/11 they took the power away from NORAD and certain military to make a decision on what to do w/ hijacked aircraft...convenient cheney waited until right before the pentagon got hit <over an hour after they were KNOWN to be hijacked and over an hour <i believe> since the first plane hit the towers> before scrambling any jets.

can anyone explain how it took over an hour for the military to react? 4 planes were known to be hijacked, some for over an hour...one even flew thru the no-fly zone in dc <again, over an hour after the first hit>, made a u-turn and hit hte pentagon and nothing could be done or decided? give me a break!

if you want to believe it was all a surprise ppl should at least be mad over the mass incompitence displayed

Uncle Leo

A Surprise Left wrote:

I like how on one hand people say Bush is a moron and he should have done this or he can't do that. But on the other hand they say he and his cronies are behind 9/11. So is he a moron or is he an evil genius? Which one is it lunatics? I find it hard to believe a guy who can't speak in public at a decent level could be behind (or even involved) in such a brillant plan.

Oh definately a moron.

(I don't buy any of the theories).

Uncle Leo

Meatwagon wrote:

I'll have to pick up the book ,because that article didn't say a damn thing. Everytime I read it, it just sounds like a damage control type of publication.
My hearsay beats your hearsay......Now I'm not jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon just yet, but this whole mess just smells fishy!!! We know that intelligence was ingored prior to the attacks. Did our Gov't do this on purpose to gain more power??? The Bush household had a score to settle with Mr. Saddam, which was no secret. You telling me you wouldn't go after the guy that put a hit out on your oldman???
Either way you look at it, we are always going to be in the dark. Have we figured out who was behind JFK's death??? Or what about Robert Kennedy??? Martin Luther King???? Put 911 in that same group, cause we all know something isn't right.

Good post. I will need TONS of evidence before I get anywhere near believing any of these 9/11 theories. I don't and likely won't, but just because one article offsets the other does not mean that it is gold.

onelongsong

sonicreducer wrote:

if all these people are being influenced by conspiracy theorists, wouldn't the government want to prove 9/11 wasn't an inside job once and for all? maybe, like, release some "irrefutable evidence"! i mean, if it's a global conspiracy theory, wouldn't they want to protect their name and their country. people think we are a joke. i know i would want to prove those fuckers wrong. but they don't. and they are shady and misleading. until they change, people will continue to make those claims.

funny; i don't feel the need to prove things to anyone. if you've been here a while; you'd see that evidence means nothing when it comes to opinions. the same conspiracy people are here every day with new theories and fears that the government is out to get them. leave the truth at the door when you enter here because it's not welcome. you can't reason with an unreasonable person and the conspiracy people will only call you part of the conspiracy. so nothing you ever do or prove will change their opinions. (because it's part of the conspiracy!)
so take comfort that your life isn't filled with fear and enjoy. it's a medically proven fact that long exposure to fear causes brain damage in humans.

farfromglorified

pushmepullme wrote:

The same way Bush researched Iraq's WMD's hey? Lol. You suckers sure fell for that old bag of shit didn't you?

*sigh*

What makes you think that these situations are even comparable? I didn't support the Iraq War. I didn't even support the Afghanistan war. I don't support this president at all, nor do I believe what he says.

Calling someone a name without even having the facts to back up the accussation really speaks volumes, considering the topic at hand.

AllNiteThing

Popular Mechanics spin gets 'owned':

chiefojibwa wrote:

no, in reality one of the guys who wrote the story is related to homeland security director michael chertoff.

El_Kabong

chiefojibwa wrote:

no, in reality one of the guys who wrote the story is related to homeland security director michael chertoff.

wasn't he the head researcher on their other 9/11 story? and when he was asked if they were related <he and chertoff> he said he didn't know?? normally when your cousin is head of homeland security word wold spread around the family

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

wasn't he the head researcher on their other 9/11 story? and when he was asked if they were related <he and chertoff> he said he didn't know?? normally when your cousin is head of homeland security word wold spread around the family

:rolleyes:

The person who wrote this article is not related to Chertoff. Chertoff is related to Popular Mechanics' online editor. That person was not a "head researcher" on anything.

El_Kabong

farfromglorified wrote:

:rolleyes:

The person who wrote this article is not related to Chertoff. Chertoff is related to Popular Mechanics' online editor. That person was not a "head researcher" on anything.

he was to their original 9/11 article

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=8&c=y
REPORTING: Benjamin Chertoff....


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Chertoff
Benjamin Chertoff is a research editor for Popular Mechanics, most known for his work with the 9/11: Debunking The Myths article. He is currently the Popular Mechanics Online editor, and he hosts and produces the Popular Mechanics Show, the weekly podcast of Popular Mechanics magazine.

He returned to magazines, working again at Men's Journal as a research editor before moving to Popular Mechanics in September, 2004. There, he worked as the magazine's research editor, and helped to manage the reporting for magazine's March, 2006 9/11: Debunking The Myths story, as well as the magazine's coverage of the aftermath to Hurrican Katrina, and countless other aviation, military and technology stories. He is currently the Online Editor of Popular Mechanics, and edits all the non-print outlets of Popular Mechanics Magazine. [1]

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

he was to their original 9/11 article

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=8&c=y
REPORTING: Benjamin Chertoff....

Hehe...didn't realize "REPORTING" and "HEAD RESEARCHER" are synonymous. You might want to keep reading that article. If you do, you'll find this:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=9&c=y

Those are your researchers.

El_Kabong

farfromglorified wrote:

Hehe...didn't realize "REPORTING" and "HEAD RESEARCHER" are synonymous. You might want to keep reading that article. If you do, you'll find this:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=9&c=y

Those are your researchers.

what do you call the research editor?

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

what do you call the research editor?

An editor. Or in the case of this story, a reporter.

farfromglorified

This might help you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editing

Drowned Out

So what are you two splitting hairs over now?
Chertoff's involvement in the article?
If he was a reporter, couldn't he have spun the article?
As an editor, it would be even easier, b/c he'd have final say, I believe.

from the editor wiki:
Improving an author's writing so that they indeed say what they want to say, in an effective manner — a substantive editor. Depending on the writer's skill, this editing can sometimes turn into ghost writing. Substantive editing is seldom a title. Many types of editors do this type of work, either in-house at a publisher or on an independent basis.

Either way....having someone related to a Bush crony heavily involved in "the definitive" article debunking the conspiracies just fuels the fire....