Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Date: Thursday, 17 March 2005
A brutal purge of the senior staff at Popular Mechanics preceded the publication of last month's scandalous propaganda piece about 9/11. Pulling the strings is the grand dame of Hearst Magazines and behind the scene is her obscure husband, a veteran propaganda expert and former special assistant to the director of the C.I.A.

In the months leading up to the Chertoff (Cousin to Head of Homeland Security) article in PM, a brutal take-over occurred at the magazine. In September 2004, Joe Oldham, the magazine's former editor-in-chief was replaced by James B. Meigs, who came to PM with a "deputy," Jerry Beilinson, from National Geographic Adventure. In October, a new creative director replaced PM's 21-year veteran who was given ninety minutes to clear out of his office.

A former senior editor at PM, who is forbidden from openly discussing the coup at PM, told AFP that the former creative director was abruptly told to leave and given severance pay of two weeks wages for every year spent at PM. "Three or four" people have been similarly dismissed every month since, he said. He said he was astounded that the coup at PM had not been reported in the mainstream media.

PM has long been a supporter of the U.S. military. The magazine ran a full page ad in support of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in May 2003. Since the purge last September, however, PM readers have noticed that government propaganda has replaced scientific writing. A letter to the editor in the current issue says, "I think you guys are just another tool in the government's propaganda machine."

Keep reading PM and see if it's changing...

Originally Posted by hershie

I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

Originally Posted by John69

that's a great read, they have as much credibility as Sticky Fingers :1orglaugh

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Alex Jones..... Hero of yours? lol this splains alot..

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Two hours before he was to debate a member of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" on a Seattle radio talk show, a research editor for "Popular Mechanics" magazine pulls out.
Richard Curtis, PhD, an Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at several Seattle area colleges and an active member of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," was scheduled to debate Davin Coburn, a research editor at Popular Mechanics and one of the contributors to the book Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up To The Facts, on Munson's radio show. Munson, furious about the last minute cancellation, said that the books PR firm was responsible for the decision and that none of the contributors to the new book would be allowed on the air with anyone from "Scholars for 9/11 Truth."

That could splain even more.. :)

Originally Posted by hershie

BTW, I'm not even American. You have a few video frames while Popular Mechanic had these experts looking at conspirasist theories, so who is the close minded idiot here?:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

A few video frames..?
I have a list too where they go into great detail complete with charts and actual research.. While P.M failed to mention many of the most important things about 9/11.. Their biggest thing was to go after the most far fetched conspiracy nuts, so anyone is bound to agree with em..

physics911

Robert Ballan
Norwood, NY, USA
MSc & JD: Clarkson College
Chemistry & Law

Kevin Barrett
Lone Rock WI, USA
PhD U of Wisconsin
Islamic Studies
Walter Davis

Kent, OH, USA
PhD: U of Connecticut
Kinesiology

A. K. Dewdney
London, Canada
PhD: U of Waterloo
Mathematics

Derrick Grimmer
Ames, IA, USA
PhD: Washington University
Physics

David Heller
Berkeley, CA
BS: Physics Bard College
MA: S. F. Inst. Architecture
Architect and Builder

Annie Higgins
Gainesville, FL
PhD University of Chicago
Arabic Language & Literature

Timothy P. Howell
Upsala, Sweden
PhD: U. of Edinburgh
Computer Science

Don Trent (Four Arrows) Jacobs
Sequim, WA
Ed. D. Boise State University
Professor, Fielding Graduate U

Steven E. Jones
Provo, Utah
PhD: Vanderbilt University
Physicist, Brigham Young U.

Peter J. Kirsch
Western Cape, South Africa
MD: University of Witwatersrand
Forensic Pathology

Karen Kwiatkowski
Mt. Jackson, VA
PhD Catholic University
Lieut. Col. USAF (ret.)

Jerry Longspaugh
Fort Worth, TX, USA
MSc: Brooklyn Polytechnic
Aerospace Engineer

Brad Mayeaux
Kenner, LA, USA
Electr. &Tech. Inst. of New Orleans
Cellphone Engineer
George F. Nelson

Huntsville, AL, USA
FAA A&P Licence
US Airforce Colonel (ret.)

Ralph W. Omholt
Kirkland, WA, USA
AAPP University of Alaska
Professional Airline Pilot

Morgan Reynolds
Arkansas, USA
PhD: U of Wisconsin
former Chief Economist,
United States Department of Labor

Kevin Ryan
Bloomington, IN, USA
BSc Indiana University
Chemistry
ASQ Certified Quality Engineer

Nila Sagadevan
Laguna Hills, CA, USA
HBS U. of Edinburgh.
Aeronautical Engineer and Qualified Pilot

David Shayler
Eastbourne, Great Britain
Hon MA Lit. & Linguistics
MI5 (former)

Helen Stace
Perth, Australia
PhD: U of Sydney
Biology

Bernard Windham
Tallahassee, FL, USA
MS Florida State
MS Louisiana State
Statistician

Russ Wittenberg
Carefree, AZ
BBA U. of Miami FL
US Airforce Capt. (ret)
Captain for PAA & UAL

Originally Posted by John69

The "smoking gun" at the Pentagon, he observed, is the clear, smooth and unblemished lawn. "It would have been especially unlikely that an inexperienced pilot like Hanjour could have flown a large airplane so close to the ground and not collided with it," Fetzer remarked. "That is a feat even experienced pilots would have found very difficult to accomplish."

"No one watching these clips over and over, focusing on each frame, can find unambiguous support for a large aircraft, much less a Boeing 757," he added. "How much less likely that bypassers in the vicinity, who only had a brief chance to notice this happening, could have figured out what they saw. Nothing here remotely resembles a Boeing 757."

Even the Pentagon itself is covered with cameras. The most serious question raised by the release of these videos may be why other videos, which would provide clearer and far more revealing information, have not been released. "The most plausible explanation for withholding this evidence from the American public," Griffin observed, "is that the American government has a great deal to hide."

Originally Posted by hershie

Just curious; what happened to that plane, the crew, and all the passengers? I mean they never made it home...

Originally Posted by hershie

Just curious; what happened to that plane, the crew, and all the passengers? I mean they never made it home...

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Originally Posted by Webby

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

This shit thread still bouncing along with silly comments from stupid Sticky?:1orglaugh

Hey.. cumon - the ass is a 30 something naive retard with nada education and living in a $250K home which only has $50K equity (according to him) and he's whoring for SI. He's not exactly the businessman of the year or some fucking scientific genius - he's a toll trying to justify his paycheck. He'd piss his frilly panties if reality hit home.

This also reflects on Splitinfinity who permit trash to represent them in this crass manner. Would you have confidence in a host to let their floor sweeper be a smartass with potential customers??? Tho, hell - some folks will try anything for a buck, - depends how low you want to go in running a business and losing any professionalism.

Excuse me while I watch more of the comedy channel - Fox :pimp

Originally Posted by John69

copy and paste for you:

THE DAY ITSELF - EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack - George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield - all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.
2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies - NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission - gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?

3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation's capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack - including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were "real world or exercise." Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an "inside job"?

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?


THE DAY - POSSIBLE SMOKING GUNS

6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted?

7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See "The Case for Demolitions," the websites wtc7.net and 911research.wtc7.net, and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones. See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)


FOREKNOWLEDGE & THE ALLEGED HIJACKERS

8) What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the "Big Wedding"), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus - Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities - including the CIA, the US military's "Able Danger" program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b. Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another a coincidence.
10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers - as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the "Phoenix Memo," David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration's order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the "Bojinka" plot, and John O'Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in The 9/11 Commission Report.)

11) Insider Trading
a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally - including but not limited to "put options" placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London.
b. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks.
c. Initial reports on these trades were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).

12) Who were the perpetrators?
a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the "magic passport" of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.
b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had "doubles," all of which is omitted from official investigations.
c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...,1825231.story

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Date: Thursday, 17 March 2005
A brutal purge of the senior staff at Popular Mechanics preceded the publication of last month's scandalous propaganda piece about 9/11. Pulling the strings is the grand dame of Hearst Magazines and behind the scene is her obscure husband, a veteran propaganda expert and former special assistant to the director of the C.I.A.

In the months leading up to the Chertoff (Cousin to Head of Homeland Security) article in PM, a brutal take-over occurred at the magazine. In September 2004, Joe Oldham, the magazine's former editor-in-chief was replaced by James B. Meigs, who came to PM with a "deputy," Jerry Beilinson, from National Geographic Adventure. In October, a new creative director replaced PM's 21-year veteran who was given ninety minutes to clear out of his office.

A former senior editor at PM, who is forbidden from openly discussing the coup at PM, told AFP that the former creative director was abruptly told to leave and given severance pay of two weeks wages for every year spent at PM. "Three or four" people have been similarly dismissed every month since, he said. He said he was astounded that the coup at PM had not been reported in the mainstream media.

PM has long been a supporter of the U.S. military. The magazine ran a full page ad in support of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in May 2003. Since the purge last September, however, PM readers have noticed that government propaganda has replaced scientific writing. A letter to the editor in the current issue says, "I think you guys are just another tool in the government's propaganda machine."

Keep reading PM and see if it's changing...

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

The best part of this is that the conspiracy theorists take a screenshot of a website and determines it is more factual proof than hundreds of eyewitnesses, all the plane parts in the Pentagon, and all the dead bodies in the Pentagon.

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Well my screenshot is from the Federal Bureau of Transportation Statistics

Just found it to be interesting..

It doesn't provide an answer.. just creates more questions..

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

See this is called the shotgun method. They throw out tons of questions all in one go. Regardless if the questions have any merit or not, weak minded people will grasp them being left unanswered as proving them as fact. Its typical and weak.

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Questions sure it does.... the plane never took off. It never hit. It was all a dream......

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Hmm.. are you saying that you're questioning the government's information?

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Strong minded people can see that the questions could be answered one at a time and question why they remain unanswered.

It's your reply that's typical and weak..
unless you can do as you expect from others and provide reliable links to
pertinent sites that practice this so called shotgun method; making it typical..

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

No its the fact that Ive answered those questions over and over and over since around 2002 or 2003.

Originally Posted by Webby

Bullshit - Proove it - where's the links? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

No its the fact that Ive answered those questions over and over and over since around 2002 or 2003.

Originally Posted by Jensen

no one touched tower 7 yet? it collapsed and its a lot more interresting that it wasn't hit by anything..

Originally Posted by nico-t

so whats the point of this thread? to prove it wasnt a conspiracy? So if its not some conspiracy, does that make president bush function any better? NO. He still fucked everything up. Case closed.

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

No its the fact that Ive answered those questions over and over and over since around 2002 or 2003. So none of that is new, its all been answered over and over and over. Even right in this thread its already been answered. Shotgun regurgitation. Doesnt matter if it has a lick of truth to it, you'll just repeat it over and over and over untill others repeat it over and over and over. yawn.

Originally Posted by Minte

Most of you people probably don't remember Watergate,but you should all recall Lewinskigate.The real media...CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN spent years investigating Watergate.It led the nightly news for several years.The degree of that investigation forced a sitting president to resign.

President Clinton was impeached because of the investigation powers of the real media.Again,for over a year it's all we heard about on the nightly news.

So,in 5 years the real media has not been able to find a single piece of real evidence to support a 9/11 conspiracy.
Why would that be? There certainly are a lot of people at CBS that would love to nail President Bush's ass to the wall.

Originally Posted by Phoenix

I do remember Dan Rather....

Originally Posted by Minte

Most of you people probably don't remember Watergate,but you should all recall Lewinskigate.The real media...CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN spent years investigating Watergate.It led the nightly news for several years.The degree of that investigation forced a sitting president to resign.

President Clinton was impeached because of the investigation powers of the real media.Again,for over a year it's all we heard about on the nightly news.

So,in 5 years the real media has not been able to find a single piece of real evidence to support a 9/11 conspiracy.
Why would that be? There certainly are a lot of people at CBS that would love to nail President Bush's ass to the wall.

Originally Posted by hershie

Just think of all the thousands of people that would have to be in on the plot to pull a conspiracy off. You cannot just say it was "the gov't" and all the defense contractors and internationalists in black helicopters that pulled it off. Simply impossible that all these ordinary people are blindly following orders of silence all this time.