|
FirmhandKY -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/4/2010 7:25:01 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real0ne
the main thing is to insure that no one uses their head in these types of arguments. You know I should toss my education out the window and lets play 5 card debunker!
so here ya have it! I call your debunker and raise your debunker with my debunker!
FACT:
Debunking Popular Mechanics' 9/11 Lies
Nepotism, bias, shoddy research and agenda-driven politics Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | August 10 2006 Popular Mechanics has re-entered the media circus in an attempt to continue its 9/11 debunking campaign that began in March of last year. A new book claims to expose the myths of the 9/11 truth movement, yet it is Popular Mechanics who have been exposed as promulgating falsehoods while engaging in nepotism, shoddy research and agenda-driven politics.
It comes as no surprise that Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Corporation. As fictionalized in Orson Welles' acclaimed film Citizen Kane, William Randolph Hearst wrote the book on cronyism and yellow journalism and Popular Mechanics hasn't bucked that tradition.
The magazine is a cheerleader for the sophistication of advanced weaponry and new technology used by police in areas such as crowd control and 'anti-terror' operation. A hefty chunk of its advertising revenue relies on the military and defense contractors. Since the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and in the future Iran all cite 9/11 as a pretext, what motivation does the magazine have to conduct a balanced investigation and risk upsetting its most coveted clientele?
Popular Mechanics' March 2005 front cover story was entitled 'Debunking 9/11 Lies' and has since become the bellwether reference point for all proponents of the official 9/11 fairytale.
Following the publication of the article and its exaltation by the mainstream media as the final nail in the coffin for 9/11 conspiracy theories, it was revealed that senior researcher on the piece Benjamin Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
This means that Benjamin Chertoff was hired to write an article that would receive nationwide attention, about the veracity of the government's explanation of an event that led directly to the creation of Homeland Security, a body that his own cousin now heads.
This is unparalleled nepotism and completely dissolves the credibility of the article before one has even turned the first page.
You don't even bother to read, except to reinforce your confirmation bias:
Is PM staffer Benjamin Chertoff a cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security?
As we explain in our book, it appears that they could be distant relatives. The connection, if any exists, dates back to the 19th century, before either family immigrated to the U.S. They have never met, and never spoken to one another. Michael Chertoff has never spoken with any member of the Popular Mechanics staff, nor with any member of Benjamin Chertoff's family.
The speculation concerning the supposed Chertoff connection is a good example of how conspiracy theorists often latch on to shreds of information, but get the details wrong. Ben Chertoff ran PM's research and fact-checking department at the time of the original magazine article, and conducted some reporting for the story. He was not the "senior editor," "head writer," or any of the other incorrect titles lofted by theorists. (Ben was later promoted to online editor, and recently left the magazine to pursue work as a freelance writer and producer.)
Moreover, Michael Chertoff was not secretary of Homeland Security at the time PM researched the original story. He was sworn in on Feb. 15, 2005, more than a month after the piece went to the printers.
Conspiracy theorists often present the supposed connection between Benjamin and Michael Chertoff as ipso facto proof of some sort of collaboration. But why would that be? There are nearly 30 people on the editorial staff of PM. Virtually none of them knew each other—or Ben—before coming to work here. So far, no one has explained to us how they believe a relatively junior magazine staffer could convince dozens of his colleagues to become complicit in a cover-up of one of the worst attacks in U.S. history.
The problem with conspiracy theories, is that you can always make a mountain out of a molehill. After all, the number "6" is related to the numbers "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9" etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum ad nauseum.
You can play 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon all you wish.
I have no doubt that there is absolutely no way to change your mind, Real0ne. I'm just posting for the record.
Firm
|
|
|
|
