I was refraining from making a post like this for quite some time now. I never wanted to get into the debunking of debunks because, when you start doing that, the battle never ends. Each debunk is debunked which is debunked and so on, and so on. I prefer to look for facts and evidence that need to heard and share them with whoever may be reading this space on the net.

Having said that, it appears that there is one publication that all skeptics seem to hold as gospel and I can't hold off from posting this any longer. The publication I'm referring to is a Popular Mechanics article entitled 9/11: Debunking The Myths, which was published in March of 2005. If you haven't done so yet, take a break from here and go read it. See what it says. Go on. Here's the link again if the other one is broken; http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense...;c=y

I'll just wait here...

...

...

Finished? That soon? Great reading isn't? It really makes you believe the official story doesn't it? Made me almost believe it for a while too... almost. You see, what I probably did differently than most of the skeptics is (besides research further into similar events in our history) seek a rebuttal to that article from the semi-collective 9/11 Truth Movement. What I found was not surprising but, still highly enlightening.

So, now that you've read their side, why not at least humour the 9/11 Truth Movement and read their response to this incredible piece of fiction, that obviously worked so well, considering the skeptics use it as their bible.

Go on. There's nothing to be scared of. Only the truth lay within these links.

Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man

Reply to Popular Mechanics re 9/11

9/11: Debunking The Myths - Killtown's Response

And just because I respect him so much for having the courage to do everything he does, I'm going to post Alex Jones' response.

Alex Jones Responds To Ben Chertoff, Popular Mechanics 9/11 Debunking Campaign

Alex Jones responds to the Popular Mechanics 9/11 debunking exercise. Popular Mechanics featured a so-called 'serious analysis' of alternative explanations behind 9/11 in their March issue.

In actual fact, the entire article was a straw man exercise. Popular Mechanics attributed false arguments to researchers and then attacked them. On top of that they lied outright by claiming that there was only one intercept of errant aircraft before 9/11.

Alex also addresses the issue of Ben Chertoff, the chief editor of the piece, being cousins with Michael Chertoff, the new Secretery of Homeland Security, an agency which owes its very existence to the establishment version of the 9/11 attack.

This page will be updated as and when new information arises.

Related: Chertoff's Cousin Penned Popular Mechanics 9/11 Hit Piece

Popular Mechanics must be challenged face to face and forced to make retractions to their sloppily researched article.

Click here to leave a message at the Popular Mechanics blog site. We are getting reports that they are deliberately censoring comments which challenge their hit piece.

This letter for example was never published.

Call Popular Mechanics at 212-649-2000 or fax them at 212-586-5562. Ask for Meigs or Chertoff's office. Please be polite when making your point.

Alex Jones also interviewed Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press. Bollyn blew the whistle on the cosy Chertoff Homeland Security family. Click here for the interview.

Problems listening to the audio? Play the audio directly in Real Player or download the video using the following link -

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/090305alexresponds.mp3

Transcript

I'm going to try to calmly and succinctly go over Benjamin Chertoff.... In late November of 2004 my wife handed me a stack of media I had to contact and amongst it was Popular Mechanics doing a piece on popular 9-11 'theories'. So I call and I talk to Benjamin Chertoff; we've now learned is a close family member of the Homeland Security Director, according to press reports. And I've talked to him and I've talked to others and I thought it was a fake interview. I've never thought an interview wasn't real. Of the hundreds of newspaper, TV interviews, the thousands of radio interviews I've done, I've never thought that a reporter was fake. People from school newspapers sound more credible and serious. USA Today, Washington Post, New York Times, these are normally focused serious people. Even if they're adversaries. I thought that the interview wasn't real, it was so shotty. I called Popular Mechanics ... one of the chief editors called back and said "Yes it's indeed real." They swore to me this is not a hit piece, we're just looking at the popular theories.

Then the headline on the magazine "9-11 Lies: Debunking" and it's "conclusive" they say. This is what they engaged in. I talked to Chertoff and others, on every point they'd raise to me I'd email them mainstream news articles, documents, Larry Silverstein saying they blew up WTC 7 (http://www.prisonplanet.com/011904wtc7.html). Suddenly they wouldn't want to talk about that, they'd move on to something else. A lot of stuff they were going to put in there got dropped because I told their chief editor, "Look I can tell this is a hit piece and you're trying to liable me, you better watch yourself." A whole bunch of stuff they were gonna do wasn't in there about me 'cause I could see what they were doing. ...It sure enough was [a hit piece]. There are just so many facets to it.

Some of the things they debunked I agree are not provable. Number 1 they build a straw man (noun: a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted). Of the 16 points, 4 or 5 of them are questionable. ...You could find somebody on the internet saying space aliens carried out 9-11 or the planes were holograms. I don't believe that. You can find people that think space aliens killed Kennedy, no the government did. But the media says okay ... "If you think somebody else killed Kennedy, you think it was space aliens. That's the straw man argument. They did that. But a bunch of the points like Building 7, no mention of Silverstein, no mention of the firefighters telling reporters to get back we're gonna pull it, that's Associated Press. There's none of that.

But one of the really sterling examples from the piece, that I pray none of you will buy. It's online, you can read it there. Please don't spend your money; and if you have a subscription to them, don't be lazy, call and cancel. They deserve to have people boycott them. ...When I try to look at the spectrum of propaganda it's so hard to know where to start. One of the biggest smoking guns of disinfo in the article is No stand-down order ... No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. 'On September 11th Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.,' says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. 'They failed to do their job.' 'There is only one explanation for this,' writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. 'Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9-11.'

'Fact,' - now they're going to tell you fact. It's like Rumsfeld telling you fact on Face The Nation, 'I never said there were weapons of mass destruction, it's an urban legend.' Well just 'cause you say that's a fact Rumsfeld we all know it's a lie; 'cause we have you on video. - 'On 9-11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the continuous 48 states.' Yeah 'cause they were all part of the giant drill. Which is what Associated Press reported. 'No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of the missing planes.' That's not true. 'They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us,' says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times. ...They go on to say that there's a claim that planes have been scrambled hundreds of times before 9-11. They say 'No that's not true, in the decade before 9-11 it only happened one time. One time.' ...The very Maj. they quote, Maj. Douglas Martin, he told the Associated Press that they'd over 60 times, scrambled them and had them intercepted in the year before September 11th. ...I've talked to pilots who've had radio problems and F-16's fly up next to them. Everybody knows this, not just Maj. Douglas Martin the Public Affairs Officer. ...We have the public record, everybody knows this, this is public knowledge.

The question is, why do we put up with this? ...This is how they supposedly debunk everything. Then he gets up on the radio Saturday night, Sunday morning, and tells Tens of Millions of people that, 'Well Mr. Jones can call and deffend himself,' and an hour later 'Well I guess he isn't gonna call in and defend himself because he can't, he can't refute these facts.' Just because you say 'fact fact fact' doesn't mean it's a fact. While I was being interviewed and other members of the Popular Propoganda staff I kept saying aren't you gonna talk about public officials being warned not to fly. Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, MSNBC, Salman Rushdie, Times of London, CBS News reporting on Ashcroft. Are you gonna talk about Bush on Cipro, White House Press Secretary Harry Fleischer admitted it. The whole cabinet on Cipro four weeks before it showed up in Boca Raton, Florida. Are you gonna talk about CIA insider trading? 'No no no.' Will you talk about Larry Silverstein saying that he pulled the buildings? I've sent you the video clip, have you watched it? 'No I haven't had time.' Will you call Larry Silverstein and ask him, he says he blew it up. 'Um, no I don't think so ...' or 'maybe.' Then I talked to his editor, I said I'm sending this to you. Will you call Larry Silverstein? 'Oh we're very interested in that. And this isn't a hit piece, no it's not, we promise. We just want to see what you guys think.'

The bottom line is this, people aren't listening to these people anymore. They're not listening. They're not believing it. The population knows by and large - they may not know all the details, but they know information is being twisted, it's being spun, it's being fabricated, it's being made up, it's being white washed. They know that. Your credibility is at an all time low. It's just that simple. Your credibility is gone. It's now part of the record that the government has been caught Thousands and Thousands of times lying to us. So is it any surprise now, that we have ariticles like this from News Max: Web News Grows, Papers Spiral Down ? (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/6/195811.shtml) I watched some TV this weekend ... every news show I saw was attacking the 'new media.' Talking about how uncredible it is and how it's taking over. ...They even tried to use the White House's own male prostitute madam as 'See how uncredible the alternative media is?' Well that's not the alternative media, that's one of your boy toys Lord Bush. That's one of the Globalist little minions. One of his influence peddler's infiltrating the alternate press through a neo con Web site openly funded by the White House. They have the nerve on two seperate shows I saw. The Daily Show was one and CNN was another - to go on the air and imply because of the Gannon story that 'Oh see, that's how uncredible the alternative press is.' John Stewart used the word man whore. 'Alternative press has got man whores running it.' So you've got your fake reporters out there and then it's our fault. See, no no, you're trying to infiltrate the alternative media. Bush has paid Tens of Millions for fake blogs, Seventy-Six Million for fake news casts just for Medicaid. Armstrong Williams ... there's dozens and dozens.... I hear it locally on the radio, people. I hear locally Federally funded Austin Air Force ads, that's a group wanting to get admissions testing on cars and I've called up before and they go 'Yeah it is a paid spot, how did you know that?' Packaged into the local newscast. It's everywhere. Look, I had these people offer me a Million bucks, in the first year, Six years ago, to go become a neo con. 'You could be the next Rush Limbaugh. Just stop talking about black helicopters and the New World Order. Here's the contract, we're gonna start you out on Fifteen juggernaut marquee stations and if you play ball after the first year,' I was gonna get a million, 'you'll get triple that.' And you know what I told them, I said, 'You can take your offer and you know what you can do with it!'

So we have this atmosphere now in the Country where we're learning how many of the press are paid off and controlled. But there's other forms of control, the globalist editors and controllers can just look at other writings and different reporters out there and pick people that instinctively have the establishment agenda and mind-set. That's another form of control. Then on top of that you have blood. You have these societies. You have this elite and its nepotism where they put their own minions into power. And it is being reported that Chertoff's cousin penned Popular Mechanics' 9-11 hit piece. 'Who is Benjamin Chertoff, the senior researcher at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article? American Free Press har learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. This means that Hearst paid Benjamin Chertoff to write an article supporting the seriously flawed explanation that is based on a practically non-existent investigation of the terror event that directly led to the creation of the massive national security department his cousin now heads. This is exactly the kind of journalism one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Because the manager of public relations for Popular Mechanics didn't respond to repeated calls from American Free Press, I called Benjamin Chertoff, the magazine's senior researcher, directly. Chertoff said he was the senior researcher of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said I don't know. Clearly uncomfortable about discussing the matter further, he told me that all questions about the article should be put to the publicist - the one who never answers the phone. Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, Yes, of course, he is a cousin.'

This guy has the classic M.O. 24 years old, 23 when he was first in Iraq. Reporting for the New World Order. Then he comes back and lands the big job at Popular Mechanics. Regardless folks, if he is Chertoff's blood, ... this is clear conflict of interest. We need to get the blogs working on this. This is a serious issue. Maybe we're on to something like the Gannon situation with more of these plants ... it fits the M.O. My nose, my snout ... smells a big gigantic rotten rat under the floor boards. I suggest we pull the floor boards up and investigate. Though it is rancid and stinky, as the hound dogs we are, we have to go after our quarry. Fearlessly. And that's exactly what we're gonna do. We're good little attack dogs for freedom. If you want to play hardball we're gonna play hardball with you for ... I'm launching a Five year campaign. I've decided. Yes, Five years you will routinely be investigated. And I know it's dangerous to go up against the Homeland Security bloodline. I understand that. But we're gonna expose it. We know we're on their radar. They're attacking us, you might as well defend ourselves. The best defense is a good offense.

Transcribed by Benedict Vincent.
Oh, while I'm at, let's talk about 9/11 Myths.com. If you want, you can go read their debunking of the movement as well.

Then, come back here and click on THIS LINK. It's the response to this website which, by the way, is extreamly well written as well. Pretty convincing stuff but, still, not the truth.

Regardless, it really is time to wake up folks.

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, ,

0 comments