Yeah, I think I spelled it three different ways.
I never put style over substance, but I will aknowledge your correction.
I never put style over substance, but I will aknowledge your correction.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Tonite, on the history channel.....
- Thread starter Bro. Curtis
- Start date
poncho said:
Asprin, to start ? Wash it down with some neocon kool-aid......
:wavey:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Bro. Curtis said:
Read David Ray Griffin's book...Debunking 9/11 Debunking. An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory.
Here's part of a review by 9/11 Blogger...
This is a timely, excellent response to the 'debunkers' of the 9/11 Truth Movement.
The 'debunkers,' of course, are the ones who are on the 9/11 research scene to say: "Everything the 9/11 Truth Movement says about government complicity is wrong. The official story is indeed correct, so please get back to whatever you were doing in your life before you ever heard of these absurd theories."
This is Griffin's thickest technical volume on 9/11. There are four lengthy chapters, totaling 322 pages of text, after which there are 62 pages of endnotes. The fourth chapter, about 100 pages in length, deals exclusively with rebutting the Popular Mechanics book "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts." The first three chapters deal with other publications that emerged in 2006, as the 9/11 Truth Movement was gaining ground. These publications include Michael Broenner's Vanity Fair article "9/11 Live: The Norad Tapes," Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton's "Without Precedent," and finally the NIST report and its attempt to debunk the controlled demolition hypothesis.
I've been toying for awhile about what kind of review to write. If I give an in-depth review of the content for each chapter of this book, the review will be so long people won't want to read it! Several other in-depth reviews have focused on the problems with the NORAD tapes. So I will focus primarily on the Popular Mechanics chapter, since PM is most often cited as the knockout punch which refutes all the movement's claims.
<snip>
Here, it is important to remember the psychological effect of a book like the Popular Mechanics volume. The publishers of that book know that people do judge books by their covers. Many people will walk past the book at the Barnes & Noble, and will say to themselves: "Ah-ha. Good to know. Conspiracy theories of deliberate US government involvement debunked. Next time someone brings up 9/11 conspiracy theories at work, I'll mention to them that I saw this book."
Fortunately thanks to David Ray Griffin (and others), Popular Mechanics' 9/11 propaganda has not been allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged. Let me just show a few ways in which the PM staff reveal themselves to be deceivers and liars. I'll focus on the Pentagon:
Continue...
And of course Alex Jones has a few words on the subject...as well as Paul Joseph Watson.
poncho
Well-Known Member
I decided to be nice today. I'm actually in a very good mood cuz the History Channel and Popular Mechanics has just peaked a whole lot of interest in 9/11 truth. Way to go HC for bringin it to the masses! We couldn't have done it like this without ya! Woo Hoo!Bro. Curtis said:
Bye...:thumbs:
Both sites are filled with vitriol & paranoia, with very little actual rebuttal. I did wade thru enough slop to find thei...
- The debunkers mentioned WTC 7 only in passing and completely failed to address why the building, which wasn't hit by a plane, collapsed in 7 seconds into its own footprint after suffering only limited fire damage from falling debris. They also failed to mention why news outlets were reporting the collapse of Building 7 over an hour before it actually fell.
This is an outright lie. The segment I saw gave great detail on the kind of debris that fell on #7, and plausable explanations of the "exsplosions" people said they heard.
- William Rodriguez' first-hand testimony of explosions prior to the impact of the planes was completely excluded, as was the testimony of numerous firefighters who attested to bombs and explosions.
This was addressed in detail, as well. I remember the one kid marveling that the bombs were pre-placed exactly where the planes were going to hit.
According to another blogger, the whole tone of the program was crafted to be antagonistic towards those questioning the official version.
Who's that blogger ? How soes he know ? Is this what passes for facts on these sites ?
- The debunkers mentioned WTC 7 only in passing and completely failed to address why the building, which wasn't hit by a plane, collapsed in 7 seconds into its own footprint after suffering only limited fire damage from falling debris. They also failed to mention why news outlets were reporting the collapse of Building 7 over an hour before it actually fell.
This is an outright lie. The segment I saw gave great detail on the kind of debris that fell on #7, and plausable explanations of the "exsplosions" people said they heard.
- William Rodriguez' first-hand testimony of explosions prior to the impact of the planes was completely excluded, as was the testimony of numerous firefighters who attested to bombs and explosions.
This was addressed in detail, as well. I remember the one kid marveling that the bombs were pre-placed exactly where the planes were going to hit.
According to another blogger, the whole tone of the program was crafted to be antagonistic towards those questioning the official version.
Who's that blogger ? How soes he know ? Is this what passes for facts on these sites ?
BTW, I'm always is a good mood. Life's too short to get all worked up about stuff.
And perhaps there is new attention being paid to this, I'm not afraid of that. It'll be more of the same. The truthers are wrong on this. They should accept that.
And perhaps there is new attention being paid to this, I'm not afraid of that. It'll be more of the same. The truthers are wrong on this. They should accept that.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Yep, that's why I suggested David Ray Griffin's book...ya don't get none of that from him. If you want a well thought out point by point rebuttal of 9/11 "debunking" like you said, then he's the man to see or read rather.Bro. Curtis said:
One kid wondering? Wow! Such detail.
Here's a couple sites that cover propaganda techniques just for kicks.
http://academic.cuesta.edu/acasupp/as/404.htm
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda_techniques
There are other reviews on Griffin's book at Amazon.com, I already linked to it.
There are lots of documented facts on "these sites" unfortunately alot of times they just happen to be mixed in with alot of other junk. You didn't think any of this was going to be easy did ya? If that's what yer lookin for ya might as well go take an asprin wash it down with some neocon kool aid and play war games on the Play Station. There must be a game out where you can kick some muslim butt and dominate the world by now.
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
I dunno bout that Ken...you might be surprised at who's starting to ask questions now.KenH said:
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation
poncho said:
I don't know. The first link you gave me contained a few fibs that I addressed. Is it written with more care than those links ?
I'll paruse the web for peer reviews of his work, than I'll decide if I want to give him any money. I'd rather not have to pay for my propoganda. You know what I mean ?
poncho
Well-Known Member
David Ray Griffin isn't anything like Alex Jones and some of these other guys. He just calmly goes about his business in a very detailed manner without all the emotion and tension. He doesn't call people names or accuse them of this that or the other, he deals in information. That's it.
Yeah, there's enough of that going around for free. Go to the book store and thumb through a copy and see what ya think. If you don't like what you see put it back on the shelf. No charge. :smilewinkgrin:
Glory Be!!! Would I ever love to see such prevalent on the BB.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Explain how this is backfiring ? Because they run an open blog ?
Can't wait. I know I'll get a straight answer as soon as you get back.
:laugh:
:laugh:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Here's the problem I have with giving you and a few others here a straight answer Curtis and I ain't saying this to be mean or to try an look smarter than you cuz I ain't. I just haven't got the will nor the time anymore to go through the whole history lesson again and again that has to precede my answers so you might be able to understand where I'm coming from. It's tiring and I've done it so many times now that I already know who's interested in a straight answer and who's not. I really wish you guys would take it upon yerselves to learn the "un politically correct" version of history so we could have some common ground to base our conversations on. Else wise we're only going to be spitting at each other all the time and I'm just sick of all that.
That's about the straightest answer yer gonna get from me Bro. Till ya put some honest effort into learnin more about the whole 9/11 subject than what the talking heads and corporate "experts" tell ya.
I'll see ya round Joseph...er, I mean Bro Curtis.
Poncho, you only want us to accept your version of the truth. Everyone who doesn't is blasted by you as a neocon, or someone to gullible to know they are under neocon control. So please, take the martyr jacket off.
You are as mean as anyone else, here.
You are as mean as anyone else, here.
