Debunking 9/11 Myths: Podcast

32. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Podcast
I´m a guy from Germany, that just got interested in the theme, and I, as a medical student already working scientificly, am disappointed about the podcast. I was seaching for evidence against the 9/11 Truth theories, because a medal has always two sides. The beginning was indeed interesting, although only few things were talked about. But the lack of "hard" scientific evidence and the occurence of discussion stoppers was just as much as in the conspiracy theories. I hope the book is more accurate and that this podcast was just a teaser without claiming scientific accurancy. The end of the show made me upset, because the general comments about conspiracy theories had a very arrogant touch. Much of it may be right, like the use of the conspiracy theory in right wing media and also that many, especially the very extreme 9/11 Truth guys may be very onesided in their argumentation, but instead of laughing it away and comparing family stories to it, I hoped for more serious statements like: "we have to do more research" (bit of it was said). I think this insults scientific working men and women in the conspiracy sector, I would refer to Mr Ruppert here as an example. And to wipe away all thoughts about conspiracy theory in the US is unjustifiable if you look at government data that is released after decades showing that a lot of sh*t went on in US history, that nobody thought about at that time, for example MK ULTRA. I will buy the book, as well as the anti-book, and hope for some detailed information on a well investigated basis to build up my own theory of what´s happened. I am glad that there is at least some information against the conspiracy theories, because you always should seek for any information available and not till then argue and fight for a doctrine. But then argue and fight! Roland Krabs, Leipzig/Germany sorry for mistakes in writing

31. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Podcast
I was just checking around, wondering what the conspiracy theories were. I doubt the government actually fired a missle at them. After seeing the mess we are in now, I would expect one of those airmen/soldiers/whatever to have come up with a battered concious and confess. However, I do think, just like in the cases of G. Bay, there is some major cover up and the government does not want the public to believe that. The public certainly does NOT want to believe it. We simply have to wait for Bush to leave office and for congress to get to the documents they have been pestering him for. By the way, does anyone know how they fixed the mess in the Pentagon? I found out how they reconstructed it. However, I sincerly doubt they could let just the average fire fighter and whatnot near a place with so much freaking top secret documents without a lot of bullet holes in them. Imagine the mess...a firefighter just going up and taking a folder that just happens to be a detail plan of all naval deployment including personel, weapons, etc. That will really be freaking bad!

30. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Podcast
Oh my God, the brain dead conspiracy kooks think they have a leg up on PM!? You r4eally lame junk could be debunked by my daughter.

29. RE: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Listen to Popular Mechanics 9/11 researcher and "fact checker" answering a few sensible questions: http://www.apfn.net/pogo/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3 He leaves their credibility in ruins.

28. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
If Popular Mechanics editors are to be trusted then certainly the invitation they recieved to OPENLY debate those that they have slandered as "conspiracy theorists" will be accepted. See: teamliberty.net/id245.html So far the Popular Mechanics editors have failed to ascend to the debate; WHY?

27. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I was beginning to worry that maybe I'd been had by the conspiracy theorists; that maybe I wasnt't doing due diligence in questioning their claims. But the Popular Mechanics podcast "debunking" 911 conspiracies has strengthened my belief in the conspiracies. I can't even begin to express how shocked I am at how feebly Popular Mechanics presents their case. What about the cruise-missle sized hole in the Pentagon? What about the vanishing 6-ton titanium engine housings at both the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites. What about the comments by the mayor of the town in Pennsylvania that it was a crash site without a plane? What about the hijacker passport that flew through the WTC inferno to land safely on the street below; too bad about the titanium and stainless-steel flight recorder which didn't make it. Whoever you're working for; Mosad, the C.I.A., the Masons or the Salvation Army; you're going to have to do better than this!!!!

26. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Put your money where your mouth is, PM... and at least show up for a scheduled radio debate. How pathetic is this... "The magazine Popular Mechanics, which recently released a book slamming the 9/11 Truth movement, cancelled a radio debate Tuesday between one of the book's contributors and a 9/11 truth activist just two hours before airtime. The debate, planned two weeks in advance, was scheduled to air on the Dori Munson talk radio program on KIRO AM 710, August the 22nd, at 1:00 PM. 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." Actions speak louder than words, guys.

25. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
>>Make sure your comment is relevant to the topic discussed. Comments not relevant to the topic will be deleted<< Yet you allow an obvious distorted and oblique, lengthy response with no real supstance. Tsk, tsk.

24. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
The proof is out!! Louis Farrakhan and Bill Clinton were behind the planing of 9/11! See Bill did not want the world to recognize him as the worst President since Jimmy Carter so he hired Louis Farrakhan and L. Ron Hubbard to have aliens commander the planes dressed as Allah and fly them into the WTC on the anniversary of the day Bill Clinton had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky!!!

23. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Another comment on this podcast noted that "conspiracy theorists" use fear and bs to lure in suckers. And yet, was 911 not capitalized on by the government in order to strike fear of terrorism into the hearts of all Americans? Has the Bush administration not been PROVEN to have given us BS in the past. Obviously your going to beleive the government, they control your lives from offices and bunkers. They own you. And sadly, despite the evidence that we see on the news every day, Americans still beleive that as a people America is honest and pure. Especially the government, of course. Let me tell you something. There is no morality test required to get into office. I do not have enough evidence from either side to have made an accurate decision, but i do find it incredibly suspicious that all controversial evidence has been swept under the table. Things to think about.

22. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
First of all, if our government can be in any way accountable for the events of 9/11/01 is the fact that many of our top officials simply had their fingers up their asses when it all came into play. The warning signs were well established. Remember the WTC bombing in 1993? This was just the appetizer. The main course would eventually follow.

21. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
This podcast is fantastic, as is the original article. I find it dissapointing that a number of Popular Mechanics readers do not seem to be versed in critical thinking - at least as shown on the comments here. Furthermore, the theorists seem to credit physics in their favour, while totally ignoring real world physics. That is depressing. This was a great podcast, and I was very impressed. I think I might just pick up the book too. Good job.

20. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Interesting that you had no-one to refute the claims put forward...LIES,LIES and more LIES.

19. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
So all these people are conspiracy nuts? Rep. Curt Weldon –Vice Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Vice Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Ten-term Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania. Regarding the 9/11 Commission "There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me," Senator Max Cleland – Former member of the 9/11 Commission, resigned in December 2003. Currently serves on the board of directors of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. U.S. Senator from Georgia 1996-2002. Secretary of State of Georgia 1982-1996. Administrator of the U.S. Veterans Administration 1977-1981. Captain, U.S. Army awarded Silver Star and Bronze Star for bravery in Viet Nam. Triple amputee from war injuries. “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up.” Louis Freeh – Director of the FBI, 1993-2001. Former U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, appointed by President George H.W. Bush. Former Deputy United States Attorney in New York. Former officer in the United States Army JAG Corps Reserve. "Even the most junior investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it "was not historically significant." This astounding conclusion--in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself. … No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a "new" commission to investigate.” Morgan Reynolds, PhD – Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Labor under George W. Bush 2001-2002. Former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. Professor Emeritus, Economics, Texas A&M University. "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound." Paul Craig Roberts, PhD - Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan, “Father of Reaganomics”, Former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. Currently Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. “We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to “pancake” at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false.” Catherine Austin Fitts - Assistant Secretary of Housing under George H.W. Bush. Former Managing Director and Member of the Board of Directors of the Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co. Regarding 9/11 “The official story could not possibly have happened. … It’s not possible. It’s not operationally feasible. … The Commission was a whitewash.” Edward L. Peck - Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under Ronald Reagan. Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the State Department. U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission to Iraq (1977-80). 32-year veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service. • “We want truthful answers to question. … As Americans of conscience, we ask for four things: o An immediate investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer o Immediate investigation in Congressional Hearings. o Media attention to scrutinize and investigate the evidence. o The formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry." Morton Goulder - Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning 1973-77 (Nixon, Ford, and Carter) Founder of Sanders Associates. • Petition requesting an immediate reinvestigation of 9/11 “We want truthful answers to question. … As Americans of conscience, we ask for four things: o An immediate investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer o Immediate investigation in Congressional Hearings. o Media attention to scrutinize and investigate the evidence. o The formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry." Philip J. Berg, Esquire - Former Deputy Attorney General, Pennsylvania. “The official story of what actually took place on 9-11 is a lie.” William Christison - Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. 29-year CIA veteran. “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.” Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) - Commanding General of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM). Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. ““One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?” Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) - Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). Appointed by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990-1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. From 1990 through 1994, he served as Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. “The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and Colonel has gone on the record to voice his doubts about the official story of 9/11 - calling it ‘the dog that doesn't hunt.’ ‘I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that's accurate,’ he said.” Raymond L. McGovern - Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for preparing the President’ Daily Brief (PDB) for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. 27-year CIA veteran. “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke. The question is: What’s being covered up? Is it gross malfeasance, gross negligence, misfeasance? … Now there are a whole bunch of unanswered questions. And the reason they’re unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions. … I just want to reassert, what Scott [Ritter, former Major in the U.S. Marines Corps, former Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq] said and this is the bottom line for me, just as Hitler in 1933 cynically exploited the burning of the parliament building, the Reichstag, this is exactly what our President did in exploiting 9/11. The cynical way in which he played on our trauma, used it to justify attacking, making a war of aggression on a country that he knew had nothing to do with 9/11. That suffices for me, I think Scott is exactly right, that’s certainly an impeachable offense.” Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) - Director of Advanced Space Programs Development “Star Wars Program” under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). “A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible. … There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up. … Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible. … Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney. Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft crash investigator and airplane parts authority. 34 year Air Force career. “The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. … Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. Flew commercial jets for Pan Am and United for 35 years, flying 727, 737, 747, 757 and 767’s. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines airplanes hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC). "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple.” … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn." … Melvin Goodman - Division Chief and Senior Analyst at the Office of Soviet Affairs, CIA,1966 to 1990. Senior Analyst at the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, State Department, 1974 to 1976. “I want to talk about the [9/11] Commission itself, about the flawed process of the Commission and finally about the conflict of interest within the Commission that is extremely important to understand the failure of the Commission.” Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) – Director U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.” Major Scott Ritter, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) - Marine Corps Intelligence Officer and Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq 1991-1998. “I, like the others, are frustrated by the 9/11 Commission Report, by the lack of transparency on the part of the United States government, both in terms of the executive branch and the legislative branch when it comes to putting out on the table all facts known to the 9/11 case.” Fred Burks - State Department Interpreter for Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, Vice Presidents Dick Cheney and Al Gore, Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Madeleine Albright. 18-year State Department career. An even bigger question is why isn't our media asking these questions? Why isn't our military spending many millions of dollars to find out why military defense systems failed on 9/11? Why is it that the 9/11 commission budget was far less than the budget allotted to the Challenger Disaster or even the Monika Lewinsky affair?” Barbara Honegger - Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the Navy’s advanced science, technology and national security affairs university (1995 - present). White House Policy Analyst and Special Assistant to the Assistant to President Ronald Reagan (1981-83). "The US military, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC2, and in WTC7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11. ... A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, high-speed 270-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system.” Sibel Edmonds – Former Language Translation Specialist, FBI. Witness before the 9/11 Commission. “I find your report seriously flawed in its failure to address serious intelligence issues that I am aware of, which have been confirmed, and which as a witness to the commission, I made you aware of. Thus, I must assume that other serious issues that I am not aware of were in the same manner omitted from your report. These omissions cast doubt on the validity of your report and therefore on its conclusions and recommendations.” Bogdan Dzakovic - 14-year Counter-terrorism expert in the Security Division of the Federal Aviation Administration. Team Leader of the FAA's Red Team, which conducted undercover tests on airport security through simulated terrorist attacks. Former Team Leader in the Federal Air Marshal program. Former Coast Guard officer. Witness before the 9/11 Commission. Regarding the 9/11 Commission “The best I could say about it is they really botched the job by not really going into the real failures. … At worst, I think the 9/11 Commission Report is treasonous. And if you look at what the word “treason” means in the Webster’s Dictionary, it’s a betrayal of a trust.” Paul Hellyer – Former Minister of National Defense of Canada. Former Deputy Prime Minister. Former Member of House of Commons. Regarding 9/11 “I think the inquiry has been very shallow, very superficial. I would like to see a much tougher, more in-depth inquiry. … I would like to see someone in a position of authority ask those questions and insist on getting answers, at least to why some of the things that happened that seem to be, for an ordinary person, inexplicable. … We have to try and get the truth. … I hope that somebody has the courage and persistence to keep at it until we get it.” Andreas von Buelow, PhD – Former National Minister of Defense of West Germany. Former Minister of Technology. Former Member of Bundestag (Parliament). “The planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry.” Michael Meacher – Former Under Secretary for Industry, Under Secretary for Health and Social Security, Minister for the Environment, and Member of the House of Commons (Parliament) (UK). The official investigative report says the US has never been able to find the sources of financing for 9/11. And then they say this “That after all is a matter of no great importance.” I find that astonishing. It is a matter of absolutely central importance. So there was a very great deal of evidence. And it seems to me extraordinary that the United States with its stupendous military capabilities and the most technologically advanced country in the world completely and totally failed to follow up on these leads.” General Leonid Ivashov - Former Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces on 9/11/2001, and Department Chief for General affairs in the Soviet Union's Ministry of Defense. Regarding 9/11 "Bin Laden does not have the capabilities for an operation of this magnitude. When I hear Bush talking about al-Qaida as if it was Nazi Germany or the communist party of the Soviet Union, I laugh because I know what is there. Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaida has been penetrated by American intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a degree of organisation and sophistication." David Shayler - Counter-Terrorism Officer, MI5 (Britain) “The available evidence indicates that people in key positions in the FBI, the State Department, the CIA and so on were not loyal to the Constitution; that they saw an opportunity in plans laid down by genuine Islamic terrorists to carry out an operation that would shock the world and would therefore justify U.S. adventurism in the middle East, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

18. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
YAAAAAA I AGREEEE YES I DO!!!!!

17. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I find it amusing that the "experts" commenting here are incapable of constructing a sentence that is free of spelling, grammar or punctuation errors. If they can't even express their views correctly, why should we assume their opinions are any more educated? If they are too lazy to learn to use the English language properly, of even use "spell check", how can one think they are any more studious or committed in their search for the truth about 9/11? "Common sense and education are highly compatible; in fact, neither is worth much without the other." (Donald G. Smith)

16. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
your an idiot .....they didnt know where the planes were .....the f15 were over the atlantic ocean....conspiracy theory my ass...learn the facts bub

15. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Come on wake up, common sense, I dont have a p.h.d in politics, but the 9-11 really looks like a holliwood movie. Al Quaeda is an extension of the CIA, they admited in their other extension CNN that "Osama" which is a pre-made cinematic character was an agent, so isn't he any more?. hmm The towers went down in freefall, a systematic demolition was evident, ... were those towers made of sand of what?

14. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Amazing how many left-wing loonies have read and ridiculed this report. Scary, actually, is more like it. The more we remain in denial that the US gov't does not have total control over a given situation the more we open ourselves up to attack. We need to face the fact that this Islamofascist threat is something that is beyond our complete control. But I think the conspiracy theorists (who seem to blame George W Bush for everything from wars to hurricanes) are too frightened to admit that there's something that is outside and beyond the control of the US.

13. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
The government did brink down the towers, but it was not Bush. Our government works way to slow, and he was not in office long enough. The real man behind this was BILL CLINTON. And on top of that Osoma is hiding in Bills Basement. I hate the eval government.

12. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
You are pathetic to think that we can believe your ad hominem attacks. The laws of physics are appearant on the images of the buildings exploding. Your arguments are weak. I thought about putting a Loose Change sign on the back of my car but now I want to put a "Boycot Popular Mechanics" sign up. Shame on you. Do you think the American people are so stupid. SHAME ON YOU Do you really believe that there are enough people in this country who have not taken even high school Physics? Your propaganda won't work this time.

11. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I walked past a construction site once. Does that qualify me as being in the construction business? It does if you're a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, lol. I had a toothache once, and I told my dentist to pull it. Clearly that meant setting up a controlled demolition of WTC 7, lol.

10. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
There is always the possibility that the government lets things happen when it wants to. Certain riots were "allowed" in the past. I'm sure there would be no shortage of conspirators in the gun-mad USA to provide for various scenarions. It is actually amazing that more sporadic assaults haven't occurred in anybody's name. What would it take for a shopping mall rampage? Nut cases have already done things like that. Why couldn't a relatively sane jihadist not do so?

9. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
The lunatic left never lets the facts get in the way of their crazy conspiracy theories. http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/videos.html A conspiracy theory attempts to explain the ultimate cause of an event (usually a political, social, or historical event) as a secret, and often deceptive, plot by a covert alliance of powerful people or organizations rather than as an overt activity or as natural occurrence. History has shown that crimes carried out by a group of people (a "conspiracy") are not uncommon. Researchers who advocate the conspiratorial view such as G. Edward Griffin, claim that most major events in history have been dominated by conspirators who manipulate political happenings from behind the scenes. The term "conspiracy theory" is usually used by mainstream scholars and in popular culture to identify a type of folklore similar to an urban legend, especially an explanatory narrative which is constructed with methodological flaws.[1] The term is also used pejoratively to dismiss allegedly misconceived, paranoid or outlandish rumors. Most people who have their theory or speculation labeled a "conspiracy theory" reject the term as prejudicial. Richard Hofstadter said that his use of the terminology is “pejorative”.[2] Critical Overview The term "conspiracy theory" may be a neutral descriptor for a conspiracy claim. However, conspiracy theory is also used to indicate a narrative genre that includes a broad selection of (not necessarily related) arguments for the existence of grand conspiracies, any of which might have far-reaching social and political implications if true. Critics say that most conspiracy theories are likely false, and lack enough verifiable evidence to be taken seriously. They raise the question of what mechanisms might exist in popular culture that lead to their invention and subsequent uptake. In pursuit of answers to that question, conspiracy theory has been a topic of interest for sociologists, psychologists and experts in folklore since at least the 1960s, when the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy provoked an unprecedented level of speculation. Whether or not a particular conspiracy allegation may be impartially or neutrally labelled a conspiracy theory is subject to some controversy. See also conspiracy in criminal law. [edit] Conspiracism When conspiracy theories combine logical fallacies with lack of evidence, the result is a world view known as conspiracism. Conspiracism is a world view that sees major historic events and trends as the result of secret conspiracies. The term was popularized by academic Frank P. Mintz in the 1980s. Academic interest in conspiracy theories and conspiracism has presented a range of hypotheses on the basis of studying the genre. Among the leading scholars of conspiracism are: Hofstadter, Popper, Barkun, Goldberg, Pipes, Fenster, Mintz, Sagan, Johnson, and Posner, from whom the following list is synthesized. According to Mintz, conspiracism denotes: "belief in the primacy of conspiracies in the unfolding of history" [3]: "Conspiracism serves the needs of diverse political and social groups in America and elsewhere. It identifies elites, blames them for economic and social catastrophes, and assumes that things will be better once popular action can remove them from positions of power. As such, conspiracy theories do not typify a particular epoch or ideology" [4]. Throughout human history, political and economic leaders genuinely have been the cause of enormous amounts of death and misery, and they sometimes have engaged in conspiracies while at the same time promoting conspiracy theories about their targets. Hitler and Stalin would be merely the most prominent examples; there have been numerous others [5]. In some cases there have been claims dismissed as conspiracy theories that later proved to have some basis in facts [6] [7]. But the idea that history is controlled by grandiose or long-standing conspiracies is dubious. As historian Bruce Cumings has put it: "But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities." [8] The term has also been used by other authors including Michael Kelly, Chip Berlet, and Matthew N. Lyons, among others. According to Berlet and Lyons, "Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm" [9]. "Conspiracy nut" is a pejorative term sometimes used to describe a conspiracist. It is based upon the perception that such beliefs are unfounded, outlandish, or irrational, or are otherwise unworthy of serious consideration. [edit] Proposed origins of conspiracy theories Humans naturally respond to events or situations which have had an emotional impact upon them by trying to make sense of those events, typically in spiritual, moral, political, or scientific terms. Events which seem to resist such interpretation—for example, because they are, in fact, unexplainable—may provoke the inquirer to look harder for a meaning, until one is reached that is capable of offering the inquirer the required emotional satisfaction. As sociological historian Holger Herwig found in studying German explanations for the origins of World War I: Those events that are most important are hardest to understand, because they attract the greatest attention from mythmakers and charlatans. This normal process could be diverted by a number of influences. At the level of the individual, pressing psychological needs may influence the process, and certain of our universal mental tools may impose epistemic 'blind spots'. At the group or sociological level, historic factors may make the process of assigning satisfactory meanings more or less problematic. [edit] Psychological origins According to many psychologists, a person who believes in one conspiracy theory is often a believer in other conspiracy theories and conversely for a person who does not believe in one conspiracy theory there is a lower probability that he, or she, will believe in another one. [citation needed] Psychologists believe that the search for meaningfulness features largely in conspiracism and the development of conspiracy theories. That desire alone may be powerful enough to lead to the initial formulation of the idea[citation needed]. Once cognized, confirmation bias and avoidance of cognitive dissonance may reinforce the belief. In a context where a conspiracy theory has become popular within a social group, communal reinforcement may equally play a part. Evolutionary psychology may also play a significant role. Paranoid tendencies are associated with an animal's ability to recognize danger. Higher animals attempt to construct mental models of the thought processes of both rivals and predators in order to read their hidden intentions and to predict their future behavior. Such an ability is extremely valuable in sensing and avoiding danger in an animal community. If this danger-sensing ability should begin making false predictions, or be triggered by benign evidence, or otherwise become pathological, the result is paranoid delusions. [edit] Epistemic bias? It is possible that certain basic human epistemic biases are projected onto the material under scrutiny. According to one study humans apply a 'rule of thumb' by which we expect a significant event to have a significant cause.[10] The study offered subjects four versions of events, in which a foreign president was (a) successfully assassinated, (b) wounded but survived, (c) survived with wounds but died of a heart attack at a later date, and (d) was unharmed. Subjects were significantly more likely to suspect conspiracy in the case of the 'major events'—in which the president died—than in the other cases, despite all other evidence available to them being equal. Another epistemic 'rule of thumb' that can be misapplied to a mystery involving other humans is cui bono? (who stands to gain?). This sensitivity to the hidden motives of other people might be either an evolved or an encultured feature of human consciousness, but either way it appears to be universal. If the inquirer lacks access to the relevant facts of the case, or if there are structural interests rather than personal motives involved, this method of inquiry will tend to produce a falsely conspiratorial account of an impersonal event[citation needed]. The direct corollary of this epistemic bias in pre-scientific cultures is the tendency to imagine the world in terms of animism. Inanimate objects or substances of significance to humans are fetishised and supposed to harbor benign or malignant spirits. [edit] Clinical psychology For relatively rare individuals, an obsessive compulsion to believe, prove or re-tell a conspiracy theory may indicate one or more of several well-understood psychological conditions, and other hypothetical ones: paranoia, denial, schizophrenia, mean world syndrome[11]. [edit] Socio-political origins Christopher Hitchens represents conspiracy theories as the 'exhaust fumes of democracy', the unavoidable result of a large amount of information circulating among a large number of people. Other social commentators and sociologists argue that conspiracy theories are produced according to variables that may change within a democratic (or other type of) society. Conspiratorial accounts can be emotionally satisfying when they place events in a readily-understandable, moral context. The subscriber to the theory is able to assign moral responsibility for an emotionally troubling event or situation to a clearly-conceived group of individuals. Crucially, that group does not include the believer. The believer may then feel excused of any moral or political responsibility for remedying whatever institutional or societal flaw might be the actual source of the dissonance.[12] Where responsible behavior is prevented by social conditions, or is simply beyond the ability of an individual, the conspiracy theory facilitates the emotional discharge or closure that such emotional challenges (after Erving Goffman) require. Like moral panics, conspiracy theories thus occur more frequently within communities that are experiencing social isolation or political dis-empowerment. "Obsession" is one of the most powerful, expertly crafted and undeniably important films I've seen this year. This courageous, utterly gripping expose' deserves the attention of every American -- and merits serious consideration for the Academy Award for Best Feature Length Documentary." -- Michael Medved Nationally Syndicated Radio Host Film Critic, "Eye on Entertainment" "It is a brilliant assemblage of archival footage of radical Islamic barbarities perpetrated across the globe, sermons of radical Imams from 24/7 satellite TV and undercover footage from Lebanon, the Palestine disputed territories, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, London and New York. Obsession is indeed a wake up message to a sleeping American public cowed by fear and menace by radical Islamists in our midst. And yes, the film is distressing that such hate, incitement and barbarity flourishes in the 21st century. But the film rouses the American public into concerted action then it will have served a vital and important purpose." Jerry Gordon Former U.S. Military Intelligence officer and Middle East Affairs analyst for American Congress for Truth Full article: www.israpundit.com/2006/?p=310 The Culture of Jihad http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/CultureOfJihad.mp4 Hitler & The Mufti http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/HitlerAndTheMufti.mp4 The Media Of Terrorism http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/MediaOfTerrorism.mp4 The War Against The West http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/WarAgainstTheWest.mp4

8. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
To understand Barry Zwicker, it's important to understand his motives. He does not himself subscribe to the claims he makes concerning 9-11. That's not even arguable. He, not unlike a great many other hucksters of our time, has found his own niche in the ever growing field of fund raising evangelism. All that's required is an idea that is outrageous, enough dupes to buy it, and a media to propagate it. Environmental groups figured that out a long time ago. And as with Zwicker, they all have a 'contribute' button on their websites. It's also interesting to note that no other serious so called 'journalist' has risked his/her rep. on such a con. Zwicker is another one of these con artists who, having an aversion to work, has devised a way to make a living by creating a fear and feeding off it. Take a look at the audience at any one of his 'town hall meetings'. They are lower middle class, scared, and all have that blank look on their faces. Old black and white film of people in the seats of theatres in Germany in the '30s listening to propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels looked exactly like that. We all know how that turned out. What concerns me is the sheer numbers of people who are prepared to allow themselves to be taken in by scams such as Zwicker's. Have you taken a close look at Benny Hinn's and Peter Popoff's 'congregations'? Same thing. These two scammers are multi-millionaires. They sell fear, bs, and the con. Charisma is all that's required. And a collection plate. Remember Peter de Jager of the Y2K scam? He made millions! Where'd that money come from? From a segment of society who will buy into anything. Particularly when no one else is selling it. Get in on the ground floor. Sell books, lectures, and have enough chutzpah to approach a station manager to give you air time. But remember this: if you buy into this guy's scam and some one some day calls you an idiot; it's a well founded charge. His whole shtick has absolutely nothing to do with 9-11! Although it was not Phineas Taylor Barnum who said "There's a sucker born every minute", it still remains a truism. -- Bud Clydesdale Coquitlam BC

7. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
You guys laughing at the factual information presented to the people. Everything brought up by "Rightwing Crazies" is based on EVIDENCE presented, not made up bull! Why didn't you mention the quake charge BEFORE the towers fell? Thats factual, it was monitored. Why didn't you mention the 2ND PLANE that was NOT brought down AFTER the first one hit the towers? How come you did not mention the security dogs that specifically sniff out bombs was REMOVED 2 weeks BEFORE 9/11. Or the security drills that removed the people weeks before that was unusal and not normal. You say you're presenting factual things when you as reporters are just ignoring them instead of presenting it. You guys want proof? Thats not possible, the evidence was swept under the carpet so fast nobody had time to even examine the leftovers of the trade centers. I find your point to be neutral on this very hypercritical, you laugh and point fingers at people who believe the govt. did this. Cropping us with nut-jobs. Is it so hard to believe our govt. is capable of such a thing? Bush administation stinks, his actions speak for themselves. I am saddened to believe you guys are pushing hardtopics out of the way, truely disappointing.

6. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
How could it take 75 minutes after the first WTC hit to get jet scrambling to stop the second? Of course our goverment wanted this to happen so we could welcome the Radio chips in our bodies !!

5. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
this book does not convince me that it was not the govt work but a natural cause and effect to bring those towers down.

4. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I have no doubt that OUR government was responsible for 9/11! Rember the Main!

3. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
Stealing cinder blocks and plywood to make tables doesn't make you in the construction business.

2. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I don't agree with your findings! I am in the contstruction bussiness, or at least was for 30 years... Lots of cover up in my opinion... questions not TRULY answered~~

1. Re: PODCAST: Debunking 9/11 Myths
I found the book intriguing.

Comment Title
Your Name
Email Address
Website	make public
Comment
Please enter the characters shown below:
	Make sure your comment is relevant to the topic discussed. Comments not relevant to the topic will be deleted. Neither you nor Popular Mechanics has the ability to make your e-mail address public in this Blog. However, we ask that you submit your e-mail address to us just in case we need to contact you. Thank you for your understanding--The Editors.