Why do we need Popular Mechanics and History Channel to attempt to debunk alternative 9/11 theories if the original conspiracy theory and the 9/11 Commission Report were strong enough to stand on its own?
The problem about the original story of 9/11 is in order to buy into it, you have to accept EVERY ridiculous explanation of why we were caught with our pants down. If you don't accept the ENTIRE story as truth, then with even the smallest discrepancy and the original conspiracy crumbles like a house of cards.
I'm reading the Popular Mechanics book and it debunks some of the weaker 9/11 theories (no planes, Lucky Larry Silverstein's "pull it") but doesn't address the massive Israeli spy ring that FAUX News reported on, and was then mysteriously pulled the report from their website:
http://www.rinf.com/news/ap-05/18.html
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6110095161238848541&q=israeli+spies+US&total=52&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
2007-08-25
11:30:00
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
News & Events
➔ Other - News & Events
It also doesn't debunk why the BBC and CNN reported WTC 7 before it did:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5661808404862296083&q=wtc+7+bbc&total=230&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
It also doesn't debunk why many eye witnesses reported hearing bombs:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-972875032828177268&q=total+proof&total=180&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Overall I think that the more "debunking" that goes on by these corporate interests trying to prop up the original story with lies and distortions, the more 9/11 "conspiracy theories" will flourish.
2007-08-25
11:31:27 ·
update #1