PDA

View Full Version : Australian's RIP the MSM a new 'A-HOLE' over 911 PROPAGANDA & LIES..!!!



jackovesk
12th September 2013, 08:46
9/11 CONSPIRACIES: Six really stupid theories debunked in about six seconds

September 12, 2013 1:13PM

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2013/09/12/1226717/737161-62eab610-1b5a-11e3-885a-29191a963f6e.jpg
Nah, that's just a missile. And Santa Claus is the pilot. (AP Photo/Carmen Taylor, File) Source: AP

PSYCHOLOGISTS will tell you that even perfectly sane people have the ability to accept wild conspiracy theories. The more powerless or alone we feel, the more likely we are to develop such theories.

It's all linked to self-esteem. If you're the sort of person who feels isolated or disenfranchised, you're much more likely to develop wild theories as a way of making you seem more knowledgeable, more powerful, more special.

That might help explain why many Americans are into conspiracies. The irony of our technologically over-connected age is that there are scores of socially disconnected people sitting in dark rooms extrapolating all sorts of crap from factoids they find online. Here are six of the worst:

STUPID THEORY 1: The US government did it

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: People who say it was an inside job are split into two camps. There are those who say the US government cooked up and enacted the whole crazy plot, and those who say they let it happen without intervention. In both cases, conspiracists generally claim that the aim was to give the Bush government an excuse to wage war on the Islamic world.

So here's your simple rebuttal. US governments have shown for decades that they will intervene when and where it suits them. The last thing they need to do to justify any foreign policy is kill 3000 of their own citizens.

STUPID THEORY 2: The twin towers did not collapse. They were demolished.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: 9/11 "truthers", who would perhaps be more accurately described as 9/11 "liars", like to rope in an expert to tell you that no office fire ever made a building topple. Well, that'd be because no office fire was ever as big as these two, with as much jet fuel to help it along.

But the real reason the twin towers collapsed was structural. Most buildings have their core structural supports at the centre. The towers had some major central steel columns, but that elegant exterior steel shell was also crucial in providing perimeter support. Also, the perimeter columns supported massive steel trusses which supported each floor.

So basically, when the exterior of the building was penetrated so devastatingly by the planes, the structure's ability to hold itself up was threatened. So when one floor went, the combined weight meant they all went.

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2013/09/12/1226717/737215-f0ea9caa-1b5a-11e3-885a-29191a963f6e.jpg
Pretend the towers were a conspiracy theory. Then pretend they were subjected to the force of logic. Here’s your result. 11/09/2001. Source: AFP
.
STUPID THEORY 3: World Trade Center 7 did not collapse. It was demolished.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: Riiiight, so the world's tallest tower collapses on its neighbour less than 200m across the road. You've got 110 storeys of rubble pummelling a 47-storey building, setting it on fire, covering it in untold extra weight and inflicted untold stresses. And later that day, when the smaller building collapses, it's obvious the CIA did it with explosives. And Elvis left the building right before it happened.

Oh, and if you want a secondary explanation of why the building really wasn't toppled by mysterious people with explosives, try googling any of the so-called architects or engineers in the wacky YouTube vids. Almost none of them appear to be either a) currently employed or b) affiliated with any group other than 9/11 conspiracy groups.

STUPID THEORY 4: FLIGHT 93 was shot down in Pennsylvania and the people who were supposedly on it were murdered or relocated.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: The small jet flying low in the area, which some believe shot down Flight 93, was in fact a business jet which had been instructed to fly low to inspect the wreckage. Also, the log of calls made from Flight 93 is pretty compelling evidence that those were real people aboard a hijacked jet. If these people are actors who are actually still alive somewhere, the real mystery is why they haven't made squillions in Hollywood. Because they were seriously convincing.

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2013/09/12/1226717/737282-a74e6f5e-1b5a-11e3-885a-29191a963f6e.jpg
And they’re fake trees and that’s a fake wall and Gilligan is still stuck on Gilligan’s Island. Picture: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images/AFP Source: AFP
.
STUPID THEORY 5: There was no "stand down" order, which proves the US government dunnit.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: A stand down order is an order from the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) to scramble fighter jets. This didn't happen until too late on September 11, prompting conspiracists to say the government deliberately held off to let the carnage unfold.

But NORAD didn't actually track flights within America prior to 9/11. Also, the hijackers turned off the transponders on their planes, which meant Air Traffic Control couldn't track them. And NORAD needed an alert from Air Traffic Control to act. So basically, you had a system which ensured bureaucratic bungles, but that's a far cry from complicit officials.

STUPID THEORY 6: They weren't planes, they were missiles.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: Some of the worst nutters claim that the original planes which struck the twin towers weren't planes but missiles. This was fuelled by an early eyewitness account broadcast on live TV from a journalist who said he thought the first plane had no windows. But the journalist saw the plane in a blink of his eye - a fact ignored by conspiracists who have seized on this statement.

The obvious plane-sized holes in the buildings are a bit of a giveaway too. But you know, maybe they were just caused by Batman or something.

Believe the conspiracies? Continue the conversation on Twitter via @newscomauHQ | @antsharwood

http://www.news.com.au/world-news/six-really-stupid-911-conspiracies-debunked-in-about-six-seconds/story-fndir2ev-1226717737311

PS - Can you believe this cacophony of :bs: MSM Propaganda & 911 Lies..?

If this wasn't enough to continually piss you off, get a load of the Aussie Readers (Comeback Comments) and you will see why I penned the thread title the way I did...

Hopefully, the Aussie comments against this article and its author will cheer you up a bit...:)

News for MSM, your LIES, PROPAGANDA & COVER-UPS aren't working any more..!!!

Here's just a quick sample of some of the comments...


Dan Posted at 3:18 PM Today

Are you serious? Ask an engineer, or a demolitions expert to look at footage of the buildings falling. They will all tell you it looks suspiciously like a controlled demolition. Why is it SO ridiculous for people to question the "official" 911 narrative? Why are those who choose to question, very quickly labelled nutters? Don't be afraid to ask questions and challenge the official 911 story.

Dean of WA Posted at 3:23 PM Today

If you actually post this to your news site, it shows a 5minute video which can quickly add info debunking alot of your claims... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XDfxB9nUfDc The Author of this article "ANTHONY SHARWOOD" has obviously just accepted the US version (minus any actual REAL (non fabricated) evidence). The type of person you are is the type that acts like a sheep and merely follows what they are told, truth or no truth without question.

Chris of Perth Posted at 3:37 PM Today

Clearly there was a stand down order given, hence people are saying it is an inside job. And in regards to Building 7, if you actually read the official government report on it. The reason it collapsed was supposedly due to a new phenomenon that had never happened before and hasn't happened since. There no extra weight on World Trade Centre 7, go read the government report. To anyone who hasn't seen the collapse of World Trade Centre 7, look it up on YouTube. Building 7 was one of the best controlled demolitions ever done, I challenge you to find a better one.

andrew of balaklava Posted at 3:38 PM Today

Your explanations of this event are simply wrong. Building 7 is the only the third building in history that fell due to fire.The first 2 were tower 1 and 2. These buildings were designed to withstand aviation fuel (part of the design brief) and physics dictate that it couldnt possibly collapse at freefall speed 'naturally. Your own pic posted yesterday showed a twin hull plane. This is a military design and the aircraft that hit the tower had this feature Zero evidence of plane hitting pentagon. zero. plane engine found (inside) was from a different, much smaller plane. Why did they do it. 2.3 trillion dollars, Department assigned to look into loss (announced september 10 2001 by rumsfield) conveniently just housed in exact spot hit by missile. not buying it

Realist Dan of Perth Posted at 3:40 PM Today

Thanks for responding to my tweet Ant ! Much appreciated. Ok building 7. The official NIST report put the global collapse down to 'thermal expansion'. A previously unheard of phenomenon. NIST determined that the collapse was not due to debris from the falling towers or the net result of fires within the building itself as stated in your debunking article. This is NIST determination and it is as official an explanation as it gets. Never mind the countdown over the radio that was witnessed and reported by multiple EMT workers, the owner himself saying the building was 'pulled', the explosions heard from within the building and the under seven second global collapse. There is only one determination you can come too about this building. Demolition. I challenge anyone to watch any building 7 collapse footage and explain to me that building was not demolished by any classical controlled demolition.

The resistance of Hezbollah headquarters Beirut Posted at 3:40 PM Today

Another load of bull crap from a Zionist slave paper. The whole world is waking up to the truth! American govt will do worse than 9/11 to its own people for the petro dollar war.

Shane Posted at 3:42 PM Today

So, on building 7, why didn't every other building within 200m also collapse. I'll tell you why, because they were not laced with explosives. Dozens of fireman were recorded at the scene claiming to have heard explosions from the basement just before the building came down. It was an inside job. I have no doubt about that.

Jed Posted at 3:45 PM Today

This story is just another way for the MSM and Govts to cover up yet another FALSE FLAG! You forgot to put in the Live report from the BBC announcing the collapse of Building 7 a full 20 minutes before it was actually demolished! Google it and look for yourself. Nice try guys, but your way too late! 911 was definitely an inside job! Period!

Click 'below' to read all the comments...

http://www.news.com.au/world-news/six-really-stupid-911-conspiracies-debunked-in-about-six-seconds/comments-fndir2ev-1226717737311

PSS - Message to America - "Well most Australian's are AWAKE" how about you..?

PSSS - At least most American's see through Obama's WarMongering and are not supporting a strike on Syria.

Geezus, you Yanks have been so slow to 'Wake-Up'...:faint:

But, in your defence it seems though you are now being 'FORCED' to Wake-Up to the Truth quicksmart before the Bombs start dropping in your OWN front yards..!!!

KiwiElf
12th September 2013, 09:09
Thanks for this Jack - (good to see you back, dude! :)). - watched a doco on HISTORY channel in a similar vain last night [ie debunking the conspiracies]. Conspiracy debunkers (particularly the FOX News types) always manage to personally insult or bully the conspiracy theorist, and then squeeze in the "emotional victim" card when they can't come up with a plausible explanation, ie "the conspiracy theory is insulting to the victims/survivors." Oh yeah? If I'd lost someone in 9/11, I'd want the TRUTH and JUSTICE for the victims (no matter how much it hurts). ;)

The author of your post describes HIMSELF quite well in the first few paragraphs me thinks? :)

araucaria
12th September 2013, 09:15
US governments have shown for decades that they will intervene when and where it suits them. The last thing they need to do to justify any foreign policy is kill 3000 of their own citizens.
Non sequitur. You could equally say:

The last thing they need to do to justify any foreign policy is kill 3000 of their own citizens.
However, US governments have shown for decades that they will intervene when and where it suits them. And this time it suited them to kill 3000 of their own citizens.

You cannot apply rules to people who don't play by rules, i.e. do what they like.

I suppose the rest is similarly stupidly treating everyone as stupid. I wonder why you posted this.

Craig
12th September 2013, 11:20
I watched it today unfold also, some of the comments showed who still have the blinkers on. A shame

WhiteFeather
12th September 2013, 12:41
Pretend That Macys had more surveillance cameras than the Pentagaon the day the missile struck it on 911. I meant plane my bad.
Pretend that a highly experienced airline pilot stated it would of taken him 10 tries to bring a plane into the pentagon. The terrorist couldnt fly a cessna plane.
Pretend That Larry Silverstein just took out a brand ass spanking new insurance policy on The Towers right before 911 and made billions.
Pretend that Larry Silverstein so conveniently had a dermotologist appointment the day the towers fell and escaped death. Larry never missed a breakfast on top of the towers. I havent seen any pimples on this imbecile either. Pretend Larry said he had to pull it with regards to pulling down WTC 7 from a very small fire.
Pretend that jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steal let alone cause the steel to turn into molten lava and having it trickling down the girders like a volcano hit the towers.
Im sure we can have more Pretenders state their pretentious ideas.

I insist.

Prodigal Son
12th September 2013, 15:19
Pretend that jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steal let alone cause the steel to turn into molten lava and having it trickling down the girders like a volcano hit the towers.


Hi WhiteFeather....

In case you aren't aware of this yet... the molten stuff pouring out of one corner was not likely steel, but heated up stuff coming from a huge array of battery backup units built into the floor of a Fuji Bank data center which was located exactly at that spot. Jim Fetzer of Veterans Today makes an excellent point in his response to a comment by "Chris Sarns" on this article that debunks the use of nano-thermite in the demolition of the towers....

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/27/nanothermite-if-it-doesnt-fit-you-must-acquit/


Chris, You are boring everyone to tears. I have already replied to this. I have ask you for the quantitative data on the explosive velocities for the products you are claiming to exist. Unless they are substantially greater than 895 m/s, it cannot have pulverized the concrete, destroyed the steel, or blown the buildings to kingdom come. I have explained all of this MANY TIMES, yet you have been completely unresponsive.

I have explained why I believe the flow of molten metal from that corner of the building–which was not observed anywhere else on either of the towers–was coming from that specific location. The Fuji Bank had an enormous array of batteries there as a source of back-up energy. That suggests those batteries were the source of the flow, which should have been present all over both towers if your theory were true.

Positive Vibe Merchant
12th September 2013, 23:20
Great to see you back Jacko!

karelia
12th September 2013, 23:39
Nice to see you back, Jacko!