Example of Misinformation and Disinformation

This ought to be funny - but it isn't. It's very dangerous propaganda in that is carefully designed to STOP someone who is new (and therefore less knowledgeable) to discontinue his or her search for the truth behind 9/11.

There are people who are paid (presumably by the real perps) to make and distribute misinformation and disinformation to confuse you about the truth of 9/11. If you read the original scientific papers and watch the scientific DVD's available (Dr. Steven Jones, Richard Gage A.I.A., etc.), the issues of "chain of evidence" are fully addressed. One example, nine scientists in three countries announced the presence of highly energetic explosive residues in the dust from 9/11 - but the video neglects to mention that.

The cozy - but sarcastic & simplistic tone of the video below is typical of misinformation and disinformation. Outlandish lies and faulty logic are used - and evidence that "doesn't fit" is ignored in the hopes that you won't notice. If you're caught unaware - garbage like this could fool you into looking no further into the truth behind 9/11....and that would be tragic.



Unfortunately, many hours are wasted on debunking this sort of garbage....it's a sad waste of our time to deal with it.

The "disinformation" propaganda is aimed at the "newcomer" who doesn't know much and who is reading about the truth behind 9/11 for the first time. They depend on the psychological fact that "most people don't want to know that those buildings came down as a result of controlled demolition." The point is to grab the fearful and/or intellectually lazy person and convince him to look no further.

Sadly it makes our job of telling the truth of 9/11 much more difficult. See Popular Mechanics - the disinformation article that just won't quit.

See "DISINFORMATION TACTICS: The Methods Used to Keep You in the Dark"
here.

And check out the "25 RULES OF DISINFORMATION" here and see how many you can spot.

ED NOTE: The above two links can help make you "Disinformation-Proof" - or at least more "Disinformation-Aware" as you search for the TRUTH behind 9/11.

Is "Popular Mechanics" Qualified to Debunk 9/11 Truth?

The following Popular Mechanics article is the most often quoted to "prove" that 9/11 Truthers are wrong:



A quick look at some other Popular Mechanics covers says something much quicker than words ever could.



Popular Mechanics tackles all sorts of wacky subject matter.



Why would anyone seriously believe that this magazine is seriously scientific?

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: Let's Get Empirical

In this talk, based on his book Debunking 9/11 Debunking, David Ray Griffin rebuts Popular Mechanics and other defenders of the official conspiracy theory.

Pointing out that most objections to the alternative theory, according to which 9/11 was an inside job, are based on purely a priori arguments and a propagandistic use of the term “conspiracy theory.” He shows that if we get empirical about 9/11, we can quickly see that the official story cannot be true. (Generously illustrated with graphics and video clips.)