"From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or
diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September
2000 to June 2001, Martin said."
The article also makes no mention whatsoever
of the numerous war games
scheduled for the morning of 911 which confused air defense personnel as to the true nature of the
attack as it unfolded, as is documented by the recent release of the NORAD
A section on the collapse of the World Trade Center fails to
address firefighters and other individuals who reported numerous explosions before the towers fell,
squibs of debris seen shooting out of the towers well below the collapse point, and the fact that the
towers fell only slightly slower than absolute free fall.
The article was
released before analysis conducted
by BYU physics Professor Steven Jones discovered traces of thermite in steel samples taken from
the World Trade Center.
"Using advanced techniques we're finding out what's
in these samples - we're finding iron, sulphur, potassium and manganese - these are characteristic of
a variation of thermite which is used to cut through steel very rapidly, it's called thermate," said
article regurgitates pancake and truss theories yet fails to
acknowledge the comments of WTC construction manager Frank
DeMartini (below) who before 911 stated that the buildings were
designed to take multiple airliner impacts and not collapse.
to view video
The article also completely fails to answer why pools of molten yellow metal were found
underneath both towers and Building 7 subsequent to the collapses.
classic crimp implosion of Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, is glossed over as the piece
again tries to mislead its readers into believing that over engineered steel buildings collapse from
fire damage - an event unprecedented in world history aside from three examples in one single day.
Commenting on his own interview for the magazine piece, Alex Jones said that initially
he thought it was a fake interview or a crank call. Jones has given hundreds of TV and print
interviews and thousands of radio interviews but his experience with Benjamin Chertoff was like no
"People from school newspapers sound more credible and serious," said
Jones had to call Popular Mechanics' office and verify that Chertoff
actually worked for them. In the course of doing so he was erroneously told by Editor in Chief James
Meigs that the story was not going to be a hit piece and that it was simply intended to explore the
different theories surrounding 911.
In addition, Popular Mechanics
highlighted an article that Jones had posted on his website about incendiary devices in the World
Jones' websites feature a cross-section of mainstream and
alternative media articles. An article written by Jones himself is clearly labeled as such.
The magazine had contacted the individuals featured in the article who told them that
they had never spoken to Jones. The article was clearly attributed to its orginal author - Randy
Lavello - and not Alex Jones. When Jones asked Popular Mechanics if they were going to contact the
individuals again and ask if they had spoken with the original author, they dropped the subject.
of a PR campaign to sell its newly packaged dross, the book
'Debunking 911 Lies,' Popular Mechanics' James Meigs appeared on
the O'Reilly Factor.
click to view video
O'Reilly need to be reminded that constantly parroting the
word "fact," without presenting any actual evidence, does
not make something a fact.
Meigs contradicts himself completely in claiming that, "No one had ever seen a one
hundred plus story building collapse to the ground before," and yet less than two minutes later
agrees with O'Reilly's comment that nothing unexpected about the impact of the planes or the
collapses surprised analysts.
Meigs concurs that it's an unprecedented event
and yet claims that analysts knew exactly what was going to happen. How could they have known the ins
and outs of an event that had never happened before?
Meigs calls the WTC
implosion, "The most closely studied collapse in world history," yet fails to address the fact that
50,000 tons of steel from the WTC, a supposed crime scene, was shipped to Asia and a
further 10,000 tons to India, preventing a detailed analysis.
citing opinions of engineers, bizarrely states that, "The real surprise is that the building stood up
as long as it did."
In February 2005, The Windsor building in Madrid
(pictured) burned for over 24 hours as shooting flames engulfed almost the entire structure and yet
the building did not collapse. The core of the WTC was exponentially more robust
than the Windsor building. So we have one building that burned incessantly for over 24 hours and did
not fall, compared to two buildings which were structurally far superior, burned briefly from limited
fires, and yet both collapsed within an average time of 79 minutes - and Meigs claims they should
have collapsed sooner!
that Popular Mechanics' investigation is "not political," and yet
foreword to their book is written by none other than GOP
darling Senator John McCain.
In the foreword McCain
re-hashes an abhorrent amount of Neo-Con detritus that
relies solely on 911 having happened exactly as the
government claims it did.
"We liberated Afghanistan from the
murderous rule of the Taliban, our attackers' proud hosts. We chased Al Qaeda around the globe," barks
Afghanistan is now a failed narco-state run by tribal warlords and
ex-Taliban kingpins, nowhere outside of Kabul is secure, malnutrition amongst children is the highest
in the world outside Africa, and opium production is at record levels. Bellicose statements about
chasing Al-Qaeda around the globe are somewhat contradicted by the fact that Al-Qaeda-Iraq links were
proven to be fraudulent and outgoing CIA director AB “Buzzy” Krongard
told the London Times that
Bin Laden should stay free. Couple this with President President Bush's view on Bin Laden - "I
truly am not that concerned about him," and McCain's rhetoric falls flat on its face.
McCain also uses the callous tactic of saying that questioning the government's
version of 911 insults the victims and this is also parroted in the Popular Mechanics magazine piece.
Let's hear what Bill Doyle, representative of the largest group of 911
family members has to say on
"If you want to believe what they want to snow you under on
like the 911 Commission - that's a total fallacy," said Doyle.
"It looks like
there was a conspiracy behind 911 if you really look at all the facts - a lot of families now feel
the same way."
Doyle said that half of the family members - relatives of the
911 victims - he represents thought that the US government was complicit in 911.
Despite the efforts of Popular Mechanics to whitewash government complicity in 911 via
a front page feature story and a new book, recent polls clearly show an increasing trend towards a
rejection of the official version of events.
If we are to set aside the
30% of Americans that do
not even know the year in which September 11 happened, then we are left with figures of around
36% who agree that the
government was involved in the attack and only 34% of Americans who actually know in which year
the attack took place that still think it was carried out solely by a rag-tag group of
19 incompetent morons who couldn't fly Cessna's
at the behest of a man on a kidney dialysis machine.
Popular Mechanics are
sure to make a tidy sum of money from their latest publication, but their credibility is certain to
dwindle in light of the fact that they are willingly acting as collaborators by aiding the cover-up
of a crime that resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans on 911 and untold more to come as a
result of how the attack changed US foreign policy.