The Guardian & Loose Change

[A W Smith]

I hereby offer to him a prize of £1,500 if he can send to me or have published within the next two weeks any verifiable evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that the 19 individuals named by the FBI as the hijackers of 9/11 actually boarded the aircraft which crashed on 9/11.

manifests manifests oh where are those manifests. Hey whats the exchange rate from pounds to US dollars today?

 

[brodski]

manifests manifests oh where are those manifests. Hey whats the exchange rate from pounds to US dollars today?

You get about two US dollars to the pound these days.

 

[The Doc]

1) Flight Manifests
2) Security Footage
3) NORAD tapes (Accidental broadcast by terrorist)
4) Passenger Phone Calls
5) Hijacker Human Remains
6) Past Activities that suggest a hijacking was being planned

I could go on all night...

 

[Big Les]

It's bloody disheartening to see all those lefties that are so sick of Bush et al that they'll uncritically buy into this bullshine (on the comments page I mean). It just goes to show how little the objective truth actually matters to people where politics (and religion of course) are concerned. They want a means to an end, and they don't really care what it is or what's sacrificed to get it.

 

[Nick Terry]

Zippo on 9/11 Trutherisms in the Guardian's letters page today. That's virtually giving the conspiraloonies the last word.

I noticed that in yesterday's batch of published woo, there were copious falllacious arguments to nonexistent authority, with repeated mentions of Professor David Ray Griffin, none of which specified his discipline.

Ho hum.

 

[westprog]

In the link I posted Mark Kermode (more of a film critic that a straight journalist really) said that the package he was sent said that his position of the film was in breach of the PATRIOAT act, so Louder Than Words (or whoever sent him the film) was in effect threatening him with legislation which, even if it said what they claimed it said, would not apply to him.

From http://observer.guardian.co.uk/screen/story/0,,1750000,00.html#article_continue

The real reason people believe in such wild conspiracies is simple - it's more reassuring. In the case of 9/11, there is something perversely comforting about the idea that, behind all the chaos, the American government was always in control, carefully orchestrating the events of that terrible day.

In the end, the facts won out and I had to abandon my adolescent fantasies. Others should do the same. It is chaos, rather than conspiracy, which really rules the world.

 

[uk_dave]

 

[Dave Rogers]

I noticed that in yesterday's batch of published woo, there were copious falllacious arguments to nonexistent authority, with repeated mentions of Professor David Ray Griffin, none of which specified his discipline.

Ho hum.

Including one reference to "physicist Dr. Judy Wood", originator of the principle of the indivisibility of energy and believer that pulverisation of concrete violates the conservation of mass. I thought she was a dental engineer - does she have a qualification in physics, and how long did it take her to unlearn it all?

Dave
(a genuine physicist)

 

[walthrup48]

'Nother letter today: Frames of reference

"George Monbiot really has rattled a few cages. All the nonsense about 9/11 is pouring out again [...]"

 

[Nick Terry]

The letter's worth reprising in full. I especially like the bolded point.

George Monbiot really has rattled a few cages. All the nonsense about 9/11 is pouring out again (Letters, February 8). Fire not hot enough to melt the steel frame? Have these people never heard of the problems steel railway tracks have in hot weather? Do they need to melt before trains start falling off the buckled tracks?
So steel-framed buildings don't free-fall collapse. Can they point to any experimental evidence to prove this? Has anyone actually tried flying an airliner with a heavy fuel load into a tall building?
As for Professor David Ray Griffin's credentials, yes, he was an academic, but of theology, not of science or engineering.
Take a look at the website of Professor Steven Dutch of the University of Wisconsin. He takes all these ideas and deals with them scientifically. I can't take all his political views, too Republican for me, but I can't fault him on his science.
Alan Calder
Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire

I like the comment at the end about Dutch's politics. Something that woowoos never seem to get their heads around is the possibility that people who dislike Bush, dislike CTists too.

 

[walthrup48]

Full article

"Response: Don't believe the official 'conspiracy' theory

We have to ask who stood to gain the most from the appalling events of 9/11, says Tim Sparke

Tuesday February 13, 2007
The Guardian

George Monbiot's explicit attack on the film Loose Change (A 9/11 conspiracy virus is sweeping the world ..., February 6) has no basis in fact. While we accept that there are flaws in the current version of the film, we stand by its overarching theme that the official "conspiracy" theory of 9/11, constructed in the hours, days, weeks and months after 9/11, is false. [...]"