Saturday, August 25, 2007
Proof positive that Robert Fisk is one of the dumbest men granted regular access to reputable print media: Robert Fisk: Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11
EVEN he?
I am talking about scientific issues. If it is true, for example, that kerosene burns at 820C under optimum conditions, how come the steel beams of the twin towers – whose melting point is supposed to be about 1,480C – would snap through at the same time? (They collapsed in 8.1 and 10 seconds.) What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) – which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at 5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American National Institute of Standards and Technology was instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC 7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical engineering – very definitely not in the "raver" bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of reference of this final report on the grounds that it could be "fraudulent or deceptive"...
The laugh:
Fisk? A conspiracy theorist? Oh no, never. Typical of 9/11 troofers everywhere, he's "only asking questions." No, no responsibility here.
If a reporter is "only asking questions", he is not doing his job.
I thought that the points made by 9/11 "truthers" had already been refuted by reputable scientists. I was half-watching a documentary last night on The History Channel ("9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction"), which said that the staff of Popular Mechanics magazine did a study (I believe with outside consultants) that answered every one of the conspiracy-minded charges.
I'm sure there have also been others who patiently debunked such popular myths as the setting of explosives in different parts of the WTC or the supposed remote-controlled plane crashing into the Pentagon.
It's just so strange that a reporter for a mainstream British newspaper--even if it is Fisk--would demonstrate a mindset that is akin to that of Lyndon LaRouche.
They say that there is not a lie too big for the Arabs not to believe it. The way Fisk reported last summer's war provides many examples of his eagerness and willingness to believe the worst about Israelis, Jews and America. When Hariri was assassinated, his first report was a rush to express doubt about the obvious suspects, insinuating that Israel had the most to gain from muredering Hariri. The only surprise is that he restrained himself until now before endorsing in his own sneaky way the 9/11 conspiracy theory. The man becomes a caricature of himself. No one can spoof Fisk better than Fisk.
These questions have indeed been answered over... and over... and over again...
Captain Ed actually did some of the basic googling:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/012080.php