Difference between revisions of "2011/07/30/0948/link"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (page link correction)
m (tag fix)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{page/link|article}}
 
{{page/link|article}}
 
* '''link''': [[URL::http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842]]
 
* '''link''': [[URL::http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842]]
* '''title''': [[title::headline::Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report]]
+
* '''title''': [[title::Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report]]
 
* '''summary''': [[summary::sub-headline::Popular Mechanics examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.]]
 
* '''summary''': [[summary::sub-headline::Popular Mechanics examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.]]
 
* '''when''': [[when posted::February 3, 2005 12:00 AM]]
 
* '''when''': [[when posted::February 3, 2005 12:00 AM]]
 
* '''source''': ''[[publication::Popular Mechanics]]''
 
* '''source''': ''[[publication::Popular Mechanics]]''
* '''topics''': [[topic::9-11/anomalies/denial]]
+
* '''topics''': [[topic::9-11/anomalies/debate]]
 
{{page/link/footer}}
 
{{page/link/footer}}

Latest revision as of 14:52, 17 October 2019

link



Commentary

 When postedPage title
2011/07/30/0948/link/woozle
2011/07/30/1606/link15 February 2005Popular Mechanics' Deceptive Smear Against 9/11 Truth

References

  • 2005/02/15 [L..T] Popular Mechanics' Deceptive Smear Against 9/11 Truth lead paragraph::The March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine contains a 14-full-page cover article which attacks skepticism about the government and media explanation of the 9/11/01 attack. The primary method of the piece is to build and attack a straw man of myths it claims are "at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario" embraced by the "growing army of conspiracy theorists." PM selects a combination of 16 valid, erroneous, and inconsequential claims found on websites, implying that they are all endorsed by the "army" of skeptics.