Difference between revisions of "9-11"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Update, add Corbett's (recommended) video remove {{stub}} since it has {{add}})
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<big>'''This is the main page covering the events of 11 September 2001 in the USA.'''</big>
 
<big>'''This is the main page covering the events of 11 September 2001 in the USA.'''</big>
  
{{9/11 rules}}
+
{| style="width:100%;" border="0"
[[file:wtc7bbc.jpg | frame | right | Did you know that [[9/11 WTC Building 7 Collapse |WTC7 collapsed spontaneously]] on 9/11, although it was not hit by a plane? Or that its collapse was announced on television ''before'' it happened?]]
+
|+ align="top" |{{9/11 rules}}
 
+
| {{Add}}
Nine years after the events, dissent from the official narrative about the 9/11 attacks is framed, less as "conspiracy theory" and increasingly as legitimate mainstream controversy.  This is because reasonable questions, arising from both glaring anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report together with subsequent peer-reviewed scientific evidence, are routinely stone-walled as somehow 'unpatriotic' by the US authorities who simply refuse to address, let alone answer any of them. The tactic is wearing very thin indeed and, absent another such ''"catastrophic and catalyzing event"'', <ref>[https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf PNAC Rebuilding America's Defences. Page 51]</ref> it surely cannot continue for much longer.  
+
A decade after the events, dissent from the official narrative about the 9/11 attacks is framed, less as "conspiracy theory" and increasingly as legitimate mainstream controversy.  This is because reasonable questions, arising from both glaring anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report together with subsequent peer-reviewed scientific evidence, are routinely stone-walled as somehow 'unpatriotic' by the US authorities who simply refuse to address, let alone answer any of them. The tactic is wearing very thin indeed and, absent another such ''"catastrophic and catalyzing event"'', <ref>[https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf PNAC Rebuilding America's Defences. Page 51]</ref> it surely cannot continue for much longer.  
 
+
| {{#widget:YouTube|id=yuC_4mGTs98}}
 
+
|}
{{Add}}
 
  
 
==Subsidiary 9/11 articles==
 
==Subsidiary 9/11 articles==
 +
[[file:wtc7bbc.jpg | frame | right | Did you know that [[9/11 WTC Building 7 Collapse |WTC7 collapsed spontaneously]] on 9/11, although it was not hit by a plane? Or that its collapse was announced on television ''before'' it happened?]]
 
*[[9/11 WTC Building 7 Collapse]]
 
*[[9/11 WTC Building 7 Collapse]]
 
*[[9/11 Controlled demolition evidence]]
 
*[[9/11 Controlled demolition evidence]]
Line 39: Line 39:
 
* [http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/index.htm 9/11 Public Discourse Project] - This is the web site of the 10 members of the Kean Hamilton Commission. It is probably the most comprehensive source of information and documents comprising [[WikiSpooks:Definitions|"The Official Narrative"]]
 
* [http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/index.htm 9/11 Public Discourse Project] - This is the web site of the 10 members of the Kean Hamilton Commission. It is probably the most comprehensive source of information and documents comprising [[WikiSpooks:Definitions|"The Official Narrative"]]
 
* [http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/Category:2001-09-11 Unwelcome Guests 9/11 Page] - An Index of over 40 radio shows about 9/11
 
* [http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/Category:2001-09-11 Unwelcome Guests 9/11 Page] - An Index of over 40 radio shows about 9/11
{{stub}}
 
 
* [http://debunking-bbc.blogspot.com/2007/02/debunking-bbcs-9-11-conspiracy-files.html A debunking of the BBC's ''Conspiracy Files'' on 9/11]
 
* [http://debunking-bbc.blogspot.com/2007/02/debunking-bbcs-9-11-conspiracy-files.html A debunking of the BBC's ''Conspiracy Files'' on 9/11]
 
[[Category:9/11]]
 
[[Category:9/11]]

Revision as of 19:47, 6 December 2011

This is the main page covering the events of 11 September 2001 in the USA.

Template:9/11 rules
Template:Add

A decade after the events, dissent from the official narrative about the 9/11 attacks is framed, less as "conspiracy theory" and increasingly as legitimate mainstream controversy. This is because reasonable questions, arising from both glaring anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report together with subsequent peer-reviewed scientific evidence, are routinely stone-walled as somehow 'unpatriotic' by the US authorities who simply refuse to address, let alone answer any of them. The tactic is wearing very thin indeed and, absent another such "catastrophic and catalyzing event", [1] it surely cannot continue for much longer.

Subsidiary 9/11 articles

Did you know that WTC7 collapsed spontaneously on 9/11, although it was not hit by a plane? Or that its collapse was announced on television before it happened?

See Also

References

External Links