Difference between revisions of "9-11"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (various edits)
(Rework intro)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
{{9/11 rules}}<br/>
 
{{9/11 rules}}<br/>
 
<div style="float:right;">{{#widget:YouTube|id=yuC_4mGTs98}}</div>
 
<div style="float:right;">{{#widget:YouTube|id=yuC_4mGTs98}}</div>
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'''.  
+
Over a decade after the events, the official narrative about the 9/11 attacks is increasingly seen as just that, an 'official explanation' rather than as the truth. Almost everyone is agreed on the lack of integrity of the officials who came up with the official story, and the implausibility of their '19 men with boxcutters' story has been questioned in parliaments from Japan<ref>http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=japan+parliament+911&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDoQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.projectcensored.org%2Ftop-stories%2Farticles%2F24-japan-questions-9-11-and-the-global-war-on-terror%2F&ei=DOuMT6LXA4iHrAfkoJShCQ&usg=AFQjCNFRY_p26UcHl2y7hDDBnKJSTgTIWQ&cad=rja</ref> to Iran<ref>http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=17845</ref>. A mound of compelling evidence has been produced, and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, which point to glaring anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report. None of these has been addressed by US government or [[MSM|big media]].
  
 
==Subsidiary 9/11 articles==
 
==Subsidiary 9/11 articles==
Line 20: Line 20:
 
*[[Document:911 JFK and War|911 JFK and War - An essay by Peter Dale Scott]]
 
*[[Document:911 JFK and War|911 JFK and War - An essay by Peter Dale Scott]]
 
*[[Document:General Hamid Gul - Interview|2001 Interview with General Hamid Gul - former DG of the Pakistan ISI Intelligence Agency]]
 
*[[Document:General Hamid Gul - Interview|2001 Interview with General Hamid Gul - former DG of the Pakistan ISI Intelligence Agency]]
*[[File:Understanding 911 and 911 wars.pdf]] - An essay by Emeritus Professor John McMurtry of Delph University
+
*[[File:Understanding 911 and 911 wars.pdf]] - An essay by Emeritus Professor John McMurtry of the University of Guelph, Ontario
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Revision as of 04:16, 17 April 2012

This is the main page covering the events of 11 September 2001 in the USA. Template:9/11 rules

Over a decade after the events, the official narrative about the 9/11 attacks is increasingly seen as just that, an 'official explanation' rather than as the truth. Almost everyone is agreed on the lack of integrity of the officials who came up with the official story, and the implausibility of their '19 men with boxcutters' story has been questioned in parliaments from Japan[1] to Iran[2]. A mound of compelling evidence has been produced, and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, which point to glaring anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report. None of these has been addressed by US government or big media.

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