Difference between revisions of "Talk:9-11"
(Lockerbie link to 9-11) |
(Glad to see Patrick exploring 9/11.) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Lockerbie link to 9-11== | ==Lockerbie link to 9-11== | ||
− | [[9/11]] is a topic which until very recently I have studiously avoided. On 30 June 2015, I finally uncovered the [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:Scottish_Mirror.jpg ''Scottish Mirror'' article of 11 September 2001] that I remembered reading with incredulity fourteen long years ago. A friend had sent me the link but it was lost somehow over the years. Googling the press on that date only turned up secondary sources or links to 9/11 articles. Then Eureka! On 30 June 2015, I stumbled across the ''BBC News'' report of 11 September 2001 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1536773.stm "Key Lockerbie 'evidence' not used"] and there was the long lost ''Scottish Mirror'' front page. Straightaway I wrote a [[Bernard Hogan-Howe#Lockerbie crime scene at Heathrow|second letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe]] referring to the Heathrow break-in and the ''Scottish Mirror'' revelations. I also mounted email, [https://www.facebook.com/groups/118951448146734/910879175620620 ''Facebook''] and [https://twitter.com/BerntCarlsson/status/616248034041692160 ''Twitter''] campaigns that have all been well received. | + | [[9/11]] is a topic which until very recently I have studiously avoided. On 30 June 2015, I finally uncovered the [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:Scottish_Mirror.jpg ''[[Scottish Mirror]]'' article of 11 September 2001] that I remembered reading with incredulity fourteen long years ago. A friend had sent me the link but it was lost somehow over the years. Googling the press on that date only turned up secondary sources or links to 9/11 articles. Then Eureka! On 30 June 2015, I stumbled across the ''BBC News'' report of 11 September 2001 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1536773.stm "Key Lockerbie 'evidence' not used"] and there was the long lost ''Scottish Mirror'' front page. Straightaway I wrote a [[Bernard Hogan-Howe#Lockerbie crime scene at Heathrow|second letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe]] referring to the Heathrow break-in and the ''Scottish Mirror'' revelations. I also mounted email, [https://www.facebook.com/groups/118951448146734/910879175620620 ''Facebook''] and [https://twitter.com/BerntCarlsson/status/616248034041692160 ''Twitter''] campaigns that have all been well received. |
On 2 July 2015, my first edit to the [[9/11]] page which introduced this missing Lockerbie link was deleted and relegated to one of the mere [[9-11/Coincidences]]. My second edit on 3 July, again deleted, introduced the idea of [[George H W Bush]] and the [[CIA]]'s complicity in both attacks: | On 2 July 2015, my first edit to the [[9/11]] page which introduced this missing Lockerbie link was deleted and relegated to one of the mere [[9-11/Coincidences]]. My second edit on 3 July, again deleted, introduced the idea of [[George H W Bush]] and the [[CIA]]'s complicity in both attacks: | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
I would urge [[User:Robin|Robin]] to reconsider, unprotect the [[9/11]] page and [https://wikispooks.com/w/index.php?title=9-11&oldid=63629 link it as I have suggested] to its [[terrorist]] predecessor [[Pan Am Flight 103]].--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 19:19, 3 July 2015 (IST) | I would urge [[User:Robin|Robin]] to reconsider, unprotect the [[9/11]] page and [https://wikispooks.com/w/index.php?title=9-11&oldid=63629 link it as I have suggested] to its [[terrorist]] predecessor [[Pan Am Flight 103]].--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 19:19, 3 July 2015 (IST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | :[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick]], welcome to the talk page. A record of our discussions will help readers more than simple reversion and re-reversion of edits. Please do not assume that the [[9-11/Coincidences]] page is for 'mere' coincidences (perhaps it would be better entitled [[9-11/'Coincidences']]). On its own, the connection you suggest ''could'' be regarded as a 'mere' coincidence, so I placed it alongside other similar material in order to present a more compelling case - since multiple such 'coincidences' become that much more implausible. I'm glad you have decided to explore the connections between these [[deep event]]s - I do not believe the [[Lockerbie]] bombing was an isolated incident, but part of a larger pattern. You may wish to work on that page, or perhaps make a ''[[Scottish Mirror]]'' article, and/or post that cover story as a [[Document]] and explore its implications. As a relative newcomer to 9/11, you may be interested to listen to [http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/568 a broadcast I made on its 10th anniversary]. For further study of [[9-11]] I can also recommend the material on [http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/911 this page]. Since you have until very recently "studiously avoided" the topic, remember that you may still have a lot to learn about it. [[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 20:26, 3 July 2015 (IST) | ||
== SMWDocs Issue? == | == SMWDocs Issue? == |
Revision as of 19:26, 3 July 2015
Lockerbie link to 9-11
9/11 is a topic which until very recently I have studiously avoided. On 30 June 2015, I finally uncovered the Scottish Mirror article of 11 September 2001 that I remembered reading with incredulity fourteen long years ago. A friend had sent me the link but it was lost somehow over the years. Googling the press on that date only turned up secondary sources or links to 9/11 articles. Then Eureka! On 30 June 2015, I stumbled across the BBC News report of 11 September 2001 "Key Lockerbie 'evidence' not used" and there was the long lost Scottish Mirror front page. Straightaway I wrote a second letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe referring to the Heathrow break-in and the Scottish Mirror revelations. I also mounted email, Facebook and Twitter campaigns that have all been well received.
On 2 July 2015, my first edit to the 9/11 page which introduced this missing Lockerbie link was deleted and relegated to one of the mere 9-11/Coincidences. My second edit on 3 July, again deleted, introduced the idea of George H W Bush and the CIA's complicity in both attacks:
- Lockerbie led by South Africa's Civil Cooperation Bureau; and,
- 9/11 led by Mossad.
I would urge Robin to reconsider, unprotect the 9/11 page and link it as I have suggested to its terrorist predecessor Pan Am Flight 103.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2015 (IST)
- Patrick, welcome to the talk page. A record of our discussions will help readers more than simple reversion and re-reversion of edits. Please do not assume that the 9-11/Coincidences page is for 'mere' coincidences (perhaps it would be better entitled 9-11/'Coincidences'). On its own, the connection you suggest could be regarded as a 'mere' coincidence, so I placed it alongside other similar material in order to present a more compelling case - since multiple such 'coincidences' become that much more implausible. I'm glad you have decided to explore the connections between these deep events - I do not believe the Lockerbie bombing was an isolated incident, but part of a larger pattern. You may wish to work on that page, or perhaps make a Scottish Mirror article, and/or post that cover story as a Document and explore its implications. As a relative newcomer to 9/11, you may be interested to listen to a broadcast I made on its 10th anniversary. For further study of 9-11 I can also recommend the material on this page. Since you have until very recently "studiously avoided" the topic, remember that you may still have a lot to learn about it. Robin (talk) 20:26, 3 July 2015 (IST)
SMWDocs Issue?
I wonder why the Related Documents section of this page doesn't reflect the Property:Display docType of the documents listed... Robin (talk) 15:40, 10 February 2014 (GMT)
- I've noticed that before and often. If you refresh one of the listed pages, then return here and refresh it, it will display the correct type. I originally thought it was a job queue issue, but I don't think it is now since the incorrect displays have survived several hard cache clears and data rebuilds. I've just confirmed the behaviour again on the top item it the list --Peter P (talk) 16:08, 10 February 2014 (GMT)