As some members of ATS may know, I've drafted quite a few entries on the Tinwiki - mainly (if not entirely) in the
UFO section of the Tinwiki
I have also made several attempts to promote participation in the Tinwiki by members of ATS (for example, see
). (I'm also planning one or two more such attempts to promote
participation in the near future).
In short, I've been quite a supporter of the Tinwiki.
So, some of you may be surprised to learn that I am seriously asking whether an entire section of the Tinwiki should simply be deleted...
This question arises in my mind since I've recently been through all of the entries in the 9/11 section of the Tinwiki.
It didn't take very long.
There are only 17 entries in the 9/11 section.
Most of those entries are only a few lines long.
Having been through all the 9/11 entries, I wonder whether the entire section should simply be deleted.
Has anyone else read all these entries?
If so, what do you make of them?
I think they give a rather bad impression of the Tinwiki.
Indeed, it is hard to take the Tinwiki seriously when it contains such a poor section.
Have a look for yourself at:
The 9/11 section of the Tinwiki
It is useful to compare that section with some of the relevant entries on Wikipedia, such as
(1) The main Wikipedia entry on 9/11 conspiracytheories
(2) The numerous additional Wikipedia pages on various (more specific) topics, including
(3) The numerous additional Wikipedia pages on specific individuals associated with the 9/11 “Truth Movement”, such as
David Ray Griffin
One of the few substantial entries in the 9/11 section is this one:
Problems with official account of September 11 2001
Although one of the moderators has stated that the Tinwiki is intended to be "factual, with out bias, and of a neutral standpoint", most of the 9/11
entries only give one side of the story. They are heavily
biased towards certain conspiracy theories.
One rather extreme example of such bias is the subsection entitled "Alleged hijackers still alive", the contents of which are (to put it midly)
highly controversial. That subsection simply states the following:
"The official story alleges that four planes were hijacked by a group of 19 terrorists, at least 7 of which are alive to this day"
Note the absence of any caveat in relation to the assertion that "at least 7 of which are alive to this day
". (This is merely one example of
a bias, or poor writing, that is prevalent in the 9/11 entries).
Furthermore, considering the limited amount of material, there are a surprisingly high number of basic factual errors. For example, the same entry on
the allegedProblems with official account of September 11 2001
contains the following:
Several employees of the Israeli company, Odigo, who were tenants of the World Trade center received warnings to leave the building two hours
There are several problems with the quoted statement about Odigo, not least being that Odigo were not in fact "tenants of the World Trade center".
Odigo's offices were in fact four blocks away from the World Trade Center
Some of the 9/11 entries on Tinwiki are simply very badly garbled. For example, the main Tinwiki entry
in relation to 9/11
contains a section which appears to relate to President Bush's rather muted reaction upon being informed of the crash of
the second aircraft on 9/11. That section states the following:
Mr. President at the school
After getting "informed" from his secretary, something was burn in him but he says nothing. Was a "single word" the signal to stop th operation.
Remember ist a basic rule to use a-weapons only with the presients obligation. A little timeshift (alter the school-stream by 10 miniutes) the would
it make possible.
I would be surprised if many people could understand that paragraph (without relying upon detailed prior knowledge of relevant conspiracy
Obviously, quite a few changes to the relevant material could be made but, frankly, it would probably be better to start from scratch.
So, should the entire 9/11 section on Tinwiki simply be deleted?
If the current entries represent the best that can be achieved on the Tinwiki in relation to 9/11 (due to a lack of interest or other reasons), I
really think something drastic needs to be done.
All the best,
[edit on 7-5-2008 by IsaacKoi]