9-11 Review
articles critiques
9-11 Research
reviews essays
9-11 Review
Attack & Cover-Up
Means & Motive
Info Warfare
Info Warfare
Trojan horses
dissembling websites
hoax-promoting videos
dissembling books
legal subterfuge
parade of errors
phantom planes
Webfairy's Whatzit
North Tower hit
South Tower hit
bumble planes
Flight 93
fake calls
Pentagon attack
757 maneuvers
no debris
crash debris
small impact hole
missing wings
turbofans 101
standing columns
small plane
Boeing 737
WTC demolition
seismic spikes
pre-impact explosions
collapse times
diminishing fires
Building 6 explosion
basement bombs
spire to dust
WTC 2 powerdown
mini nukes
pull it
vast conspiracy
divide and conquer
left gatekeepers
Holocaust denial
the Big Tent
hit parade
conspiracy theory
shell game

Parade of Errors

On September 11, 2001 four jetliners, the Pentagon, and Manhattan were struck in a complex and coordinated military operation involving numerous individual assaults. A critical view of the timeline and targeting of the attack undermines the official story that bands of Islamic terrorists armed only with primitive weapons executed the attack, and that the deadly collapses that followed were merely engineering failures.

Consequently a growing number of skeptics of the official account of the attack have raised questions and demonstrated that key assertions of the official story are impossible.

However, skeptics have faced an array of challenges in their attempts to convince others of the bankruptcy of the official story, not the least of which are their own failures to correctly interpret evidence of the attack and present a unified theory. It appears that confusing and dividing the skeptics was an important objective in the planning and follow-up of the attack. This was accomplished both at the front end, by the way the attack was structured, and at the back end, by the insertion of disinformation.

The idea that Flights 11 and 175 did not hit the North and South Towers illustrates how the front-end and back-end techniques work together to divide and discredit the skeptics. Many skeptics point to the absence of public evidence that proves Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, and apparent evidence to the contrary, such as an absence of much recognizable debris from a 757 in photographs of the site, and a pattern of damage that seemed to be incommensurate with the impact of 757. In the absence of evidence theories flourished that something other than a jetliner crashed at the Pentagon, despite numerous eyewitness accounts supporting the crash of a jetliner. The Pentagon 'no-plane' theories helped to seed even more incredible theories that the Twin Towers were hit, not by jetliners, but by some other objects -- despite considerable evidence that the impacts were, in fact, of Flights 11 and 175. The counterintuitive appearance of jetliners entering the towers would help to fuel these theories. After the attack "investigative reports" from neutral countries such as Spain and Canada would feed the idea that those crashes did not involve Boeing 767s at all, but rather the planes had been swapped or the crashes were simulated by various means. These dead-end theories would serve to discredit skeptics, soak up large amounts of their time, and divert attention from the core fraud of the attack -- the Big Lie that the Twin Towers collapsed due to impacts and fires.

Errors such as these litter websites and books by sincere researchers attempting to discover the truth behind the attack. One of the goals of 911review.com is to highlight these errors and improve the quality of analysis in the community of skeptics.

page last modified: 2005-12-14
Copyright 2004 - 2011,911Review.com / revision 1.08 site last modified: 12/21/2012