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
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
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.
absence of evidence
theories flourished that something other than a jetliner crashed at the Pentagon,
supporting the crash of a jetliner.
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