Talk:9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories/Archive 1

message: The URL for the Vreeland note is no longer available.  I currently cannot find this resource anywhere on the web, any help locating this resource and fixing the link would be much appreciated.
- I think the Vreeland material should be expunged -CKLN radio in Toronto basically exposed him as a fraud - an ex-con with a very lengthy criminal record who was in custody in St. Thomas, Canada on the date when he claimed to have met the diplomat who later died.  Vreeland later failed to appear for his refugee hearing, and a warrant was issued. He was later arrested in Ohio in October of 2004.
----
- I think that the material should stay.  Because of the well-established secrecy provisions of National Security Letters, gag orders, and government policy in general to cover-up, obstruct, etc., the number of independent sources who are able to document that the government might have known anything prior to September 11th is going to be very limited.  The most important facts regarding Vreeland are not matters of Mr. Vreelands character, rather that most important fact (I think) regarding the Vreeland case is that it is pretty much not contested that the note Image:Delmart Vreeland Note.jpg is authentic, and is said to have been locked away in a safe in the possession of Candian authorities, following Vreelands arrest - prior to the September 11th attacks.
Now it is a fact that Senator Bob Graham in early 2004 made statements that the September 11th attack might have been predicted, or that it should have been possible to predict.  Likewise, the 911 Commision report uses less strong terminolgy when it describes a Failure of imagination or makes other vague statements about the governments reliance on unrelaible sources, ignoring important sources, not sharing information or not connecting the dots.  The role of an encylopedia of course should include finding out just what the dots are, for the sake of the historic record.
Lazarus666 19:09, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Link

message: #Conspiracy theories are well recognized observable phenomena that other encyclopedias refer to.  The particular collection of conspiracy theories discussed in this article all assert varying sorts of U.S. complicity in the 9/11 attacks, therefore the title 9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories most accurately summarizes the article content. Jayjg (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories 

message: # Rhobite 04:20, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
# ObsidianOrder 06:40, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Since WP policy is that articles' titles should be simply stated how about 9/11 domestic complicity? zen master    T  18:16, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  9/11 domestic conspiracy theory 

message: #  "conspiracy theory" is a POV loaded term and its use should be deprecated on an encyclopedia. "complicity" more accurately summarizes this article. zen master    T  08:14, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  9/11 domestic complicity theory 

message: #This should be the title, preferring "complicity" as more neutral wording and "theories" because there are a variety of theories that should not be lumped together. Everyking 17:44, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 9/11 domestic complicity theories