Talk:9/11 Report Critique

"CENSORSHIP IS WRONG" says that the editors should explain their objections to, and deletion of, this article critiquing the Commission Report and/by documenting considerations of omission therefrom, which are perhaps out of scope for the Commission's mandate, but remain as possibly important unanswered questions.

Commission missions are carefully defined to limit their scope of investigation, generally avoiding essential or potentially embarrasing discoveries, intentionally.

moved from User:69.171,224,181:

Yes I deleted the "9/11 critique" and made a small note on the deletion log. As the article came from an unregistered contributor who hadn't been around for a few days I assumed it was from a transient contributor we wouldnlt see again so figured there was no point writing a lengthy explanatory note.

As for the original article, I read it three times & couldn't make sense of it. So I left it for a few days half hoping someone else who understands the the 9/11 commission commission report better that I would edit it. However in the absence of anyone else doing anything I looked at it once more and still couldn't follow it - which would be the reaction of most people who haven't followed the 9/11 commission process or report. On checking the links they mostly went back to sites flagging conspiracy theories about 9/11 but not to testimony, citing specific points in the commission report and marshalling credible evidence about it etc. And there was a lot of persoanl opinion in the article. As far as I could see there was little to be gained from spending a lot of time trying to research the report and then edit down to something general readers would understand. As it stood it wasn't of sufficient quality to simply be left in SourceWatch. While you obviously disagree, I stand by my decision. -- --Bob Burton 17:10, 18 Aug 2004 (EDT)

I'd like to keep the discussion, the topic, and the possibilities, open. Perhaps the contributor, and others, can build an article of merit while considering your concerns. --Maynard