Talk:9/11: Debunking The Myths

Factual errors

These gentlemen make unsupported assumptions when they claim that "It is safe to assume that a significant fraction of scrambles lead to intercepts" [1]. There is no evidence to support such an assumption (oh no - did I find a hole in their logic??!?). I can't see how this criticism can stand as credible. -- ZimZalaBim (talk) 14:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares, we are only here to report. I personaly view that their article is full of BS, not that it maters what i view. --Striver 17:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Critic

Here is a link to more critic [2] --Striver 11:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ben

This contradicts his own testimony in the podcast. We should be more cautious in the wording, and also point out his contradictory statments. I will not revert and trust the one making the edit to make the correction. --Striver 11:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where in the podcast? --ZimZalaBim (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

after the first hour --Striver 15:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listen again: [3]. He states "its possible" and "I don't know" and that if there is a relationship it probably goes back to "19th century Belarus" and that he's not aware of anyone in his family ever meeting or talking with Michael Chertoff. Of course its possible they are related - its possible you and I are related. But, guess what: they're not cousins, and any allegation of bias on that belief is horribly unfounded. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 16:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, even George W. Bush and John Kerry are distant cousins. [4] But, it's a meaningless bit of trivia. --Aude (talk contribs as tagcloud) 17:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]