| Revision as of 15:06, 27 January 2007 editDHeyward (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,753 edits Undo revision 103611424 by NuclearUmpf (talk)correct title← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:52, 27 January 2007 edit undoLovelight (talk | contribs)1,461 edits rev. vandalismNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <noinclude> | <noinclude> | ||
| ==Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center== | |||
| ==9/11 conspiracy theories== | |||
| <noinclude>The template is intended to make no comment on any of the articles linked to. Its role is solely to assist navigation by researchers who wish to find articles on this topic with ease. | <noinclude>The template is intended to make no comment on any of the articles linked to. Its role is solely to assist navigation by researchers who wish to find articles on this topic with ease. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| {{tfd|911ct}} | {{tfd|911ct}} | ||
| {| class="toccolours" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;" | {| class="toccolours" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;" | ||
| | align="center" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" colspan="2"|<div class="plainlinks" style="width: 100%; text-align: right; font-size: smaller; margin: 0; padding: 0; height: 0"><nowiki><nowiki>]</nowiki></div>''']<br> |
| align="center" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" colspan="2"|<div class="plainlinks" style="width: 100%; text-align: right; font-size: smaller; margin: 0; padding: 0; height: 0"><nowiki><nowiki>]</nowiki></div>''']<br>Controlled demolition hypothesis, proponents & supporters, and popular culture''' | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| | align="center" halign="top" | |
| align="center" halign="top" | Theory | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| | valign="left" align=center halign="top" style="font-size: smaller" | ] |
| valign="left" align=center halign="top" style="font-size: smaller" | ] | ||
| |- | |||
| | valign="left" align=center halign="top" style="font-size: smaller" |] | |||
| |- | |- | ||
| | align="center" halign="top" | Proponents and supporters | | align="center" halign="top" | Proponents and supporters | ||
Revision as of 15:52, 27 January 2007
Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center
The template is intended to make no comment on any of the articles linked to. Its role is solely to assist navigation by researchers who wish to find articles on this topic with ease.
When adding articles to the template please do so in alphabetical order. When adding an article to the template do not forget to add the template to the article. Simply add {{911ct}} directly above the categories the article is part of.
This template must be substituted. Replace {{Template for discussion ...}} with {{subst:Template for discussion ...}}.
| Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center Controlled demolition hypothesis, proponents & supporters, and popular culture | |
| Theory | |
| Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center | |
| 7 World Trade Center | |
| Proponents and supporters | |
| Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed | Kevin Barrett | Robert M. Bowman | Andreas von Bülow | James H. Fetzer | David Ray Griffin | Sander Hicks | Jim Hoffman | Alex Jones | Steven E. Jones | Thierry Meyssan | Michael Ruppert | Peter Dale Scott | Webster G. Tarpley | Barrie Zwicker | |
| Groups | |
| 9/11 Citizens Watch | Scholars for 9/11 Truth | |
| Visual media | |
| Dust to Dust: The Health Effects of 9/11 | Fahrenheit 9/11 | 9/11 Guilt: The Proof is in Your Hands | 911: In Plane Site | Loose Change | 9/11: Press for Truth | |
| Books | |
| 9/11: The Big Lie | The CIA and September 11 | The New Pearl Harbor | The Terror Timeline | The War on Freedom | |
This template is intended to be deployed at the foot of the various 9/11 articles that do not favour the official explanation, and on article pages of people and organisations who are proponents of, or are linked in some manner with, such articles. Popular culture references are to (eg) TV shows where the existence of such a theory is fundamental to the show/edition and is "taken as read" to exist.