[Imc-uk-features] Unhidden: Conspiraloons, Ravers and Peace Activists

[Chris]

Hi

I have unhidden this article:

- Conspiraloons, Ravers and Peace Activists
  Danny
  https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/379676.html

Ben hid it with this reason:

  ben - hidden, inaccurate, non news rant
  "The proof it isn't is that wikipedia has always
  published the IP's of contributors in the hope that
  somebody would one day expose the changes made by the
  CIA and other nefarious organisations and
  corporations." - crap

I think it's an interesting article, I didn't know that
Robert Fisk had come out for 9/11 truth:

  What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade
  Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) –
  which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at
  5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to
  the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American
  National Institute of Standards and Technology was
  instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of
  all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC
  7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical
  engineering – very definitely not in the "raver"
  bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of
  reference of this final report on the grounds that it
  could be "fraudulent or deceptive" 

  http://news.independent.co.uk/fisk/article2893860.ece

The article also talks about the uncovering of various
agencies, government and corporate bodies who have been
caught red handed editing things on wikipedia via the new
wikiscanner tool:

  http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/

And goes on to say that it is "wrong to describe wikipedia
as an intelligence front", rather "it is a battlefront in
the war between information and disinformation". I think
this is essentially correct thought I'd phrase it
differently, I'd say that the Wikipedia, like Indmedia are
part of the terrain that the information war is being
fought across.

The quote that Ben cites as being "crap" doesn't actually
make sense to me, "The proof it isn't is", but the
sentance before this and the one after are the ones I have
quoted from above and these do make sense and are not crap.

Chris

-- 
Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World