Allan,

Thanks for your reply, and thanks for removing the block. The block was actually blocking all users of several UK Internet service providers, as it is actually the IP address of their web cache, which they force all users to go through.

Regarding my changes as being silly, I would have to disagree. In a recent documentary on BBC1 it was shown that the term "Al Qaeda" was only adopted by Osama Bin Laden AFTER the September 11 attacks, and therefore the article as it is currently worded is misleading.

It is also widely debated on Wikipedia as to when the term "terrorist" should be used, as this implies a political stance and as such does not constitute a NPOV. I am British, and favor neither Al Qaeda nor the current US government, and therefore consider myself to be in a good position to write about September 11 in a neutral way. To some people "freedom fighters" are "terrorists" and vice versa. It is important we remember that, and remember that Wikipedia is intended for a world wide audience, who may research subject more than simply believing what they see on television programs such as Fox News.

In addition to this, there is much evidence that the CIA is or has been protecting the Bin Laden family, as had also been recently "documented" in the film Fahrenheit 911, and also in numerous BBC documentaries recently.

BBC being the British Broadcasting Corporation.

Therefore the changes I made were reasonable, as these are widely disputed issues, and should not be being stated as fact. This is according to Wikipedia's own NPOV policies, which I have been reading last night and this morning.

I look forward to discussing this further if you so wish.

Edmund

Allan Crossman wrote:

R E Broadley wrote:

...

I noticed that the definition of the September 11 attacks was claiming as fact some information that is widely disputed

Come off it now. You went from:

The attacks of September 11, 2001, were a series of coordinated terrorist attacks against the United States

To:

The attacks of September 11, 2001, are described by the Ubited States Government to be a series of coordinated terrorist attacks against the United States

This is more than a bit silly. The attacks meet any sane definition of terrorism, and were certainly coordinated. What's the problem? NPOV only applies when there is serious dispute. Silly disputes can be ignored.

The other bit you claimed was disputed was that Al Qaeda was involved. Contesting this might have made sense prior to the latest bin Laden tape...

All that said, the block was a bit harsh. I'll undo it.