
Lawmakers Say Redacted Pages of 9/11 Report Show Saudi Official Met Hijackers - rfreytag
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/04/11/60-minutes-lawmakers-say-redacted-pages-of-911-report-shows-saudi-official-met-hijackers-in-la/
======
kafkaesq
Which doesn't support the "truther" narrative in any way, of course.

But adds incremental evidence to the support the observation that there's
still a lot we're not being told about how the attacks were orchestrated, and
who their financial supporters were.

------
Laaw
This is super duper off-topic for HN...

------
jgrahamc
I've been on HN for a very long time (3207 days) and have seen it ebb and flow
over time, but recently I've seen the front page inundated by stories that
feel like a dilution of the formerly start-up and technology focussed news
stories that were here.

For example: this story, another about a Verizon strike, one about
multinational corporations, one about NPR, one about The Guardian evolving,
one about Blackwater.

Lots of us read HN from outside the US and do so to read about technology. Any
chance we can get back to that?

~~~
kafkaesq
From the guidelines:

 _On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes
more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the
answer might be: anything that gratifies one 's intellectual curiosity._

 _Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they 're
evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters,
or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-
topic._

By these criteria, the posted article would seem to be an edge case. I lean
toward the "on-topic" side, because it isn't just reporting some routine
disaster -- rather it touches (quite deeply, in my view) on the nature of how
we really come know about important events that affect our daily lives.

And because this information damn well _should_ have been covered on TV news,
around the time it was known to investigators. Why it wasn't is, in my view,
certainly a valid question to ask.

~~~
Laaw
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're
> evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or
> disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's
> probably off-topic.

This is about politics. It is off-topic. You can argue how the rules are
written, but as they currently stand, this _is_ off-topic, by definition.

~~~
dragonwriter
I think you need to review the definition of the word "most", and then read
the section on what is on-topic, as well. When you do, you'll realize that
there is no black and white objective line, and that's by design.

~~~
Laaw
I'm playing the odds, and using my judgement. Combined, this submission is
most certainly not what PG had in mind when he founded HN.

I could be wrong, but I don't see how.

~~~
ooooo00000
You are wrong, because this comes up ALL THE TIME, and the simple answer is
that it's not off-topic if enough HN members find it interesting enough to
upvote.

