The result was withdrawn. Verbal chat 06:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Soapbox for blatant conspiracy theory. A library and web search indicates that this topic is almost entirely ignored except for conspiracy theory websites and forums. The sources cited in the article are also suspect. I have been unable to find any of the AP articles in archive searches and the Guardian article is not found in their archive search. The single book cited is carried by no library in the United States, United Kingdom or Canada (according to catelogue searches such as WorldCat). This article seems to serve no purpose but the advancement of a far afield theory completed ignored outside of conspiracy theory circles (and not even documented in common conspiracy print sources).
Note: When I contested the prod, I pointed out that 45 libraries held the book according to WorldCat. Apparently there was some error. That's not to say it is a major book. 19:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn. Verbal chat 06:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Soapbox for blatant conspiracy theory. A library and web search indicates that this topic is almost entirely ignored except for conspiracy theory websites and forums. The sources cited in the article are also suspect. I have been unable to find any of the AP articles in archive searches and the Guardian article is not found in their archive search. The single book cited is carried by no library in the United States, United Kingdom or Canada (according to catelogue searches such as WorldCat). This article seems to serve no purpose but the advancement of a far afield theory completed ignored outside of conspiracy theory circles (and not even documented in common conspiracy print sources).
Note: When I contested the prod, I pointed out that 45 libraries held the book according to WorldCat. Apparently there was some error. That's not to say it is a major book. 19:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)