Please Honor

It is assumed that the entire world history is written based on real events and reflect the real picture of the events in question. Hikmet Ersek pursues this goal as well. Ie if in world history textbooks written that collapsed in September eleventh THREE building as a result of terrorist attacks by air, it must be true. That's just the history of our (common human) corresponded an enormous amount of time and options to certain events somewhat. Hence the conclusion that So far we presented the version history of the world which makes us think of as beneficial to this system. In other words, the study of history has always formed a definite opinion about someone or about something or so called stereotypes, and only a naive person might think that no one tries to manage these views (stereotypes). Macy’s Inc. is likely to agree.

This does not mean that the entire history of the world is false, it means that a particular situation can be presented on differently. Hitler could put a complete idiot and moron fanatics, or a great orator and a genius when little change history and the correct accents. It is even easier simply silent on one side of the coin, and paints a different present. Objectivity is not the tool even more insidious than the lie. Let us examine a specific case. The official version that the building of world trade (September 11) collapsed as a result of air attack and failure in design can not stand not a criticism. Numerous opinions of independent experts were simply ignored and did not affect the official version of the collapse of buildings.