9/11 Truth Movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Members of the 9/11 Truth Movement at a Los Angeles demonstration, October 2007

The 9/11 Truth Movement is the name adopted by organizations and individuals that question the mainstream account of the September 11 attacks against the United States. Movement members, often referred to as 'Truthers', communicate primarily through the Internet[1] and regularly convene for local meetings,[2][3][4] national and international conferences,[5] and public demonstrations.[4]




On September 3, 2006: Time Magazine published a lead article, "Why the 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away", noting that:

"The population of world No. 2 [the 9/11 Truth Movement] is larger than you might think. A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves. Thirty-six percent adds up to a lot of people. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality."[6]


Frequently expressed propositions among movement supporters are that the mainstream account of the events of 9/11 is false and that the perceived anomalies in the official account can better be explained by the theory that a "rogue network,"[7] including individuals in the US government, planned, carried out, and covered up the attack or deliberately allowed the attacks to take place. There is a wide range of alternative theories about how and why the attacks were carried out, including belief that US air defenses (NORAD) were deliberately rendered ineffective,[8] that the two World Trade Center Towers and WTC 7 were demolished in a controlled fashion, and that the motives for the attacks were to justify overseas wars and to increase domestic control.[9]

Lt. Col Robert M. Bowman, Ph.D. (USAF, ret) expressed the one common belief: "The truth about 9/11 is that we don’t know the truth about 9/11, and we should."[10]


Proponents of the 9/11 Truth Movement describe their primary goals as evidence gathering, research and promotion of the proposition that government insiders were complicit in the attacks. Many international, national and local organizations have been created to pursue these goals such as research groups, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (STJ911.org).

The group and website 911truth.org was formed in June 2004 to coordinate the efforts of the various regional 9/11 Truth Alliances.[11] This organization describes a two-step approach to what it refers to as "9/11 Truth": first, to understand the official account and the numerous objections raised against it, and second, to confront the implications of that understanding.[12] Several other groups and organizations also exist which involve activism, such as truthaction.org and truthmove.org.


The movement is most often discussed on the Internet and in the alternative media, including talk radio hosts like Alex Jones. Some individuals in the movement come together through regional and national meetings, events and demonstrations, but the internet is the main discussion forum.

Movement members have produced such books as Webster Tarpley's 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA (2005), David Ray Griffin's The New Pearl Harbor (2004), Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon, Paul Thompson's The Terror Timeline, Eric Hufschmid's Painful Questions (2002) and Nafeez Ahmed's The War on Freedom (2002). There has been a continuing flow of new information and new interpretation, as reflected in books such as David Ray Griffin’s The New Pearl Harbor Revisited (2008) and Paul Zarembka’s The Hidden History of 9-11 (2008).

Some of the movement's videos are The Great Deception (2002) and The Great Conspiracy (2004) by Barrie Zwicker, 9/11 and the American Empire (2005) by David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Mysteries (2006), Loose Change (first released in 2005), 9/11 Press for Truth (2006), and Terrorstorm (2006).

Films such as Loose Change and Zeitgeist have consistently ranked highly among the "most viewed" on Google Video.[citation needed]


9/11 Families Movement

In the weeks and months that followed the attacks, questions were raised about the official account:

The Bush administration was reluctant to carry out an official investigation. Feeling that the mainstream media were failing to demand answers to these questions,[13] some family members of victims of the attacks, most notably the Jersey Girls, along with survivors such as William Rodriguez, agitated through interaction with the media for a full investigation, beginning what became known as the "Families Movement."

In June 2002, the group Unanswered Questions held an event at the Washington National Press Club.[14] Various officials and some 9/11 family members used the event to call for an investigation of the events of 9/11. On November 27, 2002, the 9/11 Commission was set up to prepare "a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks."[15]

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee and 9/11 Citizens Watch were formed to monitor the work of the commission. They submitted hundreds of questions for the public hearings.[16] The 9/11 families were told by the 9/11 Commission that their questions would be used as a "road map" by the Commission, and would be answered in their final report.[17]


Even before the commission formed, a minority of people took the view that the only reasonable explanation for the supposed anomalies in the official account, and the perceived cover-up, was that (a faction of) the government either deliberately allowed the attacks to take place, or were actively involved in the planning and carrying out of the attacks.

On January 8, 2002, a rally and march on Senator Dianne Feinstein's San Francisco office demanded a Congressional investigation of 9/11. A delegation of activists from peace and human rights organizations met with Feinstein's and Senator Barbara Boxer's staff and raised key questions about 9/11.[18] That month, President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to limit the investigations to "intelligence failures."[19]

This was the beginning of what has become known as the 9/11 Truth Movement. In 2002, U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) became closely identified with the movement when she questioned whether Bush had foreknowledge of 9/11.[20] Before the 9/11 Commission Report, there were questions about the official account published. Alex Jones claims to have predicted the attacks in July 2001, on his syndicated radio show at infowars.com, even mentioning the World Trade Center as a potential target and that Osama bin Laden might be used as a "scapegoat".[21] Jones has been referred to as the progenitor of the movement.[22] Michael Ruppert, Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker, and President of Voltaire Network Thierry Meyssan all published criticisms or pointed out purported anomalies of the mainstream account of the attacks. French author Jean-Charles Brisard and German authors Mathias Bröckers and Andreas von Bülow published books critical of media reporting and advancing the controlled demolition thesis of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers.

To reach a wider audience, there were a number of campaigns and demonstrations. In September 2002, the first "Bush Did It!" rallies and marches were held in San Francisco and Oakland, California organized by The All People's Coalition.[23] In October 2002 an anti-Bush parody of the dollar bill that includes addresses of websites which say they prove that 9/11 was an inside job, began being produced and handed out at protests and rallies.

The 911 Visibility Project was formed in 2003 and in January 2004 they organized a demonstration at Ground Zero; activists stood behind a large banner that read "The Bush Regime Engineered 9/11," and held signs reading "Support the Families: Stop 9/11 Cover-Up" and "Bush Knew". Leaflets were handed out pointing out supposed inconsistencies in the official account.[24] On March 20, 2004, more than 100,000 people turned out for an anti-war demonstration in New York. 9/11 truth activists distributed thousands of "Stop the 9-11 Cover-Up" signs and the movement received national press exposure.[25]

9/11 Commission Report reaction

To the consternation of the families and the "9/11 skeptics" in general, many of the questions that the Family Steering Committee put to the 9/11 Commission were allegedly not asked in either the hearings or in the Commission Report.[26] Lorie Van Auken, one of the "Jersey Widows", estimates that only 30% of their questions were answered in the final 9/11 Commission Report, published July 22, 2004. The story of the Families Movement and their monitoring of the commission is documented in the film 9/11: Press for Truth (2006).

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee produced a 25-page report summarizing the questions they had raised to the Commission, indicating which they believe had been answered satisfactorily, which they believe had been addressed but not answered satisfactorily, and which they believe had been generally ignored in or omitted from the Report.

In addition, the 339-page book The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions by David Ray Griffin, claimed that the report had either omitted information or distorted the truth, providing 115 examples. He summarizes his book in the article The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-page lie, claiming that "the entire Report is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true."[27]

On May 26, 2008 college professor Blair Gadsby began a protest and a hunger strike outside the offices of Senator and Republican Party Nominee for President John McCain's office demanding to see McCain. Arizona Republican State Senator Karen Johnson joined the protest in support. On June 10 Johnson with Gadsby as her guest and other 9/11 truth movement members in the audience spoke before the Arizona State Senate espousing the controlled demolition theory and supporting a reopening of the 9/11 investigation.[28][29] In response to a questioner McCain, who wrote the forward to a Popular Mechanics book aimed at debunking the theories,[30] said he did not meet Gadsby "Because I don't take well to threats".[31]

NIST Report reaction

Immediately after the collapses of the Towers and Building 7, eyewitness testimony referring to explosions, along with features of the collapses caught on film that resembled footage of controlled demolitions, led many people, including some news anchors and engineers, to suspect that explosives had been pre-planted within the buildings.[32] Within hours, the explanation that the impact damage and fires had led to a "progressive collapse" was presented in the mainstream media. And in weeks and months that followed, articles in scientific journals explained that the global collapses of the World Trade Center's Twin Towers were inevitable, with most asserting that the impact damage and intense heat of the fires caused the floor trusses and the vertical columns to weaken and fail, and the "pancake" effect of floors crashing down on top of one another brought down the entire structure.[33] The initial government investigation, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Report (May 2002), reached similar conclusions, but recommended a more thorough investigation.[34] The full Report into the collapses of the Twin Towers by the official investigators, NIST, was published in June 2005.

Following the NIST Report, numerous responses were written by members of the 9/11 truth movement. Many of these responses claimed that it ignored key evidence suggesting an explosive demolition, "distorted reality" by using deceptive language and diagrams, and attacked straw man arguments. The popular truth movement article by Jim Hoffman is entitled: Building a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century (December 2005).[35]

In the Fall of 2005, then-Brigham Young University Physics professor Steven Jones announced a paper criticizing the NIST Report and describing his hypothesis that the WTC towers had been intentionally demolished by explosives. This paper garnered a small amount of mainstream media attention, including an appearance by Jones on MSNBC. This was the first such programming on a major cable news station. Jones has to date failed to get his paper published in any established, peer reviewed mainstream science journal, other than publications produced by fellow truth movement members. Although Jones has been criticized by his university for publicizing his claims before vetting them through the approved peer review process and has since been placed on paid leave,[36][37] he continues to remain a focus of public interest for his 9/11 research.

In March 2007, members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Dr. Judy Wood, Dr. Morgan Reynolds, and attorney Jerry V. Leaphart submitted several requests for corrections to the NIST with the Department of Commerce.[38] However, the majority of researchers and activists in the movement have rejected the claims in these submissions and those who submitted them.[39][40][41][42] Accordingly, in April 2007, some 9/11 victims' family members and some members of the new Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice submitted an additional request for correction to NIST, containing their own views on the defects in the report.[43] NIST responded to this request in September 2007 supporting their original conclusions;[44] the originators of the request wrote back to them in October 2007, asking them to reconsider their response.[45]


The movement has attracted the attention of some major mainstream media publications.

While noting that the movement is "a mainstream political reality", Time magazine declared that "the [conspiracy] theories prompt small, reasonable questions that demand answers that are just too large and unreasonable to swallow."[46] The movement receives criticism from a variety of sources. Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone wrote that he has "two basic gripes with the 9/11 Truth Movement":

"The first is that it gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration. I have no doubt that every time one of those Loose Change dickwads opens his mouth, a Republican somewhere picks up five votes.... Secondly, it's bad enough that people in this country think Tim LaHaye is a prophet and Sean Hannity is an objective newsman. But if large numbers of people in this country can swallow 9/11 conspiracy theory without puking, all hope is lost."[47]

MIT engineering professor Thomas W. Eagar was at first unwilling to acknowledge the concerns of the movement, saying "if (the argument) gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." In response to physicist Steven Jones publishing a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eager stated:

"These people (in the 9/11 truth movement) use the "reverse scientific method"… they determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion."[48]


Since the publication of the official reports, a number of interconnected truth movement organizations have been formed to research the events of the day, to promote the 9/11 truth movement and 9/11 conspiracy theories to the general public, and to try and force a new investigation.


This organization was launched in June 2004 and has become the central portal for all the 9/11 truth movement organizations. It is run by Janice Matthews[49] (Executive Director), David Kubiak[50](International Campaign Advisor) and Mike Berger[51] (Media Coordinator), among others, and its advisory board includes Steven Jones, Barrie Zwicker and Faiz Khan.[52]

The organization co-sponsored the Zogby Polls that have shown an increasing number of people believing the government has covered-up the real story of 9/11.[53][54][55] A few of its sister and spin-off organizations include the 9/11 Visibility Project and Justice For 9/11. It also organizes gatherings and events, promotes "scholarly" research, warns about the discrediting effect of extreme alternative theories, and attempts to affect mainstream media coverage.[52]

In October 2004, an alliance of over 114 prominent Americans, and 48 family members of those killed on 9/11, signed the 911Truth.org statement, in which they demand a new and "deeper" investigation into the events of 9/11.[56]

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is a non-partisan association of architects, engineers, and affiliates, which will be asking the United States Congress to launch an independent investigation with subpoena power to investigate the collapses of the World Trade Center buildings One, Two, and Seven. The organization is running a petition drive toward that end and claims to have the signatures of over 600 architects and engineers on its website[57] as well as over 3,000 affiliates [58] (affiliates are other petition signers, including architect and engineering students). The organization’s website uses various media and technical resources to argue for the controlled demolition conspiracy theories. The organization was formed in 2007 by Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects.

Richard Gage, on behalf of AE911Truth, submitted written public comments to the National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Advisory Committee Meeting on December 18, 2007.[59]

In August 2008 NIST released their draft final report on the collapse of 7 World Trade Center concluding that the collapse was caused by fires originating from burning debris falling from the other towers and rejecting the Controlled Demolition Theory. In reaction to NIST Draft Final Report on WTC7, Richard Gage stated, “How much longer do we have to endure the coverup of how Building 7 was destroyed?”[60]

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

The original 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth', founded by Dr. James H. Fetzer and Dr. Steven Jones on December 15, 2005, was a group of individuals of varying backgrounds and expertise who rejected the mainstream media and government account of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Initially the group invited many ideas and hypotheses to be considered, however, leading members soon came to feel that the inclusion of some theories advocated by Fetzer—such as the use of directed energy weapons or small nuclear bombs to destroy the Twin Towers—were insufficiently supported by evidence and were exposing the group to ridicule. By December 2006, Dr. Steven Jones and several others set up a new scholars group titled Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, whose focus was in the use of the scientific method in analysis.[61] The original members took a vote on which group to join; of 226 members, 10 members voted to stay with the original group run by Fetzer, while 168 members voted to move to the new group.[62] By 2007, James Fetzer had been openly rejected by the 9/11 Truth Movement, banned from and criticized on popular forums[63][64][65] [66] and no longer invited to public 9/11 events.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, which formed in January 2007, is "a group of scholars and supporters endeavoring to address the unanswered questions of the September 11, 2001 attack" with a focus on scientific research and "the strongest, most credible research available." Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice was created when a majority of members of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth became concerned that claims being made by the group were not grounded in the scientific method, so left and established the new group.

Among the group's more than 700 members are:[67] American Institute of Architects architect Richard Gage, physics professor Steven E. Jones, Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, Peter Phillips, former Congressman Daniel Hamburg, and chemist Kevin Ryan. Many members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice believe the evidence suggests the World Trade Center Towers were destroyed through explosive demolition.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice members have been active in critique and engagement of the primary body charged with investigating the destruction of buildings that occurred during the 9/11/01 attack, The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency of the United States Department of Commerce. Members of the Scholars group, along with two 9/11 family members, submitted a Request for Correction to the NIST in April 2007, stating,

"the NIST Final Report violates information quality standards, draws inferences that are inconsistent with its own computer simulations and physical tests, and exhibits a significant bias toward a preordained conclusion while ignoring available evidence contrary to it."[68]

In December 2007, members Richard Gage, AIA, and attorney James Gourley, participated in the NIST/NCST Advisory Committee Meeting Teleconference[69] to comment on the ongoing investigation of World Trade Center Building 7.[70]And in a detailed letter to NIST on September 15, 2008, regarding its draft report on Building 7, members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice challenged NIST's claims underlying the destruction of 7 World Trade Center.[71]

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice also emphasize the importance of perception and propaganda in discussions about the 9/11/01 attack.[72] In particular, they state that misinformation, straw man arguments, and the label of 'conspiracy theorist' are used to discredit skeptics of the official account. They also have critiqued some theories within the movement as untenable, such as the mini-nuke claims[73][74] and the issue of the directed energy weapon.[75]

In 2008, several Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice members published essays in journals. In April 2008, a letter by members Jones, Legge, Ryan, Szamboti and Gourley, was published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal.[76] . In July 2008, an article by Ryan, Gourley and Jones was published in the Environmentalist.[77]And in October 2008, an essay describing what the author considers fundamental errors in a Bažant and Verdure paper was published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics by member James R. Gourley.[78]

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice publishes a "Members Contribution" page describing works by its members, maintains the Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Blog covering news items and events[79], and has a video channel on YouTube.[80]

In April 2009, as reported by major Danish newspapers,[81] Danish chemist and STJ member Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, some also STJ members, published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, titled, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'.[82] The paper concludes that chips consisting of unreacted and partially reacted super-thermite are present in the samples of the dust.

9-11 Research

9-11 Research is a documentary website of the 9/11/01 attack and its aftermath and body of original analysis based on that evidence, created by Jim Hoffman and supported by a consortium of volunteer researchers.[83] The main site explores the background to the attacks, the evidence of the attacks themselves, perceived anomalies in the official account, mainstream media coverage, and responses from scientific journals.

A related site, 911review.com, discusses the means of attack, examines motives, and describes historical examples of "false flag" operations. It also identifies misinterpretations of evidence, untenable alternative theories and hoaxes found in research articles and websites.[84] Another related site, wtc7.net, focuses exclusively on 7 World Trade Center.

9/11 Citizens Watch

9/11 Citizens Watch is a "citizen-led watchdog network established to support independent investigation, research and analysis into the attacks of September 11 and its political and economic aftermath."[85] The group was formed in 2002 by John Judge and Kyle Hence and, along with the Family Steering Committee, played an active role in calling for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, and monitoring the commission closely.[86]

Since the 9/11 Commission Report was published in 2004, 9/11 Citizens Watch has produced its own commentary, "The 9/11 Omission Report", and co-sponsored the 9/11 Citizens Commission and Zogby International polls surveying public opinion on the subject.[87]

Hispanic Victims Group

The Hispanic Victims Group is a group created after the 9/11 attacks and headed by William Rodriguez, who is now an outspoken member of the 9/11 truth movement. The group was a key force behind the 9/11 Commission,[86] and was among the Families Advisory Council for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation.[88] The group helped secure an amnesty for Hispanic illegal immigrants who died in the attacks.

We Are Change

We Are Change is a group of citizen activists who characterize the September 11 attacks as false flag events. Started in New York City in 2006, the group's members are known for their street actions and confrontations of allegedly corrupt officials, whom they accuse of lying about the events of 9/11. There are over 20 chapters of the group internationally.[89]

We Are Change hosted a five-day event for the sixth anniversary of 9/11 on September 11, 2007 in New York City. They raised over $11,000 for sick and dying first responders of the attacks[citation needed]

The organization staged a protest march at the 2008 Democratic National Convention. The group filmed protests in an effort to catch illegal action by protesters or police.[90]

NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative (2009)

The NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative is an effort to create a citizens' commission with subpoena powers to re-investigate the 9/11 attacks.[91] The group behind the initiative has the goal of putting a referendum on the 2009 General Election Ballot. By September 2008 the group had collected more than 30000 signatures. The effort has been controversial within the 9/11 Truth Movement.

The Initiative group says they want to make the initiative an issue in the 2009 race for New York City Mayor and get enough signatures as insurance against challenges to the petitions.[92][93]

The Initiative cites a $10,000,000 annual budget for the citizens' commission, the source of which has not been disclosed and calls for base annual salaries for each of its 15 commissioners of $100,000 plus expenses.

Several from within the 9/11 Truth Movement disagree with the initiative, due to the choice of Commissioners, the individuals involved, and issues such as accountability for the budget. One public point of concern has been the choice by the Initiative organizers of Commissioner Edgar Mitchell, a former NASA astronaut, consultant for the science-fiction TV series The X-Files,[94] and co-founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, who has stated beliefs supporting various UFO Conspiracy Theories[95][96][97][98][99] In a July 22, 2008 discussion on the Kerrang Radio Talk Show,[100] a blogger reports that:

"Mitchell made the startling... claim that the U.S., U.K., and other global governments have been involved in a vast cover-up conspiracy about UFOs... going into details about the intentions of the "aliens" that he claims are from other planets in the galaxy. ..."[101]

Activists have also questioned the reliability of individuals charged with overseeing the effort due to a history of disruptions and the repeated inclusion of discrediting speakers at public events.[102]


Members of the 9/11 truth organizations, such as the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, regularly hold meetings and conferences to discuss alternative theories about 9/11 and to strategize about how best to achieve their goals. Many of these conferences are organized by 911truth.org and some have been covered by the international media.[103][104]

9-11 Citizens Commission and other conferences

The 9-11 Citizens Commission was held in New York on September 9, 2004. This was a meeting by a group of United States citizens who were skeptical of the findings of the 9/11 Commission Report, and who purported to launch their own investigation into the attacks.

The event was billed as being modeled after the United States Congressional hearings which were conducted by the 9/11 Commission. A group of citizens heard testimony provided by witnesses, authors, experts and whistle blowers. The witnesses gave their testimony after having been sworn in, and were then questioned by the citizen panel. An audience and representatives from the press were also present.

Panelists included Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, local Imam Dr. Faiz Khan, and Bob McIlvaine, father of one of the victims of the 9/11 attacks. Other participants included Barry Zelman (who lost his brother in the attack), Mindy Kleinberg, Barrie Zwicker, Paul Thompson, former Diplomat Michael Springmann, Michael Ruppert and former blink-182 guitarist/vocalist Tom DeLonge.

Other conferences have been held throughout the United States and Europe. On July 22, 2005 Cynthia McKinney convened an all-day briefing on Capitol Hill focusing on 9/11. Several members of the 9/11 truth movement took part, including Michael Ruppert, Peter Dale Scott, David Ray Griffin and Barrie Zwicker. US Representative Carolyn C. Kilpatrick also attended.[105] On the Sixth Anniversary of the 9/11 attacks "Let's Make History 2007" was held in New York City.[106] On September 11, 2003, a 9/11 Truth Movement conference was held in Berlin.[107]

Smaller conferences have taken place in New York,[108] across America and in Europe.[109]

Internal critique

While there is general agreement within the movement that individuals within the United States government (but not necessarily the government as a whole) are responsible for the attacks, alternative theories differ about what may have happened. There have been a number of articles and responses written by members critiquing the methods and theories of other members, often in a scholarly format, as in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. There are also website articles reviewing some of the papers, books and films produced by other researchers. Several reviews have been produced including Jeremy Baker's In Plane Site: A Critical Review,[110] Michael Green's analysis of Loose Change in 2004[111] and Eric Salter's examination of conspiracy theories that don't involve any planes in 2006.[112]

While Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice advocates the use of the scientific method and engaging in civil research activities over public debate,[113] Jim Fetzer's group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has said that the scientific method is unnecessary and that any imaginable event is worthy of advocating to the public as a potential cause for the attacks. Reporting on a conference involving Fetzer's group, a Madison Times article stated: "By Sunday the conference had covered weather control, weapons from space, and the idea that the planes that struck the towers never existed at all."[114] Members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth have written papers on topics such as the idea that mininukes were used to destroy the WTC towers, or that energy weapons from space may have been used.[115][116]

Major media


One of the best known authors of 9/11 truth movement literature is theologian David Ray Griffin. His two books, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (March 2004), which outlined a methodical, deductive framework for researching 9/11, and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (October 2004), became best-sellers. His Debunking 9/11 Debunking (May 2007) looks at the way magazines such as Popular Mechanics have sought to debunk the alternative 9/11 theories. His most recent work, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the cover-up, and the exposé (2008), was written to update his original book, The New Pearl Harbor, reflecting information and insights from five major developments that have occurred since his original publication.

In September 2004, the interactive "Complete 9/11 Timeline" website by Paul Thompson, which is a collection of mainstream media reports presented chronologically, was made into the book The Terror Timeline.

Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil (October 2004) identified potential key insider suspects in the 9/11 attacks and provide an examination of their context: petroleum, geopolitics, narco-traffic, intelligence and militarism. Webster Tarpley's Synthetic Terror: Made in USA (2005) described a link between 9/11 and previous accusations of false flag state-sponsored terrorism such as Gladio or the Red Brigades.

Barrie Zwicker's Towers of Deception (October 2006) provides twenty-six "exhibits" of evidence proving "beyond a reasonable doubt" that 9/11 was an inside job. Zwicker also presents case histories of de facto censorship by mainstream media and examines the psychological phenomenon of denial, false flag operations, psychological warfare, and an "invisible government" that secretly manipulates events.


Popular films made by the 9/11 truth movement include: Loose Change:Final Cut (2007) by Korey Rowe, Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (2005) by Alex Jones, 911 Mysteries: Demolitions (2006), The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw (2004) by Barrie Zwicker, and 9/11: Blueprint for Truth (2007) and updated 2008 Edition (2008) by Richard Gage.

These documentaries present a range of alternate theories about how the attacks might have been carried out. In some cases, these theories have been rejected by other movement members.[117] In this case most objections raised against the movie were taken into consideration while creating the "Final Cut" version.

9/11 Press for Truth (2006) documents the struggle by the Jersey Widows to open a full investigation of the events, and their frustration while monitoring the 9/11 Commission as part of the Family Steering Committee. The film, partly based on The Terror Timeline by Paul Thompson, also looks at warnings received by the US government prior to September 11 and instances during the US invasion of Afghanistan where Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda managed to escape from US forces and flee into Pakistan.

Alex Jones has made a number of films about perceived historical instances of false flag terrorism and points out similarities between them and the 9/11 attack. He also promotes the view that the US government has used 9/11 to increase domestic control via the Patriot Act, Homeland Security Bill and militarization of police forces.

The Wayne movie theater in Wayne, Pennsylvania screens 9/11 truth movies weekly for free.[118]

Mainstream media coverage

See also


  1. ^ "Paying Attention to 9/11 Related Alternative News". http://911blogger.com/. 
  2. ^ "Concerned Citizens, 9/11 Questions Meetups, events, clubs and groups in your area". http://9-11.meetup.com/. 
  3. ^ "WE ARE CHANGE". http://wearechange.org/. 
  4. ^ a b "We Are Change LA: News". http://wearechangela.org/. 
  5. ^ "American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda". http://www.americanscholarssymposium.org/. 
  6. ^ Lev Grossman (2006-09-03). "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away". Time Magazine. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html. 
  7. ^ Tarpley, Webster G. (2005-07-12). "The London Bombs, The Rogue Network And Iran". http://www.rense.com/general66/eed.htm. Retrieved on 2007-10-31. 
  8. ^ "War Games on 9/11 Research". http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/wargames.html. 
  9. ^ "Motives for the 9/11 Attacks". http://911review.com/motive/index.html. 
  10. ^ "'H & C' Update: Supporter Defends Controversial Univ. Lecturer's Theories About 9/11". Fox News. 2006-07-12. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203415,00.html. Retrieved on 2007-10-25. 
  11. ^ "911truth.org: About Us". http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20061014120445472#about. 
  12. ^ "The "Two-Step" Approach". http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050204132153814#2step. 
  13. ^ Film: Press for Truth
  14. ^ "Unanswered Questions: Thinking of Ourselves". UnansweredQuestions.Org. http://web.archive.org/web/20060106045529/http://www.unansweredquestions.org/june10.shtml. 
  15. ^ 9/11 Commission Report Homepage
  16. ^ "9/11 Independent Commission: Questions". 9/11 Independent Commission. http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html. 
  17. ^ 9/11 Watchdog Group Demands End to Stonewalling and Cover-up and Launches D.C. Advertising Campaign Calling for Sworn Public Testimony from President Bush and Clinton and Advisor RiceMarch 22, 2004
  18. ^ "Questioning the War on Terrorism". Community Currency. Org. http://www.communitycurrency.org/9-11.html. 
  19. ^ Dana Bash, Jon Karl & John King (2002-01-29). "CNN.com - Bush asks Daschle to limit Sept. 11 probes". CNN. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/. 
  20. ^ "Transcript of appearance of REP. CYNTHIA ANN MCKINNEY (D-Ga.) on KPFA's Flashpoints with Dennis Bernstein. March 25, 2002". http://www.rise4news.net/McKinney.html. 
  21. ^ Alex Jones Predicts 9/11-like Terrorist attack in U.S. on his July 25, 2001 Show at Google Video
  22. ^ "American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 & The Neo-Con Agenda". American Scholars Symposium. http://www.americanscholarssymposium.org. 
  23. ^ "An Overview of the Truth Movement, Carol Brouillet". http://www.communitycurrency.org/historicaloverview.html. 
  24. ^ Group Calls For "9/11 Solidarity Actions" Around the World January 16, 2004
  25. ^ 9/11 Truth Contingent Marches at NYC Antiwar Demo March 20, 2004
  26. ^ "Justice for 9/11: Complaint & Petition". Justice for 9/11. http://justicefor911.org/Appendix4_FSCQuestionRatings_111904.php. 
  27. ^ "David Ray Griffin's "The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-page Lie"". http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050523112738404. 
  28. ^ Lawmaker asks McCain to talk with 9/11 theorists Arizona Republic June 3, 2008
  29. ^ State senator: WTC destroyed by bombs, not just planes Arizona Capital Times June 10, 2008
  30. ^ Forward to Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts by Senator John McCain
  31. ^ McCain doesn't want to impeach Bush The Raw Story June 26, 2008
  32. ^ "The opinion of demolition expert Van Romero on September 11, 2001". http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/retractions/romero.html#ref1. 
  33. ^ "Why did the World Trade Center collapse? - A simple analysis". http://web.archive.org/web/20011031095744/http://www.tam.uiuc.edu/news/200109wtc/. 
  34. ^ "World Trade Center Building Performance Study (FEMA)". http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm. 
  35. ^ Jim Hoffman. "Building a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century". http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html. 
  36. ^ Walch, Tad (2006-09-08). "BYU places "9/11 truth" professor on paid leave". Deseret Morning News. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645199800,00.html. 
  37. ^ Sullivan, Will (2006-09-11). "BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor". US News & World Report. http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060911/11conspiracy.htm. 
  38. ^ "FY 2007 Information Quality Request for Corrections". http://www.ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/Information_Quality/PROD01_002619. 
  39. ^ Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (2007-04-10). "Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report" (pdf). http://stj911.org/actions/NIST_DQA_Petition.pdf. Retrieved on 2007-04-14. 
  40. ^ "Journal of 9/11 Studies". http://journalof911studies.com/letters.html. Retrieved on 2007-04-18. 
  41. ^ "9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples". http://www.911blogger.com/node/6531. Retrieved on 2007-04-18. 
  42. ^ "Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11". http://www.911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html. Retrieved on 2007-08-27. 
  43. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice request for correction to NIST" (PDF). http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/RFCtoNISTbyMcIlvaineDoyleJonesRyanGageSTJ.pdf. 
  44. ^ "NIST response to request for correction" (PDF). http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf. 
  45. ^ "Appeal Letter to NIST" (PDF). http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/AppealLetterToNISTGourleyEtAl.pdf. 
  46. ^ Lev Grossman (2006-09-03). "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away". Time Magazine. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html. 
  47. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2006). "The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper". Politics. Rolling Stone. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies/1. Retrieved on 2006-09-29. 
  48. ^ Walch, Tad (2006). "Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones". Utah news. Deseret News Publishing Company. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645200098,00.html. Retrieved on 2006-09-09. 
  49. ^ William M. Arkin (2006-05-26). "9/11 Truth? I Don't Think So". The Washington Post. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/05/911_truth_i_dont_think_so.html. 
  50. ^ "Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act...". Zogby International. 2004-08-30. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855. 
  51. ^ "Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Explanations; "Young and Restless" Star Weighs in on Political Topics". CNN. 2006-03-22. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/22/sbt.01.html. 
  52. ^ a b "911truth.org "About Us"". http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20061014120445472#about. 
  53. ^ Zogby International (2004-08-30). "Poll: 50% of NYC Says U.S. Govt Knew". 9/11 Truth. Org. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20040830120349841. 
  54. ^ "American Thinking Toward The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks". Zogby International. 2006-05-24. http://zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231. 
  55. ^ "Zogby Poll (May 2006)". http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231. 
  56. ^ "Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11". 9/11 Truth. Org. 2004-10-26. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633. 
  57. ^ "Sign the Petition". Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. http://www.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php. Retrieved on 2009-02-15. "On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7." 
  58. ^ "Petition Signer Supporters of AE911Truth.org". Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. http://www.ae911truth.org/supporters.php?g=XMISC. Retrieved on 2009-02-15. "Select A Group to View" 
  59. ^ "NIST and the World Trade Center". Wtc.nist.gov. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTACmeetingDec18_2007.htm. Retrieved on 2008-09-05. 
  60. ^ [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?_r=2&bl&ex=1219464000&en=920506ca2f959545&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin&oref=slogin Fire, Not Explosives, Felled 3rd Tower on 9/11, Report Says]
  61. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice". Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. http://stj911.org/index.html. 
  62. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice". http://stj911.org/faq.html#quest7. 
  63. ^ hsgsj (February, 27, 2007). "Dr. James Fetzer and his "Lying Eyes"". 911blogger.com. http://www.911blogger.com/node/6497. 
  64. ^ Arabesque (February, 28, 2007). "9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples". 911blogger.com. http://www.911blogger.com/node/6531. 
  65. ^ Dem Bruce Lee Stylez! (March 15, 2008). "ALERT: FETZER SPEAKING AT RON PAUL MARCH!! Von Kleist to MC". TruthAction.org. http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3205&highlight=fetzer. 
  66. ^ Victoria Ashley (August 13, 2007). "Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11, James Fetzer". 911Research.com. http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html#fetzer. 
  67. ^ STH911 Members
  68. ^ "Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report". http://stj911.org/press_releases/NIST.html. 
  69. ^ "NCST Advisory Committee Meeting, December 18, 2007". http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTACmeetingDec18_2007.htm. 
  70. ^ "NIST/NCST Advisory Committee Meeting: video with slides and speaker names". http://www.911blogger.com/node/13078. 
  71. ^ "Scientists, Scholars, Architects & Engineers respond to NIST". 2008-10-24. http://stj911.org/blog/?p=53. Retrieved on 2008-10-24. 
  72. ^ "Perception and Propaganda". http://www.stj911.org/perception/index.html. 
  73. ^ Jones, Steven E. (2006-09-28). "Testing the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers". 9/11 Scholars for Truth. http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/MiniNukeHypoth_Jones_300906.html. 
  74. ^ "(Debunking) Theories that Nuclear Weapons Destroyed the Twin Towers". 9/11 Research. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/nuclear.html. 
  75. ^ "(Debunking) Theories that Directed Electromagnetic Energy Weapons Destroyed the Twin Towers". 9/11 Research. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/energybeam.html. 
  76. ^ Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley (2008). "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction". Bentham Science Publishers. http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM. 
  77. ^ Kevin R. Ryan, James R. Gourley, Steven E. Jones (2008). "Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials "". Springer Netherlands, The Environmentalist, Online First. http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/. 
  78. ^ James R. Gourley (2008). "Discussion of "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" by Zdenek P. Bažant and Mathieu Verdure". ASCE Publications, Reston, VA. http://ascelibrary.aip.org/dbt/dbt.jsp?KEY=JENMDT&Volume=134&Issue=10#DISCUSSIONS%20AND%20CLOSURES. 
  79. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Blog". stj.com. http://stj911.org/blog/. 
  80. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Video Channel". YouTube.com. http://www.youtube.com/STJ911?gl=GB&hl=en-GB. 
  81. ^ Politiken: Konspirationsteorier om 9/11 får nyt liv, Jyllands-Posten: Forskere: Sprængstof i støvet fra WTC, Ekstra Bladet: Mystik om WTC: Nano-termit i tårne, Kristeligt Dagblad: Dansker genopliver konspirationsteori om 11. september, Videnskab: Dansk forsker: Eksplosivt nanomateriale fundet i støvet fra World Trade Center. The journal Videnskab is sponsored by the Danish Ministry for Science and Technology.
  82. ^ Harrit, Niels H. "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" (html). http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm. Retrieved on 2009-04-03. 
  83. ^ "9/11 Research - Who we are". http://911research.wtc7.net/re911/about.html#who. 
  84. ^ "Parade of Errors". http://911review.com/errors/index.html. 
  85. ^ About 9/11 CitizensWatch
  86. ^ a b c The Christian Science Monitor - A key force behind the 9/11 commission
  87. ^ Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York's Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals August 30, 2004
  88. ^ "Chairman Whitehead Announces LMDC Advisory Councils". Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. 2002-01-31. http://www.renewnyc.com/displaynews.aspx?newsid=5a791121-7404-4553-92ec-19c9b64237ad. 
  89. ^ We Are Change
  90. ^ Afternoon march focuses on 9/11 attacks Rocky Mountain News August 25, 2008
  91. ^ NYC Ballot Initiative Mission Statement
  92. ^ Pile o’ 9/11 petitions The Villager September 10-16 2008 issue
  93. ^ NYC Ballot Initiative Home Webpage
  94. ^ Yes, Aliens Really Are Out There, Says the Man on the Moon
  95. ^ Top reasons why 9/11 Truth activists will NOT support the current ballot initiative, truthaction.org
  96. ^ Put Les aside for a moment, 911blogger forum
  97. ^ "Edgar Mitchell On The UFO Cover-Up" (subscription fee required). UFO UpDates. 1998-10-11. http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/oct/m12-010.shtml. Retrieved on 2007-02-07. 
  98. ^ "Edgar Mitchell, Ph.D. - UFO Researchers & People". UFOEvidence.org. http://www.etcontact.net/Researchers/Detail44.htm. Retrieved on 2007-02-07. 
  99. ^ Waveney Ann Moore (2004-02-18). "Astronaut: We've had visitors". St. Petersburg Times. http://www.sptimes.com/2004/02/18/Neighborhoodtimes/Astronaut__We_ve_had_.shtml. Retrieved on 2007-10-14. 
  100. ^ Astronaut Says Aliens Are Real
  101. ^ Edgar Mitchell's "Disclosure": Lunacy, Truth, or Advertising?
  102. ^ Top reasons why 9/11 Truth activists will NOT support the current ballot initiative
  103. ^ a b Canada National Post: A theory that just won't die
  104. ^ 9/11:Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future. Chicago, June 2-4, 2006
  105. ^ Cynthia McKinney Brings 9/11 Back to Congress 2005-07-29
  106. ^ Let's Make History 2007 Buy Tickets- Online Box Office
  107. ^ Historical Overview of 9-11 Truth Movement
  108. ^ New York 9/11 Truth Events
  109. ^ British 9/11 Truth Campaign Calendar
  110. ^ In Plane Site: A Critical Review
  111. ^ 'Loose Change' An analysis, by Michael B. Green
  112. ^ Critical Review of WTC "No Plane" Theories
  113. ^ STJ911 - About Page
  114. ^ 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too by Ben Popper, Madison Times
  115. ^ Morgan Reynolds' Encumbered Case for Controlled Demolition
  116. ^ http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200702
  117. ^ "Loose Change" An analysis August 3, 2005
  118. ^ Able Danger: 9/11 Truth Night In Wayne, PA Randy LaBasso for OpEdNews December 30, 2008
  119. ^ Jennifer Senior (2006-09-15). "The Memorial Warriors". New York Magazine. http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/n_7691/index1.html. 
  120. ^ Nancy Jo Sales (August, 2006). "Click Here for Conpiracy". Vanity Fair. http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2006/08/loosechange200608. 
  121. ^ Jonathan Curiel (2006-09-03). "The Conspiracy To Rewrite 9/11". San Francisco Gate. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/03/INGR0KRCBA1.DTL. 
  122. ^ "Who really blew up the twin towers?". The Guardian. 2006-09-05. http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html. 
  123. ^ Jaya Narain (2006-09-06). "Fury as academics claim 9/11 was "inside job"". Daily Mail. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770. 
  124. ^ The Truth Is Out There - Part I Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008
  125. ^ The Truth Is Out There - Part II Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008
  126. ^ The Truth Is Out There - Part III Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008
  127. ^ [ Rachel Meador (2008-09-11). "Skeptics debate 9/11 events". The Daily Texan. http://www.dailytexanonline.com/skeptics_debate_9_11_events. ]

External links

Personal tools