The9/11 truth movement encompasses a disparate group of adherents to a set of overlappingconspiracy theories that dispute the general consensus of theSeptember 11 attacks that a group ofAl-Qaeda terrorists had hijacked four airliners and crashed them intothe Pentagon and theoriginal World Trade Center Twin Towers, which consequentlycollapsed. The primary focus is on missed information that adherents allege is not adequately explained in the officialNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reports, such as the collapse of7 World Trade Center. They suggest acover-up and, at the least, complicity byinsiders.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
They analyze evidence from the attacks, discussdifferent theories about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] Some of the organizations assert that there is evidence that individuals within theUnited States government may have been either responsible for or knowingly complicit in the September 11 attacks. Motives suggested by the movement include the use of the attacks as a pretext to fight wars inIraq andAfghanistan and to create opportunities to curtail Americancivil liberties.[2][16] Support for the movement is negligible from professionals in relevant fields, such as civil and aerospace engineering.[17]
"9/11 truth movement" is a term that has been applied to loosely affiliated[16][18] organizations and individuals that question whether the United States government, agencies of the United States or individuals within such agencies were either responsible for or purposefully complicit in the September 11 attacks.[3][4][5][6][7][19][20][21] The term is also being used by the adherents of the movement,[22][23] who call themselves "9/11 skeptics",[24] "truth activists",[25] or "9/11 truthers",[26] while generally rejecting the term "conspiracy theorists".[18][25]
Adherents of the movement come from diverse social backgrounds.[1][23][25] The movement draws adherents from people of diverse political beliefs includingliberals,conservatives, andlibertarians.[3][20][25]
Lev Grossman ofTime magazine has stated that support for the movement is not a "fringe phenomenon", but "a mainstream political reality."[22] Others, such as Ben Smith ofPolitico and theMinneapolis Star Tribune have stated that the movement has been "relegated to the fringe".[27][28]The Washington Post editorial staff went further describing the movement as "lunatic fringe."[29] Mark Fenster, aUniversity of Florida law professor and author of the bookConspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture,[30] says that "the amount of organisation" of the movement is significantly stronger than the organization of the movement related to doubts about the official account of theassassination of John F. Kennedy,[3] though this is likely the result ofnew media technologies, such as online social networks, blogs, etc.
The movement is active in the US as well as in other countries.[15]
In 2004,John Buchanan ran for president on a 9/11 truth platform.[31][32]Jeff Boss ran in the 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020 US presidential elections on platforms promoting the movement.[33]
In a 2011 article inSkeptical Inquirer,Jamie Bartlett and Carl Miller gave an overview and analyzed the members of the 9/11 truth movement. The authors found that people involved in this movement, which seemingly is a disparate group with very diversified backgrounds, could be classified into three groups. They join the movement for different reasons, loosely self-assemble to fill different roles, and are united by their shared mistrust in experts and the establishment (government and reputable sources of knowledge) and have a conspiratorial stance. Through their engagement, they each find their own fulfillment and satisfaction. Together, they contribute to the persistence, resilience, and exaggerated claims of acceptance (in general public) of the movement.[34]
Many believers in the movement say that US government insiders played a part in the attacks, or may have known the attacks were imminent, and did nothing to alert others or stop them.[24] Some within the movement who argue that insiders within the US government were directly responsible for the September 11 attacks often allege that the attacks were planned and executed in order to provide the US with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East, and, by extension, as a means of consolidating.[22][23]
According to these allegations, this would have given the Bush administration the justification for more widespread abuses of civil liberties and to invade Afghanistan and Iraq to ensure future supplies of oil.[24] In some cases, even in the mainstream media, "hawks" in theWhite House, especially then vice-presidentDick Cheney and members of theProject for the New American Century, the neoconservative think-tank, have been accused of either being aware of, or involved in, the alleged plot.[35][36][37]
A relatively common, but not exclusive view within the movement alleges that the buildings of the World Trade Center were destroyed bycontrolled demolition.[1][20][38][39]
The Internet plays a large role both in the communication between adherents and between local groups of the 9/11 truth movement and in the dissemination of the views of the movement to the public at large.[2][3][6][22][36]Colorado Public Television has aired several films produced by the movement such as9/11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out, a documentary produced byArchitects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which once was one of the "most shared" and "most watched" programs on the nationalPBS site. The station's airing of such films has been controversial for the affiliate and PBS.[40][41]
Months before the attack, in June and July 2001, two of the conspiracy theory's earliest proponents,William Cooper andAlex Jones, claimed that the US government planned terror attacks that would be blamed onOsama bin Laden. Both began broadcasting the "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory on the day of the 9/11 attacks.[42][43] Jones went on to become "one of the loudest voices in the self-styled 9/11 Truth movement".[44]
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, different interpretations of the events that questioned the account given by the US government were published. Among others,Michael Ruppert[45] and Canadian journalistBarrie Zwicker,[46] published criticisms or pointed out purported anomalies of the accepted account of the attacks. French authorJean-Charles Brisard[47] and German authorsMathias Bröckers[48] andAndreas von Bülow[49] published books critical of media reporting and advancing the controlled demolition thesis of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. In September 2002, the first "Bush Did It!" rallies and marches were held inSan Francisco andOakland, California, organized by The All People's Coalition.[50]
In October 2004, the organization 9/11 Truth released a statement, signed by nearly 200 people, including many relatives of people who perished on September 11, 2001, that calls for an investigation into the attacks. It also asserted that unanswered questions would suggest that people within the administration of President George W. Bush may have deliberately allowed the attacks to happen. ActorEdward Asner, former presidential candidateRalph Nader, former congresswomanCynthia McKinney, former assistant secretary of housingCatherine Austin Fitts, authorRichard Heinberg, professorsRichard Falk of the University of California,Mark Crispin Miller of New York University, and others signed the statement. In 2009,Van Jones, a former advisor to President Obama, said he had not fully reviewed the statement before he signed and that the petition did not reflect his views "now or ever".[51][52][53]
In 2006,Steven E. Jones, who became a leading advocate of the demolition theory,[2] published the paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?".[54] He was placed on paid leave byBrigham Young University following what they described as Jones's "increasingly speculative and accusatory" statements in September 2006, pending a review of his statements and research. Six weeks later, Jones retired from the university.[55] Skepticism arose as to the scientific claims made by Jones and the efficacy of the peer-review process involved in the publication of his hypotheses, and conspiracy theorists responded to criticism by positing still more elaborate ostensible cover-ups.[56]
In the same year, 61 legislators in the US state of Wisconsin signed a petition calling for the dismissal of aUniversity of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett, after he joined the groupScholars for 9/11 Truth. Citingacademic freedom, the universityprovost declined to take action against Barrett.[57][58][59]
Several organizations of family members of people who have died in the attacks have called for an independent investigation into the attacks.[60] In 2009, a group of people, including 9/11 truth activistLorie Van Auken and others who have lost friends or relatives in the attack, appealed to the City of New York to investigate the disaster. The New York City Coalition for Accountability Now collected signatures to require theNew York City Council to place the creation of an investigating commission on the November 2009 election ballot.[61] The group collected more than enough signatures to put the proposal before the voters, but New York Supreme Court Justice Edward Lehner stated that the petition overstepped what is allowable by city law, and ruled that, despite wording in the petition to allow for elements ruled invalid to be stricken, it would not be allowed to appear on the ballot.[62][63]
According to some adherents of the 9/11 truth movement, many of the questions that the9/11 Family Steering Committee put to the9/11 Commission, chaired by formerNew Jersey GovernorThomas Kean, were not asked in either the hearings nor in the Commission Report.[64]Lorie Van Auken, one of theJersey Girls, estimates that only 30% of their questions were answered in the final 9/11 Commission Report, published July 22, 2004.[citation needed]
The9/11 Family Steering Committee produced a website 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.[65]
In addition,The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, written byDavid Ray Griffin, claimed the report had either omitted information or distorted the truth, providing 115 examples of his allegations.[66][67][68] Griffin has characterized the 9/11 Commission Report as "a 571-page lie".[69]
On May 26, 2008, adjunct religious studies professor Blair Gadsby began a protest and a hunger strike outside the offices ofSenator andRepublican Party nominee for PresidentJohn McCain's office requesting McCain meet with the principal scientists and leaders of the 9/11 truth movement, specificallyRichard Gage, Steven E. Jones, and David Ray Griffin. McCain had written the foreword to the bookDebunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts, published by the magazinePopular Mechanics.[70]
Arizona Republican State SenatorKaren 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 theArizona State Senate espousing thecontrolled demolition theory and supporting a reopening of the 9/11 investigation.[14][70]
Following the initial government investigation, theFederal Emergency Management Agency issued FEMA 403 in May 2002, titledWorld Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations. TheNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) subsequently issued final reports on building collapse in 2005 and 2008.
Numerous responses to these reports were written by members of the 9/11 truth movement. Many of these responses claimed that it[which?] ignored key evidence suggesting an explosive demolition, "distorted reality" by using deceptive language and diagrams, and depicted the report(s)[which?] as consisting ofstraw man arguments, such as the 2005 article byJim Hoffman entitledBuilding a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century.[77]
In late 2005, Steven E. Jones, then a professor atBrigham Young University, announced a paper criticizing the NIST Report and describing his hypothesis that the WTC towers had been intentionally demolished by explosives. This paper garnered some mainstream media attention, including an appearance by Jones onMSNBC. This was the first such programming on a major cable news station. Jones was criticized by his university for making his claims public before vetting them through the approved peer review process. He was placed on paid leave and has since retired.[55][78][79]
Accordingly, in April 2007, some 9/11 victims' family members and some members of the newScholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice submitted an additional request for correction to NIST, containing their own views on the defects in the report.[80] NIST responded to this request in September 2007 supporting their original conclusions;[81] the originators of the request wrote back to them in October 2007, asking them to reconsider their response.[clarification needed]
Members of the movement distributed pamphlets that they say told the "truth" about the attacks at theNational September 11 Memorial & Museum when the Museum opened in May 2014.[82]
Since the publication of the official reports, a number of interconnected 9/11 truth movement organizations have been formed.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an organization of architectural and engineering professionals[83] who support theWorld Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories and are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7.[10][84] The group is collecting signatures for a petition to theUnited States Congress that demands "a truly independent investigation with subpoena power" of theSeptember 11 attacks, which, according to the organization, should include an inquiry into the possible use of explosives in the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.[85][86] Richard Gage, aSan Francisco Bay area-based architect,[87] foundedArchitects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth in 2006.[2][88]
Investigations by theFederal Emergency Management Agency and theNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have concluded that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impacts of the planes and of the fires that resulted from them.[54][89] Gage criticized NIST for not having investigated the complete sequence of thecollapse of the World Trade Center towers inits report,[90] and claims "the official explanation of the total destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers has explicitly failed to address the massive evidence forexplosive demolition".[91] To support its position, the group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth points to the "free fall" pace of the collapse of the buildings, the "lateral ejection of steel", and to the "mid-air pulverization of concrete", the "molten metal", among other things.[92]
9/11 Truth was launched in June 2004 and has become a central portal for many 9/11 truth movement organizations. It is run by Janice Matthews (executive director),[93][94] David Kubiak (International Campaign Advisor)[95] and Mike Berger (Media Coordinator),[96] among others, and its advisory board includes Steven E. Jones andBarrie Zwicker.[97]
The organization co-sponsored opinion polls conducted by the U.S. market research and opinion polling firmZogby International that have shownsubstantial numbers of people believing the government did not tell the full truth about the September 11 attacks.
The original Scholars for 9/11 Truth was founded byJames H. Fetzer, a former philosophy professor, and physicist Steven E. Jones, in December 2005. It was a group of people of differing backgrounds and expertise who rejected the mainstream media and government account of theSeptember 11 attacks.[3][98] 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 miniature nuclear bombs to destroy the Twin Towers—were insufficiently supported by evidence and were exposing the group to ridicule. By December 2006, Jones and others set up a new scholars group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, which described its focus as the use of scientific analysis.[99] The original members took a vote on which group to join and the majority voted to move to the new group.[100]
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice (STJ) formed in January 2007 and is a self-described "group of scholars and supporters endeavoring to address the unanswered questions of the September 11, 2001 attack through scientific research and public education".[101] The group is composed of more than 900 members,[102] includingRichard Gage, Steven E. Jones,Jim Hoffman,David Ray Griffin, and former CongressmanDaniel Hamburg. Most members support the conspiracy theory that the World Trade Center Towers and the third skyscraper, WTC 7, were destroyed throughexplosive demolition.[citation needed]
In 2008 and 2009, several members of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice published essays in science and engineering journals. In April 2008, a letter by some of its members, was published inThe Open Civil Engineering Journal.[103] In July 2008, an article by Steven E. Jones and others was published inThe Environmentalist.[104]
In October 2008, a comment by STJ member James R. Gourley describing what he considers fundamental errors in a Bažant and Verdure paper was included in an issue of theJournal of Engineering Mechanics.[105] In April 2009, Danish chemist and STJ member Niels H. Harrit, of theUniversity of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, including some STJ members, published a paper inThe Open Chemical Physics Journal, entitledActive Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. The paper, which caused the editor and only peer-reviewer, Professor Pileni, to resign, claiming it was published without her knowledge,[106] concludes that chips consisting of unreacted and partially reactednano-thermite ("super-thermite") appear to be present in samples of the dust.[74][unreliable source?][107]
9/11 Citizens Watch was formed in 2002 by John Judge and Kyle Hence and, along with theFamily Steering Committee, played an active role in calling for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, and monitoring the commission closely.[108]
Founded in 2011 by SenatorMike Gravel, the 9/11 Commission Campaign's objective is to enact subpoena-capable, state-level commissions through state ballot initiatives, namely in Oregon, Alaska and California.[109] These commissions are envisioned as citizen-driven, independent organizations that would form a semi-unified grassroots national presence by exercisingjoint powers authority.
The Hispanic Victims Group is a group created after the 9/11 attacks, founded byWilliam Rodriguez,[110] a supporter of the 9/11 truth movement. The group was one of the key forces behind the creation of the 9/11 Commission.[108] William Rodriguez, as founder of the group, was a member of the Families Advisory Council for theLower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC).[111]
Members of the 9/11 truth organizations, such as 911truth.org and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, held meetings and conferences to discuss ongoing research about 9/11 and to strategize about how best to achieve their goals during the early 2000s and 2010s. Many of these conferences are organized by 911truth.org, and some have been covered by the international media.[112]
Matt Taibbi ofRolling Stone assessed that the movement "gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration", and expressed concerns about the number of people who believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories.[113]
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) engineering professorThomas W. Eagar was at first unwilling to acknowledge the concerns of the movement, saying that "if (the argument) gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate". In response to Steven E. Jones' publication of a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eagar said that adherents of the 9/11 truth movement would use the reverse scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, as 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".[114]
Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers",Bill Moyers has quoted journalist Robert Parry by stating that the theorists "... threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right's sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the 'truthers' cherry-picked a few supposed 'anomalies' to build an 'inside-job' story line".[115]
Al-Qaeda has sharply criticized Iran's ex-president,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over his suggestions that the US government was behind the September 11 attacks, dismissing his comments as "ridiculous".[116]
Someskeptics[117]—who oppose conspiracy as thea priori explanation to events, and who find most of the questions posed by the Truthers to be either easily answered[118] or based on misleading or false ideas[119]—have suggested that some of the Truthers are knowingly disseminating false information with no care for the grieving families, and have accordingly called them "disrespectful" or even "sickos".[120]
Films made by people associated with the 9/11 truth movement include:
the movement known as "9/11 Truth", a society of skeptics and scientists who believe the government was complicit in the terrorist attacks.
an army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement
The loose agglomeration known as the '9/11 Truth Movement'
a group known as the 9/11 Truth Movement
A large group of people – collectively called the 9/11 Truth Movement
The '9/11 Truth Movement,' as it is now commonly called
two leading voices of what's known as the 9/11 truth movement
Jones is a physics professor involved in what's called the "9-11 Truth Movement".
a larger coalition known as the "9/11 Truth Movement"
a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement
On September 1, 2000, before Mr. Bush took office, the Project for a New American Century proposed the invasions, without provocation or attack, of Afghanistan and Iraq. The motive? 'to protect America's oil interests.' The signatories to that sinister plan – Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle, to name but a few – cleverly and dishonorably set the stage for all that would follow, including the horrifying spectacle of 9/11, when they noted that since well-fed and materially-comfortable Americans would lack the will and focus to fight such 'interventionist' wars – now known as 'The Bush Doctrine' – there must be a galvanizing incident on the order of Pearl Harbor.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)[...] Barrett will teach a class on Islam at the University of Wisconsin this fall, over the protests of more than 60 state legislators. Jones is a tenured physicist at Brigham Young University [...] co-founder James Fetzer, a retired philosophy professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth [...]
| Key topics | |
|---|---|
| Groups | |
| Film and TV | |
| Books | |
