Misplaced Pages

9/11 conspiracy theories: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:29, 26 January 2007 view sourceBov (talk | contribs)1,905 edits removing bogus template - yawn - again← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:40, 25 December 2024 view source Yaktam (talk | contribs)78 edits The original text stated that Norad did not receive warning of the hijack of Flight 93 prior to its crash. Reference 74 upon which this statement was based, leads us to an online copy of Anthony Summers's "The eleventh day" that states that Norad did indeed know about the hijack prior to its crash.Tag: Visual edit 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Conspiracy theories regarding the September 11 attacks}}
{{Sep11}}
{{pp-semi-indef}}
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=April 2020}}


] of the two ] towers and the nearby ] (in this photo, the brown building to the left of the towers) is a major focus of ] conspiracy theories.]]
Since the ''']''', a variety of ''']''' have emerged which contradict the ] account of those events. The theories typically include suggestions that individuals in (or associated with) the ] knew of the impending attacks and refused to act on that knowledge, or that the attacks were a ] carried out with the intention of stirring up the passions and buying the allegiance of the American people. Some conspiracy theorists have claimed that the ] was the ]. Some also contend that a commercial ] did not crash into ], and that ] was shot down.
The mainstream ] does not support the controlled demolition hypothesis and U.S. officials, mainstream journalists, and mainstream researchers have concluded that ] rests solely with ].<ref>Bazant, Zdenek P. and Mathieu Verdure. "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" in ''Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE'', in press. PDF On page 3 Bazant and Verdure write "As generally accepted by the community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering (though not by a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives), the failure scenario was as follows..." (continues with a four-part scenario of progressive structural failure).</ref>


There are various ] that attribute the preparation and execution of the ] against the ] to parties other than, or in addition to, ].<ref name=Norman>{{cite web |author=Norman, Joshua |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/9-11-conspiracy-theories-wont-stop/ |title=9/11 conspiracy theories won't stop |work=] |date=September 11, 2011 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref> These include the theory that high-level government officials had ]. Government investigations and independent reviews have rejected these theories.<ref name=popularmechanics.com /><ref name=Purdue /> Proponents of these theories assert that there are inconsistencies in the commonly accepted version, or that there exists evidence that was ignored, concealed, or overlooked.<ref name=VF>{{cite web |url=https://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2006/08/loosechange200608 |title=Click Here For Conspiracy |author=Sales, Nancy Jo |publisher=Vanity Fair |date=July 9, 2006 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>
==Origins and reception==
] struck the south tower of the WTC.]]
Since the ] attacks, a number of websites, books, and films have challenged the mainstream account of the attacks. Although mainstream media has stated that al-Qaeda "]" to execute the attacks on the World Trade Center in the legal sense, a 9/11 ] generally refers to a belief in a broad conspiracy, in which the attacks were executed by powerful groups often including government agencies or an alleged ] global network. Many groups and individuals challenging the official account identify as part of the ].


The most prominent conspiracy theory is that the ] and ] were the ] rather than structural failure due to impact and fire.<ref>{{cite book |last=Summers |first=Anthony |title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden |url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ |url-access=registration |year=2011 |publisher=Ballantine |location=New York |isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9 |page= |author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |date=February 3, 2005 |title=Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report – The World Trade Center |journal=Popular Mechanics |publisher=Hearst Communication |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center |quote=That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.}}</ref> Another prominent belief is that ] was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government,<ref>{{cite book |last=Summers |first=Anthony |title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden |url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ |url-access=registration |year=2011 |publisher=Ballantine |location=New York |isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9 |page= |author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref><ref name="usgovDidPlaneHitPentagon" /><ref>{{cite news |last1=Kemble |first1=Gary |title=Challenging September 11 conspiracy theories |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/specials/september-11-remembered/2011-09-09/september-11-conspiracies/2875134 |website=ABC News|date=September 9, 2011 }}</ref> or that hijacked planes were remotely controlled, or that a commercial airliner was allowed to do so via an effective stand-down of the American military. Possible motives claimed by conspiracy theorists for such actions include justifying the U.S. invasions of ] in 2001 and ] in 2003 (even though the U.S. government concluded Iraq was not involved in the attacks)<ref name="nytimes.com"> New York Times May 2, 2002</ref> to advance their ] interests, such as ].<ref name="Knight">{{cite journal |doi=10.1215/0094033X-2007-024 |title=Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States |year=2008 |last1=Knight |first1=Peter |journal=New German Critique |volume=35 |pages=165–93 |issn = 0094-033X }}</ref> Other conspiracy theories revolve around authorities having advance knowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignoring or assisting the attackers.<ref name=VF/><ref name="The Eleventh Day pp92" /><ref name="BBCevolution">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7488159.stm |title=The evolution of a conspiracy theory |date=July 4, 2008 |work=BBC News |access-date=July 27, 2008}}</ref>
Initially, 9/11 conspiracy theories received little attention in the media. In an address to the ] on ], ], ] ] denounced the emergence of "outrageous conspiracy theories ... that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."<ref>{{cite web| author= Bush, George Walker|title = Remarks by the President To United Nations General Assembly| publisher = ]| date = ] 2001| url =http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011110-3.html}}</ref> Later, as media exposure of conspiracy theories of the events of 9/11 increased, US government agencies and the ] issued refutations to the theories, including a formal response by the ] to questions about the destruction of the World Trade Center,<ref>{{cite web|title = National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions| publisher = ]| url =http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm}}</ref> a revised 2006 ] webpage to debunk the theories,<ref>{{cite web|title = The Top ] Conspiracy Theories| publisher = Bureau of International Information Programs, ]| date= ], 2006| url=http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=pubs-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355}}</ref> and a strategy paper referred to by President Bush in an August 2006 speech, which declares that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda."<ref>{{cite web|title =
Strategy for Winning the War on Terror| publisher = ]|date=September 2006| url = http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nsct/2006/sectionV.html}}</ref>


The ] (NIST) and the technology magazine '']'' have investigated and rejected the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.<ref name="investigation">{{cite web |url=http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/ |title=NIST NCSTAR 1: Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster |date=September 2005 |publisher=] |page=146 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090529010501/http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/ |archive-date=May 29, 2009 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref><ref name="finalreport">{{cite web |url=http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf |title=Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 |date=August 2008 |publisher=] |pages=22–4 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080928013317/http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf |archive-date=September 28, 2008 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref><ref name=PopMech-ConspiracyIndustry-2006/> The ] and most of the ] community accept that the impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, not controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bažant |first1=Z.K.P. |author-link1=Zdenek Bažant |last2=Verdure |first2=M. |doi=10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:3(308) |title=Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions |journal=Journal of Engineering Mechanics |volume=133 |issue=3 |pages=308–319 |year=2007 |url=http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf |publisher=] |quote=As generally accepted by the community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering (though not by a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives), the failure scenario was as follows: .}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bažant |first1=Z.K.P. |author-link1=Zdenek Bažant |last2=Le |first2=J.L. |last3=Greening |first3=F.R. |last4=Benson |first4=D.B. |title=What Did and Did Not Cause Collapse of World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York? |doi=10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2008)134:10(892) |journal=Journal of Engineering Mechanics |volume=134 |issue=10 |page=892 |year=2008 |url=http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/00%20WTC%20Collapse%20-%20What%20Did%20%26%20Did%20Not%20Cause%20It.pdf |publisher=] |quote=Universally though has the foregoing explanation of collapse been accepted by the communities of structural engineers and structural mechanics researchers, some outside critics have nevertheless exploited various unexplained observations to disseminate allegations of controlled demolition.}}</ref> but some conspiracy theory groups, including ], disagree with the arguments made by NIST and ''Popular Mechanics''.<ref>{{cite news |last=Blatchford |first=Andy |publisher=Canadian Press |title=U.S. skeptics to speak of 9–11 cover-up at three Canadian universities |date=April 30, 2010 |url=https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/803231--u-s-skeptics-to-speak-of-9-11-cover-up-at-three-canadian-universities |access-date=May 1, 2010 |location=Toronto |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100504143115/http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/803231--u-s-skeptics-to-speak-of-9-11-cover-up-at-three-canadian-universities |archive-date=May 4, 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="KGO">{{cite news |publisher=KGO Newstalk |title=Architects and Engineers Seek 9/11 Truth |date=June 3, 2009 |url=http://www.kgoam810.com/Article.asp?id=1353865 |access-date=June 3, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090802192109/http://www.kgoam810.com/Article.asp?id=1353865 |archive-date=August 2, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
In August 2004, a ] International poll indicated that 49.3% ] residents and 41% of New York citizens "overall" say US Leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.zogby.com/search/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855 |title=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 |year=2004|publisher=]}}</ref> In July 2006, a ] and ] poll concluded that "Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the ] and the ] or took no action to stop them", "sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings" and "twelve percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a military cruise missile in 2001 rather than by an airliner captured by terrorists."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll |title=Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy |year=2006 |publisher=Scripps News}}</ref> A May 2006 Zogby International poll indicated that 42% of Americans more likely agree with people who believe that "the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up."<ref>{{cite web |title=A word about our poll of American thinking toward the 9/11 terrorist attacks| url=http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231 |date=May 24, 2006 | Publisher=]}}</ref> A September 2006 Ipsos-Reid poll found that 22 percent of Canadians believe "the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden and were actually a plot by influential Americans."<ref>{{cite web |title = One in 5 Canadians sees 9/11 as U.S. plot: poll|url = http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N11186384.htm |publisher =Reuters| date = September 11, 2006}}</ref> An October 2006 New York Times and CBS news poll showed that 28 percent believe members of the Bush Administration are mostly lying about "what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States."<ref>{{cite web |title = Americans Question Bush on 9/11 Intelligence |url = http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469 |publisher =Angus Reid Global Monitor| date = October 14, 2006}}</ref>


== Background ==
Just prior to the fifth anniversary of the attacks, a flurry of mainstream news articles on 9/11 conspiracy theories were released.<ref>{{cite news |first = Jim |last = Wolf|title = U.S rebuts 9/11 homegrown conspiracy theories|url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090200527.html|publisher = ]|date = September 2, 2006}}</ref><ref></ref> In its coverage ] stated, "This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality."<ref>{{cite news |first = Lev|last = Grossman|title = Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away|url = http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304-1,00.html|publisher = ]|date = September 3, 2006}}</ref> Mainstream coverage has generally presented these theories as a cultural phenomenon and is often very critical of their content.
9/11 conspiracy theorists reject one or both of the following facts about the 9/11 attacks:


* ] suicide operatives hijacked and crashed ] and ] into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, and crashed ] into the Pentagon. The impact and resulting fires caused the collapse of the Twin Towers and the destruction and damage of other buildings in the World Trade Center complex. The Pentagon was severely damaged by the impact of the airliner and the resulting fire. The hijackers also crashed ] into a field near ] after the passengers and flight crew attempted to regain control of the aircraft.{{refn|<ref name="investigation"/><ref name="finalreport"/><ref name='Flight93Story'>{{cite web |url=http://www.nps.gov/flni/historyculture/index.htm |title=The Flight 93 Story |access-date=September 22, 2011 |publisher=National Park Service}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.biography.com/profiles-of-9-11/about911.jsp |title=Profiles of 9/11 – About 9/11 |publisher=Biography.com |date=September 11, 2001 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090716140728/http://www.biography.com/profiles-of-9-11/about911.jsp |archive-date=July 16, 2009}}</ref>}}
==The mainstream account==
* Pre-attack warnings of varying detail of the planned attacks against the United States by al-Qaeda were ignored due to a lack of communication between various law enforcement and intelligence personnel. For the lack of interagency communication, the 9/11 report cited bureaucratic inertia and laws passed in the 1970s to prevent abuses that caused scandals during that era, most notably the ]. The report faulted both the ] and the ] administrations with "]".<ref name="Schmitt">{{cite news |last=Schmitt |first=Richard |title=The 9/11 Commission Report; Panel Calls for Single Intelligence Chief |work=Los Angeles Times |date=June 23, 2004 |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-jul-23-na-intel23-story.html}}</ref>
Immediately following the ] 2001 attacks, the ] said the attacks were carried out by members of the terrorist organisation ], headed by ]. On the morning of ], the government said, nineteen terrorists hijacked four commercial airplanes by using knives, ]s, ] and fake explosives. They piloted the planes themselves and crashed these into the ] and ]. According to mainstream scientific account, the World Trade Center towers later collapsed due to the impact damage, removal of the fire protection and the intense fires. Due to the collapse of ] and ], surrounding World Trade Center buildings were heavily damaged as well, leading in turn to their complete or partial collapse. American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the west side of the Pentagon. ] crashed in ] later that day after passengers learned via ] of the other attacks and mounted resistance to that plane's hijackers.


This consensus view is backed by various sources, including:
Soon after the 9/11 attacks, the ] (ASCE) and ] conducted building performance studies at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm |World Trade Center Building Performance Study}}</ref> The Intelligence Committees of the ] and the ] conducted a Joint Inquiry in 2002. U.S. government officials, such as ], said they had no advance knowledge of the attacks and no idea that such a thing might happen. Organizations representing the victims' families such as the ] demanded further investigation and, after initial reluctance, the administration acceded to their request. The bipartisan ] was formed tasked with “not placing individual blame” but providing an explanation as to what happened and making recommendations to prevent a recurrence. In 2004 the commission released its ]. It disclosed that there were prior warnings of varying detail that the United States would be attacked by al-Qaeda. These were ignored, the report said, due to a lack of communication between various law enforcement and intelligence personnel. For the lack of interagency communication, the report cited bureaucratic inertia and laws passed in the 1970s to prevent abuses that resulted in major scandals during that era. The report also faulted both the ] and the ] with “]”. The explanation laid out in the report has been endorsed by most members of both major political parties, and is what conspiracy theorists refer to as "''the official account''" of the September, 2001 attacks, which only focuses on government sources.
* The reports from government investigations&nbsp;– the ] (that incorporated intelligence information from the earlier ] investigation (]) and the Joint Inquiry of 2002), and the studies into building performance carried out by the ] (FEMA)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm |title=FEMA: World Trade Center Building Performance Study |publisher=Fema.gov |date=March 17, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110430200952/http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm |archive-date=April 30, 2011}}</ref> and the ] (NIST)<ref name="investigation"/>
* Investigations by non-government organizations that support the accepted account&nbsp;– such as those by scientists at ].<ref name="Purdue">{{cite news |last=Herman |first=Steve |url=https://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-06-20-fireproofing-wtc-collapse_N.htm |title=Purdue study supports WTC collapse findings |work=USA Today |date=June 20, 2007 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090916174128/https://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-06-20-fireproofing-wtc-collapse_N.htm |archive-date=September 16, 2009 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5442 |title=Behind Purdue's computing simulation on the 2001 World Trade Center attack ZDNET June 20, 2007 |publisher=] |access-date=September 11, 2013 |archive-date=May 30, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080530003552/http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5442 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
* Articles supporting these facts and theories appearing in magazines such as '']'', '']'', and '']''.<ref name=PopMech-ConspiracyIndustry-2006>{{cite news |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html |title=The Conspiracy Industry |publisher=Popular Mechanics |author=Meigs, James |date=October 13, 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061024062122/http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html |archive-date=October 24, 2006}}</ref>
* Similar articles in news media throughout the world, including <!-- ] Needs another link. The former link has no information regarding this news. -->'']'',<ref>{{cite news |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms |title=Osama claims responsibility for 9/11 |date=May 24, 2006 |work=] |location=India |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071027153604/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms |archive-date=October 27, 2007 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref> the ] (CBC),<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/bin-laden-claims-responsibility-for-9-11-1.513654 |title=Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 |publisher=CBC (Canada) |date=October 29, 2004}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/ |title=America's day of terror |work=BBC News |date=September 11, 2001 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110527033533/http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/ |archive-date=May 27, 2011 |url-status= live}}</ref> '']'',<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3222,36-687756@51-641954,0.html |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120804050128/http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3222,36-687756@51-641954,0.html |archive-date=August 4, 2012 |title=Depuis le 11-Septembre, la menace terroriste est devenue permanente |website=] |url-status=live |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,623034,00.html |title=Sept. 11: One Year Later |publisher=Deutsche Welle – Dw-world.de |date=May 2, 2003 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071212142424/http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0%2C2144%2C623034%2C00.html |archive-date=December 12, 2007 |access-date=May 29, 2014 }}</ref> the ] (ABC),<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1736235.htm |title= Bin Laden tape shown days before 9/11 anniversary |publisher=ABC |location=Australia |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref> and '']'' of South Korea.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200609/200609110002.html
|title=Korean's Memories of 9/11 Still Fresh Five Years On |publisher=The Chosun Ilbo |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061012164148/http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200609/200609110002.html |archive-date=October 12, 2006 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>


== History ==
In addition to government investigations and sources that comprise the "official account" that conspiracy theorists look to, the September 11, 2001 attacks have been documented and analyzed by numerous non-government sources. These include eyewitnesses, investigations by the ] and other organizations, experts at ] and ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html |title=The Conspiracy Industry |publisher=Popular Mechanics |author=Meigs, James |date=October 13, 2006}}</ref> and news media throughout the world, including ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=35852 |title=World remembers 9/11 five years on |publisher=Al Jazeera}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms |title=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1550477.cms |publisher=Times of India}}</ref> the ] (CBC),<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html |title=Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 |publisher=CBC (Canada)}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/ |title=America's Day of Terror |publisher=BBC}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3222,36-687756@51-641954,0.html |title=Depuis le 11-Septembre, la menace terroriste est devenue permanente |publisher=Le Monde}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,623034,00.html |title=Sept. 11: One Year Later |publisher=Deutsche Welle}}</ref> the ] (ABC),<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1736235.htm |title=Bin Laden tape shown days before 9/11 anniversary |publisher=ABC}}</ref> and ] of South Korea.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200609/200609110002.html |title=Korean's Memories of 9/11 Still Fresh Five Years On |publisher=The Chosun Ilbo}}</ref>
Since the attacks, a variety of conspiracy theories have been put forward in websites, books and films. Many groups and individuals advocating 9/11 conspiracy theories identify as part of the ].<ref>{{Cite news|last=Feuer|first=Alan|date=June 5, 2006|title=500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11|access-date=May 5, 2009|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/us/05conspiracy.html | work=The New York Times| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110512222259/http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/us/05conspiracy.html| archive-date=May 12, 2011| url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory| last=Griffin|first=David Ray|author-link=David Ray Griffin|isbn=978-1-56656-686-5|publisher=Olive Branch Press|year=2007}}</ref><ref>The following news media state that the movement is being known as or being called "9/11 Truth movement":
* {{Cite news| title = The 9/11 Truth Movement's Dangers| last = Hayes| first = Christopher| work = CBS News| date = December 10, 2006| url = https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-9-11-truth-movements-dangers/| access-date = June 8, 2009| ref = none| archive-date = March 3, 2009| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090303104632/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/08/opinion/main2242387.shtml| url-status = live}}
* {{Cite news| title = The truth is out there| last = Barber| first = Peter| newspaper = Financial Times| date = June 7, 2008| url = http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html| access-date = May 23, 2009| quote = An army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090603164130/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html| archive-date = June 3, 2009| url-status = live| ref = none}}
* {{Cite news| title = The Disbelievers| last = Powell| first = Michael| newspaper = ]| date = September 8, 2006| url = http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html| access-date = June 13, 2010| quote = The loose agglomeration known as the '9/11 Truth Movement'| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100723110251/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html| archive-date = July 23, 2010| url-status = dead| df = mdy-all| ref = none}}
* {{Cite news |title=9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather in N.Y. |last=Barry |first=Ellen |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=September 10, 2006 |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-sep-10-na-conspiracy10-story.html |access-date=May 30, 2009 |quote=a group known as the 9/11 Truth Movement |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090617183636/http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/10/nation/na-conspiracy10 |archive-date=June 17, 2009 |url-status=live |ref=none }}
* {{Cite news| title = The 30 greatest conspiracy theories&nbsp;— part 1| last = Hunt| first = H.E.| newspaper = ]| date = November 19, 2008| url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3483477/The-30-greatest-conspiracy-theories-part-1.html| access-date = May 30, 2009| quote = A large group of people&nbsp;— collectively called the 9/11 Truth Movement| location = London| ref = none}}
* {{Cite news |title=Richard Gage: 9/11 truther extraordinaire |last=Kay |first=Jonathan |journal=National Post |date=April 25, 2009 |url=https://nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1532386 |quote=The '9/11 Truth Movement,' as it is now commonly called |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090605070241/http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1532386 |archive-date=June 5, 2009 |url-status=dead |access-date=May 29, 2014 |ref=none }}</ref> Within six hours of the attack, a suggestion appeared on an Internet chat room suggesting that the collapse of the towers looked like an act of controlled demolition. "If, in a few days, not one official has mentioned anything about the controlled demolition part," the author wrote, "I think we have a REALLY serious problem."<ref>{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|page=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref> The first theories that emerged focused primarily on various perceived anomalies in the publicly available evidence, and proponents later developed more specific theories about an alleged plot.<ref name="Knight" /> One false allegation that was widely circulated by e-mail and on the Web is that not a single Jew had been killed in the attack and that therefore the attacks must have been the work of the ], not Islamic terrorists.<ref name="Knight" />


The first elaborated theories appeared in Europe. One week after the attacks, the "inside job" theory was the subject of a thesis by a researcher from the ] published in the newspaper '']''. Other theories sprang from the far corners of the globe within weeks.<ref>{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|page=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref> Six months after the attacks, ]'s piece on 9/11, ''L'Effroyable Imposture'', topped the French bestseller list. Its publication in English (as '']'') received little attention, but it remains one of the principal sources for "trutherism".<ref name=WeeklyStandard>{{cite web|url=http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/german-protestors-marked-911-denouncing-inside-job-reichstag-fire |title=German Protestors Marked 9/11 by Denouncing "Inside Job," "Reichstag Fire" Weekly Standard September 21, 2010 |publisher=Weeklystandard.com |date=September 21, 2010 |access-date=October 15, 2010| archive-url= https://archive.today/20130209171015/http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/german-protestors-marked-911-denouncing-inside-job-reichstag-fire| archive-date=February 9, 2013 | url-status= dead}}</ref> 2003 saw the publication of '']'' by former German state minister ] and ''Operation 9/11'' by the German journalist Gerhard Wisnewski; both books are published by ], who was at the time an editor at the German newspaper '']''.<ref name="Knight" />
==Main approaches==
9/11 conspiracy theories generally start with dissatisfaction with the official explanation of 9/11.<ref>Sales, Nancy Jo. "Click Here For Conspiracy", ''Vanity Fair'' July 9, 2006 </ref> But criticism of the official account does not in and of itself constitute a conspiracy theory. 9/11 conspiracy theories constitute a strong version of the ].


While these theories were popular in Europe, they were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement, and they were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of ].<ref name="Knight-Popular">{{cite journal |doi=10.1215/0094033X-2007-024 |title=Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States |year=2008 |last1=Knight |first1=Peter |journal=New German Critique |volume=35 |pages=165–93 |quote=Although immensely popular in Europe (and soon translated into Arabic), these early conspiracy accounts were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement and were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of anti-Americanism.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Johnson|first=Ian|title=Conspiracy Theories about Sept. 11 Get Hearing in Germany|work=The Wall Street Journal|date=September 29, 2003|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB106479068042179400}}</ref> In an address to the United Nations on November 10, 2001, President ] denounced the emergence of "outrageous conspiracy theories&nbsp; that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."<ref>{{cite web| author= Bush, George Walker|title = Remarks by the President To United Nations General Assembly| publisher = ]| date = November 10, 2001| url =https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011110-3.html}}</ref>
The weak version, which does not directly imply a conspiracy, merely suspects that government agencies, including the military and intelligence communities, dealt incompetently with the 9/11 attacks. It may go as far as suggesting that the ] covered up these alleged incompetencies and even that part of the incompetence involved inappropriate reactions to advanced warnings.<ref>
Eggen, Dan. "9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon", ''Washington Post'', Wednesday, August 2, 2006, page A03.</ref> While 9/11 conspiracy theories often include such claims, they go further to suggest intentional activities that either facilitated or directly caused the attacks. There are two main categories of 9/11 conspiracy theories.


The 9/11 conspiracy theories started out mostly in the political left but have broadened into what '']'' magazine describes as "] where left and right meet, fusing ] distrust with the ] variety".<ref name=StrangeMan>{{cite web|last=Hagan |first=Joe |url=https://nymag.com/news/media/alex-jones-2011-4/ |title=How Radio Host Alex Jones Has Cornered the Bipartisan Paranoia Market |publisher=New York Magazine |date=March 27, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref>
# Key individuals within the government and defense establishment "let it happen on purpose" (LIHOP). That is, they knew the attacks were coming (though there is a range of opinion about how specific their knowledge was) and undertook to weaken America's defenses sufficiently to ensure a successful major terrorist attack on home soil.
# Key individuals within the government and defense establishment "made it happen on purpose" (MIHOP). That is, they planned the attacks (and here there is a range of opinion about what the plan was) and ultimately carried it into action.


By 2004, conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks began to gain ground in the United States. One explanation is that the rise in popularity stemmed more from growing criticism of the ] and the newly re-elected President George W. Bush than from any discovery of new or more compelling evidence or an improvement in the technical quality of the presentation of the theories.<ref name="Knight" /> ] theorized that revelations that ] did not exist in Iraq, the belated release of the ], and reports that ] had lied to the ], may have fueled the conspiracy theories.<ref name="Knight" />
Some theories go on to identify the people who had the power to either make it or let it happen purposefully. This list of suspects also varies considerably across theories.<ref>Sales, Nancy Jo. "Click Here For Conspiracy", ''Vanity Fair'' July 9, 2006 </ref>


Between 2004 and the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in 2006, mainstream coverage of the conspiracy theories increased.<ref name="Knight" /> The U.S. government issued a formal analysis by the ] (NIST) of the collapse of the World Trade Center.<ref name="nistfaq">{{cite web|url=http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm |title=NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster – Frequently Asked Questions |publisher=Wtc.nist.gov |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref> To address the growing publicity of the theories, the ] revised a webpage in 2006 to debunk them.<ref name="usgovTopConspiracyTheories">{{cite web
The case for the theories is generally built on publicly available sources following a "connect the dots" approach. These sources include news reports of government actions, terrorist activities, and physical events, and a substantial amount of video footage. Part of the argument is a critique of the mainstream media for reporting individual facts without making an adequate effort to understand the connections between them. Conspiracy theories emerge from making such connections in the interpretative room left open by "unanswered questions". In some cases, conspiracy theorists will insist on the accuracy of early news reports that have since been retracted, refuted, or forgotten.
|url=http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html
|title=The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories
|publisher=Bureau of International Information Programs, ]
|date=September 16, 2006
|url-status=dead
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110228104436/http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html
|archive-date=February 28, 2011
}}</ref> A 2006 national security strategy paper declared that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda."<ref name="NSec2006">{{cite book | last1 = Bush | first1 = George W. | author-link1 = George W. Bush | title = The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (March 2006) | publisher = Wordclay | year = 2009 | page = 10 | isbn = 978-1-60037-587-3}}</ref> Al-Qaeda has repeatedly claimed responsibility for the attacks, with chief deputy ] accusing ] Iran and ] of denigrating ] successes in hurting America by intentionally starting rumors that Israel carried out the attacks.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7361414.stm |title=Al-Qaeda accuses Iran of 9/11 lie |work=BBC News |date=April 22, 2008 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110511123743/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7361414.stm| archive-date=May 11, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-04-22-al-qaeda-tape_N.htm |title=USA Today |date=April 22, 2008 |access-date=October 15, 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Michael |first=Maggie |url=http://news.scotsman.com/world/AlQaeda-No-2-accuses-Iran.4009088.jp |title=Al-Qaeda No 2 accuses Iran of 9/11 conspiracy theory |work=The Scotsman |location=UK |date=September 11, 2001 |access-date=May 30, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100926221502/http://news.scotsman.com/world/AlQaeda-No-2-accuses-Iran.4009088.jp |archive-date=September 26, 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.foxnews.com/story/al-qaeda-no-2-accuses-iran-of-spreading-9-11-conspiracy-rumor |title=Al Qaeda No. 2 Accuses Iran of Spreading 9/11 Conspiracy Rumor |publisher=Fox News |date=April 22, 2008 |access-date=May 30, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080924071715/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352066,00.html |archive-date=September 24, 2008 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|author=Lee Keath |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/23/MN4U109VEJ.DTL&type=printable |title=Al Qaeda audiotape blisters Iran over who executed 9/11 |work=San Francisco Chronicle |date=April 23, 2008 |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2008/04/22/al_qaida_no_2_says_group_still_targeting_the_west/ |title=Al-Qaida No. 2 says 9/11 theory propagated by Iran |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090918035430/http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2008/04/22/al_qaida_no_2_says_group_still_targeting_the_west/ |archive-date=September 18, 2009 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>


Some of the conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks do not involve representational strategies typical of many conspiracy theories that establish a clear dichotomy between good and evil, or guilty and innocent; instead, they call up gradations of negligence and complicity. Mathias Bröckers, an early proponent of such theories, dismisses the commonly accepted account of the September 11 attacks as being itself a conspiracy theory that seeks "to reduce complexity, disentangle what is confusing," and "explain the inexplicable".<ref name="Knight" />
Arguments are offered to suggest both the physical possibility and circumstantial plausibility or likelihood of a given conspiracy theory and, correspondingly, to demonstrate the physical impossibility and circumstantial implausibility of the official account. Since most conspiracy theorists argue for further independent investigations of the attacks, the basic assertion is normally only that the alternative conspiracy theory is ''more likely'' than "the official conspiracy theory". The remainder of this article provides a survey of the arguments, which are generally combined by individual theorists in overlapping and sometimes incompatible ways.


Just before the fifth anniversary of the attacks, mainstream news outlets released a flurry of articles on the growth of 9/11 conspiracy theories,<ref>{{Cite news|first = Jim |last = Wolf|title = U.S rebuts 9/11 homegrown conspiracy theories|url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090200527.html|publisher = Reuters|date=September 2, 2006}}</ref> with an article in ] stating that "his is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality."<ref name="The Eleventh Day pp92">{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|page=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref><ref name="time">{{Cite news|first = Lev|last = Grossman|title = Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away|url = http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304-1,00.html|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061104175923/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304-1,00.html|url-status = dead|archive-date = November 4, 2006|work=Time Magazine|date=September 3, 2006}}</ref> Several ] have included questions about beliefs related to the September 11 attacks. In 2008, 9/11 conspiracy theories topped a "greatest conspiracy theory" list compiled by '']''. The list was ranked by following and traction.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3483477/The-30-greatest-conspiracy-theories-part-1.html |title=The 30 greatest conspiracy theories The Telegraph November 19, 2008 |work=The Daily Telegraph |location=London |date=November 19, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |first=H. E. |last=Hunt}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nmauk.co.uk/nma/do/live/factsAndFigures |title=Audit Bureau of Circulations Ltd |publisher=Nmauk.co.uk |date=February 23, 2009 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090501233741/http://www.nmauk.co.uk/nma/do/live/factsAndFigures |archive-date=May 1, 2009 }}</ref>
==Basic argument==
Unlike the official account, which suggests that the perpetrators (the terrorists) got much more than they bargained for, conspiracy theorists assume that the 9/11 attacks achieved more-or-less exactly their intended result. They therefore draw conclusions about the motives for 9/11 by looking at its consequences. Among these they emphasize the powerful military presence of the US in the Middle East (implying, they say, increased control over oil and natural gas reserves), the significant increase in funding for the American military and the intelligence community, the restrictions on civil liberties (often presented as an attack on the US constitution), and a general will to rule the world through brute military force. 9/11, the argument goes, was a convenient opportunity for certain elements of the American establishment, and the Bush administration in particular, to achieve key foreign and domestic policy goals that had been determined in advance of the attacks.<ref>This basic argument can be found a variety of forms in the work of David Ray Griffin, Webster Griffin Tarpley, Michael C. Ruppert and Ahmed M. Afeez.</ref>


In 2010, the "International Center for 9/11 Studies," a private organization that is said to be sympathetic to conspiracy theories,<ref name="Bild Videos">{{Cite news|journal=]|title=Neue Videos vom 11. September aufgetaucht – New videos of September 11 released|date=September 10, 2010|url=http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/2010/09/10/neue-videos-911-aufgetaucht/terror-anschlaege-world-trade-center.html|access-date=September 18, 2010|quote=Es heißt, die Organisation besitzt eine Affinität zu Verschwörungstheorien. &nbsp;... Freigegeben wurden die Informationen nur, weil das "International Center for 9/11 Studies" geklagt hatte. &nbsp;... Augenzeugen hatten immer wieder von Explosionen berichtet, bevor die beiden Türme zusammenbrachen. Experten halten diese Theorien für unsinnig. | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100918084717/http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/2010/09/10/neue-videos-911-aufgetaucht/terror-anschlaege-world-trade-center.html| archive-date=September 18, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> successfully sued for the release of videos collected by NIST of the attacks and aftermath.<ref name="FAZ Videos"/><ref name="NZZ Nahaufnahme">{{Cite news|journal=]|last=Wysling|first=Andres|title=9/11 in Nahaufnahme −9/11 up close|date=September 7, 2010|url=http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/panorama/911_1.7466811.html|access-date=September 18, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100910092900/http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/panorama/911_1.7466811.html| archive-date=September 10, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> According to the German daily '']'', the videos that were published shortly before the ninth anniversary of the attacks provide "new food for conspiracy theorists." Many of the videos show images of ], a skyscraper in the vicinity of the WTC towers that also ] on September 11, 2001.<ref name="FAZ Videos">{{Cite news|journal=]|title=Neue Videos vom 11. September -New videos of September 11|date=September 10, 2010|url=https://www.faz.net/artikel/C30721/terroranschlaege-neue-videos-vom-11-september-30306648.html|access-date=September 12, 2010|quote=Das private "International Center for 9/11 Studies" hatte erfolgreich auf Herausgabe der Videodokumente geklagt und sie nun auf seinem eigenen Kanal bei Youtube veröffentlicht. Das "National Institute of Standards and Technology"&nbsp;... hatte die Videos&nbsp;... jahrelang nicht freigegeben. &nbsp;... Die bislang unbekannten Videos sollen als weitere Beweise für eine Verschwörung rund um den 11. September dienen. &nbsp;... Eine Vielzahl der nun neu veröffentlichten Videos zeigt Bilder vom WTC7. }}</ref>
Many point to the writings of ] strategists to suggest that 9/11 was, at best, on their 'wish list' and, at worst, on their list of 'things to do'. The standard reference in presenting this idea has become a document titled ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'', which was written by the ]. This document outlines a global strategy that conspiracy theorists say is very similar in its details to the military strategy of the ]. The document includes the line "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."<ref>This document is available in its entirety online.</ref>
There have been claims that the George W. Bush administration was preparing for war on Iraq months before 9/11. In particular, a government employee by the name of O'Neill reported the president's having said ''"Go find me a way to do this"'' (invade Iraq).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml |title=Bush Sought ‘Way’ To Invade Iraq? |accessdate=2006-11-19 |year=2004 |month=January |publisher= CBS News |quote= "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this,’" says O’Neill.}} O'Neill Tells '60 Minutes' Iraq Was 'Topic A' 8 Months Before 9-11</ref> David Ray Griffin and others have presented an argument that draws a parallel to a particular interpretation of the Japanese ] in 1941, according to which Roosevelt both provoked the attack and allowed it to happen in order to have a pretext for American entry into the second world war. Conspiracy theorists believe that 9/11 constitutes a "new Pearl Harbor" in at least this sense (LIHOP), many also adding the element of "] terrorism", i.e., that the attacks were organized by at least some of its supposed beneficiaries (MIHOP).


9/11 truth figures ] and Mike Berger have further added that the ]<ref name="binladendeathcelebration">{{cite web | url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/osama-bin-ladens-death-celebration-relief-globe/story?id=13511120 | title=Osama Bin Laden's Death Greeted With Celebration, Anger | publisher=ABC World News | date=May 2, 2011 | access-date=May 3, 2011 | author=Patrick, Maggy}}</ref> did not change their questions about the attacks, nor provide closure.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/report-of-bin-ladens-death-spurs-questions-from-conspiracy-theorists/2011/05/02/AF90ZjbF_story.html |title=Report of bin Laden's death spurs questions from conspiracy theorists |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=May 2, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011 |first=Susan |last=Baer}}</ref>
==Pattern of behavior==
To establish that the United States government (which some allege to have carried out the September 11, 2001 attacks) would be willing to use a staged incident to generate support for an armed conflict (which some conspiracy theorists say was the purpose behind the attacks) conspiracy theorists have often pointed to ]. This plan,<ref>The document recommending Operation Northwoods can be downloaded from the National Security Archive of the George Washington University at .</ref> which was proposed by ] leaders in 1962 during the ], was meant to generate U.S. public support for military action against the ] government of ]. The plan suggested various false flag actions, including simulated or real state sponsored acts on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. The plan, however, was rejected by the Kennedy administration.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba | author=David Ruppe |publisher=ABC News url= http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662}}</ref>


According to writer Jeremy Stahl, since Bush left office, the overall number of believers in 9/11 conspiracy theories has dipped, while the number of people who believe in the most "radical" theories has held fairly steady.<ref name=Stahl>Stahl, Jeremy. . '']''. September 9, 2011</ref>
] points out what he says are similarities between the assassination of JFK and the events of 9/11. Among many arguments he makes is that on September 11, at 9:59 the FBI already had names of 3 out of the 4 hijackers of Flight 93, at which time NORAD, according to the 9/11 Commission, wasn't yet aware that Flight 93 had been hijacked. (This Scott finds similar to the situation when ] description was released immediately after the ]).<ref name=PDScott_Insights>{{google video|7404458118476453937|JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both}} - Peter Dale Scott points out similarities that he says arise when you look at the assassination of JFK and the all events of 9/11. (COPA meeting in Dallas, Texas, November 18, 2006)</ref>


== Types ==
==Government foreknowledge==
The most prominent conspiracy theories can be broadly divided into three main forms:
One theory is that individuals within the United States government and private sector knew of the impending attacks and purposefully failed to act on that knowledge. Former British Environment Minister ] is among those who have suggested this possibility.<ref>{{cite web| last = Meacher| first = Michael| authorlink = Michael Meacher| year = 2003| url = http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html| title = This war on terrorism is bogus| work = The Guardian Unlimited - Comment| publisher = Guardian Newspapers Limited | accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref> The theory does not necessarily suggest that individuals within the US Government actually conducted the operation, but rather that they had enough information to have prevented the attack.
* LIHOP ("Let it happen on purpose") – suggests that key individuals within the government had at least some foreknowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignored it or actively weakened United States' defenses to ensure the hijacked flights were not intercepted.<ref name=VF/><ref name="The Eleventh Day pp92" /><ref name="BBCevolution"/> ] were made about ].
* MIHOP ("Make/Made it happen on purpose") – that key individuals within the government planned the attacks and collaborated with, or framed, al-Qaeda in carrying them out. There is a range of opinions about how this might have been achieved.<ref name=VF/><ref name="The Eleventh Day pp92" /><ref name="BBCevolution" />
* Others – who reject the accepted account of the September 11 attacks but are not proposing specific theories, but try to demonstrate that the U.S. government's account of the events is wrong. This, according to them, would lead to a general call for a new official investigation into the events of September 11, 2001. According to Jonathan Kay, managing editor for comment at the Canadian newspaper '']''<ref name="Kay Nashville">{{Cite news|last=Kay|first=Jonathan|journal=Newsweek|title=Black Helicopters Over Nashville|date=February 9, 2010|url=http://www.newsweek.com/id/233331/page/2|access-date=March 14, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100213061042/http://www.newsweek.com/id/233331/page/2| archive-date=February 13, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> and author of '']'',<ref>{{cite web|last=Weigel |first=David |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2292081/pagenum/all/#p2 |title=You're All Nuts! How America became the land of Truthers, Triggers, Birthers, and Dan Brown fans|publisher=Slate.com |date=April 25, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref> "They feel their job is to show everybody that the official theory of 9/11 is wrong. And then, when everybody is convinced, then the population will rise up and demand a new investigation with government resources, and that investigation will tell us what actually happened."<ref name="Unofficial Theory">{{Cite news|publisher=]|date=November 27, 2009|title=The Unofficial Theory|url=http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/the_unofficial_story/|access-date=November 30, 2009|format=Flash video, only available in Canada, no transcript| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20091129081638/http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/the_unofficial_story/| archive-date=November 29, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>


== Theories ==
===Intelligence issues===
=== Foreknowledge ===
''Shortly after the attacks, ], the chief prosecutor for the impeachment of ], stated that the government had been warned in 1995 about a future attack on a government building and that later he was contacted by three FBI agents who mentioned uncovering a possible terrorist attack planned for lower Manhattan.''<ref>{{cite web | title=Interview with David Schippers| work=Alex Jones Infowars.com | url=http://infowars.com/transcript_schippers.html| accessdate=2006-05-02}}</ref>
{{See also|September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories|U.S. military response during the September 11 attacks|United States government operations and exercises on September 11, 2001}}
*According to the story, as the agents informed their superiors they were briefed not to pursue the issue and threatened with prosecution. David Schippers declared, "Five weeks before the ] tragedy, I did my best to get a hold of ] ] with my concerns." According to Mr. Schippers, Ashcroft responded that they (the Justice Department) do not start investigations at the top.
*Mr. Schippers has said the information dated back to a 1995 warning that indicated a possible terrorist attack planned for lower Manhattan using a nuclear device.<ref>{{cite web| last = Crogan| first = Jim| year = 2002| url = http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/37/news-crogan.php| title = Another FBI Agent Blows the Whistle| work = LA Weekly News| publisher = LA
Weekly, LP| accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref>
*Author William Norman Grigg furthered the Schippers story in his article "Did We Know What Was Coming?" According to the article, three unnamed veteran federal law enforcement agents confirmed "the information provided to Schippers was widely known within the Bureau before September 11."<ref>{{cite web| last = Grigg| first = William Norman| year = 2002| url = http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/03-11-2002/vo18no05_didweknow.htm| title = Did We Know What Was Coming?| work = The New American magazine| publisher = American Opinion Publishing Incorporated| accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref>


Conspiracy theorists claim that action or inaction by U.S. officials with foreknowledge was intended to ensure that the attacks took place successfully. For example, ], former British environment minister and member of ]'s government, said that the United States knowingly failed to prevent the attacks.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/sep/06/september11.iraq |title=Michael Meacher: This war on terrorism is bogus Politics |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=July 20, 2009 |date=December 4, 2003| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090715133257/http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/sep/06/september11.iraq| archive-date=July 15, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/sep/06/uk.iraq |title=Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war Politics |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=July 20, 2009 |first=Ewen |last=MacAskill |date=September 6, 2003}}</ref>
''Rep. ] (R-PA) has asserted that over a year before the 9/11 attacks, a classified US intelligence unit known as "]" identified ] and three other future 9/11 hijackers as likely members of an Al Qaeda cell operating in the US.'' (Able Danger was managed by ], the military's Special Operations Command.)
*The team recommended that the information be shared with the FBI, but SOCOM rejected the recommendation. (''New York Times'', “Four in 9/11 Plot Are Called Tied to Qaeda in '00”, 8/9/2005)
* Acting Pentagon Inspector General Thomas Gimble in a 71-page report given to Defense Department officials in ] ] dismissed claims that an Army intelligence unit code-named Able Danger uncovered data that could have thwarted the ] attacks, saying the allegations could not be substantiated. "Able Danger team members did not identify Mohamed Atta or any other 9/11 hijacker," "In fact, Able Danger produced no actionable intelligence information"<ref>
</ref>
*Reacting to the Pentagon report, Rep. Weldon said, "The report trashes the reputations of military officers who had the courage to step forward and ... describe important work they were doing to track al-Qaida prior to 9/11". ] co-chairman ] said he hoped the report would put an end to discussion about Able Danger. "After this I don't know where it can go"<ref></ref>
*Pentagon officials, however, said they have found three more individuals who recall an intelligence chart identifying Mohamed Atta as a terrorist one year prior to the attacks.<ref>{{cite web| last = The Associated Press| year = 2005| url = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9163145/| title = More remember Atta ID’d as terrorist pre-9/11| work = MSNBC News - US Security| publisher = MSNBC.com| accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref>


==== Suspected insider trading ====
*] agent and ] expert ] warned of an Al-Qaeda threat to the United States in the year preceding the attacks. He retired from his position in mid 2001 after an undisclosed source leaked information to the ''New York Times'' about an investigation into an incident that had occurred 13 months earlier. He was then recruited to be chief of security at the ]. His body was found in a staircase inside the south tower rubble.<ref>{{cite web| last = Kirk| first = Michael| coauthors = Jim Gilmore | year = 2002| url = http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/etc/script.html| title = The Man Who Knew| work = Transcript of Frontline program #2103| publisher = WGBH Educational Foundation| accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref>
Some conspiracy theorists maintain that just before 9/11, an "extraordinary" amount of ]s were placed on ] and ] stocks and speculate that insiders may have known in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. An analysis into the possibility of ] on 9/11 concludes that:


{{blockquote|A measure of abnormal long put volume was also examined and seen to be at abnormally high levels in the days leading up to the attacks. Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks.<ref>{{Cite journal| title = Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 | journal = ] | year = 2006 | first = Allen M. | page = 1703 | last = Poteshman | s2cid = 153626942 | volume = 79 | issue = 4| doi = 10.1086/503645 }}</ref>
===Possible early warning===
*On September 12, 2001, '']'' reported that San Francisco Mayor ] may have received an early warning of the attack, because Brown had said a phone call from his airport security eight hours before the attacks advised him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel. He did not cancel his flight plans until he became aware of the attacks.<ref>{{cite web| coauthors = Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross| year = 2001| url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL| title = Willie Brown got low-key early warning about air travel| work = Matier and Ross| publisher = San Francisco Chronicle | accessdate = 2006-06-11}}</ref>
*Of the call, Brown said it "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make an alarming statement. It was not an abnormal call. I'm always concerned if my flight is going to be on time, and they always alert me when I ought to be careful."<ref>http://www.liberalconspiracy.com/911FAQ.htm</ref>


—Allen M. Poteshman, '']''}}
===Allegations of insider trading by people with foreknowledge===
News accounts in the aftermath reported a suspicious pattern of trading in the options of United and American Airlines<ref></ref> as well as Morgan Stanley and<ref>http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/09/24/gen.europe.shortselling/</ref> other unusual market activity.<ref>http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/woil23.xml</ref>


This study was intended to address the "great deal of speculation about whether option market activity indicated that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the days leading up to September 11 on advance knowledge of the impending attacks."<ref>"Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001", Allen M. Poteshman The Journal of Business Vol. 79, No. 4 (July 2006), pp. 1703–1726</ref>
*In a statement to the 9/11 Commission in 2003, Mindy Kleinberg, of the ], said:
::''"Never before on the Chicago Exchange were such large amounts of United and American Airlines options traded. These investors netted a profit of at least $5 million after the September 11th attacks. Interestingly, the names of the investors remain undisclosed and the $5 million remains unclaimed in the Chicago Exchange account."''<ref>http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing1/witness_kleinberg.htm</ref>


In the days leading up to 9/11, analysis shows a rise in the put to call ratio for United Airlines and American Airlines, the two airlines from which planes were hijacked on 9/11. Between September 6 and 7, the ] recorded purchases of 4,744 "put" option contracts in UAL and 396 call options. On September 10, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings, with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. No other airline companies had an unusual put to call ratio in the days leading up to the attacks.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mystery-of-terror-insider-dealers-631325.html |location=London |work=The Independent |title=Mystery of terror 'insider dealers' |first=Chris |last=Blackhurst |date=October 14, 2001 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110310025104/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mystery-of-terror-insider-dealers-631325.html |archive-date=March 10, 2011 }}</ref> The 9/11 Commission concluded that all these abnormal patterns in trading were coincidental.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp | title=September 11 Put Call | work=] | date=December 11, 2005 | access-date=May 12, 2017}}</ref>
However, according to the 9/11 Commission, the SEC and FBI examined each trade, the trades were innocuous, and no evidence of a connection was found:
<blockquote>
A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10, the Commission said. Similarly, the Commission said, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, that recommended these trades.<ref>page 51 of the , PDF</ref></blockquote>
*Numerous conspiracy theorists express doubts that the Commission was actually able to explain worldwide trading patterns around the 9/11 attacks.<ref>http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html</ref><ref>http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/12_06_01_death_profits_pt1.html</ref>


Insurance companies saw anomalous trading activities as well. ], which estimated that its ] unit could pay $500 million in claims from the World Trade Center attack, had about 45 times the normal volume during three trading days before the attack for options that profit, if the stock falls below $40. Citigroup shares fell $1.25 in late trading to $38.09. ], which occupied 22 floors at the World Trade Center, experienced bigger-than-normal pre-attack trading of options that profited when stock prices fell. Other companies directly affected by the tragedy had similar jumps.<ref>{{cite news|work=Bloomberg News |date=September 20, 2001 |title=SEC asks Goldman, Lehman for data}}</ref>
==World Trade Center collapse as controlled demolition ==
{{main article|Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center}}
{{seealso|Collapse of the World Trade Center}}


The initial options were bought through at least two ]s, including ], a subsidiary of ], and ]. It was estimated that the trader or traders would have realized a five million dollar profit. The ] launched an ] investigation in which ] was a suspect after receiving information from at least one Wall Street Firm.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/profiting-from-disaster/ |title=Profiting From Disaster? |publisher=CBS News – 60&nbsp;Minutes |date=September 19, 2001 |access-date=October 15, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100924195744/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/19/eveningnews/main311834.shtml| archive-date=September 24, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref>
The collapse of the World Trade Center was a surprise to the engineering community. While no skyscraper had ever before completely collapsed due to fire or other local damage, three skyscrapers collapsed on September 11, 2001. The challenge for engineers was then to explain how the ''local'' damage caused by the airplanes (or, in the case of WTC 7, falling debris) was able to occasion a ''global'' progressive collapse. After an intensive three-year investigation, the ] published an account that has been largely accepted in the engineering community. The official collapse mechanism refers only to the aircraft impacts and the subsequent fires, which are taken to have caused sufficient structural damage to occasion the collapses. Conspiracy theorists emphasize that the only precedents for global collapse before 9/11 are controlled demolitions, and demand a more thorough investigation of this possibility.<ref name="Bazant2006">Bazant, Zdenek P. and Mathieu Verdure. "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" in ''Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE'', in press. PDF</ref><ref name="nistfaq">{{cite web |publisher= National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster|title = Answers to Frequently Asked Questions | date=August 30, 2006|url =http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm}}</ref>


The ] concluded that "Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf |title=Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States |page=172 |access-date=July 20, 2015 |date=July 22, 2004 |publisher=9-11commission.gov}}</ref> The report further stated:
The controlled demolition hypothesis plays a central, albeit not essential, role in the 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>See Michael Ruppert's, "The Kennedys, Physical Evidence, and 9/11", ''From the Wilderness'', 2003.</ref> Jeff King and ] were early defenders of the controlled demolition hypothesis and published their observations online.<ref>Plague Puppy, 9/11 Research</ref> David Ray Griffin included the theory in his book '']''. It received its most notable proponent to date in early 2006, when ], a physicist at ], argued that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges would defy the laws of physics.<ref>{{cite web | title = Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse | work = Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 3 | date = 2006, September | author = Dr. Steven E. Jones|url = http://worldtradecentertruth.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf}}</ref>


{{blockquote|text=Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options — investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price — surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10 — highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included ''buying'' 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.<ref>{{cite web |date=2004-07-22 |title=Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States |publisher=9-11commission.gov |page=499 |url=http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf |access-date=2015-07-20}}</ref>}}
There is a range of opinion about the most likely sort and amount of explosives, the way they were distributed, and how they were successfully brought into the building. Some conspiracy theorists propose a regular ], in which the role of the demolition charges would have been to remove the main structural supports in order to let gravity and the weight of the building do the rest. Steven Jones believes that the molten metal found underground weeks after 9/11 proves that jet fuel could not have been the only incendiary used that day, and that ] (thermate), perhaps in combination with other devices, was likely involved. Critics often argue that the difficulty of preparing the building for demolition without being noticed makes controlled demolition implausible. Proponents sometimes cite reports of what they believe are unusual power outages, maintenance work and emergency drills in the weeks leading up to ] 2001.


==== Air-defense stand-down theory ====
There is widespread agreement, however, about the ''significance'' of the ], even among those who don't endorse it specifically or conspiracy theories in general. The necessary devices could only have been planted well in advance of the ] attacks and would have required extraordinary access to three highly secured buildings.
A common claim among conspiracy theorists is that the ] (NORAD) issued a stand down order or deliberately scrambled fighters late to allow the hijacked airplanes to reach their targets without interference. According to this theory, NORAD had the capability of locating and intercepting planes on 9/11, and its failure to do so indicates a government conspiracy to allow the attacks to occur.<ref name="Molé|2006"/> Conspiracy theorist Mark R. Elsis says: "There is only one explanation for this&nbsp;... Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."<ref name="popularmechanics.com">{{cite web |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/911-myths?click=main_sr |title=Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report |publisher=Popular Mechanics |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101024055909/http://www.popularmechanics.com/911-myths?click=main_sr |archive-date=October 24, 2010 }}</ref><ref name="women.timesonline.co.uk">{{Cite news|author=David Aaronovitch|date=April 29, 2009|title=9/11 conspiracy theories: The truth is out there&nbsp;... just not on the internet|work=The Times|location=London|url=http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6187493.ece|url-status=dead|access-date=September 6, 2009|archive-date=July 21, 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090721050714/http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6187493.ece}}</ref>


One of the first actions taken by the hijackers on 9/11 was to turn off or disable each of the four aircraft's on board transponders. Without these transponder signals to identify the airplane's tail number, altitude, and speed, the hijacked airplanes would have been only blips among 4,500 other blips on NORAD's radar screens, making them very difficult to track.<ref name="Molé|2006"/>{{sfn|Dunbar|Reagan|2011|p=33}}
===Building Seven===
Conspiracy theorists frequently emphasise the collapse of ] in discussing the ]. They cite several reasons for this. First, they believe the collapse displayed especially clear features of a ]. Second, they say that since no plane hit the building, its collapse is even more difficult to explain than that of the two towers. Flaming debris did fall onto the building as a result of the collapse of the twin towers, but World Trade Center buildings 4, 5 and 6 remained standing despite also being severely damaged.<ref>{{cite web |title = ''Diesel suspected in 7 WTC collapse'' |url = http://web.archive.org/web/20020214182921/http:/www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0111290236nov29.story |publisher =New York Times News Service| date = November 29, 2001}}</ref> Third, researchers emphasise the style in which WTC7 collapsed: according to conspiracy theorists the collapse took 7 seconds, with constant acceleration close to
gravitational.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200612/911-Acceleration-Close-to-Free-Fall.pdf |title=9/11 – Acceleration Close to Free Fall |accessdate=2006-12-03 |author=Frank Legge (Ph D) |year=2006 |month=November |format=pdf |publisher= |pages=1,Volume 5 |quote=The observed acceleration, 9.06 m/s2, if maintained, would bring the roof to the ground in 6.2
seconds, very close to free fall in a vacuum, 6.0 seconds. There is no sign of the slow start that
would be expected if collapse was caused by the gradual softening of the steel.}} </ref> (FEMA described the collapse sequence as lasting 37 seconds, basing this on seismic evidence and videos of the roof of the building;<ref>, page 5-23.</ref> 9/11 researchers analyse video footages that show only the sudden collapse of the outer walls and refer to similarity with typical controlled demolitions<ref>{{cite video | people = Controlled Demolition Team | year = 2002 | title = Beirut Hilton implosion | url = http://www.controlled-demolition.com/images/client/beirut_hilton.mpg | format = mpg | location = Beirut | publisher = }}</ref>) Fourth, in a PBS documentary on the collapse, Larry Silverstein, the owner of the building, said the fire department had decided to "pull it".<ref>{{web cite|url=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329&q=trade+center+7&pl=true |title=Larry Silverstein on PBS Documentary (video) |date=2002, September}}</ref> Although his spokesperson later said Silverstein meant that firefighters had decided to withdraw from the building and the surrounding area for their own safety,<ref>http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Sep/16-241966.html</ref> many conspiracy theorists insist that "pull it" is technical slang in the demolition industry for demolish a building. (Whether or not this is what the phrase means has become a point of dispute.)<ref>Popular Mechanics. ''Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand up to the Facts''</ref> The official investigation into the collapse is still ongoing (a draft of the NIST report will be released in early 2007). NIST said they had to prioritize their investigations and chose to investigate the collapse of WTC buildings 1 and 2 first, and then building 7.<ref name="nistfaq"/> The fact that the building housed the offices of government agencies like the ],<ref></ref> the ], and the ], along with the City of New York's emergency command bunker has also fueled conspiracy theories.


On 9/11, only 14 fighter jets were on alert in the contiguous 48 states. There was no automated method for the civilian air traffic controllers to alert NORAD.{{sfn|Dunbar|Reagan|2011|p=32}} A passenger aircraft had not been hijacked in the U.S. since 1979.<ref>{{cite AV media |medium=Television production|title = 9/11: The Conspiracy Files |url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6160775.stm |publisher = ] |date = February 18, 2007 |access-date=January 1, 2010}}</ref> "They had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Only one civilian plane—a ] with golfer Payne Stewart and five others on board—was intercepted by NORAD over North America in the decade prior to 9/11, which took one hour and 19&nbsp;minutes.{{sfn|Dunbar|Reagan|2011|p=38}}
=== Mini-Nukes or Energy Weapons ===
A small number of theorists -- ], Judy Wood, ] and ] -- believe that the widespread damage and eventual collapse of the Twin Towers was caused by a "mini-nuke" or energy weapon. Since the resignation of ], Kevin Ryan and others from the ] group, James Fetzer has broadened its scope to encourage the consideration of these theories, and has endorsed the exploration of the possible use of mini-nukes, directed energy weapons, and even of ] for this purpose. Among these theories is one first proposed by ] and ].<ref></ref> Researchers ] and ] have published refutations to claims that "nukes" were used<ref></ref><ref></ref> and Jones has questioned whether the space weapon theories are even testable.<ref>Jones, Steven. "My Response to 'An Open Letter'".</ref>


Rules in effect at that time, and on 9/11, barred supersonic flight on intercepts. Before 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore ] (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," says FAA spokesman Bill Schumann. After 9/11, the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation. They set up hotlines between command centers while NORAD increased its fighter coverage and installed radar to watch airspace over the continent.<ref name="popularmechanics.com" />
==Pentagon not hit by an airplane==
{{see also|American Airlines Flight 77}}


The longest warning NORAD received of the hijackings was some eight minutes for American Airlines Flight 11, the first flight hijacked. The FAA alerted NORAD to the hijacked Flight 175 at just about the same time it was crashing into the World Trade Center's South Tower. The FAA notified NORAD of the missing – not hijacked – Flight 77 three minutes before it struck the Pentagon.
]
]
Claims that the Pentagon was hit by something significantly smaller than a ] (typically a ] or smaller aircraft) have been raised by some conspiracy theorists based on photographs in which there appears to be a lack of expected debris or pieces of a commercial aircraft within the immediate impact area, and what some believe is a lack of damage to the building and the lawn. The first person to suggest that a missile hit the Pentagon was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in an interview on October 12, 2001,{{fact}} which helped set up this claim. Subsequently, ] in his book '']'' gave this claim much more visibility. He also advanced the idea with his website ''Hunt the Boeing!''<ref></ref> and the popular internet videos '']'' and "]". A likely cause of these ideas, some say, was the initial scarcity of documentation of the attack. At first the only evidence available consisted of long distance photographs and video footage<ref name="pentagon footage">{{cite web|url=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1375208054676470714&q=loose+change+final+cut&hl=en |publisher=Louder Then Words |title=Our Presentation from the American Scholars Symposium}} - forward to 43 minute and 06 seconds for Bob Pugh's footage of The Pentagon minutes after the attack</ref> taken after the attack, eyewitness testimony from individuals at the scene, and five video frames captured by a security camera which were released on ], ]. A large amount of evidence was later released after the ] trial and several ] requests.


Regarding United Airlines Flight 93, Major General Larry Arnold indicated that there had been time to intercept the plane. However, NORAD was awaiting authorization to shoot it down, a decision that was ultimately obviated by the extraordinary bravery of the passengers who stormed the cockpit, leading to the plane's crash in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.<ref>{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ/page/123|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|pages=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref>
Suspicions were additionally fueled by a lack of video footage of the impact of the jetliner, since many assume that the Pentagon must be subject to intense camera surveillance for security reasons. In addition to the Pentagon's own security cameras, these people also noted that security camera footage from a nearby ] gas station and from the Virginia Department of Transportation was swiftly confiscated by the US government. On ], ] the security camera footage was released as part of a Judicial Watch's FOIA request.<ref name="foia">{{cite web|url=http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2006/DOD-FOIA-pentagon-attack.pdf |publisher=Judicial Watch |title=FOIA request}}</ref><ref name="pentagon footage2">{{cite web|url=http://www.judicialwatch.org/flight77.shtml |publisher=Judicial Watch |title=Defense Department Releases Two Videos of Flight 77 Crashing Into Pentagon}}</ref> However, due to a low number of frames per second, the videos do not clearly show the impact of the plane, only the approach of the plane (at an angle) and the explosion cloud, thus keeping the "no Boeing" theory popular. In addition to the security cam footage, the Citgo footage was released on ], ], but did not show the attacks.<ref></ref> The ] hotel, located nearby in ], also had a security camera video, and on ], ] the FBI released the video in response to a freedom of information lawsuit filed by Scott Bingham.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/4821121.html |title=FBI Releases New Footage of 9/11 Pentagon Attack |publisher=KWTX News |date=December 5, 2006}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H285_DWX_bQ|title=Flight77.info's FOIA Release: Doubletree Hotel 9/11 |publisher=Flight77.info/ YouTube}}</ref> No plane can be seen entering the Pentagon since the camera was mounted on a lower point on the Doubletree Hotel and an elevated highway obstructs the view of the Pentagon.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/index.php?title=Doubletree |title=Doubletree Hotel security video |publisher=debunk911myths.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doubletree.com/en/dt/hotels/index.jhtml?ctyhocn=DCAAEDT |title=Doubletree Hotel Crystal City-National Airport |publisher=Doubletree Hotels}}</ref>


==== Alleged communications leak ====
A few fringe conspiracy theorists also consider ] pilot ] as a "prime suspect" in the conspiracy.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/theories.html |title=Killtown's: Did Flight 77 really crash into the Pentagon?}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.loosechange911.com/lc2e.htm |title=Loose Change, 2nd Edition |publisher=Louder Than Words}}</ref> In response to these accusations and the ] video, his sister, Debra, remarked "The only thing they (the filmmakers) seem to have gotten right about the Sept. 11 attacks is the date when they occurred...They aren't truth-tellers looking to save the world. They're con artists hoping to sucker conspiracy-theory paranoids or anti-government malcontents into shelling out their hard-earned dollars."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-27-conspiracies-sept-11_x.htm |title=Conspiracy film rewrites Sept. 11 |publisher=USA Today |date=April 29, 2006}}</ref>
] and ] criticized claims by ] who stated, "certain suspects in the September 11th attacks may have managed to stay ahead of them by knowing who and when investigators are calling on the telephone," by using information from ], an Israeli-based private communications company, and ], another Israeli-run company that provides electronic eavesdropping technology for the U.S. government.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Berger |first1=Matthew |title=Jews Worry That 'baseless' Report on 9/11 Could Be a Blow to Israel |url=https://www.jta.org/archive/jews-worry-that-baseless-report-on-911-could-be-a-blow-to-israel |website=Jewish Telegraphic Agency|date=March 20, 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Safian |first1=Alex |title=Fox News's Carl Cameron Recycles More Rubbish |url=https://www.camera.org/article/fox-news-s-carl-cameron-recycles-more-rubbish/ |website=CAMERA}}</ref>


==== Israeli agents ====
The Pentagon "no Boeing" theory constitutes a controversial issue, even among conspiracy theorists, many of whom have said that this claim is "disproved" by hundreds of eyewitnesses and physical evidence, suggesting it is disinformation to create a supposedly easily discredited straw man argument.<ref>http://www.911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html </ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> Several researchers have argued that the wings would cause less damage than the plane's main body, that photographs of large amounts of wreckage and debris matching a 757 have become available, that the appearance of the size of the hole is typically misrepresented; and that the actual fuselage diameter of 12 feet is a much more relevant dimension for the deepest parts of the hole than the overall 44-foot height of the 757's tail.<ref></ref><ref>{{snopes|link=http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm |title=Hunt the Boeing!}}</ref> They also emphasize reports from numerous eyewitnesses, including commuters on nearby roads,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/daily/sep01/attack.html |title=Extensive Casualties' in Wake of Pentagon Attack |publisher=The Washington Post |date=September 11, 2001}}</ref> nearby apartment buildings,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2001/09/12/AR2005033108366.html |title=Loud Boom, Then Flames In Hallways |publisher=The Washington Post |date=September 12, 2001 |author=Sheridan, Mary Beth}}</ref> and other surrounding locations. Many witnesses saw the aircraft close up as it approached the Pentagon and described it as an American Airlines Boeing 757.<ref>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.32.html</ref><ref></ref><ref></ref>
{{See also|September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories#Israel}}
It has been claimed that ] may have had foreknowledge of the attacks, and a persistent theory claimed Israeli and/or Jewish involvement.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Greenberg|first1=Richard|title=The 9/11 Lie that Won't Die|url=https://www.jta.org/2006/08/31/lifestyle/the-911-lie-that-wont-die|website=JTA|date=August 31, 2006|access-date=November 13, 2019}}</ref> Four hours after the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment building, for "puzzling behavior." The Israelis were videotaping the events, and one bystander said they acted in a suspicious manner: "They were like happy, you know&nbsp;... They didn't look shocked to me. I thought it was very strange." The van was found to be owned by an Israeli-owned company called Urban Moving, which the FBI believed was providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation. The case was then moved to the FBI's Foreign Counterintelligence Section. According to a former CIA operations chief, "many people in the U.S. intelligence community believed that some of the men arrested were working for Israeli intelligence." A spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in the United States said the men had not been involved in any intelligence operation in the United States. The FBI eventually concluded that the five Israelis probably had no foreknowledge of the attacks.<ref name="White Van"> ] June 21, 2002</ref>


=== World Trade Center ===
] also released a study with results that recreated the attack. In explaining the damage, the study argued that the plane was like a "sausage skin" because of the speed of impact.<ref>, website of ]</ref>
{{See also|World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories}}
] on the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings plays a central role in theories about an alleged controlled demolition. The picture shows the simulated exterior buckling of ] during the collapse.]]


The plane crashes and resulting fires caused the ]. ] say the collapse of the North Tower, South Tower, or of ] was caused by explosives installed in the buildings in advance.
Adding to confusion is an interview with Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense at the time, published by Parade Magazine
and which is still hosted at http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html where
Rumsfeld mentions "Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens,
and the '''missile''' to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center." (Emphasis added.)


Demolition theory proponents, such as ] physicist ], architect ], software engineer ], and theologian ], argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional factors weakening the structures.
==Flight 175 "pod" claims==


In the article "Active Thermotic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe", which appeared in the ''Open Chemical Physics Journal'', authors Niels Harrit of the ]'s Department of Chemistry, Jeffrey Farrer of ]'s Department of Physics and Astronomy, Steven E. Jones, and others state that ] and ] composites in the dust and debris were found following the collapse of the three buildings. The article contained no scientific rebuttal and the editor in chief of the publication subsequently resigned.<ref name=NYTCountersTheories>{{Cite news | author=Jim Dwyer | title=2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11 | date=September 2, 2006 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/nyregion/02conspiracy.html | access-date=April 30, 2009 | work=The New York Times | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110512221337/http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/nyregion/02conspiracy.html | archive-date=May 12, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref name="Deseret-Dean-2006">{{Cite news |last=Dean |first=Suzanne |journal=Deseret Morning News |title=Physicist says heat substance felled WTC |date=April 10, 2006 |url=http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635198488,00.html |access-date=May 7, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090510002116/http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1%2C5143%2C635198488%2C00.html |archive-date=May 10, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news | last=Barber | first=Peter | date=July 8, 2008 | journal=Financial Times | title=The truth is out there | url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html | access-date=May 23, 2009 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090603164130/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html | archive-date=June 3, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>
Some conspiracy theorists say there was a "pod" of some sort under the aircraft which hit the South Tower. This theory has mainly been propagated by ''911 In Plane Site'', ''Let’s Roll 911'' and ''Reopen 911''. Theories as to what this pod may have been have ranged from a missile to simply the Boeing’s left fairing.<ref> </ref> The website ''911 In Plane Site'' cited an analysis by a Spanish university as proof that there were objects on the base of the plane. The report says that the "only explanation" for these objects is that they are "in relief."<ref></ref>


Jones has not explained how the amount of explosive needed to bring down the buildings could have been positioned in the two buildings without drawing attention, but mentioned efforts to research the buildings' maintenance activity in the weeks prior to the event. Federal investigators at the National Institute of Standards and Technology state that enormous quantities of thermite would have to be applied to the structural columns to damage them, but Jones disputed this, saying that he and others were investigating "superthermite".<ref name=NYTCountersTheories/> Brent Blanchard, author of "A History of Explosive Demolition in America",<ref name=HEDA>{{cite conference | author = Brent Blanchard | title = A History of Explosive Demolition in America | book-title = Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique | pages = 27–44 | date=February 2002 | issn =0732-619X | publisher = International Society of Explosives Engineers}}</ref> who corresponded with Jones, states that questions about the viability of Jones' theories remain unanswered, such as the fact that no demolition personnel noticed any telltale signs of thermite during the eight months of debris removal following the towers' collapse. Blanchard also said that a verifiable chain of possession needs to be established for the tested beams, which did not occur with the beams Jones tested, raising questions of whether the metal pieces tested could have been cut away from the debris pile with acetylene torches, shears, or other potentially contaminated equipment while on site, or exposed to trace amounts of thermite or other compounds while being handled, while in storage, or while being transferred from Ground Zero to memorial sites.
Both 9/11 researchers and their critics have published refutations of the pod claims. The websites oilempire.us,<ref></ref> 911review.com,<ref></ref> and questionsquestions.net<ref></ref> have each provided critiques illustrating that the pod claim is not supported in the evidence. Those promoting the pod theory were sometimes referred to as the "pod people."<ref></ref><ref></ref>


]
Popular Mechanics’ “Debunking the 9/11 Myths” quotes Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University, who said that the sunlight is glinting off the plane, and that “such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film, which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images--the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels.” They said that “the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear”.<ref></ref>
Jones also said that molten steel found in the rubble was evidence of explosives, as an ordinary airplane fire would not generate enough heat to produce this, citing photographs of red debris being removed by construction equipment, but Blanchard said that if there had been any molten steel in the rubble any excavation equipment encountering it would have been immediately damaged.<ref name=NYTCountersTheories/> Other sampling of the pulverized dust by ] and RJ Lee did not report any evidence of thermite or explosives. It has been theorized the "thermite material" found was primer paint.<ref name=BBCMag>. '']''. August 28, 2011</ref> Dave Thomas of '']'' magazine, noting that the residue in question was claimed to be thermotic because of its iron oxide and aluminum composition, pointed out that these substances are found in many items common to the towers. Thomas said that in order to cut through a vertical steel beam, special high-temperature containment must be added to prevent the molten iron from dropping down, and that the thermite reaction is too slow for it to be practically used in building demolition. Thomas pointed out that when ] hired ] to conduct a demonstration showing nanothermite slicing through a large steel beam, the nanothermite produced copious flame and smoke but no damage to the beam, even though it was in a horizontal, and therefore optimal, position.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Thomas | first1=Dave | title=The 9/11 Truth Movement: The Top Conspiracy Theory, a Decade Later | journal=] | date=July–August 2011 | pages=34–40 | volume=35 | issue=4 | url=http://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_9_11_truth_movement_the_top_conspiracy_theory_a_decade_later/ | access-date=September 11, 2012 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120923074425/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_9_11_truth_movement_the_top_conspiracy_theory_a_decade_later | archive-date=September 23, 2012 | url-status=dead | df=mdy-all }}</ref>


The ] (NIST) concluded the accepted version was more than sufficient to explain the collapse of the buildings. NIST and many scientists have refused to debate conspiracy theorists because they feel it would give those theories unwarranted credibility.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/06/ap/national/mainD8JB6LTG0.shtml | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071224135836/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/06/ap/national/mainD8JB6LTG0.shtml | archive-date=December 24, 2007 | title=9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Thriving | work = CBS News | date=August 6, 2006 | access-date=July 12, 2009}}</ref> Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings without the use of explosives.<ref name="bazant07">{{cite journal | doi=10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:3(308) | title=Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions | year=2007 | last1=Bažant | first1=Zdenek P. | last2=Verdure | first2=Mathieu | journal=Journal of Engineering Mechanics | volume=133 | issue=3 | pages=308–19 | quote=As generally accepted by the community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering (though not by a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives), the failure scenario was as follows...}}</ref><ref name="ProfessorsOfParanoia">{{cite web|last = Gravois | first = John | date=June 23, 2006 | url=http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm | title = Professors of Paranoia? | publisher = The Chronicle of Higher Education | access-date=September 26, 2009}}</ref><ref name="conspiraciesContinueToAbound">{{Cite journal | last=Asquith | first=Christina | date=September 7, 2006 | title=Conspiracies Continue to Abound Surrounding 9/11: On the Eve of the Fifth Anniversary, a Group of Professors Say the Attacks Were an 'Inside Job' | journal=Diverse Issues in Higher Education | volume=23 | issue=15 | url=http://diverseeducation.com/article/6337/}}</ref> As a result, NIST said that it did not perform any test for the residue of explosive compounds of any kind in the debris.<ref name="nistfaq"/>
''911 IPS'' responded to this by saying that “the anomaly could not have been the fairing because it protrudes beyond the front of the wing.”<ref></ref>


Soon after the day of the attacks, major media sources published that the towers had collapsed due to heat melting the steel.<ref name='BBC_Melt_Steel'>{{Cite news| first=Sheila | last=Barter | title=How the World Trade Center fell | date=September 13, 2001 | work=BBC News | url =http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1540044.stm | access-date=December 2, 2009}} "But steel melts, and 24,000 gallons (91,000 litres) of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire."</ref><ref name='NewScientist_Melt_Steel'>{{cite web | url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1281 | title=Design choice for towers saved lives | access-date=December 2, 2009 | last=Samuel | first=Eugenie | author2=Damian Carrington | date=September 12, 2001 | publisher=New Scientist}}</ref>
=== "Flash" claims before Flight 175 hit the South Tower ===
Many of the same conspiracy theorists supporting the pod claim have often alleged a flash as the plane hit the tower as proof that there was a missile launched from the underside of the plane. ''911 IPS'' says that the flash could not be a reflection, as it was caught on camera from four different angles, and it is their theory that an object cannot reflect light in more than one direction. In addition, they said that sparks or static discharge "have been ruled out by every airline pilot we have spoken with."<ref></ref>


While the theoretical ], this assumes perfect conditions, such as no heat loss and complete combustion in a stoichiometric mix of pure oxygen. In real-world conditions, such as burning kerosene in normal air, flame temperatures typically range from . These temperatures are far below the ] (1,539°C). However, steel loses approximately . This weakening, combined with the removal of fireproofing by the initial impact and prolonged exposure to fire, may have contributed to the structural failures observed during the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.
As with the pod claims, 9/11 researchers published refutations of these ideas, such as questionsquestions.net,<ref></ref> oilempire.us,<ref></ref> and 911review.com, which states,


Further, NIST did not claim that the steel melted, but rather that heat softened and weakened the steel, and that weakening, together with the damage caused by the planes' impacts, caused structural collapse.<ref name="nistfaq" /> NIST reported that a simulation model based on the simple assumption that combustible vapors burned immediately upon mixing with the incoming air showed that "at any given location, the duration of gas temperatures near 1,000&nbsp;°C was about 15 to 20 minutes. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were 500&nbsp;°C or below."<ref>{{cite web | publisher=NIST | title=NCSTAR 1. Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers | date=September 2005 | url=http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201.pdf | page=129 | access-date=December 1, 2009 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20091108202443/http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201.pdf | archive-date=November 8, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>
:"The most plausible explanation for the flashes we've seen is that the kinetic energy of the collisions vaporized a mix of materials, including steel and aluminum, which were rapidly oxidized by the pressure and heat of the 400+ mph collision."<ref></ref>


=== Pentagon ===
But when Popular Mechanics published an article debunking the 16 most prevalent conspiracy theories, the flash theory was not amongst them.<ref></ref>
] footage of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon (at 1:26 in the video)]]
]
] scattered near the Pentagon on the day of the attack]]


Political activist ] and filmmaker ] claim that ] did not crash into ]. Instead, they argue that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government. Some claim that the holes in the Pentagon walls were far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757: "How does a plane 125&nbsp;ft. wide and 155&nbsp;ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60&nbsp;ft. across?" Meyssan's book, ''L'Effroyable Imposture'' (published in English as ''9/11: The Big Lie'') became available in more than a dozen languages. When released, the book was heavily criticized by both the mainstream French and American press, and later, from within the ]. The French newspaper ''Liberation'' called the book "a tissue of wild and irresponsible allegations, entirely without foundation."<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite web |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?do=print |title=Popular Mechanics |publisher=Popular Mechanics |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080329153037/http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?do=print |archive-date=March 29, 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/01/september11.france |title=US invented air attack on Pentagon, claims French book |work=The Guardian |location=London |first=Jon |last=Henley |date=April 12, 2002 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090617172525/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/01/september11.france |archive-date=June 17, 2009 |url-status=live |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref><ref name="ConspiracyTheoristsDownButNotOut">{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4990686.stm |title=Conspiracy theorists down but not out |author=Paul Reynolds |date=May 16, 2006 |work=BBC News|access-date=September 26, 2009}}</ref>
==United Airlines Flight 93==
There are several conspiracy theories surrounding the crash of ] in ].


In response to the conspiracy theorists' claim of a missile hitting the Pentagon, Mete Sozen, a professor of civil engineering at ] argues that: "A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building. When Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, one wing hit the ground and the other was sheared off by the Pentagon's load-bearing columns."<ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref>{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ/page/111|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|pages=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref> According to '']'', the reason the Pentagon took relatively little damage from the impact was because Wedge One had recently been renovated.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html |title=Pentagon Battered but Firm – 2001.1003 |publisher=ArchitectureWeek |date=October 3, 2001 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110605050850/http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html| archive-date=June 5, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> (This was part of a renovation program which had been begun in the 1980s, and Wedge One was the first of five to be renovated.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dtic.mil/ref/html/Welcome/renovations.html |title=The Pentagon Renovation Program |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20010804065429/http://www.dtic.mil/ref/html/Welcome/renovations.html |archive-date=August 4, 2001 |url-status=dead}}</ref>)
] notes a three-minute discrepancy in the cockpit voice recording immediately prior to the flight's crash.<ref name="shotdown"></ref> The cockpit voice recorder transcripts end at 10:03 a.m.,<ref></ref> but Cleveland Air Traffic Control reported that Flight 93 went out of radar contact at 10:06 a.m., and FAA radar records also note a time of 10:06 a.m.<ref name="shotdown"/> Seismologists record an impact at 10:06:05 a.m., +/- a couple of seconds.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/publications/download/911pentagon.pdf |title=Seismic Observations during September 11, 2001, Terrorist Attack (pdf) |author=Kim, Won-Young and Gerald R. Baum |accessmonthday=11 April |accessyear=2006}}</ref>


Evidence contradicting some conspiracy theorists' claim of a missile hitting the Pentagon have been described by researchers within the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as Jim Hoffman, in his essay "The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows", and by others broadly refuting the role of other conspiracies in the attacks. The evidence refuting missile claims includes airplane debris including Flight 77's ],<ref>{{Cite news| title=Searchers find Pentagon black boxes | date=September 14, 2001 | url =https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/14/pentagon-fire.htm | work =USA Today |access-date=May 1, 2010}}</ref> the nose cone, landing gear,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://hamptonroads.com/pilotonline/special/911/pentagon3.html |title=Inside the Pentagon on 9/11: The Call of Duty |access-date=May 1, 2010 |last=Swift |first=Earl |date=September 9, 2002 |work=Pilot Online |publisher=Virginian-Pilot |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040730074824/http://www.hamptonroads.com/pilotonline/special/911/pentagon3.html |archive-date=July 30, 2004}}</ref> an airplane tire,<ref>{{Cite news| title=Where were you when ... | date=September 6, 2002 | url =http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2002/09/09/story1.html | work =Wichita Business Journal |access-date=May 1, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100413203349/http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2002/09/09/story1.html| archive-date=April 13, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> and an intact cockpit seat<ref>{{cite news|url=http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069699/ |title=On the ground at the Pentagon on Sept. 11 |access-date=May 1, 2010 |date=September 28, 2001 |publisher=MSNBC |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040526034459/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069699/ |archive-date=May 26, 2004}}</ref> were observed at the crash site. The remains of passengers from Flight 77 were indeed found at the Pentagon crash site and their identities confirmed by ] analysis.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/armymed/news/releases/afip.htm |title=Experts ID 184 Pentagon Fatalities |access-date=May 7, 2010 |last=Kelly |first=Christopher C. |date=January 11, 2002 |publisher=U.S. Army Medical Department |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020815123251/http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/armymed/news/releases/afip.htm |archive-date=August 15, 2002}}</ref> Foreign governments, such as the ] (FMPRC), also confirms the death of their citizens onboard Flight 77.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Spokesman on the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington |publisher=Consulate General of China, New York |date=2001-09-13 |url=http://www.nyconsulate.prchina.org/eng/17928.html |archiveurl=https://archive.today/20020603060503/http://www.nyconsulate.prchina.org/eng/17928.html |archivedate=2002-06-03|accessdate=2002-06-03}}</ref> Many eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Further, Flight 77 passengers made phone calls reporting that their airplane had been hijacked. For example, passenger Renee May called her mother to tell her that the plane had been hijacked and that the passengers had been herded to the back of the plane. Another passenger named ] called her husband (U.S. Solicitor General ]) and said that the flight had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had ] and ].<ref name="usgovDidPlaneHitPentagon">{{cite web
Some conspiracy theorists believe there is a cover up of evidence as the Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder from Flight 93 have not been released to the general public. However, a 1990 Congressional Law prohibits the “public disclosure cockpit voice recorder recordings and transcriptions, in whole or in part, of oral communications by and between flight crew members and ground stations…”<ref></ref>
|url=http://www.america.gov/st/webchat-english/2009/April/20050628163417atlahtnevel0.1261103.html
And on April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings.<ref></ref> This was made possible because the FBI controlled the investigation, as opposed to the NTSB as in typical air disasters.<ref></ref>
|title=Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?
|publisher=Bureau of International Information Programs, ]
|date=April 19, 2009
|access-date=September 6, 2009
|url-status=dead
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130315195123/http://www.america.gov/st/webchat-english/2009/April/20050628163417atlahtnevel0.1261103.html
|archive-date=March 15, 2013
}}</ref><ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.america.gov/st/webchat-english/2009/May/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html |title=The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories |publisher=America.gov |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090714061116/http://www.america.gov/st/webchat-english/2009/May/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html |archive-date=July 14, 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|page=|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref> Some conspiracy theories say the phone calls the passengers made were fabricated by voice morphing, the passengers' bodies disposed of, and a missile fired at the Pentagon.<ref name="Dunbar|Reagan|2011"/><ref>{{Cite news |title=September 11 conspiracy theories continue to abound |work=The Guardian |access-date=March 15, 2012 |date=September 5, 2011 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/05/september-11-conspiracy-theories |location=London |first=Chris |last=McGreal}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |issn=1091-2339 |last=Stahl |first=Jeremy |title=The Theory vs. the Facts |work=Slate |access-date=March 15, 2012 |date=September 7, 2011 |url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/trutherism/2011/09/the_theory_vs_the_facts.html}}</ref>


The pressure group ] filed a ] request on December 15, 2004, to force the government to release video recordings from the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, Pentagon security cameras and the Virginia Department of Transportation. On May 16, 2006, the government released the Pentagon security camera videos to Judicial Watch.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4987716.stm| title=US releases 9/11 Pentagon video|work=BBC News| date=May 16, 2006}}</ref> The image of American Airlines Flight 77 which appears in the videos has been described as " white blob" and "a white streak" (by the BBC),<ref>{{cite news|title=US releases 9/11 Pentagon tape|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_4980000/newsid_4988000/4988038.stm?bw=nb&mp=rm&news=1&bbcws=1|work=BBC News|access-date=May 5, 2011|format=Video|quote=At first it's hard to make out the hijacked plane, but if one looks closely at the lower right-hand corner, the blured white blob entering the frame appears to be the nose of the plane, skidding along the ground at high speed before crashing into the Pentagon, and not a missile. That adds to images from a second security camera, ten feet away, which show a white streak in the lower right-hand corner, then the explosion.|date=May 16, 2006}}</ref> "a thin white blur" (by The ]),<ref>{{cite news|title=Video of 9/11 plane hitting Pentagon is released |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna12818225 |work=NBC News |access-date=May 5, 2011 |agency=Associated Press |date=May 16, 2006 |quote=The airplane is a thin white blur on the video as it slams into the Pentagon at ground level. }}</ref> and "a silver speck low to the ground" (in '']'').<ref>{{cite news|last=Markon|first=Jerry|title=Videos Released Of Plane Crashing Into Pentagon|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051600788.html|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=May 5, 2011|date=May 17, 2006|quote=In one of the videos, the plane shoots across the screen from the right, a silver speck low to the ground.}}</ref> A sequence of five frames from one of the videos already appeared in the media in 2002.<ref>{{cite news|title=In pictures: Pentagon crash|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1861977.stm|work=BBC News|access-date=May 6, 2011|date=March 8, 2002}}</ref> Some conspiracy theorists believe the new video does not answer their questions.<ref>{{cite news|title=US releases 9/11 Pentagon tape|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_4980000/newsid_4988000/4988038.stm?bw=nb&mp=rm&news=1&bbcws=1|work=BBC News|access-date=May 5, 2011|format=Video|quote= and other skeptics believe the new video does not answer any of their questions. ''Why'' did it take four and a half years to release more ambiguous frames that still do not prove the government's case definitively?|date=May 16, 2006}}</ref>
===Claims that Flight 93 was shot down===
Some conspiracy theorists who question the common account of United Airlines Flight 93 crashing as a result of an attempted cockpit invasion, have speculated that it was shot down by US fighter jets.<ref></ref><ref></ref>


=== Flight 93 ===
This idea was promoted by author ] in his book ''The New Pearl Harbor,'' who cited ]. Thompson examined a number of mainstream media reports and says that fighter jets were actually much closer to Flight 93 at the time of the crash than stated in the official record.<ref></ref> He mentions witnesses who noticed a small white jet near the impact site soon after the crash.<ref></ref> However, some say this was likely a business jet the ATC asked to investigate the crash area and that descended to an altitude of around 1500 ft to survey the impact. Ben Sliney, who was the FAA operation manager on September 11, 2001, says no military aircraft were near Flight 93.<ref></ref>
]


The fourth plane hijacked on 9/11, ], crashed in an open field near ], ], after the passengers revolted. Out of the four planes hijacked on that day, Flight 93 was the only one not to reach its target.<ref name="news.bbc.co.uk">{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6341851.stm#8 |title=Programmes &#124; Conspiracy Files &#124; Q&A: What really happened |work=BBC News |date=February 16, 2007 |access-date=July 20, 2009}}</ref>
Thompson and other conspiracy theorists note that pieces of Flight 93 were found far from the crash site and suggest that this may be evidence of a shoot-down.<ref></ref> NTSB investigators say they have found no evidence the plane was shot down. 9/11 conspiracy theorists say:
*The existence of multiple debris fields located miles away from the crash site<ref></ref>
*Eyewitness accounts that debris fell out of the sky like confetti<ref></ref>
* The military had known about the WTC strikes and would have investigated a plane off its flight path nearing the White House, or Three Mile Island depending on the intended target<ref></ref>


One conspiracy theory surrounding this event is the claim that Flight 93 was shot down by a U.S. fighter jet. ] and ] have asserted that large parts of the plane, including the main body of the engine, landed miles away from the main wreckage site, too far away for an ordinary plane crash. Jones says that planes usually leave a small debris field when they crash, and that this is not compatible with reports of wreckage found farther away from the main crash site. One person claimed that the main body of the engine was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner.<ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref name="news.bbc.co.uk" />
'']'', however, argued that debris exploding away and landing far from the crash scene is not a unique occurrence in commercial airline accidents.<ref></ref>


According to some theories, the plane had to be shot down by the government because passengers had found out about the alleged plot.<ref name="women.timesonline.co.uk"/>
=== Claims that Flight 93 never crashed ===


According to Phil Molé of '']'' magazine, " claim rests largely on unsupported assertions that the main body of the engine and other large parts of the plane turned up miles from the main wreckage site, too far away to have resulted from an ordinary crash. This claim is incorrect, because the engine was found only 300&nbsp;yards from the main crash site, and its location was consistent with the direction in which the plane had been traveling."<ref name="Molé|2006"/> Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of ] in 1996, says that, at very high velocities of 500&nbsp;mph or more, it would only take a few seconds to move or tumble across the ground for 300&nbsp;yards.<ref name="Molé|2006"/><ref name="ReferenceA"/>
Some conspiracy theorists speculate that Flight 93 landed safely in ]. The website Physics911 says that the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was actually not United 93 and that the flights involved in the 9/11 attacks were landed and substituted with other aircraft.<ref></ref> However other websites refute this claim<ref></ref>and point to the wreckage at the scene and witness testimony,<ref></ref> aside from the difficulty of "plane swapping". Often cited is a preliminary AP story on Flight 93’s safe landing at a ] airport by WCPO, a local Cincinnati ] affiliate.<ref></ref> It was later learned Delta Flight 1989 was the plane confused with Flight 93. WCPO has since retracted the story noting its earlier factual inaccuracies.<ref></ref>


Reports of wreckage discovered at Indian Lake by local residents are accurate. CNN reported that investigators found debris from the crash at least eight miles away from the crash site, including in ].<ref>{{Cite news|publisher=CNN|title='Black box' from Pennsylvania crash found|date=September 13, 2001|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/penn.attack/|access-date=July 19, 2009}}</ref> According to CNN, this debris was all very light material that the wind would have easily blown away, and a ''Pittsburgh Post-Gazette'' article from September 14, 2001, describes the material as "mostly papers", "strands of charred insulation", and an "endorsed paycheck". The same article quotes FBI agent Bill Crowley that, "Lighter, smaller debris probably shot into the air on the heat of a fireball that witnesses said shot several hundred feet into the air after the jetliner crashed. Then, it probably rode a wind that was blowing southeast at about 9&nbsp;m.p.h."<ref>{{Cite news |first=James |last=O'Toole |author2=Tom Gibb|author3=Cindi Lash |title=Flight data recorder may hold clues to suicide flight |date=September 14, 2001 |publisher=Pittsburgh Post-Gazette |url=http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010914scene0914p2.asp |access-date=July 12, 2009}}</ref> Also, the distance between the crash site and Indian Lake was misreported in some accounts. According to the BBC, "In a straight line, Indian Lake is just over a mile from the crash site. The road between the two locations takes a roundabout route of 6.9&nbsp;miles—accounting for the erroneous reports."<ref name="news.bbc.co.uk" />
===Claims that cell phone calls were impossible===
During the flight of Flight 93 passengers made a number of calls to both family and emergency personnel. It is argued by some that connecting a cell phone to a tower's signal would have been near to impossible from the air. Based on this assumption, economist ] suggests the calls were fabricated or never made at all.<ref></ref>
*In 2003 a Canadian team conducted experiments to determine if cell phones could be used from civilian aircraft flying at cruising speeds and altitudes. Their results show a 75% success rate at 2000 feet, 25% at 4000 feet, and 17-18% at 6-8000 feet.<ref></ref>
*] researchers published results of a study in which they monitored spectrum frequencies generated by cell phone use during commercial passenger flights. They concluded that one to four cell phone calls are made during each average passenger flight, contrary to ] and ] regulations.<ref></ref> The study makes no mention of the length of the calls or whether a successful air-ground connection was actually made during the monitored transmissions.
*According to official accounts, at 9:58 a.m.,<ref name="P200055">{{cite web |url=http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200055.html |title=Moussaoui Trial Exhibit #P200055 |publisher=U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia}}</ref> moments before Flight 93 crashed, ] dialed ] from his cell phone from the lavatory of the aircraft and his call was answered by dispatcher John Shaw. Felt was able to tell the dispatcher about the hijacking before the call was out of range and subsequently disconnected.<ref></ref> At the time of the call, the aircraft had descended to 5,000 feet, over ],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ntsb.gov/info/Flight%20_Path_%20Study_UA93.pdf |publisher=NTSB |title=United 93 Flight Path Study}}</ref> which together with ] has the highest summits in ], at ~3,000 feet in elevation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.americasroof.com/highest/pa.shtml |title=Pennsylvania Highest Named Summits |publisher=americasroof.com |accessdate=2006-10-29}}</ref>


Some conspiracy theorists believe a small white jet seen flying over the crash area may have fired a missile to shoot down Flight 93.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7 |title=Flight 93 |access-date=July 12, 2009 |date=March 2005 |work=Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report |publisher=Popular Mechanics |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090704084428/http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7 |archive-date=July 4, 2009 }}</ref>{{Dubious| reason=In the reference, no one specifically theorizes that the "small white jet" observed by witnesses committed a shootdown. An Air Force jet or a U.S. Customs airplane are conjectured. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7|date=December 2009}} Government agencies such as the FBI assert this small plane was a ] business jet asked to descend to an altitude of around 1,500&nbsp;ft to survey the impact.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/unanswered-questions-the-mystery-of-flight-93-639770.html |last=Carlin |first=John |title=Unanswered questions |work=The Independent |location=London |date=August 13, 2002 |access-date=July 12, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090713012007/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/unanswered-questions-the-mystery-of-flight-93-639770.html |archive-date=July 13, 2009 }}</ref> Ben Sliney, who was the FAA operation manager on September 11, 2001, says no military aircraft were near Flight 93.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080529141832/http://www.metro.co.uk/fame/interviews/article.html?in_article_id=20603&in_page_id=11 |date=May 29, 2008 }} October 4, 2006</ref>
Aside from Ed Felt's call, and another made by flight attendant ] also at 9:58 a.m, all the other calls were made with onboard ] and not cell phones.<ref name="P200055"/>


Some internet videos, such as '']'', speculate that Flight 93 safely landed in ], and a substituted plane was involved in the crash in Pennsylvania. Often cited is a preliminary news report that Flight 93 landed at a ] airport;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11|title=9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective|date=September 11, 2006}}</ref> it was later learned that Delta Flight 1989 was the plane confused with Flight 93, and the report was retracted as inaccurate. Several websites within the 9/11 Truth Movement dispute this claim, citing the wreckage at the scene, eyewitness testimony, and the difficulty of secretly substituting one plane for another, and claim that such "hoax theories&nbsp;... appear calculated to alienate victims' survivors and the larger public from the 9/11 truth movement". The editor of the article has since written a ] to the claims.<ref> (Archived by the ])</ref>
==War games and training exercises==
{{See also|United States military exercises scheduled for September 11, 2001}}
Some ] assert that government and military exercises were being conducted to deliberately confuse NORAD, FAA and other military personnel to allow the attack to take place. ] ], economist ], and publisher/editor ] of ] are a few of the individuals who have questioned these exercises.


Valencia McClatchey, a local woman who took the only photograph of the mushroom cloud from the impact of Flight 93 seconds after it hit the ground, says she has been harassed over the telephone and in person by conspiracy theorists, who claim she faked the photo. The FBI, the Somerset County authorities, the Smithsonian, and the National Park Service's Flight 93 National Memorial staff have all individually examined the photograph as well as the film negatives and all four agencies consider the photo to be authentic.<ref name=Flight93Photo>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/us/10cnd-shanksville.html |title=Picture Made on 9/11 Takes a Toll on Photographer |work=The New York Times |first=Sean D. |last=Hamill |date=September 10, 2007 |access-date=March 30, 2010}}</ref>
The following ] and training events were being conducted by ], ], ], ], ] and ]:<ref>http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/wargames.html</ref><ref>http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=387</ref>
*Northern Vigilance: an Air Force drill simulating a Russian attack, in which defense aircraft normally patrolling the Northeast are re-deployed to Canada and Alaska. Russian exercises were being held at that time in the arctic and north Pacific and the drill was based on the observation of that exercise.
*]: a NORAD exercise posing an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide with a simulated air war and an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States.
*On the morning of 9/11, 50 minutes before Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, the ], who are responsible for operating US reconnaissance satellites, had scheduled an exercise simulating the crashing of an aircraft into their building, four miles from ] airport.<ref name="nro1">{{cite web|url=http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm |publisher=Associated Press |title=Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building}}</ref>
*Tripod II, a ] drill simulating a ] attack in New York City, was to take place on September 12th.


While some conspiracy theorists have claimed that passengers of Flight 93 and/or ] were murdered or that they were relocated, with the intent that they never be found,<ref name="women.timesonline.co.uk"/> others within the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as ] and ], repudiate such claims.
==The President's behavior==
President Bush was promoting the passage of his education plan at ] on the morning of September 11. Two aspects of his behavior have been offered as indications that he had privileged access to the planning and execution of the events of 9/11. First, neither Bush nor his security personnel responded to the terrorist attacks in a manner that indicated that the President might be in danger, though he would presumably be among the targets of a coordinated terrorist attack. His remaining in the classroom with schoolchildren reading him '']'', a fact criticized in Michael Moore's ], would be understandable if he knew what the plan was in advance.<ref>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html</ref> A response is that Bush's intention was to "project strength and calm", i.e., that he did not want to cause more panic by fleeing the room, as the footage would likely have been replayed over and over on news coverage.<ref>Achenbach, Joel. "On 9/11, a Telling Seven-Minute Silence." ''Washington Post'', Saturday, June 19, 2004, Page C01. </ref>


=== Hijackers ===
Second, Bush made statements on two separate occasions, in late 2001<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011204-17.html</ref> and early 2002,<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html</ref> that suggested he had seen the first plane hit the World Trade Center. But unless he had some special access to the events of that day, he could not have seen the first plane hit the tower live on commercial television, since no television stations were covering that area when the first plane hit. However, skeptics insist President Bush was referring to the aftermath and not the actual jetliner impact at 8:46 a.m. The White House explained his remarks as "a mistaken recollection".<ref>Paltrow, S. (2004) "Day of Crisis: Detailed Picture of U.S. Actions on Sept. 11 Remains Elusive." ''Wall Street Journal'' March 22</ref>
{{See also|Hijackers in the September 11 attacks|September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories}}


During the initial confusion surrounding the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the ] published the names and identities of what they believed to be some of the hijackers.<ref name="911Ct_SteveHerrmann" /> Some of the people named were later discovered to be alive, a fact that was seized upon by 9/11 conspiracy theorists as proof that the hijackings were faked.<ref name="911Ct_SteveHerrmann" /><ref name="Panoply"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Summers|first=Anthony|title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden|url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ|url-access=registration|year=2011|publisher=Ballantine|location=New York|isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9|author2=Swan, Robbyn}}{{page needed|date=September 2012}}</ref> The BBC explained that the initial confusion may have arisen because the names they reported back in 2001 were common Arabic and Islamic names.<ref name="911Ct_SteveHerrmann" /> In response to a request from the BBC, the FBI said that it was confident to have identified all nineteen hijackers, and that none of the other inquiries had raised the issue of doubt about their identities.<ref name="911Ct_SteveHerrmann">{{cite news|author=Steve Herrmann |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html |title=9/11 Conspiracy Theory, by Steve Hermann, BBC Editor |publisher=BBC |date=October 27, 2006 |access-date=January 28, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100108134031/http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html| archive-date=January 8, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> '']'' also acknowledged these as cases of mistaken identity.<ref>Sack, Kevin. ''The New York Times'', September 16, 2001.</ref>
==Allegations of cover-up==
Conspiracy theorists say they detect a pattern of behavior on the part of officials investigating the September 11 attack meant to suppress the emergence of evidence that might contradict the "official account".<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref>


According to John Bradley, the former managing editor of ''Arab News'' in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the only public information about the hijackers was a list of names issued by the FBI on September 14, 2001. When the FBI released photographs four days after the cited reports on September 27, the mistaken identities were quickly resolved. According to Bradley, "all of this is attributable to the chaos that prevailed during the first few days following the attack. What we're dealing with are coincidentally identical names." In Saudi Arabia, says Bradley, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, ] and ], are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain."<ref name="Panoply">{{cite web |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-2,00.html |title=Panoply of the Absurd |work=Der Spiegel |date=September 23, 2001 |access-date=May 30, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604163010/http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0%2C1518%2C265160-2%2C00.html |archive-date=June 4, 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
News stories they associate with that pattern include:


According to Thomas Kean, chair of the 9/11 Commission, "Sixteen of the nineteen shouldn't have gotten into the United States in any way at all because there was something wrong with their visas, something wrong with their passports. They should simply have been stopped at the border. That was sixteen of the nineteen. Obviously, if even half of those people had been stopped, there never would have been a plot."<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline6.html |title=The Secret History of 9/11: Terrorist Threats Ignored|publisher=]|date=September 10, 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070703045949/http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline6.html |archive-date=July 3, 2007 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>
*"Bush asks Daschle to limit Sept. 11 probes"<ref></ref>


Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi had both been identified as al-Qaeda agents by the CIA, but that information was not shared with the FBI or U.S. Immigration, so both men were able to legally enter the U.S. to prepare for the 9/11 attacks.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline5.html|title=The Secret History of 9/11: Planning 9/11|publisher=]|date=September 10, 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071031102129/http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline5.html |archive-date=October 31, 2007 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>
*"Bush Opposes 9/11 Query Panel"<ref></ref>


=== Foreign governments ===
*"Whistleblower Complains of FBI Obstruction"<ref></ref>
{{See also|Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations|9/11 advanced-knowledge debate#Foreign government foreknowledge|l2=Foreign government foreknowledge}}


There are allegations that individuals within the Pakistani ] (ISI) may have played an important role in ]. There are also claims that other foreign intelligence agencies, such as the Israeli ], had foreknowledge of the attacks, and that some Saudi officials may have played a role in financing the attacks. General ], a former head of ISI, believes the attacks were an "inside job" originating in the United States, perpetrated by Israel or ]s.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0812/07/fzgps.01.html |title=Fareed Zakaria GPS Mexican Crisis; India Terror Attacks CNN Transcript December 7, 2008 |publisher=Transcripts.cnn.com |access-date=July 20, 2009}}</ref> ], former President of Italy from 1985 until his 1992 resignation over ], said that it is common knowledge among the Italian center-left that the 9/11 attacks were a joint operation of the CIA and the Mossad.<ref>{{Cite news|journal=Corriere della Sera|title=Osama-Berlusconi? "Trappola giornalistica"|date=November 30, 2007|url=http://www.corriere.it/politica/07_novembre_30/osama_berlusconi_cossiga_27f4ccee-9f55-11dc-8807-0003ba99c53b.shtml|access-date=June 15, 2009|quote=in prima linea quelli del centrosinistra italiano, sanno ormai bene che il disastroso attentato è stato pianificato e realizzato dalla Cia americana e dal Mossad }}</ref> Subsequent reports indicated that he did not actually believe this.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://archivio.lastampa.it/LaStampaArchivio/main/History/tmpl_viewObj.jsp?objid=7190957 |title=La Realta' Travisata Si teorizzano i complotti per non vedere |date=April 9, 2006 |author=Cossiga, Francesco |work=La Stampa |language=it |access-date=February 16, 2011 |quote=mi sembra improbabile anzi impossibile che l'11 settembre sia stato frutto di un complotto americano. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100919004558/http://archivio.lastampa.it/LaStampaArchivio/main/History/tmpl_viewObj.jsp?objid=7190957 |archive-date=September 19, 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/18/francesco-cossiga-obituary | title=Francesco Cossiga obituary | access-date=February 16, 2011 | author=Sassoon, Donald | date=August 18, 2010 |work=The Guardian |location=London }}</ref>
*"9-11 Commission Funding Woes"<ref></ref>


==== Israel ====
*"Bush: Documents sought by 9/11 commission 'very sensitive'"<ref></ref>
{{See also|September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories#Israel|l1=September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories: Israel}}


A conspiracy theory documented by the ], ] and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel's treatment of ]; to help ] take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel. Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by ], ], or the government of Israel.<ref>
*"9/11 commission finishes Bush, Cheney session"<ref></ref>
* Foxman, Abraham, ''Jews and money'', Palmgrave Macmillan, 2010, p. 41
* ADL, "Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories", Detailed report, 2003. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070308145444/http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/9-11conspiracytheories.pdf |date=March 8, 2007 }}
* Burnett, Thom, '']'', Franz Steiner Verlag, 2006, p. 262
* Olmsted, Kathryn, ''Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11'', Oxford University Press US, 2011, p. 221
* Atkins, Stephen, ''Holocaust denial as an international movement'', ABC-CLIO, 2009, p. 173
</ref><ref name=mutations/> Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the ] is, according to '']'' website, a "leading advocate of theories that Israel's Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks."<ref name=SlateMainstream>{{cite journal|last=Palmer |first=Brian |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2302834/ |title=The Rise of "Truth" How did 9/11 conspiracism enter the mainstream? Slate Magazine September 6, 2011 |journal=Slate |publisher=Slate.com |date=September 6, 2011 |access-date=June 4, 2014}}</ref>


Some proponents of this believe that Jewish employees were forewarned by Israeli intelligence to skip work on September 11, resulting in no Jewish deaths at the World Trade Center. According to Cinnamon Stillwell, some 9/11 conspiracy theorists put this number as high as 4,000 Jewish people skipping work.<ref name="sfgateTruthAbout911ConspiracyTheories">{{Cite news
===Cockpit flight and voice recorders===
| url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2006/04/19/cstillwell.DTL
The ] (CVR) or ] (FDR) were not recovered from the remains of the WTC attack.
| title = The Truth About 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
*The Chicago Tribune reported that experts believed the recorders would not be found simply because of the massive scope of the damage and debris. NTSB and FBI have both publicly stated the recorders were never recovered. The 9/11 Commission and federal authorities say that none of the cockpit voice recorders (CVR) or the flight data recorders (FDR) from the two planes that crashed into the Twin Towers were ever found.
| author = Cinnamon Stillwell
*Two men who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center say they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners; this is cited to support the claim there was a government cover-up at Ground Zero.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://counterpunch.org/lindorff12202005.html |title=9/11: Missing Black Boxes in World Trade Center Attacks Found by Firefighters, Analyzed by NTSB, Concealed by FBI |accessdate=2006-10-07 |last= |first= |authorlink=Dave Lindorff |coauthors= |date=2005-12-19 |year= |month= |format= |work=A CounterPunch Special Report - Did the Bush Administration Lie to Congress and the 9/11 Commission? |publisher=CounterPunch |pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote= }}</ref><ref name=JonesFAQ>{{cite web|url=http://worldtradecentertruth.com/JonesAnswersQuestionsWorldTradeCenter.pdf |title= FAQ: Questions and Answers|last=Jones |first=Steven E. |year=2006 |format=pdf |publisher=}} page 181.</ref>
| date = April 19, 2006
:''"At one point I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV& There were a total of four black boxes. We found three"'' (Ground Zero, p. 108).<ref>{{cite book |last=Swanson |first=Gail |coauthors=edited by Dennis Fisin |title= Ground Zero, A collection of personal accounts |year=2003 |publisher=TRAC Team}} </ref>
|work=San Francisco Chronicle
:''"It's extremely rare that we don't get the recorders back. I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders," said Ted Lopatkiewicz, spokesman for the National Transportation Safety Board.''<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002/02/23/black-boxes.htm |title= Voice recorders could provide crucial 9/11 clues|publisher=USAToday}}</ref>
| access-date=September 6, 2009
}}</ref> This was first reported on September 17 by the Lebanese ]-owned satellite television channel ] and is believed to be based on the September 12 edition of '']'' that said "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks."<ref name=jews>{{cite web|url=http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/14-260933.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050408072925/http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/14-260933.html |archive-date=April 8, 2005 |title=The 4,000 Jews Rumor: Rumor surrounding Sept. 11th proved untrue. Internet Archive – which appeared in the September 12 Internet edition of the "Jerusalem Post". It stated, "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks." |access-date=October 15, 2010}}</ref>


The number of Jews who died in the attacks is variously estimated at between 270 and 400.<ref name=jews/>{{efn|1=A survey of the 1,700 victims whose religion was listed found approximately 10% were Jewish indicating around 270 in total. A survey based on the last names of victims found that around 400 ({{frac|15|1|2}}%) were possibly Jewish. A survey of 390 Cantor Fitzgerald employees who had public memorials (out of the 658 who died) found 49 were Jewish ({{frac|12|1|2}}%). According to the 2002 American Jewish Year Book, New York State's population was 9% Jewish. Sixty-four percent of the WTC victims lived in New York State.{{citation needed|date=July 2020}} }}<ref>{{cite web |author=Gary Rosenblatt |date=September 5, 2002 |url=http://www.thejewishweek.com/bottom/specialcontent.php3?artid=362 |title=The Mitzvah To Remember |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20021010020906/http://www.thejewishweek.com/bottom/specialcontent.php3?artid=362 |archive-date=October 10, 2002 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref><ref name="phas-13">{{cite web |url= http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-13.htm |title=The Resuscitation of Anti-Semitism: An American Perspective: An Interview with Abraham Foxman |publisher=Jcpa.org |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110608060311/http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-13.htm| archive-date=June 8, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> The lower figure tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area and partial surveys of the victims' listed religion. The U.S. State Department has published a partial list of 76 in response to claims that fewer Jews/Israelis died in the WTC attacks than should have been present at the time.<ref name=jews/><ref name="usgov4000JewsRumor">{{cite web
==Other points==
|url=http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2007/November/20050114145729atlahtnevel0.1679041.html
*US Representative Cynthia McKinney led a ] hearing on ] 2005, into "what warnings the Bush administration received before the terrorist attacks of ] 2001." Panelist and former CIA official Melvin Goodman was quoted as saying "Congresswoman McKinney is viewed as a contrarian and I hope someday her views will be considered conventional wisdom." Many 9/11 conspiracy theorists testified at the hearing, including ], ], ], ] and several others.<ref>http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/072905_mckinney_911_briefing.shtml</ref>
|title=The 4,000 Jews Rumor
*Between 1993 and 2000, ] (President Bush's brother) was a principal in a company that provided security for both the World Trade Center and United Airlines. According to an article by ] "from 1999 to January of 2002 their cousin Wirt Walker III was the *CEO."<ref>http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html#_ednref58</ref> According to its president CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down". This last statement has been used by some conspiracy theorists to say that the contract "expired" on ], ]. ] allegedly confirmed this theory in her book ''Reflections'' (ISBN 0-7432-2359-4) also stating 9/11 was the day the contract expired. However, no specific quote is provided to support this allegation, and a search for the words "contract" or "expired" yields no results. Mr. Bush was also a former director and now is an advisor to the board of directors to a firm called HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc., which had what it called a "small participation in the World Trade Center property insurance coverage and some of the surrounding buildings".<ref></ref> Marvin Bush was on a subway under Wall Street when the attacks happened.<ref>http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bush_newyork_9-11.html</ref>
|publisher=Bureau of International Information Programs, ]
*The day before the 9/11 attacks, President Bush's father former President ] and several members of his cabinet had been present at a ] business conference with ] a brother of Osama bin Laden at the ] hotel located several miles from the Pentagon. The conference was continuing with the remaining cabinet members and Bin Laden's brother at the time of the Pentagon attack.<ref></ref><ref></ref> Congresswoman ] (D-Ga.), along with conspiracy websites, have suggested that Carlyle's and Bush's ties to the Middle East made them somehow complicit in the Sept. 11 terror attacks.<ref></ref> ''The New York Times'' reported that members of the bin Laden family were driven or flown under FBI supervision to a secret assembly point in Texas and then to Washington from where they left the country on a private charter plane when airports reopened three days after the attacks.<ref></ref> The official 9/11 commission later concluded that "the FBI conducted a satisfactory screening of Saudi nationals who left the United States on charter flights" and that the exodus was approved by special advisor ] after a request by Saudi Arabia who feared for the safety of their nationals.
|date=November 16, 2007
*Iranian President ] in a letter to President Bush said, “September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?” He also wrote, “Some believe that the hype paved the way-- and was the justification-- for an attack on Afghanistan”.<ref>http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/ahmadinejad0509.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-727571,36-769886@45-1,0.html</ref>
|access-date=September 6, 2009
*Venezuelan President ] in remarks delivered on ] ] said that it was plausible the U.S. government was behind the 9/11 attacks and that "The hypothesis is not absurd ... that those towers could have been dynamited". The motive might have been "To justify the aggressions that immediately were unleashed on Afghanistan, on Iraq"<ref></ref>
|url-status=dead
*The '']'' reported in its August 3, 2006 edition that "For more than two years after the attacks, officials with NORAD and the FAA provided inaccurate information about the response to the hijackings in testimony and media appearances" and that "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial account of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public" and that "Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation. In the end, the panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted". Sources told the Post this was done to hide a bungled Pentagon response.<ref></ref>
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130810083338/http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2007/November/20050114145729atlahtnevel0.1679041.html
|archive-date=August 10, 2013
}}</ref> Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.<ref>{{Cite news|first = Greer Fay|url = http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1031666147075 |archive-url = https://archive.today/20021104190710/http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1031666147075 |url-status = dead |archive-date = November 4, 2002 |last = Cashman|title = Five Israeli victims remembered in capital|work = The Jerusalem Post |page = 3|date=September 12, 2002 |access-date=October 17, 2006}}</ref>


==== Antisemitism in conspiracy theories ====
==Claims that some of the hijackers are still alive==
In 2003, the ] (ADL) published a report attacking "hateful conspiracy theories" that the 9/11 attacks were carried about by Israelis and Jews, saying they had the potential to "rationalize and fuel global ]." It found that such theories were widely accepted in the ], as well as in Europe and the United States.
Initial news reports shortly after 9/11 indicated that some of the hijackers were alive, fueling speculation that others were responsible.


The ADL's report found that "The Big Lie has united American ] extremists and ] and ]". It asserted that many of the theories were modern manifestation of the 19th-century '']'', which purported to map out a Jewish conspiracy for world domination.<ref name=mutations>{{cite web|url=http://www.adl.org/presrele/asint_13/4346_13.htm |title=Conspiracy Theories About Jews and 9/11 Cause Dangerous Mutations in Global Anti-Semitism |publisher=Adl.org |date=September 2, 2003 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110525143344/http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4346_13.htm| archive-date=May 25, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.adl.org/ADL_Opinions/Anti_Semitism_Arab/911_Conspiracies.htm|title=9/11 Conspiracy Theories Take Root in Arab/Muslim World|author=Abraham H. Foxman|publisher=Adl.org -This article originally appeared in Jewish News Weekly of Northern California|date=September 8, 2006|access-date=May 30, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604144105/http://www.adl.org/ADL_Opinions/Anti_Semitism_Arab/911_Conspiracies.htm|archive-date=June 4, 2011|url-status=dead}}</ref> The ADL has characterized the ] website as carrying anti-Semitic materials, such as "American Jews staged the 9/11 terrorist attacks for their own financial gain and to induce the American people to endorse wars of aggression and ] on the nations of the Middle East and the theft of their resources for the benefit of Israel".<ref> March 17, 2009 {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121027104746/http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/Rense_Web_Site.htm |date=October 27, 2012 }}</ref>
The BBC News reported on ] 2001, that some of the people named by the FBI as hijackers, killed on the crashes, were actually alive and well.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm</ref>


Pedro A. Sanjuan, a former ] diplomat, alleged that antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theories were quite common at high levels of the organization following the attacks.<ref>Pedro A. Sanjuan. ''The UN Gang.'' Doubleday, 2005. p. 165</ref>
One of the hijackers was ], and according to the BBC report he was found in Casablanca, Morocco.
*However, al-Shehri's father says he hadn't heard from his sons in ten months prior to September 2001.<ref></ref> An ABC News story in March 2002 repeated this, and during a report entitled "A Saudi Apology" for ] on ] 2002, NBC's reporter ] traveled to 'Asir, where he interviewed the third brother Salah who agreed that his two brothers were dead and said they had been "brainwashed".
*Furthermore, another article explains that the pilot who lives in Casablanca was named Walid al-Shri (not Waleed M. al-Shehri) and that much of the BBC information regarding "alive" hijackers was incorrect according to the same sources used by BBC.<ref>http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-2,00.html</ref>


==== Saudi Arabia ====
According to the BBC report, ], ], and ], three other hijackers, were also living in the Middle East.
{{See also|Alleged Saudi role in the September 11 attacks|The 28 pages}}
*A man with the same name as Abdulaziz Al Omari turned up alive in ], saying that he had studied at the ] and his ] was stolen there in 1995. The name, origin, birth date, and occupation were released by the FBI, but the picture was not of him. "I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list", he said. "They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this."<ref></ref><ref></ref> This individual was not the same person as the hijacker whose identity was later confirmed by Saudi government interviews with his family, according to the ] Report.
*On ], ], the ] and ]<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml</ref> reported that a person named Saeed al-Ghamdi was alive and well. His name, birth date, origin, and occupation were the same as those released by the FBI, but his picture was different. He says that he studied flight training in Florida flight schools from 1998 to 2001. The journalist involved with the story later admitted "No, we did not have any videotape or photographs of the individuals in question at that time."<ref>http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-2,00.html</ref>
*After the attacks, reports began emerging saying that al-Mihdhar was still alive. On ], the ] distributed a "special alert" which listed al-Mihdhar as alive. The ] says that this was a typo.<ref>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/ap092001b.html</ref><ref>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/coxnews102101.html</ref>
The '']'' and '']'' have since reported that there was evidence al-Mihdhar was still alive and that some of the other hijackers identities were in doubt. This was commented on by FBI director ].<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm</ref> '']'' later investigated the claims of "living" hijackers by the BBC and discovered them to be cases of mistaken identities.<ref>http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-2,00.html</ref> In 2002, ] admitted that the names of the ] were in fact correct.<ref>http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200202/06/eng20020206_90055.shtml</ref> The editor of ] has said the identity confusion in the original BBC article that sparked the theories may be due to the hijackers' names being common Arabic names, and that the BBC has later superseded the original article.<ref>, BBC News Online - The Editors</ref> None of the hijackers has turned up alive since the ] 2001 attacks.


British investigative journalists ] and Robbyn Swan claimed in their 2011 book ''The Eleventh Day'' that the ] provided material and financial support to the hijackers and that the Bush Administration covered this up as well as their own alleged incompetence. The authors claim the ] helped this coverup by deflecting attention away from these actions.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/fyi/a-convincing-argument--4-127648388.html |title=Conspiracies and catastrophe Winnipeg Free Press August 14, 2011 |newspaper=Winnipeg Free Press |date=August 13, 2011 |publisher=Winnipegfreepress.com |access-date=June 4, 2014|last1=Dudley |first1=Michael }}</ref> In September 2011 a "Lloyd's insurance syndicate" began legal action against Saudi Arabia demanding the repayment of £136m it paid out to victims of the 9/11 attacks. A number of prominent Saudi charities and banks as well as a leading member of the al-Saud royal family were accused of being "agents and alter egos" for the Saudi state that "knowingly" provided funding to al-Qaeda and encouraged anti Western sentiment.<ref>{{cite news|author=Cahal Milmo |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lloyds-insurer-sues-saudi-arabia-for-funding-911-attacks-2356857.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110921081837/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lloyds-insurer-sues-saudi-arabia-for-funding-911-attacks-2356857.html |archive-date=2011-09-21 |url-access=limited |url-status=live |title=Lloyd's insurer sues Saudi Arabia for 'funding 9/11 attacks' The Independent September 19, 2008 |publisher=Independent.co.uk |date=September 19, 2011 |access-date=June 4, 2014}}</ref>
==Motives==
Theories as to why members of the US government would have allowed the attacks to occur, perpetrated the attacks, and/or obstructed the investigation generally involve one or more of the following:
*] in an article entitled "The Criminalization of the State" suggests a simple motive in a plan for a ]. This particular theory takes root in a ] Statement to the ] Business Council in September 1994: ''We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.''<ref>http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO402A.html</ref>
*An article on ''whatreallyhappened.com'' entitled "The 9/11 Reichstag Fire" suggests that the ] (PNAC) may have been responsible.<ref>http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_reichstag.html</ref> It cites as evidence a statement from page 51 of a document titled 'Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century' published by PNAC: “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor.”<ref>http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf</ref>
*The Web site proposed that 9/11 was allowed to happen and given technical assistance by a faction of the U.S. government in order to benefit the arms manufacturing and oil industries.<ref>http://www.oilempire.us/911.html</ref>
*The Web site 911Review.com listed several other benefits of the attacks as possible motives, including Mayor ] and President Bush's surge in popularity, ]'s defense contracts for the wars in ] and ], and a $2.2 billion insurance payout to the owner of the World Trade Center, ]<ref>http://911review.com/motive/index.html</ref> who obtained the lease of the buildings from the ] seven weeks before the buildings were destroyed in the ] 2001 attacks. This was the first time in the building's 31-year history the complex had changed ownership.<ref>http://www.panynj.gov/pr/pressrelease.php3?id=80</ref>


Such theories have historically revolved around the putative content of the ] of the 2002 report of the ]<ref name=post2013/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.salon.com/2011/09/07/sept_11_unanswered_questions/|author=Justin Elliott|title=The enduring mysteries of 9/11|date=September 7, 2011|newspaper=Salon}}</ref> that were withheld from publication until July 15, 2016.<ref name="WaPoRelease">{{cite news|last1=Demirjian|first1=Karoun|title=Congress releases long-classified '28 pages' on alleged Saudi ties to 9/11|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/congress-releases-long-classified-28-pages-on-alleged-saudi-ties-to-911/2016/07/15/e8671fde-4ab1-11e6-bdb9-701687974517_story.html|access-date=July 15, 2016|newspaper=]|date=July 15, 2016}}</ref>
==Claims related to Jews and Israel==


Former Florida Senator ], co-chairman of the ], as well as other former officials who did read the entire version of the Joint Inquiry's report, claimed that there was a U.S. government coverup on the Saudi officials' assistance provided to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks,<ref name=post2013>{{cite news|url=https://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/|title=Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup|author=Paul Sperry|newspaper=New York Post|date=December 15, 2013}}</ref> notably the role of Fahad al-Thumairy, a diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles.<ref name=locked>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-911-classified-report-steve-kroft/|title=28 Pages: Former Sen. Bob Graham and others urge the Obama administration to declassify redacted pages of a report that holds 9/11 secrets |work=CBS|date=April 10, 2016}}</ref>
Some conspiracy theories hold that Israel or organized Jewry played a key role in carrying out the September 11 attacks.<ref>www.jewsdidwtc.com Retrieved October 19, 2006</ref> According to the ], "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories have not been accepted in mainstream circles in the U.S.," but "this is not the case in the Arab and Muslim world."<ref>"Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories." New York: Anti-Defamation League, 2003. http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/9-11conspiracytheories.pdf p. 1</ref> The Anti-Defamation League has published a paper, , identifying the claims made and responding to them. Several websites of the 9/11 truth movement have also worked to debunk such claims and expose websites and individuals engaging in ] and ].<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> The theory that Jews carried out the attacks was also alluded to in the ] movie.


=== No-planes theory ===
A claim that 4,000 Jewish employees skipped work at the WTC on September 11 has been widely reported and widely debunked. The number of Jews who died in the attacks--typically estimated at around 400<ref>http://www.thejewishweek.com/bottom/specialcontent.php3?artid=362</ref><ref name="phas-13">http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-13.htm</ref><ref>http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/14-260933.html</ref>--tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area. Five Israelis died in the attack.<ref>{{cite news |first = Greer Fay|last = Cashman|title = Five Israeli victims remembered in capital|work = The Jerusalem Post |publisher = The Jerusalem Post |page = 3|date = 2002-09-12 |accessdate = 2006-10-17}}</ref>
] accidentally appearing from behind a ].]]
Former chief economist within the Labor Department under the Bush administration, ], argues that no planes were used in the attacks. Reynolds claims it is physically impossible that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175 could have penetrated the steel frames of the Towers, and that ] was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video. "There were no planes, there were no hijackers", Reynolds insists. "I know, I know, I'm out of the mainstream, but that's the way it is". According to ], "the only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes", he says (although that would be well beyond the capabilities of contemporaneous ] technology). "Watch footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center". Most no-planes adherents, including ] and Reynolds, assert that either CGI of a passenger plane was overlaid onto a winged cruise missile or military aircraft, or that computer-generated images of a passenger plane were inserted into the video footage and plane-shaped explosive cut-outs were planted in the buildings in order to create the impression of plane impact.<ref></ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/01/september11.france|title=US invented air attack on Pentagon, claims French book|last=Henley|first=Jon|date=April 1, 2002|work=The Guardian|access-date=April 25, 2019|language=en-GB|issn=0261-3077}}</ref><ref>The Great Derangement, Matt Taibbi, New York, 2009</ref> Some truth movement veterans have repeatedly refuted the "no-plane" claims.<ref name="women.timesonline.co.uk"/><ref name="msnbc">{{Cite news| url = http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html| title = WP: 9/11 conspiracy theories| author = Michael Powell| date = September 8, 2006| publisher = ]| access-date = June 13, 2010| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100723110251/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html| archive-date = July 23, 2010| url-status = dead| df = mdy-all}}</ref> In fact, discussion of no-plane theories has been banned from certain conspiracy theory websites and advocates have sometimes been threatened with violence by posters at other conspiracy theory websites.<ref name=Yoda>{{cite web |url=http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-08-09/news/the-yoda-of-9-11/5 |title=The Yoda of 9/11 |page=5 |work=Phoenix News |publisher=Phoenixnewtimes.com |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-date=September 16, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090916081821/http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-08-09/news/the-yoda-of-9-11/5 |url-status=dead }}</ref>


== Cover-up allegations ==
], in 2001 Prime Minister of Israel, cancelled a planned trip to New York around the time of the attacks. Some have interpreted this as evidence he was warned to stay away. In fact the rally at which he was going to speak had been scheduled for ] ], and had been cancelled a month before September 11.<ref>http://www.ujc.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=15820</ref>


=== Cockpit recorders ===
On September 17, 2001,<ref> &ndash; 5 Israelis detained for `puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy</ref> the Israeli newspaper '']'' reported that four hours after the attack the ] arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of their company's building for "puzzling behavior". The Israelis were said to have been videotaping the disaster with cries of joy and mockery.<ref>http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries3.html</ref> On ], ], ABC reported that the FBI has not reached a consensus on whether they were Israeli intelligence operatives but concluded they had no advance knowledge of the September 11 attacks.<ref> &ndash; "The White Van"</ref> The five were released and deported to Israel on November 20-21, 2001.<ref>Sanders, Doug. "U.S. arrests of Israelis a mystery." ''The Globe and Mail'', Dec. 17., 2001.</ref>
] from ] was heavily damaged from the impact and resulting fire.]]
According to the 9/11 Commission Report, both black boxes from Flight 77 and both black boxes from Flight 93 were recovered. Flight 77's CVR was said to be too damaged to yield any data. On April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings.<ref> April 18, 2002 {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090922042419/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/04/18/rec.flight.93/index.html |date=September 22, 2009 }}</ref> In April 2006, a transcript of the CVR was released as part of the ] trial.<ref name="United93FullTranscript">{{Cite news
| url = https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/apr/13/usa.september11| title = United 93: full transcript | date = April 13, 2006|work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=September 20, 2009 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090825215713/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/13/usa.september11| archive-date=August 25, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>


Two men, Michael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi, who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, said in the book ''Behind-The-Scenes: Ground Zero'' that they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners:<ref>{{Cite news |first=William |last=Bunch |title=9/11 "black box" cover-up at Ground Zero? |date=October 28, 2004 |publisher=Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC |url=http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/extra/archives/001139.html |work=Philadelphia Daily News |access-date=November 6, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091124011925/http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/extra/archives/001139.html |archive-date=November 24, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
According to '']'' (], ]), Israel had sent two Mossad agents to Washington in August to warn both the FBI and CIA of an imminent large-scale attack involving a cell of up to 200 terrorists. ''The Telegraph'' quoted an unnamed senior Israeli security official as saying "They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama bin Laden and told the Americans that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement."<ref>http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/16/wcia16.xml</ref>


{{blockquote|
== Less common theories ==
At one point, I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Swanson |first=Gail |editor=Dennis Fisin |title= Ground Zero, A collection of personal accounts |year=2003 |publisher=TRAC Team}}</ref>
* ] reported that people within and outside the U.S. government believed that then Iraqi leader ] conspired in the 9/11 attacks and the ].<ref>http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/9/111622.shtml</ref> The theory extended from the one advanced by investigative journalist ] in her book ''The Third Terrorist'' linking Hussein to the Oklahoma City Bombing. It was discussed in an op-ed piece in the ].<ref>http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110002217</ref>
}}
* According to the ]’s ], psychiatrists are responsible for creating ]s and were behind the ] attacks ("Suicide bombers are... assassins manufactured through drugs and psycho-political methods. Careful psychiatric indoctrination and treatment can make the most barbaric act rational.")<ref name="gumbel">{{cite news
|first = Andrew
|last = Gumbel
|url = http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=3137&IssueNum=136
|title = Scientology vs. Science
|work = ]
|publisher = Southland Publishing
|date = ]
|accessdate = 2006-06-08
}}</ref>
*] of ] suggested the possible involvement of the ].<ref>http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/cover071105.htm</ref>


=== Bin Laden tapes ===
==Media reaction==
{{Main|Videos and audio recordings of Osama bin Laden}}
] Norway July 2006]]
While discussion and coverage of these theories is mainly confined to internet chat sites and conversation, a number of mainstream news outlets around the world have covered the issue.


A series of interviews, audio and videotapes were released in the years following the 9/11 attacks that were reported to be from Osama bin Laden. In the first of these the speaker denied responsibility for the attacks. On September 17, 2001, in a statement issued to ], Bin Laden is quoted as saying: "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/index.html |title=Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks CNN September 17, 2001 |publisher=CNN |date=September 17, 2001 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090707090738/http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/index.html |archive-date=July 7, 2009 }}</ref> Some observers, especially people in the ], doubted the authenticity of the tape.<ref> '']'' December 15, 2001.</ref> On December 20, 2001, German TV channel "]" broadcast an analysis of the White House's translation of the videotape. On the program ''Monitor'', two independent translators and an expert on ] found the White House's translation to be both inaccurate and manipulative, stating, "At the most important places where it is held to prove the guilt of bin Laden, it is not identical with the Arabic", and that the words used that indicate foreknowledge can not be heard at all in the original. Prof. Gernot Rotter, professor of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the Asia-Africa Institute at the ], said "The American translators who listened to the tapes and transcribed them apparently wrote a lot of things in that they wanted to hear but that cannot be heard on the tape no matter how many times you listen to it."<ref> WDR, Das Erste, MONITOR Nr. 485 am December 20, 2001</ref>
The ] version of the July 2006 '']'' sparked interest when they ran, on their own initiative, a three page main story on the 9/11 attacks and summarized the various types of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which were not specifically endorsed by the newspaper, only recensed) <ref> , Norwegian edition of '']'', July 2006. See also English translation: Kim Bredesen, and </ref> . The ], which has somehow changed position since the September 11 attacks and whose director, ], became a leading proponent of 9/11 conspiracy theory, explained that although the Norwegian version of ''Le Monde diplomatique'' had allowed it to translate and publish this article on its website, the mother-house, in France, categorically refused it this right, thus displaying an open debate between various national editions <ref> * {{fr icon}} ,
Some members of ] believe that the man in this videotape is not Osama bin Laden at all, citing differences in weight and facial features, along with his wearing of a gold ring, which is forbidden by Muslim law, and writing with his right hand although bin Laden was left-handed.<ref>{{cite web|author=Looking Glass News |url=http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6233 |title=Osama Tape Appears Fake, Experts Conclude |publisher=Looking Glass News |access-date=March 23, 2010}}</ref>
'']'' * {{es icon}} </ref>. In December 2006, the French version published an article by ], co-editor of '']'', which strongly criticized the endorsement of conspiracy theories by the US left-wing, alleging that it was a sign of "theoretical emptiness." <ref> *{{en icon}} , by ] in '']'', December 2006 *{{fr icon}}, by ] in ''Le Monde diplomatique'', December 2006 *{{ir icon}} *{{pt icon}} </ref><ref> , by ] and ], '']'', November 28, 2006 </ref>


In an audiotape released in November 2007, Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the attacks and denied the ] and the Afghan government or people had any prior knowledge of the attacks.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/alqaida/page/0,12643,839823,00.html |title=Timeline: the al-Qaida tapes The Guardian Unlimited |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=July 20, 2009 }}</ref><ref name=autogenerated5>{{Cite news|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL2912911920071129?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071221062504/http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL2912911920071129?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0 |url-status=dead |archive-date=December 21, 2007 |title=Bin Laden urges Europe to quit Afghanistan Reuters UK November 29, 2007 |publisher=Uk.reuters.com |date=November 29, 2007 |access-date=July 20, 2009}}</ref><ref name=Reuters-Voice>{{Cite news |url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKWAT00851220071129 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090706081043/http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKWAT00851220071129 |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 6, 2009 |title=U.S. says voice on Qaeda tape appears to be bin Laden |publisher=Reuters |date=November 29, 2007 |access-date=September 15, 2009}}</ref> In an interview with al-Jazeera, ] and ], two of al-Qaeda's alleged masterminds of the attacks, also confessed their involvement in the attacks.<ref>{{cite news|title=We left out nuclear targets, for now|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/04/alqaida.terrorism|access-date=July 11, 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=March 3, 2003|location=London}}</ref>
An article in the ] 2006 edition of the United States newsweekly ] titled “Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away” states that the major 9/11 conspiracy theories “depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses” and the continued popularity of these theories are due to “the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting”. It concludes that “conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events like Sept. 11. Conspiracy theories form around them like scar tissue. In a curious way, they're an American form of national mourning.”<ref>Grossman, Lev. (2006) &ndash; Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away</ref>


=== CIA recruitment efforts ===
] published an article called "The CIA couldn't have organised this..." which said "The same people who are making a mess of Iraq were never so clever or devious that they could stage a complex assault on two narrow towers of steel and glass" and "if there is a nefarious plot in all this bad planning, it is one improvised by a confederacy of dunces". This article mainly attacked ], a group of scientists which was, at the time, led by Professor ]. They said "most of them aren't scientists but instructors... at second-rate colleges".<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/09/08/ftterror08.xml&page=4</ref>
], who headed the government's anti-terrorism efforts in 2001, theorized CIA director ] ordered the agency to withhold information about ] and ] from the rest of the government in an effort to cover up the agency's recruitment of the two. George Tenet released a statement denying the agency deliberately withheld information about the pair and noted Clarke himself said he had no proof.<ref>Shenon, Philip. . '']''. August 11, 2011</ref>


==Criticism== == Motives ==
Critics of these alternative theories say they are a form of ] common throughout history after a traumatic event in which ] emerge as a mythic form of explanation (Barkun, 2003). A related criticism addresses the form of research on which the theories are based. Thomas W. Eagar, an engineering professor at MIT, suggested they "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."<ref>{{cite web|last = Walch|first = Tad|year = 2006|url=http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645200098,00.html|title = Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones|work = Utah news|publisher = Deseret News Publishing Company|accessdate = 2006-09-09}}</ref> Eagar's criticisms also exemplify a common stance that the theories are best ignored. "I've told people that if gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." This, he continues, happened when Steve Jones took up the issue. The basic assumption is that conspiracy theories emerge a set of previously held or quickly assembled beliefs about how society works, which are then legitimized by further "research". Taking such beliefs seriously, even if only to criticize them, it is argued, merely grants them further legitimacy.


=== Pax Americana ===
Michael Shermer, writing in ''Scientific American'', said:
{{Main|Pax Americana}}
"The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as ], ] and the various ] theories of physics). All the "evidence" for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."<ref>{{cite web|last = Shermer|first = Michael|authorlink = Michael Shermer|year = 2005 |url = http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&articleID=000DA0E2-1E15-128A-9E1583414B7F0000&colID=13|title = Fahrenheit 2777 |work = Skeptic|publisher = Scientific American, Inc. |accessdate = 2006-10-13}}</ref>


In September 2000 the ] (PNAC) released a strategic treatise entitled ''Rebuilding America's Defences''. The Defense Planning Guidance of 1992, was drafted by ] on behalf of then ] ]. This was described as "a blueprint for permanent American global ]" by ] in his book ''American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy''.<ref>{{cite book |author=Andrew J. Bacevich |title=American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2002 |page=44}}</ref>
There are also behavioristic objections to these conspiracy theories, arguing that the conspiracy theorists behave in an irrational or unscholarly way.<ref name="progressive">{{cite news |url=http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/TheProgressive/2006/10/01/1944413 |title=Enough conspiracy theories, already |publisher=The Progressive |author=Rothschild, Matthew |date=October 1, 2006}}</ref> One objection is that the conspiracy theorists tend to connect unrelated information. Another is that they will often expand the conspiracy to include those who debunk their original theories, such as Popular Mechanics.<ref name="progressive"/> There is also the tendency of the conspiracy theorists to quote only other conspiracy theorists and provide little if any expert verification of any of their claims.<ref>{{cite news |title=The coincidental cash value of conspiracy theories: Theorists 'make the unexplainable explainable' and, in the case of works like The Da Vinci Code, make a fair bit of money |publisher=Ottawa Citizen |author=Laucius, Joanne |date=November 26, 2004}}</ref>


Matt Taibbi argued in his book '']'' that conspiracy theorists have taken what is written in the paper "completely out of context", and that the "transformation" referenced in the paper is explicitly said to be a decades-long process to turn the ]-era military into a "new, modern military" which could deal with more localized conflicts.<ref name="tgd">{{cite book |last=Taibbi |first=Matt |title=The Great Derangement |publisher=Spiegel & Grau |year=2008 |location=New York |pages= |isbn=978-0-385-52034-8 |url=https://archive.org/details/greatderangement00taib/page/9}}</ref> He said that, for this to be evidence of motive, either those responsible would have decided to openly state their objectives, or would have read the paper in 2000 and quickly laid the groundwork for the 9/11 attacks using it as inspiration.<ref name="tgd" />
] mystery books]]
'']'',<ref name="SciAm">{{cite web| title = Fahrenheit 2777, 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories | publisher = Scientific American | date = June, 2005 | author = Shermer, Michael | url = http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000DA0E2-1E15-128A-9E1583414B7F0000}}</ref> '']'',<ref>{{cite web| title = Debunking The 9/11 Myths - Mar. 2005 Cover Story | publisher = Popular Mechanics | date = March, 2005 | url = http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y}}</ref> and '']''<ref>{{cite web| title = Mass Media Bunk - 9/11 conspiracies: the war on critical thinking | publisher = The Skeptic's Dictionary | author= Carroll, Robert Todd | date = March 30, 2006 | url = http://skepdic.com/refuge/bunk27.html}}</ref> have published articles that challenge and discredit various 9/11 conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theorists have jumped on the contribution to the Popular Mechanics article by "senior researcher" Ben Chertoff, who they claim is cousin of ] - current head of Homeland Security.<ref>{{cite web| title = 9/11 and Chertoff | publisher = Associated Free Press | date = March 4, 2005 | author = Bollyn, Christopher | url = http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=66176}}</ref> However, no indication of an actual connection has been revealed and Ben Chertoff has denied the allegation.<ref>{{cite web| title = Viewing 9/11 From a Grassy Knoll | publisher = Us News | date = September 3, 2006 | author = Sullivan, Will |url = http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060903/11conspiracy.htm}}</ref> Popular Mechanics has published a book entitled '']'' that expands upon the research first presented in the article.<ref>{{cite web| title = Debunking The 9/11 Myths blog | publisher = Popular Mechanics | url = http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog/911mythsblog}}</ref> '']'' dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories as a "panoply of the absurd", stating "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons."<ref>{{cite web| author = Cziesche, Dominik, Jürgen Dahlkamp, Ulrich Fichtner, Ulrich Jaeger, Gunther Latsch, Gisela Leske, and Max F. Ruppert| date = September 8, 2003| url = http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160,00.html| title = Panoply of the Absurd| publisher = Der Spiegel}}</ref>
9/11 conspiracy theories were satirized and criticized in "'']''", an episode of the ] ].


== References == === Invasions ===
Conspiracy theorists have questioned whether '']'' and 9/11 provided the United States and the United Kingdom with a reason to launch a war they had wanted for some time, and suggest that this gives them a strong motive for either carrying out the attacks, or allowing them to take place. For instance, ], a former research minister in the German government, has argued that 9/11 was staged to justify the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.<ref>{{cite news |last=Connolly |first=Kate |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1447232/German-Sept-11-theory-stokes-anti-US-feeling.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1447232/German-Sept-11-theory-stokes-anti-US-feeling.html |archive-date=January 12, 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |title=Telegraph, Nov 20, 2003 |work=The Daily Telegraph |date=November 20, 2003 |access-date=July 20, 2009}}{{cbignore}}</ref> Former Malaysian prime minister ] was quoted as saying that there was "strong evidence" that the attacks were faked so that the United States could go to war against Muslims.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avatar-it-could-fake-911-attacks-mahathir/354031 |title=If US Could Create 'Avatar', It Could Fake 9/11 Attacks: Mahathir Jakarta Times January 21, 2010 |work=Jakarta Globe |access-date=October 15, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100722015907/http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avatar-it-could-fake-911-attacks-mahathir/354031 |archive-date=July 22, 2010 }}</ref> In spite of these allegations, the Bush administration specifically rejected proposals to immediately attack Iraq in response to 9/11,<ref> pp. 334–336</ref> and acknowledged that there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement in the attacks.<ref name="nytimes.com"/>
<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
<references/>
</div>


===Books=== === New World Order ===
{{Main|New World Order (conspiracy theory)}}
* '']'' - ]
] and other personalities hold that 9/11 was initiated by a disparate variety of banking, corporate, globalization, and military interests for the purpose of creating a globalist government. Such ] predate 9/11.<ref name=Stahl/>
* ''9/11 Revealed : The Unanswered Questions'' - Rowland Morgan and Ian Henshall
* ''9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA'' - Webster Griffin ]
*{{cite book| last = Barkun
| first = Michael
| year = 2003
| title = A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America
| publisher = University of California Press
| id = ISBN 0-520-23805-2
}}
* ''Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories, and the Secrets of 9/11'' - ]
* ''Crossing the Rubicon'' - ]
* '']'' - The Editors of ]. ISBN 1-58816-635-X
* ''Divided We Stand: A Biography of New York's World Trade Center''
*{{cite book
|last = ]
|year = 2002
|title = Inside 9-11: What Really Happened
|publisher = St. Martin's Press
|id = ISBN 0-312-30621-0
}}
*{{cite book
|last = Johnston
|first = Patrick, S.
|year = 2006
|title = ]
|publisher = Dog Ear
|id = ISBN 1-59858-244-5
}}
*{{cite book
| last = Laurent
| first = Eric
| year = 2004
| title = La face cachée du 11 septembre
| publisher = Plon
| id = ISBN 2-259-20030-3
}}
* ''Pentagate'' - ]
* '']''
*{{cite book
|last = Griffin
|first = David
|year = 2004
|title = The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions
|publisher = Olive Branch Press
|id = ISBN 1566565847
}}
* ''The Five Unanswered Questions About 9/11'' - James Ridgeway
* ''The New Pearl Harbor'' - ] (''The New Pearl Harbor'' can be found available online .)
* ''Waking up from our Nightmare: The 9/11 Crimes in New York City'' - Don Paul and ], ISBN 0-943096-10-3
* '']'' (2004) - Paul Thompson and The Center for Cooperative Research


== Suggested historical precedents ==
===Videos===
Conspiracy theorists often point to ] as a model for the 9/11 attacks, theorizing the attacks were carried out by the U.S. government as a ] operation and then blamed on Islamic extremists.<ref name=Knight/><ref>{{cite news |url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/16693/on-conspiracy-theories/ |author=Arshad Zaman |title=On conspiracy theories |publisher=The Express Tribune |date=May 27, 2010}}</ref> Operation Northwoods was an unimplemented, apparently rejected, plan approved by the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962. One proposal in the plan suggested that covert operatives commit multiple acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and blame Cuba, thus providing a pretext for invasion.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1|title=U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba |work=] |date=May 1, 2001 |access-date=January 21, 2012}}</ref>
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* ''The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw''


] magazine contrasted events which inspired past conspiracy theories with those that inspire 9/11 conspiracy theories such as the ]. ''Time'' called the public assassination of Kennedy a "private, intimate affair" when compared with the attack on the World Trade Center, which was witnessed by millions of people and documented by hundreds of videographers; and said, "there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it."<ref name="time" />
==Trivia==
* About 90 minutes into the film ], a CIA man first hints that the 1993 ] was aided by the CIA to get the government to raise their funds to fight terrorism. So now, in their 'operation honeymoon', they decide to do just that. The exact lines:
:"You're telling me that you're going to fake some terrorist thing just to get some money out of congress?"
:"Well, unfortunately, mr Henessey, I have no idea how to fake killing 4000 people. So we're just going to have to do it for real. Oh, and blame it on the ]s ... naturally."


==External links== == Proponents ==
{{Main|9/11 Truth movement}}
;Final report of the "National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" (9-11 Commission), chaired by Thomas H. Kean
Many individuals and organizations that support or discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories consider themselves to be part of the 9/11 Truth movement.
*
;Cynthia McKinney's July 2005 Congressional Briefing on 9/11
*
;June 1, 2001, directive from the Joint Chiefs of Staff changing rules on intercepting hijacked planes
*


] event in 2007]]
===Conspiracy theories===
Prominent adherents of the movement include, among others, radio talk show host ], theologian ], physicist ], software engineer ], architect Richard Gage (of ]), film producer ], former Governor of Minnesota ], former member of the U.S. House of Representatives ],<ref name=Roff>{{cite news |last=Roff |first=Peter |title=Charlie Sheen Joins the 'Truther' 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Fringe |date=September 9, 2009 |url=https://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-roff/2009/09/09/charlie-sheen-joins-the-truther-911-conspiracy-theory-fringe.html |access-date=September 19, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Klepper |first=David |title=From election to COVID, 9/11 conspiracies cast a long shadow |url=https://apnews.com/article/911-conspiracy-qanon-7d288d0678f5cc7425412931b0212009 |access-date=September 8, 2021}}</ref> actors ], ], and ], political science professor Joseph Diaferia and journalist ].<ref name="Powell|2006"/><ref name="Manjoo">{{cite news |last=Manjoo |first=Farhad |journal=Salon |date=June 27, 2006 |title=The 9/11 deniers |url=http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2006/06/27/911_conspiracies/ |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061218041517/http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2006/06/27/911_conspiracies/ |archive-date=December 18, 2006}}</ref><ref name="CBC-Speculation">{{cite news |publisher=CBC |date=October 29, 2003 |title=Conspiracy theories: The Speculation |url=http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/speculation.html |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20031101052401/http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/speculation.html |archive-date=November 1, 2003 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref> Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds.<ref name="Feuer">{{cite news |last=Feuer |first=Alan|date=June 5, 2006|title=500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/us/05conspiracy.html |work=The New York Times}}</ref><ref name="Harvey">{{cite news|last=Harvey|first=Adam|date=September 3, 2006|title=9/11 myths busted|url=http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20341165-5007191,00.html|work=The Sunday Mail (Qld)|access-date=December 8, 2010|archive-date=December 31, 2012|archive-url=https://archive.today/20121231063243/http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/sunday-mail/myths-busted/story-e6frep2o-1111112178647|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Curiel">{{cite news|last=Curiel|first=Jonathan|title=The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11|date=September 3, 2006|url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/03/INGR0KRCBA1.DTL|access-date=June 2, 2009 | work=The San Francisco Chronicle}}</ref> The movement draws adherents from people of diverse political beliefs including liberals, conservatives, and libertarians.<ref name="Molé|2006"/><ref name="Curiel"/><ref name="Barber">{{cite news |last=Barber|first=Peter|date=June 7, 2008|journal=Financial Times|title=The truth is out there|url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html|access-date=May 23, 2009|quote=an army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090603164130/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html| archive-date=June 3, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref> The ] has named ] as a key figure in ] 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/documents/assets/pdf/anti-semitism/united-states/911-conspiracy-theories-2011-8-30.pdf|title=Decade of Deceit: Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 10 Years Later}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url= http://www.jpost.com/International/ADL-Anti-Semitic-911-theories-still-strong-10-years-on|title=ADL: Anti-Semitic 9/11 theories still strong 10 years on|work=The Jerusalem Post {{!}} JPost.com|access-date=December 14, 2017}}</ref>
;Presentations of various conspiracy theories
====Mainstream news organizations====
*{{cite web
| title =Conspiracy Theories
| work =CBC Television
| url =http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =9/11 conspiracy theorists energized Five years later, purveyors claim academic momentum
| work =CNN.com
| url =http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/08/06/sept11.theories.ap/index.html
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| author =Gerrick Lewis
| title ='United 93' raises many questions
| work =The Lantern
| url =http://www.thelantern.com/media/storage/paper333/news/2006/05/04/Arts/united.93.Raises.Many.Questions-1901148.shtml
}}
*{{cite web
| author =Lev Grossman
| title =Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away
| work =Time magazine
| url =http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304-1,00.html
| accessdate=2006-09-12
}}


Among the organizations that actively discuss and promote such theories are Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group that focuses on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings; ], founded in 2004; ], founded in 2005, and ], a group that split from Scholars for 9/11 Truth in 2007 and runs the online publication ''Journal of 9/11 Studies''; ], which was already formed in 2002; and the ]. Several of these groups have collected signatures on petitions asking for further investigation of the September 11 attacks.<ref name=ArchitectsEngineers>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/22/inside-the-beltway-70128635/?feat=home_columns |author=Jennifer Harper |title=Explosive News |work=The Washington Times |date=February 22, 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.smh.com.au/world/utzons-son-signs-up-for-september-11-conspiracy-theory-20091124-jhf7.html |author=Sean Nicholls |title=Utzon's son signs up for September 11 conspiracy theory |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=November 25, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/12598/2/ |title=1,000 Architects and Engineers ask for New 9-11 Investigation |publisher=Macedonian International News Agency |date=February 21, 2010 |access-date=May 23, 2011 |archive-date=July 20, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720164433/http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/12598/2/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>
====Webpages====


In 2004, ] ran for president on a "9/11 Truth" platform.<ref name=upi>{{cite news | first=Jillian | last=Jonas | title=Challenge by 'honest Republican' | date = January 25, 2004 | url = http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2004/01/25/Analysis-Challenge-by-honest-Republican/UPI-77191075046442/ | publisher = United Press International |access-date=May 29, 2011}}</ref>
*{{cite web
| title =9-11 Research: An Attempt to Uncover the Truth About September 11th, 2001 (WTC 7)
| work =
| url =http://www.911research.wtc7.net/index.html
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =9-11 Review: A Resource for Understanding the 9/11/01 Attack
| work =
| url =http://911review.com/
| accessdate=2006-11-25
}}
*{{cite web
| title =Alex Jones Infowars
| work =
| url =http://www.infowars.com
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =9/11 Truth Movement Forum
| work =
| url =http://forum.911movement.org
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
* {{cite web
| title =Former Top German Minister Rejects Official Story Of 911 Attacks
| work =www.ratical.org
| url =http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/VonBuelow.html
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =The "Patriots and 9/11" Trap
| work =
| url =http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/12/14/18337689.php
| accessdate=2006-12-28
}}
*{{cite web
| title =9/11 an Inside Job by H. Titan, Ph. D.
| work =
| url =http://bogusstory.com/9-11
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =Information on 9/11 Wargames
| work =oilempire.us
| url =http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =Scholars for 9/11 Truth
| work =
| url =http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}
*{{cite web
| title =9/11 Mysteries The show went to Hollywood!
| work =
| url =http://www.911mysteries.com
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}} Movie on 9/11 questions
*{{cite web
| title =The WTC Conspiracy
| work =Telepolis
| url =http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/special/wtc.html
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}} {{de icon}}
* {{cite web
| title =Loose Change
| work =
| url =http://www.seeloosechange.com
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}} Film questioning the official account
* {{cite web
| title =The 9/11 Conspiracy: A Skeptic's View by Ernest Partridge
| work =], commondreams.org
| url =http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0427-29.htm
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}} Article sympathetic to LIHOP theories but skeptical of MIHOP theories
*{{ cite web
| title=Picking Up Where Partridge Leaves Off: Conspiracy theorists Address a 9/11 Skeptic by Victoria Ashley and Jim Hoffman
| work =
| url =http://www.911research.wtc7.net/essays/commondreams/partridge.html
| accessdate=2006-08-07}} Pro MIHOP rebuttle to above article
* {{cite web
| title=Physics911.net
| work =
| url =http://www.physics911.net
| accessdate=2006-09-11}}
* {{cite web
| title=9/11 Conspiracy & Truth Movement News
| work =
| url =http://rinf.com/conspiracies/9-11.html}}
* The 9-11 Research Companion to LOOSE CHANGE 2ND EDITION.


9/11 Conspiracy theory critic ] asserts that for the most part proponents are not out for financial gain and in some cases have left lucrative careers to become activists.<ref>.</ref>
====Flight 93====

* {{cite web
Dr Michael Wood and Dr Karen Douglas ] psychologists who specialize in conspiracy theories<ref>.</ref> examined the comments sections of over 2000 news articles relating to the collapse of World Trade Center 7. They found that proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories were more likely to try and debunk the mainstream account than promote their own theories and also were more likely to believe in other conspiracy theories. Proponents of the mainstream account tended to argue for that account and showed a greater hostility toward conspiracy theory proponents.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00409|pmid = 23847577|pmc = 3703523|title = "What about building 7?" A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories|journal = Frontiers in Psychology|volume = 4|pages = 409|year = 2013|last1 = Wood|first1 = Michael J.|last2 = Douglas|first2 = Karen M.|doi-access = free}}</ref>
| title =How Did United Flight 93 Crash?

| work =flight93crash.com
=== Analysis ===
| url =http://www.flight93crash.com
According to a 2011 analysis in a '']'' article, 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 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. These three groups are:<ref name=Bartlett>{{cite journal |last1=Bartlett |first1=Jamie |last2=Miller |first2=Carl |title=A Bestiary of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Notes from the Front Line |journal=] |volume=35.4 |issue=July/August |pages=43–46 |year=2011 |publisher=] |url=http://www.csicop.org/si/show/a_bestiary_of_the_9_11_truth_movement_notes_from_the_front_line |access-date=May 29, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121001051753/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/a_bestiary_of_the_9_11_truth_movement_notes_from_the_front_line |archive-date=October 1, 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
| accessdate=2006-07-30
* Hard core: The organizers and active members of the various 9/11 Truth Movement organizations. They produce the information, spot the anomalies and technical inconsistencies, provide the technical base and form the theories. While they claim to be only interested in facts and to use ], they commit the ] of ']' by pre-determining the outcome, then searching for corroborating evidence while ignoring the vast body of ]ed, independent, consensual research which contradict their theories. They supply the physical structure of the movement by organizing events, seminars, discussions, marches and distributing flyers and pamphlets. Their numbers are relatively small but they are tight-knit and highly connected. Their worldview favors 'super-conspiracy', a master plan that is behind conspiracies which they believe they are uncovering.<ref name=Bartlett/>
}}
* Critically turned: They are the young students and political activists whose affiliation with the 9/11 Truth Movement often is rooted from their dissatisfaction and anger at the established political and social order. Their sense of justice and ] propels them to activism against perceived oppression and social injustice. Their penchant to use Internet, especially ], and tech savvy make them the propaganda machine for the movement. They produce ] videos and films with cool, countercultural content, make good use of pop culture parody and eye-catching graphics. The countercultural street cred of their productions buy them broad appeal and exposure to millions of people.<ref name=Bartlett/>
*{{cite web
* Illiterati: They are the movement's mass membership backbone, a large, diffuse group which give the movement exaggerated claims of popularity and influence. Participation in the 9/11 Truth Movement, to this group of people, is as much a social and recreational pursuit as the quest for truth. Their partaking is mostly through ] social networking and YouTube. Their commentaries often are emotional and they make no pretense to be accurate, balanced or to show genuine intent to find truth. Involvement with the movement that fit their worldview gives them a sense of identity and belonging, which they find more appealing than the facts and evidences of the 9/11 terrorist attack itself.<ref name=Bartlett/>
| title =Flight 93 Ordered Shot Down

| work =dcdave.com
== Media reaction ==
| url =http://www.dcdave.com/article5/060704.htm
While discussion and coverage of these theories is mainly confined to Internet pages, books, documentary films, and conversation, a number of mainstream news outlets around the world have covered the issue.
| accessdate=2006-07-30

}}
The Norwegian version of the July 2006 '']'' sparked interest when they ran, on their own initiative, a three-page main story on the 9/11 attacks and summarized the various types of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which were not specifically endorsed by the newspaper, only recensed).<ref>, Norwegian edition of '']'', July 2006. See also English translation: Kim Bredesen, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060813083428/http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-07-21-bredesen-en.html |date=August 13, 2006 }}</ref> In December 2006, the French version published an article by ], co-editor of '']'', which strongly criticized the alleged endorsement of conspiracy theories by the U.S. left-wing, alleging that it was a sign of "theoretical emptiness."<ref>
*{{cite web
* {{cite web|url=http://mondediplo.com/2006/12/02conspiracy |title=Distractions from awful reality – US: the conspiracy that wasn't |author=Alexander Cockburn |publisher=Le Monde diplomatique |date=December 2, 2006 |access-date=May 29, 2014 |author-link=Alexander Cockburn|ref=none }}
| title =Problems With the ASCE Report On The Pentagon Cast Further Doubt on 757 Account
* {{cite web|url=http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2006/12/COCKBURN/14270 |author=Alexander Cockburn |publisher=Le Monde diplomatique |date=December 2, 2006 |title=Scepticisme ou occultisme? Le complot du 11-Septembre n'aura pas lieu |access-date=May 29, 2014 |language=fr |author-link=Alexander Cockburn |ref=none}}
| work =bedoper.com
* {{cite web|url=http://ir.mondediplo.com/article1024.html |script-title=fa:توطئه ۱۱ سپتامبر سرنخواهد گرفت |title=The September 11 conspiracy will resume on|date=December 2006 |access-date=May 29, 2014 |language=fa }}
| url =http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce/
* {{cite web|url=http://diplo.uol.com.br/2006-12,a1465 |title=PODERES IMAGINÁRIOS – A "conspiração" das Torres Gêmeas |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070107091414/http://diplo.uol.com.br/2006-12%2Ca1465 |archive-date=January 7, 2007 |access-date=May 29, 2014 |language=pt }}</ref>
| accessdate=2006-07-30

Also, on the Canadian website for ''CBC News: ]'', a program titled, "Conspiracy Theories: uncovering the facts behind the myths of Sept. 11, 2001" was broadcast on October 29, 2003, stating that what they found may be more surprising than any theories.<ref> at cbc.ca {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130917233125/http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/ |date=September 17, 2013 }}</ref> On November 27, 2009, ''The Fifth Estate'' aired a documentary entitled ''The Unofficial Story'' where several prominent members of the 9/11 Truth Movement made their case.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/was-911-a-conspiracy-truthers-make-their-case/article1378976/ |title=Was 9/11 a conspiracy? 'Truthers' make their case Toronto Globe and Mail November 26, 2009 |work=The Globe and Mail |location=Canada |date= November 26, 2009|access-date=October 15, 2010 |first=Andrew |last=Ryan| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100927222044/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/was-911-a-conspiracy-truthers-make-their-case/article1378976/| archive-date=September 27, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/the_unofficial_story/ |title=CBC Website The Unofficial Story Webpage |publisher=CBC |location=Canada |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110511082113/http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/the_unofficial_story/| archive-date=May 11, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>

An article in the September 11, 2006, edition of ''Time'' magazine comments that the major 9/11 conspiracy theories "depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses", and enjoy continued popularity because "the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting". It concludes that "conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events" and constitute "an American form of national mourning."<ref>Grossman, Lev. (2006) &nbsp;– Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away.</ref>

Australian newspaper '']'' published an article titled "The CIA couldn't have organised this&nbsp;..." which said "The same people who are making a mess of Iraq were never so clever or devious that they could stage a complex assault on two narrow towers of steel and glass" and "if there is a nefarious plot in all this bad planning, it is one improvised by a confederacy of dunces". This article mainly attacked a group of scientists led by Professor ], now called ]. They said "most of them aren't scientists but instructors&nbsp;... at second-rate colleges".<ref name="CIACouldntHaveOrganisedThis">{{Cite news |url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/09/08/ftterror08.xml&page=4 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071011190156/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=%2Farts%2F2006%2F09%2F08%2Fftterror08.xml&page=4 |url-status = dead |archive-date = October 11, 2007 |title = The CIA couldn't have organised this&nbsp;... |work = The Daily Telegraph |location = London |author = Michael Shelden |access-date = September 23, 2009 |date = September 8, 2006 }}</ref>

''The Daily Telegraph'' also published an article in May 2007 that was highly critical of ''Loose Change 2'', a movie which presents a 9/11 conspiracy theory.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Blair |first=Tim |url=http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/opinion/story/0,22049,21671628-5001031,00.html |work=The Daily Telegraph |title=Virgin's 9/11 Farce |date=May 5, 2007 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090705224534/http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/opinion/story/0%2C22049%2C21671628-5001031%2C00.html |archive-date=July 5, 2009 }}</ref>

Doug MacEachern in a May 2008 column for '']'' wrote that while many "9/11 truthers" are not crackpots that espouse "crackpot conspiracy theories", supporters of the theories fail to take into account both human nature and that nobody has come forward claiming they were participants in the alleged conspiracies.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0511vip-maceachern0511.html |title=Truthers are overlooking key point about 9/11 Human nature Doug MacEachern for the Arizona Republic May 11, 2008 |publisher=Azcentral.com |date=May 11, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-date=March 5, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210305224324/https://azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0511vip-maceachern0511.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> This view was seconded by Timothy Giannuzzi, a '']'' ] columnist specializing in foreign policy.<ref>{{cite news |last=Calgary |first=The |url=http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=0bc82ffe-1e2e-4991-93ea-0f384b864bad&p=2 |title=Washington can't live up to standards of 9/11 'truthers Timothy Giannuzzi for the Calgary Herald July 10, 2008 |publisher=Canada.com |date=July 10, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090918100543/http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=0bc82ffe-1e2e-4991-93ea-0f384b864bad&p=2 |archive-date=September 18, 2009 }}</ref>

On June 7, 2008, the '']'' published a lengthy article on the ] and 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d66e778-3128-11dd-ab22-000077b07658.html |title=The Truth Is Out There |work=Financial Times |author=Peter Barber |date=June 7, 2008 |access-date=September 20, 2009}}</ref>

], a British comedian and multimedia personality, in a July 2008 column published by '']'' as part of its "Comment is free" series agreed that 9/11 conspiracy theorists fail to take in account human fallacies and added that believing in these theories gives theorists a sense of belonging to a community that shares privileged information thus giving the theorists a delusional sense of power.<ref>{{Cite news|author=Charlie Brooker |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jul/14/september11.usa |title=So, you believe in conspiracy theories, do you? You probably also think you're the Emperor of Pluto Charles Brooker for The Guardian Unlimited July 14, 2008 |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=September 20, 2009 |date=July 14, 2008}}</ref> The commentary generated over 1700 online responses, the largest in the history of the series.<ref>{{Cite news|author=Dan Hind |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jul/17/september11 |title=Who knows what happened on 9/11? Dan Hind for The Guardian Unlimited July 17, 2008 |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=September 20, 2009 | date=July 17, 2008}}</ref> In a September 2009 piece, ''The Guardian'' was more supportive of 9/11 conspiracy theories, asking, "when did it become uncool to ask questions? When did questioners become imbeciles?"<ref>{{Cite news|author=Charlie Skelton |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2009/sep/11/ground-zero-bbc-protest |title=9/11 anniversary: a lovely day for a spot of protesting at the BBC Charlie Skelton for The Guardian Unlimited September 11, 2009 |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=January 9, 2010 |date=September 11, 2009}}</ref>

On September 12, 2008, ] broadcast in prime time a documentary made by ] ] entitled ''Zero'', sympathetic to those who question the accepted account of the attacks according to Chiesa. According to ] in conjunction with the documentary, Russian State Television aired a debate on the subject. The panel consisted of members from several countries including 12 Russians who hold divergent views. The motive of Russian State Television in broadcasting the documentary was questioned by a commentator from '']'' who noted that Russian State Television had a history of broadcasting programs involving ] involving the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3626100,00.html |title=DPA News Agency Filmmaker Urges International Tribunal to Probe 9/11 September 9, 2008 |publisher=Dw-world.de |access-date=July 20, 2009}}</ref>

Nasir Mahmood in a commentary printed by the '']'' wrote favorably about a 9/11 truth lecture and film festival held in California and quoted a Jewish speaker at that festival who said that none of the 19 suspected hijackers had been proven guilty of anything and compared racism against Muslims resulting from what he called false accusations to the racism against Jews in the Nazi era.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pakobserver.net/200809/15/news/topstories07.asp |title=19 Muslims involved in 9/11 never proved guilty by anybody |author=Nasir Mahmood |publisher=Pakistan Observer |date=September 15, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080918020434/http://pakobserver.net/200809/15/news/topstories07.asp |archive-date=September 18, 2008 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref>

On November 10, 2008, ] broadcast a story summarizing various 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref name=ITN081110>{{cite web|url=http://itn.co.uk/news/eb25eb27b4c1315a34017442fb7831a7.html |title=9/11 conspiracy theories exposed ITN November 10, 2008 |publisher=Itn.co.uk |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090122213036/http://itn.co.uk/news/eb25eb27b4c1315a34017442fb7831a7.html |archive-date=January 22, 2009 }}</ref>

The emergence of the ] in 2009 has led to comparisons between that movement and the 9/11 Truth movement, with both movements seen in a very negative light. ] have also been compared to the birther and 9/11 conspiracy theories. James Borne, a journalist for '']'' who covered the ], described his assignment covering a 9/11 truth meeting as "erhaps the most intellectually scary assignment I have had in recent years".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/world-agenda-to-tell-you-the-truth-these-conspiracists-scare-me-c0fxqfnx3jk |title=World Agenda: To tell you the truth, these conspiracists scare me|work=]|date= August 4, 2009|author=James Bone}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://huffingtonpost.com/ben-cohen/why-the-birthers-matter_b_243647.html |title=Why the Birthers Matter |work=Huffington Post |date= July 23, 2009|access-date=May 30, 2011 |first=Ben |last=Cohen| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110511213243/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-cohen/why-the-birthers-matter_b_243647.html| archive-date=May 11, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120830140825/http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2009/08/birthers-versus-truthers/27374/ |date=August 30, 2012 }}. '']'' August 3, 2009</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0808/1224252235086.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110218132405/http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0808/1224252235086.html|archive-date=February 18, 2011 |title=Conspiracy theorists seek order in a terrifying world|newspaper=The Irish Times |date=August 8, 2009 |access-date=May 30, 2011}}</ref>

On August 31, 2009, the ] aired the program ''9/11 Science and Conspiracy'', in which the ] tested some of the claims frequently made by those who question the accepted 9/11 account. Specifically, the experiments concluded that burning jet fuel alone can sufficiently raise the temperature of a steel support column to the point of structural failure, that a controlled demolition using conventional techniques would leave clear evidence that was not found at Ground Zero, that using ] is not an effective technique to melt a steel column, and that even if thermite chemical signatures were found, it would be impossible to tell if thermite was actually used or if the traces came from the reaction of aircraft aluminum with other substances in the fire. The testing also concluded that the type of hole found at the Pentagon was consistent with the standard scenario, and that damage from a bombing or missile attack would differ from the damage that occurred. In the program, several prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorists viewed rough edits of the experiments, and expressed their disagreement with the findings.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067/ |title=9/11 Science and Conspiracy Theory Website |publisher=Channel.nationalgeographic.com |access-date=May 30, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110518135528/http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067/ |archive-date=May 18, 2011 }}</ref><ref>] 9/11 Science and Conspiracy.</ref>

The British left wing magazine '']'' listed ] as the 41st most important person who matters today. The magazine said that Griffin's "books on the subject have lent a sheen of respectability that appeals to people at the highest levels of government". The publication listed 9/11 conspiracy theories as "one of the most pernicious global myths".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/global-issues/2009/09/world-fashion-gay-india-church |title=The 50 people who matter today: 41–50 |work=New Statesman |location=UK |date=September 24, 2009 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110607182955/http://www.newstatesman.com/global-issues/2009/09/world-fashion-gay-india-church| archive-date=June 7, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> Griffin's book ''The New Pearl Harbor Revisited'' was chosen by Publishers Weekly as a "Pick of the Week" in November 2008.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Henry |first=Kendra |title=Full 9/11 story is not told, says visiting WU speaker |journal=Webster University Journal |date=April 29, 2010 |url=http://media.www.webujournal.com/media/storage/paper245/news/2010/04/29/News/Full-911.Story.Is.Not.Told.Says.Visiting.Wu.Speaker-3914619.shtml |access-date=May 1, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100503223325/http://media.www.webujournal.com/media/storage/paper245/news/2010/04/29/News/Full-911.Story.Is.Not.Told.Says.Visiting.Wu.Speaker-3914619.shtml |archive-date=May 3, 2010 }}</ref>

Denver ] ] has aired 9/11 truth documentaries several times. The stations spokesperson claimed airing these documentaries has been a boon for the stations fund raising efforts.<ref>{{cite news|last=Carroll |first=Vincent |url=http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13422315 |title=Carroll: Public TV and the Truthers |work=] |date= September 26, 2009 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110605033035/http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13422315| archive-date=June 5, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>

], television and radio host, said of the allegations: "There are limits to debasement of this country, aren't there? I mean, it's one thing to believe that our politicians are capable of being ]. It's another to think that they are willing to kill 3,000 Americans. Once you cross that line, you're in a whole new territory."<ref name="WSJ Watching">{{Cite news|last=Taranto |first=James |journal=Wall Street Journal |title='Nobody's Watching Charlie Rose' |date=January 18, 2010 |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703436504574641192528461858 |access-date=January 22, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100119061813/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703436504574641192528461858.html |archive-date=January 19, 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref>

In March 2010, '']'' editorialized against ], a prominent Japanese politician who has espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories. They described Fujita as a man "susceptible to the imaginings of the lunatic fringe". It went on to say that the ] would be "severely tested" if Fujita's party continued to tolerate these kinds of comments.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/07/AR2010030702354.html |title=A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy Washington Post March 8, 2010 |newspaper=The Washington Post |date= March 8, 2010|access-date=October 15, 2010}}</ref>

For the ninth anniversary of the attacks the Egyptian daily '']'' published an article questioning the U.S. Government story and promoting conspiracy theories. The senior analyst for the semi-official ] and a member of Parliament from the ] was quoted.

Gordon Farrer, the technology editor for '']'', theorized in a November 2010 column for the '']'' that the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories was a result of two main factors. One revolved around the personality traits of the theorists themselves (cynical, anxious, belief that they are ]). The second revolved around the high ] ranking 9/11 conspiracy theories receive, leading to a false air of authority to the theories. Speaking of the theorists. Farrer wrote that "when politicians and media don't give them voice they feel more threatened, more suspicious, cornered, helpless; and so they go on the attack".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/blogs/untangling-the-web/dont-get-caught-in-the-web-of-conspiracy-theory-truthiness/20101105-17gq1.html |title=Don't get caught in the web of conspiracy theory truthiness|first= Gordon |last=Farrer|publisher= Sydney Morning Herald – Smh.com.au |date=November 5, 2010 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110315183816/http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/blogs/untangling-the-web/dont-get-caught-in-the-web-of-conspiracy-theory-truthiness/20101105-17gq1.html| archive-date=March 15, 2011| url-status= live}}</ref>

], the host of '']'', a news magazine run by ], expressed openness to questions on causes of the collapse of ].<ref name="Fox takes heat"/> ], a legal analyst for Fox News and former judge at the ], voiced support for skepticism about the collapse of the high-rise building, and for Rivera investigating the event.<ref name="Fox takes heat">{{cite news|publisher=CNN|title=Fox takes heat from left and right over analysts|date=December 1, 2010|url=http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/01/fox-takes-heat-from-left-and-right-over-analyst/|access-date=December 8, 2010|archive-date=December 18, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211218025754/https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/01/fox-takes-heat-from-left-and-right-over-analyst/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Alex Jones syndicated radio program was dropped by 70 radio stations when he began espousing 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref name=StrangeMan/><ref>{{cite magazine|last=Zaitchik|first=Alexander|url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/talk-radios-alex-jones-the-most-paranoid-man-in-america-20110302 |title=Meet Alex Jones, the Talk Radio Host Behind Charlie Sheen's Crazy Rants|magazine=Rolling Stone |date=March 2, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110628221649/http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/talk-radios-alex-jones-the-most-paranoid-man-in-america-20110302| archive-date=June 28, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> On August 29, 2010, ] broadcast a program entitled ''The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – Ten Years On''.<ref name=BBCMag/>

On September 5, 2011, '']'' published an article entitled, "9/11 conspiracy theories debunked". The article noted that unlike the collapse of World Trade Centers 1 and 2 a controlled demolition collapses a building from the bottom and explains that the windows popped because of collapsing floors. The article also said there are conspiracy theories that claim that ] was also downed by a controlled demolition, that the Pentagon being hit by a missile, that the hijacked planes were packed with explosives and flown by remote control, that Israel was behind the attacks, that a plane headed for the Pentagon was shot down by a missile, that there was ] by people who had foreknowledge of the attacks were all false.<ref>{{cite web|url = https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/05/9-11-conspiracy-theories-debunked|title = 9/11 conspiracy theories debunked|date = September 5, 2011|access-date = February 5, 2016|website = ]|last = McGreal|first = Chris|location = Washington, D.C.|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160205131010/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/05/9-11-conspiracy-theories-debunked|archive-date = February 5, 2016|url-status = live}}</ref>

], who has Tweeted his suspicions about the attack on the Pentagon, is one of the hosts of the ] program '']'', which debuted on June 25, 2012.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://times247.com/articles/msnbc-show-to-star-9-11-conspiracy-theorist|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120915142251/http://times247.com/articles/msnbc-show-to-star-9-11-conspiracy-theorist |url-status=dead |title=times247.com|archive-date=September 15, 2012|website=times247.com}}</ref>

== Criticism ==
Critics of these conspiracy theories say they are a form of ] common throughout history after a traumatic event in which ] emerge as a mythic form of explanation.<ref name="Barkun|2003"/> A related criticism addresses the form of research on which the theories are based. Thomas W. Eagar, an engineering professor at ], suggested they "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." Eagar's criticisms also exemplify a common stance that the theories are best ignored. "I've told people that if the argument gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." According to him, this happened when Steve Jones, a physics professor at ], took up the issue.<ref>{{cite web |last = Walch |first = Tad |year = 2006 |url = http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645200098,00.html |title = Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones |work = Utah news |publisher = Deseret News Publishing Company |access-date = September 9, 2006 |archive-date = March 2, 2007 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070302104135/http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645200098,00.html |url-status = dead }}</ref>

], writing in '']'', said:
"The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking. All the evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."<ref name="SciAm"/>

'']'',<ref name="SciAm">{{cite journal|title = Fahrenheit 2777, 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories |journal = Scientific American |date=June 2005|last = Shermer |first = Michael |volume = 292 |issue = 6 |pages = 38 |pmid = 15934650 |author-link = Michael Shermer |url = http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fahrenheit-2777}}</ref> '']'',<ref>{{cite web|title = Debunking The 9/11 Myths&nbsp;— Mar. 2005 Cover Story |publisher = Popular Mechanics |date=March 2005 |url = http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842}}</ref> and '']''<ref>{{cite web|title = Mass Media Bunk – 9/11 conspiracies: the war on critical thinking |publisher = The Skeptic's Dictionary |author= Carroll, Robert Todd |date=March 30, 2006 |url = http://skepdic.com/refuge/bunk27.html|author-link = Robert Todd Carroll }}</ref> have published articles that rebut various 9/11 conspiracy theories. ''Popular Mechanics'' has published a book entitled '']'' that expands upon the research first presented in the article.<ref>{{cite web |title=Debunking The 9/11 Myths blog |publisher=Popular Mechanics |url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog/911mythsblog |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060813114159/http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog/911mythsblog |archive-date=August 13, 2006 |access-date=May 29, 2014}}</ref> In the foreword for the book ] ] wrote that blaming the U.S. government for the events "mars the memories of all those lost on that day" and "exploits the public's anger and sadness. It shakes Americans' faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low. It trafficks in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans."<ref>{{cite book |editor1-last= Dunbar |editor1-first= D. |editor2-last= Reagan |editor2-first= B. |contribution=Foreword |contribution-url= http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/3491861.html?page=4 |first=John |last=McCain |title=Debunking 9/11 myths |date= August 4, 2006 |work=Popularmechanics.com |access-date= July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090714131744/http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/3491861.html?page=4 |archive-date=July 14, 2009}}</ref> '']'' dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories as a "panoply of the absurd", stating "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons."<ref>{{cite web|author = Cziesche, Dominik |author2=Jürgen Dahlkamp |author3=Ulrich Fichtner |author4=Ulrich Jaeger |author5=Gunther Latsch |author6=Gisela Leske |author7=Max F. Ruppert |date=September 8, 2003 |url = http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160,00.html| title = Panoply of the Absurd |work=Der Spiegel}}</ref>

Journalist ], in his book '']'', discusses 9/11 conspiracy theories as symptomatic of what he calls the "derangement" of American society; a disconnection from reality due to widespread "disgust with our political system".<ref name="tgd"/> Drawing a parallel with the ], he argues that both "chose to battle bugbears that were completely idiotic, fanciful, and imaginary," instead of taking control of their own lives.<ref name="tgd" /> While critical, Taibbi explains that 9/11 conspiracy theories are different from "]-era ]", and constitute more than "a small, scattered group of nutcases they really were, just as they claim to be, almost everyone you meet."<ref name="tgd" />

], a columnist for '']'', in his book entitled ''Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History'' that was published in May 2009, claimed that the theories strain credulity.<ref name="women.timesonline.co.uk"/> He charges that 9/11 conspiracy theorists have exaggerated the expertise of those supporting their theories, and says 9/11 conspiracy theorists, including ], cross-cite each other.<ref>{{cite news|last=Aaronovitch|first=David|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704238104574602042125998498|title=A Conspiracy-Theory Theory|work=]|date=December 19, 2009|access-date=October 6, 2020}}</ref> He also claims the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories has hurt the ]. According to Aaronovitch, because a significant portion of educated Pakistanis believe that ] brought the towers down, dealing with the ] is difficult "because they actually don't believe the fundamental premise on which the war against terror was waged".<ref>{{cite news|last=Aaronovitch |first=David |url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123127032 |title=Debunking Conspiracy Theories In 'Voodoo Histories' National Public Radio (United States) January 30, 2010 |publisher=Npr.org |date=January 30, 2010 |access-date=October 23, 2010}}</ref>

] law professor ] co-authored a 2009 paper which used members of the 9/11 Truth movement and others as examples of people who suffer from "crippled epistemologies", to public trust and the political system. He wrote that "hey do not merely undermine democratic debate&nbsp; In extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so."<ref name=StrangeMan/>

In June 2011, the ] (RIBA) was criticized for hosting a lecture by Richard Gage, president of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Rick Bell, the director of the ] (AIA) New York chapter, who was a witness to the 9/11 attacks, said that "no amount of money" would persuade him to allow the group to talk at his headquarters and said that Gage lacks credibility among the professional community. ], former spokesperson for the AIA, said Gage's theories were "ridiculous", "here were no explosives planted", and "he buildings were definitely brought down by the planes". The decision to host the event was also criticized by the former president of RIBA and the founding president of the AIA's United Kingdom chapter. Gage has been warned by the AIA against giving a false impression that he has a relationship with it. A July 2012 article in the AIA's magazine criticized Gage for continuing to intimate that he has an association with the organization, and claimed that there were no architects at an Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth screening held in an AIA boardroom.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.architectmagazine.com/architecture/architects-shy-from-truther-conspiracy-theory_1.aspx|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130616211232/http://www.architectmagazine.com/architecture/architects-shy-from-truther-conspiracy-theory_1.aspx |url-status=dead |title=Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Architect Magazine July 19, 2012|archive-date=June 16, 2013}}</ref> RIBA released a statement saying the perception that it endorses events held in its buildings is "regrettable", and said it would review policy on "private hire" of its buildings.<ref>Petrunia, Paul. , Archinect News. Retrieved June 28, 2011.</ref> Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan offer scathing criticism of many of the above theories in ''The Eleventh Day'', their 2011 investigation of the attacks.<ref>{{cite book |last=Summers |first=Anthony |title=The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden |url=https://archive.org/details/eleventhdayfulls0000summ/page/91 |url-access=registration |year=2011 |publisher=Ballantine |location=New York |isbn=978-1-4000-6659-9 |pages= |author2=Swan, Robbyn}}</ref>

U.S. representative ], chairmen of the ], said 9/11 conspiracy theorists "trivialize" the "most tragic event to affect the United States" and that "eople making these claims are disgraceful, and they should be ashamed of themselves".<ref>.</ref>

The hosts of '']'' (the "SGU") have spoken repeatedly about the "absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theories". In addition to critiquing the theories using the same or similar arguments as the above, the "SGU" hosts say that, like most conspiracy theories, this one collapses under its own weight and contradicts itself. In order for the 9/11 conspiracy theories to be correct, the U.S. government would not only have to orchestrate the claimed false flag operation regarding the airplanes that crashed into the World Trade Center, but they would also have to orchestrate a superfluous controlled demolition and cover their tracks so flawlessly that it becomes indistinguishable to physicists from the "official story", yet the plan would have to be flawed enough so that "losers in their mothers' basement" will discover the conspiracy.<ref>SGU Productions. ''The Skeptics Guide to the Universe''. SGU Productions: October 12, 2013. October 17, 2013.</ref>

== In politics ==
Former Canadian ] leader ] forced a candidate from ], Lesley Hughes, to terminate her campaign after earlier writings from Hughes surfaced in which Hughes wrote that U.S., German, Russian and Israeli intelligence officials knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/506806 |title=Dion drops candidate over 9/11 remarks Toronto Star September 26, 2008 |work=Toronto Star |date=September 26, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |first=Bruce |last=Campion-Smith}}</ref><ref name="BeWaryOfThoseWhoSay911WasAFake">{{cite news |url=http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=efc419f6-7030-45c7-b431-8976158b23df |title=Be wary of those who say 9/11 was a fake |date=October 5, 2008 |access-date=September 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081006123037/http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=efc419f6-7030-45c7-b431-8976158b23df |archive-date=October 6, 2008 }}</ref> ], Deputy Editor of ] News and a ] candidate in the 2008 Canadian election, had earlier called for Hughes's resignation, saying that the 9/11 Truth movement is "one of Canada's most notorious hatemongering fringe movements" composed of "conspiracy theorists who are notorious for holding anti-Semitic views."<ref>{{cite web |author=Conservative Party Of Canada |url=https://www.conservative.ca/EN/1091/106439 |title=Dion must fire his anti-israel candidate Conservative Party Press Release September 26, 2008 |publisher=Conservative.ca |date=September 26, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081103175309/http://www.conservative.ca/EN/1091/106439 |archive-date=November 3, 2008}}</ref> On June 16, 2009, Hughes sued Kent, the ], the ] of Canada and four senior members of the two organizations, alleging the ] allegations were untrue and defamatory and ruined her career.<ref>{{cite news |last=Martin |first=Nick |url=http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/hughes-sues-mp-bnai-brith-says-anti-semite-accusations-have-ruined-career-48864447.html |title=Hughes sues MP, B'Nai Brith Says anti-Semite accusations have ruined career Winnipeg Free Press June 23, 2009 |newspaper=Winnipeg Free Press |publisher=Winnipegfreepress.com |date=June 23, 2009 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090628115751/http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/hughes-sues-mp-bnai-brith-says-anti-semite-accusations-have-ruined-career-48864447.html |archive-date=June 28, 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref> Later, another Conservative Party candidate called for the leader of the ] to fire a candidate for her pro-9/11 truth views.<ref>{{cite web |author=Conservative Party Of Canada |url=https://www.conservative.ca/EN/1091/106644 |title=Ottawa NDP continue to flirt with fringe Conservative Party Press release September 30, 2008 |publisher=Conservative.ca |access-date=July 20, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081103175808/http://www.conservative.ca/EN/1091/106644 |archive-date=November 3, 2008}}</ref> ], head of the ], Canada's largest Muslim advocacy organization, is trying to remove 9/11 conspiracy theorists from its board, in an effort to what he describes as purifying within and totally canadianize the organization.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://nationalpost.com/news/saturday-interview-the-cics-canadian-imam |title=Saturday Interview: The CIC's Canadian imam National Post October 2010 |work=National Post |date=October 9, 2010 |location=Canada |access-date=March 5, 2021|last1=Brean |first1=Joseph }}</ref>

In 2008, calls for the resignation of ], the special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories for the United Nations, were partially based on his support investigating the validity of 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>{{cite news |last=Abrams |first=Joseph |url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369122,00.html |title=Critics Demand Resignation of U.N. Official Who Wants Probe of 9/11 'Inside Job' Theories Fox News June 19, 2008 |publisher=Fox News |date=July 15, 2008 |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090715133257/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C369122%2C00.html |archive-date=July 15, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2011, Falk praised a book by David Ray Griffin. Falk was condemned for his remarks by ] ] and United States ambassador to the United Nations ].<ref>{{cite web|last=Liel |first=Alon |url=http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=205192 |title=Falk's 9-11 remarks are 'condemned' by UN sec.-gen. |publisher=Jerusalem Post |date=January 25, 2011 |access-date=May 30, 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110511172523/http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=205192| archive-date=May 11, 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>

In February 2009, ], a professor of geopolitics at CID military college in Paris, was fired by French Defence Minister ] for writing a book entitled ''Chronicle of the Clash of Civilizations'' that espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/local_news/French-lecturer-sacked-over-9_11-conspiracy-claims_49327.html |title=French lecturer sacked over 9/11 conspiracy claims AFP/Expatica February 6, 2009 |publisher=Expatica.com |access-date=July 20, 2009 |archive-date=April 6, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120406115848/http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/local_news/French-lecturer-sacked-over-9_11-conspiracy-claims_49327.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In September 2009, ], an adviser to US President Barack Obama, resigned after his signature on a 2004 petition calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur and other controversial statements came to light drawing criticism. Van Jones said he was a victim of a smear campaign, adding that he does not currently, nor ever has agreed with that theory.<ref name="ObamaDidNotOrderVanJonesResignation">{{Cite news| url = http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/06/obama.adviser.resigns/| title = Obama did not order Van Jones' resignation, adviser says| date = September 6, 2009| publisher = CNN |access-date=September 6, 2009}}</ref>

The 9/11 truth movement became an issue in the 2010 Texas Gubernatorial Republican primary when candidate ] replied when asked by ] about US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks: "I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard, there are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that." After being criticized for the remarks by opposing candidates, Medina said that she has never been a 9/11 truth movement member and believes the twin towers were attacked by Muslim terrorists.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/02/11/2200374.aspx|title=Perry, KBH blast Medina|publisher=MSNBC|date=February 11, 2010|access-date=October 23, 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100216135306/http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/02/11/2200374.aspx|archive-date=February 16, 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2010/0211/Debra-Medina-self-destructs-on-Glenn-Beck-radio-show |title=Debra Medina self-destructs on Glenn Beck radio show Cristian Science Monitor February 11, 2010 |publisher=Csmonitor.com |date=February 11, 2010 |access-date=October 23, 2010| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20101022025158/http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2010/0211/Debra-Medina-self-destructs-on-Glenn-Beck-radio-show| archive-date=October 22, 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref>

] made statements that were skeptical of al-Qaeda executing the 9/11 attacks.]]
On September 23, 2010, Iranian President ] in a speech to the United Nations said that "he majority of the American people, as well as other nations and politicians, believe some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime", and that "the majority of the American people as well most nations and politicians around the world agree with this view".<ref>{{cite web |title='9/11 was an inside job': Full speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at UN |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4phNuwx8Hs |website=YouTube |publisher=RT |access-date=March 25, 2020}}</ref> The remarks prompted the United States delegation as well as others to walk out.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/09/ahmadinejad-suggests-911-conspiracy-theories-by-us-government.html |title=President Obama 'Deeply Offended' by Ahmadinejad Comments On 9/11 ABC September 23, 2010 |publisher=Blogs.abcnews.com |date=September 23, 2010 |access-date=October 23, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101026200250/http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/09/ahmadinejad-suggests-911-conspiracy-theories-by-us-government.html |archive-date=October 26, 2010 |url-status=dead}}</ref> U.S. President ] criticized Ahmadinejad's remarks before the United Nations General Assembly on the following day, saying that "or him to make a statement like that was inexcusable" and called the remarks "offensive" and "hateful".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/iranian-president-mahmoud-ahmadinejad-united-nations-investigate-9-11-conspiracy-theory-article-1.439238 |title=Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: United Nations needs to investigate my 9/11 conspiracy theory |work=Daily News |location=New York |date=September 24, 2010 |access-date=October 23, 2010 |first=Samuel |last=Goldsmith }}</ref> Previously Ahmadinejad had described the 9/11 attacks as a "suspect event"<ref name="IranPresidentCastsDoubtOnSuspect911">{{cite web| url = http://www.mg.co.za/article/2008-04-16-iran-president-casts-doubt-on-suspect-911| title = Iran president casts doubt on 'suspect' 9/11| author = Stuart Williams| date = April 16, 2008| publisher = ] |access-date=September 20, 2009| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20091002080136/http://www.mg.co.za/article/2008-04-16-iran-president-casts-doubt-on-suspect-911| archive-date=October 2, 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref> and suggested that the Bush Administration was involved in 9/11.<ref name="911MythsBusted">{{Cite news |url= http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,20341165-5003406,00.html |title=9/11 myths busted |author=Adam Harvey |date=September 3, 2006 |publisher=] |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20081008090742/http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0%2C%2C20341165-5003406%2C00.html |archive-date=October 8, 2008 |access-date=May 29, 2014 }}</ref><ref name="AhmadinejadQuotes">{{cite news| url= http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961353170&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull| title= Ahmadinejad quotes |date=May 22, 2006| publisher= ] |access-date=September 20, 2009}}{{dead link|date=June 2016|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> The Iranian president repeated his claims in 2011 with another appearance at the UN and was thereafter criticized in an article appearing in al-Qaeda's magazine, '']''. The article claimed that Ahmadinejad was jealous of al-Qaeda because the stateless and under-fire Islamic terrorist organization did on 9/11 what Iran could not do.<ref>{{cite web |url= https://huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/28/al-qaeda-ahmadinejad-end-911-theories_n_985265.html |title=Al Qaeda Calls On Mahmoud Ahmadinejad To End 'Ridiculous' 9/11 Conspiracy Theories |work=Huffington Post |date=September 28, 2011 |first=Mark |last=Hanrahan |access-date=June 4, 2014}}</ref>

In 2012, Egyptian President ] has called for a scientific conference to look into the events of 9/11 and speculated that the attacks were an inside job. According to an international poll that same year, huge majorities in Muslim countries prefer to believe baseless conspiracy theories rather than listen to the mainstream facts of what happened on September 11, 2001, in New York City and Washington. Although al-Qaeda occasionally brags about its "achievement," 75 percent of Egyptian citizens, for example, still deny that Arabs carried out the attacks, as a Pew study reported in July 2011.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/getting-egypts-morsi-to-give-up-911-conspiracy-rhetoric/2012/09/11/4ca304ea-fb97-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_story.html |title=Getting Egypt's Morsi to give up his 9/11 'truther' talk by Robert Satloff and Eric Trager of the Washington Post September 11, 2012 |work=Washingtonpost.com |access-date=June 4, 2014}}</ref>

== Legal cases ==
Army specialist April Gallop filed suit claiming that Vice President ], Secretary of Defense ], and other Bush administration officials orchestrated the 9/11 attacks and that the Pentagon was hit by an attack ordered by Cheney. The suit was dismissed in 2010 by Judge ], who said the claim was "the product of cynical delusion and fantasy". Her lawyers filed an appeal to the ] which in April 2010 issued a ] why the lawyers and Gallop should not be sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit. Her lawyers asked that the judges on the Court of Appeals recuse themselves because their emotions made them prejudge the case and abuse their power. On October 14, 2011, the judges sanctioned her lawyers $15,000 each for both the frivolous lawsuits and the accusations of prejudice. Gallop was not fined because of her unfamiliarity with the law.<ref>{{cite web| last=Hamblett| first=Mark| url=http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202519035977&slreturn=1| title=Circuit Levels $15,000 in Sanctions Against 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists| publisher=New York Law Journal| date=October 17, 2010| access-date=June 4, 2014}}</ref>

== See also ==

* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em|refs=
<ref name="Barkun|2003">{{cite book|last= Barkun |first= M. |year= 2003 |title= A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America |publisher= University of California Press |isbn= 978-0-520-23805-3}}</ref>
<ref name="Dunbar|Reagan|2011">{{cite book |editor1-last= Dunbar |editor1-first= D. |editor2-last= Reagan |editor2-first= B. |title= Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts |publisher= Hearst |location= New York |year= 2011 |isbn= 978-1-58816-855-9}}<br />–{{Cite book |publisher= Sterling Publishing Company, Inc. |isbn= 978-1-58816-635-7 |title= |date= August 15, 2006 |url= https://archive.org/details/debunking911myth00dunb }}</ref>
<ref name="Molé|2006">{{cite magazine|last= Molé |first= P. |title= 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement Perspective |magazine= ESkeptic |volume=12 |issue=4 |year=2006 |publisher= ] |location= Altadena, California |url= http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11 |access-date= June 2, 2009 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090606001336/http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11| archive-date=June 6, 2009 |url-status= live |issn= 1556-5696}}</ref>
<ref name="Powell|2006">{{cite news|last= Powell |first= M. |title= 9/11 conspiracy theorists multiply |newspaper= The Seattle Times |date= September 9, 2006 |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html |access-date= September 21, 2009 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140308001143/http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2003250424_911conspire09.html |archive-date= March 8, 2014 |url-status= dead}}</ref>
}} }}


<!-- NOT USED -->
====Videos====
<!--
* {{Google video | id = 1130731388742388243 | title = The Oil Factor: Behind The war on Terror}}
== Bibliography ==
*{{Google video | id = -4556787288866368337 | title = WTC Tower 7 Collapse }}
* {{Cite book| last = Begin | first = Jeremy | year = 2007 | title = Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) | publisher = Trine Day Press | isbn = 978-0-9777953-3-8 }}
*
* {{Cite book| last = Broeckers | first = Mathias | title = Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories, and the Secrets of 9/11 | year = 2006 | publisher = Progressive Press | isbn = 978-0-930852-23-8 }}
* {{Google video | id = -2205940254635302539 | title = 911 - Steven Jones on 911 Evidence }}: L.A. Conference, Alex Jones, ].
* {{Cite book| last = Bounan | first = Michel | title = Logique du terrorisme | year = 2003 | publisher = Allia | isbn = 2-84485-129-0}}
* {{Google video | id = 6757267008400743688 | title = Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime }}
* {{Cite book| title = Divided We Stand: A Biography of New York's World Trade Center }}
* {{Google video | id = -3768803122384448937 | title = Secret of 9/11 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Editors of ] | year = 2002 | title = Inside 9-11: What Really Happened | publisher = St. Martin's Press | isbn = 978-0-312-30621-2 }}
*
* {{Cite book| last = Editors of ] | title = ] | isbn = 978-1-58816-635-7 | year = 2006 | publisher = Hearst Books | location = New York }}
* {{Google video | id = -275577066688213413 | title = 9/11 The Myth and the Reality: Dr. David Ray Griffin }}: two speeches given by philosopher and theologist Dr. David Ray Griffin at The Commonwealth Club in San Francisco (4/3/06) and at The Grand Lake Theater in Oakland (3/30/06).
*
*
* {{Cite book| last = Fetzer | first = James H. | title = 9/11 Conspiracy | publisher = Open Court Publishing Company, U.S. | isbn = 978-0-8126-9612-7 | page = 342 | year = 2007 }}
* {{Google video | id = 3156121348015048039 | title = Interview with Gore Vidal by Alex Jones, Infowars, October 29, 2006 Texas Book Festival}}: ] speaks very critically about today's US government, 9/11 official account, US media.
* {{Cite book| last = Griffin | first = David Ray | year = 2007 | title = Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. | publisher = Olive Branch Press | isbn = 978-1-56656-686-5 }}
* *{{google video|7404458118476453937|JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both}} - In his wide-ranging talk, ] points out similarities that arise when you look at the assassination of JFK and the all events of 9/11. (COPA meeting in Dallas, Texas, ] 2006)
* {{Cite book| last = Griffin | first = David Ray | year = 2006 | title = 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, Vol. 1 | publisher = Olive Branch Press | isbn = 978-1-56656-659-9 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Griffin | first = David | year = 2004 | title = The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions | publisher = Olive Branch Press | isbn = 978-1-56656-584-4 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Griffin | first = David Ray |author2 = Richard Falk | title = The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 | url = http://bogusstory.com/TheNewPearlHarbor.html/ | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070110213718/http://bogusstory.com:80/TheNewPearlHarbor.html | url-status = dead | archive-date = January 10, 2007 |access-date=July 26, 2007 | isbn = 978-1-56656-552-3 | year = 2004 | publisher = Olive Branch Press | location = Northampton, Mass. }}
* {{Cite book| last = Henshall | first = Ian | year = 2007 | title = 9.11: The New Evidence | publisher = Robinson Publishing | isbn = 978-1-84529-514-1 | page = 256 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Hufschmid | first = Eric | year = 2002 | title = Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September&nbsp;11th&nbsp;Attack | publisher = Ink & Scribe | isbn = 978-1-931947-05-3 | page = 158 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Laurent | first = Eric | year = 2004 | title = La face cachée du 11 septembre | publisher = Plon | isbn = 978-2-259-20030-1 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Manjoo | first = Farhad | year = 2008 | title = True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society | publisher = Wiley | isbn = 978-0-470-05010-1 | page = 256 | author-link = Farhad Manjoo }}
* {{Cite book| last = Marrs | first = Jim | year = 2006 | title = The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11 and the Loss of Liberty | publisher = Disinformation Company | isbn = 978-1-932857-43-6 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Meyssan | first = Thierry | title = ] | year = 2002 | publisher = Carnot Editions | isbn = 978-2-912362-73-5 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Meyssan | first = Thierry | title = Pentagate | year = 2003 | publisher = USA Books | isbn = 978-1-59209-028-0 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Morgan | first = Rowland |author2 = Ian Henshall | title = 9/11 Revealed: The Unanswered Questions }}
* {{Cite book| author = National Commission on Terrorist Attacks | title = ] | year = 2004 | publisher = W. W. Norton & Co. | isbn = 978-0-393-06041-6 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Olmsted | first = Kathyrn | title = Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11 | isbn = 978-0-19-518353-5 | year = 2009 | publisher = Oxford University Press }}
* {{Cite book| last = Paul | first = Don |author2 = ] | title = Waking up from our Nightmare: The 9/11 Crimes in New York City | isbn = 978-0-943096-10-0 | year = 2004 | publisher = Harts Spring Works }}
* {{Cite book| last = Roeper | first = Richard | year = 2008 | title = Debunked!: Conspiracy Theories, Urban Legends, and Evil Plots of the 21st century | publisher = Chicago Review Press | isbn = 978-1-55652-707-4 | page = 224 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Ruppert | first = Michael | title = Crossing the Rubicon }}
* {{Cite book| last = Ridgeway | first = James | title = The Five Unanswered Questions About 9/11 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Summers | first = Anthony | year = 2011 | title = The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden | publisher = Ballantine | isbn = 978-1-4000-6659-9 |author2=Swan, Robbyn }}
* {{Cite book| last = Taibbi | first = Matt | year = 2008 | title = 'The Great Derangement' A Terrifying True Story of War, Politics, and Religion at the Twilight of the American Empire | publisher = Spiegel & Grau | isbn = 978-0-385-52034-8 | page = 288 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Tarpley | first = Webster Griffin | title = 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA }}
* {{Cite book| last = Thompson | first = Paul |author2 = The Center for Cooperative Research | title = ] | year = 2004 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Williams | first = Eric D. | year = 2006 | title = 9/11 101: 101 Key Points that Everyone Should Know and Consider that Prove 9/11 Was an Inside Job | publisher = Booksurge Publishing | isbn = 978-1-4196-2428-5 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Wright | first = Lawrence | year = 2006 | title = The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 | publisher = Knopf | isbn = 978-0-375-41486-2 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Zwicker | first = Barrie | year = 2006 | title = Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11 | publisher = New Society Publishers | isbn = 978-0-86571-573-8 | page = 416 }}
-->


== External links ==
====Blogs====
{{sisterlinks|d=Q22763|v=Was 9/11 an inside job?|n=no|c=category:9/11 conspiracy theories|b=no|voy=no|m=no|mw=no|wikt=no|s=no|species=no|q=no}}
*{{cite web
;United States government sources
| title =911blogger
*
| work =911Blogger.com
*
| url =http://www.911blogger.com
**
| accessdate=2006-07-30
**
}} Latest news and research
* , August 28, 2006
*{{cite web

| title =American-Freedom.org
;Engineering publications
| work =
* {{cite web
| url =http://www.geocities.com/americans_freedoms/
| last =Eagar
| accessdate=2006-07-30
| first =Thomas
}} News, research, information, blog, links, and a vast video library
| title =Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation
*{{cite web
| url =http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
| title =Totally Fixed and Rigged Magazine
}}
| work =TotallyFixed.blogspot.com
*
| url =http://totallyfixed.blogspot.com/
| accessdate=2006-12-15
}} 9/11 Research and Critiques of 9/11 Media Coverage


{{911ct|state=expanded}}
===Debunking conspiracy claims===
{{Conspiracy theories}}
* Evidence against Controlled Demolition and its most widely held myths.
{{September 11}}
* - free online publication dedicated to educating the public on the collapse of the three World Trade Center structures on ] 2001.
{{George W. Bush}}
* debunking of ''Loose Change'' and 9/11 conspiracy theories by Mark Roberts.
* {{Google video | id = 4162315283354424113 | title = 911 Conspiracy Wars }} - comedic documentary by Abby Scott and Ray Rivero on 9/11 conspiracy theorists who protest at ].
* - articles by UK software developer and freelance writer Mike Williams on a wide range of 9/11 conspiracy theories.
* - critical article on 9/11 conspiracy theories by David Corn.
*
* - debate between ] and ].
* - article debunking several 9/11 conspiracy theories by Phil Molé.
*
* - editorial cartoon mocking 9/11 conspiracy theories.
* - point by point debunking of ''Loose Change''.
*
* - computer animation of Flight 77's crash in the Pentagon.
* - article on Thierry Meyssan's ''L'Effroyable Imposture'' by James S. Robbins, a national-security analyst & NRO contributor.
* - critical article on 9/11 conspiracy theories by Mark Jacobson.
* - satirical article on ''Loose Change'' and 9/11 conspiracy theories.
* - examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of ].
* - article skeptical of 9/11 conspiracy theories by ].
* - blog covering 9/11 conspiracy theories and ] by James B. and Pat.
* - counter-video of ''Loose Change 2nd Edition'' by Mark Iradian.
* - debunks the claims of the ''Hunt the Boeing!'' website.
* - argument against 9/11 conspiracy theories by popular Internet humorist ].
* - critical article on 9/11 conspiracy theories by David Corn. Focuses on Michael Ruppert and Delmart Vreeland.
* - debunking of several 9/11 conspiracy theories by Coco Masters.
* - critical article about 9/11 conspiracy theories by Lev Grossman
* - A study of the primary source evidence against conspiracy.
*
* - links to refutations of various 9/11 conspiracy theories.
* - strong focus on refuting Michael Ruppert's timeline.
* focuses on the facts, not theories of 911]]
*


] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]


]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 02:40, 25 December 2024

Conspiracy theories regarding the September 11 attacks

The nature of the collapse of the two World Trade Center towers and the nearby 7 World Trade Center (in this photo, the brown building to the left of the towers) is a major focus of 9/11 conspiracy theories.

There are various conspiracy theories that attribute the preparation and execution of the September 11 attacks against the United States to parties other than, or in addition to, al-Qaeda. These include the theory that high-level government officials had advance knowledge of the attacks. Government investigations and independent reviews have rejected these theories. Proponents of these theories assert that there are inconsistencies in the commonly accepted version, or that there exists evidence that was ignored, concealed, or overlooked.

The most prominent conspiracy theory is that the collapse of the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center were the result of controlled demolitions rather than structural failure due to impact and fire. Another prominent belief is that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government, or that hijacked planes were remotely controlled, or that a commercial airliner was allowed to do so via an effective stand-down of the American military. Possible motives claimed by conspiracy theorists for such actions include justifying the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 (even though the U.S. government concluded Iraq was not involved in the attacks) to advance their geostrategic interests, such as plans to construct a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Other conspiracy theories revolve around authorities having advance knowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignoring or assisting the attackers.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the technology magazine Popular Mechanics have investigated and rejected the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. The 9/11 Commission and most of the civil engineering community accept that the impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, not controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers, but some conspiracy theory groups, including Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, disagree with the arguments made by NIST and Popular Mechanics.

Background

9/11 conspiracy theorists reject one or both of the following facts about the 9/11 attacks:

  • Al-Qaeda suicide operatives hijacked and crashed United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11 into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, and crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The impact and resulting fires caused the collapse of the Twin Towers and the destruction and damage of other buildings in the World Trade Center complex. The Pentagon was severely damaged by the impact of the airliner and the resulting fire. The hijackers also crashed a fourth plane into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after the passengers and flight crew attempted to regain control of the aircraft.
  • Pre-attack warnings of varying detail of the planned attacks against the United States by al-Qaeda were ignored due to a lack of communication between various law enforcement and intelligence personnel. For the lack of interagency communication, the 9/11 report cited bureaucratic inertia and laws passed in the 1970s to prevent abuses that caused scandals during that era, most notably the Watergate scandal. The report faulted both the Clinton and the Bush administrations with "failure of imagination".

This consensus view is backed by various sources, including:

History

Since the attacks, a variety of conspiracy theories have been put forward in websites, books and films. Many groups and individuals advocating 9/11 conspiracy theories identify as part of the 9/11 Truth movement. Within six hours of the attack, a suggestion appeared on an Internet chat room suggesting that the collapse of the towers looked like an act of controlled demolition. "If, in a few days, not one official has mentioned anything about the controlled demolition part," the author wrote, "I think we have a REALLY serious problem." The first theories that emerged focused primarily on various perceived anomalies in the publicly available evidence, and proponents later developed more specific theories about an alleged plot. One false allegation that was widely circulated by e-mail and on the Web is that not a single Jew had been killed in the attack and that therefore the attacks must have been the work of the Mossad, not Islamic terrorists.

The first elaborated theories appeared in Europe. One week after the attacks, the "inside job" theory was the subject of a thesis by a researcher from the French National Centre for Scientific Research published in the newspaper Le Monde. Other theories sprang from the far corners of the globe within weeks. Six months after the attacks, Thierry Meyssan's piece on 9/11, L'Effroyable Imposture, topped the French bestseller list. Its publication in English (as 9/11: The Big Lie) received little attention, but it remains one of the principal sources for "trutherism". 2003 saw the publication of The CIA and September 11 by former German state minister Andreas von Bülow and Operation 9/11 by the German journalist Gerhard Wisnewski; both books are published by Mathias Bröckers, who was at the time an editor at the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung.

While these theories were popular in Europe, they were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement, and they were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of anti-Americanism. In an address to the United Nations on November 10, 2001, President George W. Bush denounced the emergence of "outrageous conspiracy theories  that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."

The 9/11 conspiracy theories started out mostly in the political left but have broadened into what New York magazine describes as "terra incognita where left and right meet, fusing sixties countercultural distrust with the don't-tread-on-me variety".

By 2004, conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks began to gain ground in the United States. One explanation is that the rise in popularity stemmed more from growing criticism of the Iraq War and the newly re-elected President George W. Bush than from any discovery of new or more compelling evidence or an improvement in the technical quality of the presentation of the theories. Knight Ridder news theorized that revelations that weapons of mass destruction did not exist in Iraq, the belated release of the President's Daily Brief of August 6, 2001, and reports that NORAD had lied to the 9/11 Commission, may have fueled the conspiracy theories.

Between 2004 and the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in 2006, mainstream coverage of the conspiracy theories increased. The U.S. government issued a formal analysis by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the collapse of the World Trade Center. To address the growing publicity of the theories, the State Department revised a webpage in 2006 to debunk them. A 2006 national security strategy paper declared that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda." Al-Qaeda has repeatedly claimed responsibility for the attacks, with chief deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri accusing Shia Iran and Hezbollah of denigrating Sunni successes in hurting America by intentionally starting rumors that Israel carried out the attacks.

Some of the conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks do not involve representational strategies typical of many conspiracy theories that establish a clear dichotomy between good and evil, or guilty and innocent; instead, they call up gradations of negligence and complicity. Mathias Bröckers, an early proponent of such theories, dismisses the commonly accepted account of the September 11 attacks as being itself a conspiracy theory that seeks "to reduce complexity, disentangle what is confusing," and "explain the inexplicable".

Just before the fifth anniversary of the attacks, mainstream news outlets released a flurry of articles on the growth of 9/11 conspiracy theories, with an article in Time stating that "his is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality." Several surveys have included questions about beliefs related to the September 11 attacks. In 2008, 9/11 conspiracy theories topped a "greatest conspiracy theory" list compiled by The Daily Telegraph. The list was ranked by following and traction.

In 2010, the "International Center for 9/11 Studies," a private organization that is said to be sympathetic to conspiracy theories, successfully sued for the release of videos collected by NIST of the attacks and aftermath. According to the German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the videos that were published shortly before the ninth anniversary of the attacks provide "new food for conspiracy theorists." Many of the videos show images of 7 World Trade Center, a skyscraper in the vicinity of the WTC towers that also collapsed on September 11, 2001.

9/11 truth figures Steven E. Jones and Mike Berger have further added that the death of Osama bin Laden did not change their questions about the attacks, nor provide closure.

According to writer Jeremy Stahl, since Bush left office, the overall number of believers in 9/11 conspiracy theories has dipped, while the number of people who believe in the most "radical" theories has held fairly steady.

Types

The most prominent conspiracy theories can be broadly divided into three main forms:

  • LIHOP ("Let it happen on purpose") – suggests that key individuals within the government had at least some foreknowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignored it or actively weakened United States' defenses to ensure the hijacked flights were not intercepted. Similar allegations were made about Pearl Harbor.
  • MIHOP ("Make/Made it happen on purpose") – that key individuals within the government planned the attacks and collaborated with, or framed, al-Qaeda in carrying them out. There is a range of opinions about how this might have been achieved.
  • Others – who reject the accepted account of the September 11 attacks but are not proposing specific theories, but try to demonstrate that the U.S. government's account of the events is wrong. This, according to them, would lead to a general call for a new official investigation into the events of September 11, 2001. According to Jonathan Kay, managing editor for comment at the Canadian newspaper National Post and author of Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground, "They feel their job is to show everybody that the official theory of 9/11 is wrong. And then, when everybody is convinced, then the population will rise up and demand a new investigation with government resources, and that investigation will tell us what actually happened."

Theories

Foreknowledge

See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories; U.S. military response during the September 11 attacks; and United States government operations and exercises on September 11, 2001

Conspiracy theorists claim that action or inaction by U.S. officials with foreknowledge was intended to ensure that the attacks took place successfully. For example, Michael Meacher, former British environment minister and member of Tony Blair's government, said that the United States knowingly failed to prevent the attacks.

Suspected insider trading

Some conspiracy theorists maintain that just before 9/11, an "extraordinary" amount of put options were placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks and speculate that insiders may have known in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. An analysis into the possibility of insider trading on 9/11 concludes that:

A measure of abnormal long put volume was also examined and seen to be at abnormally high levels in the days leading up to the attacks. Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks. —Allen M. Poteshman, The Journal of Business

This study was intended to address the "great deal of speculation about whether option market activity indicated that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the days leading up to September 11 on advance knowledge of the impending attacks."

In the days leading up to 9/11, analysis shows a rise in the put to call ratio for United Airlines and American Airlines, the two airlines from which planes were hijacked on 9/11. Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange recorded purchases of 4,744 "put" option contracts in UAL and 396 call options. On September 10, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings, with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. No other airline companies had an unusual put to call ratio in the days leading up to the attacks. The 9/11 Commission concluded that all these abnormal patterns in trading were coincidental.

Insurance companies saw anomalous trading activities as well. Citigroup Inc., which estimated that its Travelers Insurance unit could pay $500 million in claims from the World Trade Center attack, had about 45 times the normal volume during three trading days before the attack for options that profit, if the stock falls below $40. Citigroup shares fell $1.25 in late trading to $38.09. Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors at the World Trade Center, experienced bigger-than-normal pre-attack trading of options that profited when stock prices fell. Other companies directly affected by the tragedy had similar jumps.

The initial options were bought through at least two brokerage firms, including NFS, a subsidiary of Fidelity Investments, and TD Waterhouse. It was estimated that the trader or traders would have realized a five million dollar profit. The Securities and Exchange Commission launched an insider trading investigation in which Osama bin Laden was a suspect after receiving information from at least one Wall Street Firm.

The 9/11 Commission Report concluded that "Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions." The report further stated:

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options — investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price — surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10 — highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.

Air-defense stand-down theory

A common claim among conspiracy theorists is that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) issued a stand down order or deliberately scrambled fighters late to allow the hijacked airplanes to reach their targets without interference. According to this theory, NORAD had the capability of locating and intercepting planes on 9/11, and its failure to do so indicates a government conspiracy to allow the attacks to occur. Conspiracy theorist Mark R. Elsis says: "There is only one explanation for this ... Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."

One of the first actions taken by the hijackers on 9/11 was to turn off or disable each of the four aircraft's on board transponders. Without these transponder signals to identify the airplane's tail number, altitude, and speed, the hijacked airplanes would have been only blips among 4,500 other blips on NORAD's radar screens, making them very difficult to track.

On 9/11, only 14 fighter jets were on alert in the contiguous 48 states. There was no automated method for the civilian air traffic controllers to alert NORAD. A passenger aircraft had not been hijacked in the U.S. since 1979. "They had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Only one civilian plane—a chartered Learjet 35 with golfer Payne Stewart and five others on board—was intercepted by NORAD over North America in the decade prior to 9/11, which took one hour and 19 minutes.

Rules in effect at that time, and on 9/11, barred supersonic flight on intercepts. Before 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," says FAA spokesman Bill Schumann. After 9/11, the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation. They set up hotlines between command centers while NORAD increased its fighter coverage and installed radar to watch airspace over the continent.

The longest warning NORAD received of the hijackings was some eight minutes for American Airlines Flight 11, the first flight hijacked. The FAA alerted NORAD to the hijacked Flight 175 at just about the same time it was crashing into the World Trade Center's South Tower. The FAA notified NORAD of the missing – not hijacked – Flight 77 three minutes before it struck the Pentagon.

Regarding United Airlines Flight 93, Major General Larry Arnold indicated that there had been time to intercept the plane. However, NORAD was awaiting authorization to shoot it down, a decision that was ultimately obviated by the extraordinary bravery of the passengers who stormed the cockpit, leading to the plane's crash in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Alleged communications leak

CAMERA and JTA (Jewish Telegraphic Agency) criticized claims by Carl Cameron who stated, "certain suspects in the September 11th attacks may have managed to stay ahead of them by knowing who and when investigators are calling on the telephone," by using information from Amdocs Limited, an Israeli-based private communications company, and Comverse Infosys, another Israeli-run company that provides electronic eavesdropping technology for the U.S. government.

Israeli agents

See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories § Israel

It has been claimed that Israeli agents may have had foreknowledge of the attacks, and a persistent theory claimed Israeli and/or Jewish involvement. Four hours after the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment building, for "puzzling behavior." The Israelis were videotaping the events, and one bystander said they acted in a suspicious manner: "They were like happy, you know ... They didn't look shocked to me. I thought it was very strange." The van was found to be owned by an Israeli-owned company called Urban Moving, which the FBI believed was providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation. The case was then moved to the FBI's Foreign Counterintelligence Section. According to a former CIA operations chief, "many people in the U.S. intelligence community believed that some of the men arrested were working for Israeli intelligence." A spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in the United States said the men had not been involved in any intelligence operation in the United States. The FBI eventually concluded that the five Israelis probably had no foreknowledge of the attacks.

World Trade Center

See also: World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories
Criticism of the reports published by NIST on the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings plays a central role in theories about an alleged controlled demolition. The picture shows the simulated exterior buckling of 7 WTC during the collapse.

The plane crashes and resulting fires caused the collapse of the World Trade Center. Controlled demolition conspiracy theories say the collapse of the North Tower, South Tower, or of 7 World Trade Center was caused by explosives installed in the buildings in advance.

Demolition theory proponents, such as Brigham Young University physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional factors weakening the structures.

In the article "Active Thermotic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe", which appeared in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, authors Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's Department of Chemistry, Jeffrey Farrer of Brigham Young University's Department of Physics and Astronomy, Steven E. Jones, and others state that thermite and nano-thermite composites in the dust and debris were found following the collapse of the three buildings. The article contained no scientific rebuttal and the editor in chief of the publication subsequently resigned.

Jones has not explained how the amount of explosive needed to bring down the buildings could have been positioned in the two buildings without drawing attention, but mentioned efforts to research the buildings' maintenance activity in the weeks prior to the event. Federal investigators at the National Institute of Standards and Technology state that enormous quantities of thermite would have to be applied to the structural columns to damage them, but Jones disputed this, saying that he and others were investigating "superthermite". Brent Blanchard, author of "A History of Explosive Demolition in America", who corresponded with Jones, states that questions about the viability of Jones' theories remain unanswered, such as the fact that no demolition personnel noticed any telltale signs of thermite during the eight months of debris removal following the towers' collapse. Blanchard also said that a verifiable chain of possession needs to be established for the tested beams, which did not occur with the beams Jones tested, raising questions of whether the metal pieces tested could have been cut away from the debris pile with acetylene torches, shears, or other potentially contaminated equipment while on site, or exposed to trace amounts of thermite or other compounds while being handled, while in storage, or while being transferred from Ground Zero to memorial sites.

Excavating equipment was cooled by water spray due to concerns about melting from underground fires.

Jones also said that molten steel found in the rubble was evidence of explosives, as an ordinary airplane fire would not generate enough heat to produce this, citing photographs of red debris being removed by construction equipment, but Blanchard said that if there had been any molten steel in the rubble any excavation equipment encountering it would have been immediately damaged. Other sampling of the pulverized dust by United States Geological Survey and RJ Lee did not report any evidence of thermite or explosives. It has been theorized the "thermite material" found was primer paint. Dave Thomas of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, noting that the residue in question was claimed to be thermotic because of its iron oxide and aluminum composition, pointed out that these substances are found in many items common to the towers. Thomas said that in order to cut through a vertical steel beam, special high-temperature containment must be added to prevent the molten iron from dropping down, and that the thermite reaction is too slow for it to be practically used in building demolition. Thomas pointed out that when Jesse Ventura hired New Mexico Tech to conduct a demonstration showing nanothermite slicing through a large steel beam, the nanothermite produced copious flame and smoke but no damage to the beam, even though it was in a horizontal, and therefore optimal, position.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concluded the accepted version was more than sufficient to explain the collapse of the buildings. NIST and many scientists have refused to debate conspiracy theorists because they feel it would give those theories unwarranted credibility. Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings without the use of explosives. As a result, NIST said that it did not perform any test for the residue of explosive compounds of any kind in the debris.

Soon after the day of the attacks, major media sources published that the towers had collapsed due to heat melting the steel.

While the theoretical adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene is 2,093°C, this assumes perfect conditions, such as no heat loss and complete combustion in a stoichiometric mix of pure oxygen. In real-world conditions, such as burning kerosene in normal air, flame temperatures typically range from 260°C to 315°C. These temperatures are far below the melting point of structural steel (1,539°C). However, steel loses approximately 50% of its strength at 600°C and around 90% at 980°C. This weakening, combined with the removal of fireproofing by the initial impact and prolonged exposure to fire, may have contributed to the structural failures observed during the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Further, NIST did not claim that the steel melted, but rather that heat softened and weakened the steel, and that weakening, together with the damage caused by the planes' impacts, caused structural collapse. NIST reported that a simulation model based on the simple assumption that combustible vapors burned immediately upon mixing with the incoming air showed that "at any given location, the duration of gas temperatures near 1,000 °C was about 15 to 20 minutes. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were 500 °C or below."

Pentagon

Security camera footage of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon (at 1:26 in the video)
The Pentagon, after collapse of the damaged section
Airplane debris scattered near the Pentagon on the day of the attack

Political activist Thierry Meyssan and filmmaker Dylan Avery claim that American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. Instead, they argue that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government. Some claim that the holes in the Pentagon walls were far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757: "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60 ft. across?" Meyssan's book, L'Effroyable Imposture (published in English as 9/11: The Big Lie) became available in more than a dozen languages. When released, the book was heavily criticized by both the mainstream French and American press, and later, from within the 9/11 Truth movement. The French newspaper Liberation called the book "a tissue of wild and irresponsible allegations, entirely without foundation."

In response to the conspiracy theorists' claim of a missile hitting the Pentagon, Mete Sozen, a professor of civil engineering at Purdue University argues that: "A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building. When Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, one wing hit the ground and the other was sheared off by the Pentagon's load-bearing columns." According to ArchitectureWeek, the reason the Pentagon took relatively little damage from the impact was because Wedge One had recently been renovated. (This was part of a renovation program which had been begun in the 1980s, and Wedge One was the first of five to be renovated.)

Evidence contradicting some conspiracy theorists' claim of a missile hitting the Pentagon have been described by researchers within the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as Jim Hoffman, in his essay "The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows", and by others broadly refuting the role of other conspiracies in the attacks. The evidence refuting missile claims includes airplane debris including Flight 77's black boxes, the nose cone, landing gear, an airplane tire, and an intact cockpit seat were observed at the crash site. The remains of passengers from Flight 77 were indeed found at the Pentagon crash site and their identities confirmed by DNA analysis. Foreign governments, such as the Chinese Foreign Ministry (FMPRC), also confirms the death of their citizens onboard Flight 77. Many eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Further, Flight 77 passengers made phone calls reporting that their airplane had been hijacked. For example, passenger Renee May called her mother to tell her that the plane had been hijacked and that the passengers had been herded to the back of the plane. Another passenger named Barbara Olson called her husband (U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson) and said that the flight had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had knives and box cutters. Some conspiracy theories say the phone calls the passengers made were fabricated by voice morphing, the passengers' bodies disposed of, and a missile fired at the Pentagon.

The pressure group Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request on December 15, 2004, to force the government to release video recordings from the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, Pentagon security cameras and the Virginia Department of Transportation. On May 16, 2006, the government released the Pentagon security camera videos to Judicial Watch. The image of American Airlines Flight 77 which appears in the videos has been described as " white blob" and "a white streak" (by the BBC), "a thin white blur" (by The Associated Press), and "a silver speck low to the ground" (in The Washington Post). A sequence of five frames from one of the videos already appeared in the media in 2002. Some conspiracy theorists believe the new video does not answer their questions.

Flight 93

Flight 93 crash site

The fourth plane hijacked on 9/11, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed in an open field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after the passengers revolted. Out of the four planes hijacked on that day, Flight 93 was the only one not to reach its target.

One conspiracy theory surrounding this event is the claim that Flight 93 was shot down by a U.S. fighter jet. David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones have asserted that large parts of the plane, including the main body of the engine, landed miles away from the main wreckage site, too far away for an ordinary plane crash. Jones says that planes usually leave a small debris field when they crash, and that this is not compatible with reports of wreckage found farther away from the main crash site. One person claimed that the main body of the engine was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner.

According to some theories, the plane had to be shot down by the government because passengers had found out about the alleged plot.

According to Phil Molé of Skeptic magazine, " claim rests largely on unsupported assertions that the main body of the engine and other large parts of the plane turned up miles from the main wreckage site, too far away to have resulted from an ordinary crash. This claim is incorrect, because the engine was found only 300 yards from the main crash site, and its location was consistent with the direction in which the plane had been traveling." Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 in 1996, says that, at very high velocities of 500 mph or more, it would only take a few seconds to move or tumble across the ground for 300 yards.

Reports of wreckage discovered at Indian Lake by local residents are accurate. CNN reported that investigators found debris from the crash at least eight miles away from the crash site, including in New Baltimore. According to CNN, this debris was all very light material that the wind would have easily blown away, and a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article from September 14, 2001, describes the material as "mostly papers", "strands of charred insulation", and an "endorsed paycheck". The same article quotes FBI agent Bill Crowley that, "Lighter, smaller debris probably shot into the air on the heat of a fireball that witnesses said shot several hundred feet into the air after the jetliner crashed. Then, it probably rode a wind that was blowing southeast at about 9 m.p.h." Also, the distance between the crash site and Indian Lake was misreported in some accounts. According to the BBC, "In a straight line, Indian Lake is just over a mile from the crash site. The road between the two locations takes a roundabout route of 6.9 miles—accounting for the erroneous reports."

Some conspiracy theorists believe a small white jet seen flying over the crash area may have fired a missile to shoot down Flight 93. Government agencies such as the FBI assert this small plane was a Dassault Falcon business jet asked to descend to an altitude of around 1,500 ft to survey the impact. Ben Sliney, who was the FAA operation manager on September 11, 2001, says no military aircraft were near Flight 93.

Some internet videos, such as Loose Change, speculate that Flight 93 safely landed in Ohio, and a substituted plane was involved in the crash in Pennsylvania. Often cited is a preliminary news report that Flight 93 landed at a Cleveland airport; it was later learned that Delta Flight 1989 was the plane confused with Flight 93, and the report was retracted as inaccurate. Several websites within the 9/11 Truth Movement dispute this claim, citing the wreckage at the scene, eyewitness testimony, and the difficulty of secretly substituting one plane for another, and claim that such "hoax theories ... appear calculated to alienate victims' survivors and the larger public from the 9/11 truth movement". The editor of the article has since written a rebuttal to the claims.

Valencia McClatchey, a local woman who took the only photograph of the mushroom cloud from the impact of Flight 93 seconds after it hit the ground, says she has been harassed over the telephone and in person by conspiracy theorists, who claim she faked the photo. The FBI, the Somerset County authorities, the Smithsonian, and the National Park Service's Flight 93 National Memorial staff have all individually examined the photograph as well as the film negatives and all four agencies consider the photo to be authentic.

While some conspiracy theorists have claimed that passengers of Flight 93 and/or Flight 77 were murdered or that they were relocated, with the intent that they never be found, others within the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as Jim Hoffman and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, repudiate such claims.

Hijackers

See also: Hijackers in the September 11 attacks and September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories

During the initial confusion surrounding the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the BBC published the names and identities of what they believed to be some of the hijackers. Some of the people named were later discovered to be alive, a fact that was seized upon by 9/11 conspiracy theorists as proof that the hijackings were faked. The BBC explained that the initial confusion may have arisen because the names they reported back in 2001 were common Arabic and Islamic names. In response to a request from the BBC, the FBI said that it was confident to have identified all nineteen hijackers, and that none of the other inquiries had raised the issue of doubt about their identities. The New York Times also acknowledged these as cases of mistaken identity.

According to John Bradley, the former managing editor of Arab News in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the only public information about the hijackers was a list of names issued by the FBI on September 14, 2001. When the FBI released photographs four days after the cited reports on September 27, the mistaken identities were quickly resolved. According to Bradley, "all of this is attributable to the chaos that prevailed during the first few days following the attack. What we're dealing with are coincidentally identical names." In Saudi Arabia, says Bradley, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, Said al-Ghamdi and Walid al-Shari, are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain."

According to Thomas Kean, chair of the 9/11 Commission, "Sixteen of the nineteen shouldn't have gotten into the United States in any way at all because there was something wrong with their visas, something wrong with their passports. They should simply have been stopped at the border. That was sixteen of the nineteen. Obviously, if even half of those people had been stopped, there never would have been a plot."

Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi had both been identified as al-Qaeda agents by the CIA, but that information was not shared with the FBI or U.S. Immigration, so both men were able to legally enter the U.S. to prepare for the 9/11 attacks.

Foreign governments

See also: Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations and Foreign government foreknowledge

There are allegations that individuals within the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) may have played an important role in financing the attacks. There are also claims that other foreign intelligence agencies, such as the Israeli Mossad, had foreknowledge of the attacks, and that some Saudi officials may have played a role in financing the attacks. General Hamid Gul, a former head of ISI, believes the attacks were an "inside job" originating in the United States, perpetrated by Israel or neo-conservatives. Francesco Cossiga, former President of Italy from 1985 until his 1992 resignation over Operation Gladio, said that it is common knowledge among the Italian center-left that the 9/11 attacks were a joint operation of the CIA and the Mossad. Subsequent reports indicated that he did not actually believe this.

Israel

See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories: Israel

A conspiracy theory documented by the Anti-Defamation League, Thom Burnett and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel's treatment of Palestinians; to help Zionists take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel. Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by Ariel Sharon, Mossad, or the government of Israel. Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the University of Wisconsin is, according to Slate website, a "leading advocate of theories that Israel's Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks."

Some proponents of this believe that Jewish employees were forewarned by Israeli intelligence to skip work on September 11, resulting in no Jewish deaths at the World Trade Center. According to Cinnamon Stillwell, some 9/11 conspiracy theorists put this number as high as 4,000 Jewish people skipping work. This was first reported on September 17 by the Lebanese Hezbollah-owned satellite television channel Al-Manar and is believed to be based on the September 12 edition of The Jerusalem Post that said "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks."

The number of Jews who died in the attacks is variously estimated at between 270 and 400. The lower figure tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area and partial surveys of the victims' listed religion. The U.S. State Department has published a partial list of 76 in response to claims that fewer Jews/Israelis died in the WTC attacks than should have been present at the time. Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.

Antisemitism in conspiracy theories

In 2003, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) published a report attacking "hateful conspiracy theories" that the 9/11 attacks were carried about by Israelis and Jews, saying they had the potential to "rationalize and fuel global anti-Semitism." It found that such theories were widely accepted in the Arab and Muslim world, as well as in Europe and the United States.

The ADL's report found that "The Big Lie has united American far-right extremists and white supremacists and elements within the Arab and Muslim world". It asserted that many of the theories were modern manifestation of the 19th-century Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which purported to map out a Jewish conspiracy for world domination. The ADL has characterized the Jeff Rense website as carrying anti-Semitic materials, such as "American Jews staged the 9/11 terrorist attacks for their own financial gain and to induce the American people to endorse wars of aggression and genocide on the nations of the Middle East and the theft of their resources for the benefit of Israel".

Pedro A. Sanjuan, a former United Nations diplomat, alleged that antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theories were quite common at high levels of the organization following the attacks.

Saudi Arabia

See also: Alleged Saudi role in the September 11 attacks and The 28 pages

British investigative journalists Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan claimed in their 2011 book The Eleventh Day that the Saudi Royal Family provided material and financial support to the hijackers and that the Bush Administration covered this up as well as their own alleged incompetence. The authors claim the 9/11 Truth movement helped this coverup by deflecting attention away from these actions. In September 2011 a "Lloyd's insurance syndicate" began legal action against Saudi Arabia demanding the repayment of £136m it paid out to victims of the 9/11 attacks. A number of prominent Saudi charities and banks as well as a leading member of the al-Saud royal family were accused of being "agents and alter egos" for the Saudi state that "knowingly" provided funding to al-Qaeda and encouraged anti Western sentiment.

Such theories have historically revolved around the putative content of the 28 pages of the 2002 report of the U.S. Congress Joint Inquiry that were withheld from publication until July 15, 2016.

Former Florida Senator Bob Graham, co-chairman of the Joint Inquiry, as well as other former officials who did read the entire version of the Joint Inquiry's report, claimed that there was a U.S. government coverup on the Saudi officials' assistance provided to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, notably the role of Fahad al-Thumairy, a diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles.

No-planes theory

The "no-plane theory", promoted via Internet videos, claims that this shot of the second impact, taken from a news helicopter, depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a Layer Mask.

Former chief economist within the Labor Department under the Bush administration, Morgan Reynolds, argues that no planes were used in the attacks. Reynolds claims it is physically impossible that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175 could have penetrated the steel frames of the Towers, and that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video. "There were no planes, there were no hijackers", Reynolds insists. "I know, I know, I'm out of the mainstream, but that's the way it is". According to David Shayler, "the only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes", he says (although that would be well beyond the capabilities of contemporaneous hologram technology). "Watch footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center". Most no-planes adherents, including Thierry Meyssan and Reynolds, assert that either CGI of a passenger plane was overlaid onto a winged cruise missile or military aircraft, or that computer-generated images of a passenger plane were inserted into the video footage and plane-shaped explosive cut-outs were planted in the buildings in order to create the impression of plane impact. Some truth movement veterans have repeatedly refuted the "no-plane" claims. In fact, discussion of no-plane theories has been banned from certain conspiracy theory websites and advocates have sometimes been threatened with violence by posters at other conspiracy theory websites.

Cover-up allegations

Cockpit recorders

The cockpit voice recorder from Flight 77 was heavily damaged from the impact and resulting fire.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, both black boxes from Flight 77 and both black boxes from Flight 93 were recovered. Flight 77's CVR was said to be too damaged to yield any data. On April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings. In April 2006, a transcript of the CVR was released as part of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.

Two men, Michael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi, who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, said in the book Behind-The-Scenes: Ground Zero that they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners:

At one point, I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three.

Bin Laden tapes

Main article: Videos and audio recordings of Osama bin Laden

A series of interviews, audio and videotapes were released in the years following the 9/11 attacks that were reported to be from Osama bin Laden. In the first of these the speaker denied responsibility for the attacks. On September 17, 2001, in a statement issued to Al Jazeera, Bin Laden is quoted as saying: "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons." Some observers, especially people in the Muslim world, doubted the authenticity of the tape. On December 20, 2001, German TV channel "Das Erste" broadcast an analysis of the White House's translation of the videotape. On the program Monitor, two independent translators and an expert on Oriental Studies found the White House's translation to be both inaccurate and manipulative, stating, "At the most important places where it is held to prove the guilt of bin Laden, it is not identical with the Arabic", and that the words used that indicate foreknowledge can not be heard at all in the original. Prof. Gernot Rotter, professor of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the Asia-Africa Institute at the University of Hamburg, said "The American translators who listened to the tapes and transcribed them apparently wrote a lot of things in that they wanted to hear but that cannot be heard on the tape no matter how many times you listen to it." Some members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth believe that the man in this videotape is not Osama bin Laden at all, citing differences in weight and facial features, along with his wearing of a gold ring, which is forbidden by Muslim law, and writing with his right hand although bin Laden was left-handed.

In an audiotape released in November 2007, Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the attacks and denied the Taliban and the Afghan government or people had any prior knowledge of the attacks. In an interview with al-Jazeera, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi bin al-Shibh, two of al-Qaeda's alleged masterminds of the attacks, also confessed their involvement in the attacks.

CIA recruitment efforts

Richard Clarke, who headed the government's anti-terrorism efforts in 2001, theorized CIA director George Tenet ordered the agency to withhold information about Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar from the rest of the government in an effort to cover up the agency's recruitment of the two. George Tenet released a statement denying the agency deliberately withheld information about the pair and noted Clarke himself said he had no proof.

Motives

Pax Americana

Main article: Pax Americana

In September 2000 the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) released a strategic treatise entitled Rebuilding America's Defences. The Defense Planning Guidance of 1992, was drafted by Paul Wolfowitz on behalf of then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. This was described as "a blueprint for permanent American global hegemony" by Andrew Bacevich in his book American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy.

Matt Taibbi argued in his book The Great Derangement that conspiracy theorists have taken what is written in the paper "completely out of context", and that the "transformation" referenced in the paper is explicitly said to be a decades-long process to turn the Cold War-era military into a "new, modern military" which could deal with more localized conflicts. He said that, for this to be evidence of motive, either those responsible would have decided to openly state their objectives, or would have read the paper in 2000 and quickly laid the groundwork for the 9/11 attacks using it as inspiration.

Invasions

Conspiracy theorists have questioned whether The Oil Factor and 9/11 provided the United States and the United Kingdom with a reason to launch a war they had wanted for some time, and suggest that this gives them a strong motive for either carrying out the attacks, or allowing them to take place. For instance, Andreas von Bülow, a former research minister in the German government, has argued that 9/11 was staged to justify the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad was quoted as saying that there was "strong evidence" that the attacks were faked so that the United States could go to war against Muslims. In spite of these allegations, the Bush administration specifically rejected proposals to immediately attack Iraq in response to 9/11, and acknowledged that there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement in the attacks.

New World Order

Main article: New World Order (conspiracy theory)

Alex Jones and other personalities hold that 9/11 was initiated by a disparate variety of banking, corporate, globalization, and military interests for the purpose of creating a globalist government. Such New World Order conspiracy theories predate 9/11.

Suggested historical precedents

Conspiracy theorists often point to Operation Northwoods as a model for the 9/11 attacks, theorizing the attacks were carried out by the U.S. government as a false flag operation and then blamed on Islamic extremists. Operation Northwoods was an unimplemented, apparently rejected, plan approved by the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962. One proposal in the plan suggested that covert operatives commit multiple acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and blame Cuba, thus providing a pretext for invasion.

Time magazine contrasted events which inspired past conspiracy theories with those that inspire 9/11 conspiracy theories such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Time called the public assassination of Kennedy a "private, intimate affair" when compared with the attack on the World Trade Center, which was witnessed by millions of people and documented by hundreds of videographers; and said, "there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it."

Proponents

Main article: 9/11 Truth movement

Many individuals and organizations that support or discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories consider themselves to be part of the 9/11 Truth movement.

Alex Jones at a 9/11 Truth Movement event in 2007

Prominent adherents of the movement include, among others, radio talk show host Alex Jones, theologian David Ray Griffin, physicist Steven E. Jones, software engineer Jim Hoffman, architect Richard Gage (of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth), film producer Dylan Avery, former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives Cynthia McKinney, actors Daniel Sunjata, Ed Asner, and Charlie Sheen, political science professor Joseph Diaferia and journalist Thierry Meyssan. Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds. The movement draws adherents from people of diverse political beliefs including liberals, conservatives, and libertarians. The Anti-Defamation League has named Alan Sabrosky as a key figure in anti-Semitic 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Among the organizations that actively discuss and promote such theories are Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group that focuses on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings; 9/11 Truth, founded in 2004; Scholars for 9/11 Truth, founded in 2005, and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, a group that split from Scholars for 9/11 Truth in 2007 and runs the online publication Journal of 9/11 Studies; 9/11 Citizens Watch, which was already formed in 2002; and the Hispanic Victims Group. Several of these groups have collected signatures on petitions asking for further investigation of the September 11 attacks.

In 2004, John Buchanan ran for president on a "9/11 Truth" platform.

9/11 Conspiracy theory critic Jonathan Kay asserts that for the most part proponents are not out for financial gain and in some cases have left lucrative careers to become activists.

Dr Michael Wood and Dr Karen Douglas University of Kent psychologists who specialize in conspiracy theories examined the comments sections of over 2000 news articles relating to the collapse of World Trade Center 7. They found that proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories were more likely to try and debunk the mainstream account than promote their own theories and also were more likely to believe in other conspiracy theories. Proponents of the mainstream account tended to argue for that account and showed a greater hostility toward conspiracy theory proponents.

Analysis

According to a 2011 analysis in a Skeptical Inquirer article, 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 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. These three groups are:

  • Hard core: The organizers and active members of the various 9/11 Truth Movement organizations. They produce the information, spot the anomalies and technical inconsistencies, provide the technical base and form the theories. While they claim to be only interested in facts and to use scientific method, they commit the logical fallacy of 'confirmation bias' by pre-determining the outcome, then searching for corroborating evidence while ignoring the vast body of peer-reviewed, independent, consensual research which contradict their theories. They supply the physical structure of the movement by organizing events, seminars, discussions, marches and distributing flyers and pamphlets. Their numbers are relatively small but they are tight-knit and highly connected. Their worldview favors 'super-conspiracy', a master plan that is behind conspiracies which they believe they are uncovering.
  • Critically turned: They are the young students and political activists whose affiliation with the 9/11 Truth Movement often is rooted from their dissatisfaction and anger at the established political and social order. Their sense of justice and idealism propels them to activism against perceived oppression and social injustice. Their penchant to use Internet, especially social media, and tech savvy make them the propaganda machine for the movement. They produce YouTube videos and films with cool, countercultural content, make good use of pop culture parody and eye-catching graphics. The countercultural street cred of their productions buy them broad appeal and exposure to millions of people.
  • Illiterati: They are the movement's mass membership backbone, a large, diffuse group which give the movement exaggerated claims of popularity and influence. Participation in the 9/11 Truth Movement, to this group of people, is as much a social and recreational pursuit as the quest for truth. Their partaking is mostly through web 2.0 social networking and YouTube. Their commentaries often are emotional and they make no pretense to be accurate, balanced or to show genuine intent to find truth. Involvement with the movement that fit their worldview gives them a sense of identity and belonging, which they find more appealing than the facts and evidences of the 9/11 terrorist attack itself.

Media reaction

While discussion and coverage of these theories is mainly confined to Internet pages, books, documentary films, and conversation, a number of mainstream news outlets around the world have covered the issue.

The Norwegian version of the July 2006 Le Monde diplomatique sparked interest when they ran, on their own initiative, a three-page main story on the 9/11 attacks and summarized the various types of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which were not specifically endorsed by the newspaper, only recensed). In December 2006, the French version published an article by Alexander Cockburn, co-editor of CounterPunch, which strongly criticized the alleged endorsement of conspiracy theories by the U.S. left-wing, alleging that it was a sign of "theoretical emptiness."

Also, on the Canadian website for CBC News: The Fifth Estate, a program titled, "Conspiracy Theories: uncovering the facts behind the myths of Sept. 11, 2001" was broadcast on October 29, 2003, stating that what they found may be more surprising than any theories. On November 27, 2009, The Fifth Estate aired a documentary entitled The Unofficial Story where several prominent members of the 9/11 Truth Movement made their case.

An article in the September 11, 2006, edition of Time magazine comments that the major 9/11 conspiracy theories "depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses", and enjoy continued popularity because "the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting". It concludes that "conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events" and constitute "an American form of national mourning."

Australian newspaper The Daily Telegraph published an article titled "The CIA couldn't have organised this ..." which said "The same people who are making a mess of Iraq were never so clever or devious that they could stage a complex assault on two narrow towers of steel and glass" and "if there is a nefarious plot in all this bad planning, it is one improvised by a confederacy of dunces". This article mainly attacked a group of scientists led by Professor Steven E. Jones, now called Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. They said "most of them aren't scientists but instructors ... at second-rate colleges".

The Daily Telegraph also published an article in May 2007 that was highly critical of Loose Change 2, a movie which presents a 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Doug MacEachern in a May 2008 column for The Arizona Republic wrote that while many "9/11 truthers" are not crackpots that espouse "crackpot conspiracy theories", supporters of the theories fail to take into account both human nature and that nobody has come forward claiming they were participants in the alleged conspiracies. This view was seconded by Timothy Giannuzzi, a Calgary Herald op-ed columnist specializing in foreign policy.

On June 7, 2008, the Financial Times published a lengthy article on the 9/11 Truth Movement and 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Charlie Brooker, a British comedian and multimedia personality, in a July 2008 column published by The Guardian as part of its "Comment is free" series agreed that 9/11 conspiracy theorists fail to take in account human fallacies and added that believing in these theories gives theorists a sense of belonging to a community that shares privileged information thus giving the theorists a delusional sense of power. The commentary generated over 1700 online responses, the largest in the history of the series. In a September 2009 piece, The Guardian was more supportive of 9/11 conspiracy theories, asking, "when did it become uncool to ask questions? When did questioners become imbeciles?"

On September 12, 2008, Russian State Television broadcast in prime time a documentary made by Member of the European Parliament Giulietto Chiesa entitled Zero, sympathetic to those who question the accepted account of the attacks according to Chiesa. According to Thierry Meyssan in conjunction with the documentary, Russian State Television aired a debate on the subject. The panel consisted of members from several countries including 12 Russians who hold divergent views. The motive of Russian State Television in broadcasting the documentary was questioned by a commentator from The Other Russia who noted that Russian State Television had a history of broadcasting programs involving conspiracy theories involving the United States government.

Nasir Mahmood in a commentary printed by the Pakistan Observer wrote favorably about a 9/11 truth lecture and film festival held in California and quoted a Jewish speaker at that festival who said that none of the 19 suspected hijackers had been proven guilty of anything and compared racism against Muslims resulting from what he called false accusations to the racism against Jews in the Nazi era.

On November 10, 2008, ITN broadcast a story summarizing various 9/11 conspiracy theories.

The emergence of the birther movement in 2009 has led to comparisons between that movement and the 9/11 Truth movement, with both movements seen in a very negative light. Moon landing conspiracy theories have also been compared to the birther and 9/11 conspiracy theories. James Borne, a journalist for The New York Times who covered the September 11 attacks, described his assignment covering a 9/11 truth meeting as "erhaps the most intellectually scary assignment I have had in recent years".

On August 31, 2009, the National Geographic Channel aired the program 9/11 Science and Conspiracy, in which the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center tested some of the claims frequently made by those who question the accepted 9/11 account. Specifically, the experiments concluded that burning jet fuel alone can sufficiently raise the temperature of a steel support column to the point of structural failure, that a controlled demolition using conventional techniques would leave clear evidence that was not found at Ground Zero, that using thermite is not an effective technique to melt a steel column, and that even if thermite chemical signatures were found, it would be impossible to tell if thermite was actually used or if the traces came from the reaction of aircraft aluminum with other substances in the fire. The testing also concluded that the type of hole found at the Pentagon was consistent with the standard scenario, and that damage from a bombing or missile attack would differ from the damage that occurred. In the program, several prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorists viewed rough edits of the experiments, and expressed their disagreement with the findings.

The British left wing magazine New Statesman listed David Ray Griffin as the 41st most important person who matters today. The magazine said that Griffin's "books on the subject have lent a sheen of respectability that appeals to people at the highest levels of government". The publication listed 9/11 conspiracy theories as "one of the most pernicious global myths". Griffin's book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited was chosen by Publishers Weekly as a "Pick of the Week" in November 2008.

Denver public television KBDI-TV has aired 9/11 truth documentaries several times. The stations spokesperson claimed airing these documentaries has been a boon for the stations fund raising efforts.

Glenn Beck, television and radio host, said of the allegations: "There are limits to debasement of this country, aren't there? I mean, it's one thing to believe that our politicians are capable of being Bernie Madoff. It's another to think that they are willing to kill 3,000 Americans. Once you cross that line, you're in a whole new territory."

In March 2010, The Washington Post editorialized against Yukihisa Fujita, a prominent Japanese politician who has espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories. They described Fujita as a man "susceptible to the imaginings of the lunatic fringe". It went on to say that the U.S.–Japan alliance would be "severely tested" if Fujita's party continued to tolerate these kinds of comments.

For the ninth anniversary of the attacks the Egyptian daily Al-masry Al-youm published an article questioning the U.S. Government story and promoting conspiracy theories. The senior analyst for the semi-official Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies and a member of Parliament from the Muslim Brotherhood was quoted.

Gordon Farrer, the technology editor for The Age, theorized in a November 2010 column for the Sydney Morning Herald that the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories was a result of two main factors. One revolved around the personality traits of the theorists themselves (cynical, anxious, belief that they are freethinkers). The second revolved around the high internet search ranking 9/11 conspiracy theories receive, leading to a false air of authority to the theories. Speaking of the theorists. Farrer wrote that "when politicians and media don't give them voice they feel more threatened, more suspicious, cornered, helpless; and so they go on the attack".

Geraldo Rivera, the host of Geraldo at Large, a news magazine run by Fox News Channel, expressed openness to questions on causes of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center. Andrew Napolitano, a legal analyst for Fox News and former judge at the New Jersey Superior Court, voiced support for skepticism about the collapse of the high-rise building, and for Rivera investigating the event.

Alex Jones syndicated radio program was dropped by 70 radio stations when he began espousing 9/11 conspiracy theories. On August 29, 2010, BBC Two broadcast a program entitled The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – Ten Years On.

On September 5, 2011, The Guardian published an article entitled, "9/11 conspiracy theories debunked". The article noted that unlike the collapse of World Trade Centers 1 and 2 a controlled demolition collapses a building from the bottom and explains that the windows popped because of collapsing floors. The article also said there are conspiracy theories that claim that 7 World Trade Center was also downed by a controlled demolition, that the Pentagon being hit by a missile, that the hijacked planes were packed with explosives and flown by remote control, that Israel was behind the attacks, that a plane headed for the Pentagon was shot down by a missile, that there was insider trading by people who had foreknowledge of the attacks were all false.

Toure Neblett, who has Tweeted his suspicions about the attack on the Pentagon, is one of the hosts of the MSNBC program The Cycle, which debuted on June 25, 2012.

Criticism

Critics of these conspiracy theories say they are a form of conspiracism common throughout history after a traumatic event in which conspiracy theories emerge as a mythic form of explanation. A related criticism addresses the form of research on which the theories are based. Thomas W. Eagar, an engineering professor at MIT, suggested they "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." Eagar's criticisms also exemplify a common stance that the theories are best ignored. "I've told people that if the argument gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." According to him, this happened when Steve Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University, took up the issue.

Michael Shermer, writing in Scientific American, said: "The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking. All the evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."

Scientific American, Popular Mechanics, and The Skeptic's Dictionary have published articles that rebut various 9/11 conspiracy theories. Popular Mechanics has published a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths that expands upon the research first presented in the article. In the foreword for the book Senator John McCain wrote that blaming the U.S. government for the events "mars the memories of all those lost on that day" and "exploits the public's anger and sadness. It shakes Americans' faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low. It trafficks in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans." Der Spiegel dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories as a "panoply of the absurd", stating "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons."

Journalist Matt Taibbi, in his book The Great Derangement, discusses 9/11 conspiracy theories as symptomatic of what he calls the "derangement" of American society; a disconnection from reality due to widespread "disgust with our political system". Drawing a parallel with the Charismatic Movement, he argues that both "chose to battle bugbears that were completely idiotic, fanciful, and imaginary," instead of taking control of their own lives. While critical, Taibbi explains that 9/11 conspiracy theories are different from "Clinton-era black-helicopter paranoia", and constitute more than "a small, scattered group of nutcases they really were, just as they claim to be, almost everyone you meet."

David Aaronovitch, a columnist for The Times, in his book entitled Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History that was published in May 2009, claimed that the theories strain credulity. He charges that 9/11 conspiracy theorists have exaggerated the expertise of those supporting their theories, and says 9/11 conspiracy theorists, including David Ray Griffin, cross-cite each other. He also claims the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories has hurt the War on Terror. According to Aaronovitch, because a significant portion of educated Pakistanis believe that George W. Bush brought the towers down, dealing with the Taliban is difficult "because they actually don't believe the fundamental premise on which the war against terror was waged".

Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein co-authored a 2009 paper which used members of the 9/11 Truth movement and others as examples of people who suffer from "crippled epistemologies", to public trust and the political system. He wrote that "hey do not merely undermine democratic debate  In extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so."

In June 2011, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) was criticized for hosting a lecture by Richard Gage, president of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Rick Bell, the director of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) New York chapter, who was a witness to the 9/11 attacks, said that "no amount of money" would persuade him to allow the group to talk at his headquarters and said that Gage lacks credibility among the professional community. Eugine Kohn, former spokesperson for the AIA, said Gage's theories were "ridiculous", "here were no explosives planted", and "he buildings were definitely brought down by the planes". The decision to host the event was also criticized by the former president of RIBA and the founding president of the AIA's United Kingdom chapter. Gage has been warned by the AIA against giving a false impression that he has a relationship with it. A July 2012 article in the AIA's magazine criticized Gage for continuing to intimate that he has an association with the organization, and claimed that there were no architects at an Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth screening held in an AIA boardroom. RIBA released a statement saying the perception that it endorses events held in its buildings is "regrettable", and said it would review policy on "private hire" of its buildings. Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan offer scathing criticism of many of the above theories in The Eleventh Day, their 2011 investigation of the attacks.

U.S. representative Peter T. King, chairmen of the House Homeland Security Committee, said 9/11 conspiracy theorists "trivialize" the "most tragic event to affect the United States" and that "eople making these claims are disgraceful, and they should be ashamed of themselves".

The hosts of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe (the "SGU") have spoken repeatedly about the "absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theories". In addition to critiquing the theories using the same or similar arguments as the above, the "SGU" hosts say that, like most conspiracy theories, this one collapses under its own weight and contradicts itself. In order for the 9/11 conspiracy theories to be correct, the U.S. government would not only have to orchestrate the claimed false flag operation regarding the airplanes that crashed into the World Trade Center, but they would also have to orchestrate a superfluous controlled demolition and cover their tracks so flawlessly that it becomes indistinguishable to physicists from the "official story", yet the plan would have to be flawed enough so that "losers in their mothers' basement" will discover the conspiracy.

In politics

Former Canadian Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion forced a candidate from Winnipeg, Lesley Hughes, to terminate her campaign after earlier writings from Hughes surfaced in which Hughes wrote that U.S., German, Russian and Israeli intelligence officials knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance. Peter Kent, Deputy Editor of Global Television Network News and a Conservative Party candidate in the 2008 Canadian election, had earlier called for Hughes's resignation, saying that the 9/11 Truth movement is "one of Canada's most notorious hatemongering fringe movements" composed of "conspiracy theorists who are notorious for holding anti-Semitic views." On June 16, 2009, Hughes sued Kent, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the B'nai B'rith of Canada and four senior members of the two organizations, alleging the antisemitic allegations were untrue and defamatory and ruined her career. Later, another Conservative Party candidate called for the leader of the New Democratic Party to fire a candidate for her pro-9/11 truth views. Zijad Delic, head of the Canadian Islamic Congress, Canada's largest Muslim advocacy organization, is trying to remove 9/11 conspiracy theorists from its board, in an effort to what he describes as purifying within and totally canadianize the organization.

In 2008, calls for the resignation of Richard Falk, the special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories for the United Nations, were partially based on his support investigating the validity of 9/11 conspiracy theories. In 2011, Falk praised a book by David Ray Griffin. Falk was condemned for his remarks by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and United States ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice.

In February 2009, Aymeric Chauprade, a professor of geopolitics at CID military college in Paris, was fired by French Defence Minister Hervé Morin for writing a book entitled Chronicle of the Clash of Civilizations that espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories.

In September 2009, Van Jones, an adviser to US President Barack Obama, resigned after his signature on a 2004 petition calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur and other controversial statements came to light drawing criticism. Van Jones said he was a victim of a smear campaign, adding that he does not currently, nor ever has agreed with that theory.

The 9/11 truth movement became an issue in the 2010 Texas Gubernatorial Republican primary when candidate Debra Medina replied when asked by Glenn Beck about US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks: "I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard, there are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that." After being criticized for the remarks by opposing candidates, Medina said that she has never been a 9/11 truth movement member and believes the twin towers were attacked by Muslim terrorists.

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made statements that were skeptical of al-Qaeda executing the 9/11 attacks.

On September 23, 2010, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a speech to the United Nations said that "he majority of the American people, as well as other nations and politicians, believe some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime", and that "the majority of the American people as well most nations and politicians around the world agree with this view". The remarks prompted the United States delegation as well as others to walk out. U.S. President Barack Obama criticized Ahmadinejad's remarks before the United Nations General Assembly on the following day, saying that "or him to make a statement like that was inexcusable" and called the remarks "offensive" and "hateful". Previously Ahmadinejad had described the 9/11 attacks as a "suspect event" and suggested that the Bush Administration was involved in 9/11. The Iranian president repeated his claims in 2011 with another appearance at the UN and was thereafter criticized in an article appearing in al-Qaeda's magazine, Inspire. The article claimed that Ahmadinejad was jealous of al-Qaeda because the stateless and under-fire Islamic terrorist organization did on 9/11 what Iran could not do.

In 2012, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has called for a scientific conference to look into the events of 9/11 and speculated that the attacks were an inside job. According to an international poll that same year, huge majorities in Muslim countries prefer to believe baseless conspiracy theories rather than listen to the mainstream facts of what happened on September 11, 2001, in New York City and Washington. Although al-Qaeda occasionally brags about its "achievement," 75 percent of Egyptian citizens, for example, still deny that Arabs carried out the attacks, as a Pew study reported in July 2011.

Legal cases

Army specialist April Gallop filed suit claiming that Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and other Bush administration officials orchestrated the 9/11 attacks and that the Pentagon was hit by an attack ordered by Cheney. The suit was dismissed in 2010 by Judge Denny Chin, who said the claim was "the product of cynical delusion and fantasy". Her lawyers filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals which in April 2010 issued a show cause order why the lawyers and Gallop should not be sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit. Her lawyers asked that the judges on the Court of Appeals recuse themselves because their emotions made them prejudge the case and abuse their power. On October 14, 2011, the judges sanctioned her lawyers $15,000 each for both the frivolous lawsuits and the accusations of prejudice. Gallop was not fined because of her unfamiliarity with the law.

See also

Notes

  1. A survey of the 1,700 victims whose religion was listed found approximately 10% were Jewish indicating around 270 in total. A survey based on the last names of victims found that around 400 (15+1⁄2%) were possibly Jewish. A survey of 390 Cantor Fitzgerald employees who had public memorials (out of the 658 who died) found 49 were Jewish (12+1⁄2%). According to the 2002 American Jewish Year Book, New York State's population was 9% Jewish. Sixty-four percent of the WTC victims lived in New York State.

References

  1. Norman, Joshua (September 11, 2011). "9/11 conspiracy theories won't stop". CBS News. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  2. ^ "Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report". Popular Mechanics. Archived from the original on October 24, 2010. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  3. ^ Herman, Steve (June 20, 2007). "Purdue study supports WTC collapse findings". USA Today. Archived from the original on September 16, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  4. ^ Sales, Nancy Jo (July 9, 2006). "Click Here For Conspiracy". Vanity Fair. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  5. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 104. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  6. "Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report – The World Trade Center". Popular Mechanics. Hearst Communication. February 3, 2005. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.
  7. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 109. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  8. ^ "Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?". Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. April 19, 2009. Archived from the original on March 15, 2013. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  9. Kemble, Gary (September 9, 2011). "Challenging September 11 conspiracy theories". ABC News.
  10. ^ U.S. Drops Last Link of Iraq to 9/11 New York Times May 2, 2002
  11. ^ Knight, Peter (2008). "Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States". New German Critique. 35: 165–93. doi:10.1215/0094033X-2007-024. ISSN 0094-033X.
  12. ^ Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 92. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  13. ^ "The evolution of a conspiracy theory". BBC News. July 4, 2008. Retrieved July 27, 2008.
  14. ^ "NIST NCSTAR 1: Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster". NIST. September 2005. p. 146. Archived from the original on May 29, 2009. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  15. ^ "Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7" (PDF). NIST. August 2008. pp. 22–4. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 28, 2008. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  16. ^ Meigs, James (October 13, 2006). "The Conspiracy Industry". Popular Mechanics. Archived from the original on October 24, 2006.
  17. Bažant, Z.K.P.; Verdure, M. (2007). "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" (PDF). Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 133 (3). American Society of Civil Engineers: 308–319. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:3(308). As generally accepted by the community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering (though not by a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives), the failure scenario was as follows: .
  18. Bažant, Z.K.P.; Le, J.L.; Greening, F.R.; Benson, D.B. (2008). "What Did and Did Not Cause Collapse of World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York?" (PDF). Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 134 (10). American Society of Civil Engineers: 892. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2008)134:10(892). Universally though has the foregoing explanation of collapse been accepted by the communities of structural engineers and structural mechanics researchers, some outside critics have nevertheless exploited various unexplained observations to disseminate allegations of controlled demolition.
  19. Blatchford, Andy (April 30, 2010). "U.S. skeptics to speak of 9–11 cover-up at three Canadian universities". Toronto: Canadian Press. Archived from the original on May 4, 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  20. "Architects and Engineers Seek 9/11 Truth". KGO Newstalk. June 3, 2009. Archived from the original on August 2, 2009. Retrieved June 3, 2009.
  21. "The Flight 93 Story". National Park Service. Retrieved September 22, 2011.
  22. "Profiles of 9/11 – About 9/11". Biography.com. September 11, 2001. Archived from the original on July 16, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  23. Schmitt, Richard (June 23, 2004). "The 9/11 Commission Report; Panel Calls for Single Intelligence Chief". Los Angeles Times.
  24. "FEMA: World Trade Center Building Performance Study". Fema.gov. March 17, 2011. Archived from the original on April 30, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  25. "Behind Purdue's computing simulation on the 2001 World Trade Center attack ZDNET June 20, 2007". ZDNet. Archived from the original on May 30, 2008. Retrieved September 11, 2013.
  26. "Osama claims responsibility for 9/11". The Times of India. India. May 24, 2006. Archived from the original on October 27, 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  27. "Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11". CBC (Canada). October 29, 2004.
  28. "America's day of terror". BBC News. September 11, 2001. Archived from the original on May 27, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  29. "Depuis le 11-Septembre, la menace terroriste est devenue permanente". Le Monde. Archived from the original on August 4, 2012. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  30. "Sept. 11: One Year Later". Deutsche Welle – Dw-world.de. May 2, 2003. Archived from the original on December 12, 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  31. "Bin Laden tape shown days before 9/11 anniversary". Australia: ABC. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  32. "Korean's Memories of 9/11 Still Fresh Five Years On". The Chosun Ilbo. Archived from the original on October 12, 2006. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  33. Feuer, Alan (June 5, 2006). "500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 12, 2011. Retrieved May 5, 2009.
  34. Griffin, David Ray (2007). Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. Olive Branch Press. ISBN 978-1-56656-686-5.
  35. The following news media state that the movement is being known as or being called "9/11 Truth movement":
  36. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 93. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  37. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 95. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  38. "German Protestors Marked 9/11 by Denouncing "Inside Job," "Reichstag Fire" Weekly Standard September 21, 2010". Weeklystandard.com. September 21, 2010. Archived from the original on February 9, 2013. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  39. Knight, Peter (2008). "Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States". New German Critique. 35: 165–93. doi:10.1215/0094033X-2007-024. Although immensely popular in Europe (and soon translated into Arabic), these early conspiracy accounts were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement and were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of anti-Americanism.
  40. Johnson, Ian (September 29, 2003). "Conspiracy Theories about Sept. 11 Get Hearing in Germany". The Wall Street Journal.
  41. Bush, George Walker (November 10, 2001). "Remarks by the President To United Nations General Assembly". White House.
  42. ^ Hagan, Joe (March 27, 2011). "How Radio Host Alex Jones Has Cornered the Bipartisan Paranoia Market". New York Magazine. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  43. ^ "NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster – Frequently Asked Questions". Wtc.nist.gov. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  44. "The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories". Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. September 16, 2006. Archived from the original on February 28, 2011.
  45. Bush, George W. (2009). The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (March 2006). Wordclay. p. 10. ISBN 978-1-60037-587-3.
  46. "Al-Qaeda accuses Iran of 9/11 lie". BBC News. April 22, 2008. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  47. "USA Today". April 22, 2008. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  48. Michael, Maggie (September 11, 2001). "Al-Qaeda No 2 accuses Iran of 9/11 conspiracy theory". The Scotsman. UK. Archived from the original on September 26, 2010. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  49. "Al Qaeda No. 2 Accuses Iran of Spreading 9/11 Conspiracy Rumor". Fox News. April 22, 2008. Archived from the original on September 24, 2008. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  50. Lee Keath (April 23, 2008). "Al Qaeda audiotape blisters Iran over who executed 9/11". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  51. "Al-Qaida No. 2 says 9/11 theory propagated by Iran". Archived from the original on September 18, 2009. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  52. Wolf, Jim (September 2, 2006). "U.S rebuts 9/11 homegrown conspiracy theories". Reuters.
  53. ^ Grossman, Lev (September 3, 2006). "Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away". Time Magazine. Archived from the original on November 4, 2006.
  54. Hunt, H. E. (November 19, 2008). "The 30 greatest conspiracy theories The Telegraph November 19, 2008". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  55. "Audit Bureau of Circulations Ltd". Nmauk.co.uk. February 23, 2009. Archived from the original on May 1, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  56. "Neue Videos vom 11. September aufgetaucht – New videos of September 11 released". Bild. September 10, 2010. Archived from the original on September 18, 2010. Retrieved September 18, 2010. Es heißt, die Organisation besitzt eine Affinität zu Verschwörungstheorien.  ... Freigegeben wurden die Informationen nur, weil das "International Center for 9/11 Studies" geklagt hatte.  ... Augenzeugen hatten immer wieder von Explosionen berichtet, bevor die beiden Türme zusammenbrachen. Experten halten diese Theorien für unsinnig.
  57. ^ "Neue Videos vom 11. September -New videos of September 11". Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. September 10, 2010. Retrieved September 12, 2010. Das private "International Center for 9/11 Studies" hatte erfolgreich auf Herausgabe der Videodokumente geklagt und sie nun auf seinem eigenen Kanal bei Youtube veröffentlicht. Das "National Institute of Standards and Technology" ... hatte die Videos ... jahrelang nicht freigegeben.  ... Die bislang unbekannten Videos sollen als weitere Beweise für eine Verschwörung rund um den 11. September dienen.  ... Eine Vielzahl der nun neu veröffentlichten Videos zeigt Bilder vom WTC7.
  58. Wysling, Andres (September 7, 2010). "9/11 in Nahaufnahme −9/11 up close". Neue Zürcher Zeitung. Archived from the original on September 10, 2010. Retrieved September 18, 2010.
  59. Patrick, Maggy (May 2, 2011). "Osama Bin Laden's Death Greeted With Celebration, Anger". ABC World News. Retrieved May 3, 2011.
  60. Baer, Susan (May 2, 2011). "Report of bin Laden's death spurs questions from conspiracy theorists". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  61. ^ Stahl, Jeremy. "Why Trutherism Lives On The 9/11 conspiracy movement has faded, but the conspiracy theory will never die". Slate. September 9, 2011
  62. Kay, Jonathan (February 9, 2010). "Black Helicopters Over Nashville". Newsweek. Archived from the original on February 13, 2010. Retrieved March 14, 2010.
  63. Weigel, David (April 25, 2011). "You're All Nuts! How America became the land of Truthers, Triggers, Birthers, and Dan Brown fans". Slate.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  64. "The Unofficial Theory" (Flash video, only available in Canada, no transcript). Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. November 27, 2009. Archived from the original on November 29, 2009. Retrieved November 30, 2009.
  65. "Michael Meacher: This war on terrorism is bogus Politics". The Guardian. London. December 4, 2003. Archived from the original on July 15, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  66. MacAskill, Ewen (September 6, 2003). "Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war Politics". The Guardian. London. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  67. Poteshman, Allen M. (2006). "Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001". The Journal of Business. 79 (4): 1703. doi:10.1086/503645. S2CID 153626942.
  68. "Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001", Allen M. Poteshman The Journal of Business Vol. 79, No. 4 (July 2006), pp. 1703–1726
  69. Blackhurst, Chris (October 14, 2001). "Mystery of terror 'insider dealers'". The Independent. London. Archived from the original on March 10, 2011.
  70. "September 11 Put Call". Snopes. December 11, 2005. Retrieved May 12, 2017.
  71. "SEC asks Goldman, Lehman for data". Bloomberg News. September 20, 2001.
  72. "Profiting From Disaster?". CBS News – 60 Minutes. September 19, 2001. Archived from the original on September 24, 2010. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  73. "Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" (PDF). 9-11commission.gov. July 22, 2004. p. 172. Retrieved July 20, 2015.
  74. "Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" (PDF). 9-11commission.gov. July 22, 2004. p. 499. Retrieved July 20, 2015.
  75. ^ Molé, P. (2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement Perspective". ESkeptic. Vol. 12, no. 4. Altadena, California: The Skeptics Society. ISSN 1556-5696. Archived from the original on June 6, 2009. Retrieved June 2, 2009.
  76. ^ David Aaronovitch (April 29, 2009). "9/11 conspiracy theories: The truth is out there ... just not on the internet". The Times. London. Archived from the original on July 21, 2009. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  77. Dunbar & Reagan 2011, p. 33.
  78. Dunbar & Reagan 2011, p. 32.
  79. 9/11: The Conspiracy Files (Television production). BBC News. February 18, 2007. Retrieved January 1, 2010.
  80. Dunbar & Reagan 2011, p. 38.
  81. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. pp. 123–. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  82. Berger, Matthew (March 20, 2015). "Jews Worry That 'baseless' Report on 9/11 Could Be a Blow to Israel". Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
  83. Safian, Alex. "Fox News's Carl Cameron Recycles More Rubbish". CAMERA.
  84. Greenberg, Richard (August 31, 2006). "The 9/11 Lie that Won't Die". JTA. Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  85. Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11 Spies? ABC News June 21, 2002
  86. ^ Jim Dwyer (September 2, 2006). "2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 12, 2011. Retrieved April 30, 2009.
  87. Dean, Suzanne (April 10, 2006). "Physicist says heat substance felled WTC". Deseret Morning News. Archived from the original on May 10, 2009. Retrieved May 7, 2009.
  88. Barber, Peter (July 8, 2008). "The truth is out there". Financial Times. Archived from the original on June 3, 2009. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  89. Brent Blanchard (February 2002). "A History of Explosive Demolition in America". Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique. International Society of Explosives Engineers. pp. 27–44. ISSN 0732-619X.
  90. ^ "9/11 conspiracy theories". BBC Magazine. August 28, 2011
  91. Thomas, Dave (July–August 2011). "The 9/11 Truth Movement: The Top Conspiracy Theory, a Decade Later". Skeptical Inquirer. 35 (4): 34–40. Archived from the original on September 23, 2012. Retrieved September 11, 2012.
  92. "9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Thriving". CBS News. August 6, 2006. Archived from the original on December 24, 2007. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
  93. Bažant, Zdenek P.; Verdure, Mathieu (2007). "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions". Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 133 (3): 308–19. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:3(308). As generally accepted by the community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering (though not by a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives), the failure scenario was as follows...
  94. Gravois, John (June 23, 2006). "Professors of Paranoia?". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved September 26, 2009.
  95. Asquith, Christina (September 7, 2006). "Conspiracies Continue to Abound Surrounding 9/11: On the Eve of the Fifth Anniversary, a Group of Professors Say the Attacks Were an 'Inside Job'". Diverse Issues in Higher Education. 23 (15).
  96. Barter, Sheila (September 13, 2001). "How the World Trade Center fell". BBC News. Retrieved December 2, 2009. "But steel melts, and 24,000 gallons (91,000 litres) of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire."
  97. Samuel, Eugenie; Damian Carrington (September 12, 2001). "Design choice for towers saved lives". New Scientist. Retrieved December 2, 2009.
  98. "NCSTAR 1. Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers" (PDF). NIST. September 2005. p. 129. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 8, 2009. Retrieved December 1, 2009.
  99. ^ "Popular Mechanics". Popular Mechanics. Archived from the original on March 29, 2008. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  100. Henley, Jon (April 12, 2002). "US invented air attack on Pentagon, claims French book". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on June 17, 2009. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  101. Paul Reynolds (May 16, 2006). "Conspiracy theorists down but not out". BBC News. Retrieved September 26, 2009.
  102. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. pp. 111–. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  103. "Pentagon Battered but Firm – 2001.1003". ArchitectureWeek. October 3, 2001. Archived from the original on June 5, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  104. "The Pentagon Renovation Program". Archived from the original on August 4, 2001.
  105. "Searchers find Pentagon black boxes". USA Today. September 14, 2001. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  106. Swift, Earl (September 9, 2002). "Inside the Pentagon on 9/11: The Call of Duty". Pilot Online. Virginian-Pilot. Archived from the original on July 30, 2004. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  107. "Where were you when ..." Wichita Business Journal. September 6, 2002. Archived from the original on April 13, 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  108. "On the ground at the Pentagon on Sept. 11". MSNBC. September 28, 2001. Archived from the original on May 26, 2004. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  109. Kelly, Christopher C. (January 11, 2002). "Experts ID 184 Pentagon Fatalities". U.S. Army Medical Department. Archived from the original on August 15, 2002. Retrieved May 7, 2010.
  110. "Spokesman on the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington". Consulate General of China, New York. September 13, 2001. Archived from the original on June 3, 2002. Retrieved June 3, 2002.
  111. "The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories". America.gov. Archived from the original on July 14, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  112. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  113. Dunbar, D.; Reagan, B., eds. (2011). Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts. New York: Hearst. ISBN 978-1-58816-855-9.
    [2006 edition]. Sterling Publishing Company, Inc. August 15, 2006. ISBN 978-1-58816-635-7.
  114. McGreal, Chris (September 5, 2011). "September 11 conspiracy theories continue to abound". The Guardian. London. Retrieved March 15, 2012.
  115. Stahl, Jeremy (September 7, 2011). "The Theory vs. the Facts". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved March 15, 2012.
  116. "US releases 9/11 Pentagon video". BBC News. May 16, 2006.
  117. "US releases 9/11 Pentagon tape" (Video). BBC News. May 16, 2006. Retrieved May 5, 2011. At first it's hard to make out the hijacked plane, but if one looks closely at the lower right-hand corner, the blured white blob entering the frame appears to be the nose of the plane, skidding along the ground at high speed before crashing into the Pentagon, and not a missile. That adds to images from a second security camera, ten feet away, which show a white streak in the lower right-hand corner, then the explosion.
  118. "Video of 9/11 plane hitting Pentagon is released". NBC News. Associated Press. May 16, 2006. Retrieved May 5, 2011. The airplane is a thin white blur on the video as it slams into the Pentagon at ground level.
  119. Markon, Jerry (May 17, 2006). "Videos Released Of Plane Crashing Into Pentagon". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 5, 2011. In one of the videos, the plane shoots across the screen from the right, a silver speck low to the ground.
  120. "In pictures: Pentagon crash". BBC News. March 8, 2002. Retrieved May 6, 2011.
  121. "US releases 9/11 Pentagon tape" (Video). BBC News. May 16, 2006. Retrieved May 5, 2011. and other skeptics believe the new video does not answer any of their questions. Why did it take four and a half years to release more ambiguous frames that still do not prove the government's case definitively?
  122. ^ "Programmes | Conspiracy Files | Q&A: What really happened". BBC News. February 16, 2007. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  123. "'Black box' from Pennsylvania crash found". CNN. September 13, 2001. Retrieved July 19, 2009.
  124. O'Toole, James; Tom Gibb; Cindi Lash (September 14, 2001). "Flight data recorder may hold clues to suicide flight". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
  125. "Flight 93". Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report. Popular Mechanics. March 2005. Archived from the original on July 4, 2009. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
  126. Carlin, John (August 13, 2002). "Unanswered questions". The Independent. London. Archived from the original on July 13, 2009. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
  127. 60 Seconds: Ben Sliney Archived May 29, 2008, at the Wayback Machine October 4, 2006
  128. "9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective". September 11, 2006.
  129. WCPO.com's Flight 93 Story (Archived by the Wayback Machine)
  130. Hamill, Sean D. (September 10, 2007). "Picture Made on 9/11 Takes a Toll on Photographer". The New York Times. Retrieved March 30, 2010.
  131. ^ Steve Herrmann (October 27, 2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theory, by Steve Hermann, BBC Editor". BBC. Archived from the original on January 8, 2010. Retrieved January 28, 2010.
  132. ^ "Panoply of the Absurd". Der Spiegel. September 23, 2001. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  133. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  134. Sack, Kevin. "After the Attacks: Missed Cues; Saudi May Have Been Suspected in Error, Officials Say" The New York Times, September 16, 2001.
  135. "The Secret History of 9/11: Terrorist Threats Ignored". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. September 10, 2006. Archived from the original on July 3, 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  136. "The Secret History of 9/11: Planning 9/11". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. September 10, 2006. Archived from the original on October 31, 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  137. "Fareed Zakaria GPS Mexican Crisis; India Terror Attacks CNN Transcript December 7, 2008". Transcripts.cnn.com. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  138. "Osama-Berlusconi? "Trappola giornalistica"". Corriere della Sera. November 30, 2007. Retrieved June 15, 2009. in prima linea quelli del centrosinistra italiano, sanno ormai bene che il disastroso attentato è stato pianificato e realizzato dalla Cia americana e dal Mossad
  139. Cossiga, Francesco (April 9, 2006). "La Realta' Travisata Si teorizzano i complotti per non vedere". La Stampa (in Italian). Archived from the original on September 19, 2010. Retrieved February 16, 2011. mi sembra improbabile anzi impossibile che l'11 settembre sia stato frutto di un complotto americano.
  140. Sassoon, Donald (August 18, 2010). "Francesco Cossiga obituary". The Guardian. London. Retrieved February 16, 2011.
    • Foxman, Abraham, Jews and money, Palmgrave Macmillan, 2010, p. 41
    • ADL, "Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories", Detailed report, 2003. online Archived March 8, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    • Burnett, Thom, Conspiracy Encyclopedia, Franz Steiner Verlag, 2006, p. 262
    • Olmsted, Kathryn, Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11, Oxford University Press US, 2011, p. 221
    • Atkins, Stephen, Holocaust denial as an international movement, ABC-CLIO, 2009, p. 173
  141. ^ "Conspiracy Theories About Jews and 9/11 Cause Dangerous Mutations in Global Anti-Semitism". Adl.org. September 2, 2003. Archived from the original on May 25, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  142. Palmer, Brian (September 6, 2011). "The Rise of "Truth" How did 9/11 conspiracism enter the mainstream? Slate Magazine September 6, 2011". Slate. Slate.com. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  143. Cinnamon Stillwell (April 19, 2006). "The Truth About 9/11 Conspiracy Theories". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  144. ^ "The 4,000 Jews Rumor: Rumor surrounding Sept. 11th proved untrue. Internet Archive – which appeared in the September 12 Internet edition of the "Jerusalem Post". It stated, "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks."". Archived from the original on April 8, 2005. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  145. Gary Rosenblatt (September 5, 2002). "The Mitzvah To Remember". Archived from the original on October 10, 2002. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  146. "The Resuscitation of Anti-Semitism: An American Perspective: An Interview with Abraham Foxman". Jcpa.org. Archived from the original on June 8, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  147. "The 4,000 Jews Rumor". Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. November 16, 2007. Archived from the original on August 10, 2013. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  148. Cashman, Greer Fay (September 12, 2002). "Five Israeli victims remembered in capital". The Jerusalem Post. p. 3. Archived from the original on November 4, 2002. Retrieved October 17, 2006.
  149. Abraham H. Foxman (September 8, 2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theories Take Root in Arab/Muslim World". Adl.org -This article originally appeared in Jewish News Weekly of Northern California. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  150. Rense Web Site Promotes Anti-Semitic Views March 17, 2009 Archived October 27, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  151. Pedro A. Sanjuan. The UN Gang. Doubleday, 2005. p. 165
  152. Dudley, Michael (August 13, 2011). "Conspiracies and catastrophe Winnipeg Free Press August 14, 2011". Winnipeg Free Press. Winnipegfreepress.com. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  153. Cahal Milmo (September 19, 2011). "Lloyd's insurer sues Saudi Arabia for 'funding 9/11 attacks' The Independent September 19, 2008". Independent.co.uk. Archived from the original on September 21, 2011. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  154. ^ Paul Sperry (December 15, 2013). "Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup". New York Post.
  155. Justin Elliott (September 7, 2011). "The enduring mysteries of 9/11". Salon.
  156. Demirjian, Karoun (July 15, 2016). "Congress releases long-classified '28 pages' on alleged Saudi ties to 9/11". The Washington Post. Retrieved July 15, 2016.
  157. "28 Pages: Former Sen. Bob Graham and others urge the Obama administration to declassify redacted pages of a report that holds 9/11 secrets". CBS. April 10, 2016.
  158. Weekend Live, Fox News, September 10, 2006
  159. Henley, Jon (April 1, 2002). "US invented air attack on Pentagon, claims French book". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
  160. The Great Derangement, Matt Taibbi, New York, 2009
  161. Michael Powell (September 8, 2006). "WP: 9/11 conspiracy theories". MSNBC. Archived from the original on July 23, 2010. Retrieved June 13, 2010.
  162. "The Yoda of 9/11". Phoenix News. Phoenixnewtimes.com. p. 5. Archived from the original on September 16, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  163. Families hear tape from hijacked Flight 93 April 18, 2002 Archived September 22, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
  164. "United 93: full transcript". The Guardian. London. April 13, 2006. Archived from the original on August 25, 2009. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  165. Bunch, William (October 28, 2004). "9/11 "black box" cover-up at Ground Zero?". Philadelphia Daily News. Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC. Archived from the original on November 24, 2009. Retrieved November 6, 2009.
  166. Swanson, Gail (2003). Dennis Fisin (ed.). Ground Zero, A collection of personal accounts. TRAC Team.
  167. "Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks CNN September 17, 2001". CNN. September 17, 2001. Archived from the original on July 7, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  168. U.S. urged to detail origin of tape Guardian December 15, 2001.
  169. "Bin-Laden-Video: Falschübersetzung als Beweismittel? WDR, Das Erste, MONITOR Nr. 485 am December 20, 2001
  170. Looking Glass News. "Osama Tape Appears Fake, Experts Conclude". Looking Glass News. Retrieved March 23, 2010.
  171. "Timeline: the al-Qaida tapes The Guardian Unlimited". The Guardian. London. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  172. "Bin Laden urges Europe to quit Afghanistan Reuters UK November 29, 2007". Uk.reuters.com. November 29, 2007. Archived from the original on December 21, 2007. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  173. "U.S. says voice on Qaeda tape appears to be bin Laden". Reuters. November 29, 2007. Archived from the original on July 6, 2009. Retrieved September 15, 2009.
  174. "We left out nuclear targets, for now". The Guardian. London. March 3, 2003. Retrieved July 11, 2012.
  175. Shenon, Philip. "An Explosive New 9/11 Charge". The Daily Beast. August 11, 2011
  176. Andrew J. Bacevich (2002). American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. p. 44.
  177. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2008). The Great Derangement. New York: Spiegel & Grau. pp. 9–12, 148–166. ISBN 978-0-385-52034-8.
  178. Connolly, Kate (November 20, 2003). "Telegraph, Nov 20, 2003". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on January 12, 2022. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  179. "If US Could Create 'Avatar', It Could Fake 9/11 Attacks: Mahathir Jakarta Times January 21, 2010". Jakarta Globe. Archived from the original on July 22, 2010. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  180. 9/11 Commission Report pp. 334–336
  181. Arshad Zaman (May 27, 2010). "On conspiracy theories". The Express Tribune.
  182. "U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba". ABC News. May 1, 2001. Retrieved January 21, 2012.
  183. Roff, Peter (September 9, 2009). "Charlie Sheen Joins the 'Truther' 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Fringe". Retrieved September 19, 2009.
  184. Klepper, David. "From election to COVID, 9/11 conspiracies cast a long shadow". Retrieved September 8, 2021.
  185. Powell, M. (September 9, 2006). "9/11 conspiracy theorists multiply". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on March 8, 2014. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
  186. Manjoo, Farhad (June 27, 2006). "The 9/11 deniers". Salon. Archived from the original on December 18, 2006.
  187. "Conspiracy theories: The Speculation". CBC. October 29, 2003. Archived from the original on November 1, 2003. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  188. Feuer, Alan (June 5, 2006). "500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11". The New York Times.
  189. Harvey, Adam (September 3, 2006). "9/11 myths busted". The Sunday Mail (Qld). Archived from the original on December 31, 2012. Retrieved December 8, 2010.
  190. ^ Curiel, Jonathan (September 3, 2006). "The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11". The San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 2, 2009.
  191. Barber, Peter (June 7, 2008). "The truth is out there". Financial Times. Archived from the original on June 3, 2009. Retrieved May 23, 2009. an army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement
  192. "Decade of Deceit: Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 10 Years Later" (PDF).
  193. "ADL: Anti-Semitic 9/11 theories still strong 10 years on". The Jerusalem Post | JPost.com. Retrieved December 14, 2017.
  194. Jennifer Harper (February 22, 2010). "Explosive News". The Washington Times.
  195. Sean Nicholls (November 25, 2009). "Utzon's son signs up for September 11 conspiracy theory". The Sydney Morning Herald.
  196. "1,000 Architects and Engineers ask for New 9-11 Investigation". Macedonian International News Agency. February 21, 2010. Archived from the original on July 20, 2011. Retrieved May 23, 2011.
  197. Jonas, Jillian (January 25, 2004). "Challenge by 'honest Republican'". United Press International. Retrieved May 29, 2011.
  198. The Persistence of Conspiracy Theories Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty September 16, 2011.
  199. Psychologists investigate online communication of conspiracy theories Medical Press July 10, 2013.
  200. Wood, Michael J.; Douglas, Karen M. (2013). ""What about building 7?" A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories". Frontiers in Psychology. 4: 409. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00409. PMC 3703523. PMID 23847577.
  201. ^ Bartlett, Jamie; Miller, Carl (2011). "A Bestiary of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Notes from the Front Line". Skeptical Inquirer. 35.4 (July/August). Committee for Skeptical Inquiry: 43–46. Archived from the original on October 1, 2012. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  202. 11.September – en innsidejobb?, Norwegian edition of Le Monde diplomatique, July 2006. See also English translation: Kim Bredesen, Was 9/11 an inside job? Archived August 13, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
  203. CBC News: the fifth estate: Conspiracy Theories at cbc.ca Archived September 17, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  204. Ryan, Andrew (November 26, 2009). "Was 9/11 a conspiracy? 'Truthers' make their case Toronto Globe and Mail November 26, 2009". The Globe and Mail. Canada. Archived from the original on September 27, 2010. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  205. "CBC Website The Unofficial Story Webpage". Canada: CBC. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  206. Grossman, Lev. (2006) Time.com – Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away.
  207. Michael Shelden (September 8, 2006). "The CIA couldn't have organised this ..." The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on October 11, 2007. Retrieved September 23, 2009.
  208. Blair, Tim (May 5, 2007). "Virgin's 9/11 Farce". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on July 5, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  209. "Truthers are overlooking key point about 9/11 Human nature Doug MacEachern for the Arizona Republic May 11, 2008". Azcentral.com. May 11, 2008. Archived from the original on March 5, 2021. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  210. Calgary, The (July 10, 2008). "Washington can't live up to standards of 9/11 'truthers Timothy Giannuzzi for the Calgary Herald July 10, 2008". Canada.com. Archived from the original on September 18, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  211. Peter Barber (June 7, 2008). "The Truth Is Out There". Financial Times. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  212. Charlie Brooker (July 14, 2008). "So, you believe in conspiracy theories, do you? You probably also think you're the Emperor of Pluto Charles Brooker for The Guardian Unlimited July 14, 2008". The Guardian. London. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  213. Dan Hind (July 17, 2008). "Who knows what happened on 9/11? Dan Hind for The Guardian Unlimited July 17, 2008". The Guardian. London. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  214. Charlie Skelton (September 11, 2009). "9/11 anniversary: a lovely day for a spot of protesting at the BBC Charlie Skelton for The Guardian Unlimited September 11, 2009". The Guardian. London. Retrieved January 9, 2010.
  215. "DPA News Agency Filmmaker Urges International Tribunal to Probe 9/11 September 9, 2008". Dw-world.de. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  216. Nasir Mahmood (September 15, 2008). "19 Muslims involved in 9/11 never proved guilty by anybody". Pakistan Observer. Archived from the original on September 18, 2008. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  217. "9/11 conspiracy theories exposed ITN November 10, 2008". Itn.co.uk. Archived from the original on January 22, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  218. James Bone (August 4, 2009). "World Agenda: To tell you the truth, these conspiracists scare me". The Times.
  219. Cohen, Ben (July 23, 2009). "Why the Birthers Matter". Huffington Post. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  220. "Birthers Versus Truthers" Archived August 30, 2012, at the Wayback Machine. Atlantic Monthly August 3, 2009
  221. "Conspiracy theorists seek order in a terrifying world". The Irish Times. August 8, 2009. Archived from the original on February 18, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  222. "9/11 Science and Conspiracy Theory Website". Channel.nationalgeographic.com. Archived from the original on May 18, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  223. National Geographic Channel 9/11 Science and Conspiracy.
  224. "The 50 people who matter today: 41–50". New Statesman. UK. September 24, 2009. Archived from the original on June 7, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  225. Henry, Kendra (April 29, 2010). "Full 9/11 story is not told, says visiting WU speaker". Webster University Journal. Archived from the original on May 3, 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
  226. Carroll, Vincent (September 26, 2009). "Carroll: Public TV and the Truthers". The Denver Post. Archived from the original on June 5, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  227. Taranto, James (January 18, 2010). "'Nobody's Watching Charlie Rose'". Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on January 19, 2010. Retrieved January 22, 2010.
  228. "A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy Washington Post March 8, 2010". The Washington Post. March 8, 2010. Retrieved October 15, 2010.
  229. Farrer, Gordon (November 5, 2010). "Don't get caught in the web of conspiracy theory truthiness". Sydney Morning Herald – Smh.com.au. Archived from the original on March 15, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  230. ^ "Fox takes heat from left and right over analysts". CNN. December 1, 2010. Archived from the original on December 18, 2021. Retrieved December 8, 2010.
  231. Zaitchik, Alexander (March 2, 2011). "Meet Alex Jones, the Talk Radio Host Behind Charlie Sheen's Crazy Rants". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on June 28, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  232. McGreal, Chris (September 5, 2011). "9/11 conspiracy theories debunked". The Guardian. Washington, D.C. Archived from the original on February 5, 2016. Retrieved February 5, 2016.
  233. "times247.com". times247.com. Archived from the original on September 15, 2012.
  234. Barkun, M. (2003). A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-23805-3.
  235. Walch, Tad (2006). "Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones". Utah news. Deseret News Publishing Company. Archived from the original on March 2, 2007. Retrieved September 9, 2006.
  236. ^ Shermer, Michael (June 2005). "Fahrenheit 2777, 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories". Scientific American. 292 (6): 38. PMID 15934650.
  237. "Debunking The 9/11 Myths — Mar. 2005 Cover Story". Popular Mechanics. March 2005.
  238. Carroll, Robert Todd (March 30, 2006). "Mass Media Bunk – 9/11 conspiracies: the war on critical thinking". The Skeptic's Dictionary.
  239. "Debunking The 9/11 Myths blog". Popular Mechanics. Archived from the original on August 13, 2006. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  240. McCain, John (August 4, 2006). "Foreword". In Dunbar, D.; Reagan, B. (eds.). Debunking 9/11 myths. Archived from the original on July 14, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
  241. Cziesche, Dominik; Jürgen Dahlkamp; Ulrich Fichtner; Ulrich Jaeger; Gunther Latsch; Gisela Leske; Max F. Ruppert (September 8, 2003). "Panoply of the Absurd". Der Spiegel.
  242. Aaronovitch, David (December 19, 2009). "A Conspiracy-Theory Theory". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 6, 2020.
  243. Aaronovitch, David (January 30, 2010). "Debunking Conspiracy Theories In 'Voodoo Histories' National Public Radio (United States) January 30, 2010". Npr.org. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
  244. "Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Architect Magazine July 19, 2012". Archived from the original on June 16, 2013.
  245. Petrunia, Paul. "RIBA comes under fire for hosting 'bonkers' 9/11 talk", Archinect News. Retrieved June 28, 2011.
  246. Summers, Anthony; Swan, Robbyn (2011). The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. New York: Ballantine. pp. 91–. ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9.
  247. Undaunted, 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Offer Alternate Theories for How Sept. 11 Terror Attacks Were Carried Out ABC News September 9, 2011.
  248. SGU Productions. "The Skeptics Guide #430 – Oct 12 2013." The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. SGU Productions: October 12, 2013. October 17, 2013.
  249. Campion-Smith, Bruce (September 26, 2008). "Dion drops candidate over 9/11 remarks Toronto Star September 26, 2008". Toronto Star. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  250. "Be wary of those who say 9/11 was a fake". October 5, 2008. Archived from the original on October 6, 2008. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  251. Conservative Party Of Canada (September 26, 2008). "Dion must fire his anti-israel candidate Conservative Party Press Release September 26, 2008". Conservative.ca. Archived from the original on November 3, 2008. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  252. Martin, Nick (June 23, 2009). "Hughes sues MP, B'Nai Brith Says anti-Semite accusations have ruined career Winnipeg Free Press June 23, 2009". Winnipeg Free Press. Winnipegfreepress.com. Archived from the original on June 28, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  253. Conservative Party Of Canada. "Ottawa NDP continue to flirt with fringe Conservative Party Press release September 30, 2008". Conservative.ca. Archived from the original on November 3, 2008. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  254. Brean, Joseph (October 9, 2010). "Saturday Interview: The CIC's Canadian imam National Post October 2010". National Post. Canada. Retrieved March 5, 2021.
  255. Abrams, Joseph (July 15, 2008). "Critics Demand Resignation of U.N. Official Who Wants Probe of 9/11 'Inside Job' Theories Fox News June 19, 2008". Fox News. Archived from the original on July 15, 2009. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  256. Liel, Alon (January 25, 2011). "Falk's 9-11 remarks are 'condemned' by UN sec.-gen". Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  257. "French lecturer sacked over 9/11 conspiracy claims AFP/Expatica February 6, 2009". Expatica.com. Archived from the original on April 6, 2012. Retrieved July 20, 2009.
  258. "Obama did not order Van Jones' resignation, adviser says". CNN. September 6, 2009. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  259. "Perry, KBH blast Medina". MSNBC. February 11, 2010. Archived from the original on February 16, 2010. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
  260. "Debra Medina self-destructs on Glenn Beck radio show Cristian Science Monitor February 11, 2010". Csmonitor.com. February 11, 2010. Archived from the original on October 22, 2010. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
  261. "'9/11 was an inside job': Full speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at UN". YouTube. RT. Retrieved March 25, 2020.
  262. "President Obama 'Deeply Offended' by Ahmadinejad Comments On 9/11 ABC September 23, 2010". Blogs.abcnews.com. September 23, 2010. Archived from the original on October 26, 2010. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
  263. Goldsmith, Samuel (September 24, 2010). "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: United Nations needs to investigate my 9/11 conspiracy theory". Daily News. New York. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
  264. Stuart Williams (April 16, 2008). "Iran president casts doubt on 'suspect' 9/11". Mail & Guardian. Archived from the original on October 2, 2009. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  265. Adam Harvey (September 3, 2006). "9/11 myths busted". The Courier-Mail. Archived from the original on October 8, 2008. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
  266. "Ahmadinejad quotes". The Jerusalem Post. May 22, 2006. Retrieved September 20, 2009.
  267. Hanrahan, Mark (September 28, 2011). "Al Qaeda Calls On Mahmoud Ahmadinejad To End 'Ridiculous' 9/11 Conspiracy Theories". Huffington Post. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  268. "Getting Egypt's Morsi to give up his 9/11 'truther' talk by Robert Satloff and Eric Trager of the Washington Post September 11, 2012". Washingtonpost.com. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  269. Hamblett, Mark (October 17, 2010). "Circuit Levels $15,000 in Sanctions Against 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists". New York Law Journal. Retrieved June 4, 2014.


External links

United States government sources
Engineering publications
9/11 conspiracy theories
Key topics
Groups
Film and TV
Books
Category
Conspiracy theories
List of conspiracy theories
Overview
Core topics
Psychology
Astronomy and outer space
UFOs
Hoaxes
Deaths and disappearances
Assassination /
suicide theories
Accidents / disasters
Other cases
Body double hoax
Energy, environment

California drought manipulation

False flag allegations
Gender and sexuality
Health
Race, religion and/or ethnicity
Antisemitic
Christian / Anti-Christian
Islamophobic
Genocide denial /
Denial of mass killings
Regional
Asia
Americas
(outside the United States)
Middle East / North Africa
Russia
Turkey
Other European
United States
2020 election
Other
Pseudolaw
Satirical
See also
September 11 attacks
Timeline
Victims
Hijacked airliners
Crash sites
Aftermath
Response
Perpetrators
Inquiries
Cultural effects
Miscellaneous
George W. Bush
Presidency

Life and
legacy
Speeches
Elections
U.S. House
Gubernatorial
Presidential
Public image
Books
Popular
culture
Family
Categories: