Jump to content

9/11 truth movement: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Redirected page to 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
m Reverted edits by 208.75.23.11 (talk) to last revision by Acroterion (HG)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Image:9-11 Truth 1.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Supporters of the 9/11 Truth movement at a Los Angeles demonstration, October 2007]]
#REDIRECT [[9/11 Conspiracy Theories]]
'''9/11 Truth movement''' is the collective name of loosely affiliated organizations and individuals who question the accepted account of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]].<ref name="Feuer">{{cite news |last=Feuer |first=Alan |date=June 5, 2006 |journal=The New York Times |title=500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/us/05conspiracy.html |accessdate=May 24, 2009 |quote=the movement known as "9/11 Truth", a society of skeptics and scientists}}</ref><ref name="Rudin">{{cite news |last=Rudin |first=Mike |publisher=BBC |title=The evolution of a conspiracy theory |date=July 4, 2008|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/magazine/7488159.stm |accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref><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 |accessdate=May 23, 2009 |quote=an army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement}}</ref><ref name="Powell">{{cite news |last=Powell |first=Michael |journal=The Washington Post |date=September 8, 2006 |title=The Disbelievers |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/07/AR2006090701669_pf.html |accessdate=May 30, 2009 |quote=The loose agglomeration known as the '9/11 Truth Movement'}}</ref><ref name="Barry">{{cite news |last=Barry |first=Ellen |journal=Los Angeles Times|date=September 10, 2006 |title=9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather in N.Y. |url=http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/10/nation/na-conspiracy10|accessdate=May 30, 2009 |quote=a group known as the 9/11 Truth Movement |work=The Los Angeles Times}}</ref><ref name="Hunt">{{cite news |last=Hunt |first=H.E. |journal=The Daily Telegraph |date=November 19, 2008 |title=The 30 greatest conspiracy theories - part 1 |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3483477/The-30-greatest-conspiracy-theories-part-1.html |accessdate=May 30, 2009 |quote=A large group of people - collectively called the 9/11 Truth Movement |location=London}}</ref><ref name="Kay">{{cite news |last=Kay |first=Jonathan |journal=Financial Post |date=April 25, 2009 |title=Richard Gage: 9/11 truther extraordinaire |url=http://www.financialpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=f54cf9ee-4637-44de-8819-19d918b3241b&k=21893 |accessdate=August 4, 2010 |quote=The '9/11 Truth Movement,' as it is now commonly called}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Ravensbergen |first=Jan |journal=Montreal Gazette |title=9/11 skeptics to speak at UQAM |date=May 2, 2010 |url=http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/skeptics+speak+UQAM/2976659/story.html |accessdate=May 3, 2010 |quote=two leading voices of what’s known as the 9/11 truth movement}} {{Dead link|date=September 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>

Adherents of the movement assert that the explanation of the 9/11 events put forth by the United States government and mainstream media contain significant inconsistencies which suggest, at the least, a cover-up, and at worst, complicity by insiders.

Adherents analyze evidence from the attacks and discuss different [[9/11 conspiracy theories|theories]] about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks.<ref name="Morales">{{cite news |first=Frank |last=Morales |title=9/11 Truth comes home; Pols back new investigation |date=June 11, 2009 |publisher=The Villager |url=http://www.thevillager.com/villager_319/talkingpoint.html |accessdate=June 21, 2009 }}</ref><ref name="Olivier"/><ref>{{cite news |first=Eli |last=Lake |title=U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11 |date=April 10, 2008 |work=The New York Sun |url=http://www.nysun.com/news/foreign/un-official-calls-study-neocons-role-911 |accessdate=June 21, 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Citizens Petition New York Attorney General to Open 9-11 Inquiry |date=October 29, 2004 |publisher=Environment News Service |url=http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2004/2004-10-29-06.asp |accessdate=June 21, 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Jefferson |last=Siegel |title='Pentagon Papers senator' calls for new 9/11 probe |date=June 18, 2008 |publisher=The Villager |url=http://www.thevillager.com/villager_268/pentagonpapers.html |accessdate=June 21, 2009 }}</ref><ref name="eastvalleytribune">{{cite news |title=Sen. Karen Johnson's floor speech about 9/11 |date=June 9, 2008 |work=East Valley Tribune |url=http://eastvalleytribune.com/article_6294b160-5bf3-5925-b34b-856202b2f397.html |accessdate=December 13, 2010 }}</ref><ref name="Stratford Gazette"/>

Some of the organizations state that there is evidence that individuals within the [[United States government]] may have been either responsible for or knowingly complicit in the September 11 attacks. Motives given include the use of the attacks to initiate the launch of [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|wars in Afghanistan]] and [[Iraq War|Iraq]], and in creating the opportunities to curtail [[civil liberties]].<ref name="Rudin"/>

==Characteristics==
===Name===

[[File:911InsideJobSticker.jpg|thumb|right|Truth movement sticker]]

"9/11 Truth movement" is the collective name of loosely affiliated<ref name="Bunch">{{cite news |last=Bunch |first=Sonny |journal=The Weekly Standard |date=September 24, 2007 |title=The Truthers Are Out There |url=http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/113zubvo.asp}}</ref><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/}}</ref> organizations and individuals that question whether the United States government, agencies of the United States or individuals within such agencies were either responsible for or purposefully complicit in the [[September 11 attacks]].<ref name="Barber"/><ref name="Powell"/><ref name="Barry"/><ref name="Hunt"/><ref name="Kay"/><ref name="Kennedy">{{cite news |last=Kennedy |first=Gene |journal=KSL TV |date=September 8, 2006 |title=BYU Professor on Paid Leave for 9-11 Theory |url=http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=476951 |quote=Jones is a physics professor involved in what's called the "9-11 Truth Movement."}}</ref><ref name="Molé">{{cite journal |last=Molé |first=Phil |title=9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement Perspective |journal=Skeptic |volume=12 |issue=4 |year=2006 |url=http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11 |accessdate=June 2, 2009 |quote=a larger coalition known as the "9/11 Truth Movement,"}}</ref><ref name="Sales">{{cite news |last=Sales |first=Nancy Jo |journal=Vanity Fair |date=August 2006 |title=Click Here for Conspiracy |url=http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2006/08/loosechange200608 |accessdate=June 2, 2009 |quote=a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement}}</ref> The term is also being used by the adherents of the movement.<ref name="Grossman">{{cite news |last=Grossman |first=Lev |journal=Time |date=September 3, 2006 |title=Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html}}</ref><ref name="Harvey">{{cite news |last=Harvey |first=Adam |journal=Courier Mail |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)}}</ref> Adherents also call themselves "9/11 Truthers",<ref name="Gravois">{{cite news |last=Gravois |first=John |journal=The Chronicle of Higher Education |date=June 23, 2006 |title=Professors of Paranoia?|url=http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm}}</ref> "9/11 skeptics"<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 |accessdate=June 2, 2009}}</ref> or "truth activists",<ref name="Curiel">{{cite news |last=Curiel |first=Jonathan |journal=San Francisco Chronicle |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 |accessdate=June 2, 2009 | work=The San Francisco Chronicle}}</ref> while generally rejecting the term "conspiracy theorists".<ref name="Bunch"/><ref name="Curiel"/>
<!-- redundand from main
Members of the movement are often referred to as "truthers",<ref name="Bunch" /><ref>{{cite news |last=Lachapelle |first=Judith |journal=La Presse |title=Le «mystère» de la Tour 7 |date=May 1, 2010 |url=http://www.cyberpresse.ca/international/en-vedette/201005/01/01-4276172-le-mystere-de-la-tour-7.php |accessdate=May 1, 2010}}</ref> "[[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theorists]]",<ref name="Feuer"/><ref name="Sullivan"/><ref name="Burchell">{{cite news |last=Burchell |first=David |date=September 15, 2008 |journal=The Australian |title=They're out there, plotting against us all |url=http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24345179-7583,00.html |accessdate=May 24, 2009}}</ref> occasionally as "9/11 deniers"<ref name="Manjoo"/><ref>{{cite news |last=White |first=Roland |title=Rebel MI5 agent says 9/11 planes were holograms |work=The Sunday Times (London) |accessdate=June 5, 2009 |date=September 10, 2006 }}</ref> and by sympathetic writers as "9/11 skeptics."<ref>{{cite news |last=Weinberg |first=Paul |title=POLITICS: 9/11 Sceptics Hold Inquiry |work=Inter Press Service News Agency |url=http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=23985 |accessdate=June 10, 2009 |date=June 10, 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Silverman |first=Justin |title=9/11 skeptics challenge WTC findings |work=amNewYork |url=http://www.amny.com/news/local/groundzero/am-loos0901,0,4383055.story |accessdate=June 10, 2009 |date=September 1, 2006 }}</ref> Members of the movement hold diverse views on other political issues.

end 'name calling' redudndant copy-->

===Adherents===
Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds.<ref name="Feuer"/><ref name="Harvey"/><ref name="Curiel"/> The movement draws adherents from people of diverse political beliefs including liberals, conservatives, and libertarians.<ref name="Barber"/><ref name="Molé"/><ref name="Curiel"/> A 2010 study of Facebook users affiliated with a 9/11 Truth group known as "We Are Change" found that most members of this group are males in their late 20s. Most members of this group are involved in right-wing politics, particularly with libertarianism and Ron Paul.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sommers |first1=Scott |year=2011 |title=Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? An Empirical Study on Political Affiliation and Conspiratorial Thinking |journal=Skeptic Magazine |volume=16 |issue=2 |pages=13–16 |publisher=Millennium Press, Inc. |doi= |url= |accessdate= }}</ref>

Lev Grossman of ''Time'' magazine has stated that support for the 9/11 Truth movement is not a "fringe phenomenon", but "a mainstream political reality."<ref name="Grossman"/> However, others, such as Ben Smith of ''[[Politico (newspaper)|Politico]]'' and the ''Minneapolis Star Tribune'' have stated that the movement has been "relegated to the fringe".<ref>''Star Tribune'': Newspaper of the Twin Cities (Minneapolis, MN) - September 6, 2006
Author: Bob von Sternberg ; Staff Writer
Edition: METRO
Section: NEWS
Page: 1A.</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/01/politics/politico/main4836526.shtml |work=CBS News | title=Culture Of Conspiracy: The Birthers |date=March 1, 2009}}</ref> The ''Washington Post'' editorial staff went further describing the movement as "lunatic fringe."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/07/AR2010030702354.html |work=The Washington Post |title=A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy |date=March 8, 2010}}</ref> Mark Fenster, a [[University of Florida]] law professor and author of the book ''Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture'', says that "the amount of organisation" of the movement is significantly stronger than the organization of the movement related to doubts about the official account of the assassination of former United States President [[John F. Kennedy]],<ref name="Barber"/> though this is likely the result of [[new media]] technologies, such as online [[social networks]], [[blogs]], etc.

The 9/11 Truth movement is active in the United States as well as in other countries.<ref name="Stratford Gazette">{{cite news |last=Sutton |first=Tori |title=Seeking the truth about 9/11 |journal=Stratford Gazette |date=February 18, 2010 |url=http://www.stratfordgazette.com/stratford/article/86274 |accessdate=February 19, 2010}}</ref>

In 2004, [[John Buchanan (American politician)|John Buchanan]] ran for president on a 9/11 Truth platform.<ref>{{cite news |first=Jillian |last=Jonas |title=Analysis: 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/ |work= United Press International |accessdate=2011-05-29}}</ref><ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20040326051601/http://johnbuchanan.org/news/newsitem.php?section=INF&id=1504&showcat=4 Archive of John Buchanan.org] ''On September 1,2000, before Mr. Bush took office, the Project for a New American Century proposed the invasions, without provocation or attack, of Afghanistan and Iraq. The motive? 'to protect America's oil interests.' The signatories to that sinister plan - Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle, to name but a few – cleverly and dishonorably set the stage for all that would follow, including the horrifying spectacle of 9/11, when they noted that since well-fed and materially-comfortable Americans would lack the will and focus to fight such 'interventionist' wars - now known as 'The Bush Doctrine' - there must be a galvanizing incident on the order of Pearl Harbor.''</ref>

===Views===
{{See also|9/11 conspiracy theories}}

Many adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement suspect that United States government insiders played a part in the attacks, or may have known the attacks were imminent, and did nothing to alert others or stop them.<ref name="CBC-Speculation"/>

Some within the movement who argue that insiders within the United States government were directly responsible for the September 11 attacks often allege that the attacks were planned and executed in order to provide the U.S. with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East, and, by extension, as a means of consolidating and extending the power of the Bush Administration.<ref name="Grossman"/><ref name="Harvey"/> According to these allegations, this would have given the Bush administration the justification for more widespread abuses of civil liberties and to invade Afghanistan and Iraq to ensure future supplies of oil.<ref name="CBC-Speculation"/> In some cases, even in the mainstream media, hawks in the [[White House]], especially former Vice President [[Dick Cheney]], and members of the ''[[Project for the New American Century]]'', a neoconservative think tank, have been accused of involvement in or awareness of the alleged plot.<ref name="Sullivan">{{cite news|last=Sullivan|first=Will|date=September 3, 2006|journal=U.S. News & World Report|title=Viewing 9/11 From a Grassy Knoll - You won't believe what the conspiracy theorists are claiming-or will you?|url=http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060903/11conspiracy_2.htm|accessdate=May 24, 2009}}</ref><ref name="Jacobson"/><ref name="Manjoo-Anthrax">{{cite news |last=Manjoo |first=Farhad |journal=Slate |date=August 7, 2008|title=The Anthrax Truth Movement|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2196986/}}</ref>

Many adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement allege that the buildings of the World Trade Center were destroyed by [[World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories|controlled demolition]], a theory of major importance for the 9/11 Truth movement.<ref name="Feuer"/><ref name="Molé"/><ref name="Tobin">{{cite news |last=Tobin |first=Hugh |publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |date=May 21, 2008 |title=Conspiracy theory lunacy |url=http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2250663.htm}}</ref>

===Communication===
The Internet plays a large role both in the communication between adherents and between local groups of the 9/11 Truth movement and in the dissemination of the views of the movement to the public at large.<ref name="Rudin"/><ref name="Barber"/><ref name="Hunt"/><ref name="Grossman"/><ref name="Jacobson">{{cite news |last=Jacobson |first=Mark |journal=New York Magazine |title=The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll |date=March 20, 2006 |url=http://nymag.com/news/features/16464 |accessdate=June 2, 2009}}</ref>

==History==
In the years after the September 11 attacks, different interpretations of the events that questioned the account given by the U.S. government were published. Among others, [[Michael Ruppert]]<ref>{{cite book |last=Brzezinski |first=Zbigniew |url=http://www.amazon.com/dp/0865715408 |title=Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil |publisher=New Society Publishers |date=October 1, 2004 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> and Canadian journalist [[Barrie Zwicker]],<ref>{{cite web |last=Ray |first=David |url=http://www.amazon.com/dp/0865715734 |title=Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11 |publisher=New Society Publishers |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> published criticisms or pointed out purported anomalies of the accepted account of the attacks. [[French people|French]] author [[Jean-Charles Brisard]]<ref>{{cite web |last=Shaffer |first=Anthony |url=http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0029E9RAE |title=Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy Saudi Arabia And The Failed Search For Bin Laden |publisher=Nation Books |date= 2002|accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> and [[German people|German]] authors [[Mathias Bröckers]]<ref>{{cite web |last=Ray |first=David |url=http://www.amazon.com/dp/0930852230 |title=Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories, and the Secrets of 9/11 |publisher=Progressive Press|date= 2006|accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> and [[Andreas von Bülow]]<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.amazon.com/dp/3492045456 |title=Die CIA und der 11. September. Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste |isbn=978-3492045452 |publisher=Piper |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> published books critical of media reporting and advancing the controlled demolition thesis of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers.

[[File:911TruthProtestSign.jpg|thumb|left|A 9/11 Truth Movement protest sign, October 2009.]]

In September 2002, the first "Bush Did It!" rallies and marches were held in [[San Francisco]] and [[Oakland, California]] organized by The All People's Coalition.<ref>[http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/09/14/1486451.php? Bush Did It: Pictures From 9/11 Protest in Oakland], by Z, September 14, 2002, San Francisco Bay Area Indymedia website.</ref>

In October 2004, the organization ''9/11 Truth'' released a statement, signed by nearly 200 people, including many relatives of people who perished on September 11, 2001, that calls for an investigation into the attacks. It also asserted that unanswered questions would suggest that people within the administration of former President G. W. Bush may have deliberately allowed the attacks to happen. Actor [[Edward Asner]], former presidential candidate [[Ralph Nader]], former congresswoman [[Cynthia McKinney]], former assistant secretary of housing [[Catherine Austin Fitts]], author [[Richard Heinberg]], [[Enver Masud]], founder of The Wisdom Fund, professors [[Richard Falk]] of the University of California, [[Mark Crispin Miller]] of New York University, Douglas Sturm of Bucknell University, Burns H. Weston of the Iowa Law School and others signed the statement. In 2009, [[Van Jones]], a former advisor to President Obama, said he hadn't fully reviewed the statement before he signed and that the petition did not reflect his views "now or ever."<ref name="salon-petition">{{cite journal |last=Rossmeier |first=Vincent |journal=Salon |title=Would you still sign the 9/11 Truth petition? |date=September 11, 2009 |url=http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/11/truth_petition/ |accessdate=September 11, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Keating |first1=Joshua |last2=Downie |first2=James |title=The World's Most Persistent Conspiracy Theories |journal=Foreign Policy |date=September 10, 2009 |url=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/09/10/the_worlds_most_popular_conspiracy_theories |accessdate=September 13, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/09/08/08greenwire-embattled-van-jones-quits-but-czar-debates-rage-9373.html |work=The New York Times |title=Embattled Van Jones Quits, but 'Czar' Debates Rage On |date=September 8, 2009 |accessdate=April 23, 2010 |first=Michael |last=Burnham}}</ref>

In 2006, Steven E. Jones, who became a leading academic voice of the demolition theory,<ref name="Rudin"/> published the paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?".<ref name="NYTCountersTheories">{{cite news |journal=New York Times |author=Jim Dwyer |title=2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11|date=September 2, 2006 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/nyregion/02conspiracy.html |accessdate=April 30, 2009 |work=The New York Times}}</ref> He was placed on paid leave by [[Brigham Young University]] following what they described as Jones's "increasingly speculative and accusatory" statements in September, 2006, pending a review of his statements and research. Six weeks later, Jones retired<!-- see Jones's website at BYU.--> from the university.<ref name=Jones>{{cite news |last=Walch |first=Tad |date=September 8, 2006 |journal=Deseret Morning News |url=http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,645199800,00.html |title=BYU places '9/11 truth' professor on paid leave |accessdate=January 4, 2009}} {{cite news |first=Will |last=Sullivan|title=BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor |url=http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060911/11conspiracy.htm |work=U.S. News & World Report |publisher=www.usnews.com|date=September 11, 2006 |accessdate=April 26, 2009}} {{cite news |url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,223318,00.html |title=BYU Professor Who Believes WTC Brought Down by Explosives Resigns |publisher=Fox News |date=October 21, 2006 |accessdate=May 15, 2009}} {{cite news |last=Walch |first=Tad |date=October 22, 2006 |journal=Deseret Morning News |url=http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650200587,00.html |title=BYU professor in dispute over 9/11 will retire |accessdate=May 15, 2009}} {{cite web |title=Steven E. Jones. Retired Professor |publisher=Brigham Young University |url=http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/ |accessdate=May 6, 2009}}</ref>

In the same year, 61 legislators in the U.S. State of Wisconsin signed a petition calling for the dismissal of a [[University of Wisconsin]] assistant professor [[Kevin Barrett]], after he joined the group ''[[Scholars for 9/11 Truth]]''. Citing [[academic freedom]], the university [[Provost (education)|provost]] declined to take action against Barrett.<ref>{{cite news |last=Ruethling |first=Gretchen |date=August 1, 2006 |title=A Skeptic on 9/11 Prompts Questions on Academic Freedom |work=New York Times |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/01/education/01madison.html |accessdate=May 17, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |publisher=CNN |date=November 20, 2006 |title=Wisconsin academic: 9/11 report a fraud |url=http://edition.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/11/wisconsin-academic-911-report-fraud.html |accessdate=May 7, 2009}}</ref><ref name="Guardian-Asquith-2006">{{cite news |last=Asquith |first=Christina |journal=The Guardian |title=Who really blew up the twin towers?|date=September 5, 2006 |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/sep/05/internationaleducationnews.highereducation |accessdate=May 6, 2009 |location=London}}</ref>

Several organizations of family members of people who have died in the attacks are calling for an independent investigation into the attacks.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Diffalah |first=Sarah |journal=Nouvel Observateur |date=July 23, 2009 |title=11/09 : le crash du Pentagone toujours contesté |accessdate=August 15, 2009}}</ref> In 2009, a group of people, including 9/11 Truth movement activist [[Lorie Van Auken]] and others who have lost friends or relatives in the attack, appealed to the City of New York to investigate the disaster. The organization ''New York City Coalition for Accountability Now'' collected signatures to require the New York City Council to place the creation of an investigating commission on the November 2009 election ballot.<ref>{{cite news |publisher=United Press International |title=Group calls for renewed Sept. 11 probe |date=August 10, 2009|url=http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/08/10/Group-calls-for-renewed-Sept-11-probe/UPI-81561249924847/ |accessdate=August 12, 2009}}</ref>
The group collected more than enough signatures to put the proposal before the voters, but Supreme Court Justice Edward Lehner ruled that the petition overstepped what is allowable by city law, and ruled that, despite wording in the petition to allow for elements ruled invalid to be stricken, it would not be allowed to appear on the ballot.<ref>{{cite news |title=New York Judges Fight New Investigation of 9/11 |date=October 13, 2009 |url=http://www.salem-news.com/articles/october132009/911_review_10-13-09.php |work = Salem-News.com |accessdate=2010-07-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/21193128/09-10-09-Lehner-Order |title=Christopher Burke, et. al against Michael McSweeney, City Clerk, and the Board of Elections, City of New York |accessdate=2010-07-27 |date=October 8, 2009 |work=Supreme Court of the State of New York |publisher=scribd.com}}</ref>

===9/11 Commission Report reaction===
To the consternation of the families and adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement, many of the questions that the [[9/11 Family Steering Committee]] put to the [[9/11 Commission]], chaired by former [[New Jersey]] Governor [[Thomas Kean]], were not asked in either the hearings nor in the Commission Report.<ref>{{cite news | first=Lloyd | last=de Vries | title=9/11 Report: The Open Question | date=July 20, 2004 | publisher=CBS News | url =http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/21/iraq/main630797.shtml | accessdate = June 1, 2009 }}</ref> [[Lorie Van Auken]], one of the [[Jersey Girls]], estimates that only 30% of their questions were answered in the final 9/11 Commission Report, published July 22, 2004.

The [[9/11 Family Steering Committee]] produced a website summarizing the questions they had raised to the Commission, indicating which they believe had been answered satisfactorily, which they believe had been addressed but not answered satisfactorily, and which they believe had been generally ignored in or omitted from the Report.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.911independentcommission.org/ |title=The Family Steering Committee |publisher=911independentcommission.org |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

In addition, the 339-page book ''The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions'' by [[David Ray Griffin]], claimed that the report had either omitted information or distorted the truth, providing 115 alleged examples.<ref>{{cite news|last=Harmanci|first=Reyhan|journal=San Francisco Chronicle|title=An inside job?|date=March 30, 2006|url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/30/NSGB3HTBQ61.DTL|accessdate=September 17, 2009 | work=The San Francisco Chronicle}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Abrams|first=Joseph|publisher=Fox News|title=Critics Demand Resignation of U.N. Official Who Wants Probe of 9/11 'Inside Job' Theories|date=July 15, 2008|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369122,00.html|accessdate=September 17, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Bhaerman|first=Steve|title=Unquestioned Answers|journal=Bohemian|date=June 14–20, 2006|url=http://www.bohemian.com/bohemian/06.14.06/david-ray-griffin-0624.html|accessdate=September 17, 2009}}</ref> He has characterized the 9/11 Commission Report as "a 571-page lie".<ref>{{cite news|last=Solomon|first=Evan|title=9/11: Truth, Lies and Conspiracy|date=August 25, 2006|url=http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911griffin.html|accessdate=September 17, 2009 | work=CBC News |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080611112401/http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911griffin.html |archivedate = June 11, 2008}}</ref>

On May 26, 2008 adjunct religious studies professor Blair Gadsby began a protest and a hunger strike outside the offices of [[United States Senate|Senator]] and [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] nominee for President [[John McCain]]'s office requesting McCain meet with the principal scientists and leaders of the 9/11Truth movement, specifically Richard Gage, Steven Jones, and David Ray Griffin. McCain had written the foreword to the book ''Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts'', published by the magazine ''[[Popular Mechanics]]''.<ref name="Benson"/> Arizona Republican State Senator Karen Johnson joined the protest in support. On June 10 Johnson with Gadsby as her guest and other 9/11 Truth movement members in the audience spoke before the [[Arizona State Senate]] espousing the [[Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center|controlled demolition theory]] and supporting a reopening of the 9/11 investigation.<ref name="eastvalleytribune"/><ref name="Benson">{{cite web|url=http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0604johnson0604.html |title=Lawmaker asks McCain to talk with 9/11 theorists |publisher=Arizona Republic - Azcentral.com |date=2008-06-03 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> In response to a question, McCain said he did not meet Gadsby, adding: "Because I don't take well to threats."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_doesnt_want_to_impeach_Bush_0626.html |title=McCain doesn't want to impeach Bush |publisher=Rawstory.com |date=2008-06-26 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

===NIST Report reaction===
[[File:World Trade Center 9-11 Iron-rich sphere.jpg|240px|thumb|right|Iron-rich sphere, found in the dust of the World Trade Center, as documented by the United States Geological Survey<ref>{{cite web | url = http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/table_1.html | title = Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust | accessdate = 2010-06-29 | date = September 23, 2005 | publisher = United States Geological Survey}}</ref> and RJ LeeGroup, Inc.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTC%20Dust%20Signature.Composition%20and%20Morphology.Final.pdf | title = WTC Dust Signature Report | accessdate = 2010-06-29 | date = December 2003 | format = PDF | publisher = RJ LeeGroup, Inc.}}</ref> As noted by RJ Lee in its report, the iron-rich spheres, which are a common component of the WTC dust, are indicative of molten iron, which forms the spheres due to surface tension. The spheres are of interest to the 9/11 Truth movement in its study of the WTC building failures, as the spheres, the proponents contend, are indicative of the presence of temperatures much hotter than office fires,<ref>{{cite book | last1 = Phillips | first1 = Peter | title = Censored 2008: The Top 25 Censored Stories | chapter = Chapter 2: Censored Déjà Vu | publisher = Seven Stories Press | year = 2007 | page = 140 | url = http://books.google.com/books?id=Hg3DR7blYgAC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA140#v=onepage&q&f=false | accessdate = 2010-08-06 | isbn = 1583227725, 9781583227725}}</ref> and they are also a common end product of thermitic reactions<ref name='active_thermitic'/><ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.hartfordadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=5546 | title = Theories of 9/11 | accessdate = 2010-08-06 | last = Abel | first = Jennifer | date = January 29, 2008 | work = Hartford Advocate | archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080430203236/http://www.hartfordadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=5546 | archivedate = 2008-04-30}}</ref>]]
Following the initial government investigation, the [[Federal Emergency Management Agency]] (FEMA) Report (May 2002) [http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm NIST Report], numerous responses were written by members of the 9/11 Truth movement. Many of these responses claimed that it ignored key evidence suggesting an explosive demolition, "distorted reality" by using deceptive language and diagrams, and attacked [[straw man]] arguments, such as the 2005 article by [[Jim Hoffman]] entitled, ''Building a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/17162 |title=KPFA 94.1, Guns and Butter |publisher=Kpfa.org |date=2005-09-28 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

In the fall of 2005, Steven Jones, then a professor at [[Brigham Young University]], announced a paper criticizing the NIST Report and describing his hypothesis that the WTC towers had been intentionally demolished by explosives. This paper garnered some mainstream media attention, including an appearance by Jones on [[MSNBC]]. This was the first such programming on a major cable news station. As of September 2009, Jones had not published his research in peer-reviewed mainstream journals. Jones was criticized by his university for making his claims public before vetting them through the approved peer review process. He was placed on paid leave and has since retired.<ref name=Jones/><ref name=DMorning_pleave>{{cite news |first = Tad |last = Walch|title = BYU places "9/11 truth" professor on paid leave|url = http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645199800,00.html |work = |publisher = Deseret Morning News|date = September 8, 2006}}</ref><ref name=USNW_BYUtakes>{{cite news |first = Will |last = Sullivan|title = BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor|url = http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060911/11conspiracy.htm |publisher = US News & World Report |date = September 11, 2006}}</ref> He continues to remain a focus of public interest for his 9/11 research.

Accordingly, in April 2007, some 9/11 victims' family members and some members of the new [http://stj911.org/press_releases/NIST.html Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice] submitted an additional request for correction to NIST, containing their own views on the defects in the report.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=36&url=http%3A%2F%2Focio.os.doc.gov%2FITPolicyandPrograms%2FInformation_Quality%2FssLINK%2FPROD01_004108&ei=lTciSobwDYe-tAOVoPmhBA&rct=j&q=nist+%22request+for+correction%22+jones&usg=AFQjCNEz3_El52eLsUZWHisKVt689pVRxA |title=Request for Correction |publisher=Google.com |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> NIST responded to this request in September 2007 supporting their original conclusions;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ocio.os.doc.gov/s/groups/public/@doc/@os/@ocio/@oitpp/documents/content/prod01_004622.pdf |title=Communication re Information Quality Request #07-06 |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> the originators of the request wrote back to them in October 2007, asking them to reconsider their response.

===Criticism===
In 2006, a book critic with [[Time (magazine)|''Time'']] magazine noted that a major problem with films such as ''[[Loose Change (film)|Loose Change]]'' and most 9/11 conspiracy theories in general is that "the more one thinks about them, the more one realizes how much they depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis, quotes taken out of context, and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses".<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html |work=Time Magazine |date=September 3, 2006 |title=Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away |author=Lev Grossman}}</ref>
[[Matt Taibbi]] of ''[[Rolling Stone]]'' assessed that the movement "gives supporters of [[George W. Bush|Bush]] an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration" and expressed concerns about the number of people who believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories.<ref>{{cite web |last = Taibbi |first = Matt |authorlink = Matt Taibbi |year = 2006 |url = http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies/1 |title = The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper |work = Politics |publisher = Rolling Stone |accessdate = September 29, 2006}}{{dead link|date=May 2011}}</ref>

Stand-up comedian [[Bill Maher]] has repeatedly denounced 9/11 conspiracy theorists as "lunatics."

Linguist [[Noam Chomsky]] stated that, regarding US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, "the evidence that has been produced is essentially worthless" and while the American government stood to benefit from the incident, "every authoritarian system in the world gained from September&nbsp;11th." He argues that the enormous risk of an information [[leak]], "it is a very porous system and secrets are very hard to keep", and consequences of exposure for the Republican party would have made such a conspiracy foolish to attempt. He dismisses observations cited by conspiracy proponents saying, "if you look at the evidence, anybody who knows anything about the sciences would instantly discount that evidence," arguing that even when a scientific experiment is carried out repeatedly in a controlled environment, phenomena and coincidences remain that are unexplained.<ref>{{cite news |title=What "truly motivates" George W. Bush? |first=Glenn |last=Greenwald |newspaper=[[Salon.com]] |date=20 June 2007 |url=http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/20/bush_motives/index.html |accessdate=24 January 2010}}</ref>

[[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] engineering professor [[Thomas W. Eagar]] was at first unwilling to acknowledge the concerns of the movement, saying "if (the argument) gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." In response to Steven E. Jones publishing a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eager said that adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement would use the reverse scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, as they "determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion.<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 = September 9, 2006}}</ref>

Former President [[Bill Clinton]] dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories saying "Nine-eleven was NOT an inside job, it was an Osama Bin Laden job with 19 people from Saudi Arabia, they murdered 3000 Americans and other foreigners including Muslims".<ref>{{cite web
|title = Bill Clinton Undeterred By 9/11 Hecklers
|publisher = ABC News
|date =January 31, 2008
|url = http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/bill-clinton-un.html
|accessdate = 19 January 2010}}</ref>

In a research paper written in 2008, Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule conclude that theories supported by 9/11 truth movement members "typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their [[No true Scotsman|self-sealing quality]]. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy...those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology..."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585 |title=Conspiracy Theories by Cass Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule :: SSRN |publisher=Papers.ssrn.com |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers", [[Bill Moyers]] states they "...threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right's sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the "truthers" cherry-picked a few supposed "anomalies" to build an "inside-job" story line".<ref>{{cite web|last=Moyers |first=Bill |url=http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/15-7 |title=Is This a Private Fight or Can Anyone Get In It? |publisher=Common Dreams |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

==Organizations==
Since the publication of the official reports, a number of interconnected 9/11 Truth movement organizations have been formed.

===Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth===
[[File:Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth Banner.jpg|240px|thumb|right|Two people holding a banner of ''Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth''.]]
{{See also|Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth}}

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an organization of architectural and engineering professionals<ref> {{cite news | first = Manasee | last = Wagh | title = Group's 9/11 theories draw controversy and indignation | date = March 25, 2011 | url = http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/courier_times_news/group-s-theories-draw-controversy-and-indignation/article_01d72cec-5573-59e8-9890-57edac492d37.html | work = phillyBurbs.com | accessdate = 2011-04-15}}</ref> who support the [[controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center]] and are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7.<ref name="Olivier">{{cite news | first=Clint | last=Olivier | title=Controversial Group Re–Examines 9/11 In Clovis | date=May 26, 2009 | publisher=KMPH Fox News | url =http://www.kmph.com/Global/story.asp?S=10427820&nav=menu612_2_2 | accessdate = May 28, 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Sutcliffe|first=Thomas|title=Yet more tall stories with no foundation|journal=Independent Extra|date=July 7, 2008|url=http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/the-weekends-tv-the-conspiracy-files-911-ndash-the-third-tower-sun-bbc2br-george-gently-sun-bbc2-861141.html|accessdate=May 24, 2009 | work=The Independent | location=London}}</ref> The group is collecting signatures for a petition to the [[United States Congress]] that demands "a truly independent investigation with subpoena power" of the [[September 11 attacks]], which, according to the organization, should include an inquiry into the possible use of explosives in the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.<ref name="telecinco">{{cite web|publisher=Telecinco|title=Un arquitecto estadounidense presenta en Madrid su versión alternativa al 11-S|date=November 8, 2008|url=http://www.telecinco.es/informativos/internacional/noticia/51928/Un+arquitecto+estadounidense+presenta+su+version+alternativa+al+11S+en+Madrid|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Mounir|first=Roderic|title=Les attentats du 11-Septembre: «une démolition contrôlée!»|journal=Le Courrier|date=November 13, 2008|url=http://www.lecourrier.ch/index.php?name=NewsPaper&file=article&sid=440823|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref> Richard Gage, a [[San Francisco Bay area]] based architect,<ref name="Moskowitz">{{cite news|last=Moskowitz|first=Eric|journal=The Boston Globe|title=Airing of 9/11 film ignites debate|date=November 29, 2007|url=http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/29/airing_of_911_film_ignites_debate|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref> founded ''Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth'' in 2006.<ref name="Rudin"/><ref>{{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|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref>

Investigations by the [[Federal Emergency Management Agency]] and the [[National Institute for Standards and Technology]] (NIST) have concluded that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impacts of the planes and of the fires that resulted from them.<ref name="NYTCountersTheories"/><ref>{{cite news|last=Glanz|first=James|journal=New York Times|title=Towers Fell as Intense Fire Beat Defenses, Report Says|date=March 29, 2002|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/29/nyregion/nation-challenged-trade-center-towers-fell-intense-fire-beat-defenses-report.html?pagewanted=all|accessdate=May 23, 2009 | work=The New York Times}}</ref> Gage criticized the government agency NIST for not having investigated the complete sequence of the [[collapse of the World Trade Center]] towers<ref name="Potocki">{{cite news|last=Potocki|first=P. Joseph|journal=Bohemian|title=Down the 9-11 Rabbit Hole|date=August 27, 2008|url=http://www.bohemian.com/bohemian/08.27.08/cover-911.truth-0835.html|accessdate=May 25, 2009}}</ref> and claims that "the official explanation of the total destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers has explicitly failed to address the massive evidence for [[World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories|explosive demolition]]."<ref>{{cite news|last=Beam|first=Alex|title=The truth is out there . . . Isn't it?|date=January 14, 2008|journal=The Boston Globe|url=http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2008/01/14/the_truth_is_out_there____isnt_it|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref> To support its position, the group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth points to the "free fall" pace of the collapse of the buildings, the "lateral ejection of steel", and to the "mid-air pulverization of concrete", among other things.<ref name="Beam-Slate">{{cite news|last=Beam|first=Christopher|date=April 8, 2009|title=Heated Controversy|journal=Slate|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2215703|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref>

===9/11 Truth===
This organization was launched in June 2004 and has become the central portal for all the 9/11 Truth movement organizations. It is run by Janice Matthews (Executive Director),<ref name="washingtonpost">{{cite news|url=http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/05/911_truth_i_dont_think_so.html |date=May 26, 2006 |work=The Washington Post |title=9/11 Truth? I Don't Think So |author=William M. Arkin}}{{dead link|date=May 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Hargrove|first=Thomas|publisher=Scripps Howard News Service|title=Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy|date=August 1, 2006|url=http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll|accessdate=December 18, 2009}}</ref> David Kubiak (International Campaign Advisor)<ref name="ID=855">{{cite web | url = http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855 | title = Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act... | publisher=Zogby International | date = August 30, 2004 |accessdate = 2011-05-30 | archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20040831092509/http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855 | archivedate = 2004-08-31}}</ref> and Mike Berger (Media Coordinator),<ref name="CNN">{{cite news|url=http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/22/sbt.01.html |publisher=CNN |title=Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Explanations; "Young and Restless" Star Weighs in on Political Topics |date=March 22, 2006}}</ref> among others, and its advisory board includes [[Steven E. Jones]], [[Barrie Zwicker]] and Faiz Khan.<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite web| url=http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20061014120445472#about| title=911truth.org "About Us"}}</ref>

The organization co-sponsored opinion polls conducted by the U.S. market research and opinion polling firm [[Zogby International]] that have shown substantial numbers of people believing the government did not tell the full truth about the September 11 attacks. Of the people surveyed, those in lower education and income brackets were more likely to express disbelief in government accounts, rather than those in higher income/education brackets.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231 |publisher=Zogby International |title=American Thinking Toward The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks |date=May 24, 2006}}{{dead link|date=May 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231| title= Zogby Poll (May 2006)}}{{dead link|date=May 2011}}</ref>

===Scholars for 9/11 Truth===
The original ''Scholars for 9/11 Truth'', founded by [[James H. Fetzer]] and [[Steven E. Jones|Steven Jones]] on December 15, 2005, was a group of individuals of varying backgrounds and expertise who rejected the mainstream media and government account of the [[September 11 attacks]].<ref name="Barber"/><ref>{{cite news|last=Pope|first=Justin|title=9/11 Conspiracy Theories Persist, Thrive|journal=Washington Post|date=August 6, 2006|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/06/AR2006080600393.html|accessdate=September 17, 2009 | work=The Washington Post}}</ref> Initially the group invited many ideas and hypotheses to be considered, however, leading members soon came to feel that the inclusion of some theories advocated by Fetzer—such as the use of directed energy weapons or small nuclear bombs to destroy the Twin Towers—were insufficiently supported by evidence and were exposing the group to ridicule. By December 2006, Jones and several others set up a new scholars group titled [[9/11 truth movement#Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice|Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice]], whose focus was in the use of the scientific method in analysis.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://stj911.org/index.html |title=Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice |publisher=Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice}}</ref> The original members took a vote on which group to join and the majority voted to move to the new group.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://stj911.org/faq.html#quest7| title=Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice}}</ref> By 2007, James Fetzer had been openly rejected by the 9/11 Truth Movement, banned from and criticized on popular forums<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.911blogger.com/node/6497 |date=February 27, 2007 |author=hsgsj |title=Dr. James Fetzer and his "Lying Eyes" |publisher=911blogger.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.911blogger.com/node/6531 |date=February 28, 2007 |author=Arabesque |title=9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples |publisher=911blogger.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3205&highlight=fetzer |date=March 15, 2008 |author=Dem Bruce Lee Stylez! |title=ALERT: FETZER SPEAKING AT RON PAUL MARCH!! Von Kleist to MC |publisher=TruthAction.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html#fetzer |date=August 13, 2007 |author=Victoria Ashley |title=Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11, James Fetzer |publisher=911Research.com}}</ref> and no longer invited to public 9/11 events.

===Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice===
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice (STJ) formed in January 2007 and is "a group of scholars and supporters endeavoring to address the unanswered questions of the September 11, 2001 attack" with a focus on scientific research. The group is composed of more than 900 members,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://stj911.org/members/index.html |title=STH911 Members |publisher=Stj911.org |date= |accessdate=2011-07-30}}</ref> including [[Richard Gage (architect)|Richard Gage]], [[Steven E. Jones]], [[Jim Hoffman]], [[David Ray Griffin]], [[Peter Phillips (activist)|Peter Phillips]], former Congressman [[Daniel Hamburg]], and Kevin Ryan. Most members support the conspiracy theory that the World Trade Center Towers and the third skyscraper, WTC 7, were destroyed through [[Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center|explosive demolition]].

In 2008 and 2009, several Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice members published essays in science and engineering journals. In April 2008, a letter by members [[Steven E. Jones]], Frank Legge, Kevin Ryan, Anthony Szamboti and James Gourley, was published in ''The Open Civil Engineering Journal''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM |title=Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction |author=Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley |year=2008 |publisher=Bentham Science Publishers}}</ref> In July 2008, an article by Ryan, Gourley and Jones was published in ''the Environmentalist.''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/ |title= Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials |author=Kevin R. Ryan, James R. Gourley, Steven E. Jones |year=2008 |publisher= Springer Netherlands, The Environmentalist, Online First}}</ref> In October 2008, a comment by STJ member James R. Gourley describing what he considers fundamental errors in a Bažant and Verdure paper was included in an issue of the ''Journal of Engineering Mechanics''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ascelibrary.aip.org/dbt/dbt.jsp?KEY=JENMDT&Volume=134&Issue=10#DISCUSSIONS%20AND%20CLOSURES |title= Discussion of "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" by Zdenek P. Bažant and Mathieu Verdure |author=James R. Gourley |year=2008 |publisher= ASCE Publications, Reston, VA}}</ref> And in April 2009, Danish chemist and STJ member Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, some also STJ members, published a paper in ''The Open Chemical Physics Journal'', titled, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'. The paper concludes that chips consisting of unreacted and partially reacted [[Metastable intermolecular composite|super-thermite]], or nano-thermite, appear to be present in samples of the dust.<ref name='active_thermitic'>{{cite web |url=http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf |title=Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe |accessdate=October 11, 2010 |last=Harrit |first=Niels H}}</ref><ref>[[Politiken]]: [http://politiken.dk/indland/article684567.ece Konspirationsteorier om 9/11 får nyt liv], [[Jyllands Posten]]: [http://jp.dk/nyviden/article1654301.ece Forskere: Sprængstof i støvet fra WTC], [[Ekstra Bladet]]: [http://ekstrabladet.dk/nationen/article1151442.ece Mystik om WTC: Nano-termit i tårne], Kristeligt Dagblad: [http://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/artikel/319661:Danmark--Dansker-genopliver-konspirationsteori-om-11--september Dansker genopliver konspirationsteori om 11. september], Videnskab: [http://www.videnskab.dk/content/dk/teknologi/dansk_forsker_eksplosivt_nanomateriale_fundet_i_stovet_fra_world_trade_center Dansk forsker: Eksplosivt nanomateriale fundet i støvet fra World Trade Center]{{dead link|date=May 2011}}. The journal Videnskab is sponsored by the Danish Ministry for Science and Technology.</ref>

===9/11 CitizensWatch===
{{Main|9/11 Citizens Watch}}

The group was formed in 2002 by John Judge and Kyle Hence and, along with the [[9/11 Family Steering Committee|Family Steering Committee]], played an active role in calling for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, and monitoring the commission closely.<ref name="csmonitor">{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0325/p03s01-usgn.htm |title=The Christian Science Monitor - A key force behind the 9/11 commission |publisher=Csmonitor.com |date=2004-03-25 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

[[Image:William-rodriguez-american-scholars-symposium.jpg|thumb|upright|William Rodriguez at American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 and the NeoCon Agenda in Los Angeles, California, June 24–25, 2006.]]

===9/11 Commission Campaign===

Founded in 2011 by Senator [[Mike Gravel]], the 9/11 Commission Campaign's objective is to enact subpoena-capable, state-level commissions through state ballot initiatives, namely in Oregon, Alaska and California.<ref name="911commissioncampaign">{{cite web|url=http://9-11cc.org |title=About the 9-11 Commission Campaign |publisher=9-11cc.org |date=2011-07-03 |accessdate=2011-07-03}}</ref> These commissions are envisioned as citizen-driven, independent organizations that would form a semi-unified grassroots national presence by exercising [[joint powers authority]].

===Hispanic Victims Group===
{{Main|William Rodriguez}}
The Hispanic Victims Group is a group created after the 9/11 attacks, founded by [[William Rodriguez]],<ref>{{cite news|last=Senior|first=Jennifer|title=«The Memorial Warriors»|work=New York magazine|url=http://nymag.com/news/articles/wtc/1year/families.htm|accessdate=August 14, 2009}}</ref> an adherent of the 9/11 Truth movement. The group was one of the key forces behind the creation of the 9/11 Commission.<ref name="csmonitor"/> William Rodriguez, as founder of the group, was a member of the Families Advisory Council for the [[Lower Manhattan Development Corporation]].<ref name="renewnyc">{{cite web|url=http://www.renewnyc.com/displaynews.aspx?newsid=5a791121-7404-4553-92ec-19c9b64237ad |publisher=Lower Manhattan Development Corporation |date=January 31, 2002 |title=Chairman Whitehead Announces LMDC Advisory Councils}}</ref>

==Conferences==
Members of the 9/11 truth organizations, such as 911truth.org and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, regularly hold meetings and conferences to discuss ongoing research about 9/11 and to strategize about how best to achieve their goals. Many of these conferences are organized by 911truth.org, and some have been covered by the international media.<ref name="nationalpost1">{{cite web|url=http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=2bcf9f07-6407-4b2c-9f4e-7d4a15afcb98&k=46273 |title=Canada National Post: A theory that just won't die |publisher=Canada.com |date=2006-07-28 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

===Internal critique===
While there is general agreement within the movement that individuals within the United States government may have played a role in some aspects of the attacks, whether it be cover-up or complicity, alternative theories differ about what may have happened.<ref name="Barber"/> There have been a number of articles and responses written by members critiquing the methods and theories of other members in the Journal of 9/11 Studies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://journalof911studies.com/letters.html |title=Letters |publisher=Journal of 9/11 Studies |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> Sites such as 911 Research and 911 Review typically include essays or pages analyzing claims in the movement which are erroneous, have little basis in evidence, or which appear to misinform readers.<ref>[http://911review.com/errors/index.html 9-11 Review: Parade of Errors<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.911research.wtc7.net/essays/index.html |title=911 Research Essays |publisher=911research.wtc7.net |date=2010-03-14 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>

While Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice states that they advocate the use of the scientific method and civil research activities over public debate,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://stj911.org/about.html |title=Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice: About |publisher=Stj911.org |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> Jim Fetzer's group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, "has emphasized that science can only proceed by considering a full range of alternative hypotheses", and held a conference which invited the public to "review the most hotly debated 9/11 theories and evidence".<ref>{{cite web|author=James Fetzer |url=http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/07/wikipedia-as-911-disinformation-op.html |title=Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op |publisher=Jamesfetzer.blogspot.com |date=2010-07-06 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> The range of hypotheses Fetzer considers as "alternative" were described in a ''Madison Times'' article on the conference held by Fetzer's group, which stated: "By Sunday the conference had covered weather control, weapons from space, and the idea that the planes that struck the towers never existed at all."<ref>[http://www.madison.com/tct/news/stories/204531 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too] by Ben Popper, Madison Times {{Dead link|date=October 2009}}</ref><ref>[http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/595 The Capital Times: 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too (Re: "DisinfoFest07")] ''Truthmove'' discussion forum</ref>

==Media==
===Books===
A prominent author of the 9/11 Truth movement literature is theologian [[David Ray Griffin]]. His two books, ''[[The New Pearl Harbor]]: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11'' (March 2004), which claimed to outline a methodical, deductive framework for researching 9/11, and ''The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions'' (October 2004), became best-sellers.<ref>{{cite news|last=Reid|first=Sue|title=An explosion of disbelief - fresh doubts over 9/11|journal=Daily Mail|date=February 9, 2007|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-435265/An-explosion-disbelief--fresh-doubts-9-11.html|accessdate=September 17, 2009 | location=London}}</ref> His ''Debunking 9/11 Debunking'' (May 2007) looks at the way magazines such as ''Popular Mechanics'' have sought to debunk the alternative 9/11 theories.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=CMZ12AxBOh8C&dq=Debunking+9/11+Debunking&source=bl&ots=jxckkPlCm3&sig=loiQloSqKgge-o1FOtMZF6j3E_Q&hl=en&ei=Az4WTOK9O8yIOOXJ2fEN&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12&ved=0CFEQ6AEwCw |title=Debunking 9/11 debunking: an answer ... - Google Books |publisher=Books.google.com |date=2007-12-31 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref> His 2008 book, ''The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the cover-up, and the exposé'', was written to update his original book, ''The New Pearl Harbor'', reflecting information and insights from five major developments that have occurred since his original publication,<ref>{{cite book |last = Griffin |first = David |first2 = Ray|title = The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé |publisher = Olive Branch Press |year = 2008 |isbn = 1-56656-729-7 }}</ref> while ''The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False'', published in 2009, examines the credibility of the official investigations into and hypotheses about the destruction of the third skyscraper, WTC 7, focusing on the final official report published in November 2008.<ref>{{cite book |last = Griffin |first = David |first2 = Ray|title = The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False |publisher = Olive Branch Press |year = 2009 |isbn = 1-56656-786-6 }}</ref>

In September 2004, the interactive "Complete 9/11 Timeline" website by Paul Thompson, which is a collection of mainstream media reports presented chronologically, was made into the book ''[[The Terror Timeline]]''.<ref name="Knight">{{cite journal |last=Knight |first=Peter |title=Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States |journal=New German Critique |number=103 |volume=35 |issue=1 |year=2008 |url=http://ngc.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/35/1_103/165.pdf |accessdate=June 9, 2009}}</ref>

===Films===
Films made by people associated with the 9/11 Truth movement include:
*''The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw'' (2004) by [[Barrie Zwicker]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.greatconspiracy.ca/ |title=Tgc: The Great Conspiracy |publisher=Greatconspiracy.ca |date=2004-09-01 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>
*''Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State'' (2005) by [[Alex Jones (radio)|Alex Jones]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.infowars.com/martial_law_911.htm |title=MARTIAL LAW-9/11: THE RISE OF THE POLICE STATE |publisher=Infowars.com |date=2005-06-08 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>
* [[9/11: Press for Truth]] (2006).
*''911 Mysteries: Demolitions'' (2006)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=31 |title=Watch 911 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions (1 of 3) |publisher=911 We Know |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>
*''9/11: Blueprint for Truth'' (2007) and updated ''2008 Edition'' by Richard Gage<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ae911truth.net/store/product_info.php?cPath=24&products_id=37 |title=AE911Truth Online Store |publisher=Ae911truth.net |date= |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref>
* ''[[Loose Change (film)|Loose Change: An American Coup]]'' (2009) by [[Korey Rowe]]
* [[New World Order (film)|New World Order]] (2009) by Luke Meyer and [[Andrew Neel]]

====Details====
These documentaries present a range of alternative theories about how the attacks might have been carried out.

''[[9/11 Press for Truth]]'' (2006) documents the struggle by the [[Jersey Widows]] to open a full investigation of the events, and their frustration while monitoring the 9/11 Commission as part of the [[9/11 Family Steering Committee|Family Steering Committee]].

[[Alex Jones (radio host)|Alex Jones]], 9/11 and [[New World Order (conspiracy theory)|New World Order]] conspiracy theorists are the subject of the documentary film [[New World Order (film)|New World Order]] directed by Luke Meyer and [[Andrew Neel]] that debuted on the [[Independent Film Channel]] on May 26, 2009. The documentary, while not endorsing the movement, is described as giving the movement "more sympathetic, or less critical, airing than they've yet had (except among the converted)".<ref>{{cite web |author=Jim Ridley |url=http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-05-20/film/doc-hangs-with-conspiracy-theorists-in-new-world-order/ |title=Doc Hangs with Conspiracy Theorists in New World Order Village Voice May 19, 2009 |publisher=Villagevoice.com |date=2009-05-20 |accessdate=2011-05-30}}</ref><ref>[http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/movies/22orde.html?ref=movies Movie Review New World Order (2009) ''[[The New York Times]]'' May 26, 2009].</ref>

==See also==

* [[Criticisms of the 9/11 Commission Report]]
* [[World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories]]
* [[9/11 advance-knowledge debate]]
* [[Casualties of the September 11, 2001 attacks]]
* [[Collapse of the World Trade Center]]
* [[Health effects arising from the September 11, 2001 attacks]]

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==External links==
{{Commons category|9/11 Truth Movement}}
*[http://www.911truth.org/ 9/11 Truth]
*[http://911truthnews.com/ 911 Truth News]
*[http://911research.wtc7.net/ 911 Research]
*[http://911review.com/ 9/11 Review]
*[http://www.ae911truth.org/ Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth]
*[http://journalof911studies.com/ The Journal of 9/11 Studies]
*[http://www.stj911.org/ Scholars for 9/11 Truth And Justice]
*[http://www.911artists.com/ Artists for 9-11 Truth]

===Media coverage===
*{{Cite news|url=http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/08/9-11-2011-201108 |author=Robynn Swan and Anthony Summers |title=The Kingdom and the Towers |date=July, 2006 |work=Vanity Fair Magazine}}
*{{Cite news|url=http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/n_7691/index1.html |author=Jennifer Senior |title=The Memorial Warriors |date=September 15, 2006 |work=New York Magazine}}
*{{Cite news|url=http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2006/08/loosechange200608 |author=Nancy Jo Sales |title=Click Here for Conpiracy |date=August, 2006 |work=Vanity Fair}}
*{{Cite news|url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/03/INGR0KRCBA1.DTL |work=San Francisco Chronicle |author=Jonathan Curiel |title=The Conspiracy To Rewrite 9/11 |date=September 3, 2006}}
*{{Cite news|url=http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html |date=September 5, 2006 |title=Who really blew up the twin towers? |work=The Guardian | location=London | accessdate=April 23, 2010 | first=Christina | last=Asquith}}
*{{Cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770 |author=Jaya Narain |title=Fury as academics claim 9/11 was "inside job" |work=Daily Mail |date=September 6, 2006 | location=London}}
*[http://www.ft.com/cms/s/a3e2879e-342c-11dd-869b-0000779fd2ac,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2Fa3e2879e-342c-11dd-869b-0000779fd2ac.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ft.com%2Fsearch%3FqueryText%3D9%252F11%2Btruth%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26aje%3Dtrue%26dse%3D%26dsz%3D The Truth Is Out There - Part I Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008]
*[http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e46f11d8-342c-11dd-869b-0000779fd2ac,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2Fe46f11d8-342c-11dd-869b-0000779fd2ac.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ft.com%2Fsearch%3FqueryText%3D9%252F11%2Btruth%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26aje%3Dtrue%26dse%3D%26dsz%3D The Truth Is Out There - Part II Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008]
*[http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8a580372-342b-11dd-869b-0000779fd2ac.html The Truth Is Out There - Part III Financial Times Magazine June 7, 2008]
*[http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/truth-and-conspiracy-in-the-catskills/?ref=opinion Truth and Conspiracy in the Catskills New York Times August 23, 2010]

==Book==
* {{Cite book| last = Summers | first = Anthony | year = 2011 | title = [[The Eleventh Day|The Eleventh Day: The Full Story Of 9/11 And Osama Bin Laden]] | publisher = Random House | isbn = 978-1-4000-6659-9 }}
* {{Cite book| last = Kay | first = Jonathan | year = 2011 | title = [[Among the Truthers|Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground]] | publisher = Harper | isbn = 978-0062004819 }}

{{911ct}}
{{Sept11}}
{{Conspiracy theories}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=August 2010}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:9/11 Truth Movement}}
[[Category:9/11 conspiracy theories|Truth movement]]
[[Category:Activism]]
[[Category:Groups challenging the official accounts of the September 11 attacks|Truth movement]]
[[Category:Aftermath of the September 11 attacks|Truth movement]]
[[Category:2001 establishments in the United States]]

[[bg:Движение за истината за 11 септември]]
[[da:Truth movement]]
[[de:9/11 Truth Movement]]
[[es:Movimiento por la verdad del 11-S]]
[[fr:9/11 Truth Movement]]
[[pt:9/11 Truth Movement]]
[[fi:9/11-totuusliike]]
[[sv:Sanningsrörelsen]]
[[vi:Phong trào đòi sự thật về vụ 11 tháng 9]]

Revision as of 09:06, 25 August 2011

Supporters of the 9/11 Truth movement at a Los Angeles demonstration, October 2007

9/11 Truth movement is the collective name of loosely affiliated organizations and individuals who question the accepted account of the September 11, 2001 attacks.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

Adherents of the movement assert that the explanation of the 9/11 events put forth by the United States government and mainstream media contain significant inconsistencies which suggest, at the least, a cover-up, and at worst, complicity by insiders.

Adherents analyze evidence from the attacks and discuss different theories about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15]

Some of the organizations state that there is evidence that individuals within the United States government may have been either responsible for or knowingly complicit in the September 11 attacks. Motives given include the use of the attacks to initiate the launch of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and in creating the opportunities to curtail civil liberties.[2]

Characteristics

Name

Truth movement sticker

"9/11 Truth movement" is the collective name of loosely affiliated[16][17] organizations and individuals that question whether the United States government, agencies of the United States or individuals within such agencies were either responsible for or purposefully complicit in the September 11 attacks.[3][4][5][6][7][18][19][20] The term is also being used by the adherents of the movement.[21][22] Adherents also call themselves "9/11 Truthers",[23] "9/11 skeptics"[24] or "truth activists",[25] while generally rejecting the term "conspiracy theorists".[16][25]

Adherents

Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds.[1][22][25] The movement draws adherents from people of diverse political beliefs including liberals, conservatives, and libertarians.[3][19][25] A 2010 study of Facebook users affiliated with a 9/11 Truth group known as "We Are Change" found that most members of this group are males in their late 20s. Most members of this group are involved in right-wing politics, particularly with libertarianism and Ron Paul.[26]

Lev Grossman of Time magazine has stated that support for the 9/11 Truth movement is not a "fringe phenomenon", but "a mainstream political reality."[21] However, others, such as Ben Smith of Politico and the Minneapolis Star Tribune have stated that the movement has been "relegated to the fringe".[27][28] The Washington Post editorial staff went further describing the movement as "lunatic fringe."[29] Mark Fenster, a University of Florida law professor and author of the book Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture, says that "the amount of organisation" of the movement is significantly stronger than the organization of the movement related to doubts about the official account of the assassination of former United States President John F. Kennedy,[3] though this is likely the result of new media technologies, such as online social networks, blogs, etc.

The 9/11 Truth movement is active in the United States as well as in other countries.[15]

In 2004, John Buchanan ran for president on a 9/11 Truth platform.[30][31]

Views

Many adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement suspect that United States government insiders played a part in the attacks, or may have known the attacks were imminent, and did nothing to alert others or stop them.[24]

Some within the movement who argue that insiders within the United States government were directly responsible for the September 11 attacks often allege that the attacks were planned and executed in order to provide the U.S. with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East, and, by extension, as a means of consolidating and extending the power of the Bush Administration.[21][22] According to these allegations, this would have given the Bush administration the justification for more widespread abuses of civil liberties and to invade Afghanistan and Iraq to ensure future supplies of oil.[24] In some cases, even in the mainstream media, hawks in the White House, especially former Vice President Dick Cheney, and members of the Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative think tank, have been accused of involvement in or awareness of the alleged plot.[32][33][34]

Many adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement allege that the buildings of the World Trade Center were destroyed by controlled demolition, a theory of major importance for the 9/11 Truth movement.[1][19][35]

Communication

The Internet plays a large role both in the communication between adherents and between local groups of the 9/11 Truth movement and in the dissemination of the views of the movement to the public at large.[2][3][6][21][33]

History

In the years after the September 11 attacks, different interpretations of the events that questioned the account given by the U.S. government were published. Among others, Michael Ruppert[36] and Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker,[37] published criticisms or pointed out purported anomalies of the accepted account of the attacks. French author Jean-Charles Brisard[38] and German authors Mathias Bröckers[39] and Andreas von Bülow[40] published books critical of media reporting and advancing the controlled demolition thesis of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers.

A 9/11 Truth Movement protest sign, October 2009.

In September 2002, the first "Bush Did It!" rallies and marches were held in San Francisco and Oakland, California organized by The All People's Coalition.[41]

In October 2004, the organization 9/11 Truth released a statement, signed by nearly 200 people, including many relatives of people who perished on September 11, 2001, that calls for an investigation into the attacks. It also asserted that unanswered questions would suggest that people within the administration of former President G. W. Bush may have deliberately allowed the attacks to happen. Actor Edward Asner, former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, former assistant secretary of housing Catherine Austin Fitts, author Richard Heinberg, Enver Masud, founder of The Wisdom Fund, professors Richard Falk of the University of California, Mark Crispin Miller of New York University, Douglas Sturm of Bucknell University, Burns H. Weston of the Iowa Law School and others signed the statement. In 2009, Van Jones, a former advisor to President Obama, said he hadn't fully reviewed the statement before he signed and that the petition did not reflect his views "now or ever."[42][43][44]

In 2006, Steven E. Jones, who became a leading academic voice of the demolition theory,[2] published the paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?".[45] He was placed on paid leave by Brigham Young University following what they described as Jones's "increasingly speculative and accusatory" statements in September, 2006, pending a review of his statements and research. Six weeks later, Jones retired from the university.[46]

In the same year, 61 legislators in the U.S. State of Wisconsin signed a petition calling for the dismissal of a University of Wisconsin assistant professor Kevin Barrett, after he joined the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Citing academic freedom, the university provost declined to take action against Barrett.[47][48][49]

Several organizations of family members of people who have died in the attacks are calling for an independent investigation into the attacks.[50] In 2009, a group of people, including 9/11 Truth movement activist Lorie Van Auken and others who have lost friends or relatives in the attack, appealed to the City of New York to investigate the disaster. The organization New York City Coalition for Accountability Now collected signatures to require the New York City Council to place the creation of an investigating commission on the November 2009 election ballot.[51] The group collected more than enough signatures to put the proposal before the voters, but Supreme Court Justice Edward Lehner ruled that the petition overstepped what is allowable by city law, and ruled that, despite wording in the petition to allow for elements ruled invalid to be stricken, it would not be allowed to appear on the ballot.[52][53]

9/11 Commission Report reaction

To the consternation of the families and adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement, many of the questions that the 9/11 Family Steering Committee put to the 9/11 Commission, chaired by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean, were not asked in either the hearings nor in the Commission Report.[54] Lorie Van Auken, one of the Jersey Girls, estimates that only 30% of their questions were answered in the final 9/11 Commission Report, published July 22, 2004.

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee produced a website summarizing the questions they had raised to the Commission, indicating which they believe had been answered satisfactorily, which they believe had been addressed but not answered satisfactorily, and which they believe had been generally ignored in or omitted from the Report.[55]

In addition, the 339-page book The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions by David Ray Griffin, claimed that the report had either omitted information or distorted the truth, providing 115 alleged examples.[56][57][58] He has characterized the 9/11 Commission Report as "a 571-page lie".[59]

On May 26, 2008 adjunct religious studies professor Blair Gadsby began a protest and a hunger strike outside the offices of Senator and Republican Party nominee for President John McCain's office requesting McCain meet with the principal scientists and leaders of the 9/11Truth movement, specifically Richard Gage, Steven Jones, and David Ray Griffin. McCain had written the foreword to the book Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts, published by the magazine Popular Mechanics.[60] Arizona Republican State Senator Karen Johnson joined the protest in support. On June 10 Johnson with Gadsby as her guest and other 9/11 Truth movement members in the audience spoke before the Arizona State Senate espousing the controlled demolition theory and supporting a reopening of the 9/11 investigation.[14][60] In response to a question, McCain said he did not meet Gadsby, adding: "Because I don't take well to threats."[61]

NIST Report reaction

Iron-rich sphere, found in the dust of the World Trade Center, as documented by the United States Geological Survey[62] and RJ LeeGroup, Inc.[63] As noted by RJ Lee in its report, the iron-rich spheres, which are a common component of the WTC dust, are indicative of molten iron, which forms the spheres due to surface tension. The spheres are of interest to the 9/11 Truth movement in its study of the WTC building failures, as the spheres, the proponents contend, are indicative of the presence of temperatures much hotter than office fires,[64] and they are also a common end product of thermitic reactions[65][66]

Following the initial government investigation, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Report (May 2002) NIST Report, numerous responses were written by members of the 9/11 Truth movement. Many of these responses claimed that it ignored key evidence suggesting an explosive demolition, "distorted reality" by using deceptive language and diagrams, and attacked straw man arguments, such as the 2005 article by Jim Hoffman entitled, Building a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century.[67]

In the fall of 2005, Steven Jones, then a professor at Brigham Young University, announced a paper criticizing the NIST Report and describing his hypothesis that the WTC towers had been intentionally demolished by explosives. This paper garnered some mainstream media attention, including an appearance by Jones on MSNBC. This was the first such programming on a major cable news station. As of September 2009, Jones had not published his research in peer-reviewed mainstream journals. Jones was criticized by his university for making his claims public before vetting them through the approved peer review process. He was placed on paid leave and has since retired.[46][68][69] He continues to remain a focus of public interest for his 9/11 research.

Accordingly, in April 2007, some 9/11 victims' family members and some members of the new Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice submitted an additional request for correction to NIST, containing their own views on the defects in the report.[70] NIST responded to this request in September 2007 supporting their original conclusions;[71] the originators of the request wrote back to them in October 2007, asking them to reconsider their response.

Criticism

In 2006, a book critic with Time magazine noted that a major problem with films such as Loose Change and most 9/11 conspiracy theories in general is that "the more one thinks about them, the more one realizes how much they depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis, quotes taken out of context, and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses".[72] Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone assessed that the movement "gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration" and expressed concerns about the number of people who believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories.[73]

Stand-up comedian Bill Maher has repeatedly denounced 9/11 conspiracy theorists as "lunatics."

Linguist Noam Chomsky stated that, regarding US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, "the evidence that has been produced is essentially worthless" and while the American government stood to benefit from the incident, "every authoritarian system in the world gained from September 11th." He argues that the enormous risk of an information leak, "it is a very porous system and secrets are very hard to keep", and consequences of exposure for the Republican party would have made such a conspiracy foolish to attempt. He dismisses observations cited by conspiracy proponents saying, "if you look at the evidence, anybody who knows anything about the sciences would instantly discount that evidence," arguing that even when a scientific experiment is carried out repeatedly in a controlled environment, phenomena and coincidences remain that are unexplained.[74]

Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineering professor Thomas W. Eagar was at first unwilling to acknowledge the concerns of the movement, saying "if (the argument) gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." In response to Steven E. Jones publishing a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eager said that adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement would use the reverse scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, as they "determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion.[75]

Former President Bill Clinton dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories saying "Nine-eleven was NOT an inside job, it was an Osama Bin Laden job with 19 people from Saudi Arabia, they murdered 3000 Americans and other foreigners including Muslims".[76]

In a research paper written in 2008, Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule conclude that theories supported by 9/11 truth movement members "typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy...those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology..."[77]

Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers", Bill Moyers states they "...threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right's sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the "truthers" cherry-picked a few supposed "anomalies" to build an "inside-job" story line".[78]

Organizations

Since the publication of the official reports, a number of interconnected 9/11 Truth movement organizations have been formed.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Two people holding a banner of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an organization of architectural and engineering professionals[79] who support the controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center and are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7.[10][80] The group is collecting signatures for a petition to the United States Congress that demands "a truly independent investigation with subpoena power" of the September 11 attacks, which, according to the organization, should include an inquiry into the possible use of explosives in the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.[81][82] Richard Gage, a San Francisco Bay area based architect,[83] founded Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth in 2006.[2][84]

Investigations by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) have concluded that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impacts of the planes and of the fires that resulted from them.[45][85] Gage criticized the government agency NIST for not having investigated the complete sequence of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers[86] and claims that "the official explanation of the total destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers has explicitly failed to address the massive evidence for explosive demolition."[87] To support its position, the group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth points to the "free fall" pace of the collapse of the buildings, the "lateral ejection of steel", and to the "mid-air pulverization of concrete", among other things.[88]

9/11 Truth

This organization was launched in June 2004 and has become the central portal for all the 9/11 Truth movement organizations. It is run by Janice Matthews (Executive Director),[89][90] David Kubiak (International Campaign Advisor)[91] and Mike Berger (Media Coordinator),[92] among others, and its advisory board includes Steven E. Jones, Barrie Zwicker and Faiz Khan.[93]

The organization co-sponsored opinion polls conducted by the U.S. market research and opinion polling firm Zogby International that have shown substantial numbers of people believing the government did not tell the full truth about the September 11 attacks. Of the people surveyed, those in lower education and income brackets were more likely to express disbelief in government accounts, rather than those in higher income/education brackets.[94][95]

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

The original Scholars for 9/11 Truth, founded by James H. Fetzer and Steven Jones on December 15, 2005, was a group of individuals of varying backgrounds and expertise who rejected the mainstream media and government account of the September 11 attacks.[3][96] Initially the group invited many ideas and hypotheses to be considered, however, leading members soon came to feel that the inclusion of some theories advocated by Fetzer—such as the use of directed energy weapons or small nuclear bombs to destroy the Twin Towers—were insufficiently supported by evidence and were exposing the group to ridicule. By December 2006, Jones and several others set up a new scholars group titled Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, whose focus was in the use of the scientific method in analysis.[97] The original members took a vote on which group to join and the majority voted to move to the new group.[98] By 2007, James Fetzer had been openly rejected by the 9/11 Truth Movement, banned from and criticized on popular forums[99][100][101][102] and no longer invited to public 9/11 events.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice (STJ) formed in January 2007 and is "a group of scholars and supporters endeavoring to address the unanswered questions of the September 11, 2001 attack" with a focus on scientific research. The group is composed of more than 900 members,[103] including Richard Gage, Steven E. Jones, Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, Peter Phillips, former Congressman Daniel Hamburg, and Kevin Ryan. Most members support the conspiracy theory that the World Trade Center Towers and the third skyscraper, WTC 7, were destroyed through explosive demolition.

In 2008 and 2009, several Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice members published essays in science and engineering journals. In April 2008, a letter by members Steven E. Jones, Frank Legge, Kevin Ryan, Anthony Szamboti and James Gourley, was published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal.[104] In July 2008, an article by Ryan, Gourley and Jones was published in the Environmentalist.[105] In October 2008, a comment by STJ member James R. Gourley describing what he considers fundamental errors in a Bažant and Verdure paper was included in an issue of the Journal of Engineering Mechanics.[106] And in April 2009, Danish chemist and STJ member Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, some also STJ members, published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, titled, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'. The paper concludes that chips consisting of unreacted and partially reacted super-thermite, or nano-thermite, appear to be present in samples of the dust.[65][107]

9/11 CitizensWatch

The group was formed in 2002 by John Judge and Kyle Hence and, along with the Family Steering Committee, played an active role in calling for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, and monitoring the commission closely.[108]

William Rodriguez at American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 and the NeoCon Agenda in Los Angeles, California, June 24–25, 2006.

9/11 Commission Campaign

Founded in 2011 by Senator Mike Gravel, the 9/11 Commission Campaign's objective is to enact subpoena-capable, state-level commissions through state ballot initiatives, namely in Oregon, Alaska and California.[109] These commissions are envisioned as citizen-driven, independent organizations that would form a semi-unified grassroots national presence by exercising joint powers authority.

Hispanic Victims Group

The Hispanic Victims Group is a group created after the 9/11 attacks, founded by William Rodriguez,[110] an adherent of the 9/11 Truth movement. The group was one of the key forces behind the creation of the 9/11 Commission.[108] William Rodriguez, as founder of the group, was a member of the Families Advisory Council for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation.[111]

Conferences

Members of the 9/11 truth organizations, such as 911truth.org and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, regularly hold meetings and conferences to discuss ongoing research about 9/11 and to strategize about how best to achieve their goals. Many of these conferences are organized by 911truth.org, and some have been covered by the international media.[112]

Internal critique

While there is general agreement within the movement that individuals within the United States government may have played a role in some aspects of the attacks, whether it be cover-up or complicity, alternative theories differ about what may have happened.[3] There have been a number of articles and responses written by members critiquing the methods and theories of other members in the Journal of 9/11 Studies.[113] Sites such as 911 Research and 911 Review typically include essays or pages analyzing claims in the movement which are erroneous, have little basis in evidence, or which appear to misinform readers.[114][115]

While Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice states that they advocate the use of the scientific method and civil research activities over public debate,[116] Jim Fetzer's group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, "has emphasized that science can only proceed by considering a full range of alternative hypotheses", and held a conference which invited the public to "review the most hotly debated 9/11 theories and evidence".[117] The range of hypotheses Fetzer considers as "alternative" were described in a Madison Times article on the conference held by Fetzer's group, which stated: "By Sunday the conference had covered weather control, weapons from space, and the idea that the planes that struck the towers never existed at all."[118][119]

Media

Books

A prominent author of the 9/11 Truth movement literature is theologian David Ray Griffin. His two books, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (March 2004), which claimed to outline a methodical, deductive framework for researching 9/11, and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (October 2004), became best-sellers.[120] His Debunking 9/11 Debunking (May 2007) looks at the way magazines such as Popular Mechanics have sought to debunk the alternative 9/11 theories.[121] His 2008 book, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the cover-up, and the exposé, was written to update his original book, The New Pearl Harbor, reflecting information and insights from five major developments that have occurred since his original publication,[122] while The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False, published in 2009, examines the credibility of the official investigations into and hypotheses about the destruction of the third skyscraper, WTC 7, focusing on the final official report published in November 2008.[123]

In September 2004, the interactive "Complete 9/11 Timeline" website by Paul Thompson, which is a collection of mainstream media reports presented chronologically, was made into the book The Terror Timeline.[124]

Films

Films made by people associated with the 9/11 Truth movement include:

Details

These documentaries present a range of alternative theories about how the attacks might have been carried out.

9/11 Press for Truth (2006) documents the struggle by the Jersey Widows to open a full investigation of the events, and their frustration while monitoring the 9/11 Commission as part of the Family Steering Committee.

Alex Jones, 9/11 and New World Order conspiracy theorists are the subject of the documentary film New World Order directed by Luke Meyer and Andrew Neel that debuted on the Independent Film Channel on May 26, 2009. The documentary, while not endorsing the movement, is described as giving the movement "more sympathetic, or less critical, airing than they've yet had (except among the converted)".[129][130]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Feuer, Alan (June 5, 2006). "500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11". The New York Times. Retrieved May 24, 2009. the movement known as "9/11 Truth", a society of skeptics and scientists
  2. ^ a b c d e Rudin, Mike (July 4, 2008). "The evolution of a conspiracy theory". BBC. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g Barber, Peter (June 7, 2008). "The truth is out there". Financial Times. Retrieved May 23, 2009. an army of sceptics, collectively described as the 9/11 Truth movement
  4. ^ a b Powell, Michael (September 8, 2006). "The Disbelievers". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 30, 2009. The loose agglomeration known as the '9/11 Truth Movement'
  5. ^ a b Barry, Ellen (September 10, 2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather in N.Y." Los Angeles Times. Retrieved May 30, 2009. a group known as the 9/11 Truth Movement {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  6. ^ a b c Hunt, H.E. (November 19, 2008). "The 30 greatest conspiracy theories - part 1". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved May 30, 2009. A large group of people - collectively called the 9/11 Truth Movement
  7. ^ a b Kay, Jonathan (April 25, 2009). "Richard Gage: 9/11 truther extraordinaire". Financial Post. Retrieved August 4, 2010. The '9/11 Truth Movement,' as it is now commonly called
  8. ^ Ravensbergen, Jan (May 2, 2010). "9/11 skeptics to speak at UQAM". Montreal Gazette. Retrieved May 3, 2010. two leading voices of what's known as the 9/11 truth movement [dead link]
  9. ^ Morales, Frank (June 11, 2009). "9/11 Truth comes home; Pols back new investigation". The Villager. Retrieved June 21, 2009.
  10. ^ a b Olivier, Clint (May 26, 2009). "Controversial Group Re–Examines 9/11 In Clovis". KMPH Fox News. Retrieved May 28, 2009.
  11. ^ Lake, Eli (April 10, 2008). "U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11". The New York Sun. Retrieved June 21, 2009.
  12. ^ "Citizens Petition New York Attorney General to Open 9-11 Inquiry". Environment News Service. October 29, 2004. Retrieved June 21, 2009.
  13. ^ Siegel, Jefferson (June 18, 2008). "'Pentagon Papers senator' calls for new 9/11 probe". The Villager. Retrieved June 21, 2009.
  14. ^ a b "Sen. Karen Johnson's floor speech about 9/11". East Valley Tribune. June 9, 2008. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
  15. ^ a b Sutton, Tori (February 18, 2010). "Seeking the truth about 9/11". Stratford Gazette. Retrieved February 19, 2010.
  16. ^ a b Bunch, Sonny (September 24, 2007). "The Truthers Are Out There". The Weekly Standard.
  17. ^ Manjoo, Farhad (June 27, 2006). "The 9/11 deniers". Salon.
  18. ^ Kennedy, Gene (September 8, 2006). "BYU Professor on Paid Leave for 9-11 Theory". KSL TV. Jones is a physics professor involved in what's called the "9-11 Truth Movement."
  19. ^ a b c Molé, Phil (2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement Perspective". Skeptic. 12 (4). Retrieved June 2, 2009. a larger coalition known as the "9/11 Truth Movement,"
  20. ^ Sales, Nancy Jo (August 2006). "Click Here for Conspiracy". Vanity Fair. Retrieved June 2, 2009. a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement
  21. ^ a b c d Grossman, Lev (September 3, 2006). "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away". Time.
  22. ^ a b c Harvey, Adam (September 3, 2006). "9/11 myths busted". Courier Mail. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  23. ^ Gravois, John (June 23, 2006). "Professors of Paranoia?". The Chronicle of Higher Education.
  24. ^ a b c "Conspiracy theories: The Speculation". CBC. October 29, 2003. Retrieved June 2, 2009.
  25. ^ a b c d Curiel, Jonathan (September 3, 2006). "The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 2, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  26. ^ Sommers, Scott (2011). "Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? An Empirical Study on Political Affiliation and Conspiratorial Thinking". Skeptic Magazine. 16 (2). Millennium Press, Inc.: 13–16.
  27. ^ Star Tribune: Newspaper of the Twin Cities (Minneapolis, MN) - September 6, 2006 Author: Bob von Sternberg ; Staff Writer Edition: METRO Section: NEWS Page: 1A.
  28. ^ "Culture Of Conspiracy: The Birthers". CBS News. March 1, 2009.
  29. ^ "A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy". The Washington Post. March 8, 2010.
  30. ^ Jonas, Jillian (January 25, 2004). "Analysis: Challenge by 'honest Republican'". United Press International. Retrieved May 29, 2011.
  31. ^ Archive of John Buchanan.org On September 1,2000, before Mr. Bush took office, the Project for a New American Century proposed the invasions, without provocation or attack, of Afghanistan and Iraq. The motive? 'to protect America's oil interests.' The signatories to that sinister plan - Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle, to name but a few – cleverly and dishonorably set the stage for all that would follow, including the horrifying spectacle of 9/11, when they noted that since well-fed and materially-comfortable Americans would lack the will and focus to fight such 'interventionist' wars - now known as 'The Bush Doctrine' - there must be a galvanizing incident on the order of Pearl Harbor.
  32. ^ Sullivan, Will (September 3, 2006). "Viewing 9/11 From a Grassy Knoll - You won't believe what the conspiracy theorists are claiming-or will you?". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved May 24, 2009.
  33. ^ a b Jacobson, Mark (March 20, 2006). "The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll". New York Magazine. Retrieved June 2, 2009.
  34. ^ Manjoo, Farhad (August 7, 2008). "The Anthrax Truth Movement". Slate.
  35. ^ Tobin, Hugh (May 21, 2008). "Conspiracy theory lunacy". Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
  36. ^ Brzezinski, Zbigniew (October 1, 2004). Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. New Society Publishers. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  37. ^ Ray, David. "Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11". New Society Publishers. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  38. ^ Shaffer, Anthony (2002). "Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy Saudi Arabia And The Failed Search For Bin Laden". Nation Books. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  39. ^ Ray, David (2006). "Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories, and the Secrets of 9/11". Progressive Press. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  40. ^ Die CIA und der 11. September. Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste. Piper. ISBN 978-3492045452. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  41. ^ Bush Did It: Pictures From 9/11 Protest in Oakland, by Z, September 14, 2002, San Francisco Bay Area Indymedia website.
  42. ^ Rossmeier, Vincent (September 11, 2009). "Would you still sign the 9/11 Truth petition?". Salon. Retrieved September 11, 2009.
  43. ^ Keating, Joshua; Downie, James (September 10, 2009). "The World's Most Persistent Conspiracy Theories". Foreign Policy. Retrieved September 13, 2009.
  44. ^ Burnham, Michael (September 8, 2009). "Embattled Van Jones Quits, but 'Czar' Debates Rage On". The New York Times. Retrieved April 23, 2010.
  45. ^ a b Jim Dwyer (September 2, 2006). "2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11". New York Times. Retrieved April 30, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  46. ^ a b Walch, Tad (September 8, 2006). "BYU places '9/11 truth' professor on paid leave". Deseret Morning News. Retrieved January 4, 2009. Sullivan, Will (September 11, 2006). "BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor". U.S. News & World Report. www.usnews.com. Retrieved April 26, 2009. "BYU Professor Who Believes WTC Brought Down by Explosives Resigns". Fox News. October 21, 2006. Retrieved May 15, 2009. Walch, Tad (October 22, 2006). "BYU professor in dispute over 9/11 will retire". Deseret Morning News. Retrieved May 15, 2009. "Steven E. Jones. Retired Professor". Brigham Young University. Retrieved May 6, 2009.
  47. ^ Ruethling, Gretchen (August 1, 2006). "A Skeptic on 9/11 Prompts Questions on Academic Freedom". New York Times. Retrieved May 17, 2009.
  48. ^ "Wisconsin academic: 9/11 report a fraud". CNN. November 20, 2006. Retrieved May 7, 2009.
  49. ^ Asquith, Christina (September 5, 2006). "Who really blew up the twin towers?". The Guardian. London. Retrieved May 6, 2009.
  50. ^ Diffalah, Sarah (July 23, 2009). "11/09 : le crash du Pentagone toujours contesté". Nouvel Observateur. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  51. ^ "Group calls for renewed Sept. 11 probe". United Press International. August 10, 2009. Retrieved August 12, 2009.
  52. ^ "New York Judges Fight New Investigation of 9/11". Salem-News.com. October 13, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2010.
  53. ^ "Christopher Burke, et. al against Michael McSweeney, City Clerk, and the Board of Elections, City of New York". Supreme Court of the State of New York. scribd.com. October 8, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2010.
  54. ^ de Vries, Lloyd (July 20, 2004). "9/11 Report: The Open Question". CBS News. Retrieved June 1, 2009.
  55. ^ "The Family Steering Committee". 911independentcommission.org. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  56. ^ Harmanci, Reyhan (March 30, 2006). "An inside job?". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved September 17, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  57. ^ Abrams, Joseph (July 15, 2008). "Critics Demand Resignation of U.N. Official Who Wants Probe of 9/11 'Inside Job' Theories". Fox News. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  58. ^ Bhaerman, Steve (June 14–20, 2006). "Unquestioned Answers". Bohemian. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  59. ^ Solomon, Evan (August 25, 2006). "9/11: Truth, Lies and Conspiracy". CBC News. Archived from the original on June 11, 2008. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  60. ^ a b "Lawmaker asks McCain to talk with 9/11 theorists". Arizona Republic - Azcentral.com. June 3, 2008. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  61. ^ "McCain doesn't want to impeach Bush". Rawstory.com. June 26, 2008. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  62. ^ "Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust". United States Geological Survey. September 23, 2005. Retrieved June 29, 2010.
  63. ^ "WTC Dust Signature Report" (PDF). RJ LeeGroup, Inc. December 2003. Retrieved June 29, 2010.
  64. ^ Phillips, Peter (2007). "Chapter 2: Censored Déjà Vu". Censored 2008: The Top 25 Censored Stories. Seven Stories Press. p. 140. ISBN 1583227725, 9781583227725. Retrieved August 6, 2010. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
  65. ^ a b Harrit, Niels H. "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" (PDF). Retrieved October 11, 2010.
  66. ^ Abel, Jennifer (January 29, 2008). "Theories of 9/11". Hartford Advocate. Archived from the original on April 30, 2008. Retrieved August 6, 2010.
  67. ^ "KPFA 94.1, Guns and Butter". Kpfa.org. September 28, 2005. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  68. ^ Walch, Tad (September 8, 2006). "BYU places "9/11 truth" professor on paid leave". Deseret Morning News.
  69. ^ Sullivan, Will (September 11, 2006). "BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor". US News & World Report.
  70. ^ "Request for Correction". Google.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  71. ^ "Communication re Information Quality Request #07-06" (PDF). Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  72. ^ Lev Grossman (September 3, 2006). "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away". Time Magazine.
  73. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2006). "The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper". Politics. Rolling Stone. Retrieved September 29, 2006.[dead link]
  74. ^ Greenwald, Glenn (June 20, 2007). "What "truly motivates" George W. Bush?". Salon.com. Retrieved January 24, 2010.
  75. ^ Walch, Tad (2006). "Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones". Utah news. Deseret News Publishing Company. Retrieved September 9, 2006.
  76. ^ "Bill Clinton Undeterred By 9/11 Hecklers". ABC News. January 31, 2008. Retrieved January 19, 2010.
  77. ^ "Conspiracy Theories by Cass Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule :: SSRN". Papers.ssrn.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  78. ^ Moyers, Bill. "Is This a Private Fight or Can Anyone Get In It?". Common Dreams. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  79. ^ Wagh, Manasee (March 25, 2011). "Group's 9/11 theories draw controversy and indignation". phillyBurbs.com. Retrieved April 15, 2011.
  80. ^ Sutcliffe, Thomas (July 7, 2008). "Yet more tall stories with no foundation". Independent Extra. London. Retrieved May 24, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  81. ^ "Un arquitecto estadounidense presenta en Madrid su versión alternativa al 11-S". Telecinco. November 8, 2008. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  82. ^ Mounir, Roderic (November 13, 2008). "Les attentats du 11-Septembre: «une démolition contrôlée!»". Le Courrier. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  83. ^ Moskowitz, Eric (November 29, 2007). "Airing of 9/11 film ignites debate". The Boston Globe. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  84. ^ Barber, Peter (June 7, 2008). "The truth is out there". Financial Times. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  85. ^ Glanz, James (March 29, 2002). "Towers Fell as Intense Fire Beat Defenses, Report Says". New York Times. Retrieved May 23, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  86. ^ Potocki, P. Joseph (August 27, 2008). "Down the 9-11 Rabbit Hole". Bohemian. Retrieved May 25, 2009.
  87. ^ Beam, Alex (January 14, 2008). "The truth is out there . . . Isn't it?". The Boston Globe. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  88. ^ Beam, Christopher (April 8, 2009). "Heated Controversy". Slate. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  89. ^ William M. Arkin (May 26, 2006). "9/11 Truth? I Don't Think So". The Washington Post.[dead link]
  90. ^ Hargrove, Thomas (August 1, 2006). "Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy". Scripps Howard News Service. Retrieved December 18, 2009.
  91. ^ "Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act..." Zogby International. August 30, 2004. Archived from the original on August 31, 2004. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  92. ^ "Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Explanations; "Young and Restless" Star Weighs in on Political Topics". CNN. March 22, 2006.
  93. ^ "911truth.org "About Us"".
  94. ^ "American Thinking Toward The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks". Zogby International. May 24, 2006.[dead link]
  95. ^ "Zogby Poll (May 2006)".[dead link]
  96. ^ Pope, Justin (August 6, 2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theories Persist, Thrive". Washington Post. Retrieved September 17, 2009. {{cite news}}: More than one of |work= and |journal= specified (help)
  97. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice". Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice.
  98. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice".
  99. ^ hsgsj (February 27, 2007). "Dr. James Fetzer and his "Lying Eyes"". 911blogger.com.
  100. ^ Arabesque (February 28, 2007). "9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples". 911blogger.com.
  101. ^ Dem Bruce Lee Stylez! (March 15, 2008). "ALERT: FETZER SPEAKING AT RON PAUL MARCH!! Von Kleist to MC". TruthAction.org.
  102. ^ Victoria Ashley (August 13, 2007). "Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11, James Fetzer". 911Research.com.
  103. ^ "STH911 Members". Stj911.org. Retrieved July 30, 2011.
  104. ^ Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley (2008). "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction". Bentham Science Publishers.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  105. ^ Kevin R. Ryan, James R. Gourley, Steven E. Jones (2008). "Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials". Springer Netherlands, The Environmentalist, Online First.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  106. ^ James R. Gourley (2008). "Discussion of "Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions" by Zdenek P. Bažant and Mathieu Verdure". ASCE Publications, Reston, VA.
  107. ^ Politiken: Konspirationsteorier om 9/11 får nyt liv, Jyllands Posten: Forskere: Sprængstof i støvet fra WTC, Ekstra Bladet: Mystik om WTC: Nano-termit i tårne, Kristeligt Dagblad: Dansker genopliver konspirationsteori om 11. september, Videnskab: Dansk forsker: Eksplosivt nanomateriale fundet i støvet fra World Trade Center[dead link]. The journal Videnskab is sponsored by the Danish Ministry for Science and Technology.
  108. ^ a b "The Christian Science Monitor - A key force behind the 9/11 commission". Csmonitor.com. March 25, 2004. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  109. ^ "About the 9-11 Commission Campaign". 9-11cc.org. July 3, 2011. Retrieved July 3, 2011.
  110. ^ Senior, Jennifer. "«The Memorial Warriors»". New York magazine. Retrieved August 14, 2009.
  111. ^ "Chairman Whitehead Announces LMDC Advisory Councils". Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. January 31, 2002.
  112. ^ "Canada National Post: A theory that just won't die". Canada.com. July 28, 2006. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  113. ^ "Letters". Journal of 9/11 Studies. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  114. ^ 9-11 Review: Parade of Errors
  115. ^ "911 Research Essays". 911research.wtc7.net. March 14, 2010. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  116. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice: About". Stj911.org. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  117. ^ James Fetzer (July 6, 2010). "Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op". Jamesfetzer.blogspot.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  118. ^ 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too by Ben Popper, Madison Times [dead link]
  119. ^ The Capital Times: 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too (Re: "DisinfoFest07") Truthmove discussion forum
  120. ^ Reid, Sue (February 9, 2007). "An explosion of disbelief - fresh doubts over 9/11". Daily Mail. London. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  121. ^ "Debunking 9/11 debunking: an answer ... - Google Books". Books.google.com. December 31, 2007. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  122. ^ Griffin, David (2008). The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé. Olive Branch Press. ISBN 1-56656-729-7. {{cite book}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help)
  123. ^ Griffin, David (2009). The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False. Olive Branch Press. ISBN 1-56656-786-6. {{cite book}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help)
  124. ^ Knight, Peter (2008). "Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States" (PDF). New German Critique. 35 (1). Retrieved June 9, 2009. {{cite journal}}: More than one of |number= and |issue= specified (help)
  125. ^ "Tgc: The Great Conspiracy". Greatconspiracy.ca. September 1, 2004. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  126. ^ "MARTIAL LAW-9/11: THE RISE OF THE POLICE STATE". Infowars.com. June 8, 2005. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  127. ^ "Watch 911 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions (1 of 3)". 911 We Know. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  128. ^ "AE911Truth Online Store". Ae911truth.net. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  129. ^ Jim Ridley (May 20, 2009). "Doc Hangs with Conspiracy Theorists in New World Order Village Voice May 19, 2009". Villagevoice.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  130. ^ Movie Review New World Order (2009) The New York Times May 26, 2009.

Media coverage

Book