Jump to content

9/11 truth movement: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Conferences: conferences seems logical subsection for organizations, internal critique should be its own section
Tag: section blanking
Line 136: Line 136:


==Media==
==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 |location=London |accessdate=2009-09-17}}</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=December 31, 2007 |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 |url=http://ngc.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/35/1_103/165.pdf |format=Pdf |first=Peter |last=Knight |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 |accessdate=2009-06-09}}</ref>

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

Revision as of 15:48, 1 February 2012

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

On the morning of Tuesday September 11, 2001, terrorists from al-Qaeda hijacked four passenger jets, intentionally crashing two into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City causing both towers to collapse. The hijackers crashed another into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. The fourth jet crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Adherents of the 9/11 Truth Movement claim that the mainstream explanation of the 9/11 events contains significant inconsistencies which suggest, at the least, a cover-up, and at worst, complicity by insiders.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

Truthers 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 assert 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 suggested by the movement 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.[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

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.[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 President George 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 University of Iowa College of Law 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 lecturer 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 9/11 Truth 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. 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.

Opponents

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.[72]

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.[73]

Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers", Bill Moyers has quoted journalist Robert Parry "...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".[74]

Al Qaeda has sharply criticized Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over his suggestions that the U.S. government was behind the Sept. 11 attacks as "ridiculous."[75]

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.
See also: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an organization of architectural and engineering professionals[76] 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][77] 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.[78][79] Richard Gage, a San Francisco Bay area based architect,[80] founded Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth in 2006.[2][81]

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][82] Gage criticized the government agency NIST for not having investigated the complete sequence of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers[83] 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."[84] 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.[85]

9/11 Truth

9/11 Truth was launched in June 2004 and has become a central portal for many 9/11 Truth movement organizations. It is run by Janice Matthews (Executive Director),[86][87] David Kubiak (International Campaign Advisor)[88] and Mike Berger (Media Coordinator),[89] among others, and its advisory board includes Steven E. Jones, Barrie Zwicker and Faiz Khan.[90]

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.[91][92]

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][93] 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.[94] The original members took a vote on which group to join and the majority voted to move to the new group.[95] By 2007, James Fetzer had been openly rejected by the 9/11 Truth Movement, banned from and criticized on popular forums[96][97][98][99] 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,[100] 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.[101] In July 2008, an article by Ryan, Gourley and Jones was published in the Environmentalist.[102] 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.[103] 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 nano-thermite ('super-thermite') appear to be present in samples of the dust.[65][104]

9/11 CitizensWatch

Main article: 9/11 Citizens Watch

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.[105]

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.[106] 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 article: William Rodriguez

The Hispanic Victims Group is a group created after the 9/11 attacks, founded by William Rodriguez,[107] an adherent of the 9/11 Truth movement. The group was one of the key forces behind the creation of the 9/11 Commission.[105] William Rodriguez, as founder of the group, was a member of the Families Advisory Council for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation.[108]

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.[109]

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.[110] 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.[111][112]

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,[113] 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".[114] The range of hypotheses considered at the conference held by Fetzer's group was described in a Madison Times article, which stated: "Saturday focused on many of the more popular theories, beginning with inconsistencies at the site of the Pentagon crash and moving on to a controlled demolition of the towers. 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."[115][116]

Media

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)".[117][118]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Feuer, Alan (June 5, 2006). "500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11". 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". 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
  6. ^ a b c Hunt, H.E. (November 19, 2008). "The 30 greatest conspiracy theories - part 1". 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". 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". 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". 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". Weekly Standard. Retrieved September 19, 2011.
  17. ^ Manjoo, Farhad (June 27, 2006). "The 9/11 deniers". Salon. Retrieved September 19, 2010.
  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. The Sunday Mail (Qld).
  23. ^ Gravois, John (June 23, 2006). "Professors of Paranoia?". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved September 19, 2011.
  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.
  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". Washington Post. March 8, 2010.
  30. ^ Jonas, Jillian (January 25, 2004). "Analysis: Challenge by 'honest Republican'". United Press International. Retrieved May 29, 2011.
  31. ^ Buchanan, John. "Is George Bush guilty of treason?". Archived from the original on March 26, 2004. Retrieved September 19, 2011. 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". 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.
  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 news}}: |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?". The San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  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. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2006). "The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper". Politics. Rolling Stone. Retrieved September 29, 2006.[dead link]
  73. ^ Walch, Tad (2006). "Controversy dogs Y.'s Jones". Utah news. Deseret News Publishing Company. Retrieved September 9, 2006.
  74. ^ Moyers, Bill. "Is This a Private Fight or Can Anyone Get In It?". Common Dreams. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  75. ^ Youssef, Maamoun. "Al Qaeda says Iran's 9/11 theory 'ridiculous'". Associated Press. Retrieved September 29, 2011.
  76. ^ Wagh, Manasee (March 25, 2011). "Group's 9/11 theories draw controversy and indignation". phillyBurbs.com. Retrieved April 15, 2011.
  77. ^ Sutcliffe, Thomas (July 7, 2008). "Yet more tall stories with no foundation". Independent Extra. London: The Independent. Retrieved May 24, 2009.
  78. ^ "Un arquitecto estadounidense presenta en Madrid su versión alternativa al 11-S". Telecinco. November 8, 2008. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  79. ^ Mounir, Roderic (November 13, 2008). "Les attentats du 11-Septembre: «une démolition contrôlée!»". Le Courrier. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  80. ^ Moskowitz, Eric (November 29, 2007). "Airing of 9/11 film ignites debate". Boston Globe. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  81. ^ Barber, Peter (June 7, 2008). "The truth is out there". Financial Times. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  82. ^ Glanz, James (March 29, 2002). "Towers Fell as Intense Fire Beat Defenses, Report Says". New York Times. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  83. ^ Potocki, P. Joseph (August 27, 2008). "Down the 9-11 Rabbit Hole". Bohemian. Retrieved May 25, 2009.
  84. ^ Beam, Alex (January 14, 2008). "The truth is out there . . . Isn't it?". The Boston Globe. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  85. ^ Beam, Christopher (April 8, 2009). "Heated Controversy". Slate. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  86. ^ Arkin, William M. (May 26, 2006). "9/11 Truth? I Don't Think So". Washington Post.[dead link]
  87. ^ Hargrove, Thomas (August 1, 2006). "Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy". Scripps Howard News Service. Retrieved December 18, 2009.
  88. ^ "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.
  89. ^ "Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Explanations; "Young and Restless" Star Weighs in on Political Topics". CNN. March 22, 2006.
  90. ^ "911truth.org "About Us"".
  91. ^ "American Thinking Toward The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks". Zogby International. May 24, 2006.[dead link]
  92. ^ "Zogby Poll (May 2006)".[dead link]
  93. ^ Pope, Justin (August 6, 2006). "9/11 Conspiracy Theories Persist, Thrive". Washington Post. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  94. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice". Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice.
  95. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice".
  96. ^ hsgsj (February 27, 2007). "Dr. James Fetzer and his "Lying Eyes"". 911blogger.com.
  97. ^ Arabesque (February 28, 2007). "9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples". 911blogger.com.
  98. ^ Dem Bruce Lee Stylez! (March 15, 2008). "Alert: Fetzer Speaking at Ron Paul March!! Von Kleist to MC". TruthAction.org.
  99. ^ Victoria Ashley (August 13, 2007). "Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11, James Fetzer". 911Research.com.
  100. ^ "STH911 Members". Stj911.org. Retrieved July 30, 2011.
  101. ^ Jones, Steven E.; Legge, Frank M.; Ryan, Kevin R.; Szamboti, Anthony F.; Gourley, James R. (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)
  102. ^ Ryan, Kevin R.; Gourley, James R.; Jones, Steven E. (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)
  103. ^ 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.
  104. ^ 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.
  105. ^ a b "The Christian Science Monitor - A key force behind the 9/11 commission". Csmonitor.com. March 25, 2004. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  106. ^ "About the 9-11 Commission Campaign". 9-11cc.org. July 3, 2011. Retrieved July 3, 2011.
  107. ^ Senior, Jennifer. "The Memorial Warriors". New York Magazine. Retrieved August 14, 2009.
  108. ^ "Chairman Whitehead Announces LMDC Advisory Councils". Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. January 31, 2002.
  109. ^ "Canada National Post: A theory that just won't die". Canada.com. July 28, 2006. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  110. ^ "Letters". Journal of 9/11 Studies. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  111. ^ 9-11 Review: Parade of Errors
  112. ^ "911 Research Essays". 911research.wtc7.net. March 14, 2010. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  113. ^ "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice: About". Stj911.org. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  114. ^ James Fetzer (July 6, 2010). "Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op". Jamesfetzer.blogspot.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  115. ^ Popper, Ben. "9/11 doubters doubt each other, too". Madison Times.[dead link]
  116. ^ The Capital Times: 9/11 doubters doubt each other, too (Re: "DisinfoFest07") Truthmove discussion forum
  117. ^ Ridley, Jim (May 20, 2009). "Doc Hangs with Conspiracy Theorists in New World Order Village Voice May 19, 2009". Villagevoice.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  118. ^ "Movie Review New World Order". New York Times. May 26, 2009.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to 9/11 Truth Movement.

Media coverage

Book

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=9/11_truth_movement&oldid=474411364"