Browse by Category
Graphic image for 9/11 foreknowledge
Graphic: unanswered questions
Graphic of paper shredder- destruction of evidence
Graphic: conflict of interest
Cui bono graphic
Alleged Hijacker graphic
9/11 Commission Shield

9/11 Commission

The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True

In The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (2004), I summarized dozens of facts and reports that cast doubt on the official story about 9/11. Then in The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (2005a), I discussed the way these various facts and reports were treated by the 9/11 Commission, namely, by distorting or simply omitting them. I have also taken this big-picture approach, with its cumulative argument, in my previous essays and lectures on 9/11 (Griffin, 2005b and 2005d).[1] This approach, which shows every aspect of the official story to be problematic, provides the most effective challenge to the official story.

But this way of presenting the evidence has one great limitation, especially when used in lectures and essays: It means that the treatment of every particular issue must be quite brief, hence superficial. People can thereby be led to suspect that a more thorough treatment of any particular issue might show the official story to be plausible after all.

In the present essay, I focus on one question: why the Twin Towers and building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed. One advantage of this focus, besides the fact that it allows us to go into considerable detail, is that the destruction of the World Trade Center provides one of the best windows into the truth about 9/11. Another advantage of this focus is that it will allow us to look at revelations contained in the 9/11 oral histories, which were recorded… Continue reading

ABLE DANGER and the 9/11 Whitewash

by reprehensor

Source: DailyKos

On Wednesday, February 15th, 2006, LTC Anthony Shaffer submitted an amazing written statement detailing his involvement with ABLE DANGER to Congress. You can download a PDF of the statement here , and I have made an HTML version here . For those people who are new to the ABLE DANGER (AD), story, I can’t think of a better starting point.

The idea was to take the ‘best and brightest’ military operators, intelligence officers, technicians and planners from the Special Operations Command (SOCOM), the U.S. Army and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), in an entrepreneurial endeavor, much like bringing the best minds and capabilities from Ford Motor Company, General Motors and Daimler-Chrysler to focus on a single challenge. In the case of ABLE DANGER, the challenge was to discover the global ‘body’ of Al Qaeda – then, with this knowledge, prepare military and intelligence “options” that would be supported by the “actionable information” that was being produced by the project. – Prepared Statement Of LTC Shaffer, 2/15/06.

That was the idea.

reprehensor’s diary :: :: And they had successes. Most notoriously identifying a threat in Yemen that may have saved lives in the USS Cole bombing, and identifying Mohammed Atta prior to 9/11; this once again reiterated in the February 15th Congressional hearing by a contractor, James D. Smith, who worked at Orion Scientific Systems in Viginia;

During the Orion support (on or about 25 October 1999 to 04 August 2000), James Smith delivered multiple… Continue reading

Allegations of Bribes to 9/11 Commission – Pakistan

The 9/11 Commission made “dramatic changes” to its final report to omit information about the role of Pakistan, according to The Friday Times, a Pakistani weekly. After learning that the report would contain damaging revelations, the Pakistani government dispatched lobbyists to Washington to influence the 9/11 Commission, and may have even paid bribes to Commission members or their staff, the weekly says, citing an official at the Pakistani Foreign Office. “The disclosure sheds doubt on the integrity and honesty of the members of the 9/11 Inquiry Commission and above all on the authenticity of the information in their final report,” according to one source cited by the weekly.

The story was picked up yesterday by The Telegraph of Calcutta, India and is now shooting around the blogosphere. We cannot vouch for its veracity, but we can guess at the sort of information that both the US and the Pakistani government might have wanted to omit from The 9/11 Commission Report:

For example, prior to Sept. 11 the chief of the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI allegedly approved a $100,000 wire transfer to a certain Mohamed Atta. Yet the same ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, was in Washington for a working visit to his counterparts in the US government for more than a week prior to Sept. 11. On the morning of 9/11 itself, he was having breakfast at the Capitol with the future congressional investigators of the September 11th events. These alleged investigators, Porter Goss and Bob Graham, somehow failed… Continue reading

And the FAA Guy Gets to Play Himself!

911Truth.org urges nationwide response to United 93 (a.k.a. The Official Film of the Official Story)

Photo of Ben Sliney

Ben Sliney of the FAA

911Truth.org is announcing a nationwide campaign to distribute flyers to the audience attending United 93, which opens at theaters across the country on Friday, April 28th. In New York City, friends of 9/11 truth received local television news coverage after conducting a visibility action Tuesday night at the movie’s Tribeca Film Festival premiere. We encourage our readers to continue this campaign throughout the nation.

Many people have objected to the release of this movie because it commercializes September 11th. Still, the desire to see it may simply express a fundamental need to understand forces that profoundly affect our lives. The real problem lies in a screenplay borrowed directly from the dubious claims of the US government and its official “9/11 Commission.” In its shameless casting of FAA executive Ben Sliney as himself, United 93 provides a Hollywood platform to a salaried spokesperson for the government.

Still, to merely reject United 93 and its version of what happened on Flight 93 is to miss an important opportunity. Those attending this film likely have a deep interest in the issues of 9/11. We urge 9/11 truth activists to respond creatively, by encouraging United 93 audiences to attend alternative events (such as, to take one example, the May 8th New York town hall meeting in Tribeca, which is designed as a direct response to United 93). Accordingly, we have designed… Continue reading

THE TOP 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story

THE TOP 40

REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001

… An outline in simple talking points …

We are continuing to compile the best documentation links for every single point on this page, and intend to post the updated version as soon as possible, and create teaching tools and more from the info. This is a significant and time-consuming process–if you have useful links, please send them to janice[at]911truth[dot]org. Thanks for your help!
If you use the search function with title key words, you will discover that 911Truth.org is home to articles backing virtually every point made below. Much of the basic research is available at the Complete 9/11 Timeline (hosted by cooperativeresearch.org), the 9/11 Reading Room (911readingroom.org), and the NY Attorney General Spitzer petition and complaint (Justicefor911.org). For physical evidence discussion, see Point 7.

THE DAY ITSELF – EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack – George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield, Ralph Eberhart – all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.

2) Air… Continue reading

Hijacked truth?

By: KEITH PHUCAS, Times Herald Staff

05/21/2006


While the 9/11 Commission Report inquiry has its share of critics, Jonathan
Gold’s misgivings about the official findings go far beyond skepticism. In fact,
the 33-year-old Plymouth Meeting resident is convinced the report is covering
up Bush administration complicity in the deadly terrorist attacks.

Gold’s unorthodox view has caused many jaws to drop and heads to shake. When
asked for proof, he calmly rattles off a long list of like-minded people, and
what he called a growing body of “evidence” that the government orchestrated
the attacks as a pretext for the global war on terror.

“There’s so much evidence out there,” he said.

For those who scoff at him, he recommends comparing the official Sept. 11 account
to the Cooperative Research Center’s Sept. 11 times lines, reading David Griffin’s
“The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” and entries
on 911Truth.org just for starters.

A quick glance at the Internet’s voluminous material critical of the 9/11 Commission
Report published in 2004 could be this generation’s Warren Report.

Gold was not always a skeptic, admitting his conversion to Sept. 11 truth seeker
was a gradual process. But by 2002, he was convinced the official story was
a monumental cover-up.

His suspicion grew with the Bush administration’s initial reluctance to cooperate
with a probe into the Sept. 11 attacks, and when former Sen. Tom Daschle was
asked to limit the scope of the investigation.

Considering nearly 3,000 people had been killed, Gold was irked it took… Continue reading

The Hidden History of 9-11-2001: a review

by Reprehensor

NINE-ONE-ONE — This three number combination is etched into the public psyche and instantly conjures up images of America’s most recent Day of Infamy. The images of chaos and terror were speedily delivered via satellite to anyone near a television set. At first, these images burst into the minds of the TV audience without context, but television viewers were not left long to worry their beautiful minds with troublesome questions like: “Who perpetrated these crimes?”

The narrative vacuum was quickly filled by the “official” story. This version of the events of 9/11 is forever enshrined in the volume known as The 9/11 Commission Report.

Proceeding apace with the development of the official story was an entire universe of unofficial stories. These alternative points of view were helpfully framed by President George Walker Bush on November 10th, 2001:

“We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.” (1)

More than a few watching the President address the UN that day were puzzled by the phrase “outrageous conspiracy theories” regarding 9/11. As they logged on to their dial-up Internet connections that evening, trying to understand what the President was talking about, they were privy to the nascent chatter that over time has morphed into a kaleidoscope of alternative narratives, fueled by 9/11 skepticism.

Show Editor’s Note »

9/11 Icon Bill Doyle Openly Condemns US Government Complicity and Cover-up

 

Editor’s Note:
Relentless 9/11 activist Bill Doyle, father of Joey Doyle, set up the first email communication network for 9/11 families, which now connects over 7,000 victim relatives. He is also a co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Secure America and a lead plaintiff in the trillion dollar “Saudi suit” filed by 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism. Having to deal and maintain trust with the entire political spectrum of 9/11 kin, Bill has naturally been reluctant to take his own thoughts public, but Friday, July 6th, on the Alex Jones Show Bill finally outed his highly accusatory personal opinions on the 9/11 cover-up, government complicity, and the fact that perhaps half of his family network now feels the same way.

Right now there is no transcript, just the mp3 audio file here, but here are a few quotes from the interview transcribed by the intrepid 911blogger and Alex’s webmaster:

Jones: Sir you have questions about the official story don’t you?

Doyle: Oh, without question… the 9/11 Commission – that’s all a fallacy… The 9/11 commission is probably the worst representation of the 9/11 families, or for that matter the American public, because it is a sham, it really is. We had tons of questions that we asked them to ask, they wouldn’t do it, and the continuing coverup is just beyond belief.

Doyle: It almost looks like there was a conspiracy about 9/11 if you really look at all the facts, a lot of the families now… Continue reading

Filmic 9/11 Fiction Wars: Whose Official Story Fantasies will Prevail?

Documentary Director Fears Fictionalization of 9/11

By Sue Zeidler

Reuters

July 20, 2006

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The director of a new documentary on September 11 fears that two upcoming Hollywood dramatizations of the World Trade Center attacks may eclipse her project.

“I hope the truth does not get lost amongst the fiction,” Linda Ellman, a former NBC News producer, who made her film directorial debut with “On Native Soil,” told Reuters.

“I don”t have a problem with fictionalized stories or fictionalized efforts about 9/11, because people need to be kept aware and should never forget. I just hope the truth isn”t replaced by fiction, because the truth is shocking,” she said.

Ellman was referring to film director Oliver Stone’s upcoming “World Trade Center,” a drama about two police officers trapped under the smoking rubble of the collapsed buildings, opening nationwide on August 9, and the ABC television network miniseries “The Path to 9/11,” debuting on September 10.

Unlike those works, Ellman’s goal with “On Native Soil,” airing next month on cable channel Court TV, was to stay true to the 9/11 Commission Report — the government’s account of the suicide hijackings that killed about 3,000 people — and present an historically accurate version of events as they unfolded, almost in real time.

All of these films, as well as other documentaries and television specials, are being released to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the attacks.

Ellman was approached by producer Jeff Hays to direct the project with a budget of just over $1 million, and immediately saw opportunities and challenges.…

Continue reading

Introducing “Politics 911″

Fine Motives, Means & Opportunities

To commemorate the great 9/11 Commission cover-up released on July 22, 2004, 9/11truth.org and MUJCA-Net are proud to announce the launch of “Politics 911″ — a focused 4-month campaign to enlighten the 2006 electoral debate with a nationwide spotlight on 9/11 truth.

As the name implies “Politics 911″ is an emergency campaign to help return democratic control, self-respect and political adulthood to the American electorate. To that end we plan to gratefully exploit:

 

  • the rising tide of 9/11 skepticism;
  • the dispersion & diversity of local 9/11 activist groups;
  • the organizing & communicative genius of the Internet;
    and
  • the political theater of the 2006 elections

in order to saturate pre-election events with substantive 9/11 truth questions and their implications for revolutionary reform.

Course of Action

The campaign’s initial goal is to require every candidate running for the US House or Senate in 2006 to publicly declare whether he/she will support a truly independent re-investigation* of the events surrounding 9/11 including evidence of US government foreknowledge, facilitation and/or complicity. This will be accomplished and augmented with the following steps:

  1. Develop a Roster of all Senate and Congressional candidates from all parties;
  2. Poll Each and Every Candidate (locally and personally, when possible) regarding their awareness of/interest in 9/11 issues, and their support for a new and truly independent investigation.* This includes all independents and third party challengers from the Greens, Libertarians, Reform Party,… Continue reading

9/11 Truth Advocates Launch Nationwide Congressional Candidate Poll

- “Politics 911″ Seeks Candidates Responsive to 70+ Million Voters Demanding New 9/11 Investigation

 

Editor’s Note:
Our second anniversary present to Zelikow’s fictional thriller, the 9/11 Commission Report. We cordially invite your participation in this historic political gut check, which we suspect may become the best argument yet for transcending the two party system.

 

Nation’s largest 9/11 truth network marks second anniversary of the 9/11 Commission Report with campaign to survey all mainstream and third party congressional candidates re their awareness of the case for US government complicity in 9/11 and the high levels of public support for a full reinvestigation, as well as their personal willingness to back such an inquiry if they are elected in the fall.

Kansas City, MO (PRWEB) July 22, 2006 — In recognition of the second anniversary and widening distrust of the 9/11 Commission Report, 911truth.org announces the launch of “Politics 911,” a national campaign to determine support for a new and truly independent 9/11 investigation among all 2006 candidates for the US House and Senate.

The three-month effort aims to poll all congressional hopefuls regarding their awareness of current evidence for US government involvement in 9/11 and the high levels of public support for a full reinvestigation, as well as their personal willingness to back such an inquiry if they are elected in the fall. Zogby polls in August, 2004 and May, 2006 showed that 66% of New York City residents and 45% of Americans overall now desire a new and broader investigation that explores all the evidence for government complicity.…

Continue reading

Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern Respond to 9/11 Truth Questioning

9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Allegations Brought to Inspectors General

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Washingtonpost.com

Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.

In the end, the panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted, officials said.

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”
 

Editor’s… Continue reading

Scapegoating Norad

georgewashington.blogspot.com

When the 9/11 Commission was wrapped up, the Federal Aviatiation Agency (FAA) was blamed for failing to quickly relay information of the hijackings to the military.

Now, years later, the finger is being pointed at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (Norad). As revealed in an article in the Washington Post (free subscription required):

Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources.

***

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”

* * *

“I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described,” John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. “The… Continue reading

Chain of Deceit: From the Pentagon to the 9/11 Commission to the Public

By Russ Wellen
OpEdNews.com
August 3, 2006

Astonishing as it sounds, a conference featuring the 9/11 Scholars for Truth was aired on C-SPAN.

– In his Washington Post article, “9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon,” Dan Eggen reported, “Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public. . .”

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us,” Commission Chair Thomas H. Kean said. “It was just so far from the truth.”

– According to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll, “More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East.”

Still more surprising, 16 percent think the collapse of the World Trade Towers was expedited by controlled demolition while 12 percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a missile, not Flight 77.

Eye-opening as these results are, they’re not unprecedented. According to Scripps/Howard, “The level of suspicion of U.S. official involvement in a 9/11 conspiracy was only slightly behind the 40 percent who suspect ‘officials in the federal government were directly responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy.’”

Kean’s colleague, 9/11 Commission vice chair Lee Hamilton, conceded the results of the poll. “A lot… Continue reading

Gandhian “WTC” Protest Makes Nonviolent Waves in Florida Media

Protests Mark Opening of ‘WTC’

Fox TV, Tampa
09 Aug 2006


‘World Trade Center’ protester arrested outside University Mall in Tampa

TAMPA – Oliver Stone’s new film ‘World Trade Center’ may well be remembered most for its tribute to the courage and heroism of those who answered the call on September 11th. But it’s also turned into a platform for protest.

“We are using leaflets to alert the public about the discrepancies between real science and physics and the fictional account that the public has been spoon-fed about the events of 9/11,” explained Mia Hamel of 911courage.org.

It’s a scene that played out at University Mall in Tampa but was also repeated nationwide as protesters pushed for a new investigation.

“We are being lied to. I don’t know why, but we know the official story does not make scientific sense,” protester David Simmons said.

World Trade Center Tower 7 is at the center of many of the theories. The 47-story building collapsed hours after the twin towers came down back on September 11, 2001.

“You see that footage in this film. You actually see the square upper silhouette of the building, and then you just see it drop like this; no buckling, no fire, no smoke,” Hamel continued.

Protesters believe the building was purposely brought down.

“I’ve been in contracting and engineering all my life. I knew from looking at it, it was a controlled demolition,” Simmons said. “We just want to know who controlled it.”

And there’s more. They are also raising questions whether the attack was actually staged by Arab terrorists, and who Mohammed Atta really was.…

Continue reading

A Trial Lawyer’s Perspective on 9/11 Truth

by William Veale

As a relative late-comer to this cause, it is with caution that I wade into these turbulent waters. It is apparent, however, that a certain disunity threatens to destroy the amazing work that so many have done with so little for such enormous good. I set out my understanding briefly. It appears that at least two camps have taken up positions on the battlefield. One argues that no airplanes hit the World Trade Center; the other disagrees and is circumspect about the precise nature of the crash at the Pentagon.

I call upon my background, thirty-one years as a trial lawyer and public defender, to make some observations. My expertise is relevant because this is a struggle about evidence and proof and its presentation. Ultimately, it will be necessary for the 911 Truth movement to prove that the government was complicit in the attacks. If that is accomplished, a feat of inestimable magnitude will have been achieved. A new understanding of our history will have clawed its way into the American consciousness, and, in my opinion, all kinds of much needed reforms, having to do with the structures of what remains of this democracy, will have demanded our collective attention.

When a lawyer sets about to prove a case in court, he or she must be critically aware of any deficiency in any piece of evidence. There is always an opponent in a courtroom. The job of that opponent will be to find whatever weakness exists, magnify it beyond its due, and then smear its proponents with its flaws.…

Continue reading

Gullible Americans

By Paul Craig Roberts

Information Clearing House

I was in China when a July Harris Poll reported that 50 percent of Americans still believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when Bush invaded that country, and that 64 percent of Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein had strong links with Al Qaeda.

The Chinese leaders and intellectuals with whom I was meeting were incredulous. How could a majority of the population in an allegedly free country with an allegedly free press be so totally misinformed?

The only answer I could give the Chinese is that Americans would have been the perfect population for Mao and the Gang of Four, because Americans believe anything their government tells them.

Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.

The two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission Report, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, have just released a new book, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.” Kean and Hamilton reveal that the commission suppressed the fact that Muslim ire toward the US is due to US support for Israel’s persecution and dispossession of the Palestinians, not to our “freedom and democracy” as Bush propagandistically claims. Kean and Hamilton also reveal that the US military committed perjury and lied about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.…

Continue reading