These protesters want an investigation of a 9/11 conspiracy. In anti-war protest parade, Los Angeles, California. Date: 28. oktober 2007. Source: flickr. Photo: Damon D'Amato from North Hollywood, California. (CC BY 2.0)
These protesters want an investigation of a 9/11 conspiracy. In anti-war protest parade, Los Angeles, California. Date: 28. oktober 2007. Source: flickr. Photo: Damon D'Amato from North Hollywood, California. (CC BY 2.0)
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Samling af materialer og sites om konspirationsteorier omkring omkring 9/11 – 11. september 2001 i USA / Collection on materials and sites on conspiracy theories on 9/11 2001 in USA.


 

Indhold


 

Forord

9/11 Truth Movement demonstrator, Los Angeles. Date: 28 October 2007. Source: 9/11 Was an Inside Job. Author: Damon D'Amato from North Hollywood, Calfornia. (CC BY 2.0)
Author: Damon D’Amato from North Hollywood, Calfornia. (CC BY 2.0)

Siden terrorangrebene på World Trade Center 11. september 2001 har konspirations-teorierne floreret som aldrig før: at World Trade Center styrtede sammen pga. anbragt sprængstof i bygningen, at Pentagon ikke blev ramt af en flyvemaskine, men af et missil osv. der i ‘hardcore’-konspirationsudgaven bruges som argument for, at den amerikanske regering helt eller delvis stod bag angrebene.
Der er også mere politiske analyser, der argumenterer for forhåndsviden i dele af magtapparatet, som så lod angrebene finde sted for at legitimere en ny agressiv indenrigs- og udenrigspolitik.
Vi har her samlet lidt af debatten med baggrund, analyser, aktuelle kommentarer og polemik, et udvalg præget af skepsis over for dele af konspirations-folket!

Bjarne A. Frandsen
Påbegyndt 30. september 2006; revideret september 2016.

Se også på Socialistisk Bibliotek:


Plumes of smoke billow from the World Trade Center towers in Lower Manhattan, New York City, after a Boeing 767 hits each tower during the September 11 attacks, as seen from the Brooklyn Promenade. Source: Flickr. Author: Flickr user Michael Foran. (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
Plumes of smoke billow from the World Trade Center towers in Lower Manhattan, New York City, after a Boeing 767 hits each tower during the September 11 attacks, as seen from the Brooklyn Promenade. Source: Flickr. Author: Flickr user Michael Foran. (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

 

På dansk (og norsk)

911truth.dk

911truth.dk “er et initiativ af den danske gren af en stadigt voksende græsrodsbevægelse.” Se også:

Humanisme.dk

Rune Engelbreth Larsen: Konspirationsteorier: Sandheden om 9/11 og 11/9 (9. september  2006)
“På femårsdagen for terrorangrebet mod USA den 11. september 2001 florerer konspirationsteorierne som aldrig før … på et tidspunkt må det være på tide at standse op og erkende en blindgyde og tage fat på noget andet. Fem år er lang tid at underprioritere andre og vigtigere opgaver …”

Information

Niels Henrik Vejen Jespersen: Harrit og ‘konspiranoiaen’ (21. maj 2007)
“Hvorfor tror så mange på tåbelige konspirationsteorier? Det seneste skud på stammen er myten om, at den amerikanske regering selv stod bag angrebet på World Trade Center og Pentagon 11. september 2001. De er parat til at tro, hvad som helst, der får den amerikanske præsident til at fremstå i et negativt lys.”

Niels Harrit: Det syvende tårn (31. marts 2007)
“Hvordan styrtede WTC7 sammen? Vi spørger ikke ‘hvorfor’. Det her er ikke konspirationsteori. Vi har ingen bevisbyrde. Der foreligger nogle observationer af den banaleste karakter, og vi vil gerne have en officiel forklaring, der er forenelig med elementær fysik og kemi ? og almindelig sund fornuft.”

Susanne Thorbek og Morten Thing: Det ny Pearl Harbor (3. december 2005)
“Alle store krige i 1900-tallet begyndte med en løgn. Hitler sendte tyske soldater udklædt som polske ind i Polen. Pearl Harbor var provokeret af Roosevelt, og Vietnam-krigen begyndte med en påstand om, at små vietnamesiske fartøjer angreb amerikanske destroyere. Det giver basis for foruroligende spørgsmål til 11. september.”

Ingeniøren

Thomas Lemke: Spekulationer fejet af bordet: Brand smadrede World Trade Centers tredje tårn (22. august 2008). Efterfulgt af en længere debat.
“En kleppert af en rapport på 1.000 sider afviser alle konspirationsteorierne om, hvorfor World Trade Centers tredje tårn kollapsede, selv om det ikke var ramt af fly. Brændende stumper fra de andre tårne satte gang i en uset voldsom ildebrand, der fik fundamentet til at smuldre, lyder konklusionen.”

Thomas Lemke: Hvad skete der egentlig den 11. september 2001? (8. september 2006)
“Det officielle USA har skinlagt efterforskningen af begivenhederne 11. september 2001, men for mange skeptikere er sagen langt fra opklaret. Hvor er det fly, der ramte Pentagon, og hvordan styrtede den mystiske bygning 7 sammen? Ingeniøren har set på nogle af de mest sejlivede konspirationsteorier.”

Christian Munch-Petersen: Højhus var et møghus (9. september 2006)
“Fire år efter terrorangrebet på World Trade Center 11. september 2001 foreligger den officielle amerikanske analyse af husets sammenstyrtning. Rapporten viser, at bygningen var meget dårligt sikret mod brand.”

Modkraft.dk

Konspirationsteoretiske vildfarelser og virkelige sammensværgelser. Af Lars Ploug (Kontradoxa, 23. april 2014)
“Er konspirationsteoretikere bare bims, eller kan man lære noget af dem?”

Demokrat vs idioti: Konspirationsteorier i danske medier. Af Ole Sandberg (Blog, 18. september 2010)
Blog om div. konspirationsteorier, med debat og links især om 9/11.

911facts.dk

911facts.dk Myter og sandhed om terrorangrebet 11. september 2001: “Umiddelbart efter angrebet opstod en græsrodsbevægelse, der har døbt sig selv Sandhedsbevægelsen eller The Truth Movement. Bevægelsen har i tidens løb rejst mange spekulative påstande og teorier … Der sættes også fokus på, hvilke metoder og mål den danske Sandhedsbevægelse har, og hvad konsekvenserne er af disse.”

David Ray Griffin

Det nye Pearl Harbor: foruroligende spørgsmål om Bush administrationen og 11. september
Af David Ray Griffin (Progressive Publishing, 2005, 319 sider).

Se anmeldelser og interviews:

Nyhedsavisen

Tema: 9/11-skepsis (23. oktober 2007- )
“Nyhedsavisen har i en række artikler fortalt historierne om de mange teorier, der er kommet i kølvandet på begivenhederne den 11. september 2001.”

Samtiden

Emil Andre Røyrvik: Et globalt bedrag? 11. september i kritisk lys (nr.3, 2006; online på Internet Archive WayBackMachine)
“Fire fly kapres. Verdens desidert mest avanserte luftforsvar løfter ikke en finger. To fly krasjer i tvillingtårnene … Tre, ikke to, skyskrapere raser sammen. Pulveriserte. Utenom kontrollert nedrivning er det første gang i verdenshistorien at stålkonstruerte skyskrapere kollapser totalt. En ‘War on Terror’ uten ende lanseres. Er det hele et velregissert bedrag?”
Se kritik:

Erik Tunstad: Ekstreme synspunkter, ja (Forskning.no, 22. september 2006)
“Hvorfor begynner stadig flere å så tvil om hva som skjedde den 11. september? I hvert fall ikke fordi det finnes saklig grunn til å trekke den såkalte offisielle versjonen i tvil.”

Jan S. Haugland: Bedrag eller selvbedrag? En tilbakevisning av 911-konspirasjonsteorier (Skepsis.no, 21. september 2006)
“Hvorfor er konspirasjonsteoretikere så ukritiske til egne teorier? Og hjelper det egentlig med høy utdannelse hvis man ikke behersker elementær kildekritikk? Jan Haugland kaster i denne artikkelen et kritisk blikk på antropologen Emil Røyrviks forsøk på å få alternative 911-teorier til å virke fornuftige.”

Skeptica.dk

Claus Larsen: Ole Retsbo: Konspiration? (21. august 2011). Anmeldelse af Ole Retsbos bog: Konspiration? Myter og facts om terrorangrebet d. 11. september 2001 (Forlaget Radius, 2011, 192 sider)
“For alle … med blot den mindste interesse og/eller tvivl om begivenhederne den dag er bogen et must.”

Claus Larsen: New World Order på Rådhuspladsen (13. september 2009)
“Den ubetinget mest populære myte i dag omhandler angrebet den 11. september, 2001. Bevægelsen bag konspirationsteorier kaldes for ‘Truth’-bevægelsen, og dens tilhængere for ‘Truthers’. Læs her om deres 8-års fejring af terror-angrebet den 11. september, 2001.”

Socialistisk Arbejderavis

Jesper Juul Mikkelsen og Jørn Andersen: Sandheden om 9-11 (nr. 288, 30. april 2009)
“Det vigtige spørgsmål er ikke hvordan de 2-3 højhuse faldt sammen, men derimod hvordan 11. september fik lov at blive et så stærkt symbol for de herskende klasser rundt om i verden.”

Stop Terrorkrigen

9-11 Materialesamling: Hvad skete 11. september 2001? (2005)
“Mere end 4 år efter 9-11 – 11. september 2001 – er der fortsat hundredvis af uafklarede spørgsmål, om hvad der egentlig skete – og stadig flere i USA og over hele verden mener, at den officielle forklaring – herunder den officielle kommissionsrapport – ikke fortæller sandheden om den skæbnesvangre dag.”

Paul Craig Roberts: 9/11, seks år efter (9. september 2007)
“Når romerne stod overfor foruroligende hændelser spurgte de sig selv: Cui bono? – hvem gavner det? Dette spørgsmål er mistænkeligt fraværende i den officielle undersøgelse.”

Crockett Grabbe and Lenny Charles: Videnskab under Bush: når politik tilsidesætter fysik (september 2007)
“Der er stadig flere beviser på, at der blev brugt sprængladninger i forbindelse med sammenstyrtningen af alle de tre bygninger, der kollapsede i World Trade Center i New York 11. september 2001 – for nøjagtig 6 år siden.”

TV2

Sune Jørgensen: Kritik af 9/11-rapport og konspirationsteorier: Simpel forklaring bag de to tårnes kollaps (11. september 2016)
“Kemiker Frank Greening mener, at flyene i tårnene er nøglen til mysteriet om kollapset, og at kollapset skyldtes en voldsom aluminiumseksplosion i tårnene.” Se dokumentaren: 9/11: Twin Towers: The Missing Evidence (November 2014, 44 min.; online at YouTube.com). Dansk udgave: Sagen genoptaget – mysteriet om 9/11 (TV2, september 2016).

Videnskab.dk

Svein Tønseth: Ny teori: Derfor styrtede World Trade Center sammen (11. september 2011)
“Norsk forsker mener, han har forklaringen på ‘uforklarlige’ eksplosionslyde i tvillingtårnene 11.september 2001 – lyde, der affødte mange konspirationsteorier. Den officielle forklaring holder ikke, mener forskeren.”

Thomas Hoffmann: 11. september – en konspirationsteori (11. september 2008). I bunden afsnit Dansk videnskab om bygning 7’s kollaps + Links.
“Hvad skete der egentlig i New York i 2001? Var amerikanske kræfter indblandet i angrebet? Tusindvis af skeptikere over hele verden er ikke i tvivl. Læs her hvorfor.”

Wikipedia, den frie encyklopædi

Konspirationsteorier om terrorangrebet den 11. september 2001
Leksikal artikel med mange links.

Se også:

Her er den virkelige sandhed om konspirationsteorier. Af Maria Brockhoff, Rikke Alberg Peters og Mikkel Thorup (Videnskab.dk, 3. januar 2019). Om deres bog Den skjulte sandhed: konspirationsteorier, magt og konflikt (Klim, 2019, 207 s.). “Mange forbinder konspirationsteoretikere med skøre og paranoide kældermennesker. Men teorierne skal faktisk tages alvorligt.”

Lars Ploug: Konspirationsteoretiske vildfarelser og virkelige sammensværgelser (Modkraft.dk, 23. april 2014)
“Er konspirationsteoretikere bare bims, eller kan man lære noget af dem?”

Rune Eltard-Sørensen: Afdækning af Bilderberg-protester udløser nye konspirationsteorier (Modkraft.dk, 9. april 2014)
“Modkraft beskyldes for at være betalte lakajer for eliten, satanister og for at »fremprovokere ballade« efter afsløring af forbindelser mellem Scientology Kirken og danske konspirationsteoretikere.”

Rune Eltard-Sørensen: Konspirationsteoretikere har forbindelse til Scientology (Modkraft.dk, 8. april 2014)
“Aktive Scientologers Radioforening er central i udbredelsen af politiske konspirationsteorier i Danmark. Græsrodsaktivister, der forbereder gadeprotester mod Bilderberg-møde i Danmark, promoverer samtidig Scientology Kirkens budskab.”


A photograph of the of the World Trade Center site (Ground Zero) with an overlay showing the original building locations. Date: 23 September 2001 (photograph), 2005 or earlier (overlay) Source: http://wtc.nist.gov/, for example, report NIST NCSTAR 1: Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Tower, figure 4-1, page 47 (in this report image erroneously credited as created in 2001-09-17). Author: Photograph by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, overlay by National Institute of Standards and Technology. Public Domain.
A photograph of the of the World Trade Center site (Ground Zero) with an overlay showing the original building locations. Date: 23 September 2001 (photograph), 2005 or earlier (overlay) Source: http://wtc.nist.gov/, for example, report NIST NCSTAR 1: Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Tower, figure 4-1, page 47 (in this report image erroneously credited as created in 2001-09-17). Author: Photograph by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, overlay by National Institute of Standards and Technology. Public Domain.

 

In English

Against the Current

Jack Ceder: Another look at 9/11 (No. 114, January/February 2005)
“Griffin’s book together with various similar books and videos give strong supporting evidence for the claim that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job.”

David Finkel: A Reichstag fire on steroids? (No. 114, January/February 2005)
“… if populist skepticism is in order, then a little Marxist common sense is appropriate too – and from that standpoint, the fullblown ‘inside job’ theory of 9/11, which Griffin clearly favors though he tactically stops short of unconditionally endorsing it, makes no sense at all.”

Jack Ceder: A rejoinder on 9/11 (No. 115, March/April 2005)

AlterNet

Debate: The ultimate 9/11 ‘Truth’ showdown: David Ray Griffin vs. Matt Taibbi, Part I + Part II + Part III (October 5-6, 2008; online at Internet Archive)
“The two writers lock horns over the accuracy of Griffin’s recent book, 9/11 Contradictions.”

George Monbiot: Short changing 9/11: popular documentary takes us nowhere (February 17, 2007)
“The English author charges that infatuation with the 9/11 conspiracy film Loose Change turns opponents of the Bush government into ‘gibbering idiots’.”

Matt Taibbi: Before the 9/11 conspiracies, there was the Oklahoma bombing (October 24, 2006)
“Much of the faulty logic and circumstancial evidence that justifies the 9/11 conspiracies are repeats of the theories that abounded in Timothy McVeigh’s Oklahoma City bombing.”

Matt Taibbi: The idiocy hehind the ‘9/11 Truth’ Movement (September 26, 2006)
“Why the ‘9/11 Truth’ movement makes the Left behind series read like Shakespeare.”

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth “… an association of architects, engineers and affiliates dedicated to exposing the falsehoods and to revealing truths about the ‘collapses’ of the 3 World Trade Center high-rises on September 11, 2001.”

Centre for Research on Globalisation

Themes: 9/11 Key articles + Foreknowledge of 9-11
“A compilation of CRG articles and documents in support of a 9-11 investigation.”

CounterPunch

Alexander Cockburn: The 9/11 conspiracists: vindicated after all these years? (September 2, 2011)
“Across those ten years have the charges that it was an ‘inside job’ – a favored phrase of the self-styled ‘truthers’ – received any serious buttress? The answer is no.”

Alex Doherty: Britain’s 9/11 ‘Truth Movement’: Who’s responsible? (September 18, 2007)
“Initially an internet based affair, the UK conspiracy advocates have developed national and local campaigning groups who organize public meetings, teach-ins and film showings and they have become a visible and vocal presence at anti-war demonstrations.”

Manuel Garcia Jr.: Forgetting 9/11 (September 12, 2007)
“Because I have written about the physics of the World Trade Center fires and collapses of September 11, 2001, I have recently been asked by several people to comment on “9-11″ during this sixth anniversary of the event.”

Christopher Ketcham: What did Israel know in advance of the 9/11 attacks? High-Fivers and art student spies. A CounterPunch Special Investigation (March 7, 2007)

Alexander Cockburn: The 9/11 conspiracists and the decline of the Anmerican Left (November 28, 2006)
“Five years after the attacks, 9/11 conspiracism has now penetrated deep into the American left … Into the theoretical and strategic void has crept a diffuse, peripatic conspiracist view of the world that tends to locate ruling class devilry not in the crises of capital accumulation, or the falling rate of profit, or inter-imperial competition, but in locale (the Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg, Ditchley, Davos) or supposedly ‘rogue’ agencies, with the CIA still at the head of the list. The 9/11 ‘conspiracy’, or “inside job”, is the Summa of all this foolishness.”

Manuel Garcia, Jr.: The Physics of 9/11: We see conspiracies that don’t exist, Part 1-3 (November 28, 2006)
“The aim of this article is to supply some understanding of physics as it relates to several of the features of the 9/11 events, so that readers can expand their range of rationality and hence their political maturity.
In Part 2: The Thermodynamics of 9/11, of this report, I address the topic of heat, a prominent feature of many conspiracy theories about the collapse of the WTC buildings.
In Part 3: Dark Fire, I address the collapse of WTC 7.”

Diana Johnstone: In defense of conspiracy: 9/11 in theory and in fact (September 15, 2006)
“I feel that the extreme version of the 9/11 conspiracy, complete with demolition and Pentagon missile, gives a bad name to conspiracy theory in general … It seems to me, on balance, that the evidence is so weak for this particular conspiracy theory that its popularity calls for a psychological explanation … Even in the case of 9/11, there is what I would call a ‘soft’ version of the conspiracy theory that deserves investigation, and that is the possible role of secret agents who may have infiltrated the al Qaeda plot enough to know what was afoot, but let it happen.”

Alexander Cockburn: The 9/11 conspiracy nuts: how they let the guilty parties of 9/11 slip off the hook (September 9/10, 2006)
“August Bebel said anti-Semitism is the socialism of the fools. These days the 9/11 conspiracy fever threatens to become the ‘socialism’ of the left, and the passe-partout of many libertarians … The nuts disdain the real world because, like much of the left and liberal sectors, they have promoted Bush, Cheney and the Neo-Cons to an elevated status as the Arch Demons of American history, instead of being just one more team running the American empire.”

The Crisis Papers

Ernest Partridge: The 9/11 Conspiracy: a skeptic’s view (April 25, 2006)
“First of all, it is clear that the 9/11 Commission is a travesty. Too many phenomena are unexplained. The evidence must be revisited and validated, and the critics’ anomalies explained … Second, the critics of the official version should, as much as possible, get their facts straight, whereupon they must then cease presenting falsehoods as evidence; e.g., that the debris was shipped immediately, uninspected, to Asia; that the OV assumes and claims that steel melted; that no physical evidence of the plane was found at the Pentagon, etc.”

Debunking 911

Debunking 911: “Debunking 911 conspiracy theories and controlled demolition homepage” (online at Internet Archive)

Democracy Now!

9/11 Debate: ‘Loose Change’ filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics editors of ‘Debunking 9/11 Myths’ (September 11th, 2006)

The New Pearl Harbor: A debate on a new book that alleges the Bush administration was behind the 9/11 attacks [David Ray Griffin versus Chip Berlet] (May 26th, 2004)

In These Times

Terry J. Allen: The 9/11 Faith Movement (July 11, 2006)
“Conspiracy hypotheses often consist of a vast pile of circumstantial evidence shaped into a seemingly coherent whole with the strong glue of faith. Debunk one or even many allegations and the pile still stands, impressive in its bulk and ideological coherence. If size were all, it would convince Pyrrho himself.”

Statue of Liberty and WTC under attack 9/11 2001
Statue of Liberty and WTC under attack 9/11 2001
Jump Cut

Christopher Sharrett: Without restraint: 9/11 videos and the pursuit of truth (No. 50, Spring 2008)
” This close critical reading of many of the prominent 9/11 Truth videos analyses 9/11 and the supporters and critics of the official narrative (left and right) within the context of past state-sanctioned crimes.”

John Molyneux’ blog

What’s wrong with conspiracy theories (September 18, 2011)
” … however understandable this phenomenon is, it is also a problem because conspiracy theories are an obstacle either to making sense of the world or to changing it. This article, therefore, will look at what is wrong with the conspiracy theory approach to the world.”

Journal of Debunking 9/11

“The Journal of Debunking 911 is a free online publication dedicated to educating the public on the collapse of the three World Trade Center structures on September 11 2001.” (online at Internet Archive).

Ryan Mackey: On debunking 9/11 debunking: Examining Dr. David Ray Griffin’s latest criticism of the NIST World Trade Center investigation (pdf) (Vol.1, No.4, May 2008, 313 p.)

Loose Change

“This film shows direct connection between the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the United States government.” Critique and debate:

  • Loose Change (film) (Wikipedia.org)
  • Screw Loose Change: Dedicated to exposing the lies, distortions and myths in the movie Loose Change
  • 9/11 Debate: ‘Loose Change’ filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics editors of ‘Debunking 9/11 Myths’ (Democracy Now!, September 11th, 2006)
Le Monde Diplomatique

Alexander Cockburn: US: the conspiracy that wasn’t (December 2006)
“The left in the United States remains distracted by fantastic stories about conpiracies hatched by the Bush administration: in many of these, even the 9/11 attacks are believed to have been an inside job. Yet the chief, and most fearful, characteristic of the Bush administration has been its low level of practical management abroad and at home.”

Alexander Cockburn: Conspiracy disproved (December 2006)
“The conspiracy theory that the World Trade Centre towers were demolished by explosive charges previously placed within them is probably impossible.”

Pascal Lardellier: A tangled web (September 2006)
“The net is the perfect medium for counter-information, analysing available data on the 11 September attacks, challenging official findings on the events and exploiting conspiracy theories.”

The Nation

Christopher Hayes: 9/11: The roots of paranoi (December 25, 2006)
“Public paranoia and a credulous establishment media that have failed to aggressively report on 9/11 have allowed a cult-like ‘Truth Movement’ to fill in the gaps.”

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

NIST WTC 7 investigation finds building fires caused collapse (August 21, 2008)
“The fall of the 47-story World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) in New York City late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001, was primarily due to fires, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced today following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation.”

9-11 Commission

9-11 Commission “The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11 Commission) ”¦ The Commission released its first interim report on July 8, 2003.”
The final report: The 9/11 Commission Report (July 2004, 585 p.)
Review by Deborah J. Gerner and Chris Toensing: Editorial (Middle East Report, Issue 232, Fall 2004)

9/11 Report: Joint Congressional Inquiry
Report of the Joint Inquiry into the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 – by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, July 24, 2003.
Comments:

9-11 Research

9-11 Research “9-11 Research is an ongoing effort to discover the truth about the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, 2001. To that end we provide a growing hypertext documentary of the attack and its aftermath, easily browsed archives of evidence, and a body of original analysis based on that evidence.”
“En af de mest seriøse konspirationsteoretikeres hjemmeside” (Ingeniøren)

NIST: World Trade Center Disaster Study

NIST: World Trade Center Disaster Study “In response to the WTC tragedy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology conducted a 3-year building and fire safety investigation to study the factors contributing to the probable cause (or causes) of post-impact collapse of the WTC Towers (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7.”

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report – The World Trade Center (March, 2005)
“PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.”
The article is later expanded to a book: Debunking 9/11 myths. Edited by David Dunbar & Brad Reagan (New York, 2006, 170 p.)

The Progressive

Matthew Rothschild: Enough of the 9/11 conspiracies, already (September 11, 2006; online at Internet Archive)
“At bottom, the 9/11 conspiracy theories are profoundly irrational and unscientific. It is more than passing strange that progressives, who so revere science on such issues as tobacco, stem cells, evolution, and global warming, are so willing to abandon science and give in to fantasy on the subject of 9/11. The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a cul-de-sac. They lead nowhere. And they aren’t necessary to prove the venality of the Bush Administration. There’s plenty of that proof lying around. We don’t need to make it up.”

Public Eye

Theme: Post 9/11 Conspiracism
“9/11 conspiracy theories on the left suggest that the US government attacked the World Trade Center itself, while on the right some suggest that Jews planned it. Why are these and other conspiracy theories persisting? Five years after the devastating attacks on September 11, 2001, conspiracy theories about the causes and culprits continue to spread. PRA Researcher Chip Berlet offers a roundup of what and why.”

9/11/01 – Repercussions: General Conspiracist Views.
“This page is part of an archival collection of material that was posted on the web by Political Research Associates shortly after the attacks on 09/11/01.”

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Scholars for 9/11 Truth: “The World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions and the available relevant evidence casts grave doubt on the government’s official story about the attack on the Pentagon. [We] believe that the government not only permitted 9/11 to occur but may even have orchestrated these events to facilitate its political agenda.”
See also: Journal of 9/11 Studies.

Scientific American

Steven Ashley: When the Twin Towers fell (October 09, 2001)
“One month after the attack on the World Trade Center, M.I.T. structural engineers offer their take on how and why the towers came down.”

Skeptic

Chris Mohr: 9/11 and the science of controlled demolitions (September 11, 2011)
“Is there any scientific validity to the claims of 9/11 controlled demolition conspiracists about the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings?”

John Ray: How skeptics confronted 9/11 denialism (June 4, 2008)
“In just under four years, the 9/11 ‘truth movement’ has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest.”

Phil Molé: 9/11 conspiracy theories: the 9/11 Truth Movement in perspective (September 11, 2006)
“On the 5th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center, Phil Molé takes a look at the ‘9/11 Truth Movement’ and shares with us his experience attending a weekend conference held in Chicago, organized by 911truth.org.”

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9/11 conspiracy theories, with External links.

September 11, 2001 attacks

Collapse of the World Trade Center

World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories

World Socialist Web Site

Patrick Martin: What the September 11 commission hearings revealed, Part 1-4 (April 22, April 26, April 27 and 1 May 2004)
“The independent commission investigating the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington has held five days of televised public hearings ”¦ The plausible answer is that at some level the US government stood down its defenses deliberately.”

Bill Vann: September 11: after two years, cover-up begins to unravel (11 September 2003)
“Today marks the second anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks ”¦. A myriad of unanswered questions persist about how the most powerful military-intelligence apparatus in the world failed to either detect such a terrorist plot or interfere with it once it was launched.”

Patrick Martin: Was the US government alerted to September 11 attack?, Part 1-4 (16 January, 18 January, 22 January and 24 January 2002)
“This series has reviewed evidence that US intelligence agencies had ample advance information about the September 11 attacks, from specific details of the methods and the likely targets to the identities of a number of the hijackers, including the alleged principal organizer, Mohammed Atta. There are other troubling and unresolved issues, such as the failure to scramble air defense fighters in time to intercept any of the jetliners.”
“Some critics of the left have dubbed serious political arguments as conspiracism, and a sensible response has been issued by the WSWS website” (Chip Berlet)

A World to Win

Paul Feldman: A conspiracy too far (18 July 2011). Review of Kathryn S. Holmsted, Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11 (Oxford University Press, 2008)
“In some detail she covers the origins of US involvement in World War One, Pearl Harbour, McCarthyism in the 1950s, the Kennedy assassination, the Nixon/Watergate period, CIA conspiracies and secret experiments as well as 9/11.”

World War 4 Report

Bill Weinberg: 9-11 and the New Pearl Harbor (September 1, 2006)
“The mini-industry which has sprung up around 9-11 ‘conspiracy theory’ … has merely replicated the dogmatism of the ‘official version’. Worse, the endemic sloppiness of the self-styled ‘researchers’ is delegitimizing the entire project of critiquing the ‘official version’. The ostentatiously named ‘Truth movement’ is not clearing the air, but muddying the water.”

ZNet

McNeill interview with Noam Chomsky (January 31, 2005)
“On the conspiracy theories about 9/11, I’ll comment, but reluctantly. There are far more important things to be concerned about, and these things can become an awful waste of time. As for the theories, I don’t think they can be taken very seriously. I think they are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of evidence, and also failure to think through the issues clearly.” Scroll down.

Theme: Conspiracy theory debates
“After 9/11 the tremendous flurry of conspiracy reports, discussions, assertions, and explorations led to a few essays on ZNet, by ZNet regulars – and so some in other periodicals as well – assessing the whole approach of conspiracy theorizing. There was some debate as well.”
See here especially: Conspiracies or institutions: 9-11 and beyond. By Stephen R. Shalom and Michael Albert (June 2, 2002)

YouTube.com

Noam Chomsky on 911 conspiracy theories (2006, 4:46 min.)

Noam Chomsky discusses 9/11 conspiracy theorists (7:25 min.)

See also:

Conspiracism (PublicEye.org)
“Topic Portal Page.”

John Rees: Conspiracy theory: the answer is more left-wing theory not less (Counterfire, March 4, 2019). “Ruling class power can’t be understood as a conspiracy.”

Wreckage from the hijacked American Airlines FLT 77 sits on the west lawn of the Pentagon minutes after terrorists crashed the aircraft into southwest corner of the building. The Boeing 757 was bound for Los Angeles with 58 passengers and 6 crew. All aboard the aircraft were killed, along with 125 people in the Pentagon. U.S. Navy Photo by Journalist 1st Class Mark D. Faram. Date: 11 September 2001. Source: 010911-N-6157F-001 from http://www.navy.mil/view_image.asp?id=2445 . Author: U.S. Navy Photo by Journalist 1st Class Mark D. Faram. (RELEASED) Public Domain.
Wreckage from the hijacked American Airlines FLT 77 sits on the west lawn of the Pentagon minutes after terrorists crashed the aircraft into southwest corner of the building. The Boeing 757 was bound for Los Angeles with 58 passengers and 6 crew. All aboard the aircraft were killed, along with 125 people in the Pentagon. U.S. Navy Photo by Journalist 1st Class Mark D. Faram. Date: 11 September 2001. Source: 010911-N-6157F-001 from http://www.navy.mil/view_image.asp?id=2445 . Author: U.S. Navy Photo by Journalist 1st Class Mark D. Faram. (RELEASED) Public Domain.

EFTERLAD ET SVAR

Indtast din kommentar
Indtast dit navn her

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.