911 Conver Up

9/11 conspiracy theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from 911 conspiracy)

The collapse of the two World Trade Center towers and the nearby WTC7 (in this photo, the brown building to the left of the towers) is a major focus of 9/11 conspiracy theories.



9/11 conspiracy theories allege that the September 11 attacks in 2001 were either intentionally allowed to happen or were a false flag operation orchestrated by an organization with elements inside the United States government.[1] A poll taken in 2006 by Scripps Howard and Ohio University showed that, "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."[2] The most prominent theory is that the collapse of the World Trade Center and 7 World Trade Center were the result of a controlled demolition rather than structural weakening due to fire.[3][4] Another prominent belief is that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government[5] or that a commercial airliner was allowed to do so via an effective standdown of the American military.[6][7] The commonly claimed motives are to justify the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, to expand U.S. control of the Middle East's oil resources, to facilitate increased military spending; and to restrict domestic civil liberties.[citation needed]

Published reports and articles by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Popular Mechanics and mainstream media have rejected the 9/11 conspiracy theories.[8][9] The civil engineering establishment generally accepts that the impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, rather than controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers.[10]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
* 2 Supporters
* 3 Mainstream account
* 4 Variants
o 4.1 "LIHOP" and "MIHOP"
o 4.2 Investigation-oriented approach
* 5 Main theories
o 5.1 Foreknowledge
o 5.2 World Trade Center collapse
o 5.3 The Pentagon
o 5.4 Flight 93
o 5.5 Hijackers
o 5.6 Phone calls
o 5.7 Jewish and Israeli involvement
* 6 Other theories
o 6.1 Cover-up allegations
+ 6.1.1 Cockpit recorders
+ 6.1.2 Bin Laden tapes
o 6.2 Foreign governments
o 6.3 No plane theories
o 6.4 Reptilian shape-shifting aliens
o 6.5 Drug industry cartel
* 7 Motives
o 7.1 Pax Americana
o 7.2 Invasions
o 7.3 Suggested historical precedents
* 8 Media reaction
o 8.1 In popular culture
* 9 Criticism
o 9.1 In the political arena
* 10 Notes
* 11 Bibliography
* 12 See also
o 12.1 External links
+ 12.1.1 United States government sources
+ 12.1.2 Engineering publications
+ 12.1.3 Proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories
+ 12.1.4 Debunkers of 9/11 conspiracy theories

History

Since the September 11 attacks, a variety of conspiracy theories regarding the 9/11 attacks have been put forward in Web sites, books, and films. Many groups and individuals advocating 9/11 conspiracy theories identify as part of the 9/11 Truth Movement.[11][12][13] Unlike conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Diana, 9/11 conspiracy theories did not emerge immediately after the event. Indeed, most professional conspiracy theorists in the United States appeared to be as shocked as the rest of the population.[14] The first theories that emerged focused primarily on various anomalies in the publicly available evidence, and proponents later developed more specific theories about an alleged plot.[14] One allegation that was widely circulated by e-mail and on the Web, is that not a single Jew had been killed in the attack and that attacks must have been the work of the Mossad, not Islamic terrorists.[14]

The first elaborated theories appeared in Europe. They include a blog published by Mathias Bröckers, an editor at the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung at the time, the book 9/11: The Big Lie by French journalist Thierry Meyssan, the book The CIA and September 11 by former German state minister Andreas von Bülow and the book Operation 9/11, written by the German journalist Gerhard Wisnewski.[14]

While these theories were popular in Europe, they were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement and were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of anti-Americanism.[15][16] In an address to the United Nations on November 10, 2001, United States President George W. Bush denounced the emergence of "outrageous conspiracy theories [...] that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."[17]

By 2004, conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks began to gain ground in the United States. One explanation for the increase in popularity was that it was not the discovery of any new or more compelling evidence or an improvement of the technical quality of the presentation of the theories, but rather the growing criticism of the Iraq War and the presidency of George W. Bush, who had been reelected in 2004.[14] Revelations of spin doctoring and lying by federal officials, such as the claims about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the belated release of the President's Daily Brief of August 6, 2001 and reports that NORAD had lied to the 9/11 Commission, may have fuelled the conspiracy theories.[14]

Between 2004 and the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in 2006, mainstream coverage of the conspiracy theories increased.[14] Reacting to the growing publicity, the U.S. government issued responses to the theories, including a formal analysis by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) about the collapse of the World Trade Center,[18] a revised 2006 State Department webpage to debunk the theories,[19] and a strategy paper referred to by President Bush in an August 2006 speech, which declared that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda."[20] Al-Qaeda has repeatedly claimed responsibility for the attacks, with chief deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri accusing Shia Iran and Hezbollah of intentionally starting rumors that Israel carried out the attacks to denigrate Sunni successes in hurting America.[21][22][23][24][25][26]

Some of the conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks do not involve representational strategies typical of many conspiracy theories that establish a clear dichotomy between good and evil, or guilty and innocent. Instead, they call up gradations of negligence and complicity.[14] Matthias Bröckers, an early proponent of such theories, dismisses the official account of the September 11 attacks as being itself a conspiracy theory that seeks "to reduce complexity, disentangle what is confusing," and "explain the inexplicable".[14]

Just prior to the fifth anniversary of the attacks, mainstream news outlets released a flurry of articles on the growth of 9/11 conspiracy theories,[27] with an article in the magazine Time stating that "This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality."[28] An August 2007 Zogby poll commissioned by 911Truth.org[29] found that 63.6% of Americans believe that Arab fundamentalists were responsible for 9/11 while 26.4% of believed that "certain elements in the U.S. government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic reasons" and 4.8% of them believe that "certain U.S. Government elements actively planned or assisted some aspects of the attacks".[30] (See 9/11 opinion polls.) In 2008, 9/11 conspiracy theories topped a "greatest conspiracy theory” list compiled by The Daily Telegraph. The list was based on following and traction.[31][32] Mainstream coverage generally presents these theories as a cultural phenomenon and is often critical of their content.[citation needed]
Supporters
Main article: 9/11 Truth movement

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

Prominent adherents of the movement include, among others, theologian David Ray Griffin, physicist Steven E. Jones, software engineer Jim Hoffman, architect Richard Gage, film producer Dylan Avery, former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives Cynthia McKinney,[33] actors Daniel Sunjata, Ed Asner, and Charlie Sheen, political science professor Joseph Diaferia and journalist Thierry Meyssan.[34][35][36] Adherents of the 9/11 truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds and hold diverse views on other political issues.

Among the organizations that actively discuss and promote such theories are Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group that focuses on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings and collects signatures for a petition to the United States Congress that demands "a truly independent investigation with subpoena power" of the September 11 attacks; 9/11 Truth, founded in 2004; Scholars for 9/11 Truth, founded in 2005, and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, a group that split from Scholars for 9/11 Truth in 2007 and runs the online publication Journal of 9/11 Studies; 9/11 Citizens Watch, which was already formed in 2002; and the Hispanic Victims Group.
Mainstream account
Main article: September 11 attacks

On September 11, 2001, 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners. The hijackers intentionally crashed two of the airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing everyone on board and many others working in the buildings. Both buildings collapsed within two hours, destroying at least two nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon and a fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after the passengers and flight crew revolted.[37]

The 9/11 Commission Report disclosed prior warnings of varying detail of planned attacks against the United States by al-Qaeda. The report said that the government ignored these warnings due to a lack of communication between various law enforcement and intelligence personnel. For the lack of inter-agency communication, the report cited bureaucratic inertia and laws passed in the 1970s to prevent abuses that caused scandals during that era. The report faulted the Clinton and the Bush administrations with “failure of imagination”. Most members of the Democratic and the Republican parties applauded the commission's work.[38]

Within the context of 9/11 conspiracy theories, the terms 'mainstream account,' 'official account' and 'official conspiracy theory' all refer to:

* The reports from government investigations — the 9/11 Commission Report (which incorporated intelligence information from the earlier FBI investigation (PENTTBOM) and the Joint Inquiry of 2002), and the studies into building performance carried out by the Federal Emergency Management Agency[39] (FEMA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
* Investigations by non-government organizations that support the mainstream account — such as those by the National Fire Protection Association, and by scientists of Purdue University and Northwestern University.[40][41][42]
* Articles supporting these facts and theories appearing in magazines such as Popular Mechanics, Scientific American, and Time.
* Similar articles in news media throughout the world, including The Times of India,[43] the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC),[44] the BBC,[45] Le Monde,[46] Deutsche Welle,[47] the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC),[48] and The Chosun Ilbo of South Korea.[49]
* President Barack Obama's June 2009 speech to the Muslim world where he said "I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day."[50]

Variants

Most 9/11 conspiracy theories generally originate from dissatisfaction with the mainstream account of 9/11.[51]
"LIHOP" and "MIHOP"

Less extensive theories allege that official reports have covered up incompetence or negligence from U.S. personnel or the Bush Administration,[52] or involvement of a foreign government or organization other than al-Qaeda.[53] The most prevalent theories can be broadly divided into two main forms:

* LIHOP ("Let it happen on purpose") - suggests that key individuals within the government had at least some foreknowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignored them or actively weakened America's defenses to ensure the hijacked flights were not intercepted.[51][54]
* MIHOP ("Make it happen on purpose") - that key individuals within the government planned the attacks and collaborated with or framed, al-Qaeda in carrying them out. There is a range of opinions about how this might have been achieved.[51][54]

Investigation-oriented approach

Other critics of the account of the September 11 attacks provided by the U.S. government are not proposing specific theories, but try to demonstrate that the U.S. government's account of the events is wrong. This, according to them, would lead to a general call for a new official investigation into the events of September 11, 2001. According to Jonathan Kay, managing editor for comment at the Canadian newspaper National Post,[55] who is currently working on a book about proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories, "they don't feel that that's their job. They feel their job is to show everybody that the official theory of 9/11 is wrong. And then, when everybody is convinced, then the population will rise up and demand a new investigation with government resources, and that investigation will tell us what actually happened."[56]
Main theories
Foreknowledge
Main article: 9/11 advance-knowledge debate
See also: U.S. military response during the September 11 attacks and United States government operations and exercises on September 11, 2001

It has been claimed that action or inaction by U.S. officials with foreknowledge was intended to ensure that the attacks took place successfully. For example, Michael Meacher, former British environment minister and member of Tony Blair's Cabinet until June 2003 claims that the United States knowingly failed to prevent the attacks.[57][58] Author David Ray Griffin alleges that the 9/11 conspiracy was considerably larger than the government claims and that the entire 9/11 Commission Report "is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true."[59]

One popular conspiracy theory suggests there was a suspiciously high volume of put options placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks just before 9/11. According to this theory, trading insiders knew in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. While this may look suspicious in isolation, the general volume of put trading on these stocks reached similar levels at earlier points in the year.[60] In fact, American Airlines had just released a major warning about possible losses.[61]

Another common claim is that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) issued a stand down order or deliberately scrambled fighters late to allow the hijacked airplanes to reach their targets without interference. According to this theory, NORAD had the capability of locating and intercepting planes on 9/11, and its failure to do so indicates a government conspiracy to allow the attacks to occur.[61] The Web site emperors-clothes.com argues that the U.S. military failed to do their job. StandDown.net's Mark R. Elsis says "There is only one explanation for this.... Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."[62][63]

In September 2001, NORAD generals said they learned of the hijackings in time to scramble fighter jets. Later, the U.S. government released tapes claiming to show the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) did not tell the military about the hijackings until three of the four planes had crashed, a fact that would indicate that the FAA repeatedly lied to other U.S. government agencies.[34]

Phil Molé of Skeptic magazine has explained that it is neither quick nor easy to locate and intercept a plane behaving erratically, and that the hijackers turned off or disabled the onboard radar transponders. Without these transponder signals to identify the airplanes, the hijacked airplanes would have been only blips among 4,500 other blips on NORAD’S radar screens, making them very difficult to track.[61][62]

According to Popular Mechanics, in fact, only 14 fighter jets were on alert in the contiguous 48 states on 9/11. There was no automated method for the civilian air traffic controllers to alert NORAD.[62] A passenger airline hadn't been hijacked in the US since 1979.[64] "They had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. According to Popular Mechanics, "In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."[62] With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet from the time when contact was lost.[62] In fact, Norad intercepted off course or ceased responding aircraft on 129 occasions in the year 2000 and on 67 occasions in the period from September 2000 to June 2001 (FAA news release, 8/9/02).

Rules in effect at that time, and on 9/11, barred supersonic flight on intercepts. Before 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," says FAA spokesman Bill Schumann. After 9/11, the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation. They set up hotlines between command centers while NORAD increased its fighter coverage and installed radar to watch airspace over the continent.[62]
World Trade Center collapse
Main article: World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories
Criticism of the reports published by NIST on the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings plays a central role in theories about an alleged controlled demolition. The picture shows the simulated exterior buckling of 7 WTC during the collapse.

The controlled demolition conspiracy theories claim that the collapse of the North Tower, South Tower and 7 World Trade Center was not caused by the plane crash damage, or by resulting fire damage, but by explosives installed in the buildings in advance. The reasoning behind this explained that if the US Government had planted explosives in the building but made it look like terrorists had done the damage, it would have given them a perfect excuse to go to war in Iraq.[65]

Demolition theory proponents, such as physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures. Jones has presented the hypothesis that thermite or nanothermite[66] was used to demolish the buildings and says he has found evidence of such explosives in the WTC dust.[67][68][69][70]

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has rejected the theory and the NIST and many mainstream scientists refuse to debate conspiracy theorists to avoid giving them unwarranted credibility.[71] Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering generally accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.[72][73][74]

Soon after the day of the attacks, major media sources published that the towers had collapsed due to melted steel.[75][76] Knowledge that the burning temperatures of jet fuel would not melt the steel support structure of the WTC contributed to the belief among skeptics that the towers would not have collapsed without external interference (something other than the planes). NIST does not claim that the steel was melted, but rather that the weakened steel (at 1000 degrees Celsius steel weakens to roughly 10% of its room temperature strength), together with the damage caused by the planes' impacts, caused the collapses.[77] NIST reported that a simulation model based on the assumption that combustible vapors burned immediately upon mixing with the incoming oxygen showed that "at any given location, the duration of [gas] temperatures near 1,000°C was about 15 min to 20 min. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were 500 °C or below."[78]

Coincidentally, in the two years before the attacks, NORAD conducted exercises using scenarios in which hijacked jets were used as weapons, and one imagined target was the World Trade Center [79][80], which has been used as an argument in various conspiracy theories.
The Pentagon
The first of the five video frames leaked in 2002 showing the Pentagon just before impact.[81]
The Pentagon, after collapse of the damaged section.
Debris scattered near the Pentagon.

According to some theories, the U.S. administration deliberately chose not to shoot down a plane that was heading for the Pentagon, while others contend that no plane hit the Pentagon at all.

Theories that allege deliberate inaction by the U.S. administration cite former transportation secretary Norman Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 Commission, in which he stated that an aide asked then Vice President Dick Cheney whether the "orders still stand". Cheney answered that they did. Mineta assumed that the orders were to shoot down the plane, while conspiracy theorists see this as an indication that the orders were not to shoot down the plane.[34]

Thierry Meyssan and Dylan Avery argue that American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. Instead, they argue that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government. Reopen911.org says that the holes in the Pentagon walls were far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757: "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60 ft. across?" Meyssan’s book, L’Effroyable Imposture (published in English as 9/11: The Big Lie) became an instant bestseller in France and is available in more than a dozen languages. When released, the book was heavily criticized by the French press. The French newspaper Liberation called the book "a tissue of wild and irresponsible allegations, entirely without foundation."[82][83][84]

According to Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University, a crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building. When Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, one wing hit the ground and the other was sheared off by the Pentagon's load-bearing columns.[82] According to ArchitectureWeek, the reason the Pentagon took relatively little damage from the impact was because Wedge One had recently been renovated.[85] (This was part of a renovation program which had been begun in the eighties, and Wedge One was the first of five to be renovated.[86])

Airplane debris including Flight 77's black boxes, the nose cone, landing gear, an airplane tire, the fuselage, an intact cockpit seat, and the tail number of the airplane were recovered at the crash site.[citation needed] The remains of passengers and crew from Flight 77 were found at the Pentagon crash site and their identities confirmed by DNA analysis.[citation needed] Many eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Further, Flight 77 passengers made phone calls reporting that their airplane had been hijacked. For example, passenger Renee May called her mother to tell her that the plane had been hijacked and that the passengers had been herded to the back of the plane. Another passenger named Barbara Olson called her husband (U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson) and said that the flight had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[5][82][87]

A year before the attacks, a massive casualty (MASCAL) exercise was conducted in which a hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon [88], which has raised suspicion amongst some.
Flight 93

The fourth plane hijacked on 9/11, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed in an open field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after the passengers revolted. Out of the four planes hijacked on that day, it was the only one not to reach its target.[89]

One of the popular conspiracy theories surrounding this event is that Flight 93 was actually shot down by a U.S. fighter jet. David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones say that large parts of the plane including the main body of the engine landed miles away from the main wreckage site, too far away for an ordinary plane crash. Jones says that planes usually leave a small debris field when they crash, and that this is not compatible with reports of wreckage found farther away from the main crash site. A posting on Rense.com claimed that the main body of the engine was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner.[82][89][90]

According to some theories, the plane had to be shot down by the government because passengers had found out about the alleged plot.[91]

According to the magazine Skeptic, "[this] claim rests largely on unsupported assertions that the main body of the engine and other large parts of the plane turned up miles from the main wreckage site, too far away to have resulted from an ordinary crash. This is incorrect, because the engine was found only 300 yards from the main crash site, and its location was consistent with the direction in which the plane had been traveling."[92] Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 in 1996, says that, at very high velocities of 500 mph or more, it would only take a few seconds to move or tumble across the ground for 300 yards.[82][92]

Reports of wreckage discovered at Indian Lake by local residents are accurate. CNN reported that investigators found debris from the crash at least eight miles away from the crash site, including in New Baltimore.[93] However, according to CNN, this debris was all very light material that the wind would have easily blown away, and a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article from September 14, 2001 describes the material as "mostly papers", "strands of charred insulation", and an "endorsed paycheck". The same article quotes FBI agent Bill Crowley that, "Lighter, smaller debris probably shot into the air on the heat of a fireball that witnesses said shot several hundred feet into the air after the jetliner crashed. Then, it probably rode a wind that was blowing southeast at about 9 m.p.h."[94] Also, the distance between the crash site and Indian Lake was misreported in some accounts. According to the BBC, "In a straight line, Indian Lake is just over a mile from the crash site. The road between the two locations takes a roundabout route of 6.9 miles — accounting for the erroneous reports."[89]

Some conspiracy theorists believe a small white jet seen flying over the crash area may have fired a missile to shoot down Flight 93.[95][dubious – discuss] However, government agencies such as the FBI assert this was a Dassault Falcon business jet asked to descend to an altitude of around 1500 ft to survey the impact.[96] Ben Sliney, who was the FAA operation manager on September 11, 2001, says no military aircraft were near Flight 93.[97]

Some internet videos, such as Loose Change, speculate that Flight 93 safely landed in Ohio, and a substituted plane was involved in the crash in Pennsylvania.[98] Often cited is a preliminary news report that Flight 93 landed at a Cleveland airport;[99] it was later learned that Delta Flight 1989 was the plane confused with Flight 93, and the report was retracted as inaccurate. Several websites within the 9/11 Truth Movement dispute this claim, citing the wreckage at the scene, eyewitness testimony, and the difficulty of secretly substituting one plane for another, and claim that such "hoax theories... appear calculated to alienate victims' survivors and the larger public from the 9/11 truth movement".[90][100] The editor of the article has since written a rebuttal to the claims.[101]

The woman who took the only photograph of the mushroom cloud from the impact of Flight 93 hitting the ground says she has been harassed by conspiracy theorists, who claim she faked the photo. The FBI, the Smithsonian, and the National Park Service’s Flight 93 National Memorial have found it to be authentic.[102]

Conspiracy theorists have claimed that passengers of Flight 93 and/or Flight 77, were murdered or that they were relocated, with the intent that they never be found.[91]
Hijackers
See also: Hijackers in the September 11 attacks and 9/11 advance-knowledge debate#Blocked al-Qaeda investigations

During the initial confusion surrounding the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the BBC published the names and identities of what they believed to be some of the hijackers.[103] Some of the people named were later discovered to be alive, a fact that was seized upon by 9/11 conspiracy theorists as proof that the hijackings were faked.[103][104] The BBC explained that the initial confusion may have arisen because the names they reported back in 2001 were common Arabic and Islamic names.[103] In response to a request from the BBC, the FBI stated:[103]

The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Also, the 9/11 investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and the House and Senate Joint Inquiry. Neither of these reviews ever raised the issue of doubt about the identity of the nineteen hijackers.

The New York Times also acknowledged these as cases of mistaken identity.[105]

According to John Bradley, the former managing editor of Arab News in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the only public information about the hijackers was a list of names issued by the FBI on September 14, 2001. When the FBI released photographs four days after the cited reports on September 27, the mistaken identities were quickly resolved. According to Bradley, "all of this is attributable to the chaos that prevailed during the first few days following the attack. What we're dealing with are coincidentally identical names." In Saudi Arabia, says Bradley, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, Said al-Ghamdi and Walid al-Shari, are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain."[104]

According to Thomas Kean, chair of the 9/11 Commission, "Sixteen of the nineteen shouldn't have gotten into the United States in any way at all because there was something wrong with their visas, something wrong with their passports. They should simply have been stopped at the border. That was sixteen of the nineteen. Obviously, if even half of those people had been stopped, there never would have been a plot."[106]

Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi had both been identified as al-Qaeda agents by the CIA, but that information was not shared with the FBI or U.S. Immigration, so both men were able to legally enter the U.S. to prepare for the 9/11 attacks.[107]

Five of the alleged hijackers may have received training at U.S. military facilities.[108] The Defense Department confirmed that three of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi, "have the same names as alumni of American military schools." A Mohamed Atta attended the International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama; an Abdulaziz al-Omari went to the Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base in Texas; and a Saeed al-Ghamdi was at the Defense Language Institute at the Presidio in Monterey, California.[109]
Phone calls

After 9/11, cellular experts said that calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they were surprised that they lasted as long as they did. They said that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground.[110] Alexa Graf, an AT&T spokesperson said it was almost a fluke that the calls reached their destinations.[111] Other industry experts said that it is possible to use cell phones with varying degrees of success during the ascent and descent of commercial airline flights.[112] Marvin Sirbu, professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University said on September 14, 2001, that "The fact of the matter is that cell phones can work in almost all phases of a commercial flight."[112]

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, 13 passengers from Flight 93 made a total of over 30 calls to both family and emergency personnel (twenty-two confirmed air phone calls, two confirmed cell phone and eight not specified in the report). According to Debunk911myths.org, all but two calls from Flight 93 were made on air phones, not cell phones, and both calls lasted about a minute before being dropped.[113] Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that Flight 93 was supported by several cell sites.[111] There were reportedly three phone calls from Flight 11, five from Flight 175, and three calls from Flight 77. Two calls from these flights were recorded, placed by flight attendants Madeleine Sweeney and Betty Ong on Flight 11.
Jewish and Israeli involvement
See also: 9/11 advance-knowledge debate#Israel

There are theories that 9/11 was part of an international Jewish conspiracy. According to Cinnamon Stillwell, another myth popular with 9/11 conspiracy theorists[114] is that 4,000 Jewish employees skipped work at the World Trade Center on September 11. This was first reported on September 17 by the Lebanese Hezbollah-owned satellite television channel Al-Manar and is believed to be based on the September 12 edition of the Jerusalem Post that stated "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks."[115] Both turned out to be incorrect; the number of Jews who died in the attacks is variously estimated at between 270 to 400.[116][117][dead link][118][119] The lower figure tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area and partial surveys of the victims' listed religion. The U.S. State Department has published a partial list of 76 in response to claims that fewer Jews/Israelis died in the WTC attacks than should have been present at the time.[120][121] Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.[122]

It has been claimed that Israeli agents may have had foreknowledge of the attacks. Four hours after the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment building, for "puzzling behavior". The Israelis were said to have been videotaping the events with cries of "joy and mockery".[123][124][125] While The Forward, a New York Jewish news magazine, reported that the FBI considered them to be intelligence operatives, a spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in the United States said that they had not been involved in any intelligence operation in the United States.[123]

Imam Anwar al-Awlaki of Virgnia initially condemned the attacks. But just six days after the attack, he wrote on the IslamOnline.net website a suggestion that Israeli intelligence agents might have been responsible for the attacks, and that the FBI "went into the roster of the airplanes and whoever has a Muslim or Arab name became the hijacker by default.[126] After the 9/11 investigations, he became known as the "9/11 Imam" who had met with or inspired 3 of the hijackers, and became known for contacts with 2009 Fort Hood shooting suspect Nidal Malik Hasan and Northwest Airlines Flight 253 suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab after which he "blessed" both of the attacks in statements to the press, and identified as a likely target for an airstrike in Yemen.
Other theories
Cover-up allegations

Conspiracy theorists say they detect a pattern of behavior on the part of officials investigating the September 11 attack meant to suppress the emergence of evidence that might contradict the mainstream account.[127][128][129][citation needed] The debris from ground-zero, for example, was removed without a proper forensic investigation, making it very difficult to discover why the World Trade Center buildings collapsed.[130][131]
Cockpit recorders

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the cockpit voice recorders (CVR) or flight data recorders (FDR), or "black boxes", from Flights 11 and 175 were not recovered from the remains of the WTC attack; however, two men, Michael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi, who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, stated in the book Behind-The-Scenes: Ground Zero[132] that they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners:[133][134]

"At one point I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three."[135]

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

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, both black boxes from Flight 77 and both black boxes from Flight 93 were recovered. However, the CVR from Flight 77 was said to be too damaged to yield any data. On April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings.[136] In April 2006, a transcript of the CVR was released as part of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.[137] Some conspiracy theorists[who?] do not believe that the black boxes were damaged and that instead there has been a cover up of evidence.[citation needed]
Bin Laden tapes
Main article: Videos of Osama bin Laden

A series of interviews, audio and videotapes have been released since the 9/11 attacks that have been reported to be from Osama bin Laden. At first the speaker denied responsibility for the attacks[138] but over the years has taken increasing responsibility for them culminating in a November 2007 audiotape in which the speaker claimed sole responsibility for the attacks and denied the Taliban and the Afghan government or people had any prior knowledge of the attacks.[139][140][141] According to the Central Intelligence Agency, the speaker was most likely Osama bin Laden. Some observers, especially people in the Muslim world, doubt the authenticity of the tape.[142]
Foreign governments
See also: Responsibility for the September 11 attacks#Other alleged responsibility and 9/11 advanced-knowledge debate#Foreign government foreknowledge

There are allegations that individuals within the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) may have played an important role in financing the attacks. There are also claims that other foreign intelligence agencies, such as the Israeli Mossad, had foreknowledge of the attacks, and that Saudi Arabia may have played a role in financing the attacks. Francesco Cossiga, former President of Italy from 1985 until his resignation over Operation Gladio, asserts that it is common knowledge among democratic circles in the U.S. and Europe, and primarily in the Italian center-left, that the 9/11 attacks were a joint operation of the CIA and the Mossad.[143] General Hamid Gul, a former head of ISI, believes the attacks were an “inside job” originating in the United States, perpetrated by Israel or neo-conservatives.[144]
No plane theories
The "no plane theory," promoted by internet-only videos like 911 Taboo,[145] asserts that this shot of the second impact, taken from a news helicopter, depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a Layer Mask.

Nico Haupt and Morgan Reynolds, formerly the chief economist within the Labor Department under the Bush administration argue that no planes were used in the attacks. Reynolds claims it is physically impossible that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175, being largely aluminium, could have penetrated the steel frames of the Towers, and that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video.[146] "There were no planes, there were no hijackers," Reynolds insists. "I know, I know, I'm out of the mainstream, but that's the way it is." According to David Shayler, "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes," he says. "Watch footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center." Truth movement veterans tend to distance themselves from "no-planers".[63][146] Discussion of no plane theories have been banned from certain conspiracy theory websites while advocates have been threatened with violence by posters at other conspiracy theory websites.[147]
Reptilian shape-shifting aliens
See also: David Icke

English author and public speaker David Icke argues that reptilian, shape-shifting extraterrestrial humanoids are responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to Icke, a reptilian global elite is behind all things that occur in the world. Icke's theories are rejected by 911blogger.com and other conspiracy theory sites.[148][149]
Drug industry cartel

In September 2009 public health expert Leonard G. Horowitz and journalist Sherri Kane published online and sent to the F.B.I. an affidavit with documents they claim prove the 9/11 attacks were part of a population reduction conspiracy by an international drug industry cartel that involves leading business and media figures. The pair alleged the documents show a link between the 9/11 attacks, Larry Silverstein and a conspiracy that also involved creating the swine flu pandemic.[150]
Motives
Pax Americana
Main article: Pax Americana

In 2006, members of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth argued that a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which included Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, set on US world dominance and orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran.[151] In September 2000 the PNAC released a strategic treatise entitled Rebuilding America's Defences. David Ray Griffin in his 2004 book The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 argued that the treatise may have been the blueprint for 9/11 attacks. Specifically the language in the paper that read "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" was describing an alleged motive.[152][153][154]

The Defense Planning Guidance of 1992, was drafted by Paul Wolfowitz on behalf of then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. This was described as "a blueprint for permanent American global hegemony" by Andrew J. Bacevich in his book American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy.[155]

Matt Taibbi argued in his book The Great Derangement that conspiracy theorists have taken what is written in the paper "completely out of context", and that the "transformation" referenced in the paper is explicitly stated to be a decades-long process to turn the Cold War-era military into a "new, modern military" which could deal with more localized conflicts.[156] He stated that, for this to be evidence of motive, either those responsible would have decided to openly state their objectives, or would have read the paper in 2000 and quickly laid the groundwork for the 9/11 attacks using it as inspiration.[156]
Invasions

Conspiracy theorists[who?] have questioned whether the Oil Factor and 9/11 provided the United States and the United Kingdom with a reason to launch a war they had wanted for some time, and suggest that this gives them a strong motive for either carrying out the attacks, or allowing them to take place. For instance, Andreas von Bülow, a former research minister in the German government, has argued that 9/11 was staged to justify the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.[157] Former Malaysian premiere Mahathir Mohamad was quoted as saying that there was "strong evidence" that the attacks were faked so the United States could go to war against Muslims.[158]
Suggested historical precedents

Time magazine contrasted events which inspired past conspiracy theories with those that inspire 9/11 conspiracy theories such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Time called the public assassination of Kennedy a "private, intimate affair" when compared with the attack on the World Trade Center, which was witnessed by millions of people and documented by hundreds of videographers; and stated, "there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it."[28]
Media reaction

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

The Norwegian version of the July 2006 Le Monde diplomatique sparked interest when they ran, on their own initiative, a three page main story on the 9/11 attacks and summarized the various types of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which were not specifically endorsed by the newspaper, only recensed).[159] The Voltaire Network, which has changed position since the September 11 attacks and whose director, Thierry Meyssan, became a leading proponent of 9/11 conspiracy theory, explained that although the Norwegian version of Le Monde diplomatique had allowed it to translate and publish this article on its website, the mother-house, in France, categorically refused it this right, thus displaying an open debate between various national editions.[160] In December 2006, the French version published an article by Alexander Cockburn, co-editor of CounterPunch, which strongly criticized the alleged endorsement of conspiracy theories by the U.S. left-wing, alleging that it was a sign of "theoretical emptiness."[161][162]

Also, on the Canadian website for CBC News: The Fifth Estate, a program titled, "Conspiracy Theories: uncovering the facts behind the myths of Sept. 11, 2001" was broadcast on October 29, 2003, stating that what they found may be more surprising than any theories.[163] On November 27, 2009 the The Fifth Estate aired a documentary entitled The Unofficial Story where several prominent members of the 9/11 Truth Movement made their case.[164][165]

An article in the September 11, 2006 edition of Time magazine comments that the major 9/11 conspiracy theories “depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses”, and enjoy continued popularity because “the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting”. It concludes that “conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events” and constitute “an American form of national mourning.”[166]

The Daily Telegraph published an article titled "The CIA couldn't have organised this..." which said "The same people who are making a mess of Iraq were never so clever or devious that they could stage a complex assault on two narrow towers of steel and glass" and "if there is a nefarious plot in all this bad planning, it is one improvised by a confederacy of dunces". This article mainly attacked a group of scientists led by Professor Steven E. Jones, now called Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. They said "most of them aren't scientists but instructors... at second-rate colleges".[167]

A major Australian newspaper The Daily Telegraph, published an article in May 2007 that was highly critical of Loose Change 2, a movie which presents a 9/11 conspiracy theory.[168]

Doug MacEachern in a May 2008 column for the Arizona Republic wrote that while many "9/11 truthers" are not crackpots that espouse "crackpot conspiracy theories". He wrote that supporters of the theories fail to take into account both human nature and that nobody has come forward claiming they were participants in the alleged conspiracies.[169] This view seconded by Timothy Giannuzzi, a Calgary Herald op-ed columnist specializing in foreign policy.[170]

On June 7, 2008, The Financial Times Magazine published a lengthy article on the 9/11 Truth Movement and 9/11 conspiracy theories.[171]

Charlie Brooker a British multimedia personality in a July 2008 column published by The Guardian as part of its "Comment is free" series agreed that 9/11 conspiracy theorists fail to take in account human fallacies and added that believing in these theories gives theorists a sense of belonging to a community that shares privileged information thus giving the theorists a delusional sense of power.[172] The commentary generated over 1700 online responses, the largest in the history of the series.[173] In a September 2009 piece, The Guardian were more supportive of 9/11 conspiracy theories however, asking, "when did it become uncool to ask questions? When did questioners become imbeciles?"[174]

On September 12, 2008, Russian State Television broadcast in prime time a documentary made by Member of the European Parliament Giulietto Chiesa entitled Zero sympathetic to those who question the mainstream account of the attacks according to Chiesa. According to Thierry Meyssan in conjunction with the documentary, Russian State Television aired a debate on the subject. The panel consisted of members from several countries including 12 Russians who hold divergent views. The motive of Russian State Television in broadcasting the documentary was questioned by a commentator from The Other Russia who noted that Russian State Television had a history of broadcasting programs involving conspiracy theories involving the United States government.[175][176][177]

Nasir Mahmood in a commentary printed by the Pakistan Observer wrote favorably about a 9/11 truth lecture and film festival held in California and quoted a Jewish speaker at that festival who said that none of the 19 suspected hijackers had been proven guilty of anything and compared racism against Muslims resulting from what he called false accusations to the racism against Jews in the Nazi era.[178]

On November 10, 2008, ITN broadcast a story summarizing various 9/11 conspiracy theories.[179]

The emergence of the birther movement in 2009 has led to comparisons between that movement and the 9/11 Truth Movement, with both movements seen in a very negative light. Moon Landing conspiracy theories have also been compared to the birther and 9/11 conspiracy theories. James Borne, a journalist for The Times who covered the September 11 Attacks, described his assignment covering a 9/11 truth meeting "Perhaps the most intellectually scary assignment I have had in recent years".[180][181][182][183]

On August 31, 2009, the National Geographic Channel aired the program 9/11 Science and Conspiracy, in which the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center tested some of the claims frequently made by those who question the official 9/11 account. Specifically, the experiments concluded that burning jet fuel alone can sufficiently raise the temperature of a steel support column to the point of structural failure, that a controlled demolition using conventional techniques would leave clear evidence that was not found at Ground Zero, that using thermite is not an effective technique to melt a steel column, and that even if thermite chemical signatures were found, it would be impossible to tell if thermite was actually used or if the traces came from the reaction of aircraft aluminum with other substances in the fire. The testing also concluded that the type of hole found at the Pentagon was consistent with the mainstream scenario, and that damage from a bombing or missile attack would differ from the damage that occurred. In the program, several prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorists viewed rough edits of the experiments, and expressed their disagreement with the findings.[184][185]

The British left wing magazine New Statesman listed David Ray Griffin as the 41st most important person who matters today. The magazine said that Griffin's "books on the subject have lent a sheen of respectability that appeals to people at the highest levels of government". The publication listed 9/11 conspiracy thories as "one of the most pernicious global myths".[186]

Denver public television KBDI-TV has aired 9/11 truth documentaries several times. The stations spokesperson claimed airing these documentaries have been a boom for the stations fund raising efforts.[187]

Glenn Beck, television and radio host, said of the allegations: "There are limits to debasement of this country, aren't there? I mean, it's one thing to believe that our politicians are capable of being Bernie Madoff. It's another to think that they are willing to kill 3,000 Americans. Once you cross that line, you're in a whole new territory."[188]

In March 2010 The Washington Post editorialized against Yukihisa Fujita, a prominent Japanese politician who has espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories. They described Fujita as "a man so susceptible to the imaginings of the lunatic fringe".[189]
In popular culture

In June 2005 the popular German State Television murder mystery program Tatort ran an episode in which a woman who claims the 9/11 attacks were instigated by the Bush family for oil and power is targeted by FBI and CIA hitmen after her male roommate is found dead. The roommate was trained to be a 9/11 pilot but was left behind. The episode viewed by 7 million people ended when the detectives investigating the death believed her and she escapes to an unnamed Arab country.[190]

In season 10 of the animated show South Park, the episode "Mystery of the Urinal Deuce" centers around 9/11 conspiracy theories. After Eric Cartman, a main character in the show, blames Kyle Broflovski of causing 9/11, Kyle and his friend Stan Marsh end up in the White House, where they are told that the government did in fact cause the 9/11 attacks. They escape, and eventually it is revealed that the government wants people to think that they caused 9/11, so that they think the government has more power than it does.[191]

A Rescue Me episode featured a character played by actor Daniel Sunjata who is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in real life, explaining to a French journalist that the 9/11 attacks were a “neoconservative government effort” to create a new Pearl Harbor to control oil and increase military spending.[192][193] According to Denis Leary major plot lines in the first 10 episodes of the show's season 5 revolved around reinvestigation and conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks.[194]
Criticism

Critics of these conspiracy theories say they are a form of conspiracism common throughout history after a traumatic event in which conspiracy theories emerge as a mythic form of explanation.[195] A related criticism addresses the form of research on which the theories are based. Thomas W. Eagar, an engineering professor at MIT, suggested they "use the 'reverse scientific method'. They determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion." Eagar's criticisms also exemplify a common stance that the theories are best ignored. "I've told people that if the argument gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." According to him, this happened when Steve Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University took up the issue.[196]

Michael Shermer, writing in Scientific American, said: "The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking. All the evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."[197]

Scientific American,[198] Popular Mechanics,[199] and The Skeptic's Dictionary[200] have published articles that rebut various 9/11 conspiracy theories. Popular Mechanics has published a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths that expands upon the research first presented in the article.[201] In the foreword for the book Senator John McCain wrote that blaming the U.S. government for the events "mars the memories of all those lost on that day" and "exploits the public's anger and sadness. It shakes Americans' faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low. It trafficks in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans."[202] Der Spiegel dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories as a "panoply of the absurd", stating "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons."[203] David Ray Griffin has published a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory,[204][citation needed] and Jim Hoffman has written an article called 'popular mechanics assault on 9/11 truth" where he attacks the methods Popular Mechanics uses in forming their arguments.[205][citation needed]

Journalist Matt Taibbi, in his book The Great Derangement, discusses 9/11 conspiracy theories as symptomatic of what he calls the "derangement" of American society; a disconnection from reality due to widespread "disgust with our political system".[156] Drawing a parallel with the Charismatic movement, he argues that both "chose to battle bugbears that were completely idiotic, fanciful, and imaginary," instead of taking control of their own lives.[156] While critical, Taibbi explains that 9/11 conspiracy theories are different from "Clinton-era black-helicopter paranoia", and constitute more than "a small, scattered group of nutcases [...] they really were, just as they claim to be, almost everyone you meet."[156] Taibbi also argued that 9/11 conspiracy theorists form "completely and utterly retarded" narratives to explain the attacks because of "defiant unfamiliarity with the actual character of America's ruling class".[156]

Historian Kenneth J. Dillon argues that 9/11 conspiracy theories represent an overly easy target for skeptics and that their criticisms obfuscate the underlying issue of what actually happened if there wasn't a conspiracy. He suggests that the answer is criminal negligence on the part of the president and vice president, who were repeatedly warned, followed by a cover-up conspiracy after 9/11.[206] This was expanded upon by columnist Matt Mankelow writing for the Socialist Workers Online. He concludes that 9/11 truthers while "desperately trying to legitimately question a version of events" end up playing into the hands of the neoconservatives they are trying to take down by creating a diversion. Mankelow noted that this has irritated many people who are politically left wing.[207]

David Aaronovitch, a columnist for The Times, in his book entitled Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History that was published in May 2009, claimed that the theories strain credulity.[91] Aaronovitch also charged that 9/11 conspiracy theorists have exaggerated the expertise of those supporting their theories, and noted that 9/11 conspiracy theorists including David Ray Griffin cross cite each other.[208]
In the political arena

Former Canadian Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion forced a candidate from Winnipeg, Lesley Hughes, to terminate her campaign after earlier writings from Hughes surfaced in which Hughes wrote that U.S., German, Russian and Israeli intelligence officials knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.[209][210] Earlier, Peter Kent, Deputy Editor of Global Television Network News and Conservative Party candidate in the 2008 Canadian election, had called for Hughes's resignation saying that the 9/11 truth movement is "one of Canada’s most notorious hatemongering fringe movements" composed of "conspiracy theorists who are notorious for holding anti-Semitic views."[211] On June 16, 2009, Hughes sued Kent, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the B'Nai Brith of Canada and four senior members of the two organizations alleging the anti-Semitic allegations were untrue and defamatory and ruined her career.[212] Later another Conservative Party candidate called for the leader of the New Democratic Party to fire a candidate for her pro 9/11 truth views.[213]

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, described the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers as a "suspect event"[214] and suggests that the Bush Administration was involved in 9/11.[215][216]

In 2008 calls for the resignation of Richard Falk, the special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories for the United Nations, were partially based on his support investigating the validity of 9/11 conspiracy theories.[217]

In February 2009, Aymeric Chauprade (fr), a professor of geopolitics at CID military college in Paris, was fired by French Defence Minister Herve Morin for writing a book entitled Chronicle of the Clash of Civilizations that espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories.[218]

In September 2009 Van Jones, an adviser to US President Barack Obama, resigned after his signature on a 2004 petition calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur and other controversial statements came to light drawing criticism. Van Jones said he was a victim of a smear campaign, adding that he does not currently, nor ever has agreed with that theory.[219]

9/11 conspiracy theorist critic David Aaronovitch claims the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories has hurt the War on Terror. According to Aaronovitch, because a significant portion of educated Pakistanis believe that George W. Bush brought the towers down, dealing with the Taliban is difficult “because they actually don't believe the fundamental premise on which the war against terror was waged”.[220]

The 9/11 truth movement became an issue in the 2010 Texas Gubernatorial Republican primary when candidate Debra Medina replied when asked by Glenn Beck about US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks: "I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard, There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that." After being criticized for the remarks by opposing candidates, Medina stated that she has never been a 9/11 truth movement member and believes the twin towers were attacked by Muslim terrorists.[221][222]