9/11 truth movement

9/11 truth movement

Company type	Social movement
Industry	Political activism
Area served	Primarily United States, international presence

The 9/11 truth movement consists of a varied coalition that promotes alternative explanations disputing the widely accepted view that Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four planes, subsequently crashing them into the Pentagon and the original Twin Towers, leading to their destruction. Central to this movement are critiques of perceived inconsistencies in the official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigations, particularly concerning the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, with claims suggesting either a deliberate cover-up or involvement by insiders.

Participants scrutinize the evidence related to the attacks, explore alternative hypotheses, and call for renewed inquiries. Certain factions within the movement assert that some individuals within the United States government were either responsible or complicit, citing motivations such as justifying military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as restricting civil freedoms. Nonetheless, endorsements from experts in relevant disciplines like civil and aerospace engineering remain minimal.

Name

The phrase "9/11 truth movement" describes a loosely connected network of individuals and groups questioning whether US governmental bodies or agencies played a role in or had prior knowledge of the September 11 attacks. Those involved frequently describe themselves as "9/11 skeptics," "truth activists," or "9/11 truthers," typically rejecting the designation "conspiracy theorists."

Adherents

Supporters hail from a wide range of social and political perspectives, encompassing liberals, conservatives, and libertarians alike.Lev Grossman of Time magazine characterizes it as a "mainstream political reality," whereas commentators such as Ben Smith from Politico and writers for the Minneapolis Star Tribune categorize it as "fringe." An editorial from The Washington Post referred to it as part of the "lunatic fringe." Mark Fenster, a law professor at the University of Florida, highlights the movement’s organizational capabilities, which have been bolstered by modern digital platforms including social media and blogs.

Primarily active within the United States but with an international presence as well, this movement has impacted political campaigns. For instance, John Buchanan ran for president in 2004 promoting a 9/11 truth agenda, while Jeff Boss campaigned across multiple presidential elections (2008, 2012, 2016, 2020) advocating for the cause.

A 2011 study by Jamie Bartlett and Carl Miller published in Skeptical Inquirer divided adherents into three distinct categories, all unified by skepticism toward experts and mainstream institutions. Despite varying reasons for involvement, these participants’ commitment helps maintain the movement’s endurance and increases its public exposure.

Perspectives

Within the movement, numerous individuals assert that insiders within the US government were either involved in or had prior knowledge of the September 11 attacks but chose not to intervene. Some contend these events were deliberately engineered to provide a pretext for military interventions in the Middle East and to strengthen political control. This alleged plan is said to have facilitated the Bush administration's expansion of civil liberties violations and justified invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, purportedly to secure oil interests. Prominent figures such as then-Vice President Dick Cheney and members affiliated with the neoconservative Project for the New American Century have been implicated in these claims.

A widely held assertion among supporters is that the destruction of the World Trade Center structures was caused by controlled demolitions rather than the official explanations.

Dissemination

The Internet serves as a crucial platform for followers to communicate internally and promote the movement’s perspectives to a broader audience. Documentaries produced by movement-affiliated groups, such as 9/11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, have been broadcast on Colorado Public Television. This particular program was once among the most accessed on PBS’s national website. The decision to air such content has generated debate and controversy surrounding both the local affiliate and PBS itself.

Background

Prior to the attacks, William Cooper and Alex Jones suggested that the US government was orchestrating terror events falsely attributed to Osama bin Laden, promoting the "controlled demolition" hypothesis on September 11. Jones subsequently emerged as a leading figure within the 9/11 Truth movement.

Following the attacks, authors such as Michael Ruppert, Barrie Zwicker, Jean-Charles Brisard, Mathias Bröckers, and Andreas von Bülow published works challenging the official narrative and endorsing controlled demolition theories. In September 2002, demonstrations titled "Bush Did It!" took place in San Francisco and Oakland.

In October 2004, a statement was issued by 9/11 Truth bearing nearly 200 signatures—including family members of victims and public personalities like Edward Asner, Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Catherine Austin Fitts, Richard Heinberg, Richard Falk, and Mark Crispin Miller—demanding a renewed inquiry and hinting at possible government involvement. Van Jones later admitted in 2009 that he had not thoroughly examined the statement prior to endorsing it.

In 2006, Steven E. Jones authored "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?" advocating for controlled demolition theories. Brigham Young University placed him on paid leave due to these controversial claims; he retired soon after. His scientific conclusions encountered considerable skepticism and critique.

That same year, a group of 61 Wisconsin legislators sought removal of University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett after he joined Scholars for 9/11 Truth. However, the university upheld principles of academic freedom and refrained from disciplinary action.

Various organizations representing victims' families have called for independent investigations. In 2009, activists including Lorie Van Auken petitioned New York City authorities to conduct further inquiries into 9/11. Although petitioners gathered sufficient signatures to propose a commission via ballot initiative, a New York Supreme Court judge invalidated the petition under city regulations, preventing it from appearing on the ballot.

9/11 Commission's Commission Report

Certain advocates within the 9/11 truth movement contend that numerous inquiries submitted by the 9/11 Family Steering Committee to the 9/11 Commission, led by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean, were left unaddressed during both the hearings and in the Commission Report. Lorie Van Auken, one of the group known as the Jersey Girls, estimated that the final report, released on July 22, 2004, answered only about 30% of their questions.

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee maintained an online platform outlining their questions and categorizing them based on whether they were thoroughly answered, insufficiently covered, or entirely excluded from the report.

David Ray Griffin’s book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, claims that the official document either left out or misrepresented information, providing a list of 115 such instances. Griffin has described the 571-page report as "a 571-page lie."

On May 26, 2008, adjunct professor Blair Gadsby initiated a hunger strike and demonstration outside Senator and Republican presidential candidate John McCain's office. The protest aimed to persuade McCain to engage with prominent members of the 9/11 truth movement, including Richard Gage, Steven E. Jones, and David Ray Griffin. Notably, McCain had authored the foreword to Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts, published by Popular Mechanics.

Arizona Republican State Senator Karen Johnson publicly supported this demonstration and addressed the Arizona State Senate on June 10, promoting the theory of controlled demolition and calling for a renewed investigation into the events of 9/11.

FEMA and NIST report reactions

Following initial inquiries, in May 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency published FEMA 403 titled World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations. Subsequently, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released its final reports concerning the collapse in 2005 and later in 2008.

Critics within the 9/11 truth movement challenged these reports for allegedly overlooking critical evidence supporting explosive demolition theories. They also accused the agencies of employing misleading terminology and graphics while resorting to straw man arguments. For example, Jim Hoffman’s 2005 article titled Building a better mirage: NIST's 3-year $20,000,000 Cover Up of the Crime of the Century exemplifies such criticism.

In late 2005, Steven E. Jones, then a professor at Brigham Young University, authored a paper disputing NIST’s findings and proposing that explosives were used deliberately to bring down the towers. His assertions attracted mainstream media coverage including an appearance on MSNBC—the first instance on a major cable news outlet. However, BYU reprimanded Jones for releasing his conclusions without undergoing peer review prior to public dissemination; this led to his being placed on paid leave. He has since retired.

In April 2007, certain family members of victims along with participants from Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice submitted a formal request to NIST seeking corrections based on perceived flaws in their report. NIST reaffirmed its original conclusions in September of that year. The petitioners responded in October requesting reconsideration, though subsequent developments remain unclear.

Pamphlet Distribution at the National September 11 Museum

When the National September 11 Memorial & Museum opened in May 2014, members of the movement handed out pamphlets purporting to disclose the "truth" behind the attacks.

Organizations

In response to official investigations, multiple linked organizations within the 9/11 truth movement have formed.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth consists of professionals in architecture and engineering who support World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories. They call for a renewed inquiry into the collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC 7. The group is urging the United States Congress to authorize "a genuinely independent investigation with subpoena authority," including examination of potential explosive devices involved in the collapses. Founded in 2006 by Richard Gage, an architect from the San Francisco Bay area, this organization disputes conclusions reached by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which attribute the failures to aircraft impacts and subsequent fires.

Gage criticizes NIST’s investigation for not thoroughly analyzing the collapse process and contends that "the official narrative... has explicitly failed to address compelling evidence supporting explosive demolition." To bolster their position, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth highlight elements such as the buildings’ near "free fall" acceleration, "horizontal ejection of steel components," "airborne pulverization of concrete," and indications of "molten metal."

9/11 Truth

Established in June 2004, 9/11 Truth functions as a primary hub for numerous organizations within the 9/11 truth movement. Leadership includes Janice Matthews (executive director), David Kubiak (International Campaign Advisor), and Mike Berger (Media Coordinator). Its advisory panel features Steven E. Jones and Barrie Zwicker.

The organization collaborated with U.S. research firm Zogby International to conduct polls that revealed a considerable portion of the public suspects government concealment regarding details of the September 11 attacks.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Founded in December 2005 by ex-philosophy professor James H. Fetzer and physicist Steven E. Jones, Scholars for 9/11 Truth brought together experts who rejected mainstream explanations of the September 11 events. Initially open to diverse theories, internal conflicts emerged over Fetzer’s proposals involving directed energy weapons or small nuclear devices, which lacked robust evidence and threatened the group’s credibility. By December 2006, Jones and others formed Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, emphasizing scientific inquiry. The majority of original members voted to join this new organization.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice

Formed in January 2007, Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice (STJ) comprises more than 900 academics and supporters dedicated to investigating unresolved aspects of the September 11 attacks through scientific study and public outreach. Notable participants include Richard Gage, Steven E. Jones, Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, and former Congressman Daniel Hamburg. Most members support the hypothesis that explosive demolition caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7.

Between 2008 and 2009, STJ affiliates contributed multiple papers to scientific journals. In April 2008, a letter from members was published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal. Steven E. Jones and collaborators authored an article appearing in The Environmentalist in July 2008. In October that year, STJ member James R. Gourley submitted a critique of a Bažant and Verdure study to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics.

In April 2009, Danish chemist and STJ member Niels H. Harrit along with eight co-authors released a contentious article in The Open Chemical Physics Journal entitled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. The study asserted that unreacted and partially reacted nano-thermite ("super-thermite") particles were detected in dust samples collected from the collapse site. This publication prompted the resignation of both the journal’s editor and sole peer reviewer, who stated it had been published without her approval.

9/11 Citizens Watch

Formed in 2002 by John Judge and Kyle Hence, 9/11 Citizens Watch partnered with the 9/11 Family Steering Committee to champion the establishment of the 9/11 Commission and vigilantly tracked its developments.

9/11 Commission Campaign

Initiated in 2011 by Senator Mike Gravel, the 9/11 Commission Campaign focuses on establishing state-level commissions with subpoena authority through ballot measures in Oregon, Alaska, and California. These grassroots organizations aim to foster a partially coordinated national movement via joint powers authority arrangements.

Hispanic Victims Group

The Hispanic Victims Group, founded by William Rodriguez, an advocate within the 9/11 truth movement, was instrumental in advocating for the creation of the 9/11 Commission. Rodriguez also participated in the Families Advisory Council for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC).

Conferences

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, groups such as 911truth.org and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice hosted conferences to disseminate research findings and develop strategies. Many of these gatherings were organized by 911truth.org and attracted international media attention.

Opponents

Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone contended that the movement enables Bush supporters to dismiss critics of his administration, expressing concerns about the widespread endorsement of 9/11 conspiracy theories.

MIT engineering professor Thomas W. Eagar initially rejected the movement’s claims but stated he would engage if they gained broader acceptance. Addressing Steven E. Jones' controlled demolition theory, Eagar criticized proponents for employing a reversed scientific approach—selecting evidence to support preconceived conclusions.

Journalist Robert Parry, cited by Bill Moyers, observed that "truthers" deny al-Qaeda’s involvement despite victim calls and confessions, instead focusing selectively on anomalies to advance an inside-job theory.

Al-Qaeda itself condemned former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for alleging U.S. government complicity in 9/11, labeling such accusations as "absurd."

Scientific skeptics reject conspiracy theories as unfounded explanations, asserting that many Truther questions have straightforward answers or are based on misleading data. Some critics have accused Truthers of spreading misinformation without sensitivity toward grieving families, calling them "disrespectful" or "distasteful."

Books

• The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False (2009) authored by David Ray Griffin
• Paul Thompson’s interactive "Complete 9/11 Timeline" website was adapted into the book The Terror Timeline in September 2004.
• The Most Dangerous Book in the World: 9/11 as Mass Ritual (2012) by S.K. Bain, examining occult dimensions related to 9/11.

Films

Significant films associated with the 9/11 truth movement include:

• The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw (2005) by Barrie Zwicker
• Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (2005) by Alex Jones
• 9/11: Press for Truth (2006), directed by Ray Nowosielski, documenting efforts by the Jersey Widows to secure a thorough investigation.
• 911 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions (2006) by Sofia Shafquat
• Zeitgeist: The Movie (part ii) (2007) created by Peter Joseph
• 9/11: Blueprint for Truth (2007) and its follow-up 9/11: Blueprint for Truth – The Architecture of Destruction (2008), produced by Richard Gage
• The New American Century (2007), directed by Massimo Mazzucco
• Loose Change: An American Coup (2009), created by Dylan Avery
• New World Order (2009), a documentary exploring conspiracy theorists without endorsing their views, directed by Luke Meyer and Andrew Neel
• 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (2012), produced by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
• September 11: The New Pearl Harbor (2013), a comprehensive five-hour documentary by Massimo Mazzucco
• The Anatomy of a Great Deception (2014), directed by David Hooper

Articles

• 9/11 as a False Flag: The Imperative for International Law to Engage (2017) authored by Amy Benjamin, featured in the African Journal of International and Comparative Law

See also

• The 28 pages