Conspiracy theories as of September 11, 2001

Slogans of the 9/11 Truth Movement, New York, September 11, 2011

Conspiracy the 11th September 2001 (date code: "9.11", so 9/11 conspiracy theories ; English : 9/11 conspiracy theories , even 9/11 denial ) lead the terrorist attacks of that day on covert, other than the causes determined and Perpetrator back. They usually claim that members of the US government , especially secret service employees , neoconservatives , Jews or alleged secret circles associated with them were the real perpetrators, clients, planners and beneficiaries of the attacks ( inside job ).

Those who hold such views often refer to them as “open questions”, “alternative research” or “seeking the truth”. The results of the investigation, however, according to which the terrorist network al-Qaeda planned and carried out the attacks, they describe as "official", unproven and implausible conspiracy theory . Censorship or self-censorship by the western mass media prevents the real perpetrators from being uncovered.

Conspiracy theories for September 11, 2001 are mainly spread on the Internet . Some found significant approval ratings in some states, according to surveys. Scientific research rejects it as unfounded and explains it from older traditions, socio-psychological factors and as a reaction to a false justification for the Iraq war in 2003 by the US government.

development

United States

→ Main article : 9/11 Truth Movement

Conspiracy theories, deep distrust in government apparatus, and belief in large-scale deceptions were part of popular culture in America long before 9/11 . The attacks and the government's handling of them intensified such mass sentiments. The Internet enabled the rapid dissemination of many new conspiracy theses, which are based on impressions from the rich image material of the event. Although 9/11 initially gave the United States a strong boost to patriotism and the simple worldview of an external enemy, doubts and skepticism have increased again since the 2003 Iraq war. By May 2006, around one million English-language websites were registered with the keyword “9/11 conspiracy”, and by 2011 around 7.85 million websites with the keyword “September 11 conspiracies”.

Since the event, it has been known that the US government had been warned of terrorist attacks in the US, but had not stepped up security. Therefore, by November 2002, the victims' relatives put through a 9/11 commission , which was made up of representatives from both major parties. Their final report from July 2004 confirmed the warnings, a lack of communication between the secret services and the FBI and inaction by the government, but no deliberate permission and no active participation in the attacks. Even so, such theories continued to grow afterwards. The behavior of the government contributed significantly to the mistrust: US President George W. Bush initially wanted to prevent the commission, then not alone to question and not be sworn in. His staff delayed the release of important documents. Some members of the government lied to the commission or answered its questions evasively. The final report contained flaws and did not hold any specific person responsible for the authorities' failure on September 11th.

Those citizens of all classes and professions who reject the "official" declarations formed groups that make up the decentralized, loose 9/11 Truth Movement . Academics such as Michel Chossudovsky , Alexander K. Dewdney , Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin , Jim Hoffman, Steven Jones , Lyndon LaRouche , Michael C. Ruppert , Webster Tarpley and others are considered spokesmen . They disseminate their theses via websites, books, their own journals, radio broadcasts (such as that of Alex Jones ) and video tapes made with media material. The film Loose Change was particularly successful . Supporters also include some victim relatives, prominent actors, former politicians and right-wing extremists . The US scene is described as a "conspiracy industry" with its own writers, publishers, media, advertisers, organizers, tour guides and souvenir sellers.

The “alternative” explanations are varied and contradictory. Accordingly, some sub-groups of the movement are fighting each other. The Scholars for 9/11 Truth under James H. Fetzer claim that energy weapons bombardment by anti-satellite weapons or small atom bombs could have brought down the buildings of the World Trade Center (WTC). Therefore, the retired physicist Steven Jones separated from them and founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice . The members are relatively large in the humanities and humanities, only a few physicists and engineers. Like Richard Gage's Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, this group claims a “controlled demolition” of the WTC buildings. The subject-related institutions, experts, engineers and designers in the USA reject the theses of all these groups as unfounded.

Bush and the ministers of his administration had justified the planned Iraq war since 2002 by saying that Iraq had cooperated with al-Qaeda terrorists, possessed weapons of mass destruction and was preparing an attack on the USA with them. After these justifications were found to be false and misleading, many US citizens believed their government was capable of the worst crimes. Significant proportions of the population at times agreed to individual 9/11 conspiracy theses in surveys:

Surveys in the USA

organizer	date	Question or statement	Result
Zogby / 9/11 Truth.org	24.-26. August 2004	The US government knew of attacks planned around September 11th and deliberately failed to act.	49.3% New York City 41% New York State
		A new investigation of the unanswered questions is necessary.	66% New York City 56.2% New York State
CBS / The New York Times	May 2002	Does the Bush administration tell the whole / mostly the truth about its prior knowledge of possible terrorist attacks, is it hiding something or is it lying?	Whole truth: 25.1% Hides something: 60.8% Lies: 7.5%
CBS	March – April 2004		Whole truth: 21.7% Hides something: 63.7% Lies: 11.5%
Angus Reid Global Monitor / NYT	October 14, 2006		Whole truth: 16% Hides something: 53% Lies: 28%
Scripps Howard / Ohio University	6-24 July 2006	People in the government either helped or did nothing to stop the terrorist attacks because they wanted to wage war in the Middle East.	Very likely: 16% Somewhat likely: 20% Unlikely: 59%
		The twin towers of the WTC collapsed with the help of secretly attached explosives.	Very likely: 6% Somewhat likely: 10% Unlikely: 77%
		The Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile fired by the US military, rather than a hijacked aircraft.	Very likely: 6% Somewhat likely: 6% Unlikely: 80%
	September 22, 2007	The government received specific warnings about the 9/11 attacks but chose to ignore them.	Very likely: 32% Somewhat likely: 29% Unlikely: 30%
Rasmussen Reports	May 2007	Did George W. Bush know about the terrorist attacks in advance?	Democrats: Yes 35%, No 39%, Insecure 26% Republicans: Yes 13%, No 87% Independents: Yes 18%, No 57%
Public Policy Polling	18.-21. September 2009	Do you think President Bush deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen because he wanted the US to wage war in the Middle East?	Yes / Unsure: Democrats 37% Independents 17% Republicans 10%
Angus Reid	9-10 March 2010	The collapse of the WTC was the result of a controlled demolition	Credible: 15% Not credible: 74% Unsure: 11%
		Flight UA 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, was shot down	Credible: 15% Not credible: 62% Unsure: 22%
		No aircraft hit the Pentagon on September 11th	Credible: 13% Not credible: 76% Unsure: 11%
		No planes hit the WTC - the television images were changed	Credible: 6% Not credible: 87% Unsure: 7%

The US government tried to slow this development. Bush said on November 10, 2001 before the UN General Assembly : “Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories regarding the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty. ”Proponents of such theories took up the quote and turned it against the government. In its 2005 counter-terrorism strategy , the US State Department identified "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation" as a source of terrorism . It published a guide for journalists on how to spot misinformation. A following page in 2006 rejected some 9/11 conspiracy theses. Communication scholars criticized this as an attempt to monitor citizens' thinking.

Other states

In France , Thierry Meyssan claimed in 2002 in his bestseller L'Effroyable imposture that no aircraft had flown into the Pentagon. At the Axis for Peace conference organized by his Voltaire network on November 17 and 18, 2005 in Brussels , around 150 representatives of the 9/11 Truth Movement from 37 countries met according to their own information.

In Germany , Mathias Bröckers , Gerhard Wisnewski and Andreas von Bülow in particular tried to generate a public debate with series of articles, books and conferences. In 2003 they claimed that a “silent cartel” from the German media was suppressing their theses. According to a survey of the period of July 2003 31% of the year's 30-under Germans surveyed held a job the US government for the attacks possible. Almost 90% of the Germans surveyed in December 2010 believed that the US government was hiding the "whole truth" about it. Some representatives of the Monday vigil in 2014, who belong to the peace movement , took up 9/11 theses.

In a survey of 16,063 people from 17 countries in July / August 2008, an absolute majority of respondents in nine countries ( Kenya , Nigeria , Germany, France , United Kingdom , Russia , Italy , Taiwan , South Korea ) held a relative majority in another four States ( Ukraine , Palestinian Territories , Turkey , Mexico ) al-Qaeda for the operators of the attacks. 43% of the respondents in Egypt , 31% in Jordan and 19% of the Palestinians believed Israel was the culprit. In China and Indonesia , an absolute majority said they did not know. 36% of the Turks surveyed, 30% of the Mexicans, 27% of the Palestinians and 23% of the Germans said the US government was behind it.

2008 average

Iran's former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the attacks in March 2010 a "big lie" and a "complex action by the secret services" that the US used as a pretext for invasions in the war against terrorism . On September 23, 2010, he claimed before the UN that most Americans and peoples of other countries believed that the terrorist attacks were "orchestrated" by sections of the US government for political gain. An independent investigation of the events is therefore necessary. Many state representatives then left the plenary in protest. Former heads of state such as Francesco Cossiga , Hugo Chávez , Fidel Castro and the then incumbent Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad publicly advocated 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Main theses

Sticker with main slogan

The slogan 9/11 was an inside job (“September 11th was an act from within”) expresses a broad consensus in the 9/11 Truth Movement: Members of the US government brought about or planned the attacks in some way foreseen and not prevented on purpose. The supporters always justify this with the argument of the cui bono : Whoever the attacks were of use, must have caused them. Because the US government was interested in broad approval of its anti-terror war and its restriction of civil rights and received this approval because of the attacks, it must have been involved in it itself.

Usually a small circle of initiated conspirators within the US government is alleged to be the "real" perpetrator. The neoconservatives are often considered to be clients and planners, while secret service employees are considered to be executors. Often certain people of Jewish origin are named among the "Neocons" and described as allies of the State of Israel . Israel is also considered the beneficiary of the attacks and is suspected or charged as the perpetrator according to the cui bono . Those who claim perpetrators outside the United States (mostly Jews) to be the masterminds refer to the attacks as outside jobs . In the tradition of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories , they assume Jews are striving for hegemony , economic and media superiority and control of the US government. Others claim that Saudi Arabia's government planned the attacks with the knowledge of US intelligence; the US government is keeping this a secret. The thesis found nourishment through the long-term censorship of some pages of a 9/11 investigation report.

There are two main variants of the inside-job theses: the US government is assumed to have known al-Qaeda’s plans for these attacks beforehand and to let it happen on purpose (LIHOP), or that she planned and carried it out herself ( made it happen on purpose : MIHOP). LIHOP representatives consider a deliberate, criminal admission of crimes against their own people to be more likely than a failure of the responsible security authorities. They reject the reference to their inadequate and incorrect preparation for the attacks as "incompetence", "chance" or "surprise theory". For MIHOP representatives, the US government not only exploited the attacks for their own interests, but carried them out itself in order to push through long-standing plans for war and conquest. Many individual theses can be assigned to both variants. Its representatives also refer to the attacks as a “ false flag ” operation or attack , in which the “real” (passive or active) perpetrators disguised the attacks as an act of al-Qaeda.

Government approved (LIHOP)

Conduct of the President

US President George W. Bush said on December 4, 2001 that he had seen the first airplane impact on the WTC on television and believed in a pilot's accident just before he found out about the second impact. Since no television station had broadcast the first impact in the WTC, Bush's statement was interpreted as evidence of his complicity: he must have received special, non-public images of it, i.e. he must have known about it beforehand. However, 73% of participants in a September 11th memory study believed they saw the first impact on television. Bush may have remembered wrongly as well.

Bush learned of the second attack on the WTC shortly after 9:03 a.m. on September 11th during a school lesson in Sarasota, Florida. He sat there quietly for another seven minutes, listening to students tell a children's story. Michael Moore showed the scene in his 2004 film Fahrenheit 9/11 as evidence of Bush's incompetence. For LIHOP representatives, the scene shows that Bush apparently saw no threat to his country and deliberately did nothing to prevent the attacks.

Bush's connections to the Bin Laden family

Another LIHOP thesis is that Bush was aware of Osama bin Laden's terrorist plans because of his longstanding relationship with the Bin Laden family , but ignored them and deliberately did not pursue them. Proponents of this thesis refer to a meeting of Bush's father George HW Bush with Shafik bin Laden , a brother of Osama, on the morning of September 11th, at a conference of the Carlyle Group . They also point to a special flight from the US, the US Government of the Bin Laden family have not granted during that time flight ban without first questioning members, as well as a high investment company Saudi Binladin in 1978 in the oil company Arbusto of Bush family. Its representative in the USA, James R. Bath , came under suspicion of terrorist financing and money laundering in another 1987 case. He is also said to have funded Bush's first candidacy (1995) for governor of Texas . Bush's father is said to have visited the Binladin Group in Saudi Arabia twice after his presidency (from 1993) .

Reports cited as evidence, however, arranged the references differently: For example, Bush's father and Osama's brother attended the same conference on September 11, but without a face-to-face meeting, as two of 500 shareholders in the Carlyle Group. Bush left the conference before breakfast as the rest of them watched the attacks. The Binladin Group left Carlyle in October 2001. Their shares only rose afterwards as a result of the war on terror. The special flight for Bin Laden members did not take place until September 20, 2001, when the flight ban was lifted. Permission was given by anti-terrorism expert Richard Clarke , an opponent of Bush, after he was convinced that the people in question were unsuspicious. No evidence has ever been found of the Binladin Group's alleged investment in Bush's former oil company. According to Bath, he invested in them with his equity; no bin Laden citizen has ever met Bush. A former Bath corporate partner had later claimed a contract from Bin Laden for the investment to harm Bath.

Forewarnings

→ Main article : “Alerts from 2001” in Article 9/11 Commission

The US government had been warned of al-Qaeda attacks for years before September 11, including possible hijackings of planes and suicide attacks in the US. She had also received information about al-Qaeda members who had entered the country, for example in a daily report for Bush on August 6, 2001. The Joint Inquiry and the 9/11 Commission investigated why these warnings were not effectively heeded and the attacks were not prevented. The latter attributed the failure of the US authorities to a “lack of imagination” to “connect the dots” (individual details). This explanation remained controversial in historical studies .

Whistleblowers like FBI officer Coleen Rowley , translator Sibel Edmonds , prosecutor and 9/11 commissioner John Farmer, and others exposed attempts by US authorities to cover up their 9/11 failure. LIHOP representatives conclude from this that the US government knew the attack plans beforehand, deliberately suppressed warnings and prevented countermeasures.

Others infer the LIHOP thesis from media reports before and after the attacks on warnings to government members. For example, the FBI Attorney General John Ashcroft advised on July 26, 2001 to stop using scheduled flights; other high-ranking members of the government are said to have canceled scheduled flights booked for September 11, 2001 at short notice because of such a warning. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had said at a meeting at the Pentagon on September 11, it will eventually new and surprising incidents (incidents) be in the US, to which the military defense must adjust. A little later he found out about the attacks on the WTC and left the meeting. Shortly thereafter, the attack on the Pentagon took place. Some interpret different versions of this statement as a prediction, suggesting Rumsfeld's foreknowledge or involvement in the attacks.

In 2012, the journalist Kurt Eichenwald reported on the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) warnings to Bush about the attacks. Law professor Paul Campos commented: It is now clear that the CIA has discovered many key details of the Al Qaeda plan and has often unsuccessfully requested counter-action from the government. Leading intelligence officials considered resigning in order not to be held responsible for future attacks. The government only published the daily report of August 6, 2001, giving the misleading impression that it received only a vaguely unspecific warning. If Eichenwald is correct, Bush has learned enough to stop the attacks. But for some reason he and his advisors would have chosen to ignore these warnings. These are just the known facts. Only when one speculates about unknown motives does one enter the field of conspiracy theories: for example, that certain neoconservatives failed to launch their planned invasion of Iraq; that they then drew attention to absurd conspiracy theses in order to distract from their real conspiracy. Bush's spokesman Ari Fleischer denounced Eichenwald as a "Truther".

Withheld air defense

→ Main article : Sequence of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001

According to a widespread LIHOP thesis, members of the government prevented interceptors from ascending in time and intercepting the hijacked aircraft. Mark Elsis (StandDown.net) concluded from the course of events: “There is only one explanation for this — our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 911. - There is only one explanation for this: Our Air Force was ordered to be on September 11th on To stay on the ground. "

As a clue, the period between the loss of contact with American Airlines Flight 11 (8:14 a.m.) and the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 (10:03 a.m.) is often pointed out and the conclusion is that this time would have been used to intercept at least some of the four hijacked flights must be sufficient. According to the standard procedure of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), air traffic controllers would have reported irregular flight behavior such as course deviation and loss of contact immediately. In a few minutes, interceptors would have reached this aircraft. A statement by NORAD General Ralph E. Eberhart is cited about this, but only referred to the accelerated procedure after September 11th. It is inexplicable that no interceptor rose from Andrews Air Force Base and no interceptor missile was launched to protect the Pentagon from the aircraft. Sufficient fighter pilots were ready to take off on September 11 and were within range of the hijacked flights. Constant flight patrols along the Atlantic coast could have been called up directly. Instead, two fighter planes that were too far away were called to Washington, DC . In addition, they only flew there at about a quarter of their top speed. With the new Pentagon directive of June 1, 2001, according to which only the Secretary of Defense was allowed to allow interceptors to pursue hijacked aircraft, incumbent Donald Rumsfeld repealed older standard procedures and thus prevented direct countermeasures. Until then, NORAD had deployed interceptors about twice a week to track planes that had gone off course, and then not once. Transport Minister Norman Mineta heard a standdown order from Vice President Dick Cheney on September 11 and testified it before the 9/11 Commission. He just didn't know what was ordered at the time. Since Cheney gave the order after Mineta's testimony around 9:20 a.m., he could only have referred to flight AA 77 and prohibited its shooting. Mineta's statement contradicts the information of the 9/11 Commission, according to which Cheney gave a kill order between 10:10 and 10:15 a.m.

Some officials initially provided incorrect information about the time when the aircraft hijacking was reported to them. Others made false statements to cover up late responses. Reports confirmed only four jets ready to take off in the US northeast sector. The 1997 Pentagon Directive also required permission from the Minister of Defense to launch interceptors. In 2001, the rapid interception procedure only applied to irregular flights arriving from overseas. In addition, their reporting was left to the discretion of the responsible air traffic controllers of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Because transponders and radio signals failed more often, they did not alert NORAD immediately. An automatic electronic reporting procedure was not set up at that time. If they suspected an airplane hijacking, they first had to seek contact with the cockpit, then inform their superiors, who were the FAA headquarters and the National Military Command Center (NMCC). This had to get permission from the Minister of Defense for an escort, which was then sent to a nearby air force base. Only then would fighter jets have risen, but only to accompany the aircraft and, in an emergency, to request landing. The use of hijacked planes for suicide attacks was not expected. Only the President could order a kill. The envisaged chain of command was far too long to be communicated to the pilots in time. In addition, it didn't work that day: Bush, Rumsfeld and the NMCC were not involved in decisions about interceptors.

NEADS, the north-east sector of NORAD, did not find out about the hijacked flight AA 11 until 8:37 am. Two fighter jets took off at 8:46 am with no destination information. At the same time, the first aircraft hit the north tower (WTC 1). They didn't reach New York until seven minutes after the second impact (9:03 a.m.). Even at top speed they would have come too late and could not have prevented the impacts, just as they would not have been able to prevent fighter jets that had not been launched closer than they were. Two fighter jets called to Washington DC at 9:24 a.m. were looking for the wrong aircraft that had already landed. They flew in the wrong direction until 9:36 a.m. (less than two minutes before the Pentagon impact). NEADS only found out about the fourth hijacked flight at 10:07 a.m., four minutes after its crash. Cheney issued a kill order for UA 93 at 10:10 a.m. at the earliest. NORAD did not receive it until 10:31 a.m. It was not sent to the pilots. This course is interpreted as a conglomerate of serious errors and systemic procedural deficiencies.

In 2006, the two Chairs of the 9/11 Commission testified that some FAA and NORAD witnesses had given false and untrue statements about the timing of the 9/11 events. This increased the distrust of the victims' families and led them to approach 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

Military maneuvers as camouflage

Shortly before and on September 11th, NORAD carried out several annual maneuvers as planned in order to test the defense against an enemy air attack from outside. When NORAD employees heard about a hijacked passenger plane, they asked whether it was real or part of the exercise. Proponents of the LIHOP thesis interpret the maneuvers with reference to such reports as a deliberate camouflage of the aircraft hijackings.

The 9/11 Commission report mentions the Vigilant Guardian maneuver and comes to the conclusion that it delayed the reactions to the hijackings by seconds at most. At the same time, the responsible personnel were on site in good time because of the maneuver. The flight controllers from FAA and NORAD were unable to locate the hijacked machines in time because the hijackers had switched off the transponder and radio signals, the primary radar signals were among around 4,500 identical signals from flying objects and the military defense was aimed at attacks from abroad.

Insider trading

According to a widespread conspiracy theory government officials are alleged foreknowledge of the attacks for insider trading with put options have exploited. Michael Ruppert, for example, relied on media reports about trading in shares in American Airlines and United Airlines in the days leading up to September 11, claiming that they referred to CIA Executive Director Alvin Bernard Krongard, among others.

Investigators from the FBI, the US Securities and Exchange Commission and authorities in many other states checked the financial transactions of companies whose shares had depreciated sharply after the attacks, as a possible lead to al-Qaida members. Years of review did not reveal any transactions that could be traced back to prior knowledge. The high share sales at American Airlines followed a letter of recommendation from analysts dated September 9, 2001, who had observed the negative trend in the share value for months. A single investor had sold 95% of his United Airlines shares and used the proceeds to buy American Airlines shares, which in turn lost value due to the September 11 attacks. He had no ties to any government or al-Qaeda.

Initiated by the government (MIHOP)

Operation Northwoods

MIHOP representatives often cite historical examples of state terrorism and covert US actions as evidence of a false flag attack , such as the Bay of Pigs invasion (1961), the Tonkin incident (1964), the Watergate affair (1972– 1974), the Iran-Contra affair (1986) and others. They refer particularly often to the Pentagon's Operation Northwoods plan of 1962. It provided for creating an excuse for the invasion of Cuba with fake terrorist attacks, including the shooting down of a passenger plane . The then President John F. Kennedy had strictly forbidden the execution. The US government released the document for publication in 1998; since April 2001 it has been completely online. So this thesis is based on a government document that proves the ban on the plan and was announced before the attacks.

Neoconservatives as planners

Authors who do not support 9/11 conspiracy theses described geostrategic and economic interests of the USA in the 1990s, such as the Silk Road strategy and the pipeline for Caspian oil through Afghanistan, which has been aimed for since 1998, as the background to the war on terror. The Bush administration used September 11th as a welcome opportunity to gain military control over this region.

MIHOP representatives claim that the US government orchestrated the attacks itself in order to be able to implement their war and conquest plans. They often refer to the strategy paper Rebuilding Americas Defenses by the neoconservative think tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC) from 2000. It advised using the superiority of the USA after the collapse of the Eastern bloc for its global hegemony and its military budget for new missile defense systems significantly increase. The domestic and foreign policy transformation required for this will likely be protracted, unless “a catastrophic and accelerating event - such as a new Pearl Harbor ” - occurs. MIHOP officials interpret this marginal note as evidence of an attack plan, also because many members of the PNAC received high government offices under Bush and implemented their previously proclaimed goals after September 11th. In doing so, they also indirectly represent conspiracy theories about the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, according to which the US government at the time either arranged or allowed this itself in order to win its population over to the Second World War . According to the American political scientist John McAdams, the statement that a “catastrophic and accelerating event” would fundamentally change the situation, is by no means evidence of previous insider knowledge, it is too unspecific.

They often suspect certain people, whom they attribute to the neoconservatives, as planners, initiators and participants in the attacks: for example Donald Rumsfeld, his chief advisor Richard Perle , the bioterrorism expert Jerome Hauer, the Middle East expert and later US ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad , Air Force General Michael V. Hayden , former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger , former Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzeziński , Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld's Deputy Paul Wolfowitz, and 9/11 Commission Staff Director Philip Zelikow .

Neoconservatives had been planning the overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and further arming the US military since 1992 and published these plans as early as 1998. The remark on the “new Pearl Harbor” did not refer to a military intervention with ground troops, which the US government after the Decided attacks. According to historian Jonathan Charles Douglas Clark, the Bush administration's counter-terrorism policy stems from the neo-conservative ideology that existed long before 9/11, whose advocates used the situation to pass off their plans as the only possible response to the attacks.

Jews as masterminds

On September 17, 2001, the Al-Manar television station of the Shiite Hezbollah claimed that 4,000 Jews did not show up for work at the WTC on September 11. Israel's domestic secret service Shabak had warned them and prevented Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon from visiting New York. According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the FBI arrested five Israelis four hours after the attacks for "strange behavior" because they were supposed to have filmed the buildings that had been hit and shouted cheers. An Israeli transmission technology company had warned its employees in New York and the FBI two hours before the attacks. Telecommunications were used to connect Israelis to all US government eavesdropping equipment. That is why no Jews were killed in the attacks.

The first of these rumors in particular were spread rapidly across the world by the print media and the Internet. However, on September 12, 2001 , the Israeli newspaper The Jerusalem Post only wrote that up to 4,000 Israelis living around the WTC and Pentagon had not yet contacted friends or relatives. 400 to 500 Jews (15 to 17 percent of all victims), including an Israeli, were killed in the attacks. The religious affiliation of many of the victims remained unknown. Sharon's visit to New York was scheduled for September 23, 2001 and was canceled after, not before, the attacks. The FBI arrested five Israeli employees of a moving company for reporting a neighbor, interrogated them for expired tourist visas and lack of work permits, and deported them to Israel after 71 days without charge. According to Haaretz, two employees of the Israeli company Odigo received an anonymous text message about an imminent attack in the USA on the morning of September 11, without any location information. The company informed the FBI after, not before, the attacks.

Right-wing extremist David Duke used these rumors to claim that Israel was the perpetrator of the attacks. In order to cover this up, the Jewish federal prosecutor Michael Chertoff released Israeli spies who were arrested shortly after the attacks. In addition, Jews had also created the thesis of an inside job . Michael Collins Piper, editor of the right-wing American Free Press , also claims a cover-up by Chertoff. The Holocaust deniers Eric Hufschmid and Christopher Bollyn claim that the Israeli secret service Mossad planned the attacks and that “Zionists” in the US government carried out them. Bollyn portrays the "five dancing Israelis" and the recipients of the Odigo text message as Mossad agents. In 2006, he claimed that Popular Mechanics magazine was run by the Jew Benjamin Chertoff, who was related to the then Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. With this he wanted to discredit the refutation of 9/11 conspiracy theses published by the magazine. Bollyn also presented his theses at the Axis for Peace conference by Thierry Meyssan; In 2006, Hufschmid also represented her to the authors of Loose Change . Some Facebook groups founded in 2007 with names like “Jews did 9/11” also represent the anti-Semitic thesis of a Zionist Occupied Government . Some link the " Protocols of the Elders of Zion ".

Some see the attacks as the work of alleged secret societies who wanted to bring about a " New World Order ". They refer to Skull & Bones , “ Khazarian- Zionist- Bolshevik (KZB) world controllers”, the Bilderbergers , the Council on Foreign Relations or the Trilateral Commission . Authors such as Jim Marrs , Gary Allen, Kevin Ryan and George Humphrey often connect these groups with Jews, James Fetzer with Israelis. For Alex Jones, the Illuminati rule the "New World Order".

In 2006, Steven Jones, citing Webster Tarpley and W. Cleon Skousen , publicly suspected the Jews Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and an "international banking cartel" that wanted to bring entire regions under its control, in 2006 publicly as secret masterminds of the attacks. This has been criticized as an anti-Semitic stereotype. Jones was fired from his university shortly afterwards, after which he stated that he would focus on physical causes and leave politico-economic aspects to other 9/11 truth writers. James Fetzer claimed on a US military veteran website in late 2012 that "Mossad death squads and the US government" were behind the rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School . The murder of children marks the terror of agents of Israel. He cited claims that Israel was also responsible for the mass murder of Anders Behring Breivik in Norway and others.

Some attribute the PNAC's policy to ideas of the Jewish philosopher Leo Strauss . The Jewish PNAC members Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle had studied it and let the attacks happen inactive in order to justify the subsequent wars of conquest and to enforce a "New World Order" dominated by the USA. The abbreviation 9/11 suggests a state of emergency that allows the state to react even unconstitutional. Leo Strauss adopted this idea from Carl Schmitt . French intellectuals, who see Leo Strauss as the source of ideas for the PNAC, often took up Thierry Meyssan's 9/11 conspiracy theses, some also anti-Semitic theses.

In Germany, the extreme right-wing National-Zeitung put up an “Israel lobby” as the commissioner of the attacks. Horst Mahler represented 9/11 conspiracy theses in 2003 in court and attended a conference by Mathias Bröckers. The latter claimed in 2002 that the US under Bush and Israel under Sharon were involved in the attacks. He compared Sharon with Adolf Hitler and attributed the quote to him: “[…] we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it. - We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it. ”The quote is not confirmed, but“ grist to the mill of the 'Jewish world conspiracy' ”. Israeli telephone company employees arrested in the US spied for the Mossad. He was able to listen to all conversations in the USA, including in the White House. The fact that authorities do not give out any information about it feeds the suspicion of a "kosher conspiracy". Andreas von Bülow also suspected the Israeli government, referring to the Odigo and Zim companies, of knowing about the attack plans and only warning their citizens. Only the Mossad had the necessary know-how for the attacks. He recruited and trained al-Qaeda terrorists.

In contrast, bin Laden's deputy, Aiman ​​az-Zawahiri, in 2008, in one of the regularly published Al-Qaida tapes, rejected the theory as a “lie” that Israel had commissioned the attacks. He insisted that al-Qaeda carried it out himself and accused Hezbollah of inventing the theory of Israel. They tried to discredit Bin Laden's group and the Sunnis , whose "heroic deed" hurt America like never before.

Theses on identified perpetrators

Airplane hijackers still alive

On September 14, 2001, the FBI published the first list of perpetrators with the names of 19 aircraft hijackers involved from the passenger lists. The BBC reported on September 23, 2001 that some living people had the same names. Many websites then claimed that the FBI invented the Arabic names to distract from the real perpetrators. In fact, the FBI had misspelled some names or ignored other spellings; this was corrected shortly afterwards.

The FBI issued a list of photos of the perpetrators on September 27 to avoid confusion. The BBC corrected its first report on October 5, 2001 and in 2006 distinguished itself from related conspiracy theses. The identities of 12 of the 19 perpetrators were proven by DNA traces from the crime scenes, their cooperation with al-Qaeda through account movements and video tapes published by al-Qaeda itself with their "wills".

Lack of abilities of the kidnappers

It was often doubted that 19 hijackers were able to hijack the planes armed only with box cutters and steer large passenger planes without piloting experience precisely into the buildings hit. According to his flight instructors, Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot on American Airlines Flight 77 , was flightless and had no prospect of a pilot's license. Nonetheless, he made a tight turning maneuver to hit the Pentagon.

In fact, the hijackers overwhelmed and murdered the pilots with knives (not just box knives) before the intended pilot among them took the cockpit. All four hijacker pilots had learned to fly passenger jets from their teachers despite negative prognoses. After failing their first exam, Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi continued their training until they received the lowest level of commercial pilot's license at the end of 2000 after 250 hours of flight. They then continued their training on flight simulators for large passenger jets, the cockpit of which was similar to that of the hijacked aircraft. Two pilots had also trained over the busy Hudson River and one over Washington, DC. All four had familiarized themselves with the GPS . At least one of the flights took place largely on autopilot . As with simulator training, they just had to enter a destination and look at the navigation screen. According to flight recorders and witness statements, they initiated the descent early in order to be able to see the target buildings and navigate them manually. Despite significant shortcomings in their skills, these were sufficient to carry out their plan.

Unproven perpetration of bin Laden

Many conspiracy theorists deny that Osama bin Laden commissioned the 9/11 attacks because not even the FBI's earlier profile mentioned them. Contradictory statements by members of the government fueled the doubts. Secretary of State Colin Powell announced evidence on September 23, 2001. FBI Vice Director Dale Watson told Congress in February 2002 that the evidence of bin Laden's 9/11 association was "clear and irrefutable." However, FBI director Robert Mueller said in April 2002 that no documents had yet been found supporting the bombers' plans. FBI press spokesman Rex Tomb said in 2006 that the attacks were missing from Bin Laden's profile "because the FBI does not have enough hard evidence". As with the 1998 embassy attacks , the Justice Department will not formally prosecute until there is enough evidence. Shortly afterwards, Tomb said: The FBI could add September 11 to the profile, but it does not have to currently. The FBI stated on its list of the ten most wanted terrorists that further charges could follow in the course of the investigation, "for example for the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001".

In early October 2001, US and German intelligence agencies presented evidence that bin Laden and al-Qaeda had planned the attacks. The NATO , the German federal government and all parliamentary parties found this evidence convincing. In March 2002, Ramzi Binalshibh and Chalid Sheikh Mohammed gave the London editor of the Arab news channel Al Jazeera Yosri Fouda a detailed description of the ten years they had been preparing for the attacks on Bin Laden's behalf. In September 2003, the Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón brought charges against bin Laden and 34 accomplices for jointly planning the 9/11 attacks; 18 of the accused were convicted in Spain in 2005. On May 23, 2006, bin Laden stated in one of his regular video messages that he himself had selected the 19 attackers for their task. On March 10, 2007, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed submitted a written confession in which he described himself as the planner and organizer of the attacks on behalf of bin Laden. In April 2008, a US military tribunal brought charges against him. Other parts of his testimony have been questioned because of his exposure to waterboarding . Through Torture resulting statements would be constitutionally not usable. Congress prevented President Barack Obama's attempted regular criminal process since 2009.

The German federal administrative judge Dieter Deiseroth emphasized in November 2009 that so far no independent court had been able to examine the evidence of Bin Laden's perpetration (money transfers, tapped telephone calls) presented by secret services. American soldiers killed Bin Laden on May 2, 2011 in Operation Neptune's Spear .

Fake video

→ Main article : Video and audio messages in the article Osama bin Laden

As evidence of bin Laden's authorship, the US government released a webcam video on December 13, 2001 . She said it was found in Jalalabad . Several translators whom she named had checked the English translation and confirmed it as correct. Afterwards, Bin Laden told guests that, because of his experience in construction, he had firmly expected “that the fire triggered by the jet fuel would melt the steel frame of the building and cause the area of ​​the impact with the floors above to collapse. We hadn't hoped for more. "During his pilot training in the USA, Mohammed Atta knew neither other hijacking groups nor the aim of his assignment:" We did not reveal the operation to them until they were there and shortly before they booked the aircraft seats. "

Conspiracy theorists either deny that the video showed bin Laden or that he admitted his perpetration. You refer to corresponding skeptical media reports. Other translators checked the wording on behalf of US news channels. According to them, bin Laden named nine assassins involved in September 11th and reminded listeners of his earlier request to kneel as soon as they heard of the attacks.

Bin Laden initially claimed that he was not involved in the 9/11 attacks. From October 2001, however, in an interview with Al Jazeera and other video and audio tapes, he confessed himself to be the planner and stated that he had selected the perpetrators himself. In 2006, the Islamic Studies professor Bruce Lawrence again doubted the authenticity of the "confession" video, but not bin Laden's perpetration. Since his message of October 30, 2004, he considered this to be proven. Others cite unconfirmed statements made by some CIA employees in 2010 that they tried to produce a false bin Laden video for disinformation in 2003 . Your superiors would have rejected the idea of ​​such videos.

Bin Laden as a tool of the CIA

Since 1979 the CIA has been supplying Afghan mujahideen with Operation Cyclone for their guerrilla warfare against the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan . According to Western media reports, bin Laden and his group are also said to have received such funds and weapons. The US government has always denied this, but could not rule out that the funds would end up in groups allied with bin Laden. From this LIHOP supporters conclude that they promoted and approved Bin Laden's attack plan. MIHOP supporters conclude that bin Laden acted on their behalf.

Bin Laden and Zawahiri, on the other hand, always denied any aid from the USA. The US government cited their statements in its own denial. The CIA agents Milt Bearden and Bill Peikney, who at the time coordinated and monitored US aid for the Afghan resistance against the Soviet Union, also denied any US aid to bin Laden. The Islam expert Peter Bergen emphasized: The CIA had not trained and financed any Islamists from Arab countries, as they had their own donors from Saudi Arabia and other religious-ideological goals. The textbook authors Steve Coll and Jason Burke also denied contacts with and assistance from the CIA for Bin Laden. Burke pointed out that the Pakistani intelligence service Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had contractually controlled all US aid to the Afghan mujahideen. State and private donors from Saudi Arabia financed the Arab volunteers, including al-Qaeda. Some of these donors are unknown. Since Saudi aid funds also received money and weapons from the USA and brokered them to Afghan warlords via the ISI, it is assumed that the USA indirectly supported bin Laden.

Theses of a controlled building demolition

The thesis of a "controlled demolition" of the collapsed WTC building with secretly placed and detonated explosives came up on the afternoon of September 11th and became a central topic in the 9/11 Truth Movement to suggest a government crime.

The twin towers

The twin towers of the WTC were the first high-rise buildings with a steel frame structure that collapsed after ongoing internal fires. Attempts with a fueled, fast-flying Boeing 767 on a high-rise constructed in this way have been unique to date. Scientists, building statisticians and fire protection experts took this as an opportunity to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings in such circumstances. The collapse of WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 are among the most thoroughly researched building collapses of all.

Proponents of the demolition theory claim that plane impacts and fires could not possibly explain the WTC collapses. They give the following information:

A plane crash into the Empire State Building (1945) had largely no consequences for the building. The towers were designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 . On the other hand, leading high-rise designers pointed out the differences: The planes that were directed into the towers flew much faster, carried more fuel ( kerosene ) and damaged far more load-bearing structures. The effect of long fires on the relatively light and long horizontal steel girders, which made the tube-like construction of the towers possible, was not given sufficient consideration during construction.

Kerosene burns with a maximum of 1800 degrees Fahrenheit (° F, 982 ° C) not hot enough to weaken the jacketed steel girders enough, since steel melts at 2750 ° F (1510 ° C) at the earliest. However, the steel did not have to melt. It loses half of its load-bearing capacity at 400 to 600 ° C and 90% at around 1000 ° C. In addition, the jet fuel spread through the destroyed elevator shafts and immediately set many floors on fire. The fires were kindled further by suction winds and fed by office supplies, so that they reached temperatures of up to 1000 ° C. That was enough for the collapse.

Most of the kerosene was burned a few minutes after the impact. The thick black smoke indicated low-oxygen, cool fires. However, the widely distributed fires lasted long enough to cause the horizontal support structure to collapse and the vertical outer columns to collapse.

Puddles of molten metal found in the rubble should indicate an explosive. However, molten aluminum was observed from the aircraft fuselage prior to the collapses. Explosives cannot melt steel because they only generate extreme heat for a short period of time. Long-lasting, underground smoldering fires after hot fires are not uncommon.

Both towers fell vertically into their own shape , almost at the speed of free fall (9.2 seconds). However, only the collapse phase visible on videos lasted 9 to 11 seconds, the entire collapses lasted between 15 and 25 seconds longer. The part of the building above the impact zone tilted to the side of the impact. The debris followed the path of least resistance and was hurled out where it met intact floors. As a result, the rubble expanded like a fountain, damaging and destroying many surrounding and distant buildings.

The collapsing floors were preceded by dust and gas waves emerging from the side. However, the falling mass compressed the floors below and thus pressed fountains of air, dust and window glass out of the sides. Dust and gas clouds emerging from the side and leading to the collapse are not a special feature of an explosion, but a feature of most building collapses regardless of their causes.

The south tower (WTC 2), which was hit later, could not have collapsed in front of the north tower (WTC 1) because of rapidly subsiding fires. Because of the construction as a hollow steel shaft, the intact upper parts of the building would have had to tilt to the side and the central building core would have to remain standing. - However, WTC 2 fell first because the plane hit the building lower, more diagonally and from one corner, thus destroying more support columns. The weight of the floors above was much greater. In addition, the speed of the impact was faster, with 42% more kinetic energy . The support pillars were only covered with fire protection material that was half as thick. In both WTC towers, tall remains of steel columns remained.

Many witnesses heard the sound of explosions in the WTC. However, these were not detonations: No independent seismic record shows the sudden peak excursions typical for them. Witnesses interpreted deflagration, bursting and impact noises in the WTC as explosions or described them as analogies. The very loud popping noises that are typical for explosions immediately before the collapse were not recorded or witnessed anywhere. Underground explosives, the noise of which was later alleged, cannot cause a collapse from above.

Seismic recordings have shown two unusually high fluctuations immediately before the collapses, as are typical for underground explosions (such as in nuclear weapon tests ). The following deflections are said to be much smaller, but should have been highest on impact. This was contradicted by the seismological records of Columbia University (published in November 2001): They showed rising and falling deflections for the duration of the collapses without any noticeable peaks. The authors rejected the thesis of sudden peak fluctuations at the beginning as a misinterpretation of their graphics: These fluctuations are merely the fluctuations of the entire collapses, which are placed in a larger time frame and thus graphically distorted. In addition, building blasts would not have caused any sudden outbreaks because of the large number of detonations that are usually above ground. The 1993 bomb attack on the World Trade Center left no seismic traces.

The concrete was almost completely pulverized. However, blasting does not pulverize concrete. Less than 30% of the WTC material was concrete; this was almost completely preserved as a rubble.

No bent steel girders were found in the WTC rubble. No remaining steel girder was longer than eleven meters. Steel beams of this length would have withstood much hotter kerosene fires unscathed in tests. However, the steel girders were composed of ten to eleven meters long sections. Bent parts were also found. The said tests related to much shorter carriers. Porters with the length typical for WTC 1 and 2 soon sank in tests with kerosene fire. The buckling of outer columns just a few minutes after the second impact is visible on videos.

The rapid removal of the steel girders should have prevented an independent investigation. In fact, under pressure from the victims' families, the entire rubble of the collapsed towers was carefully searched for evidence and remains of victims for eight months. Not a single one of the hundreds of cleanup workers involved, all of whom had extensive experience with explosives, found and testified to traces of explosives or damaged steel girders. Their clearing and shipping took several months and was documented in detail by the companies involved. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Professor of Steel and Structural Engineering, examined steel girders from the two towers for two weeks before they were removed and reported to the Congress Science Committee on March 6, 2002, among other things, about severely deformed steel hinges. For this reason too, Congress approved a comprehensive investigation into the collapses.

Some experts and scientists explained the causes of the collapse in their own studies independently of a government order. WTC designers already explained the collapse on September 11, 2001 by saying that steel girders softened by ongoing office fires caused a domino effect when the upper parts of the building fell onto the lower ones. On September 13, 2001, two scientists from Northwestern University calculated how the plane impacts caused the collapses. They affirmed in 2002 that the collapses were physically inevitable according to all available building and aircraft data and took place exactly at the times, with the duration and the course that were to be expected. In December 2001, MIT metallurgist Thomas W. Eagar demonstrated how the materials used in the WTC towers reacted with the fires caused by the kerosene and caused the collapses. Experts in the fire protection of high-rise buildings referred to the special design of the WTC towers: The floors were supported horizontally by light steel girders, the vertical support columns of which had suffered massive structural damage from the aircraft impacts and lost their fire protection jacket.

The final report of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which was prepared by 2005, confirmed these studies and stated that the impacts had severely damaged at least twelve of the 47 core columns of the towers and destroyed their fire protection envelope. The exact level of fuel in the aircraft is unknown (it is estimated at 15,000 to 40,000 liters of kerosene per aircraft), but half of that can cause large-scale fires. These were spread over many floors via destroyed elevator shafts, were lined with combustible interior material, and therefore lasted until they collapsed and reached temperatures of up to 1000 ° C. They let enough steel girders sink in until the outer columns connected to them buckled inwards and triggered the collapse, which then inexorably tore all parts of the building down. In order to overload the barely heated lower steel pillars, a few failing outer pillars on a single floor were sufficient. The weight of the floors depressed and falling from above then increased more and more downwards. Demolition expert Brent Blanchard, whose company documented thousands of explosions and also supervised the clean-up work at Ground Zero , rejected the demolition thesis in a 2006 study: The WTC collapses began at the impact zone and proceeded from top to bottom. When buildings are blown up, however, the explosive devices are attached to the base of supporting elements and the lowest floors are blown up first so that the rest can fall in one piece. A complex computer simulation from Purdue University , which was only possible in 2007, confirmed the NIST report and suggested that even more support columns were damaged in the impact.

In an article published in September 2016 in EurophysicsNews (EPN) of the European Physical Society (EPS), four authors of the 9/11 Truth movement (Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti, Ted Walter) echoed main known objections to the NIST reports : Building damage and ongoing fires had never led to the collapse of a steel girder skyscraper before or since September 11; the temperatures of normal fires were not sufficient for this; the supporting pillars in the twin towers were particularly fire-protected; the speed of the collapse and testimonies speak for a controlled demolition. A new, independent investigation must consider this possibility. The EPN editors stated in a pre-note that, unlike other EPN publications, the article contained some speculation, but that it seemed "sufficiently scientific and interesting enough" to them. Some 9/11 truth authors then untruthfully claimed that the article had appeared in the European Scientific Journal (ESJ) after a peer review , and that the theses represented therein had been confirmed as scientific. As a result, ESJ and the associated European Scientific Institute (ESI) distanced themselves : They did not publish about the 9/11 attacks.

According to a fact-checking by Snopes , the EPN article only repeated long since invalidated and misleading theses: steel girders do not have to melt in order to lose structural load-bearing capacity; Sprinkler systems and fire protection were destroyed by the plane impacts; Dust clouds escaping from the side are far easier to explain by air pressure through the mass falling from above; the speed of the collapse is consistent with the causes of the collapse and in any case cannot be reliably and precisely determined. In response to public pressure, EPN stated that it also publishes on controversial topics in order to stimulate discussion, but unlike ESI journals without peer review. The best way to resolve the controversy is to have an open debate about it, with the arguments necessary to ultimately tell the truth. In the next issue EPN will publish a counter article. The 9/11 article was published without a review in order to lead a controversy as openly as possible to a non-refutable solution. They were shocked that the publication had been used to support 9/11 conspiracy theories that were not endorsed. In the future, authors will be asked to provide a table of contents and information on other publications on their essay topic in order to better assess the content.

In response to their request, NIST stated that its WTC 1, 2, and 7 investigation was the most detailed structural failure assessment it has ever conducted. No new evidence has emerged since 2008; all known evidence still led to the collapse scenario described by NIST. With its later FAQ websites, NIST answered all aspects of alternative perspectives. In the counter-article (January 2017), the experts Jia-Liang Le and Zdeněk P. Bažant stated: The WTC collapses were clarified by a mathematical analysis of their mechanics. They were spontaneous and inevitable because of the plane impacts and subsequent fires, as all calculations and available observations confirmed. "Lay critics" would have questioned this cause without any significant calculations to suggest some kind of conspiracy.

World Trade Center 7

Protest poster of the 9/11 Truth Movement at an anti-war demonstration in Los Angeles , October 2007

Proponents of the demolition thesis refer particularly to the collapse of the former World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2001. The fact that it was not hit by any aircraft and did not collapse until around seven hours after WTC 1 and 2 is can only be explained by a prepared demolition. As evidence of this, they cite: The building was damaged too little by rubble to collapse. Internal fires have only been observed in isolated parts of the building. According to the video recordings, the collapse occurred symmetrically. The building fell vertically into its own outline ("imploded"). To do this, all pillars would have to have failed at the same time. No combination of rubble damage and fire could explain that. The resulting pile of rubble is as small as if it were blown up. The rubble was removed suspiciously quickly, so that the causes of the collapse can no longer be proven.

Scientists and investigative journalists showed that the proponents of these theses had used the available image material selectively. Videos and photographs from the south side of WTC 7 showed far greater damage to the building than on the north side and intensely burning fires spread over several floors. The fire brigade therefore feared the building collapse early on. This did not take place symmetrically, but rather began, as expected, on the heavily damaged south side. In order to prepare for an explosion, one would have had to foresee exactly where the rubble would hit: this is where the explosion theory fails. The heap of rubble was 12 stories high and 150 meters wide. It had been removed quickly to find any buried people. Because the steel girders were not numbered, they could not be assigned later. The orderly recovery of the rubble seemed to the authorities to be of secondary importance in those buildings whose collapse did not kill anyone. Even if the removed steel girders had shown traces of a demolition, this would at most have proven individual perpetrators, not a government plot.

Proponents of the demolition thesis often refer to a report by the BBC , whose reporter on site erroneously reported the collapse at 5:00 p.m. That proves the authorities' prior knowledge, which was accidentally leaked to the media prematurely. In addition, the owner Larry Silverstein said in a phone call before the collapse: "[...] maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it." "Pull it" means the order to initiate a prepared demolition for building demolition companies.

The BBC explained the reporter's error by referring to the mess that day when the collapse of WTC 7 had been expected for hours. The original tapes of the report were not kept. In 2002, Silverstein reported on the phone call with the fire chief on September 11, 2001 around 2:30 p.m. In it he suggested that the still existing fire brigade unit should be removed from the unstable building, which it then decided:

“I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. ' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse. "

“I remember a call from the fire chief who told me they weren't sure they could contain the fire. And I said, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the wisest thing to do is pull it off. And they made the decision to leave, and then we saw the building collapse. "

According to Silverstein's spokesman, "it" (it) referred to the rest of the fire brigade that evacuated the building and its surroundings until they too were withdrawn. Fire chief Daniel Nigro swore his withdrawal order in 2007 in writing. Firefighters involved testified that they had been pulled. In the demolition industry, “pull” refers to the fastening of steel cables to load-bearing parts of the building in order to tip them over hydraulically.

Proponents of the demolition theory claim that WTC 7 was blown up in order to remove traces of the attack planning by the Secret Service , the Department of Defense and the CIA departments located in the building . Which members of these authorities are said to have prepared the demolition and in what way remained unexplained. It was also alleged that Larry Silverstein insured the WTC buildings against terrorist attacks shortly after his purchase in July 2001 and gained substantial insurance sums from their collapse. Why he should have "confessed" to a demolition in 2002 and what relationship he had with the government authorities in WTC 7 also remained unexplained. According to the Port Authority , which owns the WTC site, and according to media reports from spring 2001, the buildings are expected to generate high profits. The insurance contracts were not fully negotiated and formulated imprecisely, so that Silverstein was defeated against the insurers in court and received less than half of the targeted amount. In addition, he was contractually obliged to invest the sum received in the new construction of WTC 7 within two years.

A preliminary report by FEMA from May 2002 suspected fires as the sole cause of the collapse because heavy smoke on videos masked the extent of the debris damage. NIST corrected this assumption in 2004 based on police photographs of the south side of WTC 7. Columbia University calculated that the kinetic energy of the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 destabilized and deformed the surrounding buildings. A scientific study in 2007 calculated that because of the special construction of WTC 7, the failure of a single support pillar would have caused the collapse. The fact that the NIST final report on WTC 7, originally announced for 2005, was delayed by three years reinforced suspicions that the government was trying to cover up other causes of the collapse. But according to NIST director Shyam Sanders, NIST first clarified the collapse of the twin towers and then had to develop new computer models to precisely simulate the consequences of each individual fire in WTC 7. After that, other collapse hypotheses were just as thoroughly checked and ruled out. For this, three years of additional investigation time are not unusual.

The final report of NIST on WTC 7 from November 2008, prepared by 88 experts with the help of hundreds of employees from other authorities, clarified the still open details of the causes of the collapse. After that, debris from the north tower caused considerable structural damage to the building, especially on the southwest side. They cut off the water supply to the sprinkler system and caused several fires that burned unhindered up to 400 degrees Celsius for seven hours over at least six floors. As a result, horizontal steel girders expanded so far that they jumped off the supporting pillars. As a result, some floors collapsed until three central vertical support pillars (79-81) were partially free, overloaded and buckled almost simultaneously. As a result, first the eastern, then the western penthouse on the roof collapsed. Then all the inner pillars collapsed from east to west, until the outer structures fell vertically as one building element. The entire collapse lasted over 16 seconds. The final report stated in a separate section on the demolition hypothesis that it would have been almost impossible to properly place the required amount of explosives unobserved by residents, employees and visitors. Detonation noises typical for building explosions were not found in video / audio recordings of the building collapse or in witness statements. Such detonations could not have been overheard, as they trigger a multitude of echoes at an estimated 130 to 140 decibels in an area of ​​up to 1000 m . In addition, the NIST found no proportionally fitting window damage in the area of ​​the support pillars and no explosive residues. Therefore it ruled out a demolition as very unlikely.

By 2011, NIST confirmed with detailed answers to questions about the final report: WTC 7 had collapsed as a result of the uncontrolled simultaneous fire on many floors, which caused damage to the floors, expansion of steel girders and girders and, most recently, the vertical overloading of a supporting column. The special construction of WTC 7, the failure of the sprinkler system and the withdrawal of the fire brigade contributed to this, unlike in high-rise buildings, which remained standing despite prolonged fires. The visible symmetrical fall of the outer facade followed the invisible inner collapse of the floors, supporting beams and buckling of the columns, which the fall of the penthouse on the roof and the breaking of windows on the north side suggest. The collapse took 40% longer than the free fall. A brief collapse phase that is just as rapid is consistent with the fact that the outer columns buckled and no longer supported the falling mass. For deliberate detonation, most or all of the pillars should have had explosives attached. To do this, walls, cladding and fire protection would have to be removed. The welding work required for this would have produced toxic smells and noises that would not have gone unnoticed. Explosive noises heard by two witnesses in the building did not mean that the building was detonated, as the witnesses would then not have been able to leave the building in time. There was no evidence for explosions in the WTC. Therefore, after careful examination of this hypothesis, an explosion was ruled out.

The critics are also unable to offer a plausible alternative scenario. After the two towers collapsed, the demolition of WTC 7 would not have significantly increased the terrorist effect that the conspirators supposedly wanted to achieve. So they had no motive to extensively prepare the building with explosives.

Thermite

The retired physicist Steven Jones has been claiming since 2005 that he experimentally detected sulfur-containing thermate in rubble samples from the WTC , which indicates a controlled demolition of the buildings with thermite .

The chemist Frank Greening demonstrated in detail the existing materials and their chemical reactions in the WTC buildings under the given fire and heat conditions. Among them were large amounts of sulfur from plaster walls and other things. The ongoing fires released gaseous sulfur dioxide , which corroded the iron-containing steel girders and combined to form iron (II) sulfide . This chemical reaction cannot be explained with thermite.

In 2009, a team of authors led by retired Danish chemist Niels Harrit published an article in the Open Chemical Physics Journal that accepts articles for an author's fee without strict peer review . The authors claim to have found active, unreacted nanothermite in dust samples that allegedly came from the WTC rubble. The chemical components of the samples could not have been created during the collapse. Nanothermite was developed by the military and is suitable for cutting steel girders or igniting other explosives. Its presence proves a controlled demolition of the building. The essay is not scientifically recognized. Technical experts point to serious methodological deficiencies and consider the substances found to be paint particles of rust inhibitors. Because the article was published without her knowledge, Marie-Paule Pileni, an expert on nanomaterials, resigned from her position as editor-in-chief of the journal. Representatives of other conspiracy theses point out that nanothermite has far too little explosive power for concrete and steel and can only be used as a fast igniter for other explosives. In a criminal trial on a libel suit, Harrits' main witness said that physics professor Per Hedegård ( University of Copenhagen ) said WTC 7 could have collapsed so quickly even without explosives. If the traces in the samples were unreacted nanothermite, then an extrapolated 60 tons of it would not have ignited.

In 2009/2010, NIST stated that thermite burns relatively slowly compared to explosives and would have had to be brought into contact with steel girders for minutes in order to significantly weaken their load-bearing capacity. To do this, many thousands of pounds of thermite would have had to be attached inconspicuously in advance, ignited from a safe distance and then somehow kept in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of structural components of the building. Thermit is therefore unlikely to be a means of controlled destruction of the building. A chemical analysis of the metal residues in the rubble would not necessarily have indicated thermite, since the components could have come from built-in materials themselves.

Theses on the aircraft

Equipped with bombs or rebuilt

Other theses are that the passenger planes carried bombs under the fuselage or intentionally enlarged fuel tanks, or that they were rockets converted into fake aircraft.

The video 911 in Plane Site and the website letsroll911.org refer to a photograph of flight UA 175, which apparently shows an elongated bulge at the foot of the right wing. They interpreted this as a bomb container. Forensic analyzes of the photography showed, however, that the sun's rays and camera angles made the standard container of a chassis wheel appear larger in the developed photo and that digital copies had enlarged it again. In addition, converting a Boeing 767 into a bomb carrier and detonating the bomb exactly on impact would have been technically very complex. The impact damage corresponded only to the plane impact.

Various authors claim that a military aircraft or a passenger jet converted to a gasoline tank was used for the attacks. As evidence, the website 911inplanesite.com names a witness who believed to have seen a flying object without a window approaching WTC 2. However, he was two miles from WTC 2 and saw the jet approaching at an angle inclined to the left so that the windows on the right were no longer visible from below. Photographs show fragments of the jet with windows that had fallen onto the roof of neighboring WTC 5 .

Remote controlled

A thesis put forward by the Australian conspiracy theorist Joe Vialls is that members of the US government took over the autopilot of the hijacked aircraft via radio remote control and thus steered them into the buildings from the ground without the hijackers having the opportunity to intervene. Thierry Meyssan (2002) and the makers of Loose Change took up the remote control thesis without giving any evidence of their connection to September 11th.

No planes

Impact damage at the Pentagon before the facade collapsed

Pentagon wall pierced by the aircraft's landing gear

Thierry Meyssan's bestseller L'Effroyable Imposture from 2002 circulated the thesis that no passenger jet could have hit the Pentagon. Photographs taken shortly after the impact showed a barely damaged lawn and no debris in front of the building. The visible damage to the front of the building is too narrow for the span of a Boeing 757 (≈38 m). The damage came more from a cruise missile used by the US military, since only this missile could penetrate the missile defense around the Pentagon. Despite unanimous rejection in the Western press, many conspiracy theorists adopted Meyssan's theses, including Dylan Avery, the author of Loose Change , the websites Hunt the Boeing , Reopen911.org and pentagonstrike.co.uk . Based on early photographs, they claimed that the impact hole before the collapse of the outer facade was only 5.5 m wide. Another, almost 5 m wide hole in the third inner ring of the building could not possibly have been made by the aircraft nose or an engine, windows at the point of impact could not possibly have remained intact. Some former US Air Force pilots and accident experts also questioned the impact of a passenger jet. David Ray Griffin thought the missile thesis matched the evidence much better. The doubts were fueled because, unlike the WTC, there were no television pictures or private videos of the impact, the FBI had quickly collected the debris as evidence of a crime and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) had not asked the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to assemble the debris.

Part of the wreckage at the Pentagon, September 11, 2001

According to the Pentagon Building Performance Report of the American Society of Civil Engineers from 2003, the massive outer walls, wall rings and tightly packed concrete columns of the Pentagon tore up the majority of the aircraft into small parts, which flew scattered into the building interior and were deformed beyond recognition. The building had been extensively renovated since 1993; the outside affected by the impact was one of the particularly reinforced parts. The bomb-proof windows made of multi-layer laminate glass had only been installed weeks earlier in a corset of new steel girders and concrete slabs to withstand attacks like the one in Oklahoma City . That is why the facade around the impact remained there for 19 minutes and only fell as a result of the intense fire. Only a few larger aircraft debris were recovered: including the undercarriage, a wheel, the flight data recorder and pieces of the fuselage, including one with the airline's symbol. The right wing first hit a massive generator house, the left one against a ventilation system. The wings tore off in the process and on impact with the outer front. This corresponded to the 27.4 (not 5.5) meter wide impact hole. In addition, a large part of the kerosene burned during the impact, so that the damage to the building was far less than at the WTC. The smaller hole in ring C was caused by a wheel of the undercarriage that was torn off and hit at high speed. Clean-up workers and firefighters held parts of the aircraft in their hands before they were removed. Hundreds of eyewitnesses saw the approach and the impact of the aircraft from the neighboring streets, many also noticed passengers in the windows. Renee May and Barbara Olson had phoned relatives from the plane. All 53 killed passengers, six crew members and the five hijackers were identified by DNA traces .

Suspicion was also fueled because the FBI withheld video taped by a parking lot camera as evidence for the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui and only released individual still images of it. The camera took only one still image per second and the aircraft traveled 780 feet (≈238 meters) per second. The video released in May 2006 therefore only shows a blurred white object with the outlines of an airplane, the fireball on impact and the thick black smoke typical of kerosene fires. These images rule out a rocket impact.

United Airlines Flight 93 was hit by the hijackers after an attack by passengers on the cockpit near Shanksville . The aircraft was almost completely shredded into small parts on impact. Photographs of the impact crater showed no major aircraft parts. According to Gerhard Wisnewski, Ernie Stull, the mayor of Shanksville, said when asked: “There was nothing! - Just this hole. ”Dennis Roddy, editor-in-chief of a Pittsburgh newspaper, couldn't see any aircraft debris either. The news magazine Der Spiegel proved, however, that Stull had seen parts of the rubble and only said that he was astonished when the machine burst. Roddy was not there, but had sent a team of journalists to the crash site. This gathered testimony from many witnesses who saw the plane crashing in rotation and heard the impact explosion. As far as possible, the remains of the 44 bodies were recovered, identified and given to the victims' families.

James Fetzer and some of his supporters have been denying that passenger planes hit the WTC towers since around 2006. Missiles made of aluminum could not have penetrated a solid steel and concrete structure so smoothly. The creators of the September Clues video series claim that a central body manipulated the TV images and private videos of the impacts and simulated aircraft impacts with computer-generated imagery (TV fakery, video trickery) .

Proponents of these theses reject other conspiracy theses that assume real plane impacts, and invented complicated explanations for the many eyewitness reports, aircraft wreckage and killed passengers. Alexander Dewdney, for example, has been claiming since 2003 that the first three hijacked aircraft were forced to stop over, replaced by remote-controlled aircraft and then sunk in the ocean. Your passengers were forced to transfer to the UA 93 aircraft, which was then shot down. However, it could have held a maximum of 200 of the total of 265 people on all four hijacked flights. Many spokesmen of the 9/11 Truth Movement regard the “no-plane” theses as harmful disinformation and a distraction from other alleged clues for government involvement, such as the demolition thesis.

Launch

According to other theses, the US military is said to have shot down the crashed UA 93 aircraft. This is often referred to a small white business jet that flew over the crash site. In fact, at the request of air traffic control in Johnstown (20 miles north of Shanksville), its pilot was only supposed to determine the exact position of the crash.

Eyewitnesses had also seen a military jet in the crash area. The retired Army Colonel Donn de Grand-Pre claimed in a radio broadcast in February 2004 that he knew the unit and its pilot who had received the order to launch and executed it with two on-board missiles. In fact, this pilot was stationed 1,100 miles north and took off unarmed at 10:45 a.m. for a flight from North Dakota to Montana and on to Albany, New York , a spokesman for his unit and his passenger confirmed. NORAD gave the order to kill Flight 93 to fighter pilots only after it had crashed. Even if the command had been received early, these would have been too far away.

Others claim body parts, clothes, books and junk were found six miles north of the crater, even though the wind was blowing south. In fact, an engine part, paper, and scraps of cloth were found south of the crater. Experts explained this with the steep but not perpendicular angle and the speed of the impact: heavy parts were torn off and thrown out, light parts were whirled up and blown in the direction of the wind.

It is often claimed that cell phone calls from an aircraft above 8,000 feet were technically impossible at the time and were very unlikely from a lower altitude. The calls, the content of which was printed in the Commission's 2004 report, were invented or fabricated. In fact, cell phone calls were possible at altitudes of up to 35,000 feet back then, albeit unsafe because of the airspeed. But Flight 93 was flying relatively low and in an area with numerous receiving stations. Most of the callers used the on-board telephones built into their seats. Many calls lasted less than a minute and were often interrupted. Since only one of four kidnappers was guarding the passengers huddled in the rear area, as some callers reported, a relatively large number of calls came through unmolested.

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld warned in 2004 of a possible victory for the " people who [...] shot down the plane over Pennsylvania ". According to a Pentagon spokesman, shot down was just a slip of the tongue. Michel Chossudovsky and others interpreted the verb as a Freudian slip of the tongue, revealing and proving Rumsfeld's knowledge of the shooting. It remains unclear why the government should have kept an actual shooting secret, since it did not deny its order to do so. Bush stressed in 2002 that he had not hesitated and gave Vice President Dick Cheney by telephone on September 11, 2001 an order to kill more hijacked aircraft. The report of the 9/11 Commission of July 2004 revealed in minute detail that this order was given at 10:10 a.m. at the earliest, that the air traffic control center was only passed on at 10:31 a.m. and did not reach the pilots.

Assessment by historians

Historians have ignored or dismissed the conspiracy theories as of September 11, 2001, with a few exceptions. According to the Austrian historian Margit Reiter , although in a weakened form they do reach into the German mainstream discourse, in their radical form they would only play a role in marginal right-wing or left-wing extremist circles.

An exception to this consensus is the Swiss historian Daniele Ganser , who questions the official government version of the events. It is just as much an unproven conspiracy theory as the assumption that the US government deliberately let the attacks happen or even caused them to happen itself. Too many questions are still open. Since the end of his academic career, Ganser has been spreading these doubts in public lectures and on YouTube. The Americanist Michael Butter considers Ganser's argumentation to be dishonest: the questions that he apparently only ask are suggestive , in truth he advocates the conspiracy theory that the American government is behind the attacks.

The retired Austrian historian Helmut Reinalter doubts the official government version, which leaves too many questions unanswered. He calls it the “Muslim conspiracy theory”, but doubts that the assumption that secret services such as the CIA, FBI, NSA or Mossad were behind the attacks is more convincing than that.

criticism

Scientists and journalists encounter 9/11 conspiracy theories in different ways: by debunking assertions of fact, by analyzing the methods and goals of their representatives, by historical classifications and political, sociological and psychological explanations.

Fact checking

In 2003 some German media outlined for the first time the baselessness of 9/11 conspiracy theses, especially those of German authors. In 2006, Spiegel published the special issue “Facts on September 11”. The BBC and National Geographic Society have debunked 9/11 conspiracy theories with multiple films since 2006.

The report of the 9/11 Commission (2004) clarified the history of the attacks as requested, the reports of the NIST (2004–2008) clarified the physical causes of the collapse of the WTC buildings. They refuted most of the 9/11 conspiracy theses on this without addressing them directly.

In 2005, Popular Mechanics published a website, and in May 2006 an updated and expanded version of it as a book. It invalidates the most famous 9/11 conspiracy theses on airplanes, WTC collapses, the Pentagon and flight UA 93 with the facts published up to then. The main documents are summarized in the appendix. For his part, David Ray Griffin attempted to disprove the book's facts ( Debunking 9/11 Debunking , 2007). The physicist Ryan Mackey rebutted Griffin's statements about the WTC collapses and summarized the results of the NIST reports. His work has been regarded as a precise scientific refutation of the explosion thesis since 2011. Other scientists have refuted the explosion thesis in independent studies.

In November 2009, the WikiLeaks exposure platform published over 500,000 text messages sent by US officials on September 11, 2001 using radio receivers . There was no evidence of an inside job . Wikileaks founder Julian Assange stated in 2010 that 9/11 conspiracy theories distracted from real conspiracies for war and corruption that are everywhere and that Wikileaks has exposed. For their part, representatives of the 9/11 Truth Movement suspected Wikileaks of being a distraction from the real crimes of the US secret services. Because of such reaction patterns, the social psychologist Jovan Byford considers attempts to refute conspiracy theories in open discussion with facts as unpromising. Revelations would be taken as confirmation of the preconceived worldview, not as evidence of the security apparatus' weakness in keeping things secret.

Plausibility check

The journalist David Corn ( The Nation , 2002) found it pointless to refute the unverifiable details of the MIHOP and LIHOP theories. In his experience, it is completely unrealistic to assume that government officials are willing and able to do such a thing. Too many employees from various competing authorities would have had to be privy to and trust each other in order not to uncover the conspiracy prematurely. To camouflage even prior knowledge (LIHOP) would have required immense effort. Corresponding reports have been circulated whose readers would have known that the government wanted to allow the attacks for geopolitical advantage. Everyone involved should have been totally sure that everyone else would withhold their knowledge. You should have taken into account possible sacrifices among your own colleagues. The known crimes of CIA officials (death squads, torture, assassinations, covered up massacres, etc.) happened during the Cold War and in foreign countries. A mass murder of thousands of US citizens for oil interests is another level of depravity. It would endanger the career of the perpetrators before and after the crime too much for them. Despite his oil interests, Bush would not have risked going down in history as the worst president of all time. This rejection is necessary in order to bring actual crimes and failures of the secret services and the military back into focus.

Historian and journalist Jefferson Flanders raised similar logical objections to the MIHOP theory in 2008: Why would someone plan to ram planes into buildings and prepare them for demolition? Wouldn't the attacks alone be enough of a provocation? Why hijackings at all? Wouldn't one or more massive truck bombs do the same thing with less logistical effort, analogous to the attack on the WTC in 1993 or the attack in Oklahoma City? Why should one plan the conspiracy in such a sophisticated and complex way? Blowing up a large office tower takes months of professional preparation. How could huge amounts of explosives have been secretly placed in three skyscrapers without being noticed? The bigger the conspiracy, the more people would be involved and many more would have to obscure the implementation. Would they all be silent and not confess to anyone, despite all the media attention for the event?

The theologian Timothy B. Cargal pointed to elementary logical errors in David Ray Griffin's theses: From arguments for perpetrators other than those of the "official" theory one could not infer that the government had deliberately "allowed" the attacks. Actual previous US government false flag actions proved nothing for the particular event and did not make its staging more likely. To assume that all the pillars of WTC 7 will be blown up at the same time is no more reasonable than assuming their collapse. An additional demolition of WTC 7 after the two towers makes no sense because it would not have added anything to the desired effect of the previous demolition. Anyone who denies an aircraft as the cause of the impact damage at the Pentagon must explain its whereabouts. Why should the government have shot down the fourth plane if it was approaching a destination it planned? And why should she have kept her kill order a secret instead of boasting that she had foiled another attack? This would have served to cover up the other planned attacks. Griffin only managed to prove his irrationality.

In 2010, the political scientist John C. McAdams emphasized the logic of common sense : only facts known to be reliable, for example the photograph of a worker installing explosives in WTC 7, would be an occasion to question the official declaration of September 11th. Even then, such a photo would not prove a conspiracy because it did not clarify its purpose. The evidence presented in conspiracy literature should be asked whether it explains this purpose. As long as one cannot imagine why a conspiracy wanted to carry out a certain detail, this is probably not proof of it either.

Political scientist George Friedman casually replied to the MIHOP theory in 2011: If the CIA were capable of these acts, it would not need any justification to curtail freedom. She wouldn't have to let the people alive who were discovering the truth. It is amazing to believe that September 11th was created to destroy American freedoms, but that the conspirators are too incompetent to take down those who discovered the conspiracy and communicated it to the world. Precisely because the doubters are concerned with the intention of the CIA, it is important to emphasize that the motives they have given make no sense.

In 2013, the book author Peter Davies referred to the number of people involved who, for example, required the demolition thesis: Hundreds would have had to spend months preparing the three WTC buildings for the demolition at night without being discovered. Every air traffic control employee involved should have known and concealed that the aircraft that had disappeared from the screen were being replaced or remotely controlled. Some theses made passengers and firefighters complicit among the victims. All scientists and engineers who supported the official version against their better judgment would then have to either have been involved in the conspiracy or been bribed by the conspirators. As Noam Chomsky has rightly pointed out, anyone supposed to be involved, from Bush to the common firefighter, would face the death penalty for life if one of the thousands who knew it would, and hope no one would do it for the rest of their lives. Therefore, according to the “ Occam's razor ” principle, it is easier to accept the 19 assassins as real.

Other authors demonstrate the application of this principle using the example of the explosion thesis: The explosive devices should have previously been placed exactly where the aircraft hit, but at the same time should not be ignited prematurely by aviation fuel. The pilots should have hit the prepared spots exactly. All those who knew about it and investigators should have covered up the traces of explosives jointly and in a coordinated manner in order to deceive the public. This explanation would be far too complicated compared to the official version.

Method critique

Michael Shermer (2005) compared 9/11 conspiracy theories to Holocaust denial : both believed, at their core, that a handful of unexplained anomalies could undermine a well-established theory. All of the Truthers' "evidence" fell into this fundamental flaw. Stephen Prince confirmed: A predilection for anomalies is essential to their thought pattern. None of them name real evidence, just contradictions in testimony or oddities in videos and photographs. Rational explanations contradicting the preconceived thesis would be rejected. Noam Chomsky criticized: Anyone who knows anything about science immediately rejects the evidence presented by conspiracy theorists. There are always coincidences and unexplained phenomena, even in scientific experiments.

James B. Meigs, editor of Popular Mechanics , spoke of a 9/11 “conspiracy industry” with its own literary section in 2006 and described some of its methods:

• Marginalizing contradicting representations: The typical rhetoric of an “official version” assumes that all available diverse sources (media reports, independent university and laboratory studies, institute studies, eyewitness reports, image and written documents, statements of the perpetrators, etc.) are the product of a small group in the US -Government.
• Concentration on a few anomalies. It is not surprising that in the mass of evidence there are also some previously unexplained details. From this, however, conspiracy thinking is always only one possible explanation.
• Concentration on early, incorrect media reports without paying attention to their later corrections. At the same time, hundreds of books by conspiracy theory authors contained so many errors and mistakes that hardly any of them met the standards for an essay in a specialist journal.
• Repeating invalid assertions over and over again, even if the rebuttal is generally available on the Internet.
• Circular justification: Missing evidence would be taken as evidence of a conspiracy. If evidence is available, their evidential value is disputed, in fact they are often taken as evidence to the contrary (as in the case of the finds of Mohammed Atta's rental car, suitcases, will and passport). So every evidence is integrated into the preconceived theory. Physical evidence would be wiped away with reference to the US government's motives, means and possibilities. Because you already know who is to blame, evidence becomes optional.
• Demonizing: Since the leading experts reject the conspiracy theses on September 11th, their representatives only have to attack them early and often as victims of pressure to conform or as puppets of the government. The more contradicting their theses, the more opponents they would have to represent as part of the conspiracy.
• Paranoid style: According to Richard Hofstadter's analysis (1964), conspiracy theories, apart from their content, are characterized by a certain rhetorical style of exaggeration, suspicion and excessive fantasy. This also applies to the 9/11 conspiracy theses.

Political scientist Stephen M. Walt (2010) pointed out: Like earlier conspiracy theories, as of September 11th, a small elite attributed enormous power to control many institutions without explaining the nature of that control. “The government” is always somehow involved for them. They disregarded the principle of preferring simple, direct explanations (“Ockham's razor”) in favor of complicated constructs that should explain away contradicting evidence. They represented the world in a much more organized and consistent manner than it actually was, and often pressed unconnected phenomena into a larger pattern. They even take the lack of evidence to confirm their theory. The more vague it is, the more difficult it is to refute it. In contrast, the neoconservative group openly approved and announced the Iraq war and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. That could therefore not be portrayed as a conspiracy. Rather, such theories made objective criticism of this group and its goals more difficult.

Stephen Carey (2011) cited 9/11 conspiracy theories as a prime example of a circular reasoning in pseudoscience : from some unexplained anomalies, completely unsubstantiated theories would be inferred, for which those anomalies were then used as evidence without considering other possible explanations. In this way, evidence is faked without empirical evidence.

Criticism of anti-Semitic tendencies

Those 9/11 conspiracy theories that accuse Jews in the US government and Israelis as perpetrators are classified as anti-Semitic . Tobias Jaecker (2004), Wolfgang Wippermann (2007) and Jasmin Waibl-Stockner (2009) find anti-Semitic stereotypes and striking analogies to the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, the traditional conspiracy theory of world Jewry , in the publications by Bröckers, Bülow and Wisnewski . Right-wing extremism researcher George Michael (2006) assesses this theory as a link between Western right-wing extremists and Arab Islamists . The documentary filmmaker Mark Levin also attributes the thesis of 4,000 Jews who allegedly stayed away from the WTC on the day of the attacks to the "Protocols".

Jovan Byford also finds structural analogies to anti-Semitic theses in common 9/11 conspiracy theses and criticizes that the 9/11 Truth Movement is insufficiently differentiated from anti-Semites. In 2011, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) described ten years of constancy and development of anti-Semitic 9/11 conspiracy theories. But they only marked part of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The thesis of 4,000 forewarned Jewish WTC employees has resigned, but the theses that Mossad agents and Jewish neoconservatives claim as perpetrators are still relevant. They are spread not only by right-wing extremists of the American Free Press , but above all by opponents of Israel such as Gordon Duff, Alan Sabrosky (both authors of the website “Veterans Today”), James Fetzer (“Scholars for 9/11 Truth”) and Kevin Barrett ("Truth Jihad" website). Her theses constantly speak of an "Israel lobby" and linked the allegation of an Israel-controlled false flag crime with Israel's behavior towards the Palestinians . Oliver Kamm ( The Times ) sees 9/11 conspiracy theories as an inherent, not just accidental threat to Jews because their representatives would sooner or later have to explain other unusual facts with familiar patterns, i.e. blame Jews. As an example, he cited James Fetzer's allegation about the Sandy Hook rampage.

Social science explanations

Alexander Cockburn (2006) criticized the influence of 9/11 conspiracy theories on the American left . They would have replaced the orientation towards Marxist social criticism with diffuse distrust and thus decisively weakened the anti-war movement. Instead of economic interests, they reduced government policy to small secret circles. Their “fundamental idiocy” is “their fervent and downright grotesque belief in American efficiency.” The fact that they did not trust the attacks “Arabs in caves” is often based on racism . The same prejudice had the effect that the declared intentions of the perpetrators were not taken seriously, thus enabling the attacks to be planned without being disturbed. To suspect secret intent behind the breakdowns of the air defense, manifest ignorance of many military actions that failed because of stupidity, cowardice, corruption or coincidences. Cockburn pointed out logical contradictions between individual theses, such as that a rocket attack on the Pentagon while the hijacked plane was approaching would only have made the allegedly planned deception more difficult. Such constructs could not prove that Bush and Cheney were omnipotent criminals who had controlled everything that happened that day: they had not even succeeded in blaming Iraq with the weapons of mass destruction with whose alleged existence they justified the war. Fictitious conspiracies distracted from real conspiracies in the USA, for example against the poor.

According to Glenn Greenwald (2007), 9/11 conspiracy theories only mirror the worldview of Bush and his followers. Both reduced complex processes to the simple opposition of good versus evil and thus claimed moral certainty for themselves. In doing so, they would give themselves the illusion that they would understand the world better and find their way around it. Such explanatory patterns are always wrong and never helpful in understanding reality.

Karsten Wind Meyhoff (2008) named three main goals of the 9/11 conspiracy theories: 1. They should radically question the current political and institutional structures of the USA, disrupt the order of power and arouse deep distrust of the government, ultimately about the current system replace. 2. You should keep the memory of September 11th alive, reflect on what happened and do some kind of mourning work. 3. You should create a critical distance from the media and teach that they often offer their facts with specific intentions and interests. Thinking about these theories could contribute to dealing critically with the events themselves.

David Altheide (2009) explains 9/11 conspiracy theories as “counter-narratives” to successful government propaganda for the war on terror. Both followed the same medial, fear-inducing and fear-driven logic. On the one hand, critics of hegemonic propaganda traditionally resorted to sources other than the established mass media, today primarily the Internet. On the other hand, they followed similarly routine lines and got the key words from the rejected media. This interaction shows how the dominant media culture contextualizes the communication behavior and the issues of both sides. For the advocates of counter-narratives, it is sufficient to link various events as parts of a secret plan, because this theory is coherent for them. Therefore, missing explanations are not important to them, for example how explosives could be transported unnoticed into the WTC buildings for weeks, attached and camouflaged there.

Lawrie Reznek (2010) explained the spread of the 9/11 conspiracy theories from a socio-psychological point of view : Their followers concluded from the failure of the government that they themselves were responsible for the attacks. That is more reassuring for them, because you can then clean up and restore normalcy. With the self-belief that few intelligent people could see through the fog of ignorance that the conspirators had cast over the crowd, they confirmed their own superiority.

For Thomas Reinacher (2013), the Internet not only made it possible to spread, but also to generate and compile 9/11 conspiracy theories and thus the organization of the 9/11 truth movement. The designation of his followers as "conspiracy theorists" is an external attribution of the established print media, while the network offers its own knowledge space for self-perception as "alternative research". So every amateur could literally put together such theories from other websites overnight. The concentration on a few dozen of the same key points is also a result of the Internet. Network communication could seriously change epistemology and give conspiracy theories a competitive claim on concepts of reality. Whether such reactions to September 11th are qualitatively new and whether the network caused them is, however, controversial, since the conspiracy theories about the assassination attempt on John F. Kennedy had statistically higher approval rates.

Alexander Riley emphasized (2015): 9/11 conspiracy theories draw their popularity in part from real conspiracies by Western governments. Their factual claims are usually easy to refute, as Popular Mechanics has demonstrated by way of example. However, as in previous catastrophic events, they reflected a radical feeling of one's own powerlessness and ineffectiveness. The linking of unrelated events, which is typical for them, can therefore be interpreted as an attempt to reject the complexity of the postmodern world.

Additional information

Conspiracy Theory Publications

English speaking

• Christopher Lee Bollyn: Solving 9-11: The Deception That Changed the World. 2014, ISBN 0-9853225-8-6 .
• Webster G. Tarpley: 9/11 Synthetic Terror-Made in USA: With the 46 Drills of 9/11. Progressive Press, 2013, ISBN 1-61577-111-5 .
• Elias Davidsson : Hijacking America's Mind On 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence. Algora Publishing, 2013, ISBN 0-87586-972-6 .
• Marco Mamone Capria: Science and the Citizen. lulu, 2013, ISBN 1-291-44683-4 .
• Tommy Anthony: The Tower of Babel: How the Fall of Man Found Us in the Age of Terror. lulu, 2013, ISBN 1-257-11796-3 .
• James Best: The Secret Agenda. Xlibris, 2012, ISBN 978-1-4771-1213-7 .
• Kevin Robert Ryan: Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects. CreateSpace, 2013, ISBN 1-4895-0783-3 .
• Mark Gaffney: Black 9/11: Money, Motive and Technology. Trine Day, 2012, ISBN 978-1-936296-46-0 .
• David Ray Griffin: 9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes against Democracy Succeed. Interlink Publishing, 2012, ISBN 1-62371-003-0 .
• Sander Hicks: Slingshot to the Juggernaut: Total Resistance to the Death Machine Means Complete Love of the Truth. Soft Skull Press, 2012, ISBN 1-59376-423-5 .
• Edward Hendrie: 9/11 Enemies Foreign and Domestic. Great Mountain Publishing, 2nd edition 2011, ISBN 978-0-9832627-3-2 .
• Ken Hudnall: The Northwoods Conspiracy. Grave Distractions Publications, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4524-4679-0 .
• MP Lelong: 9/11 Deceptions. Xlibris, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4535-7561-1 .
• Jim Marrs: The Terror Conspiracy Revisited. Disinformation Books, 2nd edition 2011, ISBN 1-934708-63-1 .
• Arthur Naiman, Gregg Roberts: 9/11: The Simple Facts. Why the official story can't possibly be true. Soft Skull Press, 2011, ISBN 1-59376-424-3 .
• Paul W. Rea: Mounting Evidence: Why We Need a New Investigation Into 9/11. iUniverse, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4620-0068-5 .
• Paul Zarembka: The Hidden History of 9/11. Seven Stories Press, 2011, ISBN 978-1-60980-072-7 .
• Bill Whitehouse: Framing 9/11. Bilquees Press, 2010, ISBN 978-1-4563-8209-4 .
• David Ray Griffin: Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory. Interlink Pub Group, 2010, ISBN 1-56656-821-8 .
• David Ray Griffin: Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive? Interlink Pub Group, 2009, ISBN 1-56656-783-1 .
• David Ray Griffin: The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Official Final Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False. Interlink Publication Group Incorporated, 2009, ISBN 1-56656-786-6 .
• Mark H. Gaffney: The 9/11 Mystery Plane: And the Vanishing of America. Trine Day, 2008, ISBN 978-0-9799886-0-8 .
• Jim Marrs: Above Top Secret: Uncover the Mysteries of the Digital Age. Disinformation Books, 2008, ISBN 1-934708-09-7 .
• Peter Dale Scott: The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America. University of California Press, 2008, ISBN 0-520-25871-1 .
• David Ray Griffin, Peter Dale Scott (Eds.): 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals speak out, Volume 1. Olive Branch Press, 2007, ISBN 1-56656-659-2 .
• David Ray Griffin: Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. Olive Branch Press, 2007, ISBN 1-56656-686-X .
• Kevin Barrett: Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie. Progressive Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-930852-99-3 .
• Michel Chossudovsky: America's "War on Terrorism". Global Research, 2007, ISBN 0-9737147-1-9 .
• James H. Fetzer (Ed.): The 9/11 Conspiracy. The Scamming of America. Transition Vendor, 2007, ISBN 978-0-8126-9612-7 .
• Jim Marrs: The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11 and the Loss of Liberty. Disinformation Books, 2006, ISBN 1-932857-43-5 .
• Barrie Zwicker: Towers of Deception. The Media Cover-up of 9-11. New Society Publishers, 2006, ISBN 0-86571-573-4 .
• Faruk Arslan: September 11 Fiction of Matrix. Lulu, 2005, ISBN 1-4116-4356-9 .
• David Ray Griffin: The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. Arris, 2005, ISBN 1-84437-057-7 .
• David Ray Griffin: The new Pearl Harbor: disturbing questions about the Bush administration and 9/11. Olive Branch Press, 2004, ISBN 1-56656-552-9 .
• William A. Borst: The Scorpion and the Frog: A Natural Conspiracy. Xlibris, 2004, ISBN 1-4134-6620-6 .
• Michael C. Ruppert: Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. New Society Publishers, 2004, ISBN 0-86571-540-8 .
• Eric D. Williams: The Puzzle of 911: An Investigation into the Events of September 11, 2001 and Why the Pieces Don't Fit Together. BookSurge Publishing, 2004, ISBN 1-4196-0033-8 .
• Russ Kick: Abuse your illusions: the disinformation guide to media mirages and establishment lies. The Disinformation Company, 2003, ISBN 0-9713942-4-5 .
• Jim Marrs: The War on Freedom: The 9/11 Conspiracies. Texas Research & Information Bureau, 2003, ISBN 0-9727131-1-5 .
• Justin Raimondo: The Terror Enigma: 9/11 and the Israeli Connection. iUniverse, 2003, ISBN 978-0-595-29682-8 .
• Roger Burbach, Ben Clarke: September 11 and the US War: Beyond the Curtain of Smoke. City Lights, 2002, ISBN 0-87286-404-9 .
• Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed: The War on Freedom: How and why America was Attacked, September 11th, 2001. Media Messenger Books, 2002, ISBN 0-930852-40-0 .
• David Icke : Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster: Why the Official Story of 9/11 is a Monumental Lie. Bridge of Love, 2002, ISBN 0-9538810-2-4 .
• Eric Hufschmid: Painful Questions: An Analysis of the Sept. 11th Attack. Ink & Scribe, 2002, ISBN 1-931947-05-8 .

German speaking

• Paul Schreyer : Fact check 9/11: Another perspective 12 years later. Kai Homilius, 2013, ISBN 3-89706-430-8 .
• Mathias Bröckers, Christian C. Walther: 11.9. - ten years later: the collapse of a building with lies. Westend, 2011, ISBN 3-938060-48-4 .
• Paul Schreyer, Jürgen Elsässer: Inside 9/11. New facts and backgrounds ten years later. Kai Homilius, 2011, ISBN 978-3-89706-399-0 .
• Lars Schall: Assassination attempt on 9/11. A criminal investigation into finance, oil and drugs. Schild, 2011, ISBN 978-3-86994-013-7 .
• Marcus B. Klöckner: 9/11 - The fight for the truth. Heise, 2011, ISBN 978-3-936931-71-6 .
• Thomas Meyer: September 11, 2001 - the new Pearl Harbor. Facts, questions, perspectives. 2nd edition, Perseus, 2011, ISBN 3-907564-39-1 .
• Jesse Ventura, Dick Russel: The American Conspiracy: 9/11 and Other Lies. Heyne, 2011, ISBN 3-453-60190-4 .
• Andreas von Rétyi: The Terror (f) lie: September 11, 2001 and the best evidence that everything was really different. Kopp, 2007, ISBN 3-938516-58-5 .
• Eric Laurent: 9/11/01. The truth. 2nd edition, Piper, Munich 2007, ISBN 3-492-25053-X .
• Andreas von Bülow: The CIA and September 11th: International Terror and the Role of the Secret Services. (2003) 4th edition, Piper, Munich 2004, ISBN 3-492-24242-1 .
• Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed: Secret 09/11. Background on September 11th and the logic of American power politics. Goldmann, Munich 2004, ISBN 3-442-15288-7 .
• Gerhard Wisnewski: Myth 9/11. On the trail of the truth. Knaur, Munich 2004, ISBN 3-426-77783-5 .
• Thierry Meyssan: Pentagate - Attack on the Pentagon. editio de facto, Kassel 2003, ISBN 3-9808561-1-9 .
• Mathias Bröckers, Andreas Hauß: Facts, forgeries and the suppressed evidence of September 11th. Zweiausendeins, Frankfurt am Main 2003, ISBN 3-86150-604-1 .
• Mathias Bröckers: Conspiracies, conspiracy theories and the secrets of September 11th. Zweiausendeins, Frankfurt am Main 2002, ISBN 3-86150-456-1 .

literature

• Mick West: Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect. Skyhorse, 2018, ISBN 1-5107-3581-X (Chapter 9: 9/11 Controlled Demolitions )
• Christopher Hodapp, Alice Von Kannon: Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies For Dummies. John Wiley & Sons, 2015, ISBN 1-118-05202-1 .
• Joseph E. Uscinski, Joseph M. Parent: American Conspiracy Theories. Oxford University Press, 2014, ISBN 0-19-935181-3 , 2014.
• Michael Butter , Maurus Reinkowski (Ed.): Conspiracy Theories in the United States and the Middle East: A Comparative Approach. Walter de Gruyter, New York 2014, ISBN 3-11-030760-X .
• Lance deHaven-Smith: Conspiracy Theory in America. University of Texas Press, 2013, ISBN 0-292-74379-3 .
• Michael J. Wood, Karen M. Douglas: “What about building 7?” A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories. in: Front Psychology 4/2013, doi: 10.3389 / fpsyg.2013.00409 , PMC 3703523 (free full text).
• Stephen E. Atkins: Conspiracy Theories. In: The 9/11 Encyclopedia. ABC-Clio, 2nd edition 2011, ISBN 1-59884-922-0 , pp. 124-126.
• Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories: A Critical Introduction. Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, ISBN 978-0-230-34921-6 .
• Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11. Oxford University Press, 2011, ISBN 0-19-975395-4 .
• Michael Shermer: The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies. How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths. Times Books, 2011, ISBN 0-8050-9125-4 .
• Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. Random House, 2011, ISBN 978-0-345-53125-4 .
• David Aaronovitch : Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History. Jonathan Cape, London 2009, ISBN 978-0-224-07470-4 . Many other issues u. a. Riverhead Books, New York 2010, ISBN 1-59448-498-8 .
• Viruses Swami, Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Adrian Furnham: Unanswered questions: a preliminary investigation of personality and individual difference predictors of 9/11 conspiracist beliefs. In: Applied Cognitive Psychology 24/2009, pp. 749-761, doi: 10.1002 / acp.1583 .
• Arthur Goldwag: Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies: The Straight Scoop on Freemasons, the Illuminati, Skull & Bones, Black Helicopters, the New World Order, and Many, Many More. Vintage, 2009, ISBN 0-307-39067-5 .
• Jasmin Waibl-Stockner: Anti-Semitic World Conspiracy and September 11th. In: "The Jews are our misfortune": Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and their anchoring in politics and society. LIT, Münster 2009, ISBN 3-643-50019-X , pp. 294-379.
• Karsten Wind Meyhoff: Counterfactual mapping. Conspiracy Theory and September 11th. In: Sandra Poppe, Thorsten Schüller & Sascha Seiler (eds.): 9/11 as a cultural turning point: Representations of September 11, 2001 in cultural discourses, literature and visual media. transcript, Bielefeld 2009, ISBN 978-3-8376-1016-1 , pp. 61-80.
• Jack Z. Bratich: Conspiracy Panics: Political Rationality and Popular Culture. State University of New York Press, 2008, ISBN 0-7914-7334-1 .
• Charles Soukup: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories on the World Wide Web: Digital Rhetoric and Alternative Epistemology. In: Journal of Literacy and Technology, Volume 9, No. 3, 2008, ISSN  1535-0975 , pp. 2-25 ( PDF ).
• Peter Knight: Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: popular and official responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States. New German Critique 35.1 (2008), pp. 165-193 ( download ).
• Cass R. Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule: Conspiracy Theories. Harvard / University of Chicago, 2008 ( doi: 10.2139 / ssrn.1084585 )
• Steve Clarke: Conspiracy Theories and the Internet: Controlled Demolition and Arrested Development. In: Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology. Volume 4, Issue 2, 2007, pp. 167-180 ( online ).
• David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts. Hearst Books, 2006, ISBN 1-58816-635-X ( excerpt online ).
• Rodney Stich: Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups. Diablo Western Press, 2005, ISBN 0-932438-15-6 .
• Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th. New variants of an old interpretation model. LIT Verlag, Münster 2004, ISBN 3-8258-7917-8 .
• Albrecht Kolthoff: Quantity instead of quality - Three German conspiracy fantasies doubt the Bin Ladin perpetrators in the attack on the World Trade Center. Your books do not meet journalistic standards. In: plain text. 5/2004.
• Steffi Hobuß: "The truth is out there somewhere": Conspiracy theories on September 11, 2001 and the question of escaping skepticism. In: Matthias N. Lorenz (Ed.): Narratives of horror. Artistic, media and intellectual interpretations of September 11, 2001. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2004, ISBN 978-3-8260-2777-2 , pp. 287-300.

Movies

conspiracy theories

• 9/11 Mysteries - The Destruction of the World Trade Center (2006)
• Zeitgeist (film)

Web links

conspiracy theories

• 911 Truth.org
• Richard Gage: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
• Michel Chossudovsky: globalresearch
• Steven Jones: Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice
• Journal of 9/11 Studies

Debunking

• Mark Roberts: 9/11 guide
• Mike Williams: 911 Myths
• Debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories
• Popular Technology.net: Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Individual evidence

1. ^ Gordon B. Arnold: Conspiracy Theory in Film, Television, and Politics. Praeger Frederick, 2008, ISBN 0-275-99462-7 , chapters 1-8 and p. 167
2. ^ Barna William Donovan: Conspiracy Films: A Tour of Dark Places in the American Conscious. McFarland, 2011, p. 184 f.
3. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. Xvii (introduction)
4. ^ Barna William Donovan: Conspiracy Films , 2011, p. 202
5. ↑ Lawrie Reznek: Delusions and the Madness of the Masses. Rowman & Littlefield, 2010, p. 123
6. ↑ Stephen Prince: Firestorm. American Film in the Age of Terrorism. Columbia University Press, 2009, ISBN 0-231-52008-5 , pp. 144-147 ; Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2011, pp. 315-319
7. ↑ Steven T. Katz, Richard Landes: The Paranoid Apocalypse: A Hundred-Year Retrospective on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. NYU Press, 2011, ISBN 0-8147-4892-9 , pp. 206-208 ; Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd Edition 2011, p. 125
8. ↑ Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 224
9. ↑ Ursula Hennigfeld, Stephan Packard (Ed.): Farewell to 9/11? Distancing itself from the disaster. Frank & Timme, 2013, ISBN 3-86596-432-X , p. 188
10. ↑ Lars Rensmann, Julius H. Schoeps (Ed.): Politics and Resentment. Antisemitism and Counter-Cosmopolitanism in the European Union. Brill, Leiden 2011, ISBN 978-90-04-19046-7 , p. 330
11. ^ Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories , 2011, p. 7
12. ↑ Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd Edition 2011, pp. 265 and 386
13. ↑ Gail Arlene de Vos: What Happens Next? Contemporary Urban Legends and Popular Culture. Libraries Unlimited, 2012, p. 110 ; Barna William Donovan: Conspiracy Films: A Tour of Dark Places in the American Conscious. McFarland, 2011, p. 205
14. ↑ James B. Meigs: The Conspiracy Industry. In: David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 94; Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive, September 12, 2006): Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracies, Already ( June 20, 2015 memento on the Internet Archive )
15. ^ Charles Lewis: 935 Reads: The Future of Truth and the Decline of America's Moral Integrity. PublicAffairs, New York 2014, ISBN 978-1-61039-117-7 , p. Xiii (foreword)
16. ↑ Kathryn Olmstedt: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 5
17. ^ Zogby Polls, Aug. 30, 2004: Millions of New Yorkers Question the Official Story of 9/11
18. ↑ CBS News / New York Times Monthly Poll # 2 ( Memento from May 20, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
19. ↑ CBS News Callback Poll ( Memento from May 20, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
20. ^ New York Times Poll - Most Americans Believe Bush Administration is Lying or 'Hiding Facts' About 9/11
21. ^ Scripps Howard: Survey: SHOH33 ( Memento from May 23, 2015 in the Internet Archive ); News Service, August 2, 2006: Anti-government anger spurs 9/11 conspiracy belief ( Memento of October 7, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
22. ^ Rasmussen Reports, May 4, 2007: 22% Believe Bush Knew About 9/11 Attacks in Advance
23. ↑ Brendan Nyhan: PPP national “birther” / “truther” poll . In: Huffington Post . September 23, 2009.
24. ↑ Angus Reid (March 2010): Most Americans Reject 9/11 Conspiracy Theories ( Memento from June 20, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) (online interviews with 1,007 adult US citizens)
25. ^ Barry Rubin, Judith Colp Rubin (eds.): Anti-American Terrorism and the Middle East: A Documentary Reader. , Oxford University Press, 2004, ISBN 0-19-517659-6 , p. 332
26. ↑ Jack Z. Bratich: Conspiracy Panics , 2008, p 136
27. ^ Marina Levina, Grant Kien: Post-Global Network and Everyday Life. Peter Lang, New York 2010, ISBN 1-4331-0698-1 , p. 15 f. ; America.gov (August 2006): The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories
28. ^ J. Michael Waller: The Public Diplomacy Reader. Crossbow Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-615-15465-7 , p. 347
29. ↑ David Aaronovitch: Voodoo Histories , 2010, pp. 201 f.
30. ^ Andreas Anton , Michael Schetsche , Michael Walter (eds.): Conspiracy: Sociology of the conspiracy thinking. Springer, 2013, p. 164 f.
31. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , 2004, p. 77
32. ↑ Axel Birkenkämper: Against Bush or America ?: On the susceptibility of Germans to anti-Americanism. Young Political Science Forum, Bouvier, 2006, p. 123.
33. ↑ Bauermedia, Newsroom (October 23, 2010): Exclusive survey by the knowledge magazine Welt der Wunder: Who do Germans still believe?
34. ↑ Erik Peter: New rights “peace movement”: In the fight against the media mafia . In: taz . April 16, 2014.
35. ^ Andreas Kopietz: Monday Demos: Völkische Friedensbewegung . In: Berliner Zeitung . April 16, 2014.
36. ^ Frida Thurm: Protests: The very own world of the Monday demonstrators . In: The time . April 22, 2014.
37. ↑ Steven Kull: Feeling Betrayed: The Roots of Muslim Anger at America. Brookings Institution, 2011, ISBN 978-0-8157-0559-8 , p. 130 ; Reuters, September 11, 2008: No consensus on who was behind Sept 1
38. ↑ World Public Opinion (September 10, 2008): International Poll: No Consensus On Who Was Behind 9/11.
39. ↑ Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd Edition 2011, pp. 865-867; Reuters, March 6, 2010: Iran's Ahmadinejad calls Sept 11 "big fabrication"
40. ^ Robert Lockwood Mills: Conscience of a Conspiracy Theorist. Algora Publishing, 2011, ISBN 0-87586-825-8 , p. 59
41. ↑ Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories , 2011, pp. 2 and 17
42. ↑ Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 1
43. ↑ Monika Schwarz-Friesel, Evyatar Friesel, Jehuda Reinharz: Current anti-Semitism - a phenomenon of the middle. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2010, ISBN 3-11-023010-0 , p. 196
44. ↑ Wolfgang Wippermann: Agents of Evil. Conspiracy theories from Luther to today , be.bra, Berlin 2007, p. 136 f.
45. ^ Richard Landes, Steven T. Katz (Ed.): The Paranoid Apocalypse , New York 2012, p. 206.
46. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Hass, Neid, Wahn , 2014, p. 42 .
47. ^ Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories , 2011, p. 110 ; Lars Rensmann , Julius H. Schoeps : Politics and Resentment. Antisemitism and Counter-Cosmopolitanism in the European Union. Brill, Leiden 2011, ISBN 978-90-04-19046-7 , p. 458
48. ↑ Madhusmita Sahoo: Did CIA-Saudi keep 9/11 details secret? . In: International Business Times . August 28, 2018. (English)
49. ↑ Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 221
50. ^ Jason Royce Lindsey: The Concealment Of The State. Bloomsbury Academic, 2013, p. 34
51. ↑ Jack Z. Bratich: Conspiracy Panics . New York 2008, p. 131 ; Daniele Ganser : "America is addicted to Oil" . In: Eric Wilson: The Dual State: Parapolitics, Carl Schmitt and the National Security Complex. Ashgate, 2012, p. 112
52. ^ Christopher Hodapp, Alice von Kannon: Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies For Dummies. 2015, p. 137 .
53. ↑ Jonathan Gottschall: The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012, ISBN 0-547-39140-4 , 2012, p. 164 f.
54. ↑ Michael Moore: The Official Fahrenheit 9-11 Reader. 2004, p. 192
55. ↑ James F. Broderick, Darren W. Miller, Web of Conspiracy: A Guide to Conspiracy Theory Sites on the Internet. Information Today, 2008, ISBN 0-910965-81-1 , p. 220 ; Clark Rountree: George W. Bush: A Biography. Greenwood, 2010, ISBN 0-313-38500-9 , p. 91
56. ^ Jon E. Lewis: The Mammoth Book of Cover-Ups. P. 54f.
57. ^ Amy Goodman: The Exception To The Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers and the Media That Love Them. Cornerstone Digital, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4464-4193-0 , pp. 42f. ; Dan Briody: Carlyle's way: Making a mint inside "the iron triangle" of defense, government, and industry. Red Herring, January 8, 2002.
58. ↑ Alexander Bolton: Clarke claims responsibility: Ex-counterterrorism czar approved post-9-11 flights for bin Laden family. ( Memento of May 29, 2004 in the Internet Archive ) In: The Hill . May 26, 2004. (English)
59. ↑ Craig Unger: House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties. Scribner, New York 2004, 0-7432-6623-9, p. 101 ; Andrew Wheat: The Bush-bin Laden Connection . In: Texas Observer . November 9, 2001.
60. ^ Conspiracy Theories: The Saudi Connection, Conspiracy or Coincidence? In: CBS / TheFifth Estate . October 29, 2003.
61. ↑ 9/11 Commission Report (July 22, 2004): 8. "The System was blinking red"
62. ↑ Erik J. Dahl: Intelligence and Surprise Attack. Georgetown University Press, 2013, ISBN 1-58901-998-9 , p. 135
63. ^ Todd A. Davis: The Global War On Terror. P. 7
64. ↑ Jeffrey W. Kassing: Dissent in Organizations. Polity Press, 2011, ISBN 0-7456-5140-2 , pp. 8-11
65. ↑ John Farmer: The Ground Truth: The Untold Story of America Under Attack on 9/11. Riverhead Books, 2009, ISBN 978-1-101-15233-1 , p. 10
66. ↑ Jack Z. Bratich: Conspiracy Panics , New York 2008, p.131 .
67. ↑ Stephen Prince: Firestorm , 2009, p. 50
68. ^ Paul Thompson: The Terror Timeline. HarperCollins, 2004, ISBN 0-06-078338-9 , p. 371; History Commons: (Before 8:46 am) September 11, 2001: Defense Secretary Rumsfeld Reportedly Predicts Terror Attacks
69. ^ Paul Campos: 9/11: What Bush knew. An article sheds new light on the CIA's desperate efforts to warn about 9/11. Why didn't the White House listen? In: Salon.com . September 11, 2012.
70. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 14.
71. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 73.
72. ↑ Scott Shuger: IGNORAD: The military screw-up nobody talks about. In: Slate . January 16, 2002.
73. ↑ Bernd Hamm (Ed.): Devastating society: the neo-conservative assault on democracy and justice. Pluto Press, 2005, ISBN 0-7453-2362-6 , p. 72.
74. ↑ Peter Dale Scott: The Road to 9/11 , 2007, pp. 204-206
75. ^ Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, p. 480, fn. 127
76. ↑ Thomas H. Kean, Lee H. Hamilton: Without Precedent. Vintage, 2006, p. 315
77. ↑ Lynn Spencer: Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11. Free Press, 2008, p. 4
78. ↑ Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs 3610.01 (July 31, 1997): Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects ( Memento of May 12, 2006 in the Internet Archive )
79. ^ FAA, August 1998: ATCC Controllers' Read Binder
80. ^ Richard H. Ward and others: Homeland Security: An Introduction. Anderson, 2006, ISBN 1-59345-304-3 , p. 37 ; Sally Donnelly (Time, Sep 14, 2001): The Day the FAA Stopped the World
81. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, pp. 15 ff.
82. ↑ Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd Edition 2011, p. 773
83. ↑ Stephen E. Atkins: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd edition 2011, pp. 329ff. ; 9/11 Commission Report: 1 “We have some planes” ; on the shooting order p. 40 f.
84. ↑ Thomas H. Kean, Lee H. Hamilton: Without Precedent. The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission. (2006) Alfred A. Knopf, 2007, ISBN 978-0-307-26377-3 , p. 260.
85. ^ Robert A. Roe, Mary J. Waller, Stewart R. Clegg (Eds.): Time in Organizational Research. Routledge, 2008, p. 192 ; Vanity Fair, August 2006: 9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes
86. ^ Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, p. 479, fn. 125
87. ^ National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (Ed.): The 9/11 Commission Report: The Attack from Planning to Aftermath. WW Norton & Company, 2011, p. 565, fn. 15
88. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, pp. 17-20.
89. ↑ Rodney Stich: Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups. 2005, p. 202
90. ^ Dave Carpenter (Associated Press, September 18, 2001): Exchange examines odd jump. ( Memento from February 15, 2002 in the Internet Archive )
91. ↑ 9/11 Commission Report: Chapter 5, footnote 130 ; Appendix A: The Financing of the 9/11 Plot (PDF; 99 kB)
92. ^ Carl Jensen, Rom Harre: Beyond Rationality. Contemporary Issues. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011, ISBN 1-4438-3424-6 , p. 74
93. ↑ Kathryn Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 227.
94. ↑ Bulent Aras, Michael P. Croissont: Oil and Geopolitics in the Caspian Sea region. Greenwood Press, 2000, English, ISBN 0-275-96395-0 , pp. 11-16.
95. ↑ Hans von Sponeck, Andreas Zumach: Irak - Chronicle of a wanted war. How the world public is manipulated and international law is broken. Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 2003, ISBN 3-462-03255-0 , p. 19 f.
96. ↑ Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 1 f. ; Example: Axis for peace, November 18, 2005: Final declaration
97. ^ "Further, 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." Project for the New American Century (September 2000): Rebuilding America's Defenses (PDF, p. 51)
98. ^ Andy Thomas: Conspiracies: The Facts. The Theories. The Evidence. Watkins, 2013, p. 128 ; Kathryn S. Olmsted: Real Enemies , 2011, p. 228 ; Robert Lockwood Mills: Conscience of a Conspiracy Theorist , 2011, p. 139 .
99. ^ John McAdams: JFK Assassination Logic. How to think about claims of conspiracy. Potomac Books, Lincoln 2011, p. 120.
100. ^ Matthew Chayes (New York Sun, September 8, 2006): Scholars Say Neocons May Have Planned 9/11
101. ^ Matthew Sparke: In the Space of Theory: Postfoundational Geographies of the Nation-State (Borderlines). University of Minnesota Press, 2005, ISBN 0-8166-3190-5 , pp. 259f. ; William W. Keller, Gordon R. Mitchell (Eds.): Hitting First: Preventive Force in US Security Strategy (Security Continuum). University of Pittsburgh, 2006, ISBN 0-8229-5936-4 , p. 15.
102. ^ Stefan Halper, Jonathan Clarke: America Alone: ​​The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order. Cambridge University Press, 2009, ISBN 0-521-67460-3 , p. 4
103. ^ Anti Defamation League: September 11 and Arab Media: The Anti-Jewish and Anti-American Blame Game ; World Net Daily, September 22, 2001: Hoaxbusters: Did Israelis evacuate towers? Net rumor sparked by reports from Pakistan, Hezbollah .
104. ↑ Jasmin Waibl-Stockner: “The Jews are our misfortune” , 2009, p. 299
105. ↑ Richard Miniter: Summary of Disinformation: 22 Media Myths That Undermine the War on Terror. Capitol Reader, Political Book Summaries, 2013, p. 1996
106. ^ Wheeler Winston Dixon: Visions of the Apocalypse: Spectacles of Destruction in American Cinema. Columbia University Press, 2003, ISBN 1-903364-74-4 , 2003, p. 79
107. ^ Bryan Curtis (Slate, Oct. 5, 2001): 4,000 Jews, 1 Lie: Tracking an Internet hoax ; Snopes.com (June 19, 2009): Absent without leave ; Anti Defamation League: Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories (PDF; 1.2 MB); Jerusalem Post, September 12, 2001: Hundreds of Israelis missing in WTC attack.
108. ^ Robert E. Reis (Majority Rights, September 5, 2008): How Many Jews Died at the World Trade Center on 911? ; Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs No. Oct. 13, 2003: The Resuscitation of Anti-Semitism: An American Perspective.
109. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , 2004, p. 68f. ; Anti Defamation League: Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
110. ↑ James Risen, Don van Natta (New York Times, September 14, 2001): After the Attacks: The Investigation ; Yossi Melman (Haaretz, September 17, 2001): 5 Israelis detained for 'puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy ; ABC News: Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11 Spies?
111. ↑ Yuval Dror (Haaretz, September 26, 2001): Odigo says workers were warned of attack ; Washington Post, September 28, 2001: Odigo Clarifies Attack Messages
112. ^ Mark Weitzman: Globalization, Conspiracvy Theory, and the Shoah. In: Robert Wistrich (Ed.): Holocaust Denial: The Politics of Perfidy. Walter de Gruyter, New York 2012, ISBN 3-11-028822-2 , p. 202
113. ↑ Michael Butter, Maurus Reinkowski (Ed.): Conspiracy Theories in the United States and the Middle East , 2014, p. 55
114. ↑ George Michael: Willis Carto and the American Far Right. University Press of Florida, 2008, ISBN 0-8130-3198-2 , p. 237.
115. ↑ Christopher Hodapp, Alice Von Kannon: Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies For Dummies. 2015, p. 156.
116. ↑ James B. Meigs: The Conspiracy Industry. In: David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , p. 102 f.
117. ^ David Aaronovitch: Voodoo Histories , 2010, pp. 205 , pp. 247f.
118. ↑ Antidefamation League (September 10, 2009): Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Abound on Social Networking Sites
119. ↑ Michael Barkun: A Culture of Conspiracy. Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America. University of California Press, Berkeley 2013, pp. 162 f.
120. ↑ ^{a b} Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories , 2011, p. 109 f.
121. ^ Tad Walch: BYU's Jones denies bias. Deseret News, September 14, 2006
122. ^ Newtown Shootings an Israeli-US Plot, Suggests Conspiracy-Mongering Professor. Huffington Post, January 18, 2013
123. ↑ Thom Burnett (Ed.): Conspiracy Encyclopedia. Pavilion Books, 2006, ISBN 1-84340-381-1 , p. 93
124. ↑ Lance DeHaven-Smith: Conspiracy Theory in America. 2013, p. 157
125. ^ Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane: Anti-Americanisms in World Politics. Cornell University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-8014-7351-9 , p. 237
126. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , 2004, p. 79
127. ↑ Der Spiegel, February 28, 2003: NPD attorney in court: Horst Mahler's obscure 9/11 theory
128. ↑ Bernd Pickert ( taz of July 2, 2003): Conspiracy professionals among themselves
129. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , Münster 2004, pp. 92–94 . On the origin of the quote: Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), May 20, 2002: Syndicated Columnist Georgie Anne Geyer Uses Fabricated Sharon Quote ( Memento of December 17, 2015 in the Internet Archive ); Camera, June 20, 2002: False Zionist quote: Sharon quote is fabricated
130. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Hatred, Envy, Delusion Anti-Americanism in the German Media. Campus, 2014, ISBN 978-3-593-50066-9 , p. 42 f.
131. ↑ Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , 2004, p. 73
132. ↑ Jasmin Waibl-Stockner: "The Jews are our misfortune" , 2009, p. 300 f.
133. ↑ BBC, April 22, 2008: Al-Qaeda accuses Iran of 9/11 lie
134. ↑ FBI Press Response September 14, 2001 ( Memento of September 14, 2001 in the Internet Archive )
135. ↑ BBC News (September 23, 2001): Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
136. ^ Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, p. 660, fn. 8
137. ↑ BBC News (October 5, 2001): The investigation and the evidence
138. ↑ Steve Herrmann, BBC Editor (October 27, 2006): 9/11 conspiracy theory
139. ↑ Arab News, September 10, 2002: Bin Laden finally claims 9/11 attacks: Al-Jazeera ; Yosri Fouda (The Sunday Times, October 1, 2006): The laughing 9/11 bombers. Exclusive film of suicide pilots at Bin Laden's HQ (full article subject to charge)
140. ^ Robert Lockwood Mills: Conscience of a Conspiracy Theorist. 2011, p. 24
141. ↑ Jim Vardley (New York Times, May 4, 2002): A Trainee Noted for Incompetence
142. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , pp. 3-8.
143. ^ Lee Newton: Counterterrorism and Cybersecurity. Springer, 2015, ISBN 978-3-319-17243-9 , p. 23 ; FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives: Usama Bin Laden
144. ↑ Marco Mamone Capria: Science and the Citizen , 2013, p. 348f. ; US State Department Archives: Interview on ABC's This Week: Secretary Colin L. Powell, Washington, DC, September 23, 2001
145. ↑ Christopher C. Yang and others: Intelligent Systems for Security Informatics. Elsevier Science, 2013, ISBN 0-12-405902-3 , p. 130 ; Oktay F. Tanrisever: Afghanistan and Central Asia. Ios Press, 2013, ISBN 1-61499-178-2 , p. 193 .
146. ↑ Eric Lichtblau, Josh Meyer (Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2002): Details of Sept. 11 Plot Elude US Investigators
147. ↑ Peter Phillips and others: Censored 2008: The Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006-074. Seven Stories Press, 2011, p. 93 f. Enver Masud (The Milli Gazette, June 11, 2006): FBI: Bin Laden Not Wanted for 9/11?
148. ^ Dan Eggen (Washington Post, August 28, 2006): Bin Laden, Most Wanted For Embassy Bombings?
149. ↑ Susan G. Mahan, Pamala L. Griset: Terrorism in Perspective. Sage Publications, 3rd edition 2012, ISBN 978-1-4522-2545-6 , p. 441 ; Suzanne Daley (New York Times, October 3, 2001): A Nation challenged: The Evidence
150. ↑ Dirk Nabers: Alliance against Terror Germany, Japan and the USA. Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften, Münster 2005, ISBN 3-322-80801-7 , p. 144 and fn. 87
151. ↑ Nick Fielding, Yosri Fouda: Masterminds of Terror. The masterminds of September 11th report. 3rd edition, Hamburg 2003, ISBN 3-203-77200-0 .
152. ↑ Carter Vaughn Findley, John Alexander Rothney: Twentieth-Century World. Wadsworth Inc Fulfillment, 2011, ISBN 0-547-21850-8 , 2011, pp. 417 f.
153. ^ Newton Lee: Counterterrorism and Cybersecurity: Total Information Awareness. Springer, 2013, ISBN 3-319-17244-1 , p. 23
154. ↑ Lorenzo Vidino: The Evolution of the Post-9/11 Threat to the US Homeland. In: Bruce Hoffman, Fernando Reinares (Ed.): Evolution of the Global Terrorist Threat: From 9/11 to Osama bin Laden's Death. Columbia University Press, ISBN 0-231-16898-5 , p. 3 and p. 23, fn. 1
155. ↑ US Department of Defense, May 10-30. April 2008: Charge Sheet against Khalid Sheik Mohammed (facsimile of the New York Times)
156. ^ Philip NS Rumney: Torturing Terrorists: Exploring the limits of law, human rights and academic freedom. Routledge, ISBN 0-415-67163-9 , p. 101 and fn. 217
157. ↑ Thomas J. Gardner, Terry M. Anderson: Criminal Law. Wadsworth, 2011, ISBN 0-495-91337-5 , 2011, p. 453.
158. ↑ Kathy Kelly: Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion. AK Press, 2012, ISBN 1-84935-110-4 , pp. 275 f. ; Jason Ryan, Huma Khan (ABC News, April 4, 2011): In Reversal, Obama Orders Guantanamo Military Trial for 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
159. ^ Dieter Deiseroth (Frankfurter Rundschau, November 26, 2009): Germany's “Combat Mission”: Beyond the Law ; Sebastian Range (background, December 11, 2014): What else the "CIA torture report" says
160. ↑ Defense.gov, December 13, 2011 / NPR, November 27, 2015: Transcript of Usama bin Laden Video Tape ; Der Spiegel, December 13, 2001: Bin Laden video: The mockery of the victims.
161. ↑ Ted Gournelos, Viveca S. Greene: A Decade of Dark Humor: How Comedy, Irony, and Satire Shaped Post-9/11 America. University Press of Mississippi, 2011, p. 142 ; The Guardian, December 15, 2001: US urged to detail origin of tape ; Georg Restle, Ekkehard Sieker (Monitor, December 20, 2001): Bin Laden Video: Wrong Translation as Evidence?
162. ↑ Peter L. Bergen: Holy War, Inc .: Inside the Secret World of Osama Bin Laden. Greenlight, 2002, ISBN 0-7432-3495-2 , p. 234 and footnote 21 ; CNN, December 21, 2001: Bin Laden named 9 hijackers on tape. White House, Pentagon defend translation
163. ↑ Peter L. Bergen: Holy War, Inc. , 2002, pp. 231-234 ; David Malone: Bin Laden's Plan: The Project for the New Al Qaeda Century. Trafford Publishing, 2005, ISBN 1-4120-6135-0 , p. 120
164. ↑ Amber Rupinta (ABC, January 19, 2006): Duke Professor Skeptical of bin Laden Tape. (Reprinted at Newsarchiv.org)
165. ↑ Bruce Lawrence: Messages to the World - The Statements of Osama Bin Laden. Verso, 2005, ISBN 1-84467-045-7 , p. XIV
166. ^ Jeff Stein (Washington Post, May 25, 2010): CIA unit's wacky idea: Depict Saddam as gay ; Ted Gournelos, Viveca Greene (Eds.): A Decade of Dark Humor: How Comedy, Irony, and Satire Shaped Post-9/11 America. P. 142
167. ↑ Jan Goldman (Ed.): The Central Intelligence Agency: An Encyclopedia of Covert Ops, Intelligence Gathering, and Spies. ABC-Clio, 2015, ISBN 1-61069-091-5 , p. 2
168. ^ Robert Fisk (The Independent, December 6, 1996): Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace
169. ^ David L. Clough: Faith and Force: A Christian Debate about War. Georgetown University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-1-58901-318-6 , p. 264, fn. 14
170. ↑ Richard Miniter (Fox News, September 24, 2003): Dispelling the CIA-Bin Laden Myth ( July 27, 2009 memento in the Internet Archive )
171. ↑ Peter Bergen: Holy War Inc. , 2002, p. 64 ff.
172. ↑ Steve Coll: Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. New edition, Penguin, London 2005, ISBN 0-14-303466-9 , pp. 86 f .
173. ^ Jason Burke: Al Qaeda: The true story of radical Islam. 2nd revised edition, Penguin, 2007, ISBN 978-0-14-103136-1 , p. 59.
174. ↑ Thom Burnett (Ed.): Conspiracy Encyclopedia. Pavilion Books, 2006, ISBN 1-84340-381-1 , p. 18
175. ^ ^{A b} Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective. In: Derek Soles (Ed.): The Essentials of Academic Writing. Heinle & Heinle, 2009, ISBN 978-0-547-18133-2 , pp. 381–399, here: p. 382 ( full text online , Skeptic Society, September 11, 2006)
176. ↑ Shouchao Jiang, ZY Shen (Ed.): Fourth International Conference on Advances in Steel Structures. Elsevier Science Ltd, 2005, ISBN 0-08-044637-X , p. 992
177. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 29.
178. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, pp. 29-32.
179. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 39; Rodney Stich: Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups. 2005, pp. 405-410
180. ↑ Daniel Vallero, Trevor M. Letcher (ed.): Unraveling Environmental Disasters. Elsevier Science, ISBN 0-12-397317-1 , p. 171
181. ^ S. Peter Davis: Occam's Nightmare. 2013, p. 135
182. ↑ Fletcher Haulley: Critical Perspectives on 9/11. Rosen Classroom, 2004, ISBN 1-4042-0060-6 , p. 57 f.
183. ^ Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, p. 466, fn. 69; FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation (on question no.11)
184. ^ Federal Emergency Management Agency: World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations. Government Printing Office, Washington DC 2002, ISBN 0-16-067389-5 , p. 8
185. ^ Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories , in: Derek Soles: The Essentials of Academic Writing , 2009, pp. 381–389, here: p. 386
186. ^ Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories , in: Derek Soles: The Essentials of Academic Writing , 2009, pp. 381–399, here: pp. 382–385
187. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Shermer: The Believing Brain , 2011, p. 214 f.
188. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 36.
189. ^ NIST, September 19, 2011: NIST: Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC Towers Investigation (on question 8); Arthur Scheuerman: How the Fire Collapsed the World Trade Center Buildings. 2011, p. 32
190. ^ Columbia University (November 2001): Seismic Waves Generated by Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at World Trade Center, New York City
191. ^ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 51.
192. ↑ Rodney Stich: Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups. 2005, p. 404
193. ^ Arthur Scheuerman: How the Fire Collapsed the World Trade Center Buildings. Llumina Press, 2011, p. 32 f.
194. ^ David A. McEntire: Disaster Response and Recovery: Strategies and Tactics for Resilience. Outskirts Press, 2014, p. 257
195. ^ Richard W. Sister: Handbook of Critical Incident Analysis. Taylor & Francis, 2012, p. 206 ; Government Printing Office (Ed.): Learning from 9/11, understanding the collapse of the World Trade Center. Hearing Before the Committee on Science, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventh Congress, Second Session, March 6, 2002, United States. 2003, p. 89.
196. ↑ Tim Wilkinson (Sydney Herald, September 11, 2001): Why Did It Collapse? Reviewed by David A. McMurrey, Joanne Buckley: A Writer's Handbook for Engineers. Thomson, 2008, ISBN 0-495-24482-1 .
197. ^ Zdeněk P. Bažant, Yong Zhou Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis (PDF; 150 kB)
198. ↑ Zdeněk P. Bažant, Jia-Liang Le, Frank R. Greening, David B. Benson: What Did and Did not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York (March 2008; PDF; 746 kB)
199. ^ Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso: Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation. In: Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society 53 (12/2001), pp. 8-11.
200. ^ Geoff Craighead: High-Rise Security and Fire Life Safety. 2009, ISBN 978-0-08-087785-3 , p. 79
201. ↑ NIST, September 19, 2011: NIST: Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC Towers Investigation (on question 6)
202. ↑ Brent Blanchard: A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7 from an Explosives and Conventional Demolition Industry viewpoint (August 8, 2006; PDF; 58 kB)
203. ^ Purdue University, June 12, 2007: Purdue creates scientifically based animation of 9/11 attack ; A. Irfanoglu, CM Hoffmann: An Engineering Perspective of the Collapse of WTC-1. In: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 22, 1 (2008), pp. 62–67. See also Purdue University: WTC I Engineering Perspective (PDF; 853 kB)
204. ↑ Finn Rütten: Article in physics magazine: "September 11th was a controlled demolition". Stern, September 9, 2016; Christian Speicher: Invitation to speculate about 9/11. NZZ, September 16, 2016
205. ^ European Scientific Journal: Disclaimer. Editorial Office, September 14, 2016
206. ↑ Alex Kasprak: Did a European Scientific Journal Conclude 9/11 Was a Controlled Demolition? Snopes, October 9, 2016
207. ↑ ^{a b} Europhysics News: Note from the Editors regarding_ 15 Years later_ On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses. October 30, 2016
208. ↑ Mechanics-based mathematical studies proving spontaneity of post-impact WTC towers collapse. Europhysics News 48/1, 2017, pp. 18-23.
209. ^ Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories , in: Derek Soles: The Essentials of Academic Writing , 2009, pp. 381–399, here: p. 386
210. ↑ ^{a b c} Arianne Cohen: 6 Debunked 9/11 Conspiracy Claims From NIST's New WTC 7 Report . In: Popular Mechanics . August 20, 2008. (English)
211. ^ Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories , in: Derek Soles: The Essentials of Academic Writing , 2009, pp. 381–399, here: p. 387.
212. ^ Sharon Crowley: Toward a Civil Discourse: Rhetoric and Fundamentalism. University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006, p. 182
213. ↑ FAZ, March 4, 2007: Vortex about BBC film: Another conspiracy theory about 9/11 ( Memento from November 26, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
214. ↑ Michael Shermer: The Believing Brain , 2011, p. 138
215. ^ Richard Porter (BBC, February 27 / March 2, 2007): Part of the conspiracy? Part 1 ; Part 2
216. ↑ Michael Shermer: The Believing Brain , 2011, quotation p. 138 and p. 219 ; Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, p. 475.
217. ↑ Richard Roeper: Debunked! Conspiracy Theories, Urban Legends, and Evil Plots of the 21st Century. Chicago Review Press, 2008, ISBN 978-1-55652-707-4 , p. 12
218. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, p. 53.
219. ↑ Phil Molé: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories , 2009, in: Derek Soles: The Essentials of Academic Writing , 2009, pp. 381-399, here: p. 388 .
220. ^ Port Authority New York and New Jersey, Press Release February 12, 2001: Net Lease of World Trade Center just Business as Usual for Port Authority's Real Estate Director ; Charles V. Bagli (New York Times, April 27, 2001): Deal Is Signed To Take Over Trade Center
221. ↑ Michael S. Moore: Causation and Responsibility: An Essay in Law, Morals, and Metaphysics. Oxford University Press, 2010, ISBN 0-19-959951-3 , pp. 514-516
222. ↑ Charles V. Bagli (NYT, January 16, 2003): Even as Foundation Is Set, a New 7 World Trade Center Faces Barriers
223. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, pp. 53-55.
224. ↑ Ramon Gilsanz, Willa Ng: Single Point of Failure. How the Loss of One Column May Have Led to the Collapse of WTC 7 (PDF; 959 kB)
225. ↑ NIST (2008): Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (PDF; especially sections 2.4 to 3.6; table: pp. 43–45)
226. ^ NIST Final Report 3.3: Hypothetical Blast Scenarios. (PDF pp. 26 to 28)
227. ↑ NIST.gov: Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation. (Questions 12-14) September 17, 2010; Update September 19, 2011
228. ↑ Roger Schawinski : Conspiracy! The fanatical hunt for the evil in the world. NZZ Libro, Zurich 2018, p. 82.
229. ↑ John Gravois: Professors of Paranoia? Chronicle of Higher Education, June 23, 2006; Michael Shelden: The CIA couldn't have organized this ... Telegraph.uk, September 8, 2006; Stephen E. Atkins: Jones, Steven E. (1949-). In: The 9/11 Encyclopedia , 2nd edition 2011, pp. 264f.
230. ↑ Frank Greening: Sulfur and the World Trade Center Disaster (PDF; 217 kB)
231. ^ The Charleston Advisor: Advisor reviews - Standard review - Bentham Open: 'Critical Evaluation'. (PDF p. 30; July 15, 2009)
232. ↑ Gunnar Ries: Was there nanothermite among the ruins of the World Trade Center? In: Spektrum.de/ SciLogs, January 29, 2010; James Millette: Analysis of Red / Gray Chips in WTC Dust. American Academy of Forensic Science, April 20-25 February 2012
233. ^ Thomas Hoffmann (Videnskab.dk, April 28, 2009): Editor-in-chief skrider efter controversial article on 9/11
234. ^ Mark Hightower (Wordpress.com, September 8, 2011): Engineer's Nano-Thermite Challenge. ( Memento from July 31, 2012 in the web archive archive.today )
235. ↑ Mike Young (University Post Copenhagen, March 12, 2015): Courtroom drama in 9/11 ´crackpot´ libel case
236. ↑ NIST Factsheet: Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation No. 22: Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? What the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? April 21, 2009 (updated September 17, 2010)
237. ^ Brian Taylor: Anti-Social Engineering the Hyper-Manipulated Self. 2010, ISBN 978-0-557-99909-5 , p. 241 ff.
238. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 8-11.
239. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 12-14.
240. ↑ Kathryn Olmsted: Real Enemies. 2011, p. 222 ; Stephen Prince: Firestorm. 2009, p. 161
241. ↑ Emily Smith (Ed.): Daniel Sunjata Handbook. 2013, p. 10
242. ^ Mark Barber: Project 2067: Urban Legends. Trafford, 2006, ISBN 1-4120-4546-0 , p. 239
243. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 66 and 71.
244. ↑ Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day. 2011, p. 109
245. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, p. 65.
246. ^ Paul E. Mlakar and others (eds.): The Pentagon Building Performance Report. 2003, ISBN 978-0-7844-0638-0 ; Summary in Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day. 2011, p. 111
247. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 62–73 and Figure 22 (Photo by Mark Faram, Sep 11, 2001, 9:50 am); Eric Bart's Pentagon Attack Eyewitness Account Compilation
248. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 60 and 99 f.
249. ↑ Der Spiegel, September 8, 2003: Panoptikum des Absurden ; Stefan Schaaf (taz, September 11, 2003): The great nonsense
250. ^ Post-Gazette (September 12, 2001): Day of Terror: Outside tiny Shanksville, a fourth deadly stroke
251. ^ CBS News (May 20, 2002): Flight 93: The Final Search
252. ^ Brian Taylor: Anti-Social Engineering the Hyper-Manipulated Self. 2010, p. 245.
253. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 1-2.
254. ↑ Arthur Goldwag: Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies. 2009, p. 204
255. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 81-83.
256. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 77-81.
257. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 86-90.
258. ↑ David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths. 2006, pp. 83-86; Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day. 2011, p. 476, fn. 113 .
259. ↑ Jamie McIntyre (CNN, December 28, 2004): Pentagon: Rumsfeld misspoke on Flight 93 crash
260. ↑ Christopher Hodapp, Alice Von Kannon: Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies For Dummies. 2015, p. 140
261. ↑ David Kohn (CBS, September 11, 2002): The President's story
262. ↑ 9/11 Commission Report: 1 We have some planes , section Clarifying the Record ; Spiegel (June 17, 2004): 9/11 Commission report: Air defense missed chance to shoot down a terrorist jet
263. ↑ Margit Reiter: “Unrestricted Solidarity”? Perceptions and interpretations of September 11th in Germany. In: the same and Helga Embacher (eds.): Europe and September 11, 2001. Böhlau, Wien / Weimar 2011, ISBN 978-3-205-79138-6 , p. 58 f. (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
264. ^ Daniele Ganser: The "Strategy of Tension" in the Cold War Period. In: David Ray Griffin , Peter Dale Scott (Eds.): 9/11 and American Empire. Intellectuals Speak Out , Volume 1, 2006, pp. 79-99.
265. ↑ Michael Butter: "Nothing is what it seems". About conspiracy theories . Berlin 2018, pp. 83–93.
266. ↑ Helmut Reinalter: Terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 . In: the same (ed.): Handbook of conspiracy theories. Salier Verlag, Leipzig 2018, pp. 278–281.
267. ↑ Stefan Schaaf (taz, September 11, 2003): The great Mumpitz ; Panorama (magazine) , August 21, 2003: Jews, BKA and CIA - absurd conspiracy theories on September 11 ; Der Spiegel, September 8, 2003: Panopticon of the absurd
268. ^ Spiegel Dossier (September 7, 2006): Facts on September 11 ; Spiegel TV: The Conspiracy Legends
269. ↑ BBC: 9-11: The Conspiracy Files (2007); Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Truth behind the Third Tower (2008); 9/11 Ten Years On (2011); National Geographic: 9/11 Science & Conspiracy
270. ↑ National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): World Trade Center Disaster Study
271. ^ Ryan Mackey: On Debunking 9/11 Debunking. Examining Dr. David Ray Griffin's Latest Criticism of the NIST World Trade Center Investigation (2007); Anthony Summers, Robbyn Swan: The Eleventh Day , 2011, pp. 104-106
272. ^ Frank Greening: Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse (PDF; 228 kB); Uwe Starossek: Progressive collapse of buildings. (Concrete and reinforced concrete construction, issue 4/2005, ISSN  0005-9900 ; Oral Buyukozturk, Franz-Josef Ulm (Massachusetts Institute of Technology): Materials and structures (PDF; 1.5 MB))
273. ^ Jason Porterfield: Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Rosen Classroom, 2012, ISBN 1-4488-6915-3 , p. 73
274. ↑ Matthew Bell (BelfastTelegraph, July 19, 2010): Wanted by the CIA: Julian Assange - Wikileaks founder
275. ^ Jovan Byford: Conspiracy Theories: A Critical Introduction. 2011, p. 154
276. ^ David Corn ( AlterNet , February 28, 2002): When 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Go Bad ; received from Jack Z. Bratich: Conspiracy Panics , New York 2008, p. 193 ; Steven T. Katz: The Paranoid Apocalypse: A Hundred-Year Retrospective on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. NYU Press, 2011, p. 215
277. ↑ Jefferson Flanders (Wordpress, September 17, 2008): Confronting reality: Occam's Razor and the 9/11 “Truth Movement”
278. ↑ Timothy B. Cargal: Hearing a Film, Seeing a Sermon: Preaching and Popular Movies. Westminster John Knox Press, 2007, pp. 173 f.
279. ^ John McAdams: JFK Assassination Logic: How to Think about Claims of Conspiracy. Potomoc Books Inc, 2010, ISBN 1-59797-489-7 , p. 156
280. ↑ George Friedman (Geopolitical Weekly, September 6, 2011): 9/11 and the Successful War.
281. ^ S. Peter Davis: Occam's Nightmare. 2013, ISBN 978-1-304-03018-4 , pp. 144-146
282. ↑ Joseph E. Uscinski, Joseph M. Parent: American Conspiracy Theories. Oxford University Press, 2014, ISBN 0-19-935181-3 , pp. 37 f.
283. ↑ Michael Shermer (The Scientific American, June 2005): Fahrenheit 2777
284. ↑ Stephen Prince: Firestorm , 2009, p. 161
285. ↑ Joseph E. Uscinski, Joseph M. Parent: American Conspiracy Theories. 2014, p. 50
286. ↑ James B. Meigs: The Conspiracy Industry. In: David Dunbar, Brad Reagan: Debunking 9/11 Myths , 2006, pp. 91-104.
287. ↑ Stephen M. Walt (Huffington Post, June 1, 2010): Shadow Elite: March to War - Why the Neoconservatives Are Not a Cabal or Conspiracy
288. ↑ Stephen S. Carey: A Beginner's Guide To Scientific Method. Wadsworth Publishing, 2011, p. 113
289. ↑ Wolfgang Wippermann: Agents of Evil. Conspiracy theories from Luther to the present day. bebra, Berlin 2007, p. 139; Tobias Jaecker: Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories after September 11th , Münster 2004, p. 155ff .; Jasmin Waibl-Stockner: “The Jews are our misfortune” , 2009, pp. 339–341
290. ↑ George Michael: The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, 2006, ISBN 0-7006-1444-3 , pp. 230 and 351, fn. 37.
291. ↑ Michael Butter, Maurus Reinkowski: Conspiracy Theories in the United States and the Middle East , 2014, p. 37
292. ^ ADL, August 30, 2011: Decade of Deceit: Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 10 Years Later
293. ↑ Oliver Kamm (The Jewish Chronicle, January 4, 2013): From nonsense to indecency
294. ↑ Alexander Cockburn (Le monde diplomatique, December 15, 2006): Who they are really after. Conspiracy theories and the state of the left in the USA ( Memento from June 20, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
295. ^ Glenn Greenwald (Salon, June 20, 2007): What “truly motivates” George W. Bush?
296. ↑ Karsten Wind Meyhoff: Kontrafaktische Kartierungen , 2009, p. 78 f.
297. ^ David L. Altheide: Terror Post 9/11 and the Media. Peter Lang, New York 2009, ISBN 1-4331-0365-6 , pp. 33-38
298. ↑ Lawrie Reznek: Delusions and the Madness of the Masses. 2010, p. 125
299. ↑ Thomas Nachreiner: In the mirror labyrinth. Web video as a form of conspiracy thinking. In: Ursula Hennigfeld, Stephan Packard (Ed.): Farewell to 9/11? Distancing itself from the disaster. Frank & Timme, 2013, ISBN 3-86596-432-X , pp. 174-176
300. ↑ Alexander Riley: Angel Patriots: The Crash of United Flight 93 and the Myth of America. New York University Press 2015, ISBN 1-4798-6845-0 , pp. 182 f.