This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at

Your Ad Here

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

The 9/11 Truth Movement

I was planning a post on this topic at some point. Since this is the 6th anniversary, it's appropriate for today.

I heard some people are now calling themselves "9/11 Skeptics" rather than "9/11 Truthers". Basically, it's a matter of degree. Someone who's a member of "9/11 Truth Movement" explicitly accuses the government of covering up the details of the attack. A "9/11 Skeptic" says they doubt the official story, aren't sure what actually happened, and doubt they ever will discover the full details.

Many people say that there are obvious contradictions in the official story of the attack. One thing is certain. The World Trade Center attack has been used as an excuse for a vast increase in red market power. Red market agents claim the right to intercept telephone and electronic transmissions. The red market's power to freeze bank accounts has increased. Red market agents claim the right to hold people indefinitely, without trial. The red market has greatly increased its ability to spy on Americans. For example, libraries can be forced to turn over records of what books people have checked out.

Many of these schemes were proposed long before the World Trade Center attacks. Privacy advocates were able to prevent them. In that sense, the terrorist attack was too convenient. It seems like a contrived excuse to take away people's rights and privacy.

Once government claims power, it never relinquishes it voluntarily. This invasion of privacy will last as long as the government survives.

The 9/11 truth movement has several theories.

First, there is the idea that a large office building would not collapse solely from an airplane crash. The buildings were specifically designed to withstand such an accident. Some people say that airline fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel. They say the collapse of the buildings resembled a controlled demolition, rather than a collapse. This could be experimentally verified by building a model of the building and simulating a fire.

Second, there is the idea that government response to the hijackings were intentionally slow. In other instances, airplanes that deviated from their flight plan were intercepted by fighter jets quickly. On September 11, 2001, that did not happen. Some people say that the US air defense was intentionally ordered to stand down, or that communications were delayed on purpose.

Third, there is the idea that certain members of US spy agencies had predicted such an attack. Their advice was deliberately ignored.

Fourth, there is the idea that some US spy agencies were secretly involved in the attacks. Some people say that the CIA was developed to allow the President to declare war without the consent of Congress. The US interferes in the affairs of other countries. Some people become angry at the US. They strike back with terrorist attacks. These attacks are then used as justification to start a war.

Fifth, there is the idea that the attacks were a false flag operation. Someone else organized the attacks, and blamed al Qaeda. Some people say that it is really difficult for an amateur pilot to precisely fly an airplane into an office building. Some people say that a homing device and explosives were planted on the floor where the airplanes crashed. The homing device could have been planted and used without the knowledge of the hijackers.

Sixth, why were the bin Laden family and other Saudi diplomats allowed to leave the country immediately after the attacks? At a minimum, they should have been detained and questioned.

Finally, there is the idea that I find most interesting. Who financed al Qaeda? Remember that Osama bin Laden was a former US ally. He had received training from the US government. His tactics were part of his training for fighting the Soviet Union. The theory is that the international banking cartel secretly funded and trained al Qaeda. It was done through several intermediary banks, so it is untraceable. The attacks would be used as justification for pointless wars. The attacks would be used as justification to take away people's rights and spy on them more. The international banking cartel has been funding both sides in all major wars for hundreds of years.

In other words, the members of al Qaeda and the average US citizen actually have a common enemy. The international banking cartel is the true enemy. The international banking cartel would much rather have al Qaeda members and the US citizens focusing their efforts fighting each other, rather than them.

It is probably impossible to tell exactly what happened. Maybe it was a cleverly organized attack combined with US government incompetence. Maybe it was secretly organized by elements of the US government or elements of the international banking cartel. It's hard to tell. In either case, the encroachment of people's freedoms and privacy is wrong. Unfortunately, power is never voluntarily relinquished once it is claimed.

No comments:

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at