Conspiracy theories regarding the events of September 11, 2001 are theories that diverge from the official version of events, according to which the attacks of September 11 were carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist organization [1] . Proponents of these conspiracy theories argue that there are inconsistencies in the official conclusions and that some evidence was missed [2] [3] .
The most common conspiracy theory claims that the collapse of the World Trade Center and World Trade Center 7 was the result of controlled destruction, not fire. Another conspiracy theory claims that the Pentagon was destroyed by a cruise missile, controlled by people associated with the US government. Proponents of conspiracy theories believe that the motivation for these actions was to justify the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as strategic interests in the Middle East, such as oil pipeline plans that Unocal and other oil companies have been developing since the early 1990s [4] .
Basic Theories
World Trade Center
Controlled Demolition Theory
The theory of controlled demolition suggests that the collapse of the towers of the World Trade Center did not occur as a result of fire or damage caused by a collision of aircraft with the towers , but because of the explosion of explosives installed in the building in advance [5] .
Demolition proponents such as physicist Stephen E. Jones from Brigham Young University , architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman and theologian David Ray Griffin argue that a plane collision and a fire caused by the collision could not weaken the building frame before such degrees to cause a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings could not collapse completely and at the speed with which they fell, without an additional source of exposure used to weaken their structure.
In the article “Explosive termite found in dust from the World Trade Center 9/11 disaster”, which was published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, authors Niels Harrit from the Department of Chemistry of the University of Copenhagen , Jeffrey Farrer from the Department of Physics and Astronomy of Brigham Young University , Stephen E Jones and others allege that termite and nanothermite particles were found in the dust and debris left after the destruction of three buildings, from which they conclude that this proves the demolition of buildings by explosives. The article did not contain scientific evidence, and the editor-in-chief subsequently resigned [6] [7] [8] [9] .
Jones did not explain how the necessary amount of explosive for detonation could be installed in two buildings without attracting attention, but noted that there was activity in the field of maintenance of buildings for several weeks before the event. Federal investigators at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have argued that a huge amount of termite is needed to damage the support beams, but Jones challenged this claim, claiming he and others had found a “super termite” [7] . Brent Blanchard, the author of The Story of Undermining in America [10] , who corresponded with Jones, argues that the question of the viability of the Jones theory remains unanswered, for example, it does not explain the fact that the participants in clearing the rubble did not notice obvious signs of termite in for eight months of garbage collection after the collapse of the towers. Blanchard also noted that a verifiable chain of ownership should be established for the samples of beams that were used for research and raises the question that metal parts for research could be cut off from debris by an acetylene torch, scissors, or other potentially contaminated tool [11] .
Jones also claimed that the molten steel found under the wreckage indicates explosives, and that an ordinary airplane fire cannot generate enough heat for this, referring to photographs with red-hot debris removed by construction equipment from the crash site. To this, Blanchard replied that any earthmoving equipment, when interacting with molten steel in the rubble, would be immediately damaged [7] . Dust samples examined by the U.S. Geological Survey and George Lee did not provide any evidence of termite or explosive use. It was suggested that “termite material” was found in the primer of the paint [12] .
Experts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA) (NIST) concluded that the generally accepted version is more than sufficient to explain the collapse of buildings. NIST and many other scholars refuse to discuss conspiracy theorists because they believe that this will create unreasonable trust in these theories [13] . Specialists in structural mechanics and the design of buildings and structures in general adopt a pyrogenic model in which the fall of the World Trade Center buildings occurred under the influence of gravity, without the use of explosives [14] [15] [16] NIST, as a result, stated that it did not performed a single test to search for remnants of explosive substances in any kind of debris [17] .
Some time after the attack, large media published information that the towers collapsed due to the melting of steel [18] [19] . The understanding that at the temperature of burning fuel for jet engines, the steel structures of the World Trade Center should not melt, contributed to the skeptics' belief that the towers would not have collapsed without interference from outside of something other than aircraft. NIST, however, does not claim that the steel was molten, but suggests that the weakened steel, along with damage caused by aircraft, caused destruction [17] . NIST reported that a simulation based on the assumption that combustible vapors burned out immediately when mixed with oxygen showed that “at any given location [air] temperature was around 1000 ° C for 15 to 20 [minutes]. The rest of the time, the temperature was 500 ° C or lower ” [20] . Proponents of the demolition theory focus on the fact that not a single tower collapsed due to a fire before the terrorist attack, while proponents of the official version note that not a single tower was damaged by a commercial airliner before the attack.
The Pentagon
According to some conspiracy theories, the US administration decided not to specifically shoot down an aircraft directed at the Pentagon wall [22] , while others claim that no plane crashed into the Pentagon at all [23] . Still others reject the claim that something other than Flight 77 could crash into the Pentagon, but agree that the towers of the World Trade Center were destroyed by controlled demolition; for example, Jim Hoffman on his website 911review.com points to the main, in his opinion, errors in the theory of “Boeing was not” [24] .
Political activist Thierry Meyssan and director Dylan Avery claim that American Airlines flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. Instead, they said, the Pentagon was hit by a missile controlled by someone from the US government. The Reopen911.org website says that the holes in the walls of the Pentagon were too small for the Boeing 757 to make: “How did a plane 125 feet wide and 155 feet long leave a hole only 60 feet in diameter?” Meyssan’s book “L'Effroyable Imposture” ( English 9/11: The Big Lie ) has become a bestseller in France and is available in more than a dozen languages. After its release, this book was sharply criticized by both the French and American press, and later, as part of the 9/11 Truth Movement, by researchers such as Jim Hoffman [25] and websites such as oilempire.us [26] . The French newspaper Liberation called the book “woven from wild and reckless accusations, which, moreover, are completely unfounded” [27] [28] [29] .
In response to Pentagon missile strike theories, Met Sozen [30] , a professor of civil engineering at Purdue University , states that “a missile hit would not have caused such an effect of destroying a reinforced concrete building. When Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, it buried itself in the ground with one wing and cut several bearing columns with the other ” [27] [31] . According to ArchitectureWeek, the reason the Pentagon’s damage was relatively small was because the First Sector, which was hit, was recently updated [32] . (This was part of the reconstruction program that began in the 1980s, the first sector was the first of five to be repaired) [33] .
Evidence that the plane was described by researchers from the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as Jim Hoffman, in the essay “Pentagon Attacks: What Material Evidence Reveals” [34] and others, and refute alternative theories. From the available evidence of the attack there are: the wreckage of the jet of the Flight 77, black boxes [35] , the nose cone, landing gear [36] , tires [37] and the surviving seat from the cockpit [38] . All this was found at the crash site. The remains of passengers of Flight 77 were also found at the crash site and their identities were confirmed by DNA analysis [39] . Many witnesses saw the plane before hitting the Pentagon with their own eyes. In addition, on-board flights of Flight 77 recorded telephone calls from passengers reporting that their plane was hijacked. For example, the passenger Rene Maya called her mother to tell her about the hijacking and that all passengers were driven into the back of the cabin. Another passenger, named Barbara Olson, called her husband (US Attorney General Theodore Olson) and said that the plane was hijacked and that the hijackers were armed with knives and cutters [40] [27] [41] [42] . Some conspiracy theories argue that the phone calls of passengers were fabricated using special equipment, the bodies of passengers were destroyed, and the Pentagon was damaged by a cruise missile.
Flight 93
A United Airlines plane hijacked on September 11th, Flight 93 crashed in an open field near Shanksville Borough, in Pennsylvania , after passengers taken hostage rebelled. Of the four aircraft hijacked that day, this was the only one that did not reach the target of the attack [43] .
One of the most popular conspiracy theories around Flight 93 suggests that it was actually shot down by a US Air Force fighter jet . For example, David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones claim that most of the aircraft, including engine parts, fell a few kilometers from the first wreckage, which is very unusual for such a plane crash. According to Jones, aircraft in a crash usually leave a small field with debris on the ground, and this does not agree with those reports that some of the debris was found much further than the crash site. According to information on Rense.com, it is alleged that the main part of the engine was found a few kilometers from the main site of the debris fall, which is comparable, for example, with the result of a thermally-guided missile strike [27] [43] [44] .
According to Phil Mole of Skeptic Magazine, “(this) claim is based on unconfirmed reports that the main engine and some large parts of the aircraft were found kilometers from the crash site, which is too far away to result from a regular plane crash. This statement is incorrect, since the engine was found only 300 yards from the crash site, and its location is in good agreement with the direction of the aircraft ” [45] . Michael C. Hines, a crash expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 in 1996, said: “At speeds of up to 500 miles per hour or more, a motor falling to the ground 300 yards further takes only a few seconds and is not something unusual ” [27] [45] .
Messages from local residents who discovered the wreckage of an aircraft in an Indian lake are likely to be well founded. CNN reported that investigators discovered the wreckage at least 8 miles from the crash site, including in New Baltimore [46] . However, according to CNN, they were made of lightweight materials that could be easily carried by the wind. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette describes them as “documents,” “scraps of isolation,” and “travelers checks.”
Public opinion and opinion polls
- According to a survey conducted in August 2004, only 36% of respondents believe that the commission of inquiry answered all the basic questions. Two-thirds of the respondents believe that another full investigation is needed to find out the answers to "still unresolved questions." [47]
- In a 2004 CNN online poll, viewers were asked: “ Do you believe that the US government is hiding information about the September 11 attacks?” ( “Do you believe there is a US goverment cover-up surrounding 9/11?” ). 89% of voters voted positively. [48]
- A public opinion poll conducted in 2008 in 17 countries showed that only 46% of respondents are sure of Al-Qaeda’s involvement, 15% believe that the US government is involved, 7% believe that Israel is involved in the attacks, 7% believe that that other performers are behind the attacks; 25% of respondents said they did not know who organized the September 11 attacks. This survey showed that it is the Arabs who are most likely to believe in conspiracy theories related to the events of September 11, 2001 [49] .
Criticism of conspiracy theories
- In March 2005, the popular science magazine Popular Mechanics (rus. “Popular Mechanics”) published an article entitled “Exposing 9/11 Myths” ( eng. “Debunking 9/11 Myths” ) [50] .
- On May 23, 2005, the popular science magazine Scientific American came out with an article called Fahrenheit 2777 (orig. Fahrenheit 2777 ) that looks at many allegations of conspiracy from several Internet sites, as well as from sources such as the book “ Big lie ”( Fr. “ L'Effroyable Imposture ” ) by French journalist Meyssan Thierry [51] .
- In August 2006, in a follow-up article from March 2005, Popular Mechanics magazine published the book “Exposing 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Ca n't Criticize (Facts)” (orig. Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can ' t Stand Up to the Facts " ). The book contained interviews with more than 300 witnesses and experts in various fields of science. The authors of the book were David Dunbar and Brad Reagan [52] .
- In August 2007, the popular science channel History Channel released a special project entitled "Conspiracy Theories of 9/11: Facts or Fiction" ( Eng. "9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction" ). The program included interviews with both eyewitnesses and experts. The recordings of negotiations between US Air Force pilots, NORAD and FAA employees, passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 were also shown. The main topic of the program was a detailed discussion of the most popular conspiracy theories about the events of September 11, 2001. In particular, the theory from the film "Loose Change" ( Eng. "Loose Change" ) [53] was considered in particular detail.
- In the spring of 2009, The Times journalist David Aronovich’s book, Voodoo of History : The Role of Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary History, was published . The author examines and analyzes many conspiracy theories, starting with the attack on Pearl Harbor . However, the author carefully considers the theory regarding the events of September 11, 2001 [54] .
- In August 2009, the program “September 11th. Science and conspiracies ”(orig. “ 9/11 Science and Conspiracy ” ), which brought together many experts in the field of forensics, computer modeling and civil engineers. In the transmission, the collision of an aircraft with towers, the fire and the destruction of the WTC buildings were simulated both in the field and virtually. The affirmative test result was the scientific justification for the destruction of buildings [55] .
- In September 2011, the Guardian newspaper published an article entitled “Conspiracy Theories of September 11th debunked” (original “9/11 conspiracy theories debunked” ) [56] .
- In 2011, the book “Among the activists of the movement 'For Truth in 9/11': Journey to the Growing Underground of American Conspiracy theorists” was published . The author of the book is Jonathan Kay. The book examines the most popular conspiracy theories and related movements in the United States, such as the John Birch Society, Bilderberg Group, Vaccination, and Reptilians. However, special attention is paid to the 9/11 Truth movement ( Rus. "Movement for the truth about 9/11" ). The book gives interviews with leaders of the movement, Alex Jones and Michael Roubert (Michael Ruppert). Positive reviews have been received from The Economist and The New York Times . However, several criticisms of the style from The Wall Street Journal were received [57] .
In addition to various kinds of authoritative popular science publications and channels, in response to the growing number of conspiracy theorists, many resources began to appear to expose these theories. Among them are Debunking911.com and JOD911.com .
Notes
- ↑ 9/11 conspiracy theories won't stop
- ↑ The Top 40 Reasons To Doubt The Official Story Of September 11th, 2001 . 911Truth.org. Date of treatment September 10, 2011. Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Sales, Nancy Jo. Click Here For Conspiracy , Vanity Fair July 9, 2006
- ↑ Knight, Peter "Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: Popular and Official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States." New German Critique 35 (1)
- ↑ Clarke, Steve. "Conspiracy Theories and the Internet: Controlled Demolition and Arrested Development." Episteme , Volume 4, Issue 2, 2007, pp. 167-180.
- ↑ Niels H. Harrit; Jeffrey Farrer; Steven E. Jones; Kevin R. Ryan; Frank M. Legge; Daniel Farnsworth; Gregg Roberts; James R. Gourley; Bradley R. Larsen. Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe (Link not available) . The Open Chemical Physics Journal (volume 2) (September 13, 2009). Date of treatment October 11, 2010. Archived October 26, 2010.
- ↑ 1 2 3 Jim Dwyer . 2 US Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11 , The New York Times (September 2, 2006). Date of treatment November 5, 2015.
- ↑ Dean, Suzanne . Physicist says heat substance felled WTC (April 10, 2006). Date of treatment May 7, 2009.
- ↑ Barber, Peter . The truth is out there (June 7, 2008). Date of treatment May 23, 2009.
- ↑ Brent Blanchard (February 2002). "A History of Explosive Demolition in America." Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique : 27–44, International Society of Explosives Engineers. ISSN 0732-619X.
- ↑ Blanchard, Brent. “A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT” , implosionworld.com, August 8, 2006
- ↑ 9/11 conspiracy theories BBC Magazine August 28, 2011
- ↑ 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Thriving , CBS News (August 6, 2006). Archived December 24, 2007. Date of treatment July 12, 2009.
- ↑ Bažant, Zdeněk P. ; Mathieu Verdure. Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions // Eng. Mech: journal. - 2007 .-- March ( vol. 133 , no. 3 ). - P. 308-319 . - DOI : 10.1061 / (ASCE) 0733-9399 (2007) 133: 3 (308) . Archived on August 9, 2007.
- ↑ Gravois, John Professors of Paranoia? . The Chronicle of Higher Education (June 23, 2006). Date of treatment September 26, 2009. Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Asquith, Christina. Conspiracies continue to abound surrounding 9/11: on the eve of the fifth anniversary, a group of professors say the attacks were an "inside job." (Eng.) // Diverse Issues in Higher Education: journal. - 2006 .-- 7 September. - P. 12 . Archived July 9, 2012.
- ↑ 1 2 NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster - Frequently Asked Questions . Wtc.nist.gov. Archived March 4, 2012.
- ↑ Barter, Sheila . How the World Trade Center fell , BBC News (September 13, 2001). Date of treatment December 2, 2009. “But steel melts, and 24,000 gallons (91,000 liters) of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire. ”
- ↑ Samuel, Eugenie; Damian Carrington. Design choice for towers saved lives . New Scientist (September 12, 2001). Date of treatment December 2, 2009. Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ NCSTAR 1. Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers . NIST (September 2005). Date of treatment December 1, 2009. Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Pentagon # 2 surveillance camera recording . Judicial Watch.
- ↑ Hoffman, Jim. "The 'Stand-Down Order' . " 9/11 Review. December 18, 2010
- ↑ Hoffman, Jim. "ERROR: 'Only A Small Plane or Missile Could Have Caused Pentagon Damage' . " 9-11 Review. December 18, 2010
- ↑ "Pentagon Attack Errors" . 9-11 Review. July 27, 2009
- ↑ Dissembling Books . 9/11 Review. accessed September 28, 2009.
- ↑ “The Complete No Planes on 9/11 Timeline” . July 7, 2007
- ↑ 1 2 3 4 5 Editors, The Popular Mechanics (link not available) . Popular Mechanics. Date of treatment July 20, 2009. Archived March 29, 2008.
- ↑ Henley, Jon . US invented air attack on Pentagon, claims French book , The Guardian (April 12, 2002). Archived on June 17, 2009. Date of treatment July 20, 2009.
- ↑ Paul Reynolds . Conspiracy theorists down but not out , BBC News (May 16, 2006). Date of appeal September 26, 2009.
- ↑ Mete Sozen Neopr . Purdue University. Date of treatment May 5, 2011.
- ↑ Summers, Anthony. The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. - New York: Ballantine, 2011 .-- P. 111-. - ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9 .
- ↑ Pentagon Battered but Firm - 2001.1003 . ArchitectureWeek (October 3, 2001). Date of treatment May 30, 2011. Archived on June 5, 2011.
- ↑ Archived copy (inaccessible link) . Date of treatment August 5, 2012. Archived on August 4, 2001.
- ↑ Hoffman, Jim. "The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows . " March 28, 2006
- ↑ Searchers find Pentagon black boxes , USA Today (September 14, 2001). Date of treatment May 1, 2010.
- ↑ Swift, Earl Inside the Pentagon on 9/11: The Call of Duty . Pilot Online . Virginian-Pilot (September 9, 2002). Date of treatment May 1, 2010. Archived July 30, 2004.
- ↑ Where were you when ... , Wichita Business Journal (September 6, 2002). Archived on April 13, 2010. Date of treatment May 1, 2010.
- ↑ On the ground at the Pentagon on Sept. 11 , MSNBC (September 28, 2001). Archived on May 26, 2004. Date of treatment May 1, 2010.
- ↑ Kelly, Christopher C. Experts ID 184 Pentagon Fatalities (Link not available) . US Army Medical Department (January 11, 2002). Date of treatment May 7, 2010. Archived on August 15, 2002.
- ↑ Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon? (inaccessible link) . Bureau of International Information Programs, US Department of State (April 19, 2009). Date of treatment September 6, 2009. Archived March 15, 2013.
- ↑ The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories (link not available) . America.gov. Date of treatment July 20, 2009. Archived July 14, 2009.
- ↑ Summers, Anthony. The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 and Osama bin Laden. - New York: Ballantine, 2011 .-- P. 112. - ISBN 978-1-4000-6659-9 .
- ↑ 1 2 Programs | Conspiracy Files | Q&A: What really happened , BBC News (February 16, 2007). Date of treatment July 20, 2009.
- ↑ The Crash of Flight 93: Evidence Indicates Flight 93 Was Shot Down . 911research.wtc7.net. Date of treatment May 30, 2011. Archived on June 5, 2011.
- ↑ 1 2 Molé, Phil The Skeptics Society & Skeptic magazine . Skeptic. Date of treatment October 15, 2010. Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ 'Black box' from Pennsylvania crash found , CNN (September 13, 2001). Date of treatment July 19, 2009.
- ↑ Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York's Attorney General , Zogby international (August 30, 2004).
- ↑ CNN Online Poll: 89% Believe There's Been a 9/11 Cover-up , 911Truth.org (November 11, 2004).
- ↑ No consensus on who was behind Sept 11: global poll
- ↑ Popular Mechanics - “Debunking 9/11 Myths” . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Scientific American - “Fahrenheit 2777” . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Popular Mechanics - Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ History Channel - The 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ David Aronovich - “Voodoo of History: The Role of Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary History” (English) . Archived October 27, 2012.
- ↑ National Geographic - 9/11: Science and Conspiracy . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Guardian - 9/11 conspiracy theories debunked . Archived on September 8, 2012.
- ↑ Book - “Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground” . Archived on September 8, 2012.
Links
- Criticism of the official version and presentation of conspiracy theories
- Journal of 9/11 Studies, peer-reviewed online journal
- Architects and engeneers for 9/11 truth - Technical Articles
- The destruction of the World Trade Center and the so-called war against terrorism
- Baranets V., Zibrov V. WTC Towers September 11th, America itself blew up " Komsomolskaya Pravda "
- Criticism of the investigation report and the call for a new investigation
- Critique of conspiracy theories
- Catalog of links to resources exposing "conspiracy theories" regarding the events of September 11, 2001
- Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy theories and Controlled Demolition Myths - Exposing "conspiracy theories" and myths about the "controlled collapse" of the WTC buildings
- Criticism of both alternative and official versions