9-11 conspiracy theory

The attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001 were obviously the product of a conspiracy, since a number of people had to coordinate secret plans in order to hijack four airliners at roughly the same time. The term "9/11 Conspiracy Theory" is used to apply the deprecatory and dismissive connotations of the phrase "conspiracy theory" to alternative theories of the attacks, especially those that involve foreknowledge of or participation in the attacks by persons in the U.S. Government.

Background
It is inevitable that events as visible and consequential as the 9/11 attacks would be accompanied by wide-ranging speculation about "what really happened," comparable to that which followed the John F. Kennedy assassination, the King and Kennedy assassinations of 1968, and the death of Princess Diana. Although the period immediately after the attacks is remembered as one of intense national unity and solidarity, for leftists and other political nonconformists it was a time when deviations from the popular narrative were ruthlessly marginalized by the major American news media. One did not have to be Noam Chomsky or Howard Zinn to answer the question "why do they hate us?", but even respected media like the New York Times and the Washington Post remained largely uncritical as the Global War on Terror roared into life. Later, much of the press and many Democratic politicians would regret giving the Bush/Cheney administration the free hand it enjoyed after 9/11, but on the Internet the secrecy, duplicity, and lawlessness of the new Long War were discussed in real time.

The Theories
Several categories of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" exist. Michael Moore's treatment of the attacks in the film "Fahrenheit 9/11" might be classed by some as such a theory, but Moore does not imply that any Americans had any active responsibility for the attacks. He suggests that the Administration was blinded to the likelihood of such attacks by its close ties to the Saudis, and then that after the attacks had taken place, it used them to justify actions that it already wanted to take for other (usually oil-related) reasons.

The Let It Happen On Purpose (LIHOP) theories assert that the Administration actually did know that the attacks were coming, and viewed them as an opportunity to implement plans that the "neoconservatives" supported, but that would require something like "a new Pearl Harbor" to sell them to the general public. This vision of an America that would have no military "peer competitors" and would use military power to prevent the rise of any such competitors - for generations, if possible - was articulated by the "Project for the New American Century" think tank before 9/11, and became an explicit part of the National Security Strategy of the United States of America after the attacks.

Finally, there are also Made It Happen On Purpose (MIHOP) theories that involve known and hypothesized connections among U.S. intelligence agencies, its Pakistani and Saudi counterparts, and various actual or alleged terrorists. In these theories, any role played by Islamic militants was known to and directed by at least a few people inside the U.S. Government.

The Evidence
It is a matter of record that the Bush/Cheney administration attempted to prevent a formal investigation of the attacks, that it cooperated with investigators only on its own terms, and that it was able to get Bush loyalists into key staff positions for writing the final report. This behavior, being consistent with the Administration's approach to many other issues, is evidence of nothing. But the report that was eventually produced by the National Commision on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States paid little or no attention to many issues that were well known to the "9/11 Truth" community. Among these are:

- the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center Building Seven, a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that was not hit by a plane or consumed by massive fires, but collapsed in a manner indistinguishable from the deliberate implosions produced by demolition contractors;

- technical and therefore infinitely debatable questions about the Twin Towers' collapse: what was the real cause of collapse? Why was red-hot molten metal visible? How hot can a air-starved jet-fuel fire get? Why did the buildings' central columns break up into such short pieces? Can the official collapse theory explain the speed and violence of the collapse?

- many inconsistencies surrounding the incident at the Pentagon, which is not connected to American Airlines Flight 77 or to any Boeing 757 by any evidence available to the public.

- is it really plausible that the air defense system failed so completely for so long, and why should we be convinced by the changing explanations for that failure?

- etc, etc

The Theorists
Paul Thompson: The Terror Timeline (2004) David Ray Griffin: The New Pearl Harbor (2004), The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (2004), Debunking 8/11 Debunking (2007), etc. Michael C. Ruppert: Crossing the Rubicon (2004)