For some reason 9/11 keeps coming up in my online interactions with people lately, both with establishment loyalists who call me a “9/11 truther” and with skeptics who say I don’t write enough about what really happened on that day 18 years ago. So I figured I’ll bang out a few quick paragraphs on the subject in the interest of transparency, and so I don’t have to keep having the same conversations over and over again.

My position on 9/11 itself is pretty simple: I don’t know exactly what happened on the eleventh of September 2001, and I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit. But it’s also extremely obvious that the world was lied to about what happened by the US government and its allies, as evidenced by the massive, glaring plot holes in the official 9/11 narrative.

The most concise and rock-solid compilation of these plot holes that I have ever seen was compiled by conspiracy analyst James Corbett in this five-minute video and its accompanying source notes. Corbett made this video eight years ago on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and to this day I believe it’s the strongest and most irrefutable case against the official narrative.

I have never once seen anyone even attempt to refute Corbett’s video, because as an argument it is completely unassailable. The brilliant thing about it is that, while it’s called “9/11: A Conspiracy Theory”, all it actually contains is the official narrative about how the alleged Al-Qaeda conspiracy to attack US buildings with jet planes is officially theorized to have taken place, per the establishment narrative. Corbett simply tells the story, exactly as it exists in mainstream discourse, but he tells the full story all at once while omitting the part where the storyteller tries to make it all sound perfectly reasonable and plausible. When you hear the official narrative repeated in this way, it’s transparently self-evident that the public hasn’t been told the truth.

So why don’t I talk about this more? It seems like it’s right in my wheelhouse, right? 9/11 was used to manufacture consent for multiple wars in a highly suspicious way that just so happened to align with preexisting imperial geostrategic agendas (as well as preexisting domestic agendas), and if everyone could understand that they were deceived by their own government and media about something so important, the entire evil empire would come crashing down. Based on all my other writings you’d assume this would be something I’d be focused on facilitating.

But I don’t. I very rarely mention 9/11 except in passing. There are two reasons for this:

Firstly, the narrative control battle has already been decisively won by the other side. The mainstream understanding is that anyone who talks about what really happened on 9/11 is a crazy crackpot who must not be listened to, because the establishment narrative control campaign to discredit and demonize critical thinking on the subject succeeded many years ago. If today’s ubiquitous internet access had happened to coincide with 9/11 and the grassroots push to find out the truth behind it, that narrative control would have been far more difficult if not impossible for the establishment to shore up. But the timing didn’t work out that way, and now the narrative is fully locked down except in the margins of discourse which have no effect on the mainstream.

Secondly, even if there were some way to show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11, the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away. The operation would be blamed on rogue actors, maybe a few powerful establishment loyalists would face consequences (though probably not) and be replaced with other establishment loyalists, and then the imperial propaganda machine would pace everyone into an understanding of why it’s still right and necessary to support the US-centralized empire and its globe-sprawling war machine. The status quo would march on essentially undisturbed. This is one hundred percent guaranteed as long as the empire still has a functioning propaganda engine.

This is why I focus on attacking the establishment propaganda machine using clear, undeniable arguments against which people haven’t been preemptively prejudiced by narrative management campaigns, in a way that people can verify independently for themselves.

As I explain in my article “How To Defeat The Empire“, people can only hope to oust the oppression machine by using the power of their numbers to do so, and they won’t use the power of their numbers to do so as long as they’re successfully propagandized. The way to kill the empire’s ability to propagandize people is not to run up to them saying things they’ve already been conditioned to view as bat shit insane, it’s to help them see in their own experience that those outlets are behaving in an untrustworthy way here and now. Distrust in the mass media is already at an all-time high, so all it takes is a little nudge in the right direction.

That’s where I choose to pour my energy. Not into attacking a heavily-armored narrative about something that happened 18 years ago, but into independently verifiable deceptions happening here and now like the mass media’s conspiracy of silence on the OPCW scandal, Bellingcat’s easily debunked lies, and the various deceitful narratives used to manufacture consent for the imprisonment of Julian Assange. I can point to these things in a way that people will actually get curious about and look into for themselves, rather than slamming the cognitive door with a conditioned reflexive “LOL shut up truther.”

It is good and right to ask questions about 9/11, but that’s a rabbit hole that only opens up for people when it opens up for them. It’s good that there are people out there talking about that rabbit hole for when people get curious about it, but you can’t force people to jump down it. Believing I should keep pushing 9/11 truth on principle because they lied to us about something evil is like believing I should keep bashing my face into a brick wall on principle because it shouldn’t be there rather than simply walking around and going through the open door.

Anyway, that’s the conclusion my experience and study of this puzzle has brought me to. I’m open to changing my mind at a later date, but that’s what seems the most effective way to fight the machine for the time being.


Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemitthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

278 responses to “Why I Don’t Talk More About 9/11”

  1. In this interview (min 46)
    journalist and 9/11 research Christopher Bollyn describes how he was attacked at his home in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, by a heavily-armed three-man team of undercover police that had been prowling around his house for several days in a row. As a result of this his family had to leave the United States for a time for their safety.

    A couple of months prior to this assault, Bollyn with Prof Stephen Jones had pinpointed the presence of nano-thermite in the dust of the world trade center and made it public.

  2. I would encourge Caitlin to watch Christopher Bollyns lecture “Solving 911 ends the War”

    I would also encourage Caitlin to listen to his interview where he describes how he was assaulted by undercover police in 2006. This assault coincided with his work with Prof Stephen Jones to show the presence of nano-thermite in WTC debris samples. The old saying “You know when you are over the target..”
    To my mind, Christopher deserves to be hailed as a hero, i.e. not ignored. Caitlin should be flattered that this true hero is a reader of her column and made a comment.

    “In August 2006, Bollyn was attacked at his home in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, by a heavily-armed three-man team of undercover police that had been prowling around his house for several days in a row. The result of the police assault on Bollyn was that he was falsely with assault and resisting arrest; both misdemeanor charges. He pled innocent and went through a four-day trial in which the police openly lied and presented false evidence. Bollyn was prohibited from presenting evidence and his expert witness was not allowed to testify. Bollyn was found guilty of both charges and faced sentencing from the same judge who had overseen the trial. The Bollyn family left their home near Chicago and moved to Europe in June 2007. “

  3. The so called heavily armored narrative has more chinks in it then you can shake a stick at. Since 9/11 there has been a tsunami of books and videos on the subject. returns over 4000 results and cursory inspection of the them reveal that at least 50% if not the majority are dedicated to debunking the official lies. Also you can notice that many books that merely regurgitate official lies are not being read since the review count is zero.

    Conclusion, the event of 9/11 has probably done more than any other event to awaken millions of people around the world to the fact that they are living in a media matrix.

    What is more, the official lies are being exposed at an official level. Witness the 2 ongoing lawsuits in New York state that seek to expose the cover up. Even the current president does not believe the official story and has publicly stated so. This fact can not have failed to escape the notice of millions of his supporters.

    The polling organization Yougov used to conduct polls on the numbers of people who disbelieve the official story of 9/11. They had to stop polling some years ago when an embarrassing large majority polled as not believing. Probably 80% of US citizens no longer believe the official lie. The media can repeat the lies all they want, but they cannot make a dent in that polling statistic. The horse has bolted.


    An Interview with Mick Harrison and John O’Kelly

    On this week’s episode of 9/11 Free Fall, host Andy Steele is joined by Mick Harrison and John O’Kelly of the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry to discuss the latest developments in two major cases: the petition for a federal grand jury investigation, which the Lawyers’ Committee filed in April 2018, and the FBI 9/11 Review Commission lawsuit filed last March.

    The Lawyers’ Committee and its co-plaintiffs are at critical junctures in both cases. In the former, they are about to enter a legal battle with U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman over whether he is required to disclose some information regarding his office’s handling of the grand jury petition and over his statutory duty to present that petition to a special grand jury. In the latter, they will soon be filing an appeal of the Washington, D.C., District Court’s recent ruling that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the FBI lawsuit.

    For a detailed update from Mr. Harrison and Mr. O’Kelly, we invite you to listen to or read the full interview.

  5. a) the narrative control battle has already been decisively won by the other side. (unfortunately true, so Caitlin is a realist)

    b) even if there were some way to show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11, the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away. The operation would be blamed on rogue actors, maybe a few powerful establishment loyalists would face consequences (though probably not) and be replaced with other establishment loyalists, and then the imperial propaganda machine would pace everyone into an understanding of why it’s still right and necessary to support the US-centralized empire and its globe-sprawling war machine. The status quo would march on essentially undisturbed. This is one hundred percent guaranteed as long as the empire still has a functioning propaganda engine. (Disagree. It would cause the downfall of the existing regime. If Caitlin really believes this, then she is pissing in the wind with all her work)

    The propaganda machine and manufactured chaos can move faster than the opposition. Young people already are distrusting the propaganda more, it is baby boomers who still trust the media and their favorite politicians.

    The real reason that almost every known alternative media star avoids 9/11 is the stigma of it. Privately, I suspect most of them are truthers.

    What Caitlin should REALLY address is the mental health effects of dealing with the 9/11 coverup, which are immense and not sufficiently addressed. Most human beings do not want to be shunned and go through the level of alienation and psychological distress that a real confrontation of 9/11 truth entails. Lots of people have flipped out over it, never to recover, thus reinforcing the stigma of tin foil hat, conspiracy, and 9/11. Yet 9/11 remains the largest elephant in the room short of some new revelation about our government participating in something even more nefarious, which would be even harder to name and not be “garlanded” in the words of Dan Rather.

    Caitlin is afraid of being garlanded, and rightly so. She still has growing credibility. Why squander all her other hard work over a single issue. The saga of 9/11 is not over. At least Caitlin has taken a stand of sorts, which is better than 99% of the rest of the alternative media!!!!

  6. « I have never once seen anyone even attempt to refute Corbett’s video »

    1. The French “refutation”, if you can call it that, is utterly ridiculous. Tons of evidence have confirmed Corbett’s video. For years “debunkers” kept saying explosions were not heard. Really?
      Ilhan Omar Is Right: Some People Did Something on 9/11
      9/11 Conspiracy Solved: Names, Connections, & Details Exposed!
      Massimo Mazzucco’s epic
      September 11 — The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
      And even Dr Steve Pieczenik confirms Israel’s involvement in the USS Liberty and 9/11:
      OPUS 167 Mossad Epstein Connection

  7. As you can see, any discussion of 911 brings out the psyops sock puppet swarm. It’s a well organized operation. And it has infinite patience and resources. The actual 911 operation didn’t need to be perfectly executed. The official story didn’t need to be credible, or free of holes. The psyop sock puppet swarm descends on the skeptics like a plague.

    1. Caitlin,

      FYI, Twitter just permanently suspended me for a reply to you on the torture toilet that plans to be marketed to corporations in order to get their employees off of the toilet faster and back to work. My reply was “The CEO of that company ought to be tarred and feathered”.

      I considered it tongue in cheek but Twitter, apparently not liking my political bent, banned me for using “threatening language”.

      BUT, I did a search and took screenshots of about 100 posters who used that same phrase, often aimed at elected officials, with context clearly indicating that they were not kidding. They all had the opposite political bent that I have. ALL of those posters appear to still be active without suspension. So this is further evidence that Twitter is abusing its privilege of claiming to be a neutral content platform provider, which as you know, gives them immunity from libel. However, as you are well aware, they also claim the privileges of a Publisher, which is NOT immune to libel. An article on this horse shit, exposing their two-faced tactics to engage in political censorship would be a great public benefit. *wink*

      Would you care to have this information that I have harvested? If so then you have my email from the reply form. Let me know.

    2. What really blows me away is the idea that “truther” is used as an insult. The opposite of a “truther” is a “liar” but many people prefer lies to truth I guess.

      1. a good observation, but I guess the people who us the term are using it in a deliberately sarcastic way.

  8. Dear Caitlin Johnston,

    I recently read your article entitled “Why I don’t talk more about 9/11”. I quickly had to google you because, being an independent 9/11 researcher for the last decade or so, I had never heard of you. I don’t get out much, and don’t have much free time, but what I have is usually spent researching, writing about, and making videos about 9/11. According to Wikipedia you, Ms. Johnstone, are a self-published author of “Woke,” a book I haven’t read (yet). You describe herself as a “Rogue Journalist,” among other things. Rogue Journalist. Forgive me but that’s a laugh.

    Any rogue journalist worth her salt would have seen through the disinformation of the 9/11 truth movement ten years ago. You admit you don’t know exactly what happened on 9/11. You then accuse anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened on 9/11 as being “fulla shit.” Well duh. The same can be said about anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened at any historic event. Everyone knows that. Babies know it. My dog knows. I’ll bet all life forms are conceived with a BS meter that trips one of those Star-Trek alarms, or maybe cramps and bad smells, as soon as someone claims to know anything with exact and absolute certainty. You, Catlin, are the mistress of understatement.

    Full letter here:

    1. You missed the entire point of Caitlin’s post. She is simply saying that the 9/11 narrative war has been won by the establishment. It HAS been won by the establishment, and nothing will change that. As I said in a comment below, Dick Cheney could hold a televised news conference tomorrow and admit everything about 9/11 and it would change nothing. Just look at the recent Washington Post exposé on the Afghanistan War. That exposé has already gone down the memory hole, and the Congress voted to INCREASE the military budget AFTER that exposé was published.

      If you really want to go down the rabbit hole to understand how and why this happens, read David Icke’s latest book “The Trigger”.

  9. Thank you, Caitlin, for wanting to disrupt “public trust in the mass media, not with lies and propaganda, but with truth.” I agree that it is of primary importance to dismantle the empire that is causing such dire suffering around the world. I accept your decision to not talk so much about 9/11, even though I do not accept it for myself. After all, truth matters for all topics.

    My own, small “decentralized” effort to weaken public trust in the mass media is found in my essay at Any day, Part 22 on the “CIA in the media” will be published there–all, of course, well documented.

    Oh, and by the way, I find that when I open up the subject of 9/11 to strangers, at least half of the people I speak to–who have been shamed into silence–do not think I am “bat shit crazy,” but actually know there is something terribly amiss with the official story and will open up, sometimes gratefully, sometimes ruefully, about their suspicions. Breaking the silence is what is important, as well as guiding these people to the science of 9/11, not the plethora of disinformation plaguing our truth movement.

    And you are right. (Along with the plague of disinformation) we have an unprecedented opportunity with the internet to be sure the corporate/government does not control the narrative.

    Thanks for all you expose. It is ALL very important toward creating the truthful, kind, sustainable, and peaceful world we want to live in and leave to our children.

    1. Frances, thanks to you and the rest of the AE911Truth folks. I’m a big supporter of this hidden history and was there when Dr. Jones first presented the evidence for explosive residue in the dust.

      Clear forensic evidence that has yet to be disputed. This evidence along with MOLTEN STEEL(iron) and WTC7 falling down like a house of cards is really all you need to see to grasp the false narrative.

      1. Walter, you understand well the three major forensic facts: nanothermite, molten iron/steel, and free fall of WTC7 (as well as near-free fall of WTC 1 and 2). Thanks!

    2. Frances, The important thing to recognise is that the establishment has control of both narratives: the mass-targeted 19-terrorists-armed-with-boxcutters narrative and the truther-targeted “controlled demolition” narrative diverting attention from the faked plane crashes which is a much more direct path to the truth. “9/11 Truth” was all planned as part of the operation, seducing and corralling genuine truthers into their “controlled truth” that eliminates the pivotal truth: staged death and injury.
      When you start with the four faked plane crashes automatically you know:
      — the buildings came down by CD (not a second needs to be spent on the buildings if you prove four faked plane crashes)
      — 265 people didn’t die in plane crashes which then makes a lie of the “3,000” dead claim and also prompts the question, “If they faked the deaths of those 265 why not the deaths of the remaining 2,735”? They completely evacuated WTC-7 so why not completely evacuate rather than partially evacuate the twin towers and fake the deaths the way they faked the 265?
      Doesn’t work the other way when you start with the buildings.
      It is preposterous that the government, when so many agency staff, government officials and the hundreds of people who needed to be in the know about 9/11, would kill those people when they absolutely didn’t have to. They needed 3,000 dead for their terror story but they certainly didn’t need to kill them for real. The master propagandists? It’s an absurdity in the extreme. They also didn’t want the loved ones of 3,000 dead people rattling the gates. If 3,000 people really had been killed we’d see a lot more going on than we see with the likes of Bob McIlvaine, the four Jersey Widows and a few others. It’s laughable.

      And the evidence clearly shows that 9/11 is wall-to-wall controlled opposition in relation to 9/11 truth and that death and injury were staged.

      If you have a skerrick of evidence that anyone died or was injured on 9/11, Frances, please let me know what it is.

      1. Petra, your contention that the 3 towers were totally evacuated before the towers came down is totally unbelievable. The only reason I can think of for you to continually make that claim is in hopes of whitewashing the massive crimes of those involved. Sorry, common sense will prevail. Sell your misinformation somewhere else.

        1. The reason people believe that not everyone wasn’t evacuated is purely propaganda.
          9/11 was a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation and in such an operation you don’t kill people for real unless you want them killed.
          You cannot call 9/11 a psyop if you believe that 3,000 people were killed who weren’t wanted dead. Do you believe that 9/11 was a psyop?
          Do you know of anyone said to be killed in WTC-7? If they managed to evacuate everyone from that building why not from the twin towers too?
          We know that 265 people didn’t die in plane crashes so the figure of 3,000 is a lie right off the bat, isn’t it? Why should we believe a single thing they tell us in this story? A single thing?
          “False flag” is a propaganda term. 9/11 wasn’t a false flag it was a psyop, a psyop is where you make people believe things that happened didn’t happen. Everything about 9/11 was a psyop except for the actual collapses of and damage to buildings. Everything else was.
          If you have a skerrick of evidence for anyone’s death on 9/11 please give provide it. I am not selling misinformation I am providing evidence. So far, you have provided none. Isn’t it I, providing evidence, who has a greater right to accuse you of propagating false information that 2,735 people died in buildings than you have of accusing me of selling misinformation when I provide evidence to back my claim?
          Please use logic and common sense, Larry, and try to extract yourself from the propaganda they’ve drowned us in.

          1. Petra,
            9/11 was a terrorist attack carried out by rogue elements of U.S. government agencies along with rogue operatives from Israel and Saudi Arabia. If the attacks had not killed many in such a horrible manner, it would not have struck such fear into Americans that they would allow our government to pass the Patriot Act and go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Close to 18,000 were evacuated from the towers after the airliners hit but those on floors above the strikes perished from the fires, from jumping to their deaths, or from the final demolition.

          2. Your website claiming, what exactly, that they put dust in ther upper layers of the wtc for an attack 30 + years later(?), You, sir, are full of shit it’s laughable. The towers were empty…….You, sir, are an idiot. My Father was a first responder there that day. Many people died, thousands. So go check your idiot theory, and meanwhile proof read your website, cause your grammar and sp

            1. Petra Liverani is a troll.

        2. To put my first reply in a different way:
          You are helping the perps propagate the “official” truther story, Larry. You have been totally seduced by the “official” truther story (controlled demolition + 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured) just as non-truthers have been seduced by the “official” 19-terrorists-armed-with-boxcutters story.
          You must challenge all “stories” and look much more closely at the evidence as well as use reason, logic and common sense.
          When I first woke up to how the “truther” story has been totally controlled I had a visceral feeling of a being a dumb bull being yanked viciously this way and that by its nose-ring. Such a visceral feeling … but then I laughed. So clever.

          1. Petra,
            I’ve been involved in the 9/11 Truth Movement since the attacks happened. One of the truths I’ve learned is that anyone who uses the derogatory term “Truthers” is an agent of the coverup.

        3. Replying to your reply here because of width issues.
          You simply believe those figures? You think they cannot lie about figures. Please look at my exercise providing evidence that 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured were a lie. You need to look deeper, for goodness sake. You’re going to believe a table of figures. You think I don’t know about those figures and wasn’t seduced by them initially?
          We know no one died in planes, Larry. Right off the bat, the whole thing falls apart when you look at the fact that no one died in planes.
          To prove my case I provide evidence to show:
          — a propaganda campaign was implemented targeting truthers to maintain their belief in the 3,000 dead/6,000 injured lie
          — the four plane crashes were faked
          — the buildings came down by controlled demolition.
          I cannot post it in a comment. Please look at my evidence and then come back to me. If you are not willing to look I will not engage in any more discussion.

          1. Petra, as I’ve posted before, the only logical motive for you to lie about the number of people killed on 9/11 is to lessen the massive crimes committed by the perpetrators. Telling the truth does not require many words. Telling lies requires exponentially more.

  10. The main thing I have come away with ever after 9/11 when before I still had some trust in some official media – you are being lied to constantly and quite consistently by the MSM, but even among alternate media one has to constantly vigilant who one might be able to trust as some are engaged in – helped by interested sponsors – to divert attention from what is really behind the issues.

    As the song Working class hero states:

    Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV
    And you think you’re so clever and classless and free
    But you’re still fucking peasants as far as I can see

    I would add: presenting what they want you to believe is reality.

  11. sabotaging a debate and obfuscating the truth happen in many ways. piling up a mountain on top of mountain of “hard empirical facts or evidence” is a very effect way. imagine thousands of millions of pieces of brick without a blueprint… what can you possibly make out of them???? nothing. a proof can easily be countered by another piece of evidence, and so on. ask Foucault, one of the gods of postmodernist ideologues. he threw his hands up and said, “keep piling them up. that’s all we can do.” and Derrida, another god, said “no definite knowledge is possible” just because they can’t find it through their own “existential, experiential, phenomenological” methodologies…. only your power of imagination, putting things in context, coming up with a blueprint gets you to a meaningful understanding and gets you to closest to “the truth”.

    so what’s so wrong with the understanding that the muslims were mad enough about the zionist criminals nestled in new york to bomb the hell out of it” that everyone has been running around like chickens with head cut off looking for some other explanation????

    1. of course the zionists couldn’t leave the attack on their world colonization unanswered, so they leveraged it to justify some more hedious crimes around the world. no rocket science.

  12. Johny Conspiranoid Avatar
    Johny Conspiranoid

    Terrorists can do controled demolition too.

    1. you need extended access to the towers inner elevator shafts and other areas to do that. Guess who owned and controlled the security at the towers.

    2. And I guess they had unlimited access and ample time to do so with no security observing anything…remember that bridge for sale?

      1. Who owned the buildings? Who owned the security company with access to the entire buildings? Just ask those questions and that will give you a glance into the octopus known as 911.

  13. Only thing I have to say is there is not a lot of solid information on the truth. If someone can explain me the following with facts, then lets see it:

    1. How did Building 7 fall without being hit by a plane?
    2. How does Jet fuel cripple a building in free fall like that when the steel is designed to handle exponentially more?
    3. Why was insurance bought a few months before the attacks on the buildings?
    4. How does the pentagon part make sense on the plane with dimensions and it was under construction?
    5. How was it Iraq to start?
    6. Was there a training day for military jets on the same day?
    7. How did our military for all the Billions we spend, not see this what so ever? If a plane is of course, your know right away.

    1. How did Building 7 fall without being hit by a plane?

      “”Our study found that the fires in WTC 7 could not have caused the collapse recorded on video,” said Professor Hulsey. “We simulated every plausible scenario, and we found that the series of failures that NIST claimed triggered a progressive collapse of the entire structure could not have occurred. The only thing that could have brought this structure down in the manner observed on 9/11 is the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building below Floor 17.”

    2. Government’s explanation of the free fall collapse of Building 7 has been debunked by professionals, again …

  14. I have seen where other ‘radical’ websites have been castigated for ‘failing’ to cover the events of September 11, 2001. But really, there is no real reason to express such criticism, since that topic is technical and very difficult to cover adequately.

    I think I have a disagreement with Caitlin about how the public perceives those events, as I am of the opinion that the majority of Americans know, deep down, that the official narrative is completely bogus.

    One big problem is that, in my present opinion, the manner in which the ‘Twin Towers’ were destroyed involved a very novel application of nuclear energy. And the deed was done by the Deep State to facilitate a number of agendas that the public would have strongly resisted had it not occurred.

    But most people tacitly know this at this point, so there is not so much need to discuss it in every potential venue.

    1. The various methods pushed out for how the towers came down is simply distraction propaganda, Blues. Controlled demolition brought them down of whatever type. That is all we need to know, unless there is proof that radiation from the nuclear demolitions is harming people – and there isn’t. Exactly what brought the buildings down is simply distraction and ties up truthers engaging in discussion about something that is completely irrelevant and helps hide the simple truth of 9/11, that it was a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise pushed out as real.

      Did you read my explanation of what 9/11 was below? Please let me know what you think of my hypothesis.

  15. “… I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit”

    OK, so I certainly don’t claim to know exactly what happened but what I do claim to know 100% – and please correct me if you think I’m wrong, Caitlin – is what 9/11 was and I think knowing what kind of phenomenon it was is a very good start.

    What 9/11 wasn’t
    — The work of 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters with or without help from the US government
    — A false flag where 3,000 people were killed and 6,000 people were injured

    What 9/11 was
    A Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation (psyop) in the form of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise comprising numerous smaller exercises and drills pushed out as a real event.The people involved included government officials, media, police, firefighters, emergency response, crisis actors, corporations, and a number of others. The only major realities of the day were damage to and destruction of buildings. The four plane crashes were faked and death and injury were staged. To maintain the lie of the dead and injured lie a massive propaganda campaign, involving significant controlled opposition, has been targeted to truthers. This campaign is to stymie truthers from getting out the truth – non-truthers will simply not accept that the US government killed all those people … and in this the non-truthers are 100% correct. That would never be the government’s MO.

    Apart from the fact that all available evidence supports this hypothesis I actually don’t think any other type of explanation makes any sense. Obviously, it wasn’t 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters so as soon as we switch perps then the idea that the US government would callously allow people in the buildings to die makes absolutely no sense whatsoever when we consider they are so skilled at duping us (and really enjoy it), the vast number of people who would have to be involved and in the know, and the highly-problematic fallout from the loved ones of the 3,000 who died not to mention that of those injured when controlled demolition is so obvious. No other explanation makes any sense.

    1. I thought the point of any investigation was to use all the available evidence to arrive at the most likely conclusion for what happened, and then to discover who had the means motive and opportunity to make it happen.

      The 9/11 truth movement has NEVER done that. Most truthers, like David Chandler, still insist the planes were real, when the evidence in the damage evidence to both towers disproves that. The evidence I refer to is evidence David Chandler pretends doesn’t exist. Same with AE911T, and the rest of the leaders of the opposition. The evidence at the crime scene is critical. Had it been investigated we could have been spared the silliness the truth movement gave us.

      The first step in any investigation ought to be the scene of the crime. The next step ought to be to use what is learned from that evidence to arrive at the most likely explanation for it. But this is evidence the truth movement won’t touch. I don’t blame Caitlin for throwing up her hands in despair when it comes to 9/11 Truth, and to assume that anyone who thinks they know what happened is fulla shit – because that was the whole point.


      1. Steve, please tell me if you think my claim of what 9/11 was is correct and if you doubt that claim please tell me why.

        “The first step in any investigation ought to be the scene of the crime.”

        I disagree. Whatever evidence you have from any source should be put together to form the jigsaw puzzle of what the event was. If there is sufficient evidence that supports, say, Hypothesis A, zero that contradicts it and no other hypotheses that can be supported by that evidence then we go with Hypothesis A. When we understand the nature of the event, it makes it so much easier to decide where to start in legal proceedings, no?

        1. Petra,

          Collecting all the available evidence from the crime scene is the first step in formulating a theory as to how a crime was committed. The crime scene vastly limits the possibilities of the series of events that occurred which resulted in the evidence as found.

          If Hypothesis A cannot account for the physical evidence, then Hypothesis A can be taken off the table. If Colonel Mustard was found stabbed to death in the drawing room, it is safe to say the rope was not the murder weapon.

          I understand why this evidence is avoided though, because it very quickly eliminates most of the truth movement’s hypotheses.

      2. Just to add, Steve, “scene of the crime” only applies to 9/11 in a limited way. 9/11 was an operatic staged event on a grand scale involving a number of threads and absolutely masses and masses of propaganda. “Scene of the crime” is not the way to approach 9/11. The way to approach 9/11 is to separate reality from propaganda. That’s the approach.

        1. I use that term to refer to the impact holes at all four sites. It’s just evidence.

          If the truth movement was genuine then there should be no evidence off the table. If my conclusions for this evidence are wrong then there is a better explanation for it, but to continue to ignore it will only ensure truthers will never get anywhere near the truth. Do you disagree that to lead truthers away from the truth was always the goal of the controlled movement?

          If you do, then surely you understand that the controlled truthers will be forced to ignore evidence that can lead to the truth. Why is the crime scene so taboo?

      3. 9/11 was an Emperor’s New Clothes affair, the visual recording of which has gone down for posterity and is available for truthers to go nuts with – the visual recording provides evidence while the scene of the crime currently provides very little to none, except perhaps the phony memorials. What on earth are you talking about Steve?

        Steel frame skyscrapers do not come down by fire, the NIST report is easily provable nonsense and we can see visually in the footage that controlled demolition (of whatever type) is what brought the buildings down and we can also see that the planes are faked. It is these artefacts available on the internet that we use to prove what 9/11 is, not going to the scene of the crime.

        Relevant artefacts from wherever are the evidence, Steve, they don’t need to be at the scene of the crime which is, effectively, long gone.

        Please tell me where the available evidence does not fit my hypothesis, Steve.

        1. “9/11 was an Emperor’s New Clothes affair, the visual recording of which has gone down for posterity and is available for truthers to go nuts with – the visual recording provides evidence while the scene of the crime currently provides very little to none, except perhaps the phony memorials. What on earth are you talking about Steve?”

          An analysis of the damage evidence to both towers, to the Pentagon, and to that field in Shanksville, that’s what. Does your analysis include the evidence of the impact of small projectiles at at least three of the four impact sites?

          1. According to your post here:

            You completely ignore the evidence of the impact holes. Big step to skip, Petra!

            1. Steve, Have you posted your theory about how the alleged aircraft holes were made? If so, I haven’t seen it. My theory is that the holes were made by 767 drones which were specially modified to penetrate the dense steel mesh on the exterior of the towers. These drones may have had explosive charges in the nose and wing leading edges. The drones may have been modified from 767 refueling tankers in order to hold more fuel than a normal airliner.

      4. Steve, I think your obsession with the holes is a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. We don’t have to know everything about the event, do we? We don’t have to know exactly what, who, when, how re the building collapses, do we? And, in fact, you don’t know but the point is it doesn’t matter. We know CD brought the buildings down and that is all we need to know at this point in time.

        Just because you think you know what created the holes (and you may well be right) doesn’t mean that this seeming fact needs to be acknowledged and studied at this point in time. We know CD and we know fake plane crashes – whether the holes were caused by CD alone or in combination with missiles or by missiles alone is not particularly relevant in the scheme of things just as knowing how, when and what re the explosives bringing the buildings down is not particularly relevant.

        You need to get a perspective on 9/11. It’s the nature of the phenomenon that is the most important. When we get the nature then we know that the primary culprits are Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. All of it was under their orders. It’s as simple as that.

        1. “Steve, I think your obsession with the holes is a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. ”


          I’m amazed that anyone would so easily disregard clues that can explain how it was done. It is not an obsession to focus on the impact holes. Someone has to do it. I gather your explanation doesn’t include the almost identical laterally-bent steel columns visible in the impact holes of both columns?


          1. Er – the impact holes of both towers, that is –

      5. “Does your analysis include the evidence of the impact of small projectiles at at least three of the four impact sites?”

        Absolutely not, just as I have no clue exactly how they brought the buildings down – as you don’t. I’m not sure why you think projectile information is important when there are vast gaps of knowledge in all kinds of things. Why are the projectile holes more important than who did and how the demolitions were done? There are vast gaps of knowledge but we don’t need that knowledge to proceed in a case against the perps. Let them provide the knowledge when they’re taken to court.

        What we have is the information to say to Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld:

        “You stand accused of authorising a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation on US citizens and, in fact, all global citizens. While you authorised media and other people including yourselves to tell and show a false story of 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters doing X, Y and Z, resulting in the deaths of 3,000 and injury to 6,000, in fact, this didn’t happen at all. What happened was you authorised the demolition of three buildings by controlled demolition and deliberately caused damage to others in addition to the fake story. In these efforts, you employed X, Y and Z people.”

        We have far more than sufficient information to do that and getting bogged down in projectiles is counterproductive distraction.

        1. “Absolutely not, just as I have no clue exactly how they brought the buildings down – as you don’t”

          Speak for yourself. There are very few explanations that can account for the evidence, both for how the holes in the towers were cut, and for how they were demolished. Perhaps you can use the evidence to support your conclusions? Or not?

      6. From you Steve, lower, but posting response here because of width issues:

        “According to your post here:

        You completely ignore the evidence of the impact holes. Big step to skip,”

        Step? To where Steve? Where does that step take me any more than the step of working out on what floors explosives were laid and where on those floors they were laid in the twin towers and Building 7? All I care about proving is faked plane crashes and controlled demolition. That is all. In fact, faked plane crashes all by themselves prove controlled demolition.

        My aim is always to present evidence that meets two criteria:
        —— It has significance
        —— it cannot be argued with

        The “magic dust” you introduced me to is fabulous information that explains the “toxic dust” propaganda that puzzled me as well as its other “magical” functions. I see no special significance in what exactly caused the holes and also see there is scope for debate reducing interest even further. Larry, who responded to your comment lower down, has his “theory” about what caused those holes. Perhaps if you get into discussion with him you will disagree and that discussion will go on for awhile. Controlled opposition are very good at producing endless debate and discussion, something I try to avoid as much as possible. Craig McKee goes nuts about David Chandler and I’m like, “Why on earth do bother wasting time arguing with someone who’s controlled opposition, that is crazy?”

        I simply do not understand why you think what produced the holes is so significant. I really don’t. The reason I did my 10-point Occam’s Razor exercises was that I felt 10 points was sufficient to prove my case. There’s so many more points that I could give but 10 is enough, especially when, of course, the other side cannot produce a single point to prove theirs. There are so very many points about the fakery of the planes, how the holes was produced is a relatively insignificant one among the very many … and Steve … it is one that can be argued about easily and I have no interest in that.

        Can I make myself any clearer, Steve? I am not interested in the holes and I think I give perfectly good reasons for not being so. You, of course, are most welcome to pursue that interest. If you produce a explanation that is bulletproof and no one dares argue with it then I might be a little interested. Until then, no.

        1. Petra,

          I’m done with crashing Caitlin’s party. You’re welcome at my place to continue this discussion.


    2. It made sense to sacrifice plenty of people to get the public aroused enough to enter WWll to get the Japanese to attack. It backfired in Korea since the public was sick from/of war.

      It worked on a tiny scale with a lot of hype and no pics or anything else to support the lie of Vietnam.

      But taking down the towers not only got the entire nation going. Nearly everyone I knew ate that shit up like it was cobbler. When I pointed out the obvious I was roundly attacked.

      1. Steve, David Chandler is not a truther, he is controlled opposition whose purpose along with all the other truther-targeted propaganda is to suppress the truth of death and injury being staged. If you disagree with this proposition please tell me why.

        I mean, if that is not the purpose of the fake “9/11 truth movement” what the hell is its purpose?

        1. Petra,

          You know I don’t disagree.

          Because the cover up is at least as important as the event, then ALL the leaders of the opposition should be considered suspect as controlling the narrative. Of course that includes David Chandler.

          Over the years I have been in contact with most of the leaders of the opposition and one thing they have in common is that they will not address the damage evidence at the scene of the crime. The “impact” holes at all four sites contain clues that ought to be critically important to an authentic truth movement. How can almost 20 years have passed without any serious discussion of this evidence? The only rational reason for it is that it explains what happened. The truth, as it were. Something Caitlin bemoans that will never be attained, about which she may be right, but only if she continues to regurgitate the same tired old “9/11 Truth”, most of which has been discredited for close to a decade.

          The only person I can be sure of is me. I know I’m not on anyone’s payroll, and although my conclusions may not be correct, they at least address all the evidence. I started the 9/11 Crash Test as an idea that a genuine peace movement should have been interested in. After 7 years it is still treated as if it doesn’t exist by Intrepid Truthers like Richard Gage, David Chandler, Steven Jones, and “fill-in-the-blank-for-9/11-truth”. Of course it is ignored. I am not under the truth movement’s control.
          The 9/11 Crash Test project could have eliminated the “no planes” contention within the movement. By using the scientific method that David Chandler talks about, we could give demonstrate to the world that the truth movement can work together to solve problems and at the same time, give the mainstream media a spectacle that would be impossible to ignore. A genuine truth movement would have fallen all over itself to fund the project. AE911T can pay for it out of pocket, but doing so would put them out of a job.

          I identify disingenuous truthers by examining the results of their activism. Do they reinforce the status quo and defer to authority? Do they wield their credentials like a bludgeon? Do their conclusions include all the available evidence? None of the truthers I know will discuss
          the clues that CAN explain how it was done, and by extension, who dunnit.

          Caitlin was right at least about this much; there could be a much more honest discussion about this stuff. Show me someone who is willing to discuss the impact holes, and I’ll show you a genuine truth seeker.


      2. Aha! But no, the evidence shows that Pearl Harbour was also a staged attack and they let this slip in the way they present their evidence as they always do when they’re hoaxing us.

        See also Point 3 that outlines similar unbelievable “miracle” survivor stories we are told at Pearl Harbour, 9/11 and other staged events.

        JB, regardless of whether Pearl Harbour was a genuine “false flag” or a staged event, the point is that all the available evidence supports the hypothesis I present for 9/11 and none contradicts it. Evidence rules!

        “False flag” is a propaganda term designed to make people think that the power elite are so evil that they will kill their own people for their nefarious agendas – it suits them for us to think of them as evil, it’s more intimidating – of course, they are evil but they’re not so stupid as to kill people when they have no desire to. Wouldn’t the morale of the soldiers be so much better going into war knowing that their fellow soldiers weren’t actually killed and isn’t it better to have all those soldiers active rather than dead? Of course, not all soldiers would probably be in on it as that might mean too many “loose lips” but no doubt it was kind of put out there in a discreet way.

        In fact, they do kill their own people by sending soldiers off to war and in other ways but the evidence shows they didn’t do it in the case of Pearl Harbour and 9/11 – simply because they don’t have to and it doesn’t suit them to actually kill those people. And they luuurve to dupe us. They really do. And my goodness are we easy to dupe. Even though I’m bleating my head off and explaining 9/11 in a way that makes perfect sense and providing the evidence how many people are catching on? It’s simply incredible.

        When you switch from the 19-terrorists-armed-with-boxcutters story you need to make a complete switch. Nothing about that story relates to reality. Nothing at all. Not a single skerrick of that story applies to what really happened. Of course, the buildings came down but that’s not story – that’s obvious reality.

    3. Petra, I’m still considering what was said by them. I never realized they were a tool and not an organization to apply facts to what happened. I now have a completely different view of them and it’s not a good one.

      1. You mean A&E for 9/11 Truth? If so, I’m glad you’re seeing the light on them. I mean, they do an absolutely fabulous job of explaining the controlled demolition and I love their two songs, they’re works of art. The only thing I can find that’s false in what they say about the demolitions is the molten metal so I’ll be curious to see how the “molten metal” plays out legally.

    4. Somebody who knows something 100% sure doesn’t need any help from me … other folks may want to take a glance at this web page:

      It will give one a sense of the scope and mastery of the alleged hoax. This is just one (amateurish) web page. Nonetheless, we get photos and (made up?) names of 343 dudes. That’s a lot of work …

      The page is from the official NY Fire Department site. It’s amazing they’ve been on board with the hoax for nearly 20 years but there you go. And probably was not easy to get the rank and file on board either. Then again, maybe they really believe that these guys were comrades and lost their lives that day. But that would be too weird, wouldn’t it?
      Anyway, these “perps” are damn good. Do we stand a chance?

      1. Big News! Last July the The Franklin Square, New York and Munson Fire District Board of Commissioners became the first fire department to pass a resolution claiming the existence of “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.”

        Certain folks on this thread may pooh pooh the fire fighters but these guys are undeterred by criticism and vow to get more fire departments on board.

  16. Caitlin wrote,
    “Secondly, even if there were some way to show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11, the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away. ”

    Any media outlet not calling BS on 9/11 and the war on terror must be considered part of the cover up. This includes the so called alternative media.

    In 2012 the 9/11 Crash Test Project was introduced as what should have been just one of many ideas that could unite the truth movement under one banner.  What happened next was instead of embracing 9/11 Crash Test (or offering a better idea) the leaders of the opposition ignored it, or attacked me personally. Seven years later nothing has changed. 

    I am certain it is not by accident that none of the leaders have offered any olive branches to the disparate Truther factions (and certainly not to me); no new ideas to find common ground and end the impasse and inertia of the 9/11 Truth Movement; no new “9/11 Crash Test” type ideas to prove (or disprove) their hypotheses; nothing.  I find it hard to believe bona fide truth-seekers are satisfied with this stalemate and I suspect they left the movement in disgust years ago, and I don’t blame them.  But I do think that was the whole point of the 9/11 Truth Movement; to discourage a genuine effort to expose the truth by leading the rank and file away from it, and in the process to discredit Truthers as anti-Semitic loons. 

    Despite the years that fact that the world has moved on; on to ISIS, Syria, the Wall, the election and one mass-shooting after another; someone needs to chronicle the events that brought us to where we are today. 

    Steve De’ak

  17. Looking at this comment thread, I think, proves Caitlin’s point. So much disinformation has been sown that rational discussion of the 9/11 attacks is almost impossible. At least David Chandler, who has actually done excellent scientific analysis of the collapse of all three WTC towers, was able to put in a relevant post. Most of the rest of the comments here are going ’round and ’round, rehashing stuff that is often irrelevant. Many of the commenters do not seem to have even read Caitlin’s article.

    1. After almost two decades when will the penny drop that the popular truth movement is and always has been part of the cover up? Why is it that truthers never consider that the truth movement is an opposition group, and as such, the leaders (such as David Chandler) deserve more scrutiny as possibly controlling the opposition?

      Caitlin is missing the point. She is taking the bait. The truth movement was deployed to discourage, confuse and lead truthers away from the truth. David Chandler included.

      1. Steve, Your false claim that the twin towers were cleared out and gutted when they were demolished on 9/11 places you directly in the class of deceivers whom you deride. The photo of the twin towers you use to back up your mendacity shows a construction crane on top of one of the towers. This indicates the photo was taken during the construction of the towers in the late 1960s and not on 9/11, 2001. David Chandler is an honest truth-teller. You are in the opposite category.

        1. Larry,

          If my conclusions are wrong then there is a better explanation for the evidence that leads me there. The photo you refer to is just one clue, and I am well aware it was captured during construction. I never said otherwise. The deceivers are the ones who have led the 9/11 truth movement in circles for the last decade and a half. I am not a leader of the ironically named movement by any means. Unlike the leaders, I let the evidence lead where it will. Unlike the followers, I do my own thinking.

          If David Chandler was honest, he would address all the evidence. He would explain how it doesn’t fit my conclusions, and better fits his. David doesn’t do that. You don’t do that. Why is that?


          Steve De’ak

  18. 9/11 was not merely an event 18+ years ago. It was a turning point…a defining moment used to leverage the US into a more aggressive foreign policy and ratchet down traditional expectations of freedom and civil rights at home. As such it is not a topic that can be simply set aside. The event, including the coverup, is a psyop that lies at the foundation of the empire. As such the official myth is heavily defended by the establishment and any dissent is labeled as crazy talk.

    I appreciate that you have not simply swallowed the official story, but when you say, “I don’t know exactly what happened on the eleventh of September 2001, and I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit,” you take it too far. The scientific wing of the 9/11 Truth Movement has established beyond doubt that the buildings were brought down with pre-planted explosives. This implies foreknowledge and insider involvement. The hijackings and plane crashes were not “surprise attacks.” The operation was coordinated on many levels. It is true that there are elements in the 9/11 Truth movement who are, as you put it, “fulla shit,” but it is also true that there is a solid scientific core of knowledge about the event that constrains the possibilities. This knowledge lays the foundation for our understanding of the nature of the event.

    –David Chandler, Coordinator, Scientists for 9/11 Truth,

    1. It is true that there are elements in the 9/11 Truth movement who are, as you put it, “fulla shit,”

      Do tell, David!


    2. So David, what is your opinion on death and injury? I have presented 10 points that favour death and injury as being staged and I’ve issued a challenge for anyone to present 10 points that favour death and injury as being real. No one has responded to this challenge, or even come up with a single point, despite the rules allowing the responder to choose their own judge to validate their 10 points. How can that be if death and injury really happened?

      The challenge also applies for the faked plane crashes … with an identical lack of response.

      Why is it that no one in Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth states that none of the alleged flights crashed when many other truthers do recognise this simple fact?
      One can only infer that AE is a “controlled opposition” group whose purpose is to focus truthers on controlled demolition to divert them from the planes whose fakery automatically means that the alleged 265 passengers did not die which then prompts one to ask well, “Whatever they did to fake the deaths of those 265 passengers could they not also have done for the remaining 2735?” Couldn’t the perps have organised it so that all the people in the buildings (we know there weren’t that many) were evacuated rather than only partly. Obviously, as the collapses were controlled they could organise that, couldn’t they? They could organise for the evacuations to be full rather than partial. And we’d really have to wonder why they wouldn’t do it that way because there’d be a lot more people than “loved ones”, Bob McIlvaine and the Jersey Widows squawking, wouldn’t there? Plus it’s not the MO is it, David? 9/11 was a psyop and in psyops you only kill people when you want to – way too many media, police, etc to even dream of killing people.

      And they’re so skilled at duping us and they love it, don’t they, David? They love duping us. What fun they would have had planning the propaganda strategy to completely lead the truthers down the garden path with their PNAC document, Operation Northwoods, the “targeting” of the people in the buildings wanted rid of, the dancing Israelis and the art students, the janitor William Rodriguez rescuing hundreds, Richard Grove and on and on. Totally swallowed it all myself. Totally. But then I woke up – the death and injury shell was starting to crack and it was actually watching an autoplay YouTube video on Rodriguez when the penny dropped. How could someone providing information against the government (his experiencing of explosions in the basement indicating controlled demolition) be receiving awards for bravery? That was when the penny dropped.

      The propaganda targeted at the truthers is evidence of itself that death and injury were staged, isn’t it? Why would Mossad agents be dancing around to be caught on camera? That makes absolutely no sense. So why are we given this little show? It’s all part of the “Israeli distraction campaign” and it also makes truthers find it more plausible that “outsiders” were responsible for the demolition – double-function propaganda! Yes, when it’s outsiders it seems more plausible than US citizens themselves being responsible for the dastardly deed. I know this was the propaganda intention because that’s how I interpreted the “Dancing Israelis”. But then I woke up.

      But other people are so very, very slow. Other people are so emotionally invested in those poor dead people … and that is, of course, what the power elite rely on, isn’t it, David? They rely on emotional investment in the story and in the taboos around death. People can’t even say die anymore, can they, it’s “pass” or “passed away”. And the power elite exploit those taboos and emotional investment in the story for all they’re worth.

    3. Yeah but see how even you aren’t claiming to know exactly what happened? You don’t claim to know exactly who planted explosives or exactly how they orchestrated it; you stick with the evidence you have and don’t claim to have evidence you don’t have. If people were more forthright about what ISN’T known, especially those promoting the establishment narrative (mainly who I was referring to), we could have much more honest conversations about this thing. But people aren’t. I’ve received many comments objecting to my obvious and undeniable statement that nobody knows with absolute certainty exactly what happened on 9/11.

      1. Sure, Caitlin, but isn’t understanding the nature of the event a massive plus in deciding on the best approach. There’s a massive difference between the three following types of event:

        — Work of 19 terrorists
        — False flag where 3,000 people were killed and 6,000 were injured
        — Complete psyop (in the form of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise) where death and injury were staged

        Does it really matter who laid the explosives? It was all obviously under the auspices of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush – no one laid explosives without them knowing about them, did they? They are responsible in the first instance. But you can see how very many people were involved – almost too many to hold accountable, no? It’s a little bit like Nazi Germany except there horrific killing really did happen while in 9/11 it was all staged. Little Johnny was in on it, of course. Thousands of people know about 9/11, that’s for sure.

  19. Hi Caitlin,

    Thank you for your article. I think the best way to stop the wars is by exposing the lies that started them.

    Some taboo truths to consider:

    How they cut the holes in the twin towers:

    How they destroyed the twin towers:

    How they faked the videos:

    Thanks again,

    Steve De’ak

  20. I agree with you Caitlin about 9/11 focusing. I get the feeling that I’ll agree with you about everything. We’ll see.I’m glad I’m on your side, that’s for sure.

    1. 9/11 was breathlessly reported by our mass media as “changing everything” but in reality it changed nothing. However “9/11 Truth (and by that I mean an honest investigation of all the available evidence), does indeed change everything. It eventually leads to a real understanding of the genuine machinations of power and how they affect all of our lives all the time.

      I believe the truth about what happened on September 11, 2001 will eventually topple the ruling classes that have wreaked such mayhem on all life on this planet for so many thousands of years, but before this can occur we as a species must evolve out of the vise-grip of our masters’ mind-control systems.

      I suspect that the reason so many people are giving up on the truth, is because doing so is easier than seeing the world as it is.

  21. One “clear, undeniable argument” about what might have happened on 9/11 was silenced by censorship imposed as the Doomed Towers were being built, a bit more than three decades before the atrocity itself.

    Since then, old age has silenced most of us who might remember that while the Towers were under construction, there were strong rumors of bribed inspectors, woefully substandard materials and gargantuan under-the-table payoffs.

    While I’ve no idea how widespread these rumors might have been, I do know they were well known to the local Working Press, of which I was then a part.

    I also know no publisher — not even at the then-deservedly legendary (pre-Murdoch) “Village Voice” — would allow their reporters to touch the story.

    That sort of graft is endemic to the NYC construction industry, where fully half of any construction budget is set aside for bribes and pay-offs.

    Hence, citing civic-mindedness, the publishers claimed to fear such reporting would irresponsibly nurture the widespread Manhattanite hatred of the project for its dreadful aesthetics, specifically its ruination of the traditional Manhattan skyline – another story since flushed down the Memory Hole.

    From today’s perspective it’s obvious the Towers were always sacrosanct, exempt from critical coverage because they were to symbolize the looming global triumph of that brand of ecogenocidal Nazism euphemized as “Neoliberalism” — though I doubt any of us with press cards had sufficient foresight at the time (c.1970, after which I left the City), to comprehend what Evil was afoot.

    That said, “substandard materials” would certainly explain not only why the two towers collapsed so quickly, but why — by zero-tolerance decree — the debris was hauled away without forensic or engineering analysis.

    As to the specifics of WTC Building Seven, I know very little – certainly not enough to discuss it knowledgeably. Hence I don’t mention it all. Nor have I troubled myself to investigate.

    In any case, I too almost never write about 9/11 for the same reason I almost never write about the USian fights for healthcare-as-a-human-right and so-called “net neutrality”: the fact that without revolution, each are lost causes.

    And without the requisite ideological instruction, discipline and protection provided by the might of the Soviet Union — which despite its many flaws was nevertheless the only force on this planet that sometimes truly stood for the 99 Percent — no such change will ever again be allowed.

    Indeed, I fear our Masters — whose ultimate purpose is to turn all human society into one vast antebellum-type slave plantation policed by the irresistible surveillance technology that already guarantees their omnipotence — will never be overthrown save by the climate crisis they foolishly imagine they can manage to their own eternal advantage.

    Which makes me ever-more-thankful for my age – 80 at my next birthday – and the probability I won’t live long enough to experience the indescribable horrors of the global Auschwitz our mercilessly sadistic Overlords are so relentlessly building.

    1. The towers collapsed by controlled demolition and any weaknesses prior to demolition are not really relevant. According to Steve De’ak a lot of stuff, as is typical prior to demolitions, was removed from the towers and dust was planted in the towers to explode out of the towers as they came down. This “magic dust” performed a number of functions:

      ——to make the collapses more spectacular
      ——to make controlled demolition less obvious
      ——to make WTC look like a warzone, enhancing the sense of enormity and terror of the event
      ——to provide distraction in the form of Judy Woods’, “Where did the towers go?”, nonsense
      ——to allow crisis actors to be “interviewed” on a day other than 9/11 all covered in dust so that they more convincingly match up with the WTC-covered-in-dust scene.
      ——to provide distraction and to entrench the sense of evilness of the perpetrators making real death and injury more plausible in the alleged deaths of first responders and others due to illness caused by the toxic dust.

      Read his fascinating article here:

      1. Even right after it happened there were rumors that the “workmen” supposedly removing asbestos were actually wiring the buildings with the explosives that brought them down. I’m not saying the Israeili’s who worked there knew of the plot but they were warned to not go to work. Only 2 didn’t get the message.

        The supposed video crew knew exactly what had happened and were cheering at how well it all came off.

        1. The Israelis being warned is just propaganda, JB. The essential truths of 9/11 are pretty simple so what they need to do to hide these simple truths and make 9/11 seem more complicated and difficult to work out is push out loads of distraction propaganda, one of them being the “Israeli distraction campaign”. In some ways I bought the Israeli distraction and in other ways I didn’t. When people say “Israel did it,” I think how absurd. It was on US soil and obviously under the auspices of the US government. Anything Israel did was under that auspices so the most I ever thought about Israelis was that they were hired – of course, their political influence in the event is probably huge – but in terms of actual responsibility it has to be primarily with the US government, at least, in the first instance.

      2. I normally decline from debating 9/11 topics because I believe most of the relevant facts about this atrocity — which two long-time friends and I witnessed on live television – are so highly classified, they’ll remain forever unknown.

        Unless, as in the Soviet Revolution or the defeat of the German Third Reich, government archives become the property of the victors.

        Hence, apart from what we saw broadcast live from Lower Manhattan that awful day, we can only speculate on what might have happened.

        We had arisen unusually early to meet at around 4:30 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time for the opening of forest-grouse season a couple of hours later.

        Needless to say, we did no bird hunting that day. But each of us – a senior Teamster business agent, his labor-writer wife and I a retired editor-in-chief — knew as soon as we saw the second airliner dive like some latter-day kamikaze into the second tower that we were watching a deliberate atrocity that could easily be manipulated into a 21st Century equivalent of the Reichstag Fire.

        As indeed it has been.

        To which I must add that most people who have not lived in the so-called “United” States – similar to the USian Moronic Majority that was born, raised and dumbed-down to reliable submissiveness here (probably 90 percent of the total U.S. population) – cannot grasp how banana-republic corrupt this nation and its global empire truly are.

        Nor – thanks to the Josef Goebbels malignancy of its propaganda — are they psychologically able to comprehend the murderous omnipotence of its Ruling Class.

        Five names should suffice to make my point: John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Robert Francis Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Karen Silkwood and Jeffrey Epstein.

        Thus I find it very easy to believe – assuming the original rumors of substandard materials were true – that our Evil Masters would demolish Building Seven merely as a part of the cover-up that included prohibiting analysis of any WTC debris.

        To me it is therefore far more plausible the post-impact events in question were intended to protect the builders, investors and owners from the literally billions of dollars in liabilities that would logically follow any substandard-materials disclosures.

        Mind you I don’t claim this is what happened; I offer it only as an obvious avenue of inquiry, all the more so given Organized Crime’s domination of the NYC construction industry.

        As a former investigative reporter, I‘d have voiced the same suspicion – without the slightest fear of being belittled as a “conspiracy theorist” – were I part of an editorial conference discussing how the atrocity should best be covered.

        While I am certainly no demolitions expert, I nevertheless know enough as a military veteran that I find it impossible to believe the entire WTC complex could have been rigged with explosives without someone noticing.

        This is especially true given the legendary attentiveness of born New Yorkers. Of necessity, we heed what obtains in our surroundings with much the same vigilance invading troops might scrutinize a Vietcong jungle.

        But to rig Building Seven after it was damaged, evacuated and burning would have been relatively easy – particularly since by then all civilians had fled or been forcibly evacuated from the area.

        And knowing there is no limit to how far our Masters will go to preserve their wealth and power – that here in today’s “United” States it’s dictatorial rule by greed, money and malevolent deception (and never again the quasi-democratic rule by law that was irremediably slain by the murder of President Kennedy) – I believe the “substandard materials” hypothesis should be given serious consideration.

        Per Occam’s Razor, it could far more plausibly answer the cause-of-collapse questions as Capitalist avarice in action – without discounting the subsequent manipulations of fact and opinion as examples of the vindictively clandestine statecraft that has defined this slavemaster-realm since its founding.

        Having now written for this comment thread more than I had ever previously written on this hopelessly opaque topic – this to express my general agreement with Ms. Johnstone that it is pointless to pursue it – I trust I shall not have to respond further to this thread.

        For the one thing I as a not-entirely retired USian journalist know with absolute certainty is that even were some proverbial “smoking gun” to be exposed, the perpetrators would remain untouchable: that’s the post-22-November-1963 reality no amount of investigative reporting – or any up-welling of protest – can ever change.

        Such is the system by which we-the-people of our Mother Earth are (again) oppressed, just as we have been throughout 99.9 percent of our approximate 6,000 years of patriarchal history: now by a diabolical cabal of Masters so technologically superior they and their aristocratic descendants will tyrannize us forever – that is, until the end of our species’ reign as this planet’s apex predator.

  22. Thanks for sharing your wisdom and for shining the light of truth on the American empire’s unrelenting false narratives!
    In 1846, pro-slavery President Polk, in affort to expand the slave bloc and American territory, sent troops led by Zachary Taylor across the southern border, the Nueces River at that, into Mexico to provoke an attack on his force by Mexican villagers. This provoked attack,which occurred at the present site of Brownsville, was used as the pretext for the Mexican-American War. A young freshman Congressman from Illinois, named Abraham Lincoln, did not believe Taylor’s account that the attack was unprovoked and occurred on American soil, and, ubsequently, declared the war as being illegitimate, thusly, Lincoln became America’s first “conspiracy theorist”. We are in good company!

  23. Journalist’s have to pick their niche and hammer on it. All your good reasons for focusing elsewhere than 9/11 – on the here and now and on topics that haven’t been locked in – make sense. I think also if you chose to take on the 9/11 battle, it’d impact your credibility and your relative stature as a journalist attacking the mainstream narrative construction machine so brilliantly. Same with writing on various genuine conspiracies (the globalists, the role of a loose organization/coordination of demented sociopaths working to establish world wide corporate sovereignty at the expense of genuine national sovereignty – and be damned its consequences for the people). Same with highlighting the workings of Jewish power (Corbyn was hammered hard by it – the Jewish power to silence criticism of Jewish power —> Gilad Atzmon’s definition.). All these would be fights where a journalist could get pummelled mercilessly and effectively marginalized. (Some how Ron Unz gets away with it but maybe that’s because he CAN get away with it. He’d be far more difficult to destroy and he’d be financially capable of making it a narrative onto itself and so ignoring him seems to be a deliberate choice given all he’s so provocatively written).

    But on the 9/11 Official Conspiracy Theory there is one other who hammers that narrative into dust but not nearly so succinctly as Corbett and with a far deeper understanding into the larger picture of which 9/11 is but a part. John McMurtry’s “The Moral Decoding of 9-11: Beyond the U.S. Criminal State” is the read. It’s what has to be reckoned with in understanding what 9-11 was, from whence it came and where it aims to go. This demented cabal is informed by a philosophy which holds that the ends justify the means and that it is a moral obligation to achieve those ends. We can see the fruits of this worldview in every sovereign state that has been destroyed and of those currently being targeted for destruction.

    I take inspiration from your brilliant, creative, imaginative approaches to exposing and working to destroy power’s attempts at narrative control. You’ve provided your readers with tools to put to work if they so wish, something no other journalist seems to do and it’s immensely valuable.

    Why do we hear the many voices of professionals related to building construction and destruction listed below (you can hear them all on my webpage on the collapse of WTC-7) while we do not hear the voice of a single person related to aircraft accident investigation?

    Tom Sullivan – Explosives Loader
    Casey Pfeiffer – Structural Engineer
    Ron Brookman – Structural Engineer
    Alfred Lopez – Structural Engineer
    Steven Dusterwald – Structural Engineer
    Leroy Hulsey – Professor, Civil Engineering
    David Topete – Civil and Structural Engineer
    Kamal Obeid – Civil and Structural Engineer
    Richard Gage – Architect
    Robert McCoy – Architect
    Les Young – Architect
    Dan Barnum – Architect
    Stephen Barasch – Architect
    Joel Miller – Architect
    Kathy McGrade – Metallurgical Engineer
    Scott Grainger – Fire Protection Engineer
    Ed Munyak – Fire Protection Engineer
    Niels Harrit – Chemist
    Jerry Lobdill – Chemical Engineer and Physicist
    Mark Basile – Chemical Engineer
    Tony Szamboti – Mechanical Engineer
    Richard Humenn – Chief Electrical Design Engineer
    Lt Col Robert Bowman – Aeronautical and Nuclear Engineer
    Robert Podolski – Physicist and Engineer
    Steven Jones – Physicist
    Jeff Farrer – Physicist

    1. There was no aircraft accident investigation. I know – such is ‘mandatory.’ But it did not happen. Nor was the debris examined. Rather it was taken away under secrecy. The horror of 9-11 is that a totally ridiculous and unsubstantiated tale was said to be official wisdom. It may have been official – but the FBI never found Osama bin Laden involved. Afghanistan was invaded to find a 6’4″ man requiring daily dialysis to survive. French stories about his death Dec 21,2001 make much more sense.
      We had perpetrators identified when the scene was not examined and passengers were burnt past recognition. That’s almost as good as the tales about cellphone calls from passengers in a time when such were not available.

      1. Hi John, I’m not talking about an official aircraft accident investigator, simply someone who does that job, just like the professionals I list above – they are simply speaking as individuals. Why has no accident aircraft investigator or similar professional come out? A professional doesn’t necessarily have to be in situ to examine the evidence, they can make judgements from the evidence provided through the media as the buildings professionals have done.

        1. Petra, there is an individual whose profession was a former FAA aircraft investigator who speaks about 911 His name is Rodney Stich. His book is Unfriendly Skies.

          1. So Rodney was a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. Hmmm. Is he just controlled opposition?

            Does he say the evidence shows that all the plane crashes were faked because, if not, then he is obviously controlled opposition.

            I should specify: where are people in aircraft investigation who say specifically that the evidence shows there were no plane crashes?

            1. I wrote “former” FAA aircraft accident investigator because Rodney Stich was fired by the FAA as a whistleblower although long before 911. To my knowledge Stich was not employed in Intelligence. BTW, I’m not keen on your “no one died on 911” analysis. Please don’t respond to try to convince me, i see your writings all over this page. That’s just my 2 cents.

          2. Just went to his website. He’s obviously controlled opposition. This is one of the headings (chortle):

            Mafiosi Mole in Al Qaeda Cell Providing Advance Information on Series of Planned al Qaeda Attacks That Could Have Prevented 9/11

          3. I know you’ve asked me not to respond but I am anyway, Coll. The MO of controlled opposition is to “fire” people and make them look like whistleblowers and then these people come out and say small amounts of truth but hide more important parts. Nifty technique, no? It’s easy to fake fire people and make them look like whistleblowers. You need to go a bit deeper, Coll. The point is that the plane crashes were faked so an expert who doesn’t recognise that they were is obviously controlled opposition. It’s pretty straightforward.

        2. See of they’ll do it for $5K … it would be a steal!

      2. Benazir Bhutto said years before her death that Osama bin Laden was dead as if it were widely known. And it probably was to everyone but the people in the world of censored news. It’s sad how the population of the US gulps down the shat coming from the MSM and likes it. Gimme more they seem to say…..and they get it, non-stop.

    2. ANSWER:
      To focus truthers on controlled demolition to keep them away from the faked plane crashes.

      The most sensible place to start inquiry is the plane crashes. If you work out the plane crashes were faked then automatically you know that the buildings came down by a controlled means. No reason to investigate the building collapses at all, right?

      Also, when you realise the plane crashes were faked you also know immediately that the 265 people alleged to have died in the crashes didn’t die which prompts the question, “Well, whatever they did to fake those deaths couldn’t they also have done for the remaining 2735?”

      They most certainly could.

      It’s all smoke’n’mirrors.

      All you have to do is extrapolate the huge number of drills and exercises that occurred on 9/11 to get what the whole event was – a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist exercise pushed out as real where the only major realities of the day were destruction and damage to buildings. That’s what it was in a nutshell.

  25. The best thing I’ve seen on 9/11 is the book A New Pearl Harbor by somebody Griffith–because it points out that there is a whole spectrum of possibility between the official story, and the wild hairy ones in which all the planes were landed far away and fake planes hit the buildings, or the buildings were taken down by magic rays obtained from Area 51. Petty hard to KNOW what happened…but it’s pretty obvious that the official story at least leaves a lot out. Okay yes, that Corbett video is excellent–I’ve seen it before.
    But the reason I’m posting is to question one of your premises–that the propaganda machine has effectively persuaded most that anything outside the official story is beyond the pale and laughable. Plenty of people think that–but I believe they are actually a minority. I know I read once that a majority of Americans are dubious about 9/11.

    1. Hi Mary, David Ray Griffin does a wonderful job on many aspects of 9/11, however, he misses the pivotal truth: death and injury were staged.

      Funnily enough, the evidence shows that death and injury were also staged at Pearl Harbour.

      It is not hard at all to know the essentials:
      ——Four faked plane crashes
      ——Controlled demolition of buildings
      ——Death and injury staged

      Evidence is very clear for all of the above. The most fascinating part is the propaganda campaign targeted at the truthers in order to stymie them from getting the truth out.

  26. If any planes hit the towers where are the engines, black boxes, landin gear, seats etc ?

    all the residue was suposed to have been carefully sifted yet nothing turns up you cant melt all that in an hour
    with petrol or kerosene

    1. Not to mention the Pentagram attack. No debris and they immediately collected all CCTV footage from any place that could possibly have it, about 90 places….so they say.

    2. Pete, all of those things disintegrated in the heat while the pristine terrorist passport of one of the pilots floated lightly through the terrifying flames flashing until it landed outside the tower where it was able to be found, fortunately, by an innocent bystander… who gave it to an FBI agent before the building fell on him and killed him… so we may never know his true identity.

      What odds! Thank goodness passports were made of such sturdy materials that even back on that fateful 9/11 day the dastardly pilot’s passport could somehow survive when the building itself did not survive. Makes you want to sleep with your passport nearby for comfort.

  27. Of course, I love you Catlin, but your link to The Corbett Reports take on 911 is something I had been searching for for weeks! A masterpiece! Thank you for resurrecting and providing access to an absolute CLASSIC! Well done!

  28. Not sure what it is about this particular essay that renders so many people incapable of just reading it and responding to the actual words that I wrote and the actual position I put forward. Please read with the intention of understanding what you’re reading, folks.

    1. That is a common problem on most blogs. Many of the commenters just start rambling on about the first thing that pops into their heads that is even remotely related to the subject of the post. In fact it appears that many of them never even read the post, other than the first one or two paragraphs, before they start commenting. There are also a couple of commenters on this post (I won’t mention their names) who have managed to spew multiple pages of nonsense to muddy up the waters.

    2. It’s probably that many of us still have an extremely difficult time accepting the effectiveness of the empire’s propaganda machine.
      Secondly, something as momentous as nine-eleven combined with a lack of certainty and no epistemic closure really messes with the psyche.

    3. Because you just have too many objectionable statements.

      First you say, “who call me a “9/11 truther” and with skeptics who say I don’t write enough”. Here you seem to set out two extremes. You don’t claim the title of “9/11 truther” you just mention it. As a person who is a “9/11 truther” I can only say you just have to accept the title, wrong or right if you talk about alternative scenarios you will be called a truther. So here you seem to be hanging us out to dry. You don’t accept the claim the title and you aren’t really interested in writing or discussing it. It is not important to you. Which puts it on our shoulders as we the social outcast 9/11s truthers attempt to get the message out.

      Why do you do this? “I don’t know exactly what happened on the eleventh of September 2001, and I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit”. You don’t know exactly so it will always stay in the gray area? A book unfinished? The second part of this sentence seems almost like an attack on those of us who attempt to read the book or decipher it. If we stray into the certainty zone anywhere, “we are full of shit” I am certain Osama did not do it. Am I full of shit? I am sure there was explosives, Am I full of shit? I am sure there was covert cover for the attack, moving the planes west, simultaneous exercise. Am I full of shit?

      “The most concise and rock-solid compilation of these plot holes that I have ever seen was compiled by conspiracy analyst James Corbett” I see this as an indication that you haven’t really dove into the issue. My opinion is Corbetts video is great. For me though it is really just a trailer. There are many other videos much longer that have much more detail. So on this point I will have to disagree.

      You’re quote taken out of context, “9/11 was used to manufacture consent for multiple wars in a highly suspicious way that just so happened to align with preexisting imperial geostrategic agendas (as well as preexisting domestic agendas), and if everyone could understand that they were deceived by their own government and media about something so important, the entire evil empire would come crashing down.” Actully these are the very sentiments that many may hold and adhere to, but you don’t. And you give reasons why.

      “Firstly, the narrative control battle has already been decisively won by the other side.” In my mind the ‘other side’ wins pretty much all the time. I don’t read about Julian Assange in the local paper, the people aren’t talking about him in the coffee shop, at work and in church. Most people don’t even know who he is. Hillary is still not in prison, Epstein’s death will never be solved. There is a reason we are called the ‘fringe’ It is because we are the few. Also personally I believe we are gaining ground on 9/11. If anything more people in the mainstream are having doubts.

      Then you say, “The mainstream understanding is that anyone who talks about what really happened on 9/11 is a crazy crackpot who must not be listened to, because the establishment narrative control campaign to discredit and demonize critical thinking on the subject succeeded many years ago” You seem to want to shy away from being called a “crazy crackpot”. Unfortunately for most of us that is just the price we pay. Yes we have something to say, no they do not look favorably to the messenger.
      “If today’s ubiquitous internet access had happened to coincide with 9/11” I don’t think they would have attempted to pull this off in today’s world with cell cameras and today’s “ubiquitous internet”

      “Secondly, even if there were some way to show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11, the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away.” So even if we did show the world the truth which we hope would, and as said earlier, “if everyone could understand that they were deceived by their own government and media about something so important, the entire evil empire would come crashing down” This is not a worthy goal? Instead we should just resign that, “the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away” Do they not do this day in and day out? Is that not the battle we constantly fight?
      Then you say, “the imperial propaganda machine would pace everyone into an understanding of why it’s still right and necessary to support the US-centralized empire and its globe-sprawling war machine. The status quo would march on essentially undisturbed” is this not at odds with the earlier statement concerning showing the world the truth? You say this is, “one hundred percent guaranteed” Is this a certainty, Is this in the “shit zone”

      “This is why I focus on attacking the establishment propaganda machine using clear, undeniable arguments” I don’t see anything we talk about as viewed as “clear undeniable” arguments. That is why the independent media has such a hard time. There is always a counter story and it is just a matter of which one you choose to believe. 9/11 though for me is different on one special way. It involves Physics and physics is not subjective. We also have an army of unbiased, professionals from the ‘mainstream’ of society to explain the physics for us, A&E Is there an organization of lawyers and judges 1,000 strong who can show irrefutable proof Julian Assange is innocent and a maligned whistle blower?

      You say, “That’s where I choose to pour my energy. Not into attacking a heavily-armored narrative about something that happened 18 years ago” This statement seems to say that 9/11 was just “something that happened 18 years ago” To me it is much more than that. I was the defining event of the 21st century, There is no news item today Assange included that measures up in relative importance. This event launched wars, migration, 7 trillion in debt. The world was never the same.

      You end with, “it is good and right to ask questions about 9/11, but that’s a rabbit hole that only opens up for people when it opens up for them.” Again 9/11 is unique in that it involve physics and the A&E group and well as a lawyers group now. I firmly believe personally we should push forward on this one. To general society much of what we talk about are considered “rabbit holes” They are subjective stories and there is no pay in going down a dark path. This involves physics. We the “truthers” can actually turn the tables on them here. We can make them look very, very stupid. We can say, “You don’t believe in Physics”, “Are you saying physics changed on this day”?

    4. They’re autistic. Vaccines have been around for a very long time and I believe it’s the cause of their problem, and our problems, with not understanding “the big picture”. They tend to focus on one thing initially and stay with it. And they then look for like types for confirmation bias. That’s why there are so many groups, and so many, that reason will won’t sway them. And in this institution that’s ok because everyone is different.
      Well, that’s the way I see it now because it’s really hard to tell people anything that takes them out of their personal habitual state. It’s like trying to turn the Titanic. They just don’t get it. And never will. It’s a developmental disorder.

  29. Any time a ” government ” creates an agency like the Central Intelligence Agency, or the Mossad, or the KGB that does its ” work in secret and is not accountable to no one ” these agencies are completely free to do any thing that they feel like doing. They have no laws, no rules, no morals, no ethics, etc. The C.I.A. did ” regime changes all over the entire world ” and when President Kennedy was killed it was said that the C.I.A. had come home to roost. The ” deep state ” exists everywhere that human beings have established a government. Like eating and breathing; human beings to not know how to exist with ” secret agencies ” to do the things not talked about in polite company!

    1. I am sorry the last line above should be: Like eating and breathing; human beings do not know how to exist without ” secret agencies ” to do the things not talked about in polite company!

  30. Just to make the essentials of 9/11 as simple as possible.

    —-The four plane crashes were faked. There is zero evidence supporting their reality and overwhelming evidence supporting fakery, including the fact that for the twin towers’ planes to have been real they would have had to break the unbreakable Newton’s Laws of Motion.

    —-Automatically this means that the buildings came down by a controlled means and that the 265 people said to have died in plane crashes did not.

    —-If 265 people said to have died did not, why should we believe that the other 2,735 did when we know already that every other part of the story is a lie. Planes didn’t crash, buildings didn’t come down by fire, 265 people didn’t die. Why on earth would we believe that the perps didn’t evacuate everyone from the buildings not just some and do whatever they did to fake the 265 in the faked planes to also fake the remaining 2,735 in the buildings. In addition, we know that the greatest number of drills and exercises ever to occur on US soil and in US airspace occurred ever so coincidentally on the same day as the most spectacular terrorist attack the world has ever known. Couldn’t they use these drills to fake the 6,000 injured? (Actually, I believe a lot of the “injured” were probably faked in drills outside 9/11 but it doesn’t really matter – these are the sorts of things we may not know exactly but do we really need to?)

    —-It’s the propaganda that shrouds the simplicity of 9/11 from both truthers and non-truthers. The very, very clever propaganda. Blow away the magic propaganda dust and what remains is actually a very simple story – the propaganda on the other hand is massively, massively complicated.

    1. 265 faked deaths in plane crashes and 2,735 faked deaths in the towers themselves didn’t happen? It would be a good bet that at least one of those fake dead would have leaked the exaggeration of the report of his or her death at some point over the past 18+ years.

      I don’t recall hearing of any such report, but feel free to enlighten us.

      1. I’ve always thought that. I don’t think the perps would care about who or how many died. I just haven’t had any clue as to where the 4th plane went. I had a guy, ex-marine and a real little shit, who couldn’t stand for anyone to wonder about the official story. He was so brainwashed he said the public didn’t deserve to know what the military was doing.

        When I asked what happened to the plane that was reported to crash but no plane was found he said “They(jet fighters)took it(airliner)out over the Atlantic and shot it down.”. I replied “Well, I’d always heard those jet fighter pilots were “cowboys” but I didn’t realize they could actually rope a plane and take it where they wanted like a cowboy and a calf”. It sent him into paroxysms of screaming and cussing. Another man my age and I would laugh at his gnashing and pulling of hair(bald). You ever notice there’s no actual “govt.” ‘splainin’ of this?

        1. The “perps didn’t care” argument drives me as mad as the “climate’s always changed” argument. They’re both classic strawmen.

          My argument is absolutely not based on whether the perps cared or not but other reasons for not killing those people. Think about it. 9/11 was a psyop – you don’t kill people in psyops unless you want them dead. If you kill people you don’t want to kill then it’s no longer a psyop, is it?

          1. They absolutely didn’t have to with their superb duping skills. My goodness, they can snow us with propaganda and even tell us the truth in their own special way and yet still get us to believe their propaganda.

          2. They need to involve a large number of agency staff, media, a number of other actors and so on – they’re not going to be AOK with being complicit in the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens, are they?

          3. The fallout from the loved ones of those killed. Can you imagine when controlled demolition is so obvious?

      2. Never use “lack of leakage” as any kind of evidence. People talk about stuff, of course, but it doesn’t appear in the media. I used to go to a cafe where the barista told me after months of me coming into the cafe and bleating on about 9/11 and other events that his father worked next door to the Sari bar where the 2002 Bali bombing took place. His father said that he was asked to help with the injured but when he went to do so there were no injured to help. So my barista knew that Bali was a fake but how many people do you think he told and even if he told a large number who’s going to publicise it? I am right now but what impact do you think that has?

        1. I knew someone who died in that bombing.

          1. Well, that is very interesting, Caitlin. The thing is there are always going to be people who know someone who allegedly died. That is the nature of these events. People will know people. I didn’t know Barbara Olson but obviously many other people knew her – some will know she didn’t die on Flight 77 and some will not.

            I know someone else who knows the father of someone who allegedly died.

            The thing is there is zero visual evidence for a single one of the 3,000 who allegedly died nor of the 6,000 who were injured. Not a single piece of visual evidence for 9,000 people plus obvious signs of fakery … plus loads of other things supporting staged death and injury.

            Knowing someone who allegedly died cannot count as evidence simply because we expect that to happen for staged events, in fact, it would be impossible for it not to be the case, unless they absolutely made everyone up and I don’t think they ever do that.

          2. Living in NYC and working just minutes from the Towers, I didn’t know anyone who died but I have friends who did. A lawyer lost his brother. A wife lost her husband. Others. Stop with the “nobody died” false and hurtful narrative.

            1. People have to know people, Coll, that is the nature of these events. People must know people. There is not a single piece of clear visual evidence for 9,000 people but there is clear visual evidence of fakery of both death and injury. Knowing people doesn’t count as evidence. They’re no longer around to say they’re dead, are they? There is no proof that they’re dead.

          3. Sorry, Caitlin, I was thinking you meant 9/11. Yes, I know a few people who knew people or knew people who knew people who died or were injured in Bali. One person I am sure died at around that time and his brother suffered severe burns but I simply think it had to be from another event, not the bombing. I’m sure they never hybridise these things. The organisers would have contacts in hospitals no doubt and through networks would get families to agree to pretend that a recently deceased or injured relative be used for the event (sometimes it might even be post the event). If they can fake 9/11 they can fake anything. When you look at the injured for Bali there is no one who looks like their body is compromised – at least not clearly at that event. Bombs maim and cause carnage. There is zero hint of that at Bali. They have scrubbed the internet clean of images of real victims of bombings. Have you seen a real victim of a bombing? You will know the difference between fake and real if you have. It’s horrific. It truly is. I saw a few images a few years ago and cannot find a real one now but they would certainly exist, just not on the internet. Now, they’re all fake.

            1. Petra, surely you’ve seen the videos of the victims hanging out of the windows on the floors above where the planes struck the towers? How do you explain all of those who jumped to their deaths rather than be burned alive?

  31. Without even looking at the official narrative we know that 9/11 was an inside job from the clear evidence. It is simple physical evidence that we know is absolutely incontrovertible because we know that Newtonian laws of physics cannot be broken. And we must construct our own story from the evidence itself. Then it is very, very simple. While Caitlin says we cannot know exactly what happened we actually can in relation to the buildings and the planes because we can see with our own eyes that the buildings came down by controlled demolition and we can see with our own eyes that the plane crashes were faked. And as we can tell that the planes were faked then automatically we also know that 265 people said to have died in plane crashes did not die. So just from simple, clear physical evidence we know an awful awful lot.

    We also know that many drills and exercises were conducted. So with the knowledge of the drills and exercises and the fact that 265 of the alleged 3,000 deaths didn’t happen we can suspect, can’t we, that perhaps the other 2,735 people said to have died did not die either. And that is what all the available evidence supports.

    9/11 is so very, very simple but they just make out it is so very, very complicated. Don’t fall for the massive story bullshit.

    1. So glad someone like you is here. The whole thing was a psyop farce, and no planes were involved or buildings collapsing due to impacts and fires. How anyone can be fooled into thinking there were planes performing feats of aeronautic impossibility, and buildings’ collapse re-writing the laws of Newtonian physics, is beyond me.

  32. It is not that the establishment succeeded in imposing a heavily-armored narrative on 9/11 because the narrative is simply not credible. It is that most of the people has accepted this blatant lie because there was too much to lose for them if they acknowledged that it was a lie.

    People will accept any lie and anything to protect their social status and their assets in this world, especially in our days which are the return of the days of Noah.

    And because I have seen enough bullshit, I pray the Rosary to hasten the Return of Jesus, which return, according to many prophecies, is very near.

  33. Well reasoned and written. Thx for posting Corbitt’s video.

  34. There’s another theory …. and it goes like this:
    A certain segment of Muslims hate America. Indeed, they feel compelled to harm or attack America (because of long-term grievances). Given that they know they can’t beat America in a traditional battlefield situation, they decided to attack America by unconventional means, namely through terrorist attacks. One of these Muslims who hates America came upon the idea of commandeering jet airliners and flying them into symbolic American landmarks. As this had never been done before, a group of people agreed such a novel attack might have a good chance of working. So they did it.

  35. the fact that the official narrative is fulla shit is enough. why should anyone prove anything else? imagination is all we have and that gets you closer to the truth than any “hard evidence”.

    caitlin, your “explanation” only obfuscates your real motive further. i have many theories but i know you don’t care.

    1. “i can’t comprehend it so it can’t exist” is the foundation of the post-this-or-that pseudo philosophies (or what marx would have called ideologies) that took over academia / MSM and “replaced” the real left in the 80s and 90s.

  36. Caitlin deeply gets the power of narrative, but as for exposing the 911 narrative — one she groks no less — it’s “”Do as I say, not as I do.”

    911 is one of Empire’s most insidious master narratives. They repeatedly trot it out to buttress all manner of military might. Yet in spite of the mountain of evidence against it, Caitlin issues excuses like it’s an insurmountable narrative so best stick to picking apart Empire’s more flimsier ones.

    Q. Is Caitlin really such a lightweight?
    A. No. Someone as astute as Caitlin knows precisely how damaging it is to tackle Empire’s most powerful master narrative. WordPress would deplatform her in a New York minute.

    1. IMO one of the “most insidious master narratives” is the CONSPIRACY to rig/suppress/manipulate the gold (and silver) “markets.” This protects the fiat U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency. Here, Saudi Arabia DOES play a key role. Namely, America doesn’t want to embarrass this Kingdom and its leaders because this Kingdom plays a pivotal role in making sure the dollar remains the world reserve currency (this allows America to “print” as much “money” as its Empire requires).
      This necessity to not embarrass Saudi Arabia probably explains why big elements of the 9-11 “narrative” have been literally redacted. These redacted elements do show some Saudi Arabians likely had more knowledge of these attacks than we have been told.

      1. Saudi Arabia? Are you kidding?
        Consider investigating the world’s central banks and IBS.
        Who concocted them?
        Who ultimately owns them?
        What is “fiat currency”?
        Why is usury so prominent?
        You crack those questions and you’ll hold the ultimate Master Narrative in the palm of your hands.

  37. FYI CAITLIN — 2-3 days ago journalist Margaret Kimberly of Black Agenda Report tweeted that a friend of hers on Facebook sent her a note. The friend described questions Facebook asked here, the friend, about you, Cailtin Johnstone. I made a screenshot of Kimberly’s tweet which you can find here —

  38. A few weeks ago, in the Nov 26, 2019, issue of Slate Magazine, Matthew Phelan’s article “The History of ‘History is Written by the Victors’” appeared. Phelan claims “We have rewritten history to credit the saying to one of the 20th century’s greatest victors [Winston Churchill].” Phelan remarks, “As for Churchill, while he is strongly associated with the aphorism, as seen on inspiring Pinterest macros, at Brainy Quote, and in taunting tweets from WWE wrestlers, there’s actually no concretely documented instance in which he’s known to have uttered the aphorism.”
    Purists might argue for eternity that this record should be corrected, but like the 9/11 MSM narrative and the JFK sole assassin theory, there is no overcoming (within lives in being plus 21 years) the consensus manufactured by MSM—Caitlin’s position is eminently reasonable. But also reasonable are the purists, because perfection is a fine ideal.

  39. I watched the five-minute video, which strongly implies W Bush was aware of the conspiracy. I’m no fan of W, but this is hard to believe. Remember, W had only been in office 8 months when this event happened. And an “operation” this “complex” had to have been in the works well before he was sworn into office – so it must have been launched/authorized when Bill Clinton was still president. Still, we would have to believe that W was “briefed” on the operation in his early days as president.
    CIA operative: “Mr. President, we thought you’d want to know that plans are going well with our WTC and Pentagon destruction project.”
    Bush: “Okay. Good deal. Keep me posted.”
    Therefore, a president just elected (as well as one just leaving office) were perfectly fine with a coordinated plan that for all they knew might kill 100,000 innocent Americans. (Did Bush and his advisors ever consider the possibility the plan might be exposed? I mean, if it came out that he was plotting to kill 100,000 Americans did they think this would help his chances for re-election?)
    Or: Both presidents were somehow kept out of the loop. The CIA just launched the operation on its own – an operation btw that seemingly/allegedly included targeting either the WH or the Capitol. Per the video, we are also supposed to believe that Rumsfeld might have been “in the loop” and therefore was okay with an attack that targeted the very Pentagon building where he would be working.
    While the video points out several valid reasons we should be skeptical of certain government versions of events, I do not find it persuasive in its central conclusion: 9-11 was an “inside job.”
    The preponderance of evidence says it was not.

    1. If 3 planes DID crash into symbolic buildings in America (and I’m among the handful of Americans who believe they did), doesn’t it make sense that the 4th plane that nosedived into a field in Pennsylvania was also targeting another symbolic building? We’re told the targeted buildings were either the Capitol or the White House, which would seem to be good targets from an attackers’ perspective. So: The plan, hatched by elements within the government, targeted the president/vice president and/or potentially every person in Congress. That is, the government was targeting the leaders of government. Does this make any sense? I guess we are supposed to believe the plan was for that plane to just crash somewhere where it did no damage, thus protecting the president or vice president and all of their friends, co-workers and family members (or every Congressman and their staffers). Which one was it? The plan was to kill key leaders in government by hitting the WH or Capitol, or … act like they were going to kill key leaders in government but really just intentionally crash that plane in some unpopulated area. So, in the case of the 4th plane, conspiracy participants went to a lot of trouble to take over a passenger plane only to crash it into a field in Pennsylvania. Doesn’t that seem bizarre? That’s a whole lot of work for little payoff. And who would want to sign up for this mission?
      No, common sense tells us “the plan” was for someone to kill a lot of key people in government (and destroy national landmarks). It’s kind of doubtful “the government” or a president would sign off on such a plan, right? Or our president did sign off on such a plan and the passengers who took control of the plane simply spoiled the plan. Unless they too were a part of the conspiracy. Anyway, where was that fourth plane headed?

      1. who er evsaid bush was a insider? plus, bush prolly didn’t want to be inside.

      2. Mr. Rice, hasn’t it occurred to you that the two planes which hit the towers were remotely-controlled drones? No hijackers boarded any of the planes that day. If they had, the airport security videos of the alleged hijackers going through baggage security would have been all over the news. Dulles Airport alone had over 300 security cameras. Logan and Newark airports had many security cameras as well. The only security video shown on corporate media was taken from such a high angle that none of the people shown could be identified. The video had been altered to draw rectangles around the people shown to point them out as highjackers. Authentic security videos have time, location and date overprinting each frame of the video. This is required before the video can be legally used in court.

        1. Oh, the remotely-controlled drone theory. It was only today I heard of that one. I don’t think this theory is plausible though.
          Was the 4th plane that crashed into the field in Pennsylvania also a remotely-controlled drone? What about all those people who called loved ones and said the plane had been hijacked by Muslim men?
          So: One plane WAS hijacked but the other 3 were remotely-controlled drones?

          1. Bill, Witnesses at the alleged Flight 93 crash scene in Shanksville claimed there was no airliner wreckage at the scene. The only report of Muslim men hijackers on any of the planes came from Barbara Olsen, wife of President Bush’s Solicitor General. The FBI later revealed that the alleged phone call never took place. As to what happened to original Flights 11, 175, 77 and 93, Malaysia Flight 370 proved that airliners full of passengers can disappear without a trace.

    2. Remember this too….Bushco had spurned the FBI for the 7 months or more, refusing to heed their warnings or even speak with them. It was obvious they were hatching a plan they wanted no one to know about.

  40. Hi Caitlin.
    I figured that this article would generate some heated debate.

    Anyway, I like what Matt Taibbi has written about 9/11 truthers.
    I also liked this piece by the late Alexander Cockburn —

    Finally, there is this comment by a guy I follow on Disqus™.
    “Cockburn is an ass most of the time, but that was pretty good. My own 9-11 experience confirms his impressions.

    “In 1975, I took in a lecture by a civil engineer and architect, whose specialty was fire safety in skyscrapers. The school was one of the few in the country where you can get a PhD in that. It was a survey course, where instructors from various fields pitched theirs. But fire safety is hereditary, firemen tend to go into it because that’s what dad and grandpa did, so he saw no need to recruit. Instead, he talked about the social responsibility of scientists and engineers. Which turned into a talk about why he had felt obligated to picket the WTC construction site. He was hopping red-in-the-face mad about how the Port Authority had gotten away with annexing the property so it could enact its own fire code, far weaker than Manhattan’s, allowing those rickety firetraps to be built. And he was even madder about the design. He was absolutely sure the towers would one day collapse from fire.

    “He described, with diagrams, exactly how the collapses would work. The basic problem was that the inner core was so rigid and brittle that it would not survive the collapse of one floor in the middle of the building. The shock of the top half of the building falling ten feet onto the bottom half propagated up and down the core at the speed of sound in steel, shattering it. What was left was basically a pile of gravel (the shattered floor decks) and office furniture, with nothing to hold it up. The buildings were a fifth of a mile high. The center of mass was 500 feet up. A million tons of gravel falling 500 feet releases a hell of a lot of energy. It’s just falling stuff, but it looks like an explosion. We found out on 2001-09-11 that he was right, except he expected the fire would be started by an electrical appliance.

    “He put a bunch of materials on reserve in the engineering library. There were trade journals and some research about how tall buildings burn. The librarian told me I was the only one to check them out. The WTC towers had been the hottest controversy in tall building design for a couple of years, because they were junk compared with monuments like Chrysler and Empire State. The controversy inspired two novels, and both of them went into production as big budget Hollywood 1970s disaster movies. The two productions discovered each other when they kept trying to rent the same props, and the productions were combined into one picture.

    “My dad was an engineer, and he was always talking about that same social responsibility. When your technical expertise would inform a public policy discussion, it’s your professional duty to speak up about it. See, for example, James Hansen and Katherine Hayhoe.”

    1. Interesting. Thanks for sharing … There’s another component to this story that’s gotten too little attention imo. For environment or health reasons, asbestos was removed from both buildings in the years before 9-11 (or a lot of this material was removed, as was case at countless other buildings in the country). Well, I believe asbestos was considered great insulation in part because of its fire-retardant properties. I have read where some people (experts?) say the fire would not have melted the steel supports as quickly if this asbestos had not been removed. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I do sense that criticizing the removal of asbestos is not a “politically correct” point.
      I also vaguely remember reading somewhere that the space shuttle disaster might have been caused by changing insulation material (again for environmental or safety reasons). I’m also among the group who believes the ban on DDT led to many more (unnecessary) deaths from malaria. Anyway, some “politically correct” changes might have contributed to some pretty epic disasters. Or maybe not. But I do think these possibilities should have at least received more attention.

      1. I don’t believe asbestos was being removed but instead, charges were being planted.

    2. Mr. Mensch, are you aware that the North Tower had a fire on the 11th floor in 1975 which firefighters described as being like fighting a blowtorch? The 1975 fire burned for 3 times as long as the South Tower fire and twice as long as the North Tower fire. After the 1975 fire was extinguished, all the steel was still strong enough to support the North Tower until it was demolished by explosives in 2001. Have you noticed that the newest tall tower built in WTC is constructed very similar to how the Twin Towers were constructed?

    3. Gary, if you believe that WTC-7 came down by fire I have a $5,000 challenge for you. It’s the manner of collapse that tells all. It makes not a jot of difference what was happening in the buildings or what their weaknesses were, it’s the manner of collapse. The manner shows all the characteristics of controlled demolition and none of the characteristics of fire.

      —- explosions pre-collapse (to weaken the building) and explosions during collapse (to bring it down);

      —- kink in middle at top just as it begins to fall (this reflects the weakening of the central columns first to make the building fall in on itself); sudden onset of destruction; straight-down, symmetrical collapse through path of greatest resistance including actual free fall acceleration into building footprint;

      —- pyroclastic-like clouds of pulverised concrete (the clouds include the gases from the incendiaries used which is why they look similar to the clouds from volcanic eruptions);

      —- limited damage to adjacent structures; complete collapse and dismemberment of steel frame;

      The ironic thing is that while people speak of WTC-7 as being the “smoking gun” it is really the fakery of the planes that is the smoking gun. If we recognise the fakery of the planes (and it is easy to do so), then there is no reason at all to study the buildings because automatically we know that they came down by a controlled means. We also know that the 265 people alleged to have died in the plane crashes didn’t die. This prompts the question: well, if those 265 people in the planes didn’t die what about the other 2,735? Couldn’t they have evacuated all those people just as they did those in WTC-7?

      —-Newtonian physics prohibits 200-ton airliners penetrating 500,000-ton steel frame skyscrapers like a knife through butter.
      —-Transportation Bureau of Statistics shown no record of Flights 11 and 77 departing.
      —-The angles that we see the second plane approach the South tower don’t add up.
      —-Evidence of wreckage is not consistent with expectations.

      The greatest number of exercises and drills occurred ever to occur on US soil and in US airspace on the very same day of the most spectacular terror attack the world has ever known. Do you really think that was a coincidence? What do they do in drills and exercises? They stage death and injury.

      $5,000 challenge – any of the following: WTC-7, planes, 3,000 dead/6,000 injured

  41. I learned about this article from a colleague who once respected Caitlin Johnstone. No. More. She described this current article as a “crock of shit.” I think it it more like a crock of highly radioactive plutonium. Ms. Johnstone says:
    “That’s where I choose to pour my energy. Not into attacking a heavily-armored narrative about something that happened 18 years ago, but into independently verifiable deceptions happening here and now….”

    Aren’t the most well “armoured lies” likely to be the most consequential lies? Certainly that is the case with the 9/11. Hasn’t the impact of this lie grown more and more deep-rooted and catastrophic over the eighteen years, with no let up in sight?

    I noticed Ms. Johnston’s evasiveness on 9/11 when she suggested in a prior article, “Replace ‘Conspiracy Theory’ with ‘Remember Iraq’”

    The lies leading to the invasion of Iraq did not begin with those concerning weapons of mass destruction. The invasion of Iraq was justified by the 9/11 lies followed by the WMD lies. To “remember Iraq” and forget 9/11 is not a good formula for countering the “conspiracy theory” meme. It is not a totem of conscientious journalism.

    Wouldn’t it be more honest for Ms. Johnstone to just acknowledge she would lose access to some venues by affording the lies and crimes of 9/11 the prominence the subject deserves. Is there any other event so far in the twenty-first century that comes even close to it in terms of its ongoing impact in the rapid decline of public health as well as the quality of our institutions, civil society and mental environment.

    Doesn’t it amount to an instigation of Islamophobia, Arabophobia, Iranophobia and Palestinianophobia to agree to let the lies and crimes of 9/11 stand because those who most zealously protect the specious narrative are really committed to the task no matter who they hurt and destroy in the process? Does it not occur to Ms. Johnstone that by walking around the forbidden story so often, she has made herself a contributing party to the cover up and a contributor to, for starters, the millions of premature deaths of mostly Muslim people on the receiving end of all the aggressive warfare since 9/11.

    Its quite likely that whoever is most responsible for the 9/11 lies and the 9/11 cover up is also responsible for perpetrating 9/11. I am dumbfounded to see a journalist announcing knowledge of the 9/11 scam alongside a formal declaration that she thinks it noble and worthy to remain complicit in the original misrepresentations and all the crimes that flow from them. AJH

    1. Christopher Bollyn adds to this conversation:

      Susan makes a very good point about how Chomsky and Zinn were not willing to discuss 9/11 truth. Chomsky always shut down discussion of 9/11. What does that say about the agenda he has been serving for decades?

      The Caitlin Johnstone position does not make sense. She wrote: “… it’s also extremely obvious that the world was lied to about what happened by the US government and its allies, as evidenced by the massive, glaring plot holes in the official 9/11 narrative.”

      Yes, it is extremely obvious that we were lied to about 9/11. It’s not just plot holes but the evidence disproves the official myth. So, the first thing to do is to identify the people behind the cover-up and the deception we were sold about 9/11. That identifies the nature of the network behind the cover-up. If these people are intentionally lying about 9/11 then they must have a connection to the crime. Why else would people (as a group) lie about such a thing? (This is the basis of my work in Solving 9/11 and my book on the War on Terror).

      A paragraph later, Johnstone wrote: “… the narrative control battle has already been decisively won by the other side.”

      Really? How can the “other side” win with a false narrative while she says it is “extremely obvious that the world was lied to.” If it’s extremely obvious that the official myth is false, which it is, how is it “well armored”?

      If we simply look at exactly WHO is behind foisting and promoting the deception (media owners, etc.) we will see that at every point there is a Zionist Jewish agent who was used to push the Zionist interpretation of 9/11, starting with Ehud Barak on BBC World TV! At the Florida school where Bush was during the attack, his press secretary Ari Fleischer was prepared to accept and promote the false narrative. Ari’s brother Michael, who headed a company (Bogen) owned by Israeli intelligence men, became the head of Private Sector Development of occupied Iraq – privatizing Iraqi assets!

      So, the question is really this: Who owns the false narrative about 9/11? If it is, as I say, a Zionist Jewish narrative that has been imposed on us, what does that tell us about the crime itself? If Jewish Zionists are behind the 9/11 deception, and if the purpose of the deception was to trick the U.S. into a Zionist war agenda (the Global War on Terror), and if the person who controlled the three towers that were obviously demolished on 9/11 is a chief of the Zionist network, then it becomes quite clear that the 9/11 atrocity was a Zionist false-flag operation to start the Zionist war to rule the Middle East. It’s that simple.

      Why CJ doesn’t want to discuss 9/11 is probably because she does not want to seen as being a 9/11 truther, which would bring here into such discussions of Israeli complicity in the crime.


      1. Here is a link to a video I watched a long time ago. it is a long video but very memorable. In this video Webster Tarpley debates Jonathan Kay as Kay has a new book about “conspiracy theories”. David Frum is the ‘moderator’ What is interesting about this video is that Frum who is Jewish and the moderator essentially teams up with Kay who is Jewish. I always though moderatores were supposed to be neutral. Not here. You may have seen this already here it is though.

      2. Christopher, What is your position on death and injury? Do you believe that the US government callously allowed those people in the buildings to die or do you think that the massively coincidental huge number of exercises and drills on 9/11 managed to take care of them – in addition to the actors such as Bob McIlvaine acting as loved ones and in addition to a significant amount of evidence that supports that death and injury were staged.

    2. Anthony, aren’t you being a little hard on Caitlin? She does admit that the government’s conspiracy theory of 9/11 is full of holes. Some of those who really do deserve this type of criticism are authors Oliver Stone, Max Blumenthal, Chris Hedges and Noam Chomsky. They know the truth but choose instead to endorse and perpetuate the government lies.
      Blumenthal is the biggest disappointment for me. I have followed his reporting on Syria and Venezuela and thought he was trustworthy. After reading his book, “The Management of Savagery”, I will never trust him again. His example of “Truthers”, as he refers to us, is Alex Jones and Dylan Avery. He does not mention any of the highly reputable members of the Truth Movement. So it goes.

      1. Maybe you have a point Larry Payne about being too hard on CJ when there is so much blame to go around, so much gate keeping on the MSM-acceptable and philanthropy-funded Left. Maybe it could be said that CJ stakes out a position that could be described as 9/11 Fence Sitter. She announces she knows the official narrative is false but because the lies are so “well-armored” she’ll accept to live with the lies or leave it to others to get shot down trying to rush the shooters lurking behind the thick armor.

        CJ seems to see the 9/11 Deception as if its one of an array of deceptions available for journalists to choose from on the supermarket shelf. I’d say the consequences of the misrepresented 9/11 events are so monumental that they have permeated almost every relationship of power there is. There is no way to develop authoritative interpretations of twenty-first century geopolitics without incorporating some sort of evidence-based interpretation of who did what to whom on 9/11 and why.

        The negative effects for the very viability of our society have only become more and more extreme over the last 18 years. And there is no end in sight. Those who do try to speak about the Big Lie publicly and conscientiously are rendered way more isolated and lonely and vulnerable than we should be. That’s because so many ambitious careerists, including those who write in supposedly alternative venues, understand very well that to address 9/11 skeptically and systematically is not a good career move. In fact its dangerous and, as you note Larry Page, CJ seems OK with leaving it at that.

        1. Anthony Hall — very well said. Great new phrase you coined “911 Fence Sitter.” Great point: “CJ seems to see the 9/11 Deception as if its one of an array of deceptions available for journalists to choose from on the supermarket shelf.” To paraphrase what I wrote in one of my earlier emails that CJ didn’t comment on as she did my 2 other posts: All these deceptions on the supermarket shelf are just branches on a tree. Rather than cutting off branches where new ones keep growing, is it not more efficient to cut out the roots of the tree? The deception of 911 is that diseased tree.

  42. Sincere question … Has anyone seen a story where the reporter interviewed an authority on building demolitions – perhaps the president of the company that routinely does this as a business – and asked him this question:
    “If your company was given the contract to implode/take down the two WTC towers plus WTC building 7, what is the FEWEST number of employees you could use to guarantee this job would be accomplished? How long would it take your team to do the necessary work to make this happen?”
    If nothing else, this question would tell us how many people would have had to have been involved in the 9-11 “job,” as well as the period of time that these people spent on all the “prep work.” Of course, this number would not include the agents who set up the coordinated hijacking of four passenger jets.
    Bottom line for me: A LOT of people would have had to have been involved. And of course none of them could EVER “talk” and they all would have to be competent enough to ensure that their activities were not exposed before the event. To me, it would be quite the formidable challenge to recruit this many people, all of whom had to be willing to kill massive numbers of their fellow countrymen.

    1. My answer to that is they weren’t our “countrymen”. They were Israelis. You could see how hard it was for them as they danced and celebrated as the towers came down. You will have to do some digging. I believe I have read where there was an Israeli company in charge of Security? or Computers? not sure. I do know they picked up several Israelis in a moving van with explosives and held them for a long time. Talking about much less pointing fingers at Israel or Jews is a big social no no in the world. it makes sense though. They are a nation welded to a religion unlike any other in the world. They have a racist superiority complex and always seem willing to do anything for greater Israel. They also have enormous power and influence and money and free access in America. What I think people are missing here today is that fortunately for us, this incident involved PHYSICS. We may not know what happened. If we listen to the A&E though we can tell you with a very high degree of certainty according to the laws of physics, what DID NOT happen. This was the defining event of the 21st century. If we can’t win over the public with an army of unbiased, highly educated, real world people (A&E) on our side and the laws of Physics as our foundational evidence then this is all just fun and games. We can rail against the machine every day of every year and all we are really doing is maintaining the fringe we live on. Humans are Hobbits, they don’t want distractions that is the sad truth. They just want to work, raise a family and have some fun in between. This is all about SOCIOLOGY and that is were the battle lies

      1. So how many ISRAELIS had access to all three of these buildings in the months before they detonated their charges?
        Personally, I don’t think Mossad would have risked pissing off America by killing 100,000 of our citizens. These are smart people. They must have known the people sneaking around the bowels of these buildings attaching plastic explosives could have been discovered. And if they were discovered this would not exactly qualify as positve PR for the nation of Israel. Indeed, one assumes this would have been the end of any alliance with the USA. But to believe your theory we have to believe the leaders of Israel were were willing to risk this possible outcome.

        1. The whole event is otherwordly, period. I can’t for obvious reason like in the video abovebelieve Osama did it. He said he didn’t. Then who? There are 150+ nations in the world I guess just start going down the list. All I know is that a Jewish person purchased the building some 6 mo. before and insured it for Billions? There was on the day an exercise involving a simulation of the exact same event which moved all the aircraft from the vicinity to a place 100s of mles west. Those to things make me impulsly say CIA/Mossad. The death toll on the day was 3,000 or so. I rementber them saying if it had been later there would have been 80,000 plus in the buildings., Maybe this was taken into account. Again the whole thing is otherworldly in it’s audacity. The Internet was not like it is now. They had a plan and I believe we saw the plan. Internal surveilance and external wars. Which benefitted Israel.

      2. In that case, to paraphrase Bill Rice Jr’s original argument: to me, it would be quite the formidable challenge to recruit this many Israelis, all of whom had to be willing to kill massive numbers of innocent American civilians, and not one of whom would ever talk. Then again, I happen to believe that Jews are just normal humans as opposed to a secretive monolithic cabal of innately and extraordinarily evil diabolical beings, which would seem to be a view that Clint shares with Adolf Hitler and other noted ‘humanitarians’ of the past.

        1. “secretive monolithic cabal of innately and extraordinarily evil diabolical beings” Does this phrase apply to all races and nationalities. Is this the qualification for and the attribute of the people of whatever nation was behind the attacks? Because evidently if I believe Israel was behind the attack you say I must believe this. So if another country was responsible I must or we must believe this about them. So who are they? No, I think most people in most nations are normal people, including Germany and Israel I just believe that one if you are recruiting you could find 5-10 people to fit the evil bill from any nation. There were 5 Israelis dancing and celebrating as 3000 people died. Are all Israelis like these 5, no. If you were an Israeli and you considered it war of life and death for your country, would you do it? Where did America recruit and find all the people it took to reduce Iraq to rubble, Kill millions of people. What did Madeline Allbright mean when asked if the deaths of half a million Iraqi children, is the price worth it? She responds, “but the price we think is worth it”. Then you have to remember that Israeli are brainwashed from childhood by the made up fictional narrative called Judaism to believe they are somehow superior to those of other nations. That is why they show up at a Palestinian home give them one hour to leave, shoot those who resist, then bulldoze the home down or why the settlers who show up later tell them they will one day be their slaves or why a sample headline I saw in Israel read, “even the gay Jews soul is more pure that a gentiles” or something along those line. Then there are normal good Jewish people who actually defend the Palestinians. What this really is about is that you have been brainwashed over the last decades to view Jews as different or better or more of the innocent victim than people of other nationalities.

  43. I saw the towers come down on tv. After the first one fell I got on the computer. Not long after, I saw the dancing Israeli’s which looked pretty damning to me and to the FBI too evidently since they picked their sorry asses up and hauled them to jail…..and then spirited them out of the country to their Zionist, terrorist home that had tried to sink the USS Liberty.

    Then we found out all but two Israeli’s who worked in the towers didn’t come in the next day because they all got calls telling them to NOT come in. Only two failed to get the message.

    It’s looking pretty bad by then but at the same time one plane is purported to have crashed but that wasn’t true and it was never found…..hhhmmmm.

    We also found out the next day the second tower was reported by the BBC to have fallen….20 minutes before it did so. I wasn’t watching the BBC so I had to rely on the internet for that.

    Miraculously, in the midst of pure destruction, a perfect “terrorists” ID was found on the ground by one of those 3 letter agency reps.

    I had seen building fall with explosives and they fell just like the towers but building 7 wasn’t hit with anything and Larry Silverstein who had them insured for well more than they were worth told “someone” to “pull it”. When he was called out on it, he said he mis-spoke(liars never lie, they just mis-speak)and meant to “pull it, pull it over”. Sure thing. I work construction. There’s not enough equipment on earth to “pull” that building over and even if there were, it would take months to rig enough cables and bring in enough equipment to do something like that, even though it’s not possible. If you ever tried to push a single buried concrete pier out of the ground with a D 6 you’d know there was absolutely no way in hell to pull over building 1000 times smaller.

    The lies kept coming and then we finally learn there were two accounting companies that were narrowing in on finding the 2+Trillion dollars missing at the Pentagram and they were each residing in those twin towers, one in each and right where the “planes” hit. And when I say planes, I mean modified planes as can be seen in slow motion slides of the flights and strikes.

    But right there on the ground, less than an hour of the towers falling, all sorts of emergency personnel, mainly NYC firemen reported hearing floor by floor explosions…..”wham, wham, wham” they said. right before the buildings fell. Yep, nothing to see here. Now move along. Oh, and it was verboten to remove even a single thing from those towers as they were hauled to the fast boats from China where the detritus was never seen again. The reason being, they had explosive residue on everything. Later on, a chief guy that was in charge of hauling the carnage away, was found to have a rivet from one building sitting on his desk for a keepsake/conversation piece. Once he was outed, he was charged and sent straight to prison. I don’t even remember his name now. It was one of those whisk to the hoosegow type things.

    No, definitely nothing to see here.

    1. The Israeli stuff is all distraction. You think Mossad agents dance around so conspicuously like that? Not saying that Israel wasn’t involved, of course, it was, and so was little old Australia. There’s no way it was a coincidence that our Little Johnny happened to be in the Big Apple on the big day. No way.

      It’s all smoke’n’mirrors to distract you from the simple basic truths of 9/11, most importantly the third one listed below.
      — four faked plane crashes
      — building destruction and damage by controlled means
      — staging of death and injury

  44. As a former Board member of “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” and the founder of what turned into the “9/11 Truth Action Project” (now off that Board also) I truly understand the position that you have posted. I find that while many people can be convinced something is truly wrong with the official version of 9/11, there isn’t much room for action that will move us forward. There are more current issues — I personally believe that the solution to global warming will present itself one of these day — after all we spend trillions of dollars setting up the conditions for it to accidentally happen. Unfortunately that solution will be Nuclear Winter.

    I’ve become reluctant to talk about 9/11 for another reason. Much of the on-line narrative (e.g., from people who are still active in the “9/11Truth Movement”) spin ridiculous, fantastical stories. If you go on-line a talk about 9/11 you will encounter vociferous advocates for “No planes impacting the Twin Towers” and “No Large Plane Impact at the Pentagon” among others.

    Note that the towers swayed upon impact, so there was momentum transfer ( No way to fake that.

    Regarding the Pentagon, the physical damage to the facade and the approach damage trail fits the dimensions of a 757. A group of us put on a conference in May to review the damage.
    But, we are called bad names by many in the “9/11 Truth Movement” for this review of the forensic data.

    For posting this I’ll be called even more bad names. Why would we invite other people to investigate 9/11 when it is not only the government and technocrats — but also many of those in the 9/11 Truth Movement” — who spin false stories. Cass Sunstein’s “cognitive infiltration” won this battle a long time ago.

    As an engineer, I remain active in the 9/11 Truth Movement to leave a clarified record — not with any illusions of making a change.

    PS. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an exceptionally good organization and have released a comprehensive study about WTC 7 and the deception of NIST.

    1. Hi Wayne,

      I have issued a $5,000 challenge to provide 10-point Occam’s Razor exercises for the following while providing my own with favouring reversed:
      — WTC-7 collapse – “fire” over “controlled demolition”
      — The four plane crashes – “real” over “faked”
      — Death and injury – “real” over “staged”

      Obviously, you have no need to look at the first challenge but perhaps you’d be interested in looking at the second and third? So far no one has responded to my challenge and it’s been in existence for quite awhile now.

      Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is a government-sponsored outfit whose purpose is to focus truthers on controlled demolition as part of their diversion strategy to keep truthers away from the pivotal truth of 9/11: death and injury were staged.

      Essentially, 9/11 was a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation in the form of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise comprising numerous smaller exercises and drills pushed out as a real event. The only major realities of the day were damage to and destruction of buildings.

    2. Wayne, anyone who has studied the photos of the Pentagon after the explosion on 9/11 can see that no 757 hit the building. The holes are not wide enough for the airliner to enter the building and there is no airliner wreckage on the lawn. The FBI confiscated all the security videos from businesses around the Pentagon which would have shown whether an airliner did hit the Pentagon. Those videos have never been released to the public. Why do you think that is?

  45. Cait, your POV is entirely understandable. I myself regard the resistance–all of us–as each doing different things to bring down the empire. You prefer to focus on the here and now, which is great. Others, the 9/11ers, the Kennedys, the Liberties, etc. ad nauseam, are like sappers, tunneling away unseen in order to destroy the foundations or maybe blow it up from beneath. Though there’s plenty of room for different approaches, we must never let them think they’ve won, or that we’ve forgotten or given up. I’m minded of Ron Unz, who’s managing almost singlehandedly to drag the real history of WWI/II out into the light, after 70 years of lies, propaganda, boycotts and denials.

  46. Maybe you should read Christopher Bollyn’s work…if you haven’t already.

  47. Interesting Caitlin. By admission you don’t know exactly what happened on September 11, 2001, but anyone who does claim to know what happened is fulla shit. Most social commentators would not recognize the truth about 911 if it crawled up their skirt and bit them on the ass. Anyone who rejects the incontrovertible, scientifically proven fact that the WTC Towers and Building 7 were brought down by highly coordinated controlled demolitions is fulla shit. If the shoe fits….

    1. You claim to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened on 9/11? I’ve been told by multiple 9/11 skeptics today that nobody in the 9/11 truth community actually thinks that, and that it’s outrageous for me to insinuate such a thing.

      1. The arrogance of Mr. Charlie Beall to presume he knows the what, how, why of 911. I’m a lawyer who recognizes there are fundamental pieces of forensic evidence that beg explaination. Subpoena power and a panel of dispassionate, objective scientists with a budget tantamount to that given to determine Clinton’s impeachment could help us reach that point.

        1. Don’t misrepresent my statement. There is no place in the competent scientific examination of the destruction of the WTC Towers and Building 7 for my, or anyone’s, subjective interpretation. That domain is reserved for lawyers, politicians, MSM talking heads, police state enforcers, and others who serve the empire. It is not necessary to know with certainty the underlying facts associated with every aspect of this horrific crime against humanity. The ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘why’ are less important than the “who”. When we have that information, we can change the course of our existence.

          1. Me: “anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit.”
            You: “By admission you don’t know exactly what happened on September 11, 2001, but anyone who does claim to know what happened is fulla shit. Most social commentators would not recognize the truth about 911 if it crawled up their skirt and bit them on the ass. Anyone who rejects the incontrovertible, scientifically proven fact that the WTC Towers and Building 7 were brought down by highly coordinated controlled demolitions is fulla shit. If the shoe fits…”
            You now, after realizing you goofed: “It is not necessary to know with certainty the underlying facts associated with every aspect of this horrific crime against humanity”

            1. No goof. I meant precisely what I said. If you/me or anyone else can’t/won’t recognize and acknowledge scientific facts about 911, that doesn’t means that others who can and do are fulla shit.

      2. Maybe, In most of the stories you cover it is mostly subjective, they say we say, even when some science is involved it can be a matter of interpretation and it is often us against the ‘experts’. In this case though we have involved laws of physics on a grand scale. We have a group of highly eduacated, top tier ‘experts’ to interpret the physics for us, (A&E). The Main stream can say what they want, they can’t change or misrepresent the laws of Physics though. So in this cas it is really a matter of What Did Not Happen and we should force that point.

        1. Some things we can know with certainty from reasoned examination of hard evidence and incontrovertible facts. It’s an unassailable scientific fact that the WTC Towers and Building 7 were brought down by highly coordinated controlled demolitions. It doesn’t matter how many people reject that truth. The truth belongs to those who cherish it. The question that we must answer is exactly “who” was responsible for 911. The souls of millions who have been slaughtered since that day are crying out for justice.

          1. Agree entirely, What people need to hear is how the accepted explantion runs contrary to the laws of Physics. Like when the top of the Trade tower fell into the bottom portion. Physics says the bottom would exert a force and slow or stop the progress. It did not. That is just my rude portrayal. Everyone should go to the A&E for the real primer. As for who it will never be proven, In my mind your are talking CIA/MOSSSAD. .If we give up on 9/11 all we will be doing is fighting over scraps, small issues in relative importance and none with such support as with A&E and their expertise.

      3. The WHY nobody should keep on evidence less speculation is simply what I have said before – watch out for the rabbi tholes that lead nowhere and distract from the important issues.
        It simply a waste of time to keep speculating unless new evidence comes along.
        Apart from labeling and discredit those who continue as “conspiracy nuts” – often rightly so because most of what I read here is pure conjecture based on very little hard evidence (that has been done away with a long time ago) – the goal of empire has been achieved: control the population and impose austerity ( Paul Volcker…. explicitly aimed at breaking the power of organised labour, and just after being appointed as Fed Chair declared: “The standard of living of the average American has to decline”.,
        achieve continuous global conflict enriching and increasing the power of the MIC and the USA hegemony towards a state of invulnerability, control the flow of resources to fulfill the needs of empire and its controlling clique.

        It is no longer necessary or even fruitful or desirable to discuss the “how”, it is to discuss the “what to do”.

  48. Wow Caitlin. You really brought the 9/11 truthers out with this article.

    1. Is Catlin a 9/11 truther. It seems she has defined a new category: 9/11 fence sitter.

      1. yeah, 9/11 is just “a heavily-armored narrative about something that happened 18 years ago” yesterday’s news, battle lost, time to move on. Then though you could consider ‘Religion’ a Heavily armored narrative about something that happened 2,000 years ago and it still seems fresh and I believe I have heard Caitlin rail against ‘religion’

  49. Epstein didn’t kill himself was helped by 9/11 truth, which was helped by the theory of the non- lone gunman. We all help each other. It builds when we keep the ball in the air. It may resurface elsewhere as long as the truth narrative keeps being told. Kids hear it and it becomes their learning curve and a point of refutation. You theory doesn’t stand.

    1. Except by your own logic my theory stands perfectly. Promoting skepticism of establishment narratives elsewhere helps skepticism of establishment narratives everywhere.

      1. I love your approach to dealing with 9-11 – it makes perfect sense.
        I used to believe the narrative (I lived in London at the time as was brainwashed like English people with their BBC and other BS).
        Then when I moved to LA a former roommate) from DC explained to me how the official narrative makes no sense whatsoever – and he saw the hole on Pentagon walls etc.
        Your approach is the most effective I think
        Thanks for great, inspiring insights as always – I post everything you write on FB for my Anglosheeple friends who normally only read MSM in fear

    2. Agree with this. I’ve personally seen many naive people open their eyes to more of the truth after one piece of truth is shown to them. Many people have taken it upon themeselves to dive into research on a topic once they’ve seen how badly they’ve been lied to in other areas. The radical censorship that’s been going on the past few years has jolted a lot of people into consciousness. We must keep pressing on, every day, until the deeds of the evil oligarchs have been fully exposed to all.

      1. Whoops! CJ posted while I was typing. My post backs with your point, Caitlin (acknowledging the lies in one area cause people to be more open to acknowledge the lies in another) , but I was responding to Laurie — I agree very much with her post here. I’ve seen many people change their minds about 911, and once they do, it’s the gateway to further research into other lies.

  50. Good morning young lady. It is impossible to read every commenter this day. You have poked the bee hive and the swarm is about. Your arms must be tiring while swinging at the buzzing and disturbed dark cloud. It is your blog and you can choose to write what is important to you and hopefully your followers will understand your position. The world’s history is replete with testaments to the lies that provide touchstones to our existence. One could very easily ask why you don’t address the lies that led to the U.S. Civil War, (haha, no such thing as a CIVIL war). One just has to look around the world at the monuments and edifices that pay tribute to events and ask about the truth behind the episode represented. The point, history is written by the winners and when they write the history they make an effort to control the narrative from the moment the event occurs. Your daily writings, striking at the contemporary narrative, gives hope that monuments to the lies won’t have the opportunity to be forged for the future generations.

  51. I’m not understanding Caitlin’s position here. I don’t think I agree with her on this subject.

    I was pleased that she mentioned James Corbett’s great work on 9/11. I’ve ignored the subject for a long time, not because I had some thought that we knew, courtesy of establishment reportage, what happened, but because it was too early for earnest researchers, uninterested in taking the government’s word for things, to do it’s work. There’s enough info now to know in the main what we need to know about 9/11, namely that it was a monumental crime and that the plane hijackers were, in a way, the bit players. It says so much. It behooves us to care enough about it that we will look into it, if not crazily deep, then at least sufficiently to be able to master the main points and convey them to others. The lessons are important.

  52. I don’t know which alternative to “official ” explanation of the 9/11 attacks is true, nor do I much care. What I do know is that there is no act you can imagine so evil that the Sociopaths In Charge would not commit if it furthers their interest in the least. The very plethora of alternative explanations is symptomatic of their successful manipulation. We have people fighting over which alternative is correct and how often Caitlin should bring it up, when the discussion should be how to further expose the Sociopaths In Charge. 9/11 is a done deal for any one who listens.

  53. Dear Caitlin,
    The day will come when the truth of that story can be demonstrated, or the lies it was concocted of, no longer matter, and it will be clear, along with so much else. As you state often, the real issue is getting every thinking person, finding their own “cognitive dissonance”, the lie they are incapable of accepting, have intimate reason to KNOW it for what it is, and only when a significant majority have this, can we “force the truth to the top, and slam down the lies”.
    I’ve pursued this most of my sixty odd years, and expect the U.S. will fail, before we are willing to stand together, as “a people”, we are far better inclined to stand apart, and fight. That was the plan.
    Semper Fidelis,
    John McClain
    GySgt, USMC, ret.
    Vanceboro, NC, USA

  54. Thank You again Caitlyn for your thoughts. I am certain there are many people who for some reason I can’t explain can “see” the world from your perspective. It’s a kind of an awareness that can’t be fooled by narrative, like a built in lie detector. I think it’s a Consciousness thing.
    You are so right about the 9/11 subject. In spite of new scientific evidence supported by Architects and Engineers for 9/11, the video you posted and other evidence the subject goes nowhere.
    Perhaps you’ve heard that a number of local fire departments from around the NY area that sent and had members die on 9/11 have joined in a lawsuit that has been presented to a federal court. They allege that the buildings came down as a result of demolition. That story has been sidestepped by MSM too.
    If you haven’t read it, the book “Where did the Towers Go” by Dr. Judy Wood is an amazing piece of work based on her expertise in engineering. I think it is available from her directly. Loose copies were likely rounded up and shredded by the establishment……. it’s not something you see in bookstores. Thanks for shining the light in on dark places.

    1. Ray, these people are “controlled opposition” whose job is to maintain the lie of the 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured on that fateful day. 9/11 was essentially a massive Full Scale Anti-Terror Exercise comprising numerous smaller exercises and drills. Death and injury were staged just as they are in any drill.
      See my webpage:

  55. “… and I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened is fulla shit.”
    You don’t need to know exactly what happened just the significant elements, one of which is the pivotal element that eluded me for four long years of study. The absolutely fascinating aspect of 9/11 is the propaganda strategy aimed at the truthers. When you understand that strategy, you will really get how propaganda can be so very sophisticated and counterintuitive.
    9/11 is a phenomenon exhibiting the following characteristics:
    — A Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation (or psyop) in the form of a massive anti-terror Full Scale Exercise comprising many drills and exercises pushed out as a real terror attack. What a remarkable coincidence that the greatest number of drills and exercises occurred on US soil on the very same day as the most spectacular terror attack the world has ever known. Remarkable coincidence, no?
    — An Emperor’s New Clothes/Hitlerian lie right in our faces showing blatant disregard for Newtonian physics both:
    • horizontally – two 200-ton airliners melting into 500,000 ton steel frame skyscrapers and
    • vertically – three steel frame skyscrapers collapsing to the ground symmetrically in a matter of seconds with that of WTC-7 exhibiting all the signs of a classic implosion (while the twin towers’ collapses were of a different kind of controlled demolition)
    — Collaboration with the US government in the exercise by other national governments, the media, response agencies, corporations, banks and many others. (Remarkable coincidence that our own Little Johnny just happened to be in the Big Apple on 9/11, isn’t it?)
    — An ongoing propaganda campaign comprising two basic streams, one directed at the masses and one directed at those who recognise 9/11 is an inside conspiracy because of the clear fact of controlled demolition (9/11 truthers).
    • Story to the masses – Osama Bin Laden, 4 hijackings by 19 terrorists armed with boxcutters, 4 plane crashes involving incidental building collapses at the WTC and destruction of the West Wing of the Pentagon, DEATHS OF 3,000 PEOPLE AND INJURY TO 6,000
    • Story to the 9/11 truthers, using a number of disinformation agents – Controlled demolition particularly focused on the collapse of WTC-7, minimisation of analysis and expression of ambivalence in relation to plane crashes, DEATHS OF 3,000 PEOPLE AND INJURY TO 6,000
    • The reason for the two-streamed propaganda campaign is to keep the truth stagnant. While the truthers have one major piece of the puzzle correct (controlled demolition) but another incorrect (death and injury real) they will not be able to get anywhere because non-truthers will simply not accept that the US government killed all those people in the buildings … and in this belief the non-truthers are perfectly correct. That would never be the perps’ MO.
    What we must do is detach ourselves from any story presented (and especially be mindful of how they play to our emotions with stories of tragic deaths) and make our own story from the evidence provided. We need to wrest control of the story from the power elite and make our own story directly from the evidence – which, admittedly, can be tricky when you have wall-to-wall controlled opposition as in the case of 9/11 so cleverly mixing truth with lies. It took me four years of overcoming the clever propaganda strategy to work out the pivotal truth of 9/11: the staging of death and injury.​
    “Those who do not have power over the story that dominates their lives,
    the power to retell it, rethink it, deconstruct it, joke about it, and change it as times change,
    truly are powerless, because they cannot think new thoughts.”
    Salman Rushdie

    All the evidence backing claims above and an explication of the propaganda strategy aimed at the truthers is found below.

    1. From time to time, we see video storage of abandoned city buildings that are imploded by professional detonation firms. This seems to be a major operation that requires weeks of prep work by large teams of employees. And these are just 15-story mundane buildings. How many people would it take to “wire with explosives” the two tallest skyscrapers in America plus WTC Building No. 7? How long would such a project take? And no one saw any of these people or reported them to authorities or the superintendents of these buildings?
      What if the two planes for some reason never crashed into the buildings. Say, the pilots missed their target or the hijackers were not able to commander the planes. Suddenly, the CIA (?) has three massive buildings wired to the brim with explosives (that presumably could be discovered at any time by maintenance workers). Do they go ahead and detonate the buildings anyway? Take the chance of sending their squads back into the bowels of the building to remove the plastic explosives?
      I keep picturing all the CIA agents involved in this planning – planning that must have taken years. CIA agent comes home from dinner, talks to 10-year-old daughter, who asks, “Daddy, what did you do at work today?
      CIA Daddy: “Well, honey, we’re still wiring the World Trade Center buildings with explosives. We’re going to kill 40,000 innocent people here in a couple of weeks, so it takes a lot of concentration.”
      Daughter: “Good job, Daddy. I’m so proud of you.”
      Multiply this psychopath Dad times the 50 (200?) that also had to be working on the same project.
      I guess all of these people were convinced they were committing mass murder on an unprecedented scale to “protect Americans’ freedoms” or something.
      And what about that “missile” that blew a hole in the Pentagon? Well, who fired it? Who shot down the passenger jet that did NOT fly into the Pentagon? Where did they shoot it down? Where are all the people who boarded that plane that morning?
      Apparently, the more preposterous the theory, the more people who believe it.

      1. First sentence should read: “From time to time, we see video FOOTAGE of buildings being imploded”

      2. Bill, Your argument takes the form of the logical fallacy, argumentum ad speculum: if the buildings had been brought down by controlled demolition, people would have known about it.

        You speculate about what you think should have happened while disregarding the evidence. Evidence rules! – not speculation about what you think should have happened.

        We don’t have to know how they wired the buildings but I’m sure you can find explanations for how they could have managed it on the internet. Lots of empty floors in all those buildings for one thing.

        The thing is, we absolutely do know that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition because that is what the evidence clearly shows. There’s no mistaking a collapse by fire for a collapse by controlled demolition and we know that steel frame skyscrapers do not collapse in symmetrical fashion by fire. That’s a physical impossibility. If you think that WTC-7 came down by fire here’s a $5,000 challenge for you.

        1. Are you saying that if, say, the Sears tower was hit tomorrow by a passenger jet loaded with jet fuel traveling at great speeds, and the fire that started burned uncontrollably for an hour or more – and if this building was NOT wired “with controlled explosives” this building would not eventually collapse onto itself?

          Do you at least agree that all the people who wired all of these 3 buildings were taking a major risk of being discovered?

          1. Bill, you want to live in the world of speculation whereas I simply live in the world of evidence. The evidence shows the buildings came down by controlled demolition. End of story.

            I’d provide links to where they talk about the empty floors and how easy it would have been to lay the explosives but when you google these days all you get are official story pages.

            1. Well, “evidence” also reveals that two big passenger jets filled with jet fuel crashed into two of the buildings. I guess a good “experiment” would be to repeat this act with other skyscrapers of similar design and see if they also ultimately collapse. But I hope no one does this “experiment.” I’m pretty sure this was the first time such an event had occurred.

          2. The evidence does not at all show that passenger jets crashed into the twin towers. I’ve issued a challenge for those who believe they did to provide 10 points that favour that hypothesis over fake and no one has responded. If you believe something surely you want to prove it, Bill. I certainly would.

  56. George Webb has taken on more digging into 9/11. The same nefarious military political players keep popping up. Just like Ukraine. Holding the corrupt players in the 2016 primary and election accountable for their crimes will implode washingtons oligarchy… So would exposing just how far their greed went with 9/11. They just keep piling on the false flags and false narratives in an attempt to overwhelm us and they are succeeding.

    1. Sharon, I believe that “false flag” is a kind of propaganda term. It implies that an act is committed by one group who blames it on another when, in fact, that is rarely quite the case – the more generic term “psyop” is the more apt term. The alleged crimes of 9/11 are completely different from the crimes that were committed.
      Alleged crimes: terrorists hijacked four planes and crashed them into buildings resulting in the deaths of 3,000 and injury to 6,000.
      Actual crimes: perpetration of terror psyop making people believe the above. Controlled demolition of three buildings and damage to a number of others. The four plane crashes were faked as was death and injury. Images of the injured show that they are “drill injured” and the few images of dead people show they are faked.

      1. Well, I went to your link but stopped reading when I reached this line: “I already knew the plane crashes were faked”
        How does one “fake” two planes flying into a giant skyscraper? All of this video showing the planes flying into the buildings was “faked” – on the spot, live, immediately? Every TV network, local TV station and person holding a camcorder was in on the conspiracy?
        Witnesses who first heard the jets flying low overhead and then saw them explode into the building are all lying?
        Where are all the passengers on those two planes today? Are they alive and hidden somewhere?
        The CIA wired all three buildings with “controlled” demolition explosives and the plane crashes were faked and the “terrorists” were Patsies, and some Navy destroyer or F-15 actually fired the missile that damaged the Pentagon and another jet didn’t really crash in Pennsylvania and passengers on those planes didn’t really call loved ones and say their plane had been hijacked by Mideast men … and on an on and on.

        1. Where I say “I already knew the plane crashes were faked” there is a link to the page on the fakery of the planes. Please click the link.

          I don’t know what witnesses saw – they may well have seen planes – but the footage we were shown clearly shows fakery.

        2. And just to add I don’t know what happened to the passengers. Some may well have been made up but some obviously weren’t such as Barbara Olson. Maybe she’s on an island in the Caribbean, maybe she had a terminal illness and died soon after. I have no idea but what I do know is she didn’t die in Flight 77.

          1. It could be they are all like the passengers on the TV series “Lost.”

  57. I am surprised and confused by your position on the whole 9/11 thing. You have never struck me as someone who is weak and “gives up”.

    You: Firstly, the narrative control battle has already been decisively won by the other side.

    Me: I think you could say this exact same thing about most of your positions on everything. In my view there is probably nothing more important than getting to the truth on 9/11. This is much more than “narrative control”, and I am hopeful that at some point the message will get out and people will demand action. However, this can only happen via the voices of people like you with a significant audience. Now if you were to say to all of us that you do not want to jump into the “rabbit hole” because you fear being called a conspiracy theorist and possibly losing some of your followers, I’d believe that.

    One thing that is different in this whole 911 thing when compared to other “conspiracy theories” is the simple fact that WTC building 7 is the total smoking gun. It simply defies the laws of physics, and any person with any sense can see and understand this by simply watching the many videos of the collapse.

    You: Secondly, even if there were some way to show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11, the establishment propaganda machine would immediately narrative manage the problem away. The operation would be blamed on rogue actors, maybe a few powerful establishment loyalists would face consequences (though probably not) and be replaced with other establishment loyalists, and then the imperial propaganda machine would pace everyone into an understanding of why it’s still right and necessary to support the US-centralized empire and its globe-sprawling war machine. The status quo would march on essentially undisturbed. This is one hundred percent guaranteed as long as the empire still has a functioning propaganda engine.

    Me: This argument is absurd. If we were to “show everyone in the western world the truth of what happened on 9/11” we would probably be looking at a global revolution and the possible collapse of the U.S. empire. The truth about 911 could very possibly destroy the “functioning propaganda engine”.

    You may think this is all old news and it is time to move on, but there are many of us who do not agree. I am hopeful that the actions of people like AE911Truth and Lawyers’ Committee for 911 Inquiry will eventually gain the attention of the masses. To do this, the help of everyone who has common sense and the conviction to speak out is essential. It seems that you are not of this group.

    1. Not sure why you’re deliberately ignoring my actual position and ascribing an imaginary one to me instead. I did not “give up”; I clearly and explicitly said it’s simply more efficacious to attack other parts of the machine. This isn’t hard to understand.
      “we would probably be looking at a global revolution and the possible collapse of the U.S. empire.”
      I think that’s a childish fantasy, for the reasons I described in the text you already quoted. You vastly underestimate the power of imperial propaganda.
      “You may think this is all old news and it is time to move on”
      Again, you’re making up a position in your imagination and falsely ascribing it to me. This isn’t an essay about why nobody should talk about 9/11, it’s about why I don’t.

      1. Nice try… But suggesting others are childish does not help. You are pretty good at telling others what to think though.

        1. If you want your comments to get a more hospitable reception, try not intentionally misrepresenting people’s arguments on the internet. It’s an obnoxious behavior.
          One more thing:
          “I think you could say this exact same thing about most of your positions on everything.”
          No you can’t. The establishment propaganda surrounding 9/11 is VASTLY more embedded and indoctrinated than any of the narratives I drill down on. If you don’t know this, it’s because you haven’t spent time arguing those different narratives in front of a large audience and comparing them to the shrieking outrage you receive when you talk about 9/11. I have done this.

          1. I can see now that I cannot expect a hospitable reception form you if I disagree with you.

            1. Nothing to do with disagreement, as I’ve already clearly and repeatedly explained.

        2. Zero empathy in your reply.
          “telling others”, might have been better put, “suggesting to others”.
          It appears to me that you are a little intolerant of criticism. Defending one’s point of view in an articulate but polite manner requires thought.

      2. 9-11 is the foundation of the “machine.” It is used as justification for all of the evil that has been perpetrated since then and the phony American patriotism that is crammed down our throats every day.
        At the same time, there are very few people who actually believe the whole bizarre story. Anyone can see the obvious lies and contradictions in the official narrative. That’s why I think it’s very important to keep talking about it, if only to remind ourselves that there is literally nothing these monsters won’t do to hold on to their power to exploit the rest of us and the planet we inhabit.

    2. Martin, While this may seem incredible AE911Truth and the Lawyers’ Committee are, in fact, government outfits whose purpose is to suppress the pivotal truth of 9/11: that death and injury were staged. Incredible, no? They certainly had me fooled too.
      James Corbett is also controlled opposition. Man, can that guy do the wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing thing. Astounding! It took me awhile to get used to the idea that he wasn’t who he purported to be but, sadly, yep he’s another one whose sole purpose is to suppress the pivotal truth. In this blog post Allan Weisbecker points out how James uses NLP techniques to sneakily put out that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Now we all know that James would certainly know that didn’t happen.

  58. From the first moment I learned about the WTC tragedy I knew that those buildings were taken down by explosives. For me this was easy since I have an academic degree in physics and from experience also an extensive knowledge on mechanics. The preparation for the explosions must have been long term and complex. So authorities must have been involved in this preparation. By now there are many studies and articles that confirm my position.

    Kind Regards, Ben

    1. Ben, did you see Herb Kline’s post on this thread referencing the new study by the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering of the University of Alaska – Fairbanks led by Dr. Leroy Hulsey concluding that Building 7 did not come down by simple office fires.
      The public comments period expired on November 7, 2019. The report will be made public by the end of this year . and
      Of course this study gets ZERO PRESS in the corporate media. Amazingly, given that this was the greatest crime on US soil since the alleged Pearl Harbor attack and the media should be clamoring for a scientific explanation of it . . . but we all know why they do not.

      1. CAITLIN — since this important scientific study is getting zero press, would you at least consider an essay on it when it is released end of December 2019, specifically addressing for example why the media is deep sixing it. Thanks!!

      2. Hi Coll, I did see this and there is much, much more.

        1. Yes, Ben, including the July 2019 resolution passed by the Franklin Square-Munson, New York Board of Fire Commissioners: ” . . the overwhelming evidence presented in said petition demonstrates beyond any doubt that pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries — not just airplanes and the ensuing fires — caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings, killing the vast majority of the victims who perished that day;”
          Their resolution is the first one of this nature but will not be the last.

        2. Hi Ben, But I wonder if you know the pivotal truth of 9/11? That death and injury were staged and that a massive propaganda campaign has been targeted at truthers to keep them indoctrinated with the lie of 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured to ensure they are hamstrung in getting out the truth because non-truthers will simply not accept that the US government would callously kill all those people in the buildings … and, ironically, it is the non-truthers who are correct in their disbelief rather than the truthers. The US government would never kill those people in that fashion. Not their MO at all. 9/11 was a psyop and you don’t kill people in psyops unless you want them killed.

          Reasons they would never kill those people:
          1. They absolutely didn’t have to with their superb duping skills. My goodness, they can snow us with propaganda and even tell us the truth in their own special way and yet still get us to believe their propaganda.

          2. They need to involve a large number of agency staff, media, a number of other actors and so on – they’re not going to be AOK with being complicit in the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens, are they?

          3. The fallout from the loved ones of those killed. Can you imagine when controlled demolition is so obvious?

          Do you know about the twin towers “magic dust”?

          No doubt you will know an awful lot already on my webpages on 9/11 but I’m sure you’ll find things you don’t already know.

          1. Hi Petra, many questions and they are not my problem. My idea about what happened is fully clear and supported by many.

            Kind Regards, Ben

      3. Coll, This may sound incredible but while it is the God’s honest truth, of course, controlled demolition has been used as a kind of propaganda.
        At first sight “controlled demolition as propaganda” seems very counterintuitive. All 9/11 truthers know that controlled demolition of the twin towers and WTC-7 on 9/11 is an absolute fact, no question about it so it seems counterintuitive that this clear fact would be used as propaganda … but it is.
        The perpetrators knew that both:
        1. footage of 200-ton airliners melting into 500,000-ton steel frame skyscrapers and
        2. the claim of collapses of those skyscrapers in the World Trade Centre by fire
        is in direct contradiction of unbreakable Newtonian laws of physics.
        Airliners would collide with the skyscrapers, not melt into them and
        Steel frame skyscrapers cannot collapse to the ground in a matter of a few seconds in symmetrical fashion from fire
        So how to manage this Emperor’s New Clothes affair whose truth will be worked out by the small but still significant percentage of the population paying attention?
        I’ll mention here the third major claim about the events of the day:
        3. Tragically, 3,000 people died and 6,000 were injured.
        Through smoke’n’mirrors style propaganda, the perps suppressed:
        the falsity of the third claim (3,000 deaths and injury to 6,000)
        using the truth related to the second claim (controlled demolition was cause of collapses).
        To see the rest of my blog post with links (plus Part 2) see:

    2. “The preparation for the explosions must have been long term and complex.”
      You “knew” these buildings were “taken down by explosives” but your above sentence should tell you why this almost certainly did NOT happen.
      How many people do you think were involved in the prep work to detonate three massive buildings? Can you cite a number as an expert? And all of these people stayed quiet for years leading up to the event, and not one of them has spoken in the decades since.
      How does the CIA find two – much less 100 – employees who are willing to kill 100,000 of their fellow citizens? We are supposed to believe that All of these people were willing to risk life imprisonment or possible death sentences if these “long term” and “complex” preparations were discovered.
      Did any of these employees involved in the conspiracy ever ask why they were getting ready to kill everyone in three buildings plus who knows how many people on the ground below?
      Wouldn’t YOU ask your bosses: “Hey, tell me again, why are we getting ready to blow up this skyscraper? isn’t this going to kill a few innocent people?”

      1. Hi Bill, many questions and they are not my problem. My idea about what happened is fully clear and supported by many.

        Kind Regards, Ben

        1. But I do think mine are fair or common-sense questions. I’ve posted them on several sites before and I never get any answers. It’s not a hard question: How many people would have to be involved in doing all the prep work to bring down three gigantic buildings with “controlled explosive devices?”
          I mean, could ONE person do all the work by himself? How many other people would have to know what this person(s) was doing?

          1. No idea and I do not care.

  59. Aaron John March Avatar
    Aaron John March

    Nice one Caitlin 🙂

  60. Where are all the people who were on that plane that we are told did NOT crash into the Pentagon?
    How many people would it take to wire 3 WTC buildings with explosives? How long would such an operation take? Why didn’t anyone see these people doing this?
    I don’t identify with the 9-11 truthers because there are so many implausibilities to their theories. With so many more credible conspiracy theories to investigate, endorsing the non-sensical ones impugns one’s credibility. I also believe Oswald killed JFK and acted alone. I do not believe the FBI has a secret team that organizes and executes all of these school shootings or the Vegas hotel sniper mass murder.
    This revealed, I DO believe in other conspiracies. I certainly believe there has been a conspiracy to cover-up the Epstein operation and to protect VIPs, including the US. government. I believe there is a conspiracy to rig gold and silver markets (in fact, this is probably the greatest and most important untold scandal of them all). That is, belief in some conspiracy theories does not mean you have to believe in all of them. You take them on a case by case basis. If there are too many implausibilities in the theories, I reject them (or consider them extremely unlikely to have happened). Showing that one does not automatically accept believe ALL “conspiracy theories,” – that one is willing to reject the conclusions of some of these theories – should give a person more credibility when he argues that another does qualify as a conspiracy that is being covered up. Conversely, those who argue that EVERYTHING bad that happens is a nefarious, orchestrated conspiracy don’t have much of a leg to stand on logically.
    P.S.Re: 9-11, I DO believe there was a conspiracy to hide Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the scheme.
    P.P.S. And you are a wimp if you are afraid to say what you believe, or are afraid to call a bogus conspiracy theory a bogus conspiracy theory.

    1. The issue of this email thread is not the accuracy or inaccuracy of the events of 911. That is not why Caitlin wrote her essay since she makes her position clear by referencing Corbett’s brilliant video.
      The point Caitlin wishes to make is Why Discuss 911? How does discussing it or not discussing it advance or impede the Empire’s Narrative and consequently Empire’s policies and actions?
      This is the kernel of her essay, and I appreciate that she raises this question . . . i just strongly disagree with her response. But I also appreciate that, like the good critical thinker she is, she keeps the door open. Thank you to her and her husband for that.

      1. Not really the point being discussed here, no. What I discuss here is why I personally don’t write about 9/11, not whether or not anybody else should. I think it’s good that it’s a topic being discussed in the margins for whoever’s ready to look at it.

    2. The issue of this email thread is not the accuracy or inaccuracy of the events of 911. That is not why Caitlin wrote her essay since she makes her position clear by referencing Corbett’s brilliant video.
      The point Caitlin wishes to make is Why Discuss 911? How does discussing it or not discussing it advance or impede the Empire’s Narrative and consequently Empire’s policies and actions?
      This is the kernel of her essay, and I appreciate that she raises this important question . . . i just strongly disagree with her response. But I also appreciate that, like the good critical thinker she is, she keeps the door open. Thank you to her and her husband for that.

      1. Those of us who do believe in other (more plausible) conspiracy theories are more easily dismissed when we are put in the group who swallows nonsensical theories. So if you happen to think the government is covering up for Epstein and his associates (very plausible even likely), you and your views can be rejected because it is assumed that you also believe that elements of the U.S. government brought down the WTC buildings with explosives (extremely implausible). Theories that are credible and important and need to be pursued seriously are dismissed because such arguments are being advanced by “kooks” who believe ridiculous assertions. Many of the important arguments “we” make are not reaching a wider audience because we are put into a group that advances theories that really are “wacky.” It is important to one’s credibility to be able to point out that just because you believe one conspiracy seems very possible, this does not mean you believe that ALL conspiracy theories have merit. All conspiracy theories are not equal.

    3. Summarizing the above more concisely: Some conspiracy theories simply insult my intelligence. Others seem quite plausible and can be more convincingly supported. If ascertaining “the truth” is important, one should not be afraid to point out glaring logic holes in theories that do not pass the “common sense” test.

      1. Unbreakable laws of Newtonian physics prove that 9/11 was an inside job, Bill. It’s very, very simple.
        The pivotal truth of 9/11 is though that death and injury were staged. The greatest number of exercises and drills ever to occur on US soil occurred on the same day as the greatest terror attack the world has ever known. Now, you are not going to tell me that that is a coincidence are you?
        What’s involved in drills? Staged injury and death.

        1. Well, I went to your link but stopped reading when I reached this line: “I already knew the plane crashes were faked”
          How does one “fake” two planes flying into a giant skyscraper? All of this video showing the planes flying into the buildings was “faked” – on the spot, live, immediately? Every TV network, local TV station and person holding a camcorder was in on the conspiracy?
          Witnesses who first heard the jets flying low overhead and then saw them explode into the building are all lying?
          Where are all the passengers on those two planes today? Are they alive and hidden somewhere?

          1. They did it in the Medusa Touch and the crash physics work better in that film.

          2. I have no idea where the passengers are, Bill, but what you must look at is the actual evidence of the planes. We don’t know what happened to the people but we can tell whether the plane crashes were real or not and the evidence shows they were fake. It’s very straightforward. As long as it’s not an impossibility for people to be “sheepdipped” (yes, it’s a thing, people get given new identities and are shipped off somewhere) then we can accept “something happened with the people”.

            1. Rebekah Roth, former airline attendant and purser, talks about what happened to the passengers. She wrote a fiction book Methodical Illusion, but she talks in fact about it on various podcasts. Not saying i fully believe her and others criticize her, but lots of plausible stuff there.

        2. You sound like one of those operatives who gives that kooky extra spin to a real story in order to muddy the waters and discredit the real facts by association

          1. So, Joe, do you think the US government callously let all those people die in the buildings? If so, can you tell me why they would do that when they could fake it?
            Do you think that 9/11 was a psyop and do you include in your definition of a psyop killing people you don’t want to kill?

      2. Bill, does the conspiracy theory which states that 19 high-jackers could use 2 planes to knock down 3 high rise office towers in one day pass your “common sense” test? In addition, these 19 Muslims were able to be invisible to the hundreds of airport security cameras in use that day.

    4. Bill Rice Jr,

      It is not a “conspiracy theory” to say that one does not believe the official narrative of 9/11. No one has to have a theory, conspiracy or otherwise, about what happened on 9/11 to know that the official narrative is pure BS. Do you believe the official narrative conspiracy theory? Did you watch the James Corbett video?

      P.S. Just ignore Petra Liverani. He is either a troll or a complete idiot.

      1. David,
        Yes, I watched the video. I DO believe the “official narrative” on this event (9-11) – with a caveat. I do think the Saudi’s role in this has been hidden. That is, there were probably many more VIP Saudi citizens who had knowledge of what was going to happen than we have been told.
        Our government is obviously hesitant to criticize Saudi Arabia (just look at the murder of Kharsoggi (sp?).
        Most people who reject the “official narrative” do substitute a conspiracy theory that posits that this was an “inside job.” I think most believe at least some element of our own government was involved.

        1. Okay, if you watched the video and still believe the official narrative conspiracy theory there is no point continuing this discussion. Have a nice day.

  61. The 9-11-01 operation, like the murder of President John F. Kennedy, and so many other diabolical schemes always succeed because the human population is extremely gullible and full of biases. Human hatred of ” others ” will always be used very effectively because it is the easiest human symptom to manipulate. As Mr. Tom Welsh said on Ms Johnstone”s website recently:
    So what we want to treat as a civilised, intelligent, informed debate is really a simple yes-or-no question.
    “Do you choose to be a member in good standing of our in-group, or not?
    If so, you must swear allegiance, obey all commands without hesitation or thought, and – above all – believe whatever you are told, however absurd.
    The penalty for not doing any of this is to be cast into outer darkness beyond the protection of the group”.
    So when someone says that Jeremy Corbyn or Boris Johnson or Donald Trump (or anyone else) is a Russian agent, what they are really telling you is
    “That person is not a member of our group.
    He is, in fact, a spy for the enemy group.
    KILL HIM!!!”

    1. See, it makes perfect sense to me that one person – Oswald who had these lofty, warped visions of himself – might be motivated to kill a president if such a chance ever presented itself. Which, as it turns out, it did. The simplest explanation IS often the best. Is history not full of stories of a “crazy” “lone gunman” who shot famous or important people? This has happened many times. What’s amazing to me is that 80 percent of the world’s population doesn’t see this as what “really” transpired.

      1. Mr. Rice, you can believe anything that you want to; it is your mind and your sense. However, President Kennedy’s brains were blown out of the back of his head from a rifle shot that entered his head from the front ( the grassy knoll ).

        1. The bullet entered his head from the back. Vince Bugliosi answers/explains how the brain matter could explode backwards. I have read his book, but don’t have it handy. Do you think Oswald fired ANY shots?

            1. But do you think Oswald fired any shot(s) at the president?

  62. Doesn’t really matter anymore how or why the buildings fell, lightening, termites, whatever; it’s all a matter now of what use became of it. Since then this country either directly or indirectly has killed close to 27 million people in retaliation, most of them children.

  63. “Not into attacking a heavily-armored narrative about something that happened 18 years ago, but into independently verifiable deceptions happening here and now….”

    The ahistoricity of your statement is shocking. I guess the oh-so-ancient topic of WWII is off bounds too, i.e., the lie WWII was a “Good War,” which enables a concept of a Good War to exist and be promoted in the corporate narrative.

    Aren’t the armoured lies likely to be the most consequential?

    Oh, let’s not cut out the root of the diseased tree (911), let’s just keep cutting off the branches it keeps sprouting.

  64. I doubt Corbett buys your cop-out logic (which can apply to almost any issue you tackle). Ask James why he still keeps talking about 911.

    1. If you had an actual argument against my actual position you would have made it.

      1. Coll Doll IS making strong arguments, it is YOU that are not taking them onboard.

        Caitlin Johnstone, you are behaving exactly LIKE mainstream media – you simply proclaim there is no point i.e. “argument” to what is being said and shut it down. This is called gatekeeping.

        1. Nothing you just said is happening is happening in real life.

  65. “I think anyone who claims to know with absolute certainty exactly what happened [on 911] is fulla shit.” Straw man you create there (just the way the corporate media narrative does) because no one in the truth community asserts this.

    1. Not a straw man at all. Most who believe the establishment narrative think they know with absolute certainty what happened, for example.

      1. By that statement I thought you were dissing the 911 truthers. I now see by your reply you meant the official establishment narratives believes their own lies. Sorry, CJ, on this yes you are right, they are fulla shit.

  66. Once again your words are a perfect mirror to my sentiments.

    The existing narrative is so well entrenched it’s like standing in front of a train with your arm up saying stop to even question it.

    The things I do know about it that are completely out in the open are as outrageous as anything underground that we could dream up and yet nobody cares or even blinks an eyelash. We shouldn’t have to go one bit beyond the established narrative to be hanging a lot of people for treason and international war crimes.

    We spent decades at war based on a completely non existent pretext of weapons of mass destruction that didn’t exist and even when clearly outlined as not existing no one (aka Bush, Cheney, the crew behind them, etc…) paid for international war crimes or for treason.

    That war was waged over the whole middle east for the nebulous target “terrorists” in the nebulous destination “the middle east” (of which there were only a literal handful of actual people if you believe the narrative”).

    They also levied countless unconstitutional laws on the books that to this day give the legal precedent to go full fascist any time they want. God knows with those laws together with the level of military and militarized police in place; if the masses ever do wake up and take to the streets it’ll be worse than 1930s Europe. As long as the masses play along with war and poverty abroad and we pretend things are better than outward fascism things here in the west won’t look like a police state on the outside.

    1. Thank you Vayu,
      you have just written a perfect description as to why it is absolutely necessary to get to the bottom of the 911 crime, and not restrict oneself to its various symptoms and offshoots.

      It is on the basis of 911 that the rest has been justified by the government and mainstream media , and continues to be so, even as the cover story of this horrendous crime crumbles to dust around them.

      The current censorship underway is not a sign of TPTB’s strength but of desperation – as the lie, and all the additional lies based on the first, unravel.

      Principled journalists understand this.

  67. King Louis XVI type of bat shit crazy, apparent to everyone when it got pointed out.

  68. What does victory look like to you? I’m at a loss. Does the term 100th Monkey mean anything to you? Where in the 100th Monkey Effect do you think we are? Was there really no one before you? How do you suppose you are where you are at today?

    How about this, is the Empire just starting out? Middle aged? Or damn near dead? Sorry but we are at the term of Empire to point out, it is THEY who are bat shit crazy, to their face, in public, now, tomorrow and any chance you get.

  69. “Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes” > principia-australia(.)org > the thermite hoax
    “Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11” > VeteransToday(.)com > eighty article bibliography
    “Exposing NIST Jenga Game” > VeteransToday(.)com > FEMA & NIST fraud
    based on exhaustive analysis of all evidence

  70. Just after 9/11 there were furious debates going on for a few years on all the comments forums about what happened on that day. I was part of the arguments on the NYT forums and the CBC forums. Then, it all stopped. (((they))) stopped arguing with us. The reason they stopped was because their arguments “the official story” was so utterly ridiculous they could no longer defend it. So they stopped arguing with us. You will be hard pressed to find a debate going on anywhere on the Internet about 9/11. Why not? Because we won.

    So what they did then was make us winning irrelevant. By denigrating us “tin foil hat conspiracy theorists”, shutting down the fora, isolating us on the Internet…they were able to bury the fact that we’d won. Also the utter corruption of the US judicial system and so-called “security agencies” [CIA and FBI] ensured that all the evidence we had amassed never went anywhere.

    So the main learning to take away from 9/11 the mass murder atrocity of September 11, 2001 is that you can win the battle but not win the war. The war is the larger conflict between good and evil, justice and criminality truth and lies that has been going on since the beginning of time.

    Yes, the truth will ultimately come out about what happened on 9/11. The masses will eventually accept the horror…but only when it no longer has the ability to rock their world.

  71. I agree with your position on the whole 9/11 take. The only thing we know for sure it the official narrative is complete BS. As someone who saw the Pentagon shortly after the attack, even Stevie Wonder could see there was no debris that should have been there if a passenger airliner had struck. The cheesy videos are laughable at best, and airliners hitting the twin towers would be the equivalent of a bug hitting your car’s windscreen. The fact that NOBODY got fired, reprimanded or censured, is also an indicator that the official story in BS. I used to have NIST as an IT customer and it was striking how many well-respected scientists who worked there were suddenly “retired”. The Corbett video is a reminder of how ludicrous the whole story was.

  72. The James Corbett video is certainly the most efficient presentation on 9/11 in terms of most information in such a short time (only 5 minutes).

    Unfortunately though you are exactly right that the narrative battle has been decisively won by the other side, and that it wouldn’t change anything even if the truth did come out. But I don’t think they would have to narrative manage the problem away if the truth came out. The people who still believe the official narrative about 9/11 do so because they simply believe what they want to believe, and any facts that refute that belief are denied or ignored, or it is claimed that they indicate the exact opposite of what they actually indicate. Dick Cheney could hold a televised news conference tomorrow and admit everything about 9/11 and it would change nothing. The MSM would mostly ignore and bury the story, and what little bit of coverage it got the pundits would say he said the exact opposite of what he actually said. Everyone who still believes the official narrative about 9/11 (which unfortunately is most people) would just continue to believe what they believe now. The 9/11 Truthers would be excitedly pointing out the news conference and it would be met with a bunch of stares and yawns.


    check out the above recent study from the University of Alaska (Fairbanks) providing convincing evidence (my opinion) that the U.S. government/Main Stream Media lied to the American people (and to the world) about the nature of the 9-11 attacks — this evidence shows that pre-set explosives/incendiaries were somehow involved in the collapse of WTC-7, a capability which al Qaeda did not possess, but which the U.S. (with possible help from the Israelis) did possess — motive, means, opportunity — the U.S. Empire had it all — is this enough to arose the curiosity of at least some Americans — wouldn’t know without trying — too soon (my opinion) to give up on this.

  74. Hey Caitlin, Being caught up going down the hole of 9/11? Understandable. As are your justifications and strategic choices about how to manage your energy in the psywar. It does seem this piece is a little dismissive of the historical revivification of outrage in the service of countering colonized mindsets. Thank you for the reminder of Corbette’s excellent piece as such a reminder. Just a note: the legal story on this is presently being played via the Lawyer’s Committee for 9/11 Truth moves forward [or not] to the grand jury of NY. This is an alive story, and part of the journey against the psywars you so brilliantly assail.
    Unity of Purpose Multiplicity of Tactics.

  75. Take your point, and of course the deaths of so many people also make it an easy discussion for them to shut down. But manufacturing consent for war was not the only goal of the operation. The other was to open the door to begin the process of turning the USA into a fascist police state, by creating and then constantly feeding a state of fear and anger in the entire population. Homeland security and all its attendant and increasing legislation is eroding people’s rights as enshrined in the constitution, and opened the door to spying on and abusing their own people. And people are accepting it because of 9/11.

    1. When certain elements of a story are proven false, Margaret, it’s always good to consider if any of the story is true. They had absolutely no reason to kill the people in the buildings (the plane crashes were faked so no one died in them) and they are superbly skilled at duping us so that’s what they did with death and injury.
      They knew that people would work out the buildings (and, less often, the planes) so to ensure the truth stagnated they ensured that the truthers kept believing in the lie of death and injury. But consider that the greatest number of drills and exercises ever to occur on US soil occurred on exactly the same day that the most spectacular terrorist attack the world has ever known occurred. What do they do for drills and exercises? They don’t do them for real, they staged them … and that’s what they did.

  76. When you think 9/11 you need to think Mossad, Israel. Entitiy with the most likely means and most likely motive.

    1. Oh yes. Everything always leads back to Israel. After all they run the world from their shadow government.

      1. USSLibertyMovie(.)com > LBJ tried Gulf of Tonkin, Mediterranean Edition > but God was not on his side

      2. “Shadow government” pretty much sums it up. Name another country welded to a national identity through a ‘religion’ like Israel. I said “most likely means and motive”. I still stand by that. Your mockery doesn’t change it.

    2. All the focus on Israel is a form of propaganda, Clint. Not saying that Israel wasn’t involved, of course it was but so were other countries. I’d say a large number of countries were, in fact, complicit in some way, including our very own Australia, after all, where indeed was Little Johnny Howard on that fateful day – in the Big Apple, that’s where.
      The thing is they distract us with heaps and heaps of story about this, that and the other to divert us from the basics of what 9/11 really was, essentially a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terror Exercise pushed out as real where the only major realities were destruction of and damage to buildings. The plane crashes were faked as were death and injury. That’s 9/11 in a nutshell. See how they have to divert us with so much crap to prevent us seeing the essentials? It’s all smoke’n’mirrors, it truly is.

  77. No. Clearly no one who would initiate an illegal war that killed a million people, displaced countless others, and began a very politically convenient immigration crisis in Europe with staggering implications, all after stealing a U.S. presidential election, would stoop so low as to mislead anyone about the deaths of thousands of Americans.

    1. They misled us all right about the deaths of 3,000 Americans … in that they didn’t happen.

Leave a Reply