My Journey to 9/11 Truth

I am a 25 year old British male based in the south of the UK. In 2007, my outlook on life changed completely when I came to the realisation that 9/11 was an inside job, and that the mainstream media is capable of making people believe enormous lies and myths. Despite my education and my interest in world affairs, even my particular interest in world history, I had been deceived.

I think back to what I thought about 9/11 before my 'awakening' as someone trying to recall a dream.

The Mainstream Media perspective

When the attacks happened, like almost everyone else, I was in shock. Within days, the media was telling us that the attacks were orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden, who quickly became the face of evil, and that he acted without the aid of any government; that he was the mastermind behind a terrorist network called Al Qaeda. Why would they attack us? This question was pondered for a few days by everyone, before the general public (including myself) accepted the answer provided by George Bush: that they are evil, and despise our freedoms and wealth.

I have a vague recollection of the media reporting "revelations" about "what really happened" on 9/11. Here are some that I remember, and what I thought about them at the time:

• It turned out that "Bush Knew", as the BBC reported. (How incompetent of him!)
• Foreign intelligence agencies sent warnings to the Americans. (Damn bureaucracy!)
  
• Some training exercises were going on, which confused the air traffic controllers and NORAD. (What an unfortunate coincidence!)
• The 9/11 families were unhappy that Henry Kissinger was appointed to head the 9/11 Commission and forced him to resign. (They're trying to cover their own backs to stop themselves getting fired or losing popularity! At least they've got someone decent to do that important job now!)
  

The media "taught" me also:

• That there was no doubt the attacks were orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden, and that no-one else was involved.
• That the attacks necessitated the "War on Terror" which would start with an invasion of Afghanistan and the PATRIOT Act; we would all have to surrender some of our liberty for security in this "new political climate".

And perhaps the most powerful view that I had was this:

• That anyone who was saying that 9/11 was an inside job was a crazy conspiracy theorist.

The Michael Moore perspective

In 2004, I watched, with mild interest, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11". I felt like I was watching an independent, anti-establishment film about 9/11, which would reveal the truth behind what the politicians were lying about and trying to keep covered up. I thought Moore was providing a "middle-ground" view between the outrageous claims of these "conspiracy theorists" and the spin the politicians and (mainstream) media presented. This, I thought, was close to the truth.

And what did that film show or imply?

• That the Bush family and Bin Laden family were closely linked. But Osama Bin Laden rebelled from his family and "stabbed Bush in the back". Bush wanted to keep this secret.
  
• That rich Saudis, or Pakistan, might have been involved in financing the attacks, and the White House wanted to keep this secret for political and/or personal reasons.
• That Bush wanted to attack Saddam Hussein, and that he would "blame" the attacks on him. He didn't get his way however, because it was "proved" that Bin Laden was behind the attacks. Damn! Now, Bush would have to think of another way to sell an invasion of Iraq to the public! And he did!
  
• That George Bush, stunned and confused in a Florida classroom, was thinking about all this, instead of doing something - anything - else at that moment. What an idiot! Vote Democrat next time!
  
• That the War on Terror has stripped away many of our civil liberties, but its all necessary because those terrorists are out there and we need the government to keep us secure.
  

There it was, I thought: the TRUTH, or, at least, close to it. It was fashionable to blame George Bush for, through his own incompetence, and that of his Administration, failing to prevent 9/11. An extreme view would be to say that he "found out about" the attacks just beforehand and deliberately chose not to act (to advance his imperial agenda), but that would be bordering on the wild speculations of those "conspiracy theorists".

The Shock and Denial Stage

In 2006, a friend of mine lent me a copy of 9/11: The Road to Tyranny by Alex Jones, which he had downloaded. Even though I had been told that the argument being made by the film - that 9/11 was an inside job - was compelling, it still took me several months to get round to watching it. When I first watched it, I was struck by the amount of information about 9/11 that I did not know: 3 skyscrapers collapsed on 9/11, the hijackers were looked after and trained by U.S. intelligence services, key evidence was destroyed and withheld, fake evidence was planted, officials told bare-faced lies, Bin Laden is a CIA asset, many people had foreknowledge, and powerful people within the U.S. administration had openly expressed a desire for "a new Pearl Harbor" to launch their 'War on Terror'.

The film also educated me on the history of the use of false-flag attacks to create myths, using the Problem-Reaction-Solution method. The Reichstag Fire. The Gleiwitz Incident. Pearl Harbor. Operation Ajax. The Northwoods Document. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident. The Attack on the USS Liberty. All events that I had previously either not known about, been misled about, or regarded as "one-offs". All now fully admitted and documented uses of Problem-Reaction-Solution. The evidence for the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing and 1995 Oklahoma City Federal Building Bombing being the same is also compelling.

This film, there was no doubt about it, was asserting that there were many "Big Lies" that are being told to the public. It didn't stop there. The film outlined the history of the New World Order: from the establishment of the Federal Reserve System and the Council on Foreign Relations, the creation and financial support for both communism and fascism, the deliberate causing of the Wall Street Crash and Great Depression, the funding of Hitler and eugenics policies to their plans for a one world tyrannical government in total control of the bulk of humanity, who will serve the Elite as slaves. After they have established a cashless-society control-grid and police state in the U.S. and internationally, this film told me about their plans to eliminate 80% of the world's population.

All this information was too much for me to take. I could not argue against the evidence I had seen in this film and I agreed with my closest friends that, yes, 9/11 was an inside job. But it could not all be true, I thought; we all could not, surely, have been so completely deceived, conditioned and propagandised, to believe complete lies about so many issues. For a few months, the film played on my mind only occasionally. I wandered just what was true and what was false in it. I told almost no-one about what I believed (or been suckered in by?), or had become skeptical about. I did not want to be a conspiracy theorist. I did not want to find out for myself, or even attempt to find out, how far the lies went. I carried on with my life just as before.

My Awakening

In May 2007, I rented a copy of 9/11: Press For Truth, a film made by the families of the victims of the attack about their search for truth and their quest for answers to their many unanswered questions. I do not remember why I rented it; I had no idea that it would have the effect it had on me. Deep down, I think I needed to see Press For Truth because I too had many unanswered questions about 9/11; a film made by the 9/11 families ought to do more than just scratch the surface as Michael Moore had done, but without jumping to the "extremism" of Alex Jones.

The film made some key points:

• That there had been a carefully orchestrated cover-up of the events of 9/11 - that the 9/11 Commissioners had numerous conflicts of interest; that they were hampered in their investigations; that their Report was essentially written by appointed staff under the guidance of White House insider Philip Zelikow; and that their Report was entirely unsatisfactory and even deceptive.
  
• That there was foreknowledge - that at least 11 different foreign nations had warned the U.S. of an attack; that NORAD, the CIA and the FBI all knew of the threat of a multiple airliner terrorist attack; that the President himself knew; that FBI investigations of Al Qaeda had been blocked by the White House prior to 9/11; that some of the hijackers were known terrorists; and that the mainstream media was manipulating the news about the events of 9/11, and giving out false messages.
• That Bin Laden was never the real aim of the war in Afghanistan - he was deliberately not captured and was allowed to flee to Pakistan; that President Bush announced shortly after the invasion that he did not care where Bin Laden was; that the Bin Laden's and Bush's were close allies; that Al Qaeda was a creation of the CIA; that Pakistan financed the hijackers; that the military-industrial complex and large corporations had profited from the war, as well as the politicians; and that the 'War on Terror' is largely a myth.
  

The film does not cross the line into claiming that 9/11 was an inside job, but, given all that it does say, that explanation seems to fit the pattern of these facts better than the official account that all this was due to just supreme incompetence, coincidence, and bad luck.

Based on the evidence I had seen until this point, I now felt sure that, at the very least, the attacks were deliberately allowed to take place. And now I wanted to know more. I wanted to know if, as Alex Jones says, insiders actually orchestrated the attack. In particular I wanted to know if it was true that the World Trade Center, including Building 7, were destroyed controlled demolition. If this were true, then it immediately implies that 9/11 was indeed an inside job.

My Press for Truth

And so I turned, at last, to the internet. What had previously been a novelty, a convenience, and a source of entertainment, became a vital tool of research. Through the internet, I could read all the views: the official view, and supporting arguments, and all the various opposing views that have been expressed. I would use the scientific method to address the scientific question of which theory best supported the observations.

I read the work of Professor Steven Jones, outlining his objections to the NIST Report and his alternative hypothesis involving thermite explosives in his paper Why Indeed Did The WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?. I watched documentaries like 9/11 Mysteries. I read David Ray Griffin's The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why The Official Story Cannot Be True.

Although the evidence was convincing, I didn't feel confident enough to be sure that what they were saying is true, and that there isn't some other explanation. I turned to see what those who support the official are saying about the controlled demolition hypothesis. The official theory is supported by NIST's two FAQ sheets (one and two) and by Popular Mechanics' Debunking the 9/11 Myths article. For a time, I was swaying, I didn't know who to believe - the 9/11 Truth Movement had a good case, but some things the "debunkers" were saying made me doubt it.

In digging deeper, I found responses and critiques of these "debunking" efforts, written by members of the 9/11 Truth Movement, such as Jim Hoffman and David Ray Griffin. These responses reveal the debunkers as being deceptive and manipulative, lying and twisting things. After reading the responses, I realised not only that these debunkers fail to debunk the evidence supporting the alternative theories, but that that isn't even their aim - their sole aim is to convince their readers that they have been debunked, using trickery.

Understanding the efforts and dirty tactics gone to by the establishment to keep the 9/11 Truth Movement out of the mainstream was what finally convinced me that 9/11 was an inside job.

During my reading, I learned that there are arguments within the 9/11 Truth Movement that are as heated as arguments between the Movement and the establishment.

Knowing that the debunkers seize on any faulty logic or questionable evidence, and draw attention to extreme arguments over the most fundamental ones, I was determined that my view of what really happened that day be as close to the truth as possible. Were explosives (like thermite) used to destroy the WTC, or was it a directed energy weapon? Was it Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon, or something else? What happened to Flight 93?

Internal disagreements on questions like this caused the split, in January 2007, of the top group of 9/11 Truth Movement scholars, into two factions. The breakaway faction, called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, is led by Steven Jones and focuses on the thermite hypothesis, and dismisses views such as that a missile hit the Pentagon, or that Flight 93 didn't exist. The minority of scholars who endorsed such viewpoints were left in the original Scholars for 9/11 Truth group, led by James Fetzer.

Reading the discussions between these two groups helped me to identify who was honestly seeking the truth about 9/11, and who was trying to obfuscate the issues and promoting false theories as science.

Reading the discussions between the two groups helped me to identify who was honestly seeking the truth about 9/11, and who was trying to obfuscate the issues and promoting false theories as science. Some of these articles are listed on this page, and there are more on my wikipedia user sub-page.

Understanding 9/11 misinformation, and disinformation, is integral to a full understanding 9/11 Truth.

Widening my research; wikipedia and this blog

I started speaking to people about 9/11 shortly after I came to know for sure that it was an inside job. I was laughed at and ridiculed, and I could not answer satisfactorily all the questions that were thrown at me. Like why? And who? And how?

I asked people to have an open mind and look at the evidence, watch documentaries and see what I had seen. But no one did. I began to understand that it was these 'larger questions' that were preventing people from looking at the evidence. I understood now that this was why I had taken 6 years to look at the evidence myself.

And so I did more research - more detail, and more 'big-picture' - other issues besides 9/11. I followed the leads provided to me by David Ray Griffin, Peter Dale Scott and Alex Jones. I realised that the mainstream story about many other events was also false - I began to see that our society is dominated by myths.

And what is more, these myths are all connected, as they have all be created and perpetuated with one ultimate goal in mind: world government. I discovered, with horror, the New World Order.

We are in more trouble than I could possibly have imagined...

But if I could not get anyone to open their minds to 9/11 Truth, how could I possibly convince anyone of this? That world government is actually being set up, and indeed is almost in complete control, and has created myths to cover up many many shocking truths - not just that they were behind 9/11?

As before, my solution was to learn more. And so I turned to politics, after hearing Ron Paul being endorsed by Alex Jones. My learning about truth was only just beginning...

In the meantime, I decided to practice my 9/11 debating, and become familiar with primary sources, by editing wikipedia articles related to 9/11. I created several new pages, rewrote some and made many hundreds of edits. My wikipedia user page demonstrates my work on wikipedia, much of which remains today in the public pages.

I experienced first-hand the flaws of wikipedia. The Reliable Source policy, which requires that every fact is sourced to a "reliable" source, prevents wikipedia from being a full and unbiased encyclopedia of 9/11 issues, because "reliable" is, within the world of wikipedia, precisely a source which supports the official story of 9/11. Any dissenting source is excluded by definition. There are obvious disinformation agents whose job it is to ensure this definition of "reliable" remains, and that the 9/11 pages continue to support the official story and paint alternative views as crazy.

Wikipedia is controlled by those who argue most tenaciously and by those whose view is the majority, even if it is wrong. It is difficult for individual editors to compete against organised, trained and full-time disinformation agents.

Eventually, I felt that I was wasting my time by arguing over words and sentences on wikipedia, and decided to start this blog, so I can tell it like it is.

From originally being dedicated only to 9/11, this blog has expanded as I have learned, with the subjects becoming broader. Politics. Economics. Climate. Police State and Big Brother news. New World Order.

Now with a broader knowledge, I have at least been able to open up more minds, get people to look at things differently. A few of my friends have watched documentaries I have given them, like Loose Change, Endgame, Terrorstorm, Truth Rising, America: Freedom to Fascism, and Fabled Enemies. Some of them have been inspired into researching and learning for themselves. All of those that have are now 9/11 Truthers.

On the whole, I am still laughed at and ridiculed. But that is beginning to change...