Why 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Still Persist (9/10/05)

by Dean Hartwell

 

Recently, a friend of mine expressed his disdain to me for conspiracy theories, particularly those having to do with September 11^th.  His attitude made me think deeply about the events of that day four years ago and why conspiracy theories still persist in the court of public opinion.

 

As with other traumatic events, the public sought answers to questions about it.  In response to this demand, the Bush Administration produced a story shortly after the attacks.

 

This official story said that nineteen Arabs with ties to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda hijacked four United States commercial airplanes.  Some of the hijackers flew two of the planes into the north and south towers of the World Trade Center.  The crashes caused the buildings to fall.  One set of hijackers crashed their plane into the Pentagon and the other set was taken over by passengers who forced their plane into a field in Pennsylvania.

 

At the time, then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said that the United States government would provide proof of this assertion in “due time.”  But to this day, no one in authority has ever provided this proof.

 

This broken promise ignited the passion for conspiracy theories.  Many rightly wondered, “What is the government hiding?”

 

The public skepticism over the government’s refusal to present its case deepened when the Bush Administration tried to block an official investigation of the attacks.  Some of the skeptics began to theorize Bush complicity.

 

Though the notion struck a nerve with many people, it persisted when more facts about September 11^th became widely known.  For instance, when apprised of the attacks on the World Trade Center, President

 

Bush sat for the next seven minutes listening to a child read from a story called “My Pet Goat” (Michael Moore’s movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” shows this scene).  Bush also later claimed to have seen on television the first plane hit the north tower of the World Trade Center as it happened even though no one showed that attack live.

 

Skeptics of the official theory had other questions they hoped the government commission would answer:

 

Why was there no military response to the attacks on the Trade Center and the Pentagon?

 

By comparison, when golfer Payne Stewart’s plane went off course a few years before September 11^th, the government sent escort planes right away with orders to shoot down, if necessary.  The situation on 9/11 had far greater implications of danger to the public.

 

How did the fire caused by the collision of the planes and the twin towers burn the steel building down?

 

There is no record of fires ever causing steel buildings to burn down anywhere in the United States.  It takes about 2770° F. to melt steel.  The temperature from the collision between the planes and the towers was, at a maximum, 1700° F.[1]

 

Why did World Trade Center-7, which was not hit and which had small fires, fall down?

 

The owner of the World Trade Center, Larry Silverstein, admitted to “pulling” this building.  This term is slang for demolition.[2]

This admission opens the door to the possibility that the north and south towers were similarly "pulled."

 

How did an airplane cause a hole in the Pentagon which is smaller than the size of the plane?

 

The hole in the Pentagon was 16 feet and the Boeing 757 that allegedly hit the Pentagon was 125 feet wide.[3]  Furthermore, the plane in question had its transponder disconnected.  A plane entering the area near the Pentagon without a transponder would likely have met a military response.

 

How did the inexperienced hijacker pilots execute the turns necessary to crash into the World Trade Center towers?

 

These sharp turns required far more expertise than the alleged hijackers supposedly received in flight training school.[4]  It raises the possibility that people controlled the airplanes by remote control.

 

Unfortunately, the 9/11 Commission missed a golden opportunity to address these and other questions.  They instead published a report that endorsed the official theory and did not even mention alternative theories.

 

Now here we are four years later, no better informed by our government than we were then.  But instead of providing information that would fill the vacuum, many supporters of the official theory ask questions of the skeptics, such as: if a hijacked plane did not hit the Pentagon, where are the passengers (such as Barbara Olson, a famous political commentator)?

 

And that is why conspiracy theories remain theories rather than established facts.  Like a trial waiting for a jury to return with a verdict, the public waits for a smoking gun or conclusive evidence for either the official theory or a conspiracy theory.

 

Home