9/11, Arts, book reviews, latest, Reviews

Book Reviews: 9/11 Unmasked

Every year, at about this time, OffGuardian likes to cover the anniversary of 9/11, the most important “catalysing event” in modern history. And this year is no different.

As part of this coverage, and in recognition of our willingness to discuss this often-controversial topic, we were invited to review 9/11 Unmasked, a new book from David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, focusing on the discrepancies in the official account of that fateful day 17 years ago.

We reached out to trusted regular contributors and friends of the site based on their honesty, integrity and potentially contrasting points of view. The results are three different reviews, illustrating an interesting cross-section of opinions and experiences.

Philip Roddis

Two years ago, on the fifteenth anniversary of 9/11, OffGuardian ran my review of Dylan Avery’s Loose Change. Except it wasn’t a review but a pouring of vitriol on the film’s central assertion that the events of September 11, 2001 were an inside job.

Reception below the line was hostile. But among the cat-calls were voices I could not ignore: voices of reason from dudes who’d done their homework and whose tones were sober; friendly even. I promised to re-assess the truther case and return either to concede and apologise or reaffirm my views with better arguments. I gave no date but strongly and at the time sincerely implied it would be a few months tops. Not two years

Read the full review here.

Piers Robinson

Although not a topic for polite conversation, nor a widely recognized ‘acceptable’ issue for mainstream academics and journalists, the issue of 9/11 and the multiple questions that persist with respect to this transformative event continue to bubble under the surface. 9/11 ushered in the global ‘war on terror’, shaping the geo-political agenda of Western governments for almost two decades now and having a deleterious impact on civil liberties across Western liberal democratic states. Torture has been used as part of official policy and there is bulk data collection and surveillance of entire populations.

Read the full review here.

Edward Curtin

If you want to fathom today’s world, absolutely nothing is more important than to understand the truth about the attacks of September 11, 2001. This is the definitive book on the subject.

For seventeen years we have been subjected to an onslaught of U.S. government and corporate media propaganda about 9/11 that has been used to support the “war on terror” that has resulted in millions of deaths around the world. It has been used as a pretext to attack nations throughout the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa.

Read the full review here.

9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation, is available to purchase through Amazon and other retailers from 11/09/2018.


  1. Philip Roddis’ difficulty with the theory which holds that a significant number of americans could be drafted into a plot to kill americans is addressed in this summary against the ‘inside job’ version and in favour of the ‘Israeli job’ theory
    Another question is: why do those who keep repeating as a mantra “9/11 was an inside job” ignore totally the compelling evidence pointing to Israel? In other words, to what extent do they constitute a “controlled opposition” intended to cover up for Israel? Asking this type of question does not mean suspecting anyone who defends an erroneous or incomplete theory of being a hypocrite. Most people defending one theory or the other do so sincerely, based on the information to which they have access. I have myself been a believer in the official theory for 7 years, and in the “inside job” theory for 2 years, before progressively moving on to the present argument from 2010. On the other hand, we can assume that those who lead the public into error on a long term are not just mistaken but lying. In any case, it is legitimate to investigate the background of opinion makers, and when they are caught lying or distorting the truth, we can speculate on their motivation.

  2. he’d be better off saving his money, as for so called “sane conspiracy theorists” , do such people actually exist? ???

    as an example I’ve recently read something called Attack Scenario 404, in which it’s suggested 3 blokes could place a 40 lb thermobaric bomb on each floor or each of the twin towers in 4 weeks, apparently these bombs would be camouflaged as light fittings, oh and they’d be extra strong just like aircraft black boxes, which apparently weight 10 lbs, so presumably these bombs would actually be a bit heavier than 40, more like 46/47 lbs, but hey lets not quibble over a few pounds here or there!

    finally all these hundreds of bombs would go off in perfect harmony after 2 ruddy great big planes had smashed into said towers no less!!

    in fairness, the folks who created this ” theory” did actually say its also highly improbable, if so then how did it happen? and why spend so much time on discussing thermobaric explosives?

    • Admin says

      many of the crazier theories exist purely in order to divert or distract from the solid data that demonstrates the failings of the official story. The simple truth is NIST and the govt have yet to provide a proper explanation of what happened on this day 17 years ago. That in itself is an implication of wrongdoing or concealment on their part. That is all we need to be aware of at this stage.

      • mog says


        Are certain links censored here?
        I have tried three times to link to an article at Unz Review, concerning Israel and 9/11, but it disappears.
        I am sure I remember OffG posting Unz articles here in the past….
        …maybe a gremlin ?

        • Admin says

          We rarely censor links, unless they’re spam. We certainly haven’t censored any links to the Unz Review, which we link to ourselves.

    • Research it yourself. There is ample evidence to support the case that it was an Israeli demolition team that planted a mix of conventional and thermitic devices over a span of weeks, possibly months. You can find photographs and interviews of some of the Israelis that did it.
      As for the many many crazy theories, it’s called muddying the waters. They create straw men to illustrate to the stupid all these conspiracy theorists are nuts. It’s not exactly subtle, figure it out.

      • they were thermobaric explosives, and it tool only 3 blokes to plant them!

  3. Mr Christopher Gwynne says

    Phillip Roddis posses some interesting and not uncommon questions. Why no whistle blower after 17 years? Two members of the 9/11 investigation commission resigned saying it was set up to fail, what is that if not whistle-blowing? FBI investigations into potential hi-jackers was blocked by senior officers, so ex-agents claim. For every Edward Snowdon 100,000’s keep their quiet. The maltreatment and torture of Chelsea Manning, and many more, is designed to invoke fear into US society, thereby reducing the risk of disclosure. How many people were aware of the atom bomb before it flattened Hiroshima? Yet 5000 people worked that project. On a more technical basis people worked on a need to know. Those who might have strengthened airframes would not have known why. There are also more subtle threads to this 9/11 ‘project’, relating to another question of Phillips; was the gain worth the risk?

    In bank balance terms having control of the world’s second largest oil reserve, is a reasonably good reward for risk? Would WMD have sufficed given the risk of 9/11? The war on terror certainly gives more flexibility concerning Imperialist interests, but The Patriot act needed home fear for ease of passing congress; WMD in the Middle East would not have worked half so well in terms of domestic control. Therefore a new ‘Pearl Harbour’ would be needed, an attack on the US homeland.

    The gain versus risk question seems to presume that Patriot act and War on Terror were the only motives of the actors. Putting aside the minor estimated £700 million saved by quick removal of the asbestos from the twin towers the blunt truth is that 9/11 is impossible to cover up completely. The evidence is right before our eyes and if so-and-so didn’t flag it up somebody else would have done. (In fact some people credibly claim to have realised that it was an inside job on the very same day). Which brings us to evaluating the risk, (gain is obvious). The power elements within society had either to be onside or at the very least controlled. Seventeen years later and not a sniff of prove that 19 Arabs even hi-jacked an aircraft let alone flew them into skyscrapers, and yet no one in authority has challenged this, (at least without an Anthrax letter in the post). Therefore by default the control job is adequate. Besides controlled demolition of the twin towers the behaviour of leading politicians was bizarre. The President continuing to read “My Pet Goat”, in a known location, whilst America was under attack. The Secretary of Defence helping to carry stretchers outside the Pentagon. Its almost as if a faction of the ruling class were not only laughing all the way to the bank, but putting two fingers too the general public and saying ‘what are you going to do about it’. And that is of course, just what they were doing. For the political far-right, power, is not just a tool for action, but an end in itself.

    • I believe the sick fuckers responsible do want it to be obvious they did it to anyone with the wits to study it. Aside from all the obvious reasons you touch on this is a statement of intent and of impunity to leaders around the world. We will do this to our own to assure our power, just imagine what we would be willing to do to you.
      “MY PET GOAT”, the sick jokes within jokes that these people make could fuel a book of their own.The cover up is not superficial, it’s deliberately lazy.

    • …the European Parliament passed a resolution on the ‘Gladio Affair’, documenting ‘the existence for 40 years of a clandestine intelligence and armed operations organization’ that had ‘eluded all democratic controls’ and ‘operated and continue to operate completely outside the law… thereby jeopardizing the democratic structures of the countries in which they are operating’ as ‘military secret services (or uncontrolled branches thereof) were involved in serious cases of terrorism and crime’.
      The argument that ‘someone would have spoken’ is weak. We have a conspiracy, decades in duration, spanning several countries, involving hundreds of people, accepted as part of documented history.
      The argument is just a conceit against the truth which is that we know nect to nothing about what really goes on in these ‘parallel structures’.

    • writerroddis says

      Thanks Mr Christopher for raising sensible points in a courteous and adult manner. Re your first point – responding to my “why no death bed confessions? – the resignation of two members of an investigation team, and other examples you cite are instances, among many, of why I now take very seriously the case that the official investigations should be thrown out. But re read carefully the context of my rhetorical question on this. Such examples don’t come close to the scale of confession, by one or more alleged conspirators, I’m referring to.

      For those who demand, with quasi religious fervour, nothing less than an unequivocal assertion of True Belief, my position that there is indeed a case to be answered – a shift from my earlier view – could never be good enough.

      On your second point, the value to the US (and satellite) ruling class of 9/11 in legitimating its wars on the middle East and ‘war on terror is not in question: I make that clear. What I question is that the gains required so vast a conspiracy.

  4. harry stotle says

    There is now a considerable body of evidence proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the official 2-planes-3 building version of 9/11 is a total fabrication.

    Thousands of US citizens were murdered and the US authorities aided and abetted by the MSM palmed us off with a version of events too far fetched to seem plausible in even a third rate spy thriller.

    This is the basic pattern: the US does shit then each time invents a smokescreen to rationalise human rights abuses.

    I don’t think it will ever change until the architects of such deeds (from Hiroshima onwards) are held to account – in fact after Viet Nam we learned that mass murderers are more likely to be awarded the nobel prize.

    • …i suppose they used sticks of dynamite, or some sort of exotic killer death ray, far more plausible!

    • Indeed. There is little doubt in my mind that Nobel Laureate Kissinger was as deeply involved in 9/11 as he was in Operation Menu, ie he was the guy who rubber stamped it. Netenyahu’s corps, Sayeret Matkal, did the demolition AND 7/11 and he was personally present to supervise on both occasions. It should also be noted he was a good friend of Fred Trump, the Donalds father. It could be fairly surmised that he, (Netenyahu), is not just the successor to dear old Heinz Kissinger but is to all intents and purposes the actual POTUS.

      • …good ironic humour, excellent, although i suspect plenty of people will think you’re being serious

        • Perhaps your humour is ironic. No humour in me on this matter at all. Kissinger was recruited as a protege to Alan Dulles and took operational control as fixer in chief for the Zionist cabal just prior to the Nixon presidency. Unlike Kissinger Netenyahu is a trained killer, a hands on terrorist and to this day leader of the most potent terrorist corps on Earth, Sayeret Matkal. He has inherited Kissingers position. You might not see this in contemporary history books but that is how they will read in the academic lierature a century from now. If we make it that long.

    • Hi Harry. I’m newish to this whole thing, although I am aware of the inconsistencies with the official narrative. I was wondering if you’d be so kind as to point me to sources/articles/reading on this? Thanks.

      • Without trying to be glib, why not just buy the book? It seems to cover most aspects of the sane conspiracy theorists in some detail.

      • harry stotle says

        Start with Niels Harritt, he dismantles the official narrative in just a few minutes

        Tony Rooke’s ‘Incontrovertible” is a more detailed and longer deconstruction

      • Roger Smith says

        I would start with these videos (available on youtube)

        Stand for the Truth: A Government Researcher Speaks Out
        The New Pearl Harbor
        9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out

        For books, David Ray Griffin is hard to beat, so the one reviewed here should be great.

        There is also a wonderful document/booklet put together by ae911truth called Beyond Misinformation – What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7 (PDF) that can be found here:


      • Admin says

        Where have you looked for such evidence? Have you checked funeral details, social security data etc? Have you tried contacting the families for 9/11 truth organisation?


Comments are closed.