The Fakest Fake News: The U.S. Government’s 9/11 Conspiracy Theory A Review of ‘9/11Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation’ by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth

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.

It has led to a great increase in Islamophobia since Muslims were accused of being responsible for the attacks. It has led to a crackdown on civil liberties in the United States, the exponential growth of a vast and costly national security apparatus, the spreading of fear and anxiety on a great scale, and a state of permanent war that is pushing the world toward a nuclear confrontation.  And much, much more.

The authors of this essential book, David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, and all their colleagues who have contributed to this volume, have long been at the front lines trying to wake people up to the real news about 9/11.  They have battled against three U.S. presidents, a vast propaganda machine “strangely” allied with well-known leftists, and a corporate mass media intent on serving deep-state interests, all of whom have used illogic, lies, and pseudo-science to conceal the terrible truth.  Yet despite the establishment’s disinformation and deceptions, very many people have come to suspect that the official story of the September 11, 2001 attacks is not true.

With the publication of 9/11Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation, they now have a brilliant source book to use to turn their suspicions into certitudes.  And for those who have never doubted the official account (or accounts would be more accurate), reading this book should shock them into reality, because it is not based on speculation, but on carefully documented and corroborated facts, exacting logic, and the scientific method.

The book is based on the establishment in 2011 of a scientific review project comprising 23 experts with a broad spectrum of expertise, including people from the fields of chemistry, structural engineering, physics, aeronautical engineering, airline crash investigation, piloting, etc. Their job was to apply systematic and disciplined analyses to the verifiable evidence about the 9/11 attacks.  They used a model called the Delphi Method as a way to achieve best-evidence consensus.

This best-evidence consensus model is used in science and medicine, and the 9/11 Consensus Panel used it to examine the key claims of the official account(s). Each “Official Account” was reviewed and compared to “The Best Evidence” to reach conclusions. The authors explain it thus:

The examination of each claim received three rounds of review and feedback.  According to the panel’s investigative model, members submitted their votes to the two of us moderators while remaining blind to one another.  Proposed points had to receive a vote of at least 85 percent to be accepted…This model carries so much authority in medicine that medical consensus statements derived from it are often reported in the news.

They represent the highest standard of medical research and practice and may result in malpractice lawsuits if not followed.

This research process went on for many years, with the findings reported in this book.  The Consensus 9/11 Panel provides evidence against the official claims in nine categories:

  1. The Destruction of the Twin Towers
  2. The Destruction of WTC 7
  3. The Attack on the Pentagon
  4. The 9/11 Flights
  5. US Military Exercises on and before 9/11
  6. Claims about Military and Political Leaders
  7. Osama bin Laden and the Hijackers
  8. Phone Calls from the 9/11 Flights
  9. Insider Trading

Each category is introduced and then broken down into sub-sections called points, which are examined in turn.  For example, the destruction of the Twin Towers has points that include, “The Claim That No One Reported Explosions in the Twin Towers,” “The Claim That the Twin Towers Were Destroyed by Airplane Impacts, Jet Fuel, and Fire,” “The Claim That There Were Widespread Infernos in the South Tower,” etc.  Each point is introduced with background, the official account is presented, then the best evidence, followed by a conclusion. Within the nine categories there are 51 points examined, each meticulously documented through quotations, references, etc., all connected to 875 endnotes that the reader can follow.  It is scrupulously laid out and logical, and the reader can follow it sequentially or pick out an aspect that particularly interests them.

The 9/11 Consensus Panel members describe their goal and purpose as follows:

The purpose of the 9/11 Consensus Panel is to provide the world with a clear statement, based on expert independent opinion, of some of the best evidence opposing the official narrative about 9/11.

The goal of the Consensus Panel is to provide a ready source of evidence-based research to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution.

As a sociologist who teaches research methods and does much research, I find the Consensus Panel’s method exemplary and their findings accurate. They have unmasked a monstrous lie.  It is so ironic that such serious scholars, who question and research 9/11, have been portrayed as irrational and ignorant “conspiracy theorists” by people whose thinking is magical, illogical, and pseudo-scientific in the extreme.

A review is no place to go into all the details of this book, but I will give a few examples of the acumen of the Panel’s findings.

As a grandson of a Deputy Chief of the New York Fire Department (343 firefighters died on 9/11), I find it particularly despicable that the government agency, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), that was charged with investigating the collapse of the Towers and Building 7, would claim that no one gave evidence of explosions in the Twin Towers, when it is documented by the fastidious researcher Graeme MacQueen, a member of The 9/11 Consensus Panel, that over 100 firefighters who were at the scene reported hearing explosions in the towers.  One may follow endnote 22 to MacQueen’s research and his sources that are indisputable. There are recordings.

On a connected note, the official account claims that there were widespread infernos in the South Tower that prevented firefighters from ascending to the 78th floor.  Such a claim would support the notion that the building could have collapsed as a result of fires caused by the plane crashing into the building.  But as 9/11 Unmasked makes clear, radio tapes of firefighters ascending to the 78th floor and saying this was not so, prove that “there is incontrovertible evidence that the firefighter teams were communicating clearly with one another as they ascended WTC” and that there were no infernos to stop them, as they are recorded saying.  They professionally went about their jobs trying to save people.

Then the South Tower collapsed and so many died.  But it couldn’t have collapsed from “infernos” that didn’t exist.  Only explosives could have brought it down.

A reader can thus pick up this book, check out that section, and use common sense and elementary logic to reach the same conclusion.  And by reaching that conclusion and going no further in the book, the entire official story of 9/11 falls apart.

Or one can delve further, let’s say by dipping into the official claim that a domestic airline attack on the Pentagon was not expected. Opening to page 78, the reader can learn that “NBC’s Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski was warned of the Pentagon attack by an intelligence officer,” who specified the illogical spot where the attack would happen shortly before it did.

In Miklaszewski’s words, “And then he got very close to me, and, almost silent for a few seconds, he leaned in and said, ‘This attack was so well coordinated that if I were you, I would stay off the E Ring – where our NBC office was – the outer ring of the Pentagon for the rest of the day, because we’re next.’”

The authors say correctly, “The intelligence officer’s apparent foreknowledge was unaccountably specific.” For if a terrorist were going to fly a plane into Pentagon, the most likely spot would be to dive into the roof where many people might be killed, including top brass and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. To make an impossibly acrobatic maneuver to fly low into an outside wall would make no sense.  And for the government to claim that this impossible maneuver was executed by the alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour, a man who according to documentation couldn’t even pilot a small plane, is absurd. But the intelligence officer knew what would happen, and the reader can learn this, and marvel.

Or the reader can start from the beginning and read straight through the book.  They will learn in detail that the official version of the attacks of 9/11 is fake news at its worst.  It is a story told for dunces.

Griffin and Woodworth and their colleagues simply and clearly in the most logical manner show that the emperor has no clothes, not even a mask.

Since knowing the truth about the attacks of September 11, 2001 is indispensable for understanding what is happening in today’s world, everyone should purchase and read Unmasking 9/11: An International Review Panel Investigation.  Keep it next to your dictionary, and when you read or hear the latest propaganda about the 9/11 attacks, take it out and consult the work of the real experts.  Their words will clarify your mind.

It is the definitive book on the defining event of the 21st century.


Edward Curtin teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His writing on varied topics has appeared widely over many years. He writes as a public intellectual for the general public, not as a specialist for a narrow readership. He believes a non-committal sociology is an impossibility and therefore sees all his work as an effort to enhance human freedom through understanding. His website is edwardcurtin.com

Filed under: 9/11, Arts and Entertainment, book reviews, Essays, Reviews

by

Edward Curtin teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His writing on varied topics has appeared widely over many years. He writes as a public intellectual for the general public, not as a specialist for a narrow readership. He believes a non-committal sociology is an impossibility and therefore sees all his work as an effort to enhance human freedom through understanding. His website is edwardcurtin.com

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Thomas Potter
Reader
Thomas Potter

Happy Halloween 🎃 to all the spooks 👻 that assist the powers-that-be and post disinformation on the Internet to cover-up DEW destruction of the World Trace Center complex on September Eleventh Two-Thousand and One ! Greenhouse gases and nuclear radiation are good for you like leaded gas, asbestos, and nicotine! And if too many people become aware of how free energy was demonstrated on that fateful day, there will be hell 😈 to pay.

http://mark-conlon.blogspot.com/2018/10/concerned-grandpa-steve-deak-resurfaces.html

Antonym
Reader
Antonym

My main question on 9/11 stays: qui bono? Was the CIA / FBI / ?? so sure they could bend the fall out of this in their advantage? Did they have such a control over the media / government/ ?
A rational society could have concluded that the country’s national defend was crap and fired the responsible leaders: the US looked very vulnerable from the outside.

OHZ
Reader
OHZ

Sad display in the comments here. I assume this is carefully planned to be off putting. I think it’d be better to let the books stand on their own and cut off the comments section. It’s nothing more than a vector for nonsense. Not one bit of good info has been left by the anonymous visitors here (be they honest researchers, interested people, trolls, or GCHQ officers – who knows?). Unlike the interesting article, near every bit of these comments serves to make the research community look like cranks and nitwits. Talk of space beams and mininukes, goofballs typing in… Read more »

Thomas Potter
Reader
Thomas Potter

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The powers-that be do not want you to read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? They would rather have sock puppet clowns populate comments to dissuade honest people in search of the truth with talk of space beams, thermite and nukes. Nowhere in Dr. Wood’s book does she suggest space beams. Credible compassionate people like me who have read her book know this to be true. NOTE FROM ADMIN: Judy Wood suggested the hypothetical “beams” came from “space” on Jim Fetzer’s radio show, Novmber 11 2006. We have reminded the Mr Potter of this on five… Read more »

manfromatlan
Reader

While it does appear that Wikipedia has blocked a page devoted to Dr, Judy Wood https://www.facebook.com/drjudywood/posts/this-is-a-screenshot-of-the-wikipedia-page-i-created-to-help-raise-public-awaren/926261794105114/ a perusal of the discussion pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests/Archive_5#Tagged_for_deletion turns up this gem

I have a vague recollection of an article by this very name being submitted and quickly deleted as advertising two or three months ago, so this may not be the first go-round.

p0000t
Reader

I don’t care. This has become a non productive hobby for nerds.I am quite ready to think that EITHER explanation is possible for the attack on the World Trade Centre: 1. retaliation by non Western victims, or 2. the US Government’s ‘Control By Terror’ state’. The US has created the terrorism in the world by its intrinsic policy of domination since its origin as a coloniser of Native American Lands and onward to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Anyone who wants the truth and the end of this international holocaust is to declare the United States a threat at every moment of… Read more »

manfromatlan
Reader

I agree with your conclusions 🙂

Thomas Potter
Reader
Thomas Potter

p0000t hit the nail on the head. George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany. How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar The epic story of how the Bushes took over America https://www.businessinsider.com/how-the-bush-family-rose-to-power-2015-3 George H. W. Bush’s career in politics began in 1963 when he was elected chairman of the Harris County, Texas Republican Party.[the year Democrat John F. Kennedy was eliminated from the political scene and later his brother Robert] https://www.biography.com/people/george-hw-bush-38066 George W. Bush was President during… Read more »

MLS
Reader
MLS

I always love it when someone pops up to say “9/11? Nah mate, just for nerds innit”

Of course it is. What’s the diff if the government did it or not, right? Who cares if they set up the biggest false flag in recorded history, murdered 3,000 of their own citizens and then blamed it on al Qaeda as an excuse to murder millions more?

The important thing is…I dunno…something else. Some generic idea about opposing imperialism maybe, something vague and unthreatening. Move on. Don’t think about 9/11. It’s old news. It doesn’t matter. IT DOESN’T MATTER.

Enver Masud
Reader

FREE: 9/11 UNVEILED, 2nd ed —
http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.pdf
~ 125,000 sold/downloaded

Anthony Williams
Reader
Anthony Williams

What a shame, that once again the truth is obfuscated by yet another pair of gatekeepers who have allegedly written this book, and deliberately come to the wrong conclusions as to what brought the towers down on 911. The reviewer should have prepared himself better before putting his endorsement to this book, and if he had read ” Where Did The Towers Go?” by Dr. Judy Wood, he would have spotted the glaring mistakes in this tome, and thrown this book into the bin where it belongs. Two immediate facts destroy the veracity of the book, the first being that… Read more »

hsaive
Reader
hsaive

Judy Wood is an agent

andrewjohnson911
Reader
andrewjohnson911

Harold Saive is an agent. It must be true – because I said so… right? Look at the 9/11 evidence for heaven’s sake! What’s wrong with people? http://www.drjudywood.com/wp/

Admin
Reader

While we would not suggest Wood is ‘an agent’, and we don’t consider such ad hom helpful, it’s only fair to point out that in the past you have made similar allegations/implications about others, and used inaccurate or misleading evidence to do so.

You can’t rationally complain of receiving treatment you’ve already dished out.

phahrenheit451
Reader

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646-faq-8-what-is-nanothermite-could-it-have-been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.html Thermite produces a blinding white light. The towers did not light up like sparklers on the Fourth of July! 😁 If they found chocolate chip cookie 🍪 crumbs in the dust would that be the cause of destruction? 😁 Let me introduce you to Dr. J. Douglas Beason https://web.archive.org/web/20180823222442/https://www.af.mil/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Print.aspx?PortalId=1&ModuleId=858&Article=108539 New weapons and how they may change war subject of talk Thursday at Museum Light-wave energy in the same spectrum of energy found in home appliances may soon be used in a new generation of weapons. On Thursday, the Laboratory’s Associate Director for Threat Reduction, Douglas Beason, will talk about… Read more »

Admin
Reader

@phahrenheit451 – we have already pointed out to you that Judy Wood DID claim the theorised beam came from ‘space’ back in Nov 2006 on James Fetzer’s radio show. Your allegation this is a misrepresentation by Dr Jones is a falsehood and you know it, yet you still repeat it.

Please do not allege this lie on here again.

phahrenheit451
Reader

Dr. Wood does not present a theory. She presents evidence that leads to ONE conclusion. A discussion with agent Fetzer 🤡 is just hearsay 🗣️ and is not admissable in court. However, ignoring all the overwhelming, conclusive, and indisputable evidence that Dr. Wood presents 📖 while focusing on “spacebeams” is a form of a cover-up. The only people this benefits are those that committed the crimes of 9/11. Just the mention of “spacebeams” reveals who those people are.

Admin
Reader

Stop this nonsense. Wood was the first to mention ‘beams’ from ‘space.’ Your claims that she didn’t do so are a lie. You’re free to repeat that lie elsewhere but if you do it here it will be removed.

phahrenheit451
Reader

Those who control the energy ⚡ control the people. 👥 But those who control their perception 💻 control everything. Douglas Beason would be proud of you❗Keep up the good work. The powers-that-be are counting on you.😀

Admin
Reader

Are you Andrew Johnson perchance? If Wood wants her hypothesis taken seriously she knows what she needs to do. Until a peer-reviewed paper is produced on the subject of how DEWs could have taken down the WTCs it remains, of necessity, pure speculation. No point lamenting the lack of scientific credibility attached to her ideas if she refuses to follow the scientific methodology and submit her ideas to peer review in the accepted form. While on the subject can you tell us how we get to talk to Wood in person, or why this Johnson character (you?) acts like her… Read more »

andrewjohnson911
Reader
andrewjohnson911

Anthony Williams posted a comment on here. The response from “Admin” mentioned my name. I can confirm that Anthony Williams is not me. I can also confirm that Dr Judy Wood submitted her research in a Court Case in 2007. This is much more serious than peer review, as it means one could go to prison for using false information. (I also submitted an affidavit for the case). If you are interested in finding the truth, this information is easily available – as are my contact details via http://www.checktheevidence.com/. In short, the towers did not burn up, nor did they… Read more »

manfromatlan
Reader

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#Legal_actions On 25 April 2007 Wood was Plaintiff/Relator in a qui tam[note 3] petition to The United States District Court, Southern District of New York. In the nature of the Qui tam process, she was acting on behalf of the United States of America. She named a list of 23 respondents headed by Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) and Science Applications International Corp.(SAIC)[9]. The petition claimed that the respondents acted fraudulently in giving advice to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) during their investigation of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. The Statement of Case included… Read more »

Laurence James Howell
Reader
Laurence James Howell

Dear Sir, 911 was the catalysing event to foment war against the Muslims. "If your not with us you are with the terrorists", and with these words Bush the Simple consigned millions to death and misery. Why? because General Albert Pike, the senior Freemason in the US had written in his book Morals and Dogma 1882, that the third world war would be arranged so that unlike WW l and WW ll which ware wars of ideology the third, last and most destructive would be a clash of civilisations Islam v Christianity. The destruction of the seven countries, slated for… Read more »

nwwoods
Reader

I have always been curious as to why all the local security cam footage from gas stations etc. around the Pentagon immediately seized by the FBI has remained sequestered for 17 years as though it were a national security secret that would put lives at risk if publicized. To date only one example footage has been released in which the nature of the “aircraft” is entirely indiscernible.

Adam Fitzgerald
Reader
Adam Fitzgerald

If you only knew what you were talking about, but you dont.

Yr Hen Gof
Reader
Yr Hen Gof

Interestingly described on Amazon.com (US) as ‘Out of Print’, available here in GB.

Alan M
Reader
Alan M

Where from?! – ‘Normally ships withing 1-2 months’ from Amazon UK…available second hand (allegedly) from someone in Poland ‘only two copies left’!! WTF is going on??

911truthNow 1 (@911_TruthNow)
Reader

Should we forget 9/11 BBC prematurely announcing Collapse WTC7 After Explosions? Truth Movement Forgot!

Hugh O'Neill
Reader
Hugh O'Neill

Firstly, I cannot thank Offguardian enough for blitzing this most patently False Flag crime of the century. Edward Curtin has done a superb review of this wonderful book. I admit, I have not had time to read all the articles and comments yet but I would offer this thought (my apologies if other have already). It appears that the whole 9/11 scenario was carefully scripted: the 1998 “academic paper” entitled “Catastrophic Terrorism” written by Zelikow, Carter & Deutz positively lusts after another Pearl Harbor event which kills thousands and permits wars of choice and the removal of domestic liberties (apologies… Read more »

Gary Corseri
Reader
Gary Corseri

As I began to read thru this article by always-impressive Edward Curtin, what first struck me and impelled me to read further was this: “The authors of this essential book, David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, and all their colleagues who have contributed to this volume, have long been at the front lines trying to wake people up to the real news about 9/11. They have battled against three U.S. presidents, a vast propaganda machine “strangely” allied with well-known leftists, and a corporate mass media intent on serving deep-state interests, all of whom have used illogic, lies, and pseudo-science to… Read more »

Bernardo1871
Reader
Bernardo1871
Sean O Braonain
Reader

Some of the best work unmasking the official 9/11 conspiracy theory is to be found at Ryan Dawson’s site http://www.ancreport.com/ryan-dawson/ He focuses his attention on a thorough analysis of the redacted police interviews of various Mossad connected individuals arrested in NY after the event and later (of course) safely repatriated to Israel, where some even felt free to brag on live TV about their foreknowledge of the attack. Some of these were caught in possession of explosives on the day, some had been seen gleefully waiting with their video cameras in a suitable vantage point minutes before the first tower… Read more »

flaxgirl
Reader

Yes, they’ve done a great job, however, the claim that 3,000 died and 6,000 were injured on 9/11 were injured needs investigation.

elenits
Reader
elenits

Flax girl – Can you say something more about this?

vexarb
Reader
vexarb

Curtin`s review gets my vote. As for Oddis, he can first “virulently” oppose as in his review of two years ago, or come round to thinking it’s time to sit on the fence as in his present review, and so on by gradual progression for as long as he likes. Meanwhile, reality grinds on.

“The truth rarely, if ever, convinces its opponents; it simply outlives them”. — “Mad” Max Planck, physicist.

rilme
Reader
rilme

That’s a good review. You should dump the first two.

binra
Reader

“No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance.”
~ Alan Bullock, in Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives

The ability to pull so many strings in both planning and executing the event and its controlled narrative is a proclamation of power. Broad spectrum dominance from the inside out.

paulcarline
Reader

Haven’t read this yet – but I do hope they demolished the idea of any hijacked planes hitting any buildings. ‘No planes’ is not theory, but demonstrable fact.

Stephen Sivonda
Reader
Stephen Sivonda

Paulcarline, I’ve been over the years skeptical of the whole original story. Over time , reading the many articles and youtube videos…it has garnered my opinion that it was a pack of lies. About 5 years back I joined the AE911truth.org group.. Just recently I saw a post about the picture of a jet engine lying on the sidewalk outside the building before it came down I recognized that picture as the same one I originally saw about 5 years ago. Back then I recognized it as NOT belonging to the model of the plane that purportedly crashed into the… Read more »

911truthNow 1 (@911_TruthNow)
Reader

Check out my NIST Drone photos

bill
Reader
bill

Certainly excellent testimony of what is yet another glaring hole in the official narrative, a 747 P and W engine represented as belonging to a 767 (and certainly not from Flight 11, a GE CF6) …..