Introduction
The collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers on September 11, 2001, can be considered a point of no return, considering the amount of change it brought to world politics. Understandably, it would be impossible for an event of such scale not to raise discussion regarding the factual credibility of the official version. In this context, the current paper elaborates on the governmental response to the 9/11 events and the conspiracy theory it invoked, considering both the reasons for its creation and proliferation.
Governmental Response
After September 11, 2001, legislation has, in many ways, untied the hands of governmental authorities and institutes. For instance, on September 14, 2001, the House and the Senate passed joint resolutions (S.J. Resolution 23 and H.J. Resolution 64) that authorized the President to “use all necessary and appropriate force” against entities involved in the attack to prevent such attacks in the future (107th Congress 2001a; 2001b).
In other words, the Pentagon has encouraged counterterrorism activities, including targeted killing, on the condition of maintaining legal oversight authority over them (107th Congress 2001a; 2001b). Apart from that, within the so-called War on Terror framework, various institutions were established to gain control over the situation. On November 19, 2001, the first piece of legislation passed in reaction to the 9/11 atrocities was signed into law (Kenney, 2019). It concentrated on enhancing airport and aircraft security in the United States.
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act permitted the establishment of a new government organization inside the Department of Transportation named the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). In particular, TSA was responsible for transferring private company security personnel to federal employees (Kenney, 2019). It also brought numerous changes to safety practices and standards in air transportation.
The TSA’s creation and the reduction of air transportation vulnerabilities were the first among multiple swift government responses to the 9/11 attacks. The following year, “more than 130 pieces of legislation” about 9/11 were approved (Kenney, 2019, p. 30). On October 26, 2001, a significantly controversial USA PATRIOT Act became law (Kenney, 2019). Since then, law enforcement agencies have substantially increased their surveillance capabilities. Moreover, it promoted the interconnection of existing intelligence institutes, obliging them to share data and coordinate action.
A vital implication of this act was the initiation of a reorganization in intelligence and information management. To achieve greater coverage of available sources, the United States President and government first established the Homeland Security Advisory System and Council to develop further responses to the crisis (Kenney, 2019). Its activity resulted from a plan that implied an institute devoted explicitly to information analysis and infrastructure protection. According to Kenney (2019), it became the foundation for the Department of Homeland Security, which was brought to life after the passage of the Homeland Security Act in November 2002. This department was later tasked with analyzing the 9/11 catastrophe and posting its report.
Evidence to Support a Conspiracy
Probably the most substantial claim that fuels the 9/11 conspiracy is the fact that the report regarding 9/11 events was accepted by the United States and world communities without a second thought. Notably, despite the numerous examples of “false flag” operations in world history, political and scientific circles remain deaf to a similar claim regarding the start of the War on Terror (Hughes, 2020). In this context, the main 9/11 conspiracy can be described by Hughes’s (2020) statement:
Prima facie, it is not inconceivable that some aspects of the U.S. government, possibly with links to other transnational actors, could have staged 9/11 to provide the pretext for the War on Terror. At the very least, this possibility should not be dismissed. (p. 3)
In short, it implies the United States government not only committed a grand-scale crime against its nation but also used it to justify its subsequent international interventions in the affairs of other countries. To support this claim, the theorists criticize the official version of the 9/11 events in the absence of scholarly attention and discussion of argumentation.
Absence of Discussion in Scholarly Literature
Poor Conspiracy Theory Image
The United States has a long-standing academic history of trying to discredit anyone considering the prospect of conspiracies in American politics. Regarding the “paranoid style” of American politics, Richard Hofstadter wrote a notorious article in 1964 (Hughes, 2020). In it, Hofstadter argues that although “there is nothing paranoid about taking note” of actual “conspiratorial acts in history,” people should be wary of theories that “alert us to a distorted judgment” (as cited in Hughes, 2020, p. 17). Consequently, any person who attempts to point out inconsistencies in the official version is automatically labeled paranoid and, thus, not worth attention.
Prohibition of the Topic
Various subjects are considered taboo for social and political reasons. The fundamental rule is not to question anything that challenges the social order, and the deliberate omission of such subjects from the media and politics upholds this rule. As a result, even a critical approach is limited to a range of acceptable viewpoints (Hughes, 2020). Hence, since people generally hesitate to stray outside the boundaries of acceptable thought, they fall in line and never challenge the taboo. The same applies to the 9/11 taboo, which is still relevant despite the time that has passed.
Political and Public Opinion Suppression
Another reason for the academic silence is the fear of being prosecuted for raising a voice. Namely, the fear of public and political pressure discourages scholars from questioning 9/11 events. According to Hughes (2020), such were the cases of William Woodward, Kevin Barrett, Judy Wood, Daniele Ganser, and many other professors in the United States and Europe who were pressured into retirement in 2006. Some skeptics wonder why academic journal publications regarding the 9/11 revelations are so scarce. However, given that the institutional culture of academia is so antagonistic to the 9/11 conspiracy, it is not surprising that there is a lack of peer-reviewed scientific research on the topic.
Particular Pieces of Evidence
WTC Towers Collapse
The symbol of 9/11—the WTC towers—serves as a popular discussion topic within the conspiracy theory framework. There is a prominent claim regarding the collapse of the WTC towers that the collision with aircraft could not realistically cause such damage (Hughes, 2020). Namely, the skyscrapers are built in a way that withstands any physical pressure, both from their weight or from the wind at high altitudes. Due to the special steel column construction design, these buildings are increasingly robust and reliable (Hughes, 2020). Consequently, even the jet-plane collision could not cause enough damage to entirely demolish the WTC towers, leaving the question of the valid reasons open to discussion.
Religious Fanaticism
Another argument against the official 9/11 version elaborates on the background of the alleged terrorists. Firstly, no photographic evidence exists of these people boarding the planes despite the sophisticated security camera systems employed in United States airports (Hughes, 2020). Secondly, the activities some of these accused people were associated with questioned their fanaticism, the claimed reason for them to commit terrorism in the first place (Hughes, 2020). Lastly, there are too many inconsistencies regarding the true identity of the alleged terrorists in the FBI and CIA reports (Hughes, 2020). Overall, conspirologists claim that, given enough effort, it is possible to criticize almost every aspect of the official version.
Theory Proliferation
When immersed in the overwhelming evidence presented by conspirologists, it is not impossible to develop a personal bias toward the official perspective. The 9/11 conspiracy is a theory that is, in many ways, strengthened by the era of contemporary technological advances. According to Berman and Stoddard (2021), the high level of conspiracy-related societal proliferation is caused mainly by the quality and availability of misinformation. In terms of the former, image and video editing technology allows for the creation of new pieces of evidence and the manipulation of existing pieces of evidence to alter public opinion.
Moreover, with time, it becomes ever more realistic and persuasive. Regarding the latter, the internet allows information to reach across the globe in such a short time that it is almost impossible to counter every piece of false evidence. In this context, only the ability to critically filter any information available in the media can allow individuals to discern the truth.
Conclusion
Overall, the 9/11 conspiracy theory does well in terms of critically questioning the reasons behind the governmental reforms and political actions that followed the catastrophe. For instance, denying that the following international developments benefited the United States is hard. Nevertheless, one should be mindful of how easy it is nowadays to counterfeit evidence and apply the same amount of criticality that conspirators put into their theories.
References
107th Congress. (2001a). S. J. Res. 23: Joint resolution. GovInfo. Web.
107th Congress. (2001b). H.J.Res.64 – Authorization for use of military force. Library of Congress. Web.
Berman, D. S., & Stoddard, J. D. (2021). “It’s a growing and serious problem:” Teaching 9/11 to combat misinformation and conspiracy theories. The Social Studies, 112(6), 298-309. Web.
Hughes, D. A. (2020). 9/11 Truth and the silence of the IR discipline. Alternatives, 45(2), 55-82. Web.
Kenney, K. L. (2019). The Department of Homeland Security: A look behind the scenes. Compass Point Books.