The official account is a conspiracy theory

Claim

The official account is a conspiracy theory⁰.

Background

The story about the 19 terrorists from al Qaeda, who hijacked four planes and where three succeeded in hitting three of their intented targets, is considered a much less credible explanation than the main explanation given by the Truth Movement, namely that the terror attack in reality was a secret operation designed by the New World Order with the goal of convincing the world of the necessity of invading Iraq and Afghanistan, of eroding and removal of citizens’ rights, and other initiatives, so that the secret powers behind the operation would achieve world domination.

Facts

It is quite obvious that there is a colossal difference in credibility of the two explanations.

al Qaeda is behind

The terror attack on September 11, 2001, was characterized by a diabolic simplicity in both planning, preparation, and execution. It was most likely these characteristics that made the operation a success.

• A very limited number of people knew about the operation.
• A minimal budget was required.
• The subsequent investigations revealed clues that in themselves did not provide a clear picture of a coming attack, what the target/targets were, or how the attack would be carried out.
• The people involved were driven by religious fanaticism. Suicide attacks are considered a holy deed securing a direct passage to Paradise. This type of people have nothing to lose, quite contrary. This makes them far more dangerous than people driven by a desire for power.
• Merely hitting the chosen targets was considered a success. The extent of the damages was seen as an extra bonus.

Despite the simplicity of the plan, 25% of it failed: The fourth plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, before it could reach its target presumably either Capitol Hill or the White House.

New World Order is behind

On the other hand are those alternative explanations that incorporate various degrees of involvement by the New World Order characterized by a far higher complexity.

Prelude

• An enormous number of people, loosely estimated at several hundred thousands, had an in-depth knowledge of the terror attack. Not one person has spilled the beans or confessed.
• Vice President Dick Cheney ursurped power to prevent military jets to take off and thus prevent that the non-hijacked planes reached their targets¹.
• Those involved were not driven by anything else than a desire for power².

The planes

• The four planes would have to be equipped with remote control technology without anyone finding out³.
• The planes would have to be remotely controlled, so they hit precisely where the explosives would have been placed in advance³.
• Two planes would have to be abducted along with all passengers and crew (Flight 77/the Pentagon, and Flight 93/Shanksville) and all aboard would either be executed, disappear without a trace, or be threatened to keep their mouths shut forever^{10, 11}.

The World Trade Center

• Selected employees in the World Trade Center complex would have to have been warned before the attack, yet nobody has spilled the beans or confessed⁴.
• Up to 100 tons of top secret explosives (nanothermite) would have to have been removed from military laboratories without anyone noticing⁵.
• An unknown number of tons of conventional explosives would have to have been required without anyone becoming suspicious⁶.
• The many tons of nanothermite, conventional explosives, and matching detonators would have to be placed strategically inside the buildings without anyone noticing⁵.
• The nanothermite would have to be rigged with an unknown feature making the huge flashes of light that detonations would create invisible⁷.
• Conventional explosives used in the World Trade Center 1, 2, and 7 would have to be rigged with an unknown feature that resulted in silent detonations⁷.
• It would have to be arranged, so that the owner of the World Trade Center 7 and lease-holder of the World Trade Center 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, Larry Silverstein, was given information before the public and that he was ordered/allowed to reveal the plot, when the cameras were rolling⁸.
• It would have to be arranged so that the Danish Prime Minister, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, was given information before the public and that he was ordered/allowed to reveal the plot when the cameras were rolling⁹.
• The entire New York Fire Department, Port Authority, and Police Department would have to be bribed.

The Pentagon

• A magical missile would have to be invented that could zig-zag over a very short distance and topple light poles before it hit the Pentagon and exploded¹⁰.
• A lot of debris that looked as if it came from a passenger plane would in a few moments have to be driven to the Pentagon and placed strategically correct¹⁰.

Flight 93/Shanksville

• A lot of debris that looked as if it came from a passenger plane would in a few moments have to be driven to a field in Pennsylvania and placed strategically correct, claiming that Flight 93 had crashed there while in reality the plane would have been at the same time magically abducted and shot down by one of the military planes that Dick Cheney had made sure would not take off^{2, 12, 13}.

Epilogue

• An enormous number of people, loosely estimated at several hundred thousands, would still have an in-depth knowledge of the terror attack. Not one person has spilled the beans or confessed.

Despite the enormous complexity, the plan was 100% successful: Everything went as planned leaving nothing to chance.

Logic

It is only fair to demand that members of the Truth Movement present evidence of their numerous claims that a world-wide conspiracy, as a small part of their goal of world domination, planned and executed the terror attack on September 11, 2001.:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

The more complex an explanation is, the stronger evidence it requires. There are far more things that need to be supported by evidence. The burden of evidence increase with complexity.

Onus Probandi – the one making the claim carries the burden of proof

It is not up to others to disprove a claim. It is solely the person making the claim that has to support it with evidence. Where the scientifically accepted explanation of the terror attack on September 11, 2001, is based on solid knowledge and well-established science, the Truth Movement postulates so many extraordinary claims that all have to correspond with each other (but evidentially does not) that the claims cannot merely be considered extraordinary but also pseudoscientific.

What is a “conspiracy”?

The Truth Movement, with Niels Harrit, make an effort in claiming that the many different alternative explanations are not conspiracy theories but explanations that solely are built on scientific facts.

This has resulted in a quaint self-contradiction. In a radio show on the Danish National Broadcast Corporation’s channel P1 on March 2, 2010, Niels Harrit was debating with author and historian Dan H. Andersen about the various alternative explanations regarding the terror attack on September 11, 2001. During the debate, Niels Harrit admitted, probably inadvertently, that his own explanation was a conspiracy:

Niels Harrit: “Because, can the two of us agree, Dan, we call it a conspiracy if more than two people conspire to commit a crime?”

Dan H. Andersen: “Yep.”

Niels Harrit: “OK. So we agree that there were more than two people who conspired to attack the U.S.A. on September 11 2001.”

Dan H. Andersen: “I also think we can agree on that.”

Niels Harrit: “So it was a conspiracy theory?”

Dan H. Andersen: “Yes.”

Niels Harrit: “And you believe that?”

Dan H. Andersen: “Oh, yes.” ¹⁴

Niels Harrit’s own criteria for a conspiracy is thus: When more than two people conspire to commit a crime. Since Niels Harrit also believe that more than two people conspired to attack the U.S. on September 11, 2001, the attack must therefore be a conspiracy, and his alternative explanations are thus conspiracy theories.

Conclusion

If the rest of the world must accept that the explanation that the New World Order was behind the terror attack on September 11, 2001, is a simpler explanation than al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were behind, it must also be far easier for the Truth Movement to find and present the evidence for their many claims. Given the claimed intense and, according to themselves, increasing activity within the movement, where the evidence is simply pouring in, it should be very easy for the members to present the results of their intense investigation to the general public and come up with a far more plausible explanation.

This has not happened, and nothing points to it ever happening. The Truth Movement has instead chosen a two-fold strategy:

• Within the movement, it is fully accepted that the New World Order was behind. Nobody is allowed to doubt this conclusion.
• Outwardly, members give the impression of “only asking questions” and that no conclusion has been reached. It is claimed to the public that there are so many unanswered questions that the public must demand a new investigation.

The claim is therefore:

• Out of touch with reality
• Out of proportions
• Undocumented
• Self-contradicting

Sources

0. “Men jeg siger jo ikke andet, end at den officielle konspirationsteori ikke kan passe”, Niels Harrit, Politiken, 14. august, 2010“Det har jeg lige antydet, at fordi der ikke foreligger nogen beviser for at den officielle konspirationsteori er korrekt.”, DR P1 Debat, 2. marts 2010“Jeg er ikke fortaler for nogen konspirationsteori, den eneste konspirationsteori jeg beskæftiger mig med, det er den officielle konspirationsteori.”, DR P1 Debat, 2. marts 2010
1. Dick Cheney was in control of NORAD
2. New World Order, Wikipedia
3. The planes were remotely controlled
4. 4,000 Israelis did not show up for work
5. Thermite found in the dust from the World Trade Center
6. Signs of explosives in FEMA report
7. Witnesses saw explosions and flashes of light
8. Larry Silverstein ordered the controlled demolition
9. Poul Nyrup Rasmussen knew it would happen
10. No plane hit the Pentagon
11. Flight 93 was abducted
12. Flight 93 was shot down
13. The hijacked planes could have been intercepted by military planes
14. Niels Harrit og Dan H. Andersen, DR P1 Debat, 2. marts 2010

Q & A