The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Part II: A Survey of Attitude Change in 2009-2010

by Elizabeth Woodworth


In the past year, in response to emerging independent science on the 9/11 attacks, nine corporate, seven public, and two independent media outlets aired analytic programs investigating the official account.

Increasingly, the issue is treated as a scientific controversy worthy of debate, rather than as a "conspiracy theory" ignoring science and common sense.

This essay presents these media analyses in the form of 18 case studies.

Eight countries – Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Russia – have allowed their publicly-owned broadcasting stations to air the full spectrum of evidence challenging the truth of the official account of 9/11.

This more open approach taken in the international media – I could also have included the Japanese media – might be a sign that worldwide public and corporate media organizations are positioning themselves, and preparing their audiences, for a possible revelation of the truth of the claim that forces within the US government were complicit in the attacks – a revelation that would call into question the publicly given rationale for the military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

The evidence now being explored in the international media may pave the way for the US media to take an in-depth look at the implications of what is now known about 9/11, and to re-examine the country's foreign and domestic policies in the light of this knowledge.

I. Introduction

Until 2009, doubts about the official 9/11 story were briefly entertained by the mainstream media on each anniversary of the event, allowing the independent research community only a fleeting moment once a year to publicly voice its findings.

But after crucial scientific evidence emerged in April 2009 to challenge the official story of how the towers fell, a spate of European media reports followed. The news coverage of this evidence seems to have opened the door to more serious reflection on all aspects of the 9/11 issue in the major media.

The first paper in my series, "The Media Response to 9/11," dealt with the New Statesman's grudging recognition of Dr. David Ray Griffin, the world's "top truther" (as it dubbed him), placing him number 41 among "The 50 People Who Matter Today."1 Since this admission in September 2009, the issue has gathered increasing momentum.

The collective content issuing from this new momentum is presented here in the hope that it will embolden other major media to take up the pivotal controversy concerning 9/11, and pursuing the truth wherever it may lead.

Observations on the Analysis

While carrying out my analysis, I observed five new features in the media treatment of the 9/11 issue that developed as 2009 progressed. They are listed here, so that readers might look for them in the case studies that follow below:

1. The 9/11 issue is increasingly framed not as conspiracy theories versus hard science, but as a legitimate controversy resting on unanswered questions and a search for truth.

2. News reports and television programs examining these controversies have become longer and more balanced.

3. Major media outlets have begun to present the claims of the truth movement first, followed by counter-arguments from defenders of the official story.

4. Major media outlets have begun to include, and even to introduce, extensive evidence to support the claims of the 9/11 truth community.

5. The media treatments increasingly suggest the possibility of a re-investigation into the events of September 11, 2001.

The first part of this essay deals with the crucial scientific evidence that emerged in early 2009, the significance of this evidence in relation to the official story of 9/11, and the immediate news coverage it received.

II. Scientific Paper Finds Nano-thermite Explosives in World Trade Center Dust, April 3, 2009

A peer-reviewed paper published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal on April 3, 2009,2 reported that a little known high-tech explosive called nano-thermite was found throughout the World Trade Center dust.

These physicists and chemists involved in this study discovered "distinctive red/gray chips in significant numbers"3 in four samples of dust collected from the area. The presence of aluminum and iron oxide in the red material provided one of the signs that it might be nano-thermite, which is a high explosive (whereas ordinary thermite is an incendiary.)

Another clue was provided when putting a flame to the chips produced an explosive reaction.

On the basis of these and other observations, the team concluded that "the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material."4

The article's first-named author, Dr. Niels Harrit – a University of Copenhagen chemistry professor who specializes in nano-chemistry5 –explained on Danish TV2 News:

"Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron.

"So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel.

"You cannot fudge this kind of science. We have found it: unreacted thermite."6

What was the significance of this sophisticated material?

(Read the entire article here.)

Great overview

Thanks for posting this great overview by Elizabeth Woodworth of the media's 9/11 coverage from this past year. I did not see any mention, though, of KBDI in Denver and its airing of 'Press for Truth' in early June, and I consider that a significant oversight. So after looking over Woodworth's summary, I think it's also worth having another look at this:

Edit: I should also have mentioned that, in addition to 'Press for Truth,' they also aired 'Blueprint for Truth' in August and September.

Compare where we were two years ago with this

We are progressing, even though we still see many attempts to marginalize us, to make us appear as mentally defective. I don't know if it is because we go after them in the comments on the hit pieces, or there are more who are awakened, but when you read the comments, we are often the dominant voice. No, not always, but often enough.

There are still a number of influential gatekeeper sites that censor us of course, such as
Daily Kos.

Very uplifting.

Thanks, A.

Manchester Union Leader is a right wing rag...amazingly so!

Elizabeth has made one misinterpretation about a "union" newspaper from Manchester New Hampshire that works to her favor.

The Manchester Union Leader is now and has always been a right leaning [a huge understatement] public newspaper that has had IMMENSE conservative influence on all presidential elections in the USofA since New Hampshire's "First in the Nation" Presidential Primary was located [for Powers-To-Be controlability] in the tiny, conservative, libertarian and wealthy state years ago.

So, that the MUL has even allowed such words is an amazing and ground breaking event...and New Hampshire 9/11 Truthers should be proud.

But then again, New Hampshire bred a Supreme Court Justice, David Souter, who had the integrity to resign from the Supreme Court because of the STAIN that the Supreme Court imposed upon our short national history with its decision to UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY by stopping the vote count in Florida in Bush V Gore in 2000.

Another thought...

If the Pentagon both controls and has the unbridaled use of 50% of the WORLD's defense-intel-secrity funding, then how is it that WORLD PEACE doesn't run right through the Pentagon?

Please consider the following that the 9/11 Truth Movement can both ignite and lead...

9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE and JUSTICE

Both the Peace Movement and 9/11 Truth Movement intersect AT THE PENTAGON....

No wonder why they have cointelpro in overdrive...

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

This is an important survey

This is an important survey and thanks go out to the author.

What is missing in the 9/11 Truth movement is an understanding in truly understanding the hurdles it faces in overcoming the 9/11 Myth.

There is a naive believe that "the truth will set you free"... that all one needs to do is reveal the truth, in contrast to lies, or demonstrate doubt in contrast to a type of certainly that stretches scientific credulity and miraculously everything will be turned around.

The lovers of truth and integrity in the government and the media will open a new investigation, honestly conducted, which will find the truth and more importantly bring accountability for the event and then even roll back the Draconian and fascist domestic policies and hegemonic foreign policies put in place in response to 9/11.

The most basic element to overcome in getting anyone or any institution to have a new look at 9/11 is the enormous paralyzing fear which the event created. In the OCT we were made to fear the ubiquitous ever present evil AQ and a terrorist force of global reach which made us unsafe anywhere and any time. To reinforce this fear, we had the color code alerts and witnessed additional terrorists events since most of which were brought to us by the same people who brought us 9/11. And we were told time and again that it was AQ behind all this terrorism and no one was able to knock that down. So the belief that AQ is out there and out enemy is firmly written onto the minds of all Americans.

They will not even consider another culprit for 9/11 or the follow on acts of terrorism, despite evidence that these were stages events using Islamic patsies - people who may have even thought they were help AQ or their people and volunteered to assist in plots only to take the full blame. And ultimately this drove another nail in the coffin for AQ. Of course, it would make sense for some Arabs to resent the US hegemony and so terrorism is viewed by much of the left as blowback for our failed foreign policy. The 9/11 Truth movement can't even seem to get the left to see how terrorism is a used as effective false flag operations to control populations.

If you can get a listener or observer to suspend their belief in the notion that American DOES have terrorist enemies long enough to look at the facts of 9/11 they almost immediately shut down because if it wasn't the obvious external enemy - radical Islamic terrorists, then and it wasn't another nation state as the likelihood of that as the attacker is hardly possible, it must be something like rogue intel / MIC or some combination of these who managed to:

get into these buildings to place explosives
disable the entire US air defense apparatus
remove almost all of the evidence of the crime
get NIST and FEMA to commit fraud and produce at the very least a cover up report
get the 9/11 Myth out to the media within minutes and have the echo chamber pound this home
understand that Americans would rally behind the flag and look for and accept an outside enemy and not even wait to see the evidence.
get the people to give up their rights out of fear
allow prosecution of wars without just cause and not stand down when it was exposed at least for Iraq.

The Americans and the media are afraid to deal with the 9/11 truth because it was probably not an act of war, but one of mass murder and treason. And it was effectively a coup d'etat which left in place the government who simply enacted all the policies that the coup desired.

The media and the government followed the general population in reacting exactly as they coup wanted to them to. All they had to do is carry out the crime and pin it on a "credible" enemy of the US and everything would be done by the existing institutions with bribes or coercion or intimidation.

There would be intimidation... self intimidation experienced by those who realize how ruthless and how power the coup is. If they did 9/11 they would not think twice about disappearing anyone who stood up with a credible challenge which would expose the lies - the coup.

So one strategy was the intimidation by the mod. Anyone who had the courage to stand up was branded a nut case and marginalized... definitely by the media and the government who were invested in the 9/11 Myth.

The truth is seeping out, but the people have shown they have no power to get their government to respond to them. Witness the financial meltdown, the health care debate. We have a government which responds ONLY to their corporate owners and the Supreme Court recently permitted the corporations to legally buy more of the government as if lobby dollars were no enough.

Where is the will for the second American revolution, velvet or otherwise? No where. Americans are now deep into survival mode as their very existence has been destroyed by the banks and corporations who choose profits for shareholders over jobs for workers every time.

Turning this around is an enormous project and proclaiming proof beyond a reasonable doubt will have no effect.

Good points

Sandero, I always like your assessments and this is no different. You paint a fairly bleak picture, but

1) I do think we are making progress, and
2) I don't know many other ways to go about it other than working at the grass-roots level to help people understand that there are credible people who question the events.

For my part, I've been doing my best to get on as many comment boards as I have time and promote the most credible evidence we have - AE911truth.

I've noticed that I'm no longer moderated on CNN boards as well as Newsweek boards - in contrast to the past. HuffPost and other boards are still problems.

I've also noticed many more people than in the past are coming to my defense or saying that they will look into the web sites I mention (who knows whether they actually do or not). Correspondingly, there are less and less knee-jerk comments that I'm a wack-job or nut case. There still are some, but I use those people's own comments as an opportunity to discredit their own viewpoints. Not all that hard, considering that the die hard fairy tale believers always come across as somewhat crazy in their own comments.

In summary, based on my own experiences, I think we are making progress, even though I do understand the large hurdles you cite. I'd be interested in hearing what you think good tactics would be to overcome the hurdles you mention.

Fear is not permanent

Sandero wrote:
"The most basic element to overcome in getting anyone or any institution to have a new look at 9/11 is the enormous paralyzing fear which the event created. In the OCT we were made to fear the ubiquitous ever present evil AQ and a terrorist force of global reach which made us unsafe anywhere and any time. To reinforce this fear, we had the color code alerts and witnessed additional terrorists events since most of which were brought to us by the same people who brought us 9/11. And we were told time and again that it was AQ behind all this terrorism and no one was able to knock that down. So the belief that AQ is out there and out enemy is firmly written onto the minds of all Americans."

I think the fear 9/11 created was very effective initially, but there are signs that the effect is wearing off. For example, we had the Christmas underpants "bomber", and the usual media frenzy about it. But if there is anyone around who is afraid to fly because of this incident, I have not met them. Nor do I know anyone who pays much attention to color coded terror alerts either. They have proven quite useless, and most people are aware of that. Consider also the complete collapse of Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign in 2008. "America's Mayor" was ridiculed by Joe Biden as offering "a noun, a verb, and 9/11", and his campaign sank from sight with uncommon rapidity.

Fear-mongering about 9/11 and terrorism is now recognized as the property of the right wing of national politics. Whatever the conventional media may say, polls show that this is not a "right of center" country at all--indeed, the main cause of disenchantment with Obama and the Democrats is, they are too much like the Republicans! There is a deep skepticism about and anger at both political parties and all of Congress for their failure to tackle important national problems. In this environment, talking about how the terrorists are gonna get us is rightly seen for the attempt at distraction that it is. Last I checked, Dick Cheney's continued fear mongering on various TV outlets has not reversed his deep unpopularity with the general public. He is a suspect character, and most people know that.

Does this mean that a majority of the public will soon be ready to embrace 9/11 truth? I doubt it. That would require a paradigm shift in most people's thinking that will not happen easily. However, if our society continues on its present course, a paradigm shift may be inevitable, and when it comes, we may be surprised at how quickly and completely it will happen.

Here's a place you can emphasize the truth with Fire Dog Lake

Jane Hamsher from Fire Dog Lake is an influential blogger on the progressive side of politics. She has shown some fight in the last few years.

(From an email she sent out...)

Got a few minutes?
Help us plan for 2010 by filling out our quick reader survey:

The Government run Australian Broadcasting Corporation did....

..allow the controversy to be broached by the airing of the BBC's "The Third Tower" in 2008. This was shown on Australia's premier public investigative program "Four Corners" and received a huge response. Normally the show is repeated the same week but in a very unusual manner it was not shown again until months later and little advertising was done for either program

Just for the record:)

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Over at Op Ed News now

I have posted it over at Op Ed News, where it has taken the 5th most viewed position. There is only one comment so far.


OpEdNews is worth registering in order to comment there.

Let's blitz 'em with truth.

NOW #1

If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Thank you Elizabeth for the great article!

I finally got time to read your article top to bottom and it is fabulous. We are getting somewhere as you clearly demonstrate!

Thank you, John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Does truth become TRUTH when major media recognizes it?

If so - are we not still slaves to the media when it swings our way? When the media recognizes 911 truth does it then become trustworthy? Or has it just postioned itself for its next set of manipulative lies by appearing to have "exposed the truth?"

We must get beyond media and into our own good judgment. We must be able to look at the president sitting immobile in a classroom while planes are crashing into buildings and REALIZE FOR OURSELVES that something is VERY VERY FISHY without needing the media to tell us so.

We must be able to see a 47-story building with a little black smoke coming from a few floors - coming crashing to the ground in perfect symmetry - and REALIZE FOR OURSELVES that buildings don't "fall down" like that.

We must break the shackles of allowing others to think for us - and substitute their reality for REALITY.

We must teach OURSELVES AND OUR CHILDREN to RELY ON OUR OWN INNATE INTELLIGENCE - not what we and they see in glossy magizines or on fancy television shows.

Mainstream media to hang itself

I don't think any of us is still dependent on the mainstream media for our own thinking. But we have to recognize, that for better or worse, the "average" American is highly dependent on the mainstream media at this time. Thus, the concern everybody has as to whether the truth is making it into the mainstream media - that's one of the key ways to sway the average American to open their eyes.

That being said, this situation of the average American being tied to the MSM is not guaranteed to be the case in perpetuity. One of the unavoidable realizations you have when you learn the truth is that the MSM had to have been complicit in the coverup. At least that was how it was with me. I expect that for many people, when the time eventually does come for them to become aware of the truth, they will go through a process of at least partial disenagagement from the MSM, because they will realize how corrupt it really is.

In that way, if and when the MSM finally does break the truth, they will in effect hang themselves. In thinking about it now, it's possible that this is one of the driving factors in the MSM's current refusal to break the code of silence.


Zmzmzm says "does truth become truth when major media recognizes it ". Yes, well said!! I just read Greg grisham's story given on Diana castillo's blog on 2-19-10. When Greg saw the challenger explode with his own eyes, his friends who also saw refused to believe it until the media announced it in the radio! Henry Thoreau said something to the effect, when he was fighting against slavery, that by the time the masses agree, it's no longer even an issue.

People believe in when it is said in the MSM

A lot of people seemed to take the idea of recent conspiracies seriously when this letter by yours truly was prominently published in Finland's largest newspaper:

This made me wonder, though: is it really impossible to get a well-thought-out and reasoned letter published in, say, the New York Times or Washington Post? Or are their Reader's Columns *that* controlled?

#1 "most Buzzed" at BuzzFlash

COTO Report

This BuzzFlash link goes to COTO Report,, Rady Ananda's blog. She was formerly an editor at Op Ed News. Rady is fully on side with 9/11, and false flags in general. COTO Report is a blog worth supporting by linking to it, visiting it, and so on. It is growing, and Rady will be a force to be reckoned with I believe. She was quite happy to publish Elizabeth's article.

Mike Zimmer