Announcing the launch of

Announcing the launch of 

The editors of 9/11 Truth News are pleased to present 9/11 Truth News is intended to be an accessible and factually oriented first reference for those curious about 9/11 truth. Our movement must serve its audience and this site was created for that purpose. 

The key to effectively serving this purpose is our strategy. That starts with the site being solely related to 9/11 truth and edited by four longtime movement activists. With a good deal of thought about who we need to reach and the obstacles that stand in the way of reaching them, the editors of will be publishing only that which we believe to be the best this movement has to offer. 

What does 'the best' look like? Uplifting images of people committed to educating the public. Videos of thoughtful actions and real connections with our audience. Stories of our mutual challenges and cooperative successes. Important discoveries. Revealing hit pieces. Thoughtful commentary. The best looks like positive movement. 

In order for this site to reflect the best this movement has to offer, we will need help from the movement to keep us informed about what we might include. We need people to help us find relevant news. We need groups to send us their best images and videos of their actions and events. We need people to help us fill out the resources section by submitting links to related history, our strongest evidence, and information relevant movement strategy. 

Commenting is provided on our site primarily to allow readers to post thoughtful questions and commentary that enhances the educational value of our posts. We will be strictly moderating comments to maintain that educational value. If you'd like to comment, please stay on topic and don't get too heavily into details, speculation or debate. 

9/11 Truth News. Please check out the site and if you like what you see, bookmark us, visit us regularly and spread the word. Also, please let us know if there are any huge bugs. We're still working out some browser issues. 

If you'd like more information about the project please have a look at our ABOUT section. 

If you would like to comment please read the COMMENT page before registering. 

To submit a suggestion about content you can use our CONTENT page. 

To contact the editors about the site please use our CONTACT page. 

Thanks for your time and your commitment to 9/11 justice. 


The 9/11 Truth News team


Show "Is there a need for another 911 Truth news site?" by Dearth

The short answer:

More 9/11 truth is a good thing.


my site, while nothing fancy, is a free site.

I Agree also

I Agree also. The more information we can put out there the better. I also think we should expand our horizons and connect the dots about what is happening right now in 2010, like the oil disaster, money crunch etc with 9/11. Lets face it all roads lead to 9/11/2001. Same people, just different disasters.

add 9/11 Truth News

Like us on facebook
Follow us on twitter

Not Just Another NEWS Site!

There are many reansons that another news site is needed! I could list them but some may find some of those points inconsistent with their world truth and justice view.

The way I see it and I speak for myself ONLY here is that we need a tight non-contriversial site that is highly critical of itself and the information it presents.

In a way this will take pressure off and allow those in this movement that are not comfortable with the current sites blossom.

I had a meeting with an award winning journalist in Sydney yesterday and we discussed 9/11 in some depth. 911 Truth News would be the place in the future that we may send this sort of person to demonstrate that we are not "conspiracy theorists".

I wish all involved the greatest sucess and this does not mean I will not be checking Blogger everyday:)

Regards John

Conflict of interest

John Bursill is serving on 9/11 Truth News' board of advisers, along with Cindy Sheehan, Bob McIlvaine, Janice Matthews, Frank Legge and Jim Hoffman. Did you think you could fool us, John? All kidding aside though, and are designed to serve different - and complimentary - purposes and I'm pretty sure the internet is big enough for both of us. We'll be working together for 9/11 truth and justice. Glad to have you on the team, John!

Yes, but what KIND of "news" will the site publish?

I don't question the creation of a new 9/11 news site - certainly this nation embraces competition to bring out the best in us all. My concern is that my very first experience visiting this new site has me face-to-face with this sentence: "A Yemeni man implicated in the SEPT. 11 ATTACKS was secretly detained in Morocco after Central Intelligence Agency operatives took him..." [emphasis mine] Now, this often-repeated ALLEGATION that the U.S. was somehow "attacked" by a foreign enemy on 9/11/01 has NEVER BEEN PROVEN. And, thus, is not a fact. Thus, the article is malicious as written, unless the author will either A) PROVE that the U.S. was "attacked" by some foreign enemy, as alleged; or, B) change the phrase "9/11 attacks" to "9/11 crimes" or "alleged 9/11 attacks." I just obtained my copy of DRG's book on WTC 7 and on the very first page it reads, "There are two main theories as to who was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to the theory put forth by the Bush-Cheney administration (and IT IS MERELY A THEORY, BECAUSE NO PROOF HAS EVER BEEN PROVIDED)..." [emphasis mine]. I must insist that we extend our growing awareness to include an awareness of the allegations which we speak of so often but are in fact just unproven statements no more valid that the claim that the cow jumped over the moon. So, let us hope that the editors at the new website will make FACT-BASED, not ALLEGATION-BASED, journalism their standard and then keep the bar high.

I agree

I think it would be good to have a disclaimer of some sort on articles of that nature. We'll sort it out.


more here

Big thanks to Justin and Erik for helping to publicize the launch!

>>there isn't as much

>>there isn't as much significant news about 911 as there once was

Yes, as it turns out we've found the "loaded gun" -- now what?

It's anyone's guess. But Richard's group keeps growing, people keep doing things, campaigns keep going and essays keep being written . . . things shift, but the facts aren't going away.

And there is a 10th Anniversary coming up, so things will ramp up for that. The Obama Admin will need their own version of trashing us by association in some way as the Bush Admin did by creating the "conspiracy theorists" badge, and more credible news and web sources which expose the trashing and discrediting and hit-pieces, while presenting strong info, will be needed more than ever.

Show "Sounds like Prof. Griffin's next book . . . " by JTL

I would like to see an occasional "replay"...

I would like to see a "replay" series which occasionally appears. Through the years there have been significant events/actions/release of films/people etc. which have played a role in the evolution of where things are now.

Many newcomers to 9/11 Truth often do not know the history of how things have come to shape the current scene.
For example, during the years 2005-2006, there was a huge surge occurring with 9/11 Truth. Many people and films and actions facilitated things. The Google search stats during the summer of 2006 set records for 9/11 Truth.

I would like to see a time-sequence consecutive replay of parts of the history. Inspiration is also contained in this history which can then rehabilitate an individual's purpose.

I like that idea a lot, Tom

One thing we're planning to do is go back and post some of the most significant milestones over the past few years. Normally these would just show up in chronological order in whatever category they are placed, but I do think it would be really cool to highlight some of them on the front page in an ongoing feature.

Here's a replay

Good idea Tom.

We are making progress. We just need to get some perspective to see how far we have come.


Looks promising.


It would be great to see an article or two from you, if you're up for it.

Maybe something for the anniversary?

Sounds good

I'd be happy to oblige.

Show "Who are the 4 editors and " by Newaij

Your slip is showing

Your first action on this site was to bump up a four year old TV fakery thread. I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed. I suggest you work on your routine a little bit more. Have a nice day.

Show "My post was for the new Psywar video" by Newaij

How strange


you are having trouble posting to the website?

Well, i'm an art director and dj maybe i can help?


Newaij said..."It is just a suggestion on my part but I recommend getting an expert such as David Ray Griffin to do the editing or at least act as an advisor."

Why? So we can try and pin 9-11 on Lloyde England, an old cab driver nearly klilled on 911 and Ted Olson, who lost his wife on his birthday? We wouldn't want to take away any time SELLING that idea to the public would we?

I suggest you do more studying and less suggesting.

"It is just a suggestion on

"It is just a suggestion on my part but I recommend getting an expert such as David Ray Griffin to do the editing or at least act as an advisor."

DRG has said several specious things that I don't see why you think he'd be necessary as an editor/adviser.

"Failing that I don't think I will be interested in this new site because I don't trust just anyone as an authority."

Are you required to trust the person instead of the facts? 9/11 Truth News is a fact-oriented site. We post news articles and avoid speculation, which basically means this is one of the most trustworthy sites on the subject, so I fail to understand your dilemma.

Mysterious 'collapse'

I was looking through David Griffin's recent book on WTC7 and was disappointed to find that he was listing Jim Fetzer's "Scholars" group alongside STJ911 in the text directly to readers, listed among the many other XXX for 9/11 Truth groups, as though nothing ever happened and people support Fetzer the same as ever. Really sad.

Anyone who doesn't get it about Jim Fetzer can read for themselves why the movement has rejected him, even if Griffin still is recommending him:

Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11

James Fetzer started off appearing to support the work of Dr. Steven Jones and offered to help form a scholars group with Jones and a handful of others. Fetzer ran the website for the group, but within months Fetzer's increasingly speculative, bizarre and one-sided posts began to earn criticism from other researchers. Jim Hoffman wrote a critique of Fetzer's research ( A Critical Review of: 'Thinking about "Conspiracy Theories": 9/11 and JFK' ) and an analysis of how the credibility of the original "9/11 Scholars group" was undermined by Fetzer's promotion of misleading claims on and his public appearances as the group's spokesperson ( Muddling the Evidence ).

By the end of about one year, the situation had gotten so dire that some of the members, including Steven Jones, decided they could no longer allow Fetzer to control the website, and decided to take a vote on what to do, since Fetzer refused to remove the offending posts. Eventually, after several weeks involving hundreds of emails attempting to resolve the situation, a poll and subsequent vote was taken of the membership via email. All but ten of the more than two hundred members who participated in the vote voted to leave Fetzer's original group and form a new group. Thirty people, including the ten, voted to join both groups. ( For more information on the split, please see: Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice: FAQ )

'I've put them in their place so many times,' [Fetzer] says of his critics. And as he sees it, his long-running battles over Wellstone and JFK have helped to prepare him for his role as spokesman for the truth movement. 'I know a whole lot about how these games are played,' he says. 'When I come into this 9/11 thing, see, I am not just a formidable foe on my own. I have this wealth of experience. The others don't know diddly shit about disinformation. But, man, I've lived through it.'"
Tumbling down the rabbit hole with professional philosopher Jim Fetzer;

Jim Fetzer: "I must say I think we're finding out Judy, what happened on 9/11. I'm just blown away by your work. This is the most fascinating development in the history of the study of 9/11 ... I'm going to make a wild guess Judy; I'm going to presume that these [directed energy] beams had to be located in Building 7?"

Judy Wood: "Nope. I don't think so."

Fetzer: "Planes?"

Judy Wood: "No ... I think it's very likely it's in orbit."

Fetzer: "Oh Really?? Oh ho ho ho ho! Oh Judy. Oh my oh my oh my oh my. This is huge ... this is huge Judy."
Non-Random Thoughts on RBN Live: Jim Fetzer interviews Judy Wood; November 11, 2006