The internet is replete with videos and articles that purport to investigate, analyze, and explain how 9/11 is not what it has been made out to be. The difficulty is in distinguishing the sensational, speculative theories from truly evidence-based challenges to the official narrative.
It seems as though there are those who will readily believe conspiracy theories without needing much evidence, while on the other side there are those who are not comfortable with considering the official government narrative to be a lie. Those are the people who are unwilling to do even the most rudimentary research into the subject.
So one might suggest that any effort to build an evidence-based refutation of the official narrative will result in simply preaching to the converted, and that those who are not ready to shift their paradigm will resist listening to any of the evidence. Certainly, the group Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth have had this experience, doing presentations and trying to get more architects and engineers to join them and sign on to the contention that the official National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) findings on the collapse of the three towers on 9/11 (1, 2 and 7) is based on flawed science. Their tireless efforts to present and communicate alternative theories to their professional community has been widely met with indifference and skepticism, though bit by bit new professionals have been signing on to the idea that the towers were brought down by controlled demolitions, thus implying that this had to be an inside job with a vast network of conspirators.
Researching Is Believing
I have met and heard from many people who have been willing to research into the issue with an open mind, and the conclusion is inevitably the same: whether or not they are sure about exactly what happened to bring about the destruction on 9/11, they are sure that there is much more to it than the official story.
On the other hand, I have never met or even heard about a single person claiming to have done extensive research on the anomalies and inconsistencies of 9/11 and have a cogent explanation as to why these exist and how the official story holds up to the scrutiny of objective scientific investigation. Researching this material basically turns non-believers of this ‘conspiracy theory’ into believers. It’s as simple as that.
So why does a fully evidence-based challenge to the official narrative become important in this environment? For some in the fields of engineering and architecture, it provides an important piece of research for detailing evidence-based information to colleagues who maintain a skeptical attitude towards the possibility that the world is not as it seems. For the average person who has already realized that 9/11 is an inside job, reading and selecting information from this volume provides them with the credibility and verifiable talking points with which to continue to challenge those around them into considering that much of the official story is a lie.
In this book review, which informs much of the rest of this article, Dick Lowman tells us that 9/11 Unmasked is the end product of a seven-year effort by two top experts in the field who have thoroughly analyzed the available evidence and are presenting the documented and relevant material in a succinct single volume. To ensure that no aspect of their research would be overlooked or misrepresented, the authors, David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, assembled and employed an impressive roster of international reviewers called the 9/11 Consensus Panel. This panel, according to the book, “includes people from the fields of physics, chemistry, structural engineering, aeronautical engineering, piloting, airplane crash investigation, medicine, journalism, psychology, and religion.” Each of the panelists is identified and credited by name and qualifications.
The book also explains the purpose of the panel: “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.” Griffin and Woodworth set the bar very high when determining what constitutes “best evidence.” Indeed, given the 875 reference notes that document virtually every statement, it seems improbable that any valid criticism of the panel’s consensus points can ever be found.
That said, critics of panels like this sometimes allege that panelists can be influenced, consciously or subconsciously, by the opinions of fellow members. The “groupthink” phenomenon, these detractors say, often comes into play, making panelists reluctant to express any opinion contrary to the group’s position. In particular, a lower ranking or passive person might mimic the opinions of a higher ranking or more aggressive member of the group.
To avoid any possibility of groupthink, the authors employ the Delphi Method as a model for achieving best-evidence consensus. This method provides all panel members with a way of sharing their honest opinions without being influenced or constrained by external sources. Questions are sent in writing to each member individually to prevent anyone from being swayed by what other members are saying. Any subject receiving less than an 85% consensus from reviewers is removed from consideration.
51 Points Of Contention
Thus far, the international team of 9/11 Consensus panelists has reached agreement on 51 points where documented evidence conclusively contradicts the official story. Each point is addressed in its own chapter, and the 51 chapters are grouped into nine categories:
- Destruction of the Twin Towers
- Destruction of WTC 7
- Attack on the Pentagon
- The 9/11 Flights [includes Flight 93]
- U.S. Military Exercises
- Claims About Military and Political Leaders
- Osama Bin Laden and the Hijackers
- Phone Calls from the 9/11 Flights
- The Question of Insider Trading
Each chapter is structured in a format akin to an executive summary. First, a claim that constitutes a part of the official account is summarized and presented with references to source material. The official claim is followed with facts that disprove it, and those facts are amply documented with notes at the end of the book.
One challenge the panelists face in analyzing the official account is that it is often a moving target, i.e., an evolving narrative. In nine of the 51 chapters (Chapters 11, 12, 19, 20, 29, 30, 36, 49, and 50, to be specific), the authors show how the government’s story has changed over time. In each of those chapters, they provide verifiable evidence that discredits the multiple versions.
Keeping It Objective
9/11 Unmasked stands out not only for what is included, but also for what is not included. There is no speculation about who perpetrated the attacks. Moreover, emotional subjects such as first responder cancer deaths are not mentioned. 9/11 Unmasked simply lays out the facts that show the official story cannot be true.
Any one of the 51 chapters, by itself, presents ample evidence to disprove the official account. When all 51 are taken together, the evidence is overwhelming and the conclusion inevitable: A new, independent investigation of 9/11 is imperative.
In the technical world, executive summaries of research are typically presented in one or two paragraphs. The events of 9/11 are so complex, so far-reaching, that one or two paragraphs on any aspect of the subject hardly suffices. Yet Griffin and Woodworth’s 308-page book might rightly be considered an executive summary of their many years of research, presented as a non-political, non-controversial compilation of facts.
9/11 Unmasked is destined to be the Bible, the foundation, the go-to source of future research. It belongs on the bookshelf of anyone who has nagging questions about what really happened on September 11, 2001. And it will surely be on the desk of each and every government official who might one day be tasked with reinvestigating that monumental event.
Perhaps no other event is as emblematic of the search for truth in the Awakening Community as 9/11. It should be obvious to us that it would take extremely powerful forces to be able to keep this highly flawed official narrative in place, and prevent a new and objective investigation from ever taking place.
Is there is a deeper reason that the truth has not been revealed yet, that the timing depends on the stage we are at in our collective awakening? Perhaps each of us still needs to be provided opportunities to proliferate the truth and play our part in the great awakening. In that regard, books like 9/11 Unmasked serve as yet another valuable tool in our toolbox.