Matt Taibbi vs. David Ray Griffin Taibbi, to whose writing Metafilter frequently links, and who is currently on retainer at Rolling Stone, takes on Griffin, who is perhaps the most prominent member of the so-called "9/11 Truth Movement," in a knock-down, drag-out multiple-round bout (in three parts). Part II. Part III.
posted by Hat Maui on Oct 6, 2008 - 99 comments

Academics question the official explanation for the WTC collapse. This paper, with internal links to assorted videos and stills, argues that WTC 7, the 45-story companion building to the towers, appears to have been demolished by planted explosives, not the fire from the twin towers.
posted by craniac on Jan 21, 2006 - 256 comments

Conspiracy theories are my friend.... And I thought I was the only one. For the longest time, I have thought that there has been no evidence to tie Osama bin Laden and the WTC attack. At least one other nut agrees with me (via BoingBoing.net).
posted by ajpresto on Nov 5, 2003 - 19 comments

Xymphora blog has very interesting 9/11 details The links here suggest that the govt had more information than was initially released, and that only through piecing together various reports (here) do we get a fuller picture which seems at odds with what we had previously been told. Important: this is not a conspiracy theory but rather what seems a clarification.
posted by Postroad on Jul 23, 2002 - 25 comments

The real culprit behind the 9/11 attack.
posted by tiaka on Jan 23, 2002 - 25 comments

Coming soon to an inbox near you, this link(& part 2) to a WTC(& Pentagon) conspiracy page. Planes didn't do all the damage, bombs did in order to exploit the "WTC Golden Goose." Any other conspiracy theories floating around yet?
posted by donkeysuck on Oct 8, 2001 - 15 comments

America's Obsession With Movies Reaches The WTC Attacks The website Metaphilm(grrr...)says the 1998 movie The Siege eerily anticipated the WTC attacks and offers a list of impressive coincidences to back up its analysis. Is this taking moviemania too far? Or is there something in it? (More)
posted by MiguelCardoso on Oct 2, 2001 - 15 comments

Who benefits from the bombings? A rather controversial piece. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I thought it would be interesting to throw into the discussion. The author's assertion definitely a possibility (since anything is possible), but I'm leaning towards the 'this is quite a nutter' assessment. Thoughts?
(I did a search and couldn't find a reference to it on this site, maybe for good reason.)
posted by jetgrrl on Sep 17, 2001 - 17 comments