“Conspiracy stories have always been around and they’ve always been part of the bigger story. Moreover, the more structured societies were, the more important they were. They are a form of counter-discourse and analysis by those who do not know how to observe it. (…) There is a disease in psychiatry called apophenia. It’s seeing things that aren’t there, and conspiracy is both a factor and a symptom of modern societies. »(Thomas Huchon, August 25, 2021 on Public Senate).
In a few days, Saturday September 11, 2021, will be the twentieth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States. Four hijacked planes that crashed, two on the two giant towers of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Manhattan, New York’s business district, a symbol of the country’s economic greatness, one on the Pentagon in nearby Arlington of Washington, symbol of the country’s military might, and another which “succeeded” in avoiding a fourth target which would have been the White House, symbol and political heart of the United States, and which fell in Pennsylvania, in Shanksville .
In all, without counting the 19 terrorists who carried out these four suicide bombings, 2,977 people died there, including 2,753 in the two twin towers of the WTC, including 343 firefighters and 60 police officers. Only 1,643 victims have been identified. In addition, there were 6,291 people injured, but besides the United States, it was the whole world that was injured, traumatized, including Russia which was one of the first countries to express its solidarity with the American people.
I have already had the opportunity to write that September 11, 2001 marked the history of the world. The change began on November 9, 1989 (the reverse for the months and days 9-11 and 11-9) with the fall of the Berlin Wall, a positive historical singularity point, the definitive end of the Communist bloc and the victory of the liberal democracies, thwarted by this horror of Islamist terror which is the negative counterpart of the singularity with a new “enemy”, Islamic terrorism which can take various forms, sometimes antagonistic, all over the world.
Like a snub to history, the Taliban, driven out by the international coalition created following September 11, 2001, returned to Kabul at the same time as the departure of this international coalition, whose political record is very bitter.
Twenty years is a generation. For young people, it is already in history textbooks but without “live” knowledge. And this is what is important: the further the event, the more we can say anything. In a way, I understand very well why the survivors of the extermination camps mostly shut up when they returned to their country of origin. Why testify when it was absolutely unspeakable, incredible? We wouldn’t have believed them. Fortunately, some ignored it, like Primo Levi, but the risk of contempt, indifference, rejection of their testimonies was too great. It was amazing, so why would we believe them? Even if they themselves were living proof of this industrial horror. Not to mention the guilt complex of having survived. Better to turn the page and live the future without going back to the past. It took decades to hear from these traumatized witnesses, sometimes on their deathbed. Today, there aren’t many left. They mostly go to schools, testify discreetly, outside of the media hype and unnecessary controversy, unnecessary except to earn money.
Conspiracy often springs from disbelief. By a downright savage fallacy, we are exempted from the blind belief of a “version” of the facts by a salutary doubt, but also by an even more credulous plunge into a completely stupid “version” (with variations since this new version is not based on any fact).
False information, reasoning deviated from reason, the exploitation of particularly traumatic events, zany and risky interpretations have always existed since man became a man, as the journalist Thomas Huchon said, but the attacks of September 11, 2001 are arrived at a time when global society had equipped itself with smartphones, laptops, with content that for a few years became social networks where the slightest stork fart is heard on the other side of the planet in a few microseconds, the time to travel the optical fiber or go from satellites to satellites.
I would have liked to write that with these attacks, never had we written so many conspiratorial stupidities about an event … but for a year and a half, it has been painful to me to note that the destruction of the World Trade Center has been a piss of conspiratorial chat next to all the nonsense you can read about the covid-19 pandemic. Sneaky, conspiratorial words never assert anything but question everything, even when there is no further debate on the subject. By asking a few manipulative questions, which above all reveal the ignorance and incompetence of the subject, the conspirators are supposed to make people think and lead their interlocutors to reach particularly fanciful conclusions themselves (I advise, as an exercise in beautiful disinformation, to watch the documentary series “Alien Theory” with very beautiful images, but saying anything, from the origin of man from Mars to the knowledge of helicopters by the pharaohs).
I have not read the voluminous reports laid over the last twenty years on these attacks of 2001, sometimes by the particularly rigorous and independent commissions of inquiry, but I have read many conspiratorial nonsense on the subject and it would be very vain to try using reason to try to reason with those who are manipulated by these propagandists of the conspiracy (a conspiracy per minute, like the pressure cooker). This is Brandolini’s law: it is easier to create false information than to take it apart. So it’s technically impossible to dismantle all the false information, and anyway, it’s no longer a matter of reason but of belief, and paradoxically in the name of disbelief.
Nevertheless, one can understand the imbecility of conspiracy theories when one can personally appreciate the facts with one’s own observations. I have two examples in mind relating to September 11, 2001.
I happened to be working for an American new technology group at that time. I worked in particular with an American colleague who had just moved to France. She was then installed in the same office as me (temporarily). She still hardly spoke French (she was learning it) but already adored France (there are some, even of Texan origin!), Having already visited Corsica, for example. My office was quite spacious and the door was glass. It was a matter of safety, to be able to see all the workers in the hallway, if for example I was passed out, that they could come and rescue me quickly. But as I was in a very busy hallway, to avoid hundreds of prying eyes, I had taped a large poster inside, against the glass, to show outside a magnificent photograph of New York by night, where we obviously saw the two twin towers, a bit like the silhouette of our Eiffel Tower. After the attacks, I was quickly embarrassed when my first American visitors came after the attacks, having forgotten this poster which could remind them of terrible emotions. I immediately tore it up and put it in the trash.
/ * * /
But back to that fatal day. It was in the afternoon and the first information that came out was that there had been an act of war against New York. This was long before the towers collapsed, but after the impact of the first plane. It must have been around 3 p.m. My colleague and I dug into my computer, looking for often fuzzy and contradictory “news”. We saw the second plane live as well as the collapse of the two towers. You can imagine the shock of my colleague (and mine).
That wasn’t what shocked him the most, though. Other information was reaching us. All American and European airports have closed. Many countries were going into a state of war. Some planes bound for the United States had to turn around. There was no indication that acts of war would not occur in other countries allied to the United States. During this time, I saw it after the fact, this image of George W. Bush, chatting with schoolchildren, learning live of the sinister event. He seemed to be having a nightmare. Everyone was having a nightmare. There was talk of a third plane crashing into the Pentagon. Peak of emotion. For my colleague: her father was working at the Pentagon. Then a fourth plane. This multitude of information, and probably from that point on, misinformation heightened the emotion of those who could be touched closely.
My colleague went to join other American expatriates at the consulate in Paris in the evening, an evening of meditation, solidarity, information. According to initial findings, no one from my company was present at the World Trade Center that morning. My colleague’s father also survived the worst, but in the destroyed building there was a lot of damage, and the crash killed all 64 passengers on the plane and 165 people working at the Pentagon.
However, the first mediatized disinformation of these attacks, coming from a book by a pseudo-journalist whom I will not quote and who has since moved to a country more promising in manipulations, was that he did not There would never have been a plane crashing into the Pentagon. I necessarily knew that this idea was wrong, and the worst part is that on the Internet, one can find in two minutes a video of a surveillance camera which filmed this horror.
In the evening, I got home relatively early (before 8 p.m.). I wonder today why I did not accompany my American colleague to the consulate. I told myself that I was not American and that it was not my place. It was probably a mistake. As soon as I got home, of course I put on the television. At the time, there was no continuous news channel, at least on conventional terrestrial channels, but TF1 and France 2 were in continuous news themselves, a nasty habit acquired since the Gulf War when it there were major events.
I do not remember which of the two channels continuously broadcast the image of the American channel CNN in order to witness the same news live as the Americans, with a French dubbing of the statements. It was around 11 p.m. that I heard an American presenter announce that firefighters or police (I can’t remember) had stuffed the seventh tower of the WTC with explosives because the foundations were cracking and the building was about to collapse, too shaken by the first two collapses. They had taken their time and had managed to get her evacuated. Then I watched live in front of my TV as the scheduled collapse of that seventh round. Everything was logical and explained, explainable in any case.
I was obviously not in New York that night, but I remember very well the chronology, the reasons, the scene, this presenter, these images that can be found on the Internet. It wasn’t until much later that I read that some completely stupid conspiracy theories were talking about the collapse of the Seventh Tower, merging that the Twin Towers were also stuffed with explosives, etc. Still, there was no mystery that there was a danger, an urgent threat, to be eliminated by hastening the destruction of the seventh tower. Simply, the author (s) of this theory did not see that this explosion was carried out in full transparency, live in front of tens of millions of Americans (and Europeans).
Smoky theories enjoy the fraying memory of those who may have seen, observed, in the time of the facts and who could invalidate these smoky theories. And finally, being a witness on television does not prevent being, the images were not invented, and here I do not want to refute all the hazy claims, except to say that the probability is much too low for that a real plot still remains in the secret of the conscience of tens of thousands of people for so long (twenty years), some of whom might have had a bad conscience, regret, confess on their deathbed, etc. There couldn’t have been some leaks. When we know that the slightest act and gesture is almost live reproduced on social networks, how could such a secret have lasted so long?
This observation by television has its interest: it is that it is easily traceable, that several people, millions of people perhaps, were able to see the same facts. I end with derisory false information. Derisory because it is without interest but it shows how fertile this culture of conspiracy is, often on an element of incomprehension, because it lacks information, a data which can explain a fact that one could find “bizarre” or “unusual”, even shocking.
It was September 1, 2021. French President Emmanuel Macron began his three-day visit to Marseille. An important “sequence”, the visit of the northern districts, the meeting with the inhabitants. Concretely, nothing concrete will come of it, but it is an essential exercise, in listening to the population, in empathy (Emmanuel Macron knows how to do this), with the risk of overflow, or even slapping. All the televisions were there, on the lookout for the slightest incident, or remarkable dialogue, in search of some future buzz.
As he walked down the street, not far from his bodyguards, there were mostly young people on the other side of the barriers, and the President came up to them, talking to them. It was the goal. I immediately noticed something: Emmanuel Macron was the only one who wore a mask, outside, in full sun, blue sky. All his interlocutors, the young people, were without a mask but it could be accepted, it was in the open air, even if the safety distances were not respected.
And then, one moment as he was walking from one block to another, he spoke with a relative, an assistant, and what you heard vaguely was (in essence): oh yeah? the mask is not mandatory outside? Okay, okay, I’ll take it off. And he proceeded to take off his mask and continue to meet other inhabitants without masks.
It only took a few hours for conspiratorial sites, or rather, currently specializing in primary antimacronism, to take it easy: ah, look! Macron does not wear a mask, makes fun of barrier gestures while in school class, children must wear masks (I will not do the insult to recall that a classroom is not open air in Marseille , as dilapidated as it is).
In short, everything is good to criticize, but to criticize Emmanuel Macron on the barrier gestures in Marseille when he was probably the only one who respected them at best, it is all the more stupid as Emmanuel Macron certainly has many others. points where one can criticize him, but… intelligently (for example, on what he said the next day, but for that, one would have to listen or read his speech, which owes an insurmountable effort for the professionals of conspiratorial stupidities).
It was ridiculous but it was exactly the same mechanics as in the seventh round: one only needed to watch television to understand the stupidity of these smoky claims and to take them apart. This is why you have to know how to choose sides in the source war: What you want to hear or what you want to learn. From sites that have always disseminated rotten information, nothing can come out good and reliable.
So there are simply the “real” journalists, those who are paid to provide information and who are of course sometimes very criticizable, often by their lack of culture and their lack of perspective in time, they can be wrong, they can even want to deceive others, manipulate, misinterpret, but in any case, the battle of the ego being what it is, the competition so fierce, that when a “real” journalist says something stupid, there will necessarily be another colleague to rebuff him and ensure a short glory before a next “streak”. Because we must not believe, journalists are like hospital mandarins, they are solitary individuals, are rarely united and never miss their prey, this is why there is a natural regulation in the market of the information: the fake never lasts very long nowadays, and that’s a good thing. Also on the blog Sylvain Rakotoarison (04 September 2021) http://www.rakotoarison.eu
To go further: The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the birth of conspiracy 2.0 The attacks of September 11, 2001 Conspiracy vs chaos: towards a new religion? New world. What did you do on September 11, 2001? September 11 Conspiracy theories explored on the Internet Ben Laden, DSK, same plot? The Kabul attack of August 26, 2021.Jacques Hamel, martyr of the Republic as much as of the Church.National holiday: five years later …
I was on the plane … I saw this one enter the tower … cross the tower and continue its flight like a letter in the mail! while thanking the pilot for this beautiful and good time.
I even lost my (thin) ID card when I opened the door! it was so hot that day
And Bin Laden, meanwhile, was at Eurodisney on the “Star Wars” attraction. He listened to R2D2’s nonsense while clinging to his chair.
The information I gave is no more fanciful than that of the “non-conspirators” … Bin Laden, Massoud, etc., what wonderful and useful scapegoats! Yet, once murdered, nothing changes …
” There are no non-conspirators, even with quotes: there are only conspirators against the single thought, making it clear that for the Doxa watchdogs, the single thought is that of the opposition. Thank you Sarkozy for having enlightened us on your credo: The circle of the great amalgamation was closed when in your speeches the opposition became anti-Semitic and conspiracy theory.
Let’s wait for the trial, the tortures at Guantanamo are not yet over, mission accomplished in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya.
“It was around 11 p.m. that I heard an American presenter of course announce that firefighters or police (I can’t remember) had stuffed the seventh tower of the WTC with explosives because the foundations were cracking and the building was going to collapse, too shaken by the first two collapses. They had taken their time and had managed to get her evacuated. Then I watched live in front of my TV as the scheduled collapse of that seventh round. ”
According to the official thesis it would seem that WTC7 was never stuffed with explosives … The firefighters, unable to do anything, abandoned the building in the flames, which would have caused it to collapse …
Then I add … That it seems even more likely that the firefighter or police officer had other much more important things to do that day than to take or waste their time to go stuff WTC7 with explosives. .
I would like you to give a source on → “firefighters or police (I can’t remember) stuffed the seventh round of the WTC with explosives” …
@John The flames are the result of thousands of paper files to be cleared away and there is no doubt that WTC7 was undermined via a proper implosion
Without a source I could (on your) → “firefighters or police (I do not remember) had stuffed explosives on the seventh round of the WTC” to conclude that the last words of your article inadvertently turn against you … → “The fake never lasts very long these days, and that’s a good thing. “
“There is no doubt that the WTC7 was undermined via an implosion worthy of the name”
Yes, of course, but not as Sylvain explains in his article … In any case, he admits that tower 7 was indeed dynamited … Perhaps in the long run after many video and other observations he would have concluded that the we could not deny the explosions …
@John Knowing that this tower originated from the Zionisthan there are no small gains through insider insurance
@John Our ingenuous Sylvain does not know it but he raised a real hare with this sentence. Indeed, the thesis that WTC7 had been blown up because it was too unstable was only initially supported by the authorities. Larry Silverstein, the owner of the building (and the twin towers), said the same day that he had asked the firefighters to pull it down (“pull it”), in other words to destroy it by controlled demolition. Subsequently, there were some debates on this subject, the central idea of which was that it was obviously impossible to have explosives installed in WTC7 in such a short time (seven hours between the fall of the Twin Towers and the fall) for the “pull it”: the building was the size of the Montparnasse tower and four times its width. Such work would have required weeks for a team of professional fireworks. Suddenly, the official version has completely abandoned this idea (yet indeed the only one possible but not with an explosives installation in less than seven hours), the NIST body which released an investigation into the collapse of WTC7 declared that everything was due to the fires and Larry Silverstein explained that by saying “pull it”, he meant by “it” the people who were still in the building. Without knowing it, Sylvain has just corroborated one of the key points of the thesis of the internal conspiracy and the false flag attack …
@alineaHello Alinea, How rare to find such a nugget, and having a bad mind, I made an article …
“George W Bush really sucks at chess, getting caught twice by a madman”
September 11, 2001 and journalism 2.0, the one that informs faster than its shadow: The BBC and CNN, announce at 4:15 pm that the “WTC7”, the “third building”, the one that was not hit by a plane, collapsed. WTC building number 7 really collapsed at 5:20 pm.
Were there no injuries in the third round? Damn, what a luck, what a coincidence: nobody !!
@alineaI speak too fast: to keep from collapsing we stuff the third tower with explosives; we say we stuff …
“This is Brandolini’s law: it is easier to create a false
information than to disassemble it. It is therefore technically impossible to
dismantle all the false information, and anyway, this is
no longer a question of reason but of belief, and this paradoxically at the
name of disbelief. “
Is it your subconscious talking? You know he knows no lies or deceit, he wisely waits for his “in” to be taken away.
The natural inclination is to stick to a “black and white” way of thinking, so there is a fairly frequent approach, going from doubts about the official thesis, to the certainty of the opposite thesis. However, reality is generally complex, in shades of gray.
When an “anti-thesis” is issued on an event, it is possible to support it with partial facts, adjusted, adapted and supplemented with hypotheses and some artifices to constitute a whole which appears coherent. We can then demonstrate that Napoleon voluntarily lost the Battle of Waterloo … or even that he did not exist
Excellent article! Nothing to add to the appalling observations that you make on conspiracy and its delirious headlongs.
The WTC was well prepared upstream for a controlled demolition except that to screw up a pseudo plane in it relieved of the impossible and therefore thank you to the two towers for this diversion like a work of the messiah! hmm, we’re not all fools by half, no, but.
1-The Independent (London) celebrates Osama bin Laden. The same
moment the Heritage Foundation (Washington), the president’s think tank
Reagan, distributed T-shirts bearing his image with the slogan “It is
fight for our freedoms “.
2-Gulbuddin Hekmatyar receives allegiance from Rached Ghannouchi
(current president of the Tunisian National Assembly) and Recep
Tayyip Erdoğan (current Turkish president).
4-Pakistani general Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, the billionaire
Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden, Egyptian physician Ayman al-Zawahiri,
Turkish militiaman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the Tunisian professor of religion
Rached Ghannouchi are members of the Brotherhood of the Brothers
5-Admiral Cebrowski’s assistant popularized his thinking on how to adapt the US armies to financial capitalism
The strategy was developed by Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
by George W. Bush, and by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, who had already
computerized the US armies.
On September 11, 2001, it became the
the thinking of the US staff. It was popularized by
Cebrowski’s assistant Thomas Barnett with his book The Pentagon’s New Map
To react, identify yourself with your login / password, at the top right of this page
“Only duty to human beings as such is eternal. ”
Quote from the philosopher Simone Weil taken from her book “L’Enracinement” (ed. Gallimard) published after her death in 1949.
“The protest can be lively, the judgment severe, but on condition of keeping to a certain intellectual and moral level which only makes it more (…)
Agoravox uses free software technologies: SPIP,
In regards to /
Legal Notice /
Cookies and personal data /