HomeAdditional ResourcesAbout Us

                            Truth Warriors Network presents

The 9/11 Hoax
'A tournament of lies'

In a speech shortly before his assassination, President John F. Kennedy warns against “a ruthless and monolithic conspiracy” attempting to take over American government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces

Those unfamiliar with the 9/11 truth movement may find the information presented on this and linked pages shocking and difficult to believe. The argument presented will become believable when you view the information presented by other truth warriors - most of them American citizens - on the linked pages.

Truth Warriors Network asks you to consider the argument being made, examine the evidence presented, and then decide for yourself what you believe happened on September 11, 2001.

The 9/11 Hoax Argument and Evidence

Ten years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, evidence is clear that the World Trade Center buildings were not downed by airplanes but by planned and controlled demolitions.

These are among the organizations asking for a new investigation into the 9/11 terrorist attacks (the linked videos related to these organizations begin our presentation of evidence):





In further evidence to be presented, you will learn about the Project for the New American Century, a think-tank of wealthy and powerful that in 2000 produced a blueprint for war and global domination to serve the interests of the corporate elite and super wealthy (redefined for their propaganda as "American interests") using American military might.

The document included statement that their goals of overthrowing sovereign governments unwelcoming to American domination and establishing several new permanent military bases around the world would take a long time to achieve unless there was some catastrophic and catalyzing event "like a new Pearl Harbor."

The 9/11 truth movement has generally believed the 9/11 terrorists attacks were done as this new Pearl Harbor. And listen to what is said in this composite video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZRFvavH_vk

- A 9/11 Commission member says the word “missile.”

- President George Bush state explosives were used (and then becomes flustered afterwards).

- Donald Rumsfeld says “shot down the plane” instead of “brought down the plane” in reference to Flight 93 - believed to have been headed for the White House - that crashed in Pennsylvania.

While continuing to examine evidence (more links below) that 9/11 was perpetrated by Americans as attack on their own country to drum up patriotic fervor and justify an invasion of Iraq, consider that invasion of Iraq was only one of many goals of the Project for the New American Century.

Is it possible that “a new Pearl Harbor” might be something even bigger that would launch us into a wider and more long-term conflict?

Consider this news story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7418860.stm

The story says 450 Russian missiles were accidentally destroyed at a Russian weapons depot. In the story, the residents describe seeing only 3 missiles and nothing in the report indicates any enormous nor prolonged explosions or destruction around the weapons depot that would have occurred if 450 missiles accidentally detonated.

Is it possible that a corrupt gang within the Russian military stole the missiles and sold them to the super powerful and corrupt in America who are planning a more literal new Pearl Harbor?

Could an American city or military base be targeted for bombardment with Russian-made missiles by these powerful and super corrupt Americans who were also behind 9/11? Will these same people tell us that Iran and 
Al Qaeda did this in revenge for Osama bin Laden's alleged death? Will this lead to us invading Iran and other Muslim and oil-producing nations?

Before you decide what you believe in answer to those questions, let's examine more evidence from 9/11. . . .

This video highlights the disappearing airplane wing, giving support to the claim that the 9/11 news footage that people watched on live TV that day, was planned and faked in advance of its broadcast (more on that below):

This one shows an explosion occurring in each of the towers a second before the airplanes hit the buildings:

This one is of an eyewitness describing explosions in the elevator while on the basement level of one of the towers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0_Ns2ShYKc

These are eyewitnesses describing explosions on the lobby floor of one of the buildings:

Several 9/11 witnesses whose stories countered the official story have died early deaths:

This video ("9/11 Coincidences" Part 8)explains science of controlled demolitions, which includes explosives in the basement of a building before setting off explosives on the higher floors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEtQGyiZaLo

The next video in the series "9/11 Coincidences" (Part 9) explains more about the suspected controlled demolition and also suggests in addition to creating an excuse for the Iraq war, some had financial motives for destruction of the WTC towers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b78j8QBoKwE

Part 10 of "9/11 Coincidences" alleges when the Bush administration could not stop investigation into 9/11, that they instead co-opted the investigation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHfYIOjVmbA

Part 11 gives more exploration to the issue of motivations (and discusses the Project for the New American Century): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj-p0YF1k-U

These next six are from a video series called "The Illuminati and Dajjal" (who or what are Illuminati and Dajjal is explained further below):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZMHT49akw (part 4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-o9DVg00mM (part 5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbpygrU0S1w (part 6)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHodRdHIq3I (part 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg62as8l8To (part 8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4efisaj4aBc (part 9)

In several parts of the video series, technical information about video editing and digital manipulation is not explained well and as result, some of the information presented does not appear to prove anything to someone with no knowledge of video editing and digital manipulation. Some of the differences in the 9/11 news and witness video footage examined by the videographer might be explainable by different camera angels, positions, and shadows. However, other parts of what is presented cannot be explained away so easily.

In addition to what is demonstrated about possible faked news footage and airplane wings miraculously slicing through steel girders, the compelling evidence presented in the series includes:

1. Use of journalists, news company employees, and relatives of news company employees as sources for stories, defying normal journalistic rules and conventions which would have had them using random people off the streets (or people calling the news room by phone) as witnesses to what they saw or heard.

2. First a journalist and then a photographer each say they are right under the towers when the second plane hits, but no noise of a plane coming in low causes them to look up and say something like, "there's another plane!"

3. Mike Walter of USA Today claims he witnessed an American Airlines jet fly into the Pentagon. In the three interview pieces shown, he displays no emotion to what he is saying, as if he were completely detached from the traumatic jolt of what he witnessed. He seems happy and he's almost smiling even in the first interview which was right after it happened.

4. Walter also makes the highly curious statement that the plane that flew into the Pentagon "looked like a cruise missile with wings." Why would he say anything about a cruise missile? Why would he say that a plane looks like a cruise missile with wings? Most of us have seen airplanes far more often than we have seen a cruise missile, so he picks a very odd reference. Why does he say it looked like anything other than what he claims it was, a commercial jet airplane? Why an out of the blue comparison to a cruise missile?

5. Later, Walter has to explain the wings on the plane collapsed when hitting the Pentagon and that is why the hole in the Pentagon was not larger, but instead was smaller as would have been made with a cruise missile.

6. When the plane hit the second WTC tower, as seen in video clip after video clip, the steel girders of the building somehow did not slice off its wings. Magically, the lighter metal airplane wings manage to cut through much thicker and heavier metal steel girders and remain intact as the plane enters the building.

7. Sean Murtagh, vice president for finance at CNN, is used as a news source. He is not a journalist but someone who deals with making sure the company makes as much profit as possible. He is called upon as an eyewitness, and says he saw a large plane crash into the first tower that was hit. No explanation is given as to why he was looking up at the towers when the first tower was hit.

8. Owen Moogan, a producer at FOX, says he heard a plane flying by low while still laying in bed in his high-rise apartment building and then he heard it crash into the tower about 5 blocks from where he lives. What he says is not that suspicious on surface level, except that you have to consider it in relation to his position with FOX. Why do they not have random people with no affiliation or connection to the media saying what they heard and saw? If he heard a loud plane overhead, surely there were others in his building who did too, but they were not interviewed.

9. Mark Obenhaus, an ABC producer, says he saw a large plane flying low, that it was certainly a commercial jet, and then says, "my eyes followed it because this is approximately 15 blocks from the World Trade Center." He followed it in the skyline for the reason that he thought it was headed toward the WTC and would hit one of the towers. It is odd that he would make such an assumption instead of assuming it was a plane having some engine trouble that might crash into the water. His first assumption is the plane is headed toward the WTC specifically.

10. Jay Aldersberg, a medical reporter for ABC, contradicts what others have said. He says he was looking at the smoke, which would have been from the first tower, so it is the second tower he is talking about that he says he saw a small plane hit. He says it "looked like a propeller type." In other words, what he saw was a small plane, nothing near the size of a commercial jet. While he says it was a small plane, it could have actually been a missile:

11. Mark Birnback, identified only as a FOX employee (not a journalist nor producer nor holding an important position with the company, but assumed to be some type of support staff), says the plane he saw had a blue circular logo on the front and no passenger windows, that is was not a commercial jet.

12. Stewart Nurick, an intern at CBS, said he saw the second plane and that it was small.

13. Don Dahler, war correspondent for ABC, says what he heard was not an airplane, but sounded like a missile. Having covered war, he would know the difference. He also says about the second tower, he didn't see a plane, but "it just exploded." He may not have seen the missile, but others are saying they saw a small plane (which may have actually been a missile).

14. Dick Oliver interviews people on the street. The people are telling him they saw a missile not a plane.

15. Eric Shawn, FOX terrorism reporter, contradicts FOX employee Birnback, ABC medical reporter Aldersberg, CBS intern Nurick, war correspondent Dahler, and Oliver's people on the street. Shawn says the second plane was large.

16. Forty-one seconds after the second tower is hit, FOX news comes up with bin Laden's name out of the blue, before most Americans had ever heard of him, ahead of the Bush administration blaming of bin Laden, with no prompting from a government source to make the suggestion it was bin Laden, and with no pretense of any evidence of bin Laden being involved.

17. Winston Mitchell, an ABC reporter, says he saw a plane overhead. Vince Cellini, a FOX sports anchor called into cover hard news that day, starts to call it a missile, but then corrects himself.

18. We find out the local news stations were knocked off the air, so they could not do coverage. If they were able to do coverage, they would not have called upon people employed by or relatives of people employed by the national media outlets, but would have used common random New Yorkers on the street who would have reported what the same common random New Yorkers were telling Dick Oliver, a missile, not a plane hit the second tower.

The video series suggests a number of members of a secret corrupt organization (the Illuminati, explained below) within media news organizations, some as journalists, some in producer or other powerful company positions. By the non-Illuminati who were able to get on air to refute what the Illuminati members were saying, we know that not all the anchors or their assistants, reporters, or producers at the national media outlets are Illuminati or they would not have used those people in their coverage. We can conclude that some of the anchors, reporters, and producers of the national news shows are Illuminati and some are not.

What ultimately appears implicit and explicit in all these sources of information about 9/11 is that Muslims were not behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the WTC, but that the attacks were part of a scheme to feed the American population a string of outrageous lies in order to prepare the American population for invasions and wars in the Muslim nations to control the remaining crude oil supplies and the profits to be made from them.

(If this is your first time through The 9/11 Hoax, we encourage you to return to the top of this page to re-view all of the videos presented thus far before you continue from this point.)

The videos also demonstrate the 9/11 truth movement is not being led by Muslims, but by American citizens of various belief systems who are alarmed at the lies and outrageous acts of their own corrupt government.

Connection to the bin Laden Hoax

9/11 is the most obvious open case of treason in American history, and yet with the change to a new administration from a different political party, President Barack Obama has not called for a new investigation into 9/11.

Is it possible that party labels make no difference in the "ruthless and monolithic conspiracy" President Kennedy gave warning about?

The news presented to us recently about the death of Osama bin Laden includes at least three perplexing and unexplained elements. First is that there was no layer upon layer of armed men the Navy Seals had to fight through before reaching bin Laden.

The public has been asked to believe that bin Laden was leader of a vast, well-financed, and sophisticated militant organization and the most wanted man in the world by western governments but somehow did not have layers upon layers of armed men protecting him in some type of bunker or ranch.

This point of the story is not believable.

Second is that Navy Seals allegedly shot an unarmed suspect rather than capturing him for trial, in direct defiance of the American political and cultural ideas of "innocent until proven guilty" and that all suspects deserve a fair trial.

This was heinous violation of what Americans consider honorable and allowable in criminal justice. It is not allowable in our American ideas to murder unarmed suspects rather than bring them to trial.

If the story had been made more plausible - layers of gunmen had to be killed first before a shootout with an armed bin Laden - it might be believable that the Navy Seals killed bin Laden. But to suggest they could have easily captured him but decided to murder an unarmed suspect instead of bring him to trial is not as believable.

Third is the burial at sea. We are told he was first murdered while unarmed, but then he was given great respect by the American government so he was buried at sea because it is a Muslim custom. Burial at sea is not a Muslim custom but the lie has allowed the American government to explain away why it has no body to produce to prove its claim that bin Laden was killed by Navy Seals.

Even if Navy Seals had been ordered to violate American standards of law and honor to murder bin Laden rather than capture him for trial, the other two suspect aspects of the story - burial at sea and no layers of armed men to fight through - make the story unbelievable.

If bin Laden's death is a hoax, then President Obama has been lying to the American public. That he has not ordered a new investigation into 9/11 does not mean he is lying about bin Laden's death. Does he have a reason to lie to us?

The timing of bin Laden's alleged death is too early to carry Obama to re-election. By the time election day arrives in November 2012, bin Laden's death will be old news in the minds of Americans and the people who cheered at that news will have evolved into jeering Obama for the state of the economy.

Unless some other things occur between now and then that make the economy issue less important to voters at election time.

The most obvious things to occur are more terrorists strike that would allegedly be done by extremist Muslims in retaliation for the death of bin Laden.

In addition to the allegedly destroyed Russian missiles and a new Pearl Harbor to worry about, Al Qaeda also allegedly released a suggested list of Americans to murder for their connection to the Iraq war:

Al Qaeda has allegedly called upon Muslims living within the United States to carry out these assassinations. In addition, western authors writing on terrorism have reported terrorist groups being caught with detailed maps and plans for poisoning food and water supplies.

Could a corrupt group be planning all three of these things - missile bombardment of an American city or military base, poisoning of food and water supplies, and a string of assassinations - to occur in rapid succession and all be blamed on Muslims in order to secure agreement of the American people for invading Iran and other nations, sending Muslim Americans to internment camps, and also sending non-Muslim political dissidents to concentration camps?

Is President Obama involved in this corrupt group that is called the Illuminati?

Before you dismiss the unthinkable, consider first who are the Illuminati, this "ruthless and monolithic conspiracy" that President Kennedy tried to warn us about.

The Illuminati

To begin explaining who or what are Illuminati, listen again to the speech President John F. Kennedy made to newspaper publishers before his assassination: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces

President Kennedy warned of a secret society that was carrying out “a ruthless and monolithic conspiracy.” He warned they were infiltrating, or already had infiltrated government, business, military and national intelligence positions.

Near the end of this video, you will also hear a forewarning from President Dwight D. Eisenhower:

While some have been researching and documenting evidence about the Illuminati and their connected organizations, others don't want to believe the story of the secret societies and the ruthless and monolithic conspiracy which President Kennedy asked the American media to investigate and expose to the American people.

According to the research others present (some linked below), the Illuminati is an international conglomeration of the most powerful organized crime syndicates on earth. They have amassed great wealth and they hold many positions of power and influence in business, government, military, intelligence, law enforcement, and mass media.

While they exist on the international and national levels, others lower in the Illuminati organization may live in your state, province, prefecture, or town and exercise corrupt influence in government and civic matters. They may have infiltrators or plants in your organizations and communities.

As you view and listen to the linked sources of information and as you seek more information on your own about the Illuminati and their associated organizations, consider that there are two ways to understand the Illuminati.

One way to understand them is the secular way in which the Illuminati is a gang of super wealthy and powerful but also super corrupt people who - when they are not planning mass murder and other horrific crimes for their control of the world's resources and wealth - for fun and games pretend to worship an owl as well as the devil.

The second way to understand them is the religious way in which the Illuminati is a gang of super wealthy and powerful but also super corrupt people who - when they are not planning mass murder and other horrific crimes for their control of the world's resources and wealth - may think they are pretending for fun and games to worship an owl and the devil but the truth is, they are actually following the Anti-Christ (called Dajjal in Islam) and they really are worshiping the devil whether they realize it or not.

For those who believe in God, let's quickly examine some information about the Anti-Christ. Paul's letters in the Christian scriptures give us critical information about Dajjal. In 2 Thessalonians 2, we find out that the Anti-Christ:

- was working in secret then

- would continue to work in secret until the one holding back his revealing steps out of the way

- will not die until Christ comes back to defeat him

Also in the Christian scriptures, John 21:20-23 gives indication of a semi-immortal disciple - whom the others do not sound fond of by the exchange that occurs between Peter and Christ about that disciple - who will not die until Jesus comes back.

If we consider the logical, that Judas would have accepted the offer the devil made to Christ (Matthew 4:8-10) to have super wealth and domination over the world's cities if he would serve the devil, we can identify the Anti-Christ as Judas (who happens to die twice in the New Testament, once by hanging himself (Matthew 27:5-8) and also by falling in a field (Acts 1:18-19)).

If the information from 2 Thessalonians (supported by John 21) is correct, the Anti-Christ has been alive and working in secret for the past 2000 years. Does “working in secret” mean he has been sitting around doing nothing for 2000 years? Or does it suggest instead that he has been highly active as a source of corruption, confusion, chaos, and conflict in human history?

Organizing the Illuminati, Bilderberg group, Skull and Bones, and other affiliated groups is only the most recent of Dajjal's activities over the past 2000 years. As you view and listen to research about these organizations and the heinous plans the Anti-Christ has convinced other people to agree to, you may find it all a bit frightening, but the prophecies give us some reassurance.

Most Muslims and Christians tend to conceptualize the Anti-Christ as someone who is to come and begin a reign of terror rather than someone who is already ruling the world and already inflicting terror upon humanity. If the information in 2 Thessalonians 2 is correct, however, we should consider the 2000-year-old Anti-Christ is indeed already ruling and we are living during his reign of terror.

While you yourself may not feel immediate negative effects of that reign, consider the homeless and starving in your nation and around the world, the corruption that exists in governments and in the common person, the moral decay of our societies and value systems that includes paganization of religious observance, rise of consumerism-focused lifestyles, breakdown of the family, rise in divorce, vulgarization of everyday language, decline of modesty in dress, and sexual promiscuity accepted as the norm.

We have seen millions slaughtered already in two world words and by various tyrannical governments, the era of slavery, the rise of toxic industrialism polluting the planet, the Native Americans and Jewish holocausts, the Crusades, colonialism, imperialism, impoverishment of nations called "the third world," and many other examples of wars, violent slaughter, forced impoverishment and other injustice put upon people around the world and in every case throughout history to serve the interests of a corrupt economic and ruling elite.

Rather than it being time for the Anti-Christ to arrive and begin a reign of terror, we may instead be near the end of that reign, near the time he is exposed and experiences a period of defeat before he rises again as prophecied in Islam and the Christian scriptures (Revelation 13:1-3, 11-14) before his final defeat by Christ.

Whether you will believe a religious understanding or the secular one regarding the Illuminati, I hope you will take the time to watch these full-length videos and to do other research about the organization:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho (End Game)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw (The Obama Deception)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVtEvplXMLs (Dark Secrets: Inside Bohemian Grove)

On behalf of millions of Americans who never agreed to exploiting the rest of the world or poisoning the planet and who have had enough of the tyranny done in our name and against us as well, we hope you will join the 9/11 truth movement and Truth Warriors Network and find creative and far-reaching application of the information presented in The 9/11 Hoax. We encourage you pass on this information to as many people as possible and as quickly as you can.

This page is not under copyright and may be freely redistributed. Check with individual content providers regarding any copyright restrictions.

Note: "A tournament of lies" is a phrase borrowed from the prophetic song, "It's the End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)," written by Michael Stipe, Mike Mills, Peter Buck, and Bill Berry, recorded by their band R.E.M., and first released in 1987. Lyrics: http://www.absolutelyrics.com/lyrics/view/r.e.m./it%27s_the_end_of_the_world_as_we_know_it_(and_i_feel_fine)/.

​Download Th 9/11 Hoax .pdf file.
Updated May 6, 2013 - The 9/11 Hoax presentation .pdf