The Truth about the “9/11 Truth Movement”
A look at the claims in the pamphlet distributed by NY911truth.org in New York City
May, 2006 Commentary by Mark Roberts email: email@example.com
Reader, something to keep in mind throughout this document: Questions are not evidence.
Thus begins a long series of allegations and assumptions posing as facts that are stated as questions.
This is a type of logical fallacy known as the “complex question.” If the people in NY9/11truth.org have
“truth” to communicate, they could simply make their claims and provide supporting evidence. Instead, they
take this sly, roundabout approach, which enables them to avoid providing evidence that would help
answer their own questions. I’ll let you, reader, judge if this is an honest approach to take in a pamphlet
that is distributed to the general public by a “Truth Movement.”
The second sentence of the first paragraph in the pamphlet contains three logical fallacies. The first one is
a doozy: that the 9/11 Commission must have covered up the cause of the terrorist attacks, because David
Ray Griffin says there are problems with their report.
If this is the kind of logic that’s going to be used in a search for “truth,” I’m very worried. I highly recommend
that the authors of the 911truth.org literature read up on the basics of logic and critical thinking.
A good place to start is James Lett’s concise “Field Guide to Critical Thinking” at
The suggestion that the 9/11 Commission addressed none of the questions in this pamphlet is incorrect.
Nor was it any commission’s job to poll everyone on earth before proceeding with an investigation. 9/11
Commissioner Jamie Gorelick said that the Commission would use victims’ families’ questions as a "road
map," not that every question would or could be addressed. It is good to provide evidence that important
questions went unanswered by the 9/11 Commission. It is wrong to accuse the commissioners of