New Yorkers Against Religion-Based Bigotry

NYARBB's position on 9/11

and on the 9/11 Truth movement

• The relevance of 9/11 to religion-based bigotry
• Our twofold stance on the 9/11 Truth movement
• The need for an independent investigation of 9/11
• Our non-advocacy of "inside job" theories
• Counteracting post-9/11 bigotry against Muslims

The relevance of 9/11 to religion-based bigotry

The events of 9/11/2001 are relevant to the following concerns having to do with religion-based bigotry:

1. The wave of anti-Muslim bigotry, harassment of Muslims, and civil rights violations after 9/11.
2. The Bush administration's war crimes against Muslim countries, including even torture, justified by the post-9/11 "war on terror." It is likely that bigotry against Muslims played a role in the U.S public's acceptance of these outrages.
3. On the other hand, the U.S. government's long history of support for Islamist militants. (See the links given in NYARBB position against both Islamism and anti-Muslim bigotry.)
4. The theocratic worldview of Al Qaeda, a stark reminder of the dangers of religious fanaticism. (This should be counterbalanced, though, with recognitions (a) that many Muslims do not favor theocratic government, and (b) that theocratic Christians exist and post real dangers too, and likewise Christian terrorists. Furthermore, not all Al Qaeda members are motivated by religious fanaticism; some of the 9/11 hijackers apparently lived a rather un-Islamic lifestyle.)
5. The U.S. government's longstanding and continuing "friendship" with extremely intolerant Islamist regimes such as Saudi Arabia (from which country most of the 9/11 hijackers actually came), while falsely demonizing other, more secular Muslim-dominated countries such as Iraq.

Because of the consequences of the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government's failure to prevent or defend against those attacks is another matter of concern to us as activists against religion-based bigotry. Hence we support the call for a new and independent investigation of what went wrong on the U.S. government's end regarding 9/11, along the lines of what the 9/11 Commission was supposed to be.

On the other hand, another major concern of ours is that most of our own members are likely to belong to religious and other minorities that are vilified by some ( though by no means all) people within the 9/11 Truth movement.

Our twofold stance on the 9/11 Truth movement

NYARBB has two sets of concerns pertaining to the 9/11 Truth movement:

1. We support the 9/11 Truth movement's main stated goal -- to demand a new and independent investigation (with subpoena power) of the U.S. government's actions on and before 9/11. We also share the goal, of some 9/11 Truth activists, to call attention to the known history of covert U.S. government support for Islamist terrorists.

NYARBB does not advocate 9/11 "inside job" theories. But there are plenty of other reasons to call for a new investigation even if one does not believe that "9/11 was an inside job." There is, at the very least, plenty of evidence of coverups by people in the U.S. government. The only question is, what is being covered up? NYARBB does not take a stand on the latter question, apart from rejecting both (1) grand conspiracy ideology (as defined in NYARBB's position on "conspiracy theories") and (2) assorted wacky claims (e.g. "no planes" theories) which have been made in the name of "9/11 Truth" but which have been rejected by most leading 9/11 Truth activists. Minus these two kinds of beliefs we reject, NYARBB's Committee for 9/11 Accountability welcomes all people who support a new investigation, regardless of whether or not they believe that "9/11 was an inside job." As a group, we support the call for independent investigation of coverups that have acknowledged even by in-the-know members of Congress, and we especially support efforts to expose U.S. government support of terrorism in the name of Islam.

2. On the other hand, we are concerned that some parts of the 9/11 Truth movement have become a vehicle for the promotion of religiously bigoted grand conspiracy ideology. (See NYARBB's position on "conspiracy theories" and NYARBB position against "Illuminati" claims.) Not all 9/11 Truth activists promote grand conspiracy ideology. Many do not. Quite a few 9/11 Truth activists have specifically rejected the more bigoted claims of "Illuminati" theory proponents. (See 9/11 Truth activists speak against bigotry within the 9/11 Truth movement.) But, alas, some highly visible public figures in the movement do promote "Illuminati" claims.

Many critics of the 9/11 Truth movement have pointed to the Jew-hating ideologies of some people in the 9/11 Truth movement. We are concerned not only about conspiratorial allegations against Jews, but also about the much more widespread conspiratorial allegations against Satanists, occultists, Pagans, Freemasons, atheists, environmentalists, feministas, and gay rights activists, all of whom are alleged to be part of an evil "New World Order" plot by "the Illuminati." (See NYARBB position against "Illuminati" claims.)

At the same time, we reject attempts to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement as a whole based on the bigotry of some people in the movement. The call for an independent investigation of 9/11 is legitimate, in any case.

When addressing people in the 9/11 Truth movement, we aim to take a constructive approach. To that end, NYARBB has a Committee for 9/11 Accountability which attends major 9/11 Truth movement events, with the aims of (1) setting an example of a sound, hard-hitting call for a new investigation without advocating "inside job" theories and without making other highly controversial claims, (2) calling attention to the larger issue of the history of covert U.S. government support for Islamist terrorists, and (3) opposing "Illuminati" claims and other religiously bigoted grand conspiracy ideologies. When we attend 9/11 Truth events, our main activity is to provide pamphlets, to be distributed to passers-by, containing our own reasons for supporting the call for an investigation. At the same time, we also distribute a separate leaflet, to 9/11 Truth activists, opposing "Illuminati" claims. By showing active support for the 9/11 Truth movement's main goal, we thereby also gain opportunities to oppose religiously bigoted grand conspiracy ideology more effectively than we could otherwise.

The need for an independent investigation of 9/11

NYARBB supports the call for a new investigation of 9/11. Our support is based not on any controversial hypothesis about what really happened (e.g. "9/11 was an inside job") but, rather, on the evidence of coverups acknowledged even by mainstream sources.

After 9/11/2001, many people had questions about how and why the attacks were able to succeed. Were there things the U.S. government could have done, but didn’t do, to stop the attacks? Were there warnings that the Bush administration ignored? Why were none of the hijacked planes intercepted by fighter jets before they hit their targets? Why were some of the 9/11 hijackers, already known to be terrorists, even allowed into this country?

In 2002 to 2004, the “9/11 Commission” was set up to examine various aspects of the 9/11 attacks, including the U.S. government’s apparent unpreparedness. The 9/11 Families movement, led by four 9/11 widows known as the “Jersey Girls,” had succeeded in pressuring Congress to call for an investigation, and even succeeded in pressuring Bush to sign it, though Bush had initially opposed any such investigation.

But there was a catch. To have an honest investigation of the possibility of even incompetence or negligence, let alone anything worse, on the part of high officials in the Bush administration, the investigation needs to be independent of the Bush administration. The “9/11 Commission” was supposed to be an “independent” investigation. But its research staff was directed by Philip Zelikow, who had strong ties to the Bush administration. (See the History Commons site's pages about The 9/11 Commission and Role of Philip Zelikow.)

The Commission spent much of its time haggling with the Bush administration over what documents they were allowed to see, and then didn’t have enough time even to look at all the information that was received. And there are many whistleblowers whose complaints were never adequately dealt with. (See The 9/11 Commission: A Play on Nothing in Three Acts by Sibel Edmonds and Bill Weaver.) Military officials made claims which the commissioners concluded were false, based on other evidence such as tapes. So, even some of the commissioners themselves concluded that there were coverups, despite their widely perceived go-easy attitude. (See the History Commons site's pages about The 9/11 Commission.)

But coverups of what? Among people who talk about 9/11, debate is now polarized between people who insist that “9/11 was an inside job” and people who insist that whatever might have been covered up, it couldn’t possibly have been anything worse than incompetence. But there are many other possibilities between the extremes of “inside job” and “nothing worse than incompetence.” Due to the coverups, we simply don't know all the facts.

Whatever the U.S. government did or didn’t do on or before 9/11, what’s important is that those responsible for its failures be held accountable, even if they were guilty of nothing worse than incompetence. And it is important to know what really went wrong in terms of counterterrorism policy, so that we can better size up what's really needed to protect us from terrorism, without undue sacrifice of civil liberties. (The "PATRIOT act" was probably overkill.) To that end, we need a new, more truly independent follow-up investigation, with subpoena power, similar to what the 9/11 Commission was supposed to be.

A new investigation of 9/11 would most likely shed light not only on counter-terrorism policy, but also on the strange love-hate relationship that the U.S. government has long had with Islamist regimes and Islamist terrorism. (See NYARBB position against both Islamism and anti-Muslim bigotry.)

Our non-advocacy of "inside job" theories

NYARBB does not promote the idea that "9/11 was an inside job." Instead, we point to the widely-recognized coverups and conflicts of interest that hampered the 9/11 Commission's work.

Individual NYARBB members may hold a variety of opinions about 9/11 "inside job" theories. Our membership is likely to include both people who strongly believe and people who strongly disbelieve the idea that "9/11 was an inside job." Likewise, NYARBB's target constituencies (people in subecultures denounced by the religious right wing) include people with many different opinions about 9/11 "inside job" theories.

Therefore, NYARBB as a group takes a cautiously neutral stance on "inside job" theories, with the aim of bringing us all together to work on the common goals of our Committee for 9/11 Accountability and our Project Against Grand Conspiracy Ideology. (See also NYARBB's position on "conspiracy theories.".)

NYARBB does not endorse any particular theory about what the U.S. government did or didn’t do regarding 9/11, except (1) to reject grand conspiracy ideology, (2) to reject the more outlandish and improbable kinds of "inside job" theories, such as "no planes" (which even the majority of "inside job" theory advocates do not accept), and (3) to recommend caution regarding one's position on other, relatively reasonable kinds of "inside job" hypotheses. We do not rule out some relatively reasonable kinds of "inside job" hypotheses (e.g. the idea that the hijackers may have been recruited by an agent provocateur) as being at least remotely possible, but we do not advocate such hypotheses either.

Due to the coverups, none of us can know all the relevant facts. Therefore, instead of advocating any claims about what really happened, we believe that it is better to focus more on pointing out (1) the clear evidence of coverups and conflicts of interest, as acknowledged even by mainstream media souces, and (2) the known facts about the U.S. government's strange historical relationship with Islamist governments and Islamist terrorism these past several decades.

Regarding alleged evidence of demolition of the WTC buildings, NYARBB does not take a stand, other than to urge careful examination of the evidence and arguments both for and against any claim before endorsing it, and to urge that non-scientists be especially cautious about taking sides in debates about scientific matters. NYARBB prefers to focus on nontechnical matters which ordinary people are better able to judge.

Thus, NYARBB neither endorses nor opposes the idea that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. We simply call for an end to the coverups, without claiming to know what was covered up.

We encourage 9/11 Truth activists to (1) be more cautious about advocating any hypothesis about what really happened, (2) examine carefully the best evidence and arguments against (as well as for) any hypothesis before endorsing it, and (3) avoid dogmatic attachment to any theory. When 9/11 Truth activists are too quick to embrace controversial claims, they thereby discredit the movement in the eyes of the general public. "9/11 Truth" should mean demanding that the truth which has been covered up be investigated and revealed, not claiming that we already know the hidden truth.

By refraining from advocating "inside job" theories, we can thereby also help make the call for a new investigation more credible to highly educated people, many of whom strongly reject "inside job" theories.

Counteracting post-9/11 bigotry against Muslims

Meanwhile, outside the 9/11 Truth movement, we can counteract post-9/11 anti-Muslim bigotry by encouraging greater publicity for Muslim reformers and also for mainstream Muslim fatwas denouncing terrorism. We do not deny the existence of terrorism in the name of Islam (as some of the more extreme "9/11 inside job" theorists have done, in a misguided approach to opposing anti-Muslim bigotry). Instead, we argue that Muslims in general should not be punished for the crimes of Al-Qaeda, and that terrorism does not justify aggressive war (especially against Iraq, which had no Al-Qaeda connection before 9/11), nor does it justify torture. There are other ways to fight terrorism without giving in to what the terrorists want, which is to provoke war between Muslim countries and Western countries.

On the other hand, we aim also to call public attention to the ways in which the U.S. government has allied with and made use of Al-Qaeda and other Islamist militants over the years, and to oppose the U.S. government's continuing support of the most intolerant Islamist regimes at the expense of more moderate Muslims. We'll also point to other factors (e.g. Saudi oil money) that have strengthened the most fanatical forms of Islamism beyond what would otherwise be expected.

###

Comments? Please post them here on the NYARBB blog.

[Last edited July 15, 2009.]