Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

The power of 20 years of propaganda

911 / How can it be that a man like Spike Lee believed so strongly that New York's Twin Towers and Building 7 were taken down with explosives that he wanted to spend the last 30 minutes of his documentary series exploring, if not defending, such a view?


Not even the respected and brave filmmaker Spike Lee managed to overcome the strong anger of the media against influential people who dare to challenge the official story of 9/11.

Within three days, from August 23 to 26, Lee went from steadfast to defend its decision to include "9/11 conspirators" in its 8-hour HBO documentary series NYC EPICENTERS 9 / 11–2021 ½, to remove 30 minutes dedicated to questions about the Twin Towers and how Building 7 fell. The half hour was part of the last two hours long episode that was set up on the broadcast schedule the night before the 20th anniversary of # 9/11 #.

Only media people were allowed to watch the entire uncut last episode and declared it unsuitable for the audience. It is therefore unknown to most that the half hour that was removed contained much more than interviews with so-called fringe architects (there were actually up to ten architects and engineers, ranging from an architect of high-rise buildings in San Francisco to a fellow of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers).

The censorship of Spike Lee's documentary series NYC Epicenters is a tragically fitting end to the last 20 years.

There were also interviews with survivors who believe that they have not been told the truth about 9/11 and the murder of their loved ones, emergency personnel and other survivors who witnessed the explosions. In addition, there were plenty of archive recordings and radio broadcasts where you can hear rescue personnel report explosions. For the record: I too was interviewed for the documentary series.

«Back in the cutting room»

Instead of reproducing a complete and accurate picture of the half hour that has now been cut off, took hold of the media the inclusion of the "conspiracy group" Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and our founder Richard Gage, as according to Slate editor Jeremy Stahl "Is responsible for promoting some of the most damaging and protracted lies about the 9/11 attacks."

Editor Stahl's formulations were obviously intended to imply that Richard Gage does not believe in the view he promotes, but deliberately keeps alive a lie for some purpose that cannot stand daylight. No serious journalist who has interviewed Gage "several times", as Stahl claims, can convincingly claim that Gage is lying. What Stahl served was propaganda, whose explicit goal was to prevent millions of viewers from watching the aforementioned half hour of the documentary series.

The death knell for Lee's attempt to mention the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 appears to have been Stahl's rendering of statements that Gage has made in the past year, in which Gage has called the corona pandemic "a bluff" and has broadcast other related views on vaccines and Bill Gates. Stahl also suggested that Gage is anti-Semitic – or tolerates anti-Semitic attitudes – since Gage in 2012 had a spectator suggest that Mossad (Israeli intelligence) could be involved in the 9/11 attacks, and he supported the same view when it was promoted by a podcast -host recently.

Less than 24 hours after Stahl's article in Slate was published, the news came that Lee was "back in the editing room" and revisited the last episode of the documentary series. A day later, HBO announced that half an hour had been removed.

If Lee had a say in this decision, I suspect he cut this half hour because he felt he could not defend keeping the footage with Gage, nor did he care about it, and he did not have time for the extensive editing that would have been necessary to remove Gage, who was central in this last episode.

It may be that none of the other attacks surprised him at all. The current narrative, however, is that Lee capitulated to the media's condemnation of so-called conspiracy theorists.

Propaganda, not journalism

For many years, countless published articles discussing the theory of controlled demolition have been cracked down on and tried to refute. These articles either have no links to any sources, or they have links to articles from Popular Mechanics from ten years ago or more, or they have links to the reports themselves and FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology – which is controversial by thousands of architects, engineers and researchers. (By the way, Lee and others who use the point that a fire is not hot enough to melt steel, mention this because it was molten metal at Ground Zero, not because the steel needed to melt for the buildings to collapse. This fact, as with all material pointing to controlled demolition, has not been disproven.)

A journalist friend from a serious news medium recently told me that if there had been any other topic, the use of the articles in a popular science magazine like Popular Mechanics to claim that an argument had been refuted without having done his own research would not pass. as legitimate journalism. But in general, when it comes to news reporting on questions about the official story of 9/11, we are not talking about journalism, but about propaganda.

A cult of deniers and propagandists when it comes to recording what happened on 9/11.

In fact, over the last 20 years, most of the media – at least those who have written and reported on this – have revealed themselves as a cult of deniers and propagandists in terms of covering what happened on 9/11. The definition of a cult is "ritual maintenance of the relationship with a deity, the sacred […]". In this case is relationship the official story of 9/11.

Thus, the media's reaction was both swift and cruel to Lee's positive portrayal of those who supported the theory of controlled demolition, since the portrayal represented a profound threat to the media's ritual maintenance of history.

Controlled demolition

Not only was the removed half hour convincing, thanks to Lees «Extraordinary directorial style» and his inclusion of sympathetic people as Bob McIlvaine – who thinks the son lost his life in an explosion when he went into the north tower. But Lee himself is about the most frightening messenger the media could dream of.

Lee is thus a man who is generally well-liked by a broad cross-section of the American population, both film enthusiasts, sports fans, people of color, progressives and so on. He recently returned to the United States after serving as president of the jury at the Cannes Film Festival. He has produced and directed dozens of films, many of them highly acclaimed. And now he has just made seven and a half hours which is described as a "bubbly", "brilliant", "gripping" documentary about covid-19 and 9/11.

How is it that a man like Lee has such strong faith that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were taken with explosives that he wanted to spend the last 30 minutes of the documentary series exploring, if not defending, such a view?

Without even being able to imagine the possibility that Lee and the documentary participants could be right, the media was forced to explain it all away: that Lee simply went off the hinges for a moment, he "fraternized with 'Truthers'" in what they describe as a "hobby project". »And almost commits a« career-defining insult », according to The New Yorkers writer Doreen St. Félix.

The denial of the theory of controlled demolition is so strongly rooted in media culture that a whole generation of young writers like St. Félix, who was eight years old in 2001, simply take for granted that the theory has been rejected – without showing curiosity, asking questions or conduct serious investigations. Somehow they manage to look at the collapse of building 7 without any doubt that the building was destroyed by fire. The power of 20 years of propaganda is so strong that intelligent people like St. Félix are doing the perpetrators of 9/11 a favor – I would assume inadvertently.

In light of this relentless propaganda machine, Lee's intention to give proponents of the demolition theory a voice in the 20th anniversary of 9/11 should be seen as a testament to the millions of hours of hard work put in by tens of thousands of activists over the past two decades, including Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Lee could have lifted the message to new heights and possibly created a turning point in the 20-year struggle for truth and justice.

But it was almost too good to be true. At least that's what it looks like at the moment. The censorship of Spike Lee's documentary series on 9/11 – when HBO noticeably broadcasts 90 minutes instead of two hours – is a tragically fitting end to the last 20 years of perpetual war, concealment and propaganda. This has also led to great distrust of the authorities.

Let us hope, and do everything we can, to ensure that the next 20 years will be different. For many, there is little doubt that society's current development is unsustainable. Revealing the truth about 9/11 is crucial to changing this trend.

See also ours review of the film.
More about 11. September:

Photograph by Satchel Lee / Courtesy HBO. Translated by Iril Kolle.

Ted Walter
Ted Walter
Walter is Director of Strategy and Development at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (, a nonprofit organization representing more than 2900 architects and engineers. In 2015, he wrote AE911Truths Beyond Misinformation: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7.

You may also like