This year’s anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America is marked by increasing confidence of so–called “conspiracy theorists”, who insist that the official story cannot be true, and growing uneasiness of the supporters of the US administration’s narrative about the earth–shattering events.

The official commemoration of events that killed more than 3,000 people has been relatively subdued, with YouTube videos questioning the official story continuing to attract considerable numbers of views.  Comments below each YouTube videos have been overwhelmingly in favour of the “Truthers”, whose critics call “conspiracy theorists” but who have formed a large movement comprising American architects, engineers, scientists and ordinary citizens.

Some of the videos have garnered millions of views. The majority of the videos does not feature hearsays, but points out at intriguing scientific evidence, implausible occurrences and unanswered questions. The “conspiracy theorists” are calling themselves the “Truth Movement”, and they have been boosted by the mystery surrounding Building 7, the third skyscraper to collapse on that day, an incident that escaped the attention of much of the world including Americans themselves, and was all but ignored by the US mainstream media and, to a large extent, official investigators.

The “Truth Movement” insists that without explosives being planted inside Building 7 in advance, the structure could not have fallen straight down into its own footprints like it did. Scientists and structural engineers also said the collapses of the Twin Towers defied key basics of physics. They questioned what the worldwide audiences saw — an airplane slamming into one of the towers — saying it was impossible for an aluminum aircraft to “disappear” into a steel–reinforced concrete building without being crushed on impact sending parts scattering around the tall structure.

One video whose views are still rising remarkably addressed one of the most emotional aspects of the official story — the phone calls from flight attendants and some passengers to relatives, friends and colleagues before their dooms. The video argues that mobile phone technology back on those days could not make calls from a high–flying airplane. Another video features “tests” using cellular phones of the old days, which failed to make calls from high altitudes.

Another question involves the fact that no plane wreckages — fuselages, wings, tires, seating, food containers, black boxes or cockpit voice recorders– were ever retrieved although four commercial airliners crashed on that day. No bodies of passengers or crew members were ever shown.

The “Truth Movement” is adamant that all the three World Trade Centre buildings were brought down in “controlled demolition”, with planted explosives the culprit.  A lot of videos feature witnesses including firemen saying they heard explosions or loud bangs, contradicting official fact–finders who concluded that jet fuel fire collapsed the twin towers and an unusual fire inside Building 7 caused its downfall.

Another question yet has to do with the attack on the Pentagon . “Conspiracy” videos try to demonstrate that the “hole” at the building was not consistent with the body of the aircraft that the official story said crashed into the structure. The videos pointed out that the government showed no plane wreckage or passengers’ bodies.

Videos on the alleged “hijackers” insist that some of them are actually alive and can be accounted for. A lot of videos mocked the “miraculous” discovery of the passport of one of the villains, and the amazing, narrow escape of World Trade Center owner Larry Silverstein and his children, all of them had been present inside the complex virtually everyday. Silverstein, who had leased the complex from the government just days before the terrorist attacks and made billions of dollars from insurances, seemed to be one of the most–hated persons in 911 “conspiracy” videos.

As for the Pennsylvania crash, “conspiracy” videos questioned the absence of wreckage and victim bodies, arguing that unlike the World Trade Centre circumstances, there should have been “signs of a plane crash”. This is in addition to the high–altitude phone call argument.

Many videos claim the motives were oil and intention to expand “supremacy”. Some other videos said money and evidence cover–up made possible by the destructions were also the motivations. All of the videos claim that, for the motives to be met, the destructions need to be massive and witnessed by much of the world.

Supporters of the government’s narrative were remarkably outnumbered in the comment section, although it was likely that those believing in the official story were paying less attention to the videos than the doubters. For government defenders in the comment section, they said “pancake collapses” of the buildings were possible amid intense fire, and “dustification” caused by deep impact could explain the absence of wreckage and other evidence.

The questions, however, will continue to linger, unless the “Truth Movement” is satisfied with official answers. The movement will unlikely stop its activities any time soon, although it acknowledges serious and unpredictable consequences of their action.