Cognitive Dissonance

The Psychological Obstacle to Accepting Scientific Truths About 9/11

By Raul Angulo and Marti Hopper, Ph.D.

"Truth passes through three stages:

First, it is ridiculed.

Second, it is violently opposed.

Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

– Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher

Nearly 25 years have passed since the attacks of September 11th, 2001. It changed our world forever and remains one of the defining historical events of our lifetimes. Still, there are many in the American fire service who loathe those who challenge the official government narrative, and the conclusions drawn by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), by citing the contradictions and controversies contained in those reports on the causes of the collapses of the World Trade Center (WTC) Buildings 1, 2, and 7.

This issue is not going away. Government data and information continue to be withheld from the public, but what happened that day is not something we can ignore by hoping all the unanswered unpleasantness will go away. Rather, the blood spilled at Ground Zero will continue to cry out to the heavens and haunt us until the scientific facts and evidence of that day are widely known and boldly spoken by those the public trusts – firefighters. 

What is Truth?

Seeking the truth is an admirable quality of good character – except when it comes to seeking uncomfortable truths, such as 9/11. Since when did becoming a “truther” become so abhorrent? Fifty years ago, it was less common to question the idea of objective truth. The scientific method offered a way to discover truths through observation and logic. But contemporary social culture has changed the concept of truth for many. Truth is seen as relative or subjective - what you believe to be true, regardless of facts. Now, for some, it has even evolved into emotions – what you feel, is the truth. What you believe and feel, becomes your reality. But is your reality really true if it doesn’t align with irrefutable facts and observations that cannot be contradicted? If we are to remain reasonable, sensible, and rational, we must acknowledge that beliefs are not the same thing as scientific facts.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, truth is fidelity. Another definition is, That which is true or in accordance with fact, or reality. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines The Correspondence Theory of Truth as essentially having a belief, or an idea, as it corresponds to reality. Your reality is your belief of what is true. This is known as your “worldview”. If your belief aligns with objective facts or evidence, then your worldview reflects an accurate reality.

There are now two new generations of firefighters that were not personally traumatized by this event. Hopefully, they – as well as the more seasoned firefighters – can objectively consider the emergence of physical and scientific evidence as to what caused the collapses of the three World Trade Center buildings. However, this is not an easy task. The psychological resistance to hearing information that differs from the official narrative is formidable, and one of the core obstacles to moving forward and healing from the tragedy of that day. The purpose of this article, and the subsequent articles, is to examine those obstacles, specifically as they pertain to firefighters, and furthermore, to set a foundation to raise the socially disturbing questions contrary to the official, authorized accounts of September 11^th. 

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term referring to the internal tension and anxiety created when someone is confronted with information that conflicts with their own preexisting core beliefs or values. This internal tension creates a visceral response that disrupts a person’s sense of emotional equilibrium. With respect to a traumatic event, it is common for us to anchor to the first information we hear about it. For example, many of us accepted the government’s explanation about the attacks on September 11, 2001, without question. So, any subsequent information that contradicts the initial belief is often resisted.

Following 9/11, a group called Firefighters for 9/11 Truth (www.911firefighters.org) emerged that challenged the official narrative, bringing into question many of our most fundamental beliefs about our government and our country. As a result, many firefighters experienced intense cognitive dissonance. Their identity, perceptions of safety, sense of loyalty to government institutions, and emotional frameworks were deeply intertwined with the official story of that day. Questioning this narrative would mean unraveling the very foundation of their identity and emotional equilibrium.

Our Culture Creates Our Identities and Core Beliefs

Our reality is shaped by the set of beliefs we hold about what is true. Every individual has a world view that is molded largely by the culture we grew up in, including our family, neighborhoods, race, ethnicity, religion, politics, state, and country. There is also a professional culture that develops within certain fraternal organizations, like fire departments, law enforcement, and elite military units that creates a deeper level of core beliefs. Ultimately, it is this worldview that not only guides our behavior but creates our sense of identity. 

Below is an examination of the more dominant firefighter cultural core beliefs that have made it particularly challenging to accept alternative explanations of what happened on September 11^th.

1. American Exceptionalism and Patriotism

A core belief that most Americans hold is known as American Exceptionalism. From a young age, we are taught that the United States is inherently superior to other nations. We are the “good guys” who defend freedom and protect the world. This belief is firmly ingrained in most of us by the time we are adults. For many firefighters, this belief is central to their personal and family identity. 

2. Family Lineage of Service

Service is often a family legacy rooted in military, fire, or law enforcement culture over multiple generations. Being a patriotic American is highly valued and a source of pride. Government agencies are to be trusted. As a result, if the official story is false, it doesn’t just challenge facts; it shakes personal identity, pride, and sense of meaning in the world. The entire foundation they built their lives on can feel like a lie.

3. Safety, Protection, and Institutional Trust

Firefighters trust their institutions for protection and are trained to see threats as external (e.g., fires, terrorists, foreign enemies). They would never suspect high-ranking government officials of criminal wrongdoing. Discovering that the threat may be internal – within our government, military, or other trusted agencies – can create a sense of profound vulnerability and loss of safety as there is nowhere left to turn for guidance and protection.

4. Institutional and Cultural Conditioning

The Firefighter culture is a paramilitary one of command and compliance. Firefighters are trained to trust their chiefs and company officers, and to follow orders. This creates a strong group-think dynamic within the team. Those who break the chain of command through insubordination, questioning orders, or speaking out, face isolation through ridicule, damage to their careers, or even being labeled as traitors. It could also generate a loss of trust within the group, potentially creating a safety threat when on the job.

5. Brotherhood, Trust, and Loyalty

The firefighter Brotherhood is sacred. Firefighters literally place their lives in each other’s hands, creating trust and lifelong bonds. Fellow firefighters are each other’s family, social group, and support system. There are instant connections when traveling at home or abroad. To threaten that bond of trust and loyalty would ostracize them from other firefighters, creating devastating consequences for them and their families.

6. Hero-Narrative Conflict

Firefighters were cast as the heroes of 9/11. Thousands of stories, memorials, and rituals honor 9/11 heroes. In addition, the trauma of 9/11 reinforced a shared reality that became sacred. To question the official narrative feels like disrespecting the fallen firefighters and dishonoring their legacy of service on that day.

7. Operational Mindset

Firefighters live in a mission-first culture. They are trained to act decisively, not analyze geopolitics. The binary framing of “good guys” versus “bad guys” makes it difficult to process gray areas or step out of the system.

Resulting Psychological and Emotional Costs

In the face of these shared belief systems, it becomes inherently difficult for firefighters to accept an explanation that questions the official narrative. The thought of betraying the fire department, and the public who trusts them, creates a visceral, disorienting fear. It can also create shame in knowing they may have served a lie or unknowingly upheld a false narrative. It unravels trust in government and the media, and challenges narratives from family and the Brotherhood. 

Additional Factors Contributing to Firefighter Cognitive Dissonance

The Role of Trauma

Trauma occurs when an individual experiences an event – or series of events – that is perceived as harmful or life-threatening. Victims are overwhelmed by forces beyond their control, which creates intense fear and shatters their sense of safety and ability to cope. This fear can create feelings of being helpless, vulnerable, and unprotected.

This can result in psychological deterioration with long-lasting effects such as anxiety, depression, hopelessness, flashbacks, emotional numbness, physical issues, and the ability to cope with daily life, among many other detrimental impacts. Importantly, those who witness a traumatic event can be equally impacted.

On September 11^th, we were collectively traumatized as a nation as we watched the graphic and violent death of close to 3,000 people. Firefighters endured the nightmare of losing 343 brothers, and those in New York attended seemingly endless funerals. The psychological impact was profound and life-changing for many. No wonder that it is especially challenging for firefighters to re-examine the painful events of that day.

Use of the Term “Conspiracy Theorist”

The creation of the term “conspiracy theorist” is often, though incorrectly, attributed to the CIA that was used to quash any questioning of the Warren Commission report about the JFK assassination back in the 1960’s. According to the Library of Congress archives, the term had been in print 294 times from as early as April 9, 1868, well before the CIA was established on September 18, 1947. It can be said, however, that the CIA, or individuals operating within, may have helped promote and popularize its use as a pejorative by intentionally creating its negative connotations, and so, turned the label into a tool of political propaganda for those who attempt to defend official, authorized accounts of historically significant events. It is used as a strategy of exclusion, and a mechanism of social control by controlling the flow of information. Keep in mind, it is our power-based institutions, like government, academia, and the media that frame and determine dominant ideologies and the worldviews permissible for public discourse. 

Since then, the use of the label “conspiracy theorist” has skyrocketed. Government officials, the press, and everyday citizens employ this term liberally to pathologize anyone who questions a widely accepted societal belief, quickly ending any discussion of alternative viewpoints. Those who raise questions are stigmatized and seen as untrustworthy, having no credible information, making conspiracy theories synonymous with false claims. Are we not allowed to ask socially disturbing questions about historically significant events lest we be labeled a “nut case” or “a crazy conspiracy theorist”? Are there certain types of questions we’re allowed and not allowed to ask? And who gets the power and authority to decide what are considered conspiracy theories, and thereby, who are the conspiracy theorists? 

Propaganda

Americans tend to think of “propaganda” as a communication control tool that is only used in communist countries like Russia, China, North Korea, and Cuba, when in fact it is widely practiced throughout the West. We’ve just sanitized its negativity by calling it public relations, strategic messaging, political talking points, psychological operations (psy-ops), or simply advertising. Propaganda involves organized attempts to persuade, manipulate, and influence the beliefs and conduct of people, often with subtleness against their free will.

Propaganda is a non-consensual process of persuasion that typically utilizes forms of deception, such as lying, exaggeration, omission, misdirection, as well as through using incentives or coercion. This results in one-sided promotion of claims and official narratives pushed incessantly by fear-based mainstream media coverage. It also results in aggressive suppression of dissident opinions through the use of smear campaigns and cognitive infiltration. Meaningful discussion of such subject matters in professional or celebrated social settings is nearly always suppressed by the pejorative use of the term “conspiracy theory” which implies irrational, poorly evidenced, even pathological argumentation. These serve to intimidate and discourage serious examination of nefarious and covert actions by elite political players.

Responses to Cognitive Dissonance

Due to the internal discomfort and tension created by cognitive dissonance, we are motivated to resolve it by using a variety of defense mechanisms outlined below. 

• Denial of the new information by refusing to believe its existence or validity. The alterative information is confusing and so overwhelmingly at odds with someone’s beliefs that it becomes unbearable to even consider. “I refuse to believe our government had anything to do with the collapse of those towers or would be involved in any criminal wrongdoing.”    

• Avoiding the new information by staying away from people that remind them of the conflict, actively ignoring the new information, or discouraging others from talking about it. People become afraid of being ostracized from their professional peer group, or from being shunned and alienated from their social circles. This justifies keeping their distance from them, and their message.

• Confirmation bias is used to reinforce one’s point of view. Confirmation bias refers to our tendency to seek, interpret, and remember information that confirms our existing beliefs, while ignoring or dismissing contradictory evidence. We commonly do this by seeking out people and groups who hold the same beliefs as ours. This process allows us to validate our own beliefs, ultimately making it difficult for us to change our views, even in the face of new information.

• Belittling the importance of conflicting evidence by claiming it was a rare event or not relevant to their situation. “9/11 is old news and doesn’t affect us anymore.” Or, “That theory has been debunked.” 

• Discrediting or attacking the person or group that is bringing the new information. Given the intense emotions involved with 9/11, this often takes the form of anger, ridicule, disgust, or personal attacks. It is natural to want to defend ourselves with anger, but when we become angry, we become indignant and easily offended which leads to personal attacks against others that can be hostile and aggressive. We can also ostracize someone from a group or cut off years-long personal relationships with friends and family members. Many activists in the 9/11 truth movement have experienced this loss of relationships with friends and family over this issue. 

• Pathologizing is when we regard or treat someone with an opposing personal conviction that seriously threatens the security of our own worldview. We defend our beliefs by labeling that person as being incompetent, psychologically abnormal, or mentally unstable. We will spoil their reputation and identity by accusing the messenger of being crazy, irrational, or a “wackadoodle”. Skeptics are scoffed at and scorned, sometimes with severe consequences.

• Censure and Censor – Finally, those in power can censure or reprimand those with beliefs we disagree with, and censor alternative views so they are not heard. In social media, censoring is called “being canceled”. Many university professors and science professionals lost their jobs as a way for their employers to suppress any discussion of alternative views to 9/11. Worst case scenario, some countries can even imprison those who speak against the government narrative. 

Moving Forward

Alternatively, we can resolve cognitive dissonance by examining new evidence and integrating it into our knowledge and belief systems. This can be accomplished by seeking out groups with scientific expertise, doing personal research, or talking with those who are knowledgeable in the area.

As we approach the 25^th anniversary of 9/11, we as firefighters have a choice. We can continue to deny and avoid any new evidence about the events of that day and continue to seek out only those who agree with us, while attacking and ridiculing those who do not. 

Or, we can decide to examine the overwhelming scientific evidence that challenges the official government account of 9/11. Countless books, scientific articles, peer-reviewed research papers, video evidence, documentaries, and much more have accumulated over the last 24 years. We can choose to be objective, open-minded, and intellectually sincere by examining and considering this evidence. Then, we can make up our own minds. 

Up until 2021, I believed the official government narrative of 9/11. I marginalized and ridiculed “conspiracy theorists” who tried to present information that opposed and challenged my worldview. It wasn’t until my textbook Engine Company Fireground Operations 4^th Edition was published that I started getting questions about the fires and collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7. Good questions. Questions I didn’t know the answer to but as an author, I should have. I went through every one of the defense mechanisms listed above, but once I understood the concepts of cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, I had to be intellectually honest with myself. I carefully studied the science, physics, and evidence of the fires and subsequent collapses. The American writer Thomas Wolfe once said, “I have to see a thing a thousand times before I see it once.” And once I saw it, I could not unsee it.

---

Raul Angulo retired from the Seattle Fire Dept. and is Captain Emeritus of Ladder Co. 6 with over 40 years of experience. He is the author of the textbook, Engine Company Fireground Operations 4^th Edition, (Jones and Bartlett Learning and NFPA) and is on the Editorial Advisory Board for Fire Apparatus and Emergency Equipment magazine, and a Core Team member for Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. He is an international fire service instructor and has authored numerous articles for Fire Engineering, Fireengineering.com, International Fire and Safety Journal, and Fire and Safety Journal Americas. He has been teaching at FDIC International since 1996.

Marti Hopper, Ph.D. is a clinical psychologist (Ret). She served over 25 years as a management consultant on effective leadership practices, team building, conflict resolution, and interpersonal communication. She worked over 12 years as a counselor for sexual assault survivors for her community’s rape crisis center and oversaw the agency’s prevention education programs. As a 9/11 Truth activist for the past 20 years, Dr. Hopper has appeared in such films as 9/11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out and The Demolition of Truth: Psychologists Examine 9/11. She is part of the core leadership team for Colorado 9/11 Truth. https://colorado911truth.org

References:

Cognitive Dissonance, Part 5 Francis T. Shure, M.A., L.P.C.

International Center for 9/11 Justice, March 2014, 

The Conspiracy Label as a Tool of Propaganda, Part 1: Origins and Organizations Behind the Conspiracy Label Richard Ellefritz, Ph.D. Propaganda In Focus, May 23, 2022

A Plausibility Probe of 9/11 and Covid-19 as ‘Structural Deep Events’

Piers Robinson Ph.D. & Kevin Ryan, International Center for 9/11 Justice, September 2024

Dangerous Machinery: “Conspiracy Theorist” as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion     Ginna Husting and Martin Orr

Sociology Faculty Publications and Presentations, Boise State University, April 1, 2007