After 1,379 Days, New York Times Finally Corrects Claim That Iran "Sponsored" 9/11 Attacks

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Adam Johnson via,

In its reporting on a dubious lawsuit alleging Iranian meta-involvement in 9/11, the New York Times badly misunderstood the case and maintained for more than three years, in the paper of record, that the government of Iran “sponsored” the September 11, 2001, attacks. The belated correction, issued late Wednesday night on two widely spaced articles on the topic, unceremoniously noted that Iran did not, in fact, help commit the 9/11 attacks.

The correction came after a report about a lawsuit last week mistakenly claimed that Iran sponsored 9/11, something that had not been alleged in the suit. The article (6/29/17,archived) originally read:

The government has agreed to distribute proceeds from the building’s sale, which could bring as much as $1 billion, to the families of victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorist attacks, including the September 11 attacks.

That 9/11 was an “Iranian-sponsored terrorist attack”  is a spectacular claim, and one that would radically alter the official narrative of 9/11, just casually thrown into an article by the Times. In fact, it isn’t even something the lawsuit alleged. The case in question was a class action lawsuit for families of all terrorism victims, and since Iran was a “state sponsor of terrorism,” they were held generically responsible. (The US State Department maintains that Iran is a “state sponsor of terrorism” chiefly because of its support for militant groups like Hezbollah and Iraq’s Kata’ib Hizballah, whose attacks have been mainly directed at other combatants.)

Even if this had been what the lawsuit was alleging, it’s remarkable that reporter Vivian Wang simply took this as fact: No “alleged,” no “lawsuit claims”—Iran’s guilt was simply asserted. And that assertion stood for a week until someone, evidently, got word it was grossly wrong. Late Wednesday night (6/29/17, correction updated 7/5/17), the Times quietly added this correction to the piece:

Correction: July 6, 2017 An article on Friday about a jury’s decision to let the federal government seize a Midtown Manhattan skyscraper it says is controlled by Iran overstated Iran’s responsibility for the September 11 attacks. While a federal court found that Iran had some culpability for the September 11 attacks as a state sponsor of terrorism, it has not been established that Iran sponsored the attacks, which were planned and executed by Al Qaeda. (A similar error occurred in a September 25, 2013, article in the Times.)

It’s as if the editors at the Times just got the memo about who was responsible for 9/11.

But the week it took to correct this massive error was nothing compared to the close to four years it took to update the very same claim the paper made in September 2013. The original article, by Julie Satow (9/26/13, original archived), read:

Proceeds from a sale would probably be used to pay some of the $6 billion in damages claimed by family members of victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism, including victims of the 9/11 attacks.

This article, published in the first year of Obama’s second term, finally got corrected this week (9/26/13, correction updated 7/5/17), with basically the same correction that ran on last week’s story:

Correction: July 5, 2017 An article on Sept. 25, 2013, about the federal government’s efforts to seize a Midtown Manhattan skyscraper it says is controlled by Iran overstated Iran’s responsibility for the September 11 attacks. While a federal court found that Iran had some culpability for the September 11 attacks as a state sponsor of terrorism, it has not been established that Iran sponsored the attacks, which were planned and executed by Al Qaeda.

The corrections, belated as they were, minimized the defamation of the original articles in a  lawyerly manner, conceding only that “it has not been established that Iran sponsored the attacks.” It has also not been established that Israel or Saudi Arabia or the Bush administration sponsored 9/11, but imagine the New York Times framing allegations against those actors this way. It’s unthinkable but, because Iran is an Official Enemy of the United States, it is not subject to the same editorial standards as those in good standing with the US State Department.

Per the North Korea Law of Journalism—which states that “editorial standards are inversely proportional to a country’s enemy status”—the Times can casually smear Iran as sponsoring  the deadliest act of terror on US soil, and it’s not taken seriously by anyone. Just thrown into an article, forgotten about and only corrected—with no special note by the paper—almost four years later.

One would be curious what the New York Times public editor would say about such a glaring error but the paper eliminated the position a month ago (FAIR.org6/1/17). Perhaps the Times’ in-house media analyst, Jim Rutenberg, who spends much of his time hand-wringing over “fake news” and RT, could spare a column on how this happened. This is unlikely, since with an Official Enemy, no amount of libel—no matter how egregious—merits a meaningful response from the paper of record.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Vinividivinci's picture

Why the revision of "history"' now?
Timing is everything folks.
This seems like a lead-in to something else, bigger and more important, to come.
What that is...fucked if I know.

Normalcy Bias's picture

The problem is, they've so destroyed their own credibility, one cannot assume that even this retraction is true.

Vinividivinci's picture

...yah, retracting, what was fake news to begin with.
How clusterfuckier can you get...

Ignatius's picture

9/11 was primarily conceived in Likudnic Israeli circles and approved by top US leadership. It serves both interests.


GoingBig's picture

you fucking nutcase...

SoilMyselfRotten's picture

Neo-cons are bawling everywhere

Handful of Dust's picture

So, 1,756 days from now we'll get a retraction of all the New York Slime's news of "Russian collusion?"


NidStyles's picture

As if the Sunni and Shia would ever consider working together on any efforts at all...

Anyone that believes Iran would be a part of 9/11 is likely affiliated with the groups that actually did 9/11 on some level.

not dead yet's picture

The court decision that claimed Iran was culpable for 9/11 was most likely politically motivated. What the court based their decision on is that some of the hijackers had travelled through Iran on their way to somewhere else. Thus the court opened a pandoras box for suing Iran since it's impossible to sue Al Qaeda.

11b40's picture

Stick around for another 26 weeks. Maybe you will learn something.

NidStyles's picture

Like new pejoratives?

That guy's mind is closed shut to reality, so don't count on it.

koan's picture

It does have a Hollywood flair to it, the first strike and then a wait for the second so that news media could get set up, all eyes were on that second strike.

the6thBook's picture

Because they don't want Trump declaring Obama and Valerie Jarrette's friend Iran an enemy.

hxc's picture

Fuck off neocon, iran hasn't started a war since 1775.

Vinividivinci's picture

Again, fuck the past...think like a globalist.
Besides, Jarett's ancient history, aside from her bunking with the Obama's
in their DC manor, plotting Trump's demise.
How's that working out for them, huh?

Bill of Rights's picture

The fuck is this retard hour?

Handful of Dust's picture

The morning trolls at NPR just got out of work and they're trying to earn a few extra bucks posting anti-American comments for $1/comment and 50 cnets per downvote.

Tallest Skil's picture

What do you mean now? They've been revising it for millennia. Or did you think that Vlad "the Impaler" nailed those jews' hats to their heads for no reason at all?

Vinividivinci's picture

What say we stick to THIS MILLENIUM...
The distant past has been re-written so many times.
Tell, me, who the fuck, realy knows, our intertwined pasts?
Respectfully but certainly, not you, peep.

MalteseFalcon's picture

"This is unlikely, since with an Official Enemy, no amount of libel—no matter how egregious—merits a meaningful response from the paper of record"


sgt_doom's picture

Oh wow!!!!!!

This is really progress!!!!

Now perhaps they will explain to each and everyone why, back during the Reagan Administration and George Gilder was all the rage among the Fake Newsy swine, they never mentioned that he was the adopted son of that Patriarch of the Deep State, David Rockefeller?

Or perhaps finally the Fake Newsy swine will finally come forward to announce why they never ever mentioned that Hillary Rodham Clinton's uncle, Wade Rodham, was a US Secret Service agent with the presidential protection unit during the Kennedy Administration????

The Fake News Extravaganza continues . . . .

political_proxy's picture

You need to be able to see the forrest through the trees.
For it is plainly splayed out before you:  History ie: His Story.
To the winners go the spoils...

NickyGall's picture

When a country is controlled by its military-industrial-intelligence co-operative, there always has to be an enemy.  Currently, Russia, Iran and North Korea fit the bill.

ebworthen's picture

Saudi Arabia.

We can be certain is was not Tibetan Monks or Buddhists.

HRClinton's picture

Rubbish!  it was the (((Amish))) who masterminded and planned the whole thing.

We all know about the (((Dancing Amish))).

poland spring's picture

Shaping public opinion is first.  Retractions and corrections can come later. US media 101.

Ignatius's picture

An astute, informed observation.

devnickle's picture

Innocent until proven.......oh, wait!....What????

JackMeOff's picture

The Fake News mea cupla continues, even after 1,379 days.

11th_Harmonic's picture

I wonder where constitutional republic supporters rank on that graph...

Son of Loki's picture

The New York Slime.

VWAndy's picture

 Ever get the idea that the NYtimes should be delivered in a new format? Im thinking it should come in 5 inch rolls with perferated pages.

Winston Churchill's picture

they'd get that wrong as well, sandpaper stock.

VWAndy's picture

 That would still work better for me. I go thru a lot of sandpaper doing real work.

shovelhead's picture

Cut back on the fiber.

Chupacabra-322's picture


"Planned & executed by Al CIA duh."

Urban Roman's picture

And it was 5779 days ago not 1379. And they still can't get their story straight.

Collectivism Killz's picture

Jew news, what else do you expect, the truth?

bobsmith5's picture

It's not Jew news. It is Satanist evil in it's purest form. Your research is demonstrably shallow as your comment indicates and proves.

my new username's picture

So in July 2021 we can expect a two-line retraction of the Russia smears. Not.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

No Iran OF COURSE didn't do it!

The hand that's always been up our ass in the 4th Estate and our government ( since WWII that we made an "outpost" for and attacked U.S. (more than once), HOLDS ALL THE CARDS!...

Chupacabra-322's picture


"Planned & executed by Mossad."

It is beyond the slightest shadow of doubt that Israeli agents had foreknowledge of the 911 attacks, and, together with scientific forensic proof of controlled demolitions of WTC 1, 2 and 7.

The very first people arrested on suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 attacks turned out to be five Israeli Jews: Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg (Sivan's brother), Oded Ellner, Yaron Shmuel and Omer Marmari. Their white Urban Moving Systems van was stopped and they were arrested within hours of the attacks, on the afternoon of 9/11/01. Sivan Kurzberg, Ellner and Shmuel had been observed by several eyewitnesses at the rear parking lot of the Doric apartment complex in Union City, New Jersey. They were seen atop the van with cameras, high-fiving, smiling, joking with cries of joy and mockery, hugging each other, and taking photographs and video of the Twin Towers within a few minutes of the first plane impact.

Marc Perelman of New York's Jewish weekly The Forward reported on March 15, 2002 that the FBI had concluded that at least two of the Israelis were agents working for the Mossad, and their employer Urban Moving Systems Incorporated was a suspected intelligence front. On September 14, 2001, Urban's owner Dominick Suter fled the U.S. for Israel. Perelman also tells on video of how he was able to confirm that, according to the FBI, two of the five Israelis were "Mossad agents". Christopher Ketcham says the transcripts of the Carl Cameron report were later removed from the Fox News website following pressure from Abe Foxman of the ADL, and replaced with the rather Orwellian message: "This story no longer exists".

When arrested, the Israelis - dubbed the "High-Fivers" by the FBI - were found to have airline tickets with immediate travel dates for destinations world-wide, and tie-ins to 9/11. Dual US-Israeli citizen Michael Chertoff, who co-authored the USA Patriot Act" and headed the Justice Department's Criminal Division in the aftermath of 9/11, is a prime suspect for pulling strings to get the Israelis released and sent home.

Not only is Obama a Scum Fuck Pure Evil Psychopath, he's now officially become, although he's always been, an accessory to War Crimes, Treason & Conspriacy to Muder Amercian's.

Its safe to say now, any Criminal Fraud CEO "President" of the Criminal Fraud UNITED STATES, CORP. INC. from here on out would have to defacto continue the Crime, swear an Oath to Treason & continue the PsyOp / False Narrative Flag of 911.

This user is banned's picture

That all sounds like a 100% legitimate cut-n-paste

thatthingcanfly's picture

Yeah, I've read that script before.

The people who peddle this are the same brain-dead Alex Jones wannabes who believe the Apollo lunar landings were faked, the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax, and that contrails from aircraft are the government's poison gas spray or some such shit.

VWAndy's picture

 Attacking the messenger. lol JV stuff.

bobsmith5's picture

This "This user is banned" sounds like a communist bot and demonstrates the lowest form of uniformed brain-death.