|Date||2001 - Present|
|Description||The 9-11 plot, a false flag attack staged by the US/Deep state in concert with other deep states, was blamed on "19 hijackers" who were members of Al Qaeda. The official opposition narrative states that small scale corruption within the US government prevented the successful apprehension of the gang of 19, and also lead to some relatively minor innaccuracies and inconsistencies between the different official narratives.|
The Official narrative of 9/11 (disbelieved by the majority of US citizens in 2018) blames the events 19 Muslim men, manipulated by Ossama bin Laden. It is constituted by US government documents such as the 9-11/Commission/Report, with the results of subsidiary other "investigations" such as those carried out by NIST and by Gene Corley. The narrative has a lot of holes, a few of which are highlighted in Elias Davidsson's 2010 OpEdNews article There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime of 9/11.
Official opposition narrative
The major official opposition narrative of 9-11, -- that is, the alternative US establishment-friendly narrative which marks the opposite pole of debate acceptable to commercially-controlled media -- is that a few officials in the US government performed suboptimally, whether as a result of laziness, incompetence, pride, venality etc. Their desire to hide their own shortcomings is a sufficient explanation for contradictions between different US government accounts of the event and for other various way that they fail to explain the events of that day. This was alleged by Anthony Shaffer in the first version of his memoirs, which the US DOD failed to suppress in what may have been an attempt to promote the story by exploiting the Streisand effect.
The 9/11 official narrative about the destruction of the World Trade center towers makes extensive use of the word "collapse", which as Donald E. Stahl has pointed out, is an extraordinary term for buildings which turned to dust. The corporate media however have normalised it through constant repetition.
Robert Mueller stated that the 9-11 attacks cost the attackers “Anywhere from about $500,000 to $550,000.”  He further claimed that “the hijackers were tremendously well-disciplined, gave off no warning signs as to this particular type of attack, the timing of attack, the methods that would be utilized or the fact that they individually were involved in some sort of attack. So, there were not those warning signs out there, in my mind, that would have enabled us to prevent what happened on September 11th.” 
"Why do they hate us?"
The purpose part of the 9/11 official narrative was always rather slim, and tended to be glossed over, since the enemy image of the "Islamic terrorist" suggests that these people do no act rationally, but are religious extremists and therefore as dangerous and unpredictable as the "lone nut" that killed JFK (sic).
On one occasion,[When?] George W. Bush advanced the suggestion that "they hate us because we are free". Widely ridiculed, this claim was recalled by Chris Hedges in 2017 when he said that “It turns out, 45 years later, that those who truly hate us for our freedoms are not the array of dehumanised enemies cooked up by the war machine -- the Vietnamese, Cambodians, Afghans, Iraqis, Iranians, even the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or ISIS. They are the financiers, bankers, politicians, public intellectuals and pundits, lawyers, journalists and business people, cultivated in the elite universities and business schools who sold us the Utopian dream of neoliberalism. We are entering the twilight phase of capitalism. Capitalists unable to generate profits by expanding markets have, as Karl Marx predicted, begun to cannibalise the state like ravenous parasites.” 
|"9-11/The 19 Hijackers"||A collection of 19 Muslim men blamed for the 9/11 attacks, 15 of whom were given visas to enter USA (in several cases, irregularly) at the orders of Richard Armitage.|
|Truth||“After a political event of the size of JFK’s assassination or 9/11, everybody runs for cover and prepares their exculpatory narrative. ‘The truth’ doesn’t make it onto the political agenda. This is normal bureaucratic behaviour.”||Robin Ramsay|
|Document:Evolution of the 9/11 Controversy From Conspiracy Theories to Conspiracy Photographs||Wikispooks Page||Donald Stahl||An examination of the photos of the World Trade Center, how clearly they contradict the claims of "collapse", and how the US government has played fast and loose with its changing 9-11/Official narrative and with the law to try to hide this fact.|
- Document:Evolution of the 9/11 Controversy From Conspiracy Theories to Conspiracy Photographs
- http://www.consensus911.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/MSNBC_Condoleezza_Rice_9_11_interview.htm , 2002
- http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/749 Unwelcome Guests Hour #2, 23:15, 2017