FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions
Writer's Guidelines and Policy
911 Article Policy
OEN is dedicated to publishing cutting-edge progressive news and opinion .
OpEdNews encourages advocacy for new hearings and investigations that answer questions that were never raised or brushed over by the original 911 investigators. We want articles on any and all serious attempts at organizing new and credible investigations, but we do not want those articles to undermine the possibility of new investigations by pre-judging the outcomes.
OEN will no longer publish articles on the Sept 11th 2001 terrorist attacks which continue to advocate that the US and Israeli governments were involved in the destruction of the WTC unless they supply new, multiply sourced information from credible persons or entities. Such sources do NOT include 911 truth web sites. Reiterating old arguments without new information is not cutting-edge reporting, or even new opinion making. It is redundant. We have already published hundreds of articles on all aspects of 911 and we do not want articles that rehash ground that has already been covered repeatedly.
Also, OpEdNews will no longer publish 911 "meta" articles, about who supports or rejects 911 truth movement theories (controlled demolition, inside job, etc.). We understand these are areas of substantial interest to many in the 911 truth movement, but we do not believe that such articles advance the goal of getting new investigations started. This also applies to commenting. Bringing up 911 in comments on articles that are not at all related will be considered spam.
Bottom line, the questions left unanswered after 911 are huge. Major questions remain about how the media and government dealt with an event that massively changed America, and how our civil liberties have been diminished as a result. OEN wants to help with a coordinated effort to get a new, comprehensive investigation undertaken. We don't want to pre-judge the conclusions of that investigation before it is even organized.