9/11 and the American Empire
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
9/11 and the American Empire by Prof. David Ray GriffinUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison 4/18/2005
As Broadcast on CSPAN's BookTV
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions
David Ray Griffin
Description: David Ray Griffin takes a critical look at the official 9/11 Commission Report. Professor Griffin argues that "omissions and distortions" in the report amount to a cover-up by government officials and says that the available evidence suggests that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Professor Griffin covers topics he says have been inadequately answered by the commission. These include questions surrounding the attack on the Pentagon, the way in which the World Trade Center towers collapsed, and the behavior of President Bush and his Secret Service detail following notification that a second plane had hit the WTC. The talk was hosted by the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (www.mujca.com) and took place at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Includes Q&A.
Author Bio: David Ray Griffin is professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, where he taught for over 30 years (retiring in 2004). He has authored or edited over two dozen books, including "God and Religion in the Postmodern World," "Religion and Scientific Naturalism," and "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11."
Use our download links above, or try one of these alternates:
[162mb WMV]
[191mb MOV]
[59mb MP3] (I highly recommend the audio or video version) Related Links:Alex Jones Interviews David Ray GriffinAlex talks with the author of the New Pearl Harbor. David Ray Griffin is professor of philosophy of religion at Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University and one of the co-directors of the Center for Process Studies. 9/11 Truth ExposeAlex is joined by three different guests for a two and a half hour 9/11 truth expose. Greg Szymanski and William Rodriguez discuss the controlled demolition of the twin towers. Rodriguez was a material witness to bombs going off in the basement of the north tower and his story has been blacked out by the mainstream media.
Also included is former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan, Paul Craig Roberts, who recently went public with his doubts about the official 9/11story. Professional Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted on a September 2002 PBS documentary, 'America Rebuilds' that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack. The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.
We have attempted to call Larry Silverstein's office on several occasions. Silverstein has never issued a retraction for his comments.
Photos taken moments before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors.
Firefighters were told to move away from the building moments before it collapsed.
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million! What makes all these links so powerful and refreshing is that they
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/21/2004
You have to be kidding right. These idiots dont think Bush was part of 911 happening.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/21/2004
Any one that has seen the footage of the of 911 can cleary see that it started where the planes hit and then, the top colapsing down to that point, then the weight of the upper section comming down onto it colapsed the rest of the building. No mystery there. This is bizzzzzar,
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
That's what Prof. Griffin thought until he started looking into it. There is no way so many people could have had advance knowledge. Let alone the eyewitness testimonies and the physics problems.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/21/2004
This guy is no fan of Bush but he sees clearly
Dangerous Liaisons
Robert Baer
Conspiracy theories are hard to kill. They've dogged virtually every national tragedy in our history, from the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John Kennedy to the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and what David Ray Griffin now claims is our new Pearl Harbor: 9/11.
Griffin's subtitle suggests this book is a search for truth, but don't let that fool you. His mind is all but made up. For a start, Griffin simply cannot accept that our national security system totally failed all on its own on September 11. What went wrong with an air defense system we'd been told would protect us from far more sophisticated attacks? Can the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) really be that incompetent? The FAA concluded that American Airlines Flight 11 had been hijacked at approximately 8:20 am. An hour and forty-three minutes later, United Airlines Flight 93 crashed into the ground at Shanksville, Pennsylvania. In between, the few F-16s that did scramble seemed to have flown everywhere except in the right direction, but even if they had found the hijacked airplanes, authority from the White House to shoot them down arrived after the fact or was relayed too late.
What's notable about Griffin's take on these events is how easily he leaps to larger evils, a conspiracy at the top.
he feels he has no choice but to recycle some of the wilder conspiracy theories, several of which were popularized by the crackpot author Thierry Meyssan in L'Effroyable Imposture, a bestseller in France:
§ that the Pentagon was hit by a missile rather than by American Airlines Flight 77;
§ that since it was impossible for the World Trade Center to collapse under the impact of an airplane, it had to have been brought down by internal explosives;
§ that United Airlines Flight 93 was shot down when it was learned that the passengers had taken control of the airplane because the conspirators could not risk the passengers' getting off the plane and telling what really happened;
§ and that, most shocking of all, the Bush Administration knew the attack was coming and either let it happen or abetted the plotters as a way of jolting the nation into accepting its policy of pre-emptive warfare and transforming the Middle East.
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10491 Posts
PM
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
Allen,
Are you serious?
quote:
...and that, most shocking of all, the Bush Administration knew the attack was coming and either let it happen or abetted the plotters as a way of jolting the nation into accepting its policy of pre-emptive warfare and transforming the Middle East.
Haha! I just can't get into conspiracy theories unless they're fun.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by unimackpass
This guy is no fan of Bush but he sees clearly
I don't have time to respond, now, but that's what the general populace thought about advance knowledge of Pearl Harbor, JFK, and the sinking of the USS Liberty, too. Then, later, it becomes more mainstream, if not frankly admitted by all. It's not about being a fan or not, it's looking at the evidence.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/21/2004
I dont know of anyone mainstream and reputal that realy believes the Pearl Harbor typ stuff. These guys are masters at smoke and mirrors, trying to quote a few reputable typs a to make them sound like they are on board with their own maniacle fring.
CBS News, the Nation, and more.
From the September 27, 2004 issue: Adventures in "Fake But Accurate" reporting.
by The Scrapbook
09/27/2004, Volume 010, Issue 03
The "Fake But Accurate" Media
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/634lbcgo.asp
Writing in the September 27 issue of the Nation, bestselling author and former CIA operative Robert Baer wants us to know that David Ray Griffin--author of The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 and a professor at the Claremont School of Theology--is "a thoughtful, well-informed theologian" who "feels he has no choice" when it comes to spreading the crackpot anti-Bush conspiracy theories in his book. However, "the catastrophic failures" of that "awful day" are "so implausible and the lies about Iraq so blatant" that Griffin just had to write The New Pearl Harbor (you know, like the one FDR let happen).
Baer himself hasn't quite ended up out where the buses don't run. His unique contribution to literary apologetics is to blame Bush for Griffin's book--"What's different about this conspiracy theory," Baer writes, "is the degree to which it has been helped along by its main suspect: the Administration of George W. Bush." You see, "By consciously misleading Americans about Saddam Hussein's role in September 11 to justify an invasion, Bush answered the question every good conspiracy theory turns on: Who benefits?"
And so it goes, for 1,400 words, as Baer (we hope) stifles a snort or two at Griffin's claims: that an American missile, not American Airlines Flight 77, hit the Pentagon on 9/11; that the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming but did nothing to stop them; and that it was "impossible" for the Twin Towers to collapse from the plane attacks alone, so they "had to have been brought down by internal explosives."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by unimackpass
I dont know of anyone mainstream and reputal that realy believes the Pearl Harbor typ stuff. These guys are masters at smoke and mirrors, trying to quote a few reputable typs a to make them sound like they are on board with their own maniacle fring.
It's sad that you are appealing to popular opinion and the mainstream media rather than evaluating based on the evidence. Since when has the secular media been a bastion of truth? Let alone our corrupt politicians.
One thing about Alex Jones is that he is thoroughly researched and documented - he was a mainstream journalist at one time, until he realized that there was a suppression of evidence going on. I'm not saying he's 100%, but I do say that his forthright and honest approach is refreshing.
One has to ask, who has more to hide? To gain or lose? This theologian and independent broadcaster, the janitor who was eyewitness to the bombs going off in the basement who the mainstream media repeatedly edited, or George W. and **** Cheney with their big oil deals and Saudi, CIA connections?
quote:
The "Fake But Accurate" Media
. . . when it comes to spreading the crackpot anti-Bush conspiracy theories . . . (you know, like the one FDR let happen).
. . . as Baer (we hope) stifles a snort or two at Griffin's claims: that an American missile, not American Airlines Flight 77, hit the Pentagon on 9/11;
This is just more appealing to ridicule rather than actually addressing the points or seriously looking at the evidence.
quote:
. . . and that it was "impossible" for the Twin Towers to collapse from the plane attacks alone, so they "had to have been brought down by internal explosives."
Why is this so outlandish?
What other modern skyscraper has ever completely fell due to it's own weight because of a diesel fire?
Especially building 7.
All three building fell in their own tracks - this is not something that skyscrapers do on their own. There were several bombs or explosions that were reported going off from the basement by several of the eyewitnesses, including audio from the firemen in the building - and this type of precise placement of explosives requires professionals weeks of planning - so it is astronomically impossible that terrorists did this alone. But this is only some of the issues.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 06/26/2002
allen
have to say i am having a hard time with this as well. especially since this conspiracy theory came out right after 9/11. apart from my objections to conspiracy theories in general for the main reason that they are never benign, i still have to wonder how they got al qaeda to play in such a game as well.
the falling of the buildings argument has been demonstrated and explained not to mention that you can simply see the building falling on itself rather than collapsing at the bottom like any other planned demonlition. if there were bombs in the basement they did not do their job. the buildings fell when the tops collapsed.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/11/2002
All conspiracy theories have evidence of some kind to substantiate them, but it is how this evidence is presented that influences whether we belive the theory or not.
jmgainor, for example, believes that he has provided evidence of Vatican complicity in Lincoln's Assassination. He cites what he believes to be credible sources ("not crackpots"). Yet, we all believe that all his sources were compromised, or that information he provided was out of context.
It is entirely possible, for example, for a plane to take down the WTC. With a full load of explosive jet fuel, soon after takeoff, the fire from the explosion can generate enough heat to melt the metal supports in the towers. Then, it's a matter of momentum and inertia as the falling floors pancake the rest of the floors.
"You have made us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You." St. Augustine of Hippo
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10491 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
oops...posted to wrong topic...moved.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/21/2004
As much as Dan Rather and others actually hate the Bush adm they would all be foaming at the mouth to print the first hint of something like this. No doubt christmass woud have come early. Dan Rather got spanked big time because he couldnt wait to pull the trigger on Bush, and then got exposed, first by the independent bloggers.
Even if someone believed there were bombs in the basement, when you watch the video it is clear that the bottom of the building was the last part to go. As the top part caved in on itself down to where the Jets impacted, the weight of that top section comming doun on the rest caused the lower section to cave from the top down.
I have seen sevral doc involving the designers of the buildings and to them it is no mystery how it happend. The outer skeletal structure design had alot to do with it. I cant see any
holes in the way they layed this out. Cant seem to find any mystery there, pretty straignt forward it seems.
Edited by unimackpass on 12/11/2005 06:40:54
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10491 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
It's so straight-forward. I've seen the same things. Since when were the media on Bush's side?
I actually think the media gets it right more often than wrong. We need more balance, though, on both sides.
When I was out of the country for three years, I returned and turned on Fox News, the first time I had seen it, and they were broadcasting on location from the prison with the execution chamber in Texas in preparation for a glorious execution that evening. I knew the conservative media had made some inroads but when I saw this I was stunned.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
Theo,
quote:
Originally posted by Theophilus
All conspiracy theories have evidence of some kind to substantiate them, but it is how this evidence is presented that influences whether we belive the theory or not.
That is very true. Maybe that's why I have never bought into them before. They always seemed to have some serious agendas. What got me to actually consider the evidence for the shadowy dealings of our government. (I was never even interested in 9-11, and I only came onto this subject as a tangent.) But I was reading a book by a retired Colonel and CIA Op who laid out a case for how the government actually works behind the scenes. Not only from his firsthand experience, but from over 20 years of research. This got me to listen to others who were saying the same thing. Retired Generals, Colonels, CIA, NSA and others - all who testify to sham politics built to prop up wars and phony engagements, etc. Possibly it has to hit a person at the right time in their life to press past the denial factor. 'You shal judge them by their fruits' - I see better fruits from the people I'm hearing testify than the spin doctors, politicians and media. For instance, I was a huge fan of Norman Swartzkoff - I followed in rapt attention the whole first Gulf War with patriotic naivete. Years later, I watched the same footage, and because many things had since come to light, there is no doubt in my mind that my 'hero' was a bald-faced liar. But oh how unthinkable and what rightious indignation that would have brought from me if someone would have suggested that to me back in 1990!
quote:
jmgainor, for example, believes that he has provided evidence of Vatican complicity in Lincoln's Assassination. He cites what he believes to be credible sources ("not crackpots"). Yet, we all believe that all his sources were compromised, or that information he provided was out of context.
I have thought of that as well. We believe him to be biased and compromised, and he believes us to be. I would wonder if he saw evidence to support the Church, would he be brave enough to accept it? If we saw evidence that would show him to be right, could we accept it? This is supposed to be about Truth - but I fear that we all are too human in this regard. People are not inclined to accept things that alter their whole worldview and way of life. So, in the end, we usually gravitate to our default mode.
quote:
It is entirely possible, for example, for a plane to take down the WTC. With a full load of explosive jet fuel, soon after takeoff, the fire from the explosion can generate enough heat to melt the metal supports in the towers. Then, it's a matter of momentum and inertia as the falling floors pancake the rest of the floors.
Could jet fuel give people foreknowledge of the event? Warn them not to come to work the next day or fly to New York on the 11th?
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
It's so straight-forward. I've seen the same things. Since when were the media on Bush's side?
Since this war. It's been astounding to me how there was almost universal media support at first.
But usually, anyone who attacks him is from the left. Both are mutually invested in not going after the corruption at it's heart.
quote:
I actually think the media gets it right more often than wrong. We need more balance, though, on both sides.
This is true on the lower levels. But there are certain subjects that just aren't investigated or discussed - or they are quickly shut down if they do. Some of this is simply out of convenience - after all, who wants to be a radical, lose their job and their reputations? Most people will not risk this.
quote:
When I was out of the country for three years, I returned and turned on Fox News, the first time I had seen it, and they were broadcasting on location from the prison with the execution chamber in Texas in preparation for a glorious execution that evening. I knew the conservative media had made some inroads but when I saw this I was stunned.
Yeah, that was a mini-revolution in the media, and I'm glad FOX News and Rush Limbaugh made that splash, but they quickly became mouthpieces for the Republican party.
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS