The Disbelievers ... 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Are Building Their Case Against the Government

The Washington Post ^ | September 8, 2006 | By Michael Powell, Washington Post Staff Writer

[aculeus]

He watched the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and assumed al-Qaeda had wreaked terrible vengeance. He listened to anchors and military experts and assumed the facts of Sept. 11, 2001, were as stated on the screen.

It was a year before David Ray Griffin, an eminent liberal theologian and philosopher, began his stroll down the path of disbelief. He wondered why Bush listened to a child's story while the nation was attacked and how Osama bin Laden, America's Public Enemy No. 1, escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora.

He wondered why 110-story towers crashed and military jets failed to intercept even one airliner. He read the 9/11 Commission report with a swell of anger. Contradictions were ignored and no military or civilian official was reprimanded, much less cashiered.

"To me, the report read as a cartoon." White-haired and courtly, Griffin sits on a couch in a hotel lobby in Manhattan, unspooling words in that reasonable Presbyterian minister's voice. "It's a much greater stretch to accept the official conspiracy story than to consider the alternatives."

Such as?

"There was massive complicity in this attack by U.S. government operatives."

If that feels like a skip off the cliff of established reality, more Americans are in free fall than you might guess. There are few more startling measures of American distrust of leaders than the widespread belief that the Bush administration had a hand in the attacks of Sept. 11 in order to spark an invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

A recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll of 1,010 Americans found that 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks or intentionally sat on its hands. Sixteen percent believe explosives brought down the towers. Twelve percent believe a cruise missile hit the Pentagon.

[Mad Dash]

1. If the government wanted people to think Al Qaeda brought the towers down, why would it look like a controlled demolition?

P So you admit it looks like controlled demo?

2. If a cruise missile hit the Pentagon, what happened to the people on the missing plane?

You tell me.

3. Out of the thousands of people involved in an operation of this scale, did none of them lose a loved one?

What is your point.

4. If the government allowed the attacks to happen why isn't there one, even one, shred of evidence (citing another person who "thinks" the government was complicit is not evidence.)

The evidence is all over the place.

Your points make a great start of an argument FOR a conspiracy. I am not saying that one exists, but the evidence is out there and is compelling. Calling people "moonbats" and blindly refusing to look at anything that counters the mainstream opinion is ignorance. "Igrnorance is Strength" Have a nice day!

ROFLOL! NormB, you proved oldleft's point so perfectly! I throughly enjoyed it..ROFLOL!

[mtairycitizen]

Why ax this guy?

He can't win, but he change the debate to "you are name calling."
"You started it."
"No you started it."

Back to the debate??

[olderwiser]

Seriously, though, I'm waiting for some in depth reportage by the Post or NYT or LAT about the widespread belief that the Clinton Administration demured from taking out Bin Laden and/or bringing him here to face justice.

The report would include Clinton's direct quotes on the matter, and give some detail about the info/statements of intelligence officials, FBI, administration notes, etc.

The theme of the article would be: why the persistent belief that Clinton could have gotten Bin Laden? There must be something to it, since so many Americans believe it!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

A recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll of 1,010 Americans found that 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks or intentionally sat on its hands.

That's not so bad. 39% of Americans believe that the gov was killing astronauts to make their fake Apollo Program look real.

[dennisw]

If you haven't figured this out...there are a couple of guys at the top of this pyramid...who are pushing out the info...

With DVDs, lectures and radio appearances

[mtairycitizen]

Ouch. That is going to leave a mark.

My prediction: When it is a conspiracy, you dont need facts. The testers were in it as well.

[P-40]

"To me, the report read as a cartoon."

I very seriously doubt he actually read it.

[lesser_satan]

bump

[Mad Dash]

Forgot sarcasm tag on #61 Don't flame me!

[dennisw]

Confronting the Evidence:
A Call To Reopen the 9/11 Investigation.

The Video is Mightier Than the Pen.

More Than 650,000 DVD's Given Away!
Now Available in Clips Below

To get a FREE copy of the DVD produced by Jimmy Walter and ReOpen911.org subtitled in 10 languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Russian, Dutch, Arabic, Chinese, and Japanese, please complete the information below. We ask you to pass the DVD along to a friend or better yet, host a party! Copy It Freely. There is no copyright. Check this page on how to copy to regular DVD. Thanks!

Due to someone wiping our server during our ad campaign, we lost thousands of names and looked terrible to unknown numbers more. If you ordered around september 11th, 2005 please re-order here and we will send you your copy as soon as possible.

To date, Reopen911.org has given away 650,000 copies of "Confronting the Evidence: A Call to Reopen the 9/11 Investigation," a new DVD exposing critical evidence about the 9/11 attacks. "Confronting the Evidence" includes footage of a "town hall meeting" held on September 11, 2004 in New York City. Hosted by actor and activist Ed Begley Jr., the groundbreaking event featured David Ray Griffin, David vonKleist, Barry Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Kristina Borjesson, Karl Schwartz, Jeff King, Paul Thompson, Jenna Orkin, Christopher Scheer, Dr Robert Bowman, Christopher Bollyn, and John
Prados.

[mtairycitizen]

I sure hope these people dont vote.

[mtairycitizen]

I sure hope these people dont vote.

[aculeus]

I sure hope these people dont vote.

I hope they don't breed.

[cvq3842]

Please do!

It's scary how you can keep building on it - once you let go of any reason or sense it writes itself.

I'm toying with starting a website - but it would be disrespectful.

But then again, maybe the MSM would do a story on ME!

Not too likely . . .

[Terabitten]

"When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

The biggest problem with that theory (besides common sense) is that when you blow a building, you start from the BOTTOM and work your way up. Watch any building demo, you'll see the charges are generally set to go off bottom to top. You don't cut a tree down from the top, do you? The blast waves start at the bottom (where the explosions are) and work their way up, then go from top to bottom again as the top floors crash down into the lower floors.

[soccermom]

LOL! Have you caught the latest conspiracy theory? My 14-year-old son loves to debate online. Yesterday, he came to me and said there was this new conspiracy theory that Rumsfeld destroyed the Pentagon to cover-up for the fact that he allegedly had to "come clean" about the fact that the Pentagon couldn't account for 2.3 trillion dollars and he "admitted" it on September 10. I told him there must be plenty of sites debunking that claim. He said he looked and he didn't see any -- that it was too new. So this morning I set about to debunk it myself. It didn't take long for me to find the so-called smoking gun --- a news report from CBS. The wording is such that it makes it seem like Rumsfeld was fessing up to losing 2.3 trillion dollars on 9/10/01. When you go to the actual text of the speech, he says no such thing. On the contrary he is critical of waste at the Pentagon and calls the waste a threat to our security. Upon further simple digging, I discovered that this missing 2.3 trillion was known about at least as early as February 12, 2001. Rummy hadn't even been Secretary of Defense for a month. So kooks expect us to believe Rumsfeld plotted 9/11 to cover up for 2.3 trillion lost on Clinton's watch? Yeah right!

[Rick.Donaldson]

Evidence? They don't need evidence. lol They have conspiracy, which is impossible to prove usually, thus it is soooo easy to tell over and over.

[cvq3842]

Their hate is all they have . . .

[soccermom]

LOL! That and their delusions.....

[geopyg]

"So kooks expect us to believe Rumsfeld plotted 9/11 to cover up for 2.3 trillion lost on Clinton's watch? Yeah right!"

And he did it all in under 24 hours!

My point when people bring this conspiracy stuff up (luckily they have all been on my side of "these guy's are nuts") - to have a conspiracy that worked that "well" - I KNOW the government couldn't do ANYTHING that well.