Dr. David Ray Griffin Speaks on Hard Evidence, Unnecessary Anonymity, and Coming Together
(Roberts posted the essay on her facebook and asked others to copy-paste widely. - Adam)
The Roberts Report
Jan. 22nd, 2010
By Cheri Roberts - 9/11 Truther Cyberzine
Dr. David Ray Griffin Speaks on Hard Evidence, Unnecessary Anonymity, and Coming Together
*Message to the Choir series #6
Audio interview available HERE on the Paul Tassopulos Podcast:
http://paulsdomain.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=573816
It’s not often I do a segment of The Roberts Report in the evening, especially when it’s in my own time zone however, we made an exception to accommodate Dr. Griffin’s busy schedule and I was happy to do so. Many thanks to my host and producer Paul Tassopulos for all his excellent work on the tech side of my small contribution on his Podcast.
Dr. David Ray Griffin is a retired Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, Emeritus, Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, California. He continues to be co-director of the Center for Process Studies.
I addressed statements that Dr. Griffin had made in the past where out of context it had appeared to many that he supported the New World Order. In the clarification he provides for The Roberts Report, you will get a better understanding behind his support of what he deems Global Democracy and how it can be better for the planet as a whole. You may also see references in a chapter of his book American Empire and the Common Wealth of God.
Griffin is known widely in the 9/11 Truth movement for his 8 + books dedicated specifically to numerous questions, inaccuracies, omissions, and distortions surrounding the September 11th, 2001 attacks as they have been wrongly preserved in history by the 9/11 Commission Report and the following N.I.S.T. Reports. David has been able to dissect and logically lay out these blatant flaws in easy to understand books and lectures.
His most recent and potentially most damning book The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False (Olive Branch Press, 2009), is an eye opener for many people who are still unaware (like my own father) that at 5:20 PM on September 11th, a third building in the WTC complex suddenly and inexplicably collapsed at free-fall speed into its own footprint without having been hit by an airplane or subjected to jet fuel fires - a phenomenon that even N.I.S.T cannot explain. In Griffins own words, “I would say that if people just want to read one book”…”it is easily the most convincing” of his own books.
We discussed unity in the Truth movement and the upcoming global 9/11 Truth visibility event Circle of Truth 2010, to which David candidly said,
“We need to remember that overwhelmingly, everybody in the movement has so much in common of all the aspects of the official story that we reject.” And to not forget,
“The foundation of what we are doing is that we all reject the official story of 9/11 and we reject it for many, many reasons.”
In an interactive effort, I opened the discussion to those on FaceBook who have been following the Message to the Choir series on the Roberts Report. Comic & Writer John Neubert posted the following question on my FB wall,
“Please ask Mr. Griffin if there is any real physical evidence that proves government involvement in 911 and if so why this can’t be used to invoke congress to re-open investigations?”
Daniel Bland, retired from the US Armed Services, a man who just three months after 9/11 enlisted. He says he “didn't wake up” to the questions surrounding 9/11 until the fall of 2008. When given an opportunity to ask Dr. Griffin a question he asked,
“Can we use science to determine how long it will take this brainwashed country to wake up to the obvious?”
Both questions were answered by David and can be listened to or downloaded and shared on the 9/11 Truther Cyberzine.
Griffin discussed the solid peer reviewed evidence discovered by Physics Prof., Dr. Stephen Jones, his own research and the collaborative work being done with architect Richard Gage, A.I.A., founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
Noting a powerful YouTube video about an orange, he encourages the simplicity of this brief presentation to everybody. An orange you ask? Just watch it; it’s worth the 2 mins., I even gave you the link. It’s worth it and in my humble opinion will make many uninformed feel downright silly for having not seen the Truth sooner.
In this 50 minute interview David was also able to address fear, paranoia and the use of anonymity explaining how some due to their profession may not be able to use their real names without repercussion however, he relays that it is “hard to not suspect” those who use a pseudonym and that “if they really are legitimate people…maybe they should use their real names”. With honesty and humor he also explains unfounded accusation of disinfo towards genuine Truthers who are simply wrong or misled.
Again many thanks to Dr. Griffin for his time, and to Paul Tassopulos for allowing me to share his bandwidth on the Cyberzine and the professional quality he adds to every show.
Audio interview available HERE on the Paul Tassopulos Podcast: Audio interview available HERE on the Paul Tassopulos Podcast: http://paulsdomain.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=573816
http://www.911truther.org
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Circle_Of_Truth_2010/
http://www.911artists.org/
Listen to The Roberts Report on the Paul Tassopulos Podcast:
INTERVIEWS WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE HERE: http://www.911truther.org/
Disclaimer: http://www.911truther.org/disclaimer-the-roberts-report/
- Adam Syed's blog
- Login to post comments
Big Tenters and Sock Puppets
"Griffin is known widely in the 9/11 Truth movement for his 8 + books dedicated specifically to numerous questions, inaccuracies, omissions, and distortions surrounding the September 11th, 2001 attacks as they have been wrongly preserved in history by the 9/11 Commission Report and the following N.I.S.T. Reports."
Griffin is also well known for his Big Tent approach which has been rejected by many serious 9-11 researchers. Griffin insists that there was no Boeing crash at the Pentagon, has endorsed CIT, whom I consider to be the worst of the available 9-11 disinformation, speaks highly of perceived suspicious characters Rob Balsamo and Morgan Reynolds, and has maintained his relationship with the now discredited Jim Fetzer and his "scholars" group. These are the kind of things that Cheri Roberts wants us to ignore and these are the kind of people that Cheri Roberts wants us to "come together" with under the big tent. I don't know about the rest of you but you can count me out.
Griffin has failed to respond to evidence which contradicts the absolute statements which he made on the National Geographic hit piece where he said unequivocally that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon. Jim Hoffman had tried to get Griffin to look at ALL the evidence including http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html, to no avail. Griffin simply failed to respond as if he is above criticism. He also spends an inordinate amount of time during his lectures "proving" that cell phone fakery was used on 9-11. Despite his early contributions to the movement, Griffin does not get a free pass with the information as if he is above reproach. It's really too bad because Griffin's deteriorating credibility may catch up with him one day as many in the movement are beginning to reject his hodgepodge of good and bad info. I can't say much about it yet, but let's just say that Colorado, one of the most prolific and active 9-11 groups in the country, is fixin to send a strong message to the good Dr. "Clean it up or you will not be welcome here.... " Credibility is everything in this movement, credibility to the general public, and credibility within the movement itself.
Which brings me to, IMO, the least credible person on this website who posted this story. I do not see it as any coincidence that a pusher of disinformation and admitted sock puppet like Adam Syed is first to jump on board the big tent band wagon. People who wish to discredit our movement want us all under the same big tent so that they can criticize us as a group that will believe anything put in front of them. They want us arguing endlessly over minutia, wasting time, bickering back and forth, and generally putting forth the worst information about 9-11 as if it's fact or "proven". All this gives the media attack dogs fodder with which to use to discredit us.
A good example is used above from the NG hit piece where Griffin makes his absolute statement that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon and then you see NG have a heyday with this unproven and debunked bit of misinformation.
This is how the game is played. Over the past several months I have grown to seriously question the motifs of Adam Syed. At times, he has turned this website into a circus of disinformation and done all of the disruptive things mentioned above. His relentless and often dishonest pimping of CIT has become increasingly more and more suspicious to me and many others. More recently, Mr. Syed was caught praising himself as a sock puppet, a deceptive and dishonest practice which is heavily frowned upon in the cyber world. I am shocked that the management at this website has chosen to allow this dishonest disruptor on the site at all. It's a huge disappointment and blow to the credibility of this website and it's owners, like it or not guys. So it should come as no surprise that Mr. Syed is now pimping the big tenter Cheri Roberts and DRG. Don't be fooled. There is a reason some people want the big tent in effect and it has nothing to do with sitting around the fire singing Kumbaya.
Finally, some, including Mr. Syed are sure to cry to the management at this site about my posting today. It should be known that these are my opinions intermingled with facts about the topic at hand. I have a right to state my opinion here and also to state some pertinent facts. Many have trumpeted the use of the term "disinformation" is an attack. I, however, beg to differ. Merriam-Webster define disinformation as:
dis·in·for·ma·tion
Pronunciation: \(ˌ)dis-ˌin-fər-ˈmā-shən\
Function: noun
Date: 1939
false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth
It cannot be argued that Adam Syed is deliberately spreading false information "in order to influence public opinion". It is arguable if these intentions are meant to obscure the truth. My opinion is that this is part of Syed's intentions, however, this I cannot prove and do not state it as fact, but my opinion which I am entitled to. Adam and CIT repeatedly assert that the ludicrous "fly over" theory is proven fact and they want to shove it down our throats.This is false information which is being deliberately and aggressively spread, which fits the definition of disinformation. I think the use of the term in the context that I have used it is appropriate.
I hadn't seen that clip before...
I didn't watch the special because those specials always infuriate me. Now that I've seen that clip, I'm glad I didn't watch it. Dr. Griffin, that is completely and totally irresponsible of you to say, and I wish you would stop making statements like that.
Everyone please read this.
And also give this a watch...
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
UNITY
Jon,
As one who also believes that it was not a plane, but a missile that hit the Pentagon, I take exception with your criticism of David Ray Griffin, just as I did when you assured a fellow poster a few months ago that you would “have a talk” with Daniel Sunjata on the same subject and set him straight about a few things. Sounds pretty arrogant to me.
If you have major dissenting theories about the Pentagon, write a book.
If we start pointing fingers within the movement, it will surely fracture. All our efforts and accusations must be directed outward, against the true enemies.
A new and complete investigation must remain our primary goal.
If you think...
Stating theory as fact when there IS a multitude of contradictions to that theory is a good idea, then are you seeking the truth or an agenda? I ask that assuming you know full well how much that particular theory has been used against this cause since 9/11 happened.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
GUN SHY?
The fact is, everything the Truth Movement has said has been used to belittle and discredit us, and now is not the time to become gun shy.
Each of us has made a personal journey into the realm of 9/11 truth and we believe what we believe. But I think we all believe one thing …we were lied to about that day, and the implications are too horrifying to ignore.
Take aim and fire at the enemies of the truth.
Nope...
But I just use better, and more effective bullets.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
EFFECTIVE?
shooting your own troops could hardly be considered effective warfare.
Beautiful
Beautiful
There comes a time...
When silence isn't "considered effective warfare." You want me to remain silent when prominent people in a cause I have dedicated my life to say or do irresponsible things? Are you serious?
And the topic was the promotion of theories as fact when there is a multitude of contradictions to that theory, not voicing our concerns when people participate in this practice.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
Are YOU Serious?
I don’t think you are the only one who has dedicated his life to this issue. Many have lost their livelihood as a result of standing up for what they believe.
This may come as a shock, but 9/11 is not about you Jon. It is about all of us.
You can not be any more certain about any aspect of 9/11 than any other member of the movement who has spent countless hours educating themselves.
As I said earlier, if I am wrong about this, write a book.
And BTW, you never did share Daniel Sunjata’s response when you set him straight about the Pentagon.
The topic...
Wasn't about me or Daniel Sunjata either... and what I can be certain of is that promoting theory as fact does not help this cause, and NEVER, EVER has.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
WELL
I guess that says it all.
No...
If Daniel had a problem with me, you would probably know about it. Did you know he's coming to speak at the conference in March? The conference where Betsy has dubbed me "Master Of Ceremonies?"
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
Congrats
As long as you are famous, nothing else matters.
I posted that...
To show that Daniel and I have no problems. ;) Take care now.
BreezyinVA asked "what's new?" Well, I just posted the first take on "Imagine" by John Lennon.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
THANKS
You take care too.
countless hours educating themselves
"You can not be any more certain about any aspect of 9/11 than any other member of the movement who has spent countless hours educating themselves."
Said the person who claims a missile hit the pentagon.
I honestly can't believe...
This "argument" is even taking place considering that there is a FINE example posted in this blog of how bad the argument is used against this cause.
However, I'm finished with it.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
MAYBE
Maybe you can write a book too.
But until you present your evidence, my beliefs are firm.
Beliefs
whit said..."my beliefs are firm."
"Beliefs" -- the evidence of the no plane cultists
PERHAPS
You may want to step back a bit and realize you are doing what 9/11 Truth deniers do to all of us.
I could present tons of evidence, but there is more important work to be done rather than fighting with my own “allies”.
Do your self a favour and go to the Journal of 911 Studies...
...and look at what scientists that we know we can trust and that have not ever been discredited say about the Pentagon!
www.journalof911studies.com
Gage, Jones, Ryan, Legge et al "do not know what hit the Pentagon" but they do know there is NO CLEAR SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that a plane, a 757-200 did not hit the Pentagon. Just like there is no evidence that flight 11 or 175 displayed impossible speed, to the contrary there is evidence that they could. Pilots for Truth, CIT and Griffin have been reckless by stating things as facts or as proven when they clearly are not!
So do you say that "The Journal" are being ignorant or arrogant to take a safe position like that with the Pentagon because you've done loads of research?
I still support Griffin, but he has failed to draw a line between info and disinfo and between the researchers to trust and no to trust.
If I was a soldier and an officer in a battle to my flank had left a hole in my our defence, yes I would let him know and if he refused to react and others saw the defence fail and other soldiers died the officer in question would in time become a legitimate target if this reckless behaviour continued.
"Friendly Fire" for a better term is simply about survival in this case for people like Jon Gold. Some of us here realize that the weak link must be replaced or removed if the defence is to hold, that is a difficult and unwanted, yes but many would say vitally necessary!
Regards John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
UNITY
This brouhaha over the Pentagon really surprises me, especially on this site, and I honestly can’t tell what you guys really believe.
Do you actually think flight 77 hit the Pentagon, or are you just afraid that too many people think the idea of something else striking the building is just too crazy to believe?
I’ve got news for you; to the uninformed, the whole damn Truth Movement sounds crazy, and therein lies our task.
Until you can explain why air-traffic controllers were convinced they were tracking sophisticated military craft… until you can explain two 16 foot holes in reinforced concrete purportedly punched by a weak nosecone… until you can explain DNA-identified bodies in a crash that vaporized plane, engines, seats and luggage… until you can explain the stench of cordite on the scene… until you can explain media reporting no evidence of a plane crashing anywhere near the Pentagon… until you can explain how an airliner waltzed past surface-to-air defenses while the vice-demon tracked it from underground… until you can explain how and why the meager wreckage was quickly removed by men in suits… … until you can explain the uncanny precision of the strike by a clown who most likely couldn’t steer a cable car, it might be prudent to just admit that, like all other aspects of 9/11, the events at the Pentagon present mysteries and unanswered questions which DEMAND A NEW AND COMPLETE INVESTIGATION!
And yes, I think it is arrogant and foolish to belittle and demonize fellow truthers whose goals are just as noble and well-intentioned as your own.
To those who think they are smart enough and clever enough to engineer the future of the movement by re-creating it in their own image, all I can say is pride goeth before the fall.
If we are all fortunate enough to see 9/11 Truth break into the mainstream, the catalysts will be serendipitous and totally unforeseen by us all.
But if this movement fractures, it dies.
Stop hacking away at your own leg, it’s not a smart thing to do.
You missed the point...
...there is no problem with thinking, beliving or theorising about what did or did not happen at the Pentagon.
Stating it is a fact is the problem. You my friend are stiffiling debate, by saying what you think is proven!
We have seen exactly what happens when we are reasonable with our claims like Richard Gage has been,,,success.
John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
Drg and Whitsun response to job gold
I am fairly new to the 911 truth movement and to this site. I like how whit challenges Jon gold, who acts like a VIP for 911truth. Why should there be unity, or even credibility? Why not simply be individuals, not a group, who question and theorize in whateverway they want? Why try to look good to the doubters and the liars? I always come back to the innocent child in The Emperors New Clothes...he says what he sees "oh look, the king is naked!!". There is no need to be an expert here or to gain credibility or acceptance!
The government is in the "credibility business. They can lie, forge, cover-up and still manage to look good to the poor masses as they march nakedly by.
I love to hear all theories of what might have happened on 911. I don't like censoring. Yes, I agree with whit, why be gun shy, we can never entirely avoid being discredited.
Adam Syed is vital to this site, and Jon gold a little troublesome.
When you get around to making your second post...
On this site, would you mind telling Adam that there is a question waiting for him in this thread? Thanks.
Edit: Never mind. www.911blogger.com moderation surprisingly deleted my comment in that thread for Adam.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
Funny stuff
You remind me an awful lot of this guy who called himself Hussein, among other things...
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
You are also free to use
You are also free to use your middle name.
Is my paranoia well founded?
Sorry to question you legitimacy, but do I smell a rat?
Are you actually suggesting we should avoid unity or consensus? That we should strive to be merely random individuals, with various beliefs, all equally weighted in "credibility", in such that credibility is actually unnecessary? To not care what the general public think and to no longer attempt to persuade anyone into looking into 911? To just let some people here postulate on controlled demolition or desire for re-investigation, while others should be free to be equally vocal and representative of 911truth by putting forth theories like UFO involvement or "facts" like hologram lasers?
Dis-unity, non-credibility, dis-regard to public image, random theories put forth in the name of 911 truth....THAT would be utterly fantastic to the detractors who diligently work to discredit 911 truth!! And therefore, to even suggest this rings alarm bells regarding your underlying objectives. (especially to disavow Jon, who is sincerely one of the most credible people involved simply because he flatly calls for just a fact based re-investigation without making technological assumptions or linking himself to hypothetical conclusions. If anything, Jon is "troublesome" to the real perpetrators of 911).
Yes
Jbax, my comment need not trouble you. I am a newcom
er (2 years of reading, listening and probing into 911's rubble) with no hidden agenda, simply sharing my passion to understand what really happened on 911. Yes, the individual journey needs to remain paramount. There is no society or government to persuade, only people who wecan hope to wake up as we continue to!
To me, the important work is not in convincing others and looking good, but in each ones authentic search and voice. We need not fear being absurd, that's what we hope the people who lied to us wiil do, finally.
They want to see us fighting,yet we don't gag people who are inquiring in order to look unified.
My first responsibility is to myself and each one in this movement can trust themselves as they keep digging deeper. Let us stay open to what could have happened, and not rush to have some 911truth belief system. Lillyann
Apologies for sounding accusational
Frankly, too much effort seems to put into postulating "what could have happened". At this point in the 911 truth movement, "staying open to what might have happened, and not rushing to have some 911truth belief system" is no longer helping with our primary goal. Maybe there was once a time for it, in the early days of scratching our heads, but unless there is a major in-the-know whistle blower or a physical smoking gun (which would probably have to be forensic, not theoretic), any further speculation of what might have happened is not going to bring about the consensus we all should be aiming for: namely, a new investigation. This should be the belief system here. Focus and unity should be put on getting the events of that day put under an open, public microscope, and THEN figure out what happened.
Sorry to sound mocking here, but this is not some cosmic exploration of our individual souls where "each one's authentic search and voice" needs to be paramount. Real shit hit the fan on 911, and we have a clear physical agenda to be dealing with, and we are up against devoutly intent detractors. Yes, there is a time for soul searching when coming to terms with the tragedy and realization of deceit, but I would imagine most here are well past that now.
We DO need to "convince others", and convince them of one thing: something rotten happened that day, the official story doesn't add up, and NOBODY will know exactly what happened without the enormous amount of testimony and physical evidence which is currently being withheld. But what we do know is that what we were told did not happen.
Theories at this point will only isolate, disenfranchise, and make people scared of coming to terms with what we are suggesting. People here can believe whatever they want, and I'd be open to hear new ideas/theories, but the fact of the matter is that those beliefs are futile without a new official investigation. And if we ever wish to achieve this, unity for that goal is absolutely necessary.
Is warfare effective?
Well said Whit. In the 60s and 70s it became clear to most that tried to keep an open mind that " fighting for peace was like fornicating for virginity", yet here we are at it again. Why not try to place principles (and facts) before theories and personalities? Proof is not in one piece of the puzzle but in the whole thing. But yes there are more than a few fake pieces to be weeded out. I thank all you that are helping me awake, but I also thank you shills who test my discernment. From my education and 40 years of aviation experience, I conclude that much of what CIT has uncovered is quite useful and most of what PFT has exposed is accurate. I like that term "Civil Informationing."
Impossible speed....good info?
Some of what P4T do and say is good...a lot is bunk.
Show me the proof that a 767-200 can not do 500 Knots at 1000 ft? This is there latest claim...
What did you do in aviation for 40 years?
Is the "fly over" proven?
What's your name?
Regards John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
"Civil Informationing" is Robin Hordons term....
..he is no fan of the Pilots Group or their latest video!
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
Hardcore conspiracy theorists Vs Truthers
Whit said..."As one who also believes that it was not a plane, but a missile that hit the Pentagon, I take exception with your criticism of David Ray Griffin" and..."If you have major dissenting theories about the Pentagon, write a book."
It's already been written...
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/0891419055
But you wont read it because your missile theory is without......
1. witnesses
2. physical evidence
3. common sense
Which is why Michael and others, myself included are tired of being lumped in with hardcore conspiracy theorists, who aren't interested in facts and reality but silly theories that make us look crazy.
9/11 was a conspiracy, so conspiracy theorists are all over it. Nothing wrong with that, but a line has to be drawn.......associating 9/11 truth with reptilian shape shifters and invissible missiles is a big tent I also have no interest in being a part of.
This is an apple
Eyewitnesses disagree on what they saw at the Pentagon. I'm not willing to automatically dismiss the eyewitness testimony of those who contradict the official story.
NTSB data contradicts the official story. Is that not significant? It either does or it doesn't. Anyone can obtain the FDR data from NTSB for AA77 via FOIA.
Judicial Watch obtained the release of these images which show a 'nose cone.' This is either consistent with the nose cone of a Boeing 757 or it is not the nose cone of a Boeing. Compare.
(1:26 mark, pull the image back and forth from 1:24 to 1:27).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8
"This is an orange" shows visual identification very simply. And this one is even better:
http://www.ae911truth.org/ppt_web/10min/slideshow.php?i=23&lores=1
two way street
Michael: Generally speaking. I find your criticisms and personal attacks at least as suspicious as those of the people your are condemning. I listened to the podcast and didn't hear any "big tent" propaganda. Griffin's perspective is exactly what I would expect from a career theologian.
You say: "It cannot be argued that Adam Syed is deliberately spreading false information in order to influence public opinion." to which I say: "End of story" for the time being.
I do share a concern about Griffin's preoccupation with the cellphone calls, but an honest approach would be to confront Griffin yourself and report that conversation publicly if you see fit and let the rest of us draw our own conclusions. I have my own hypothesis about why he does this and the next time I see him I may just ask him about it, myself. Likewise, I'm on the fence about CIT, something about which I reserve my conclusions until expert investigators are able to weigh in
Most of us by now have realized that "disruptors" use character assassination and ad hominem attacks as part of their arsenal. I'll leave it up the the readers here to determine for themselves if any of that is contained in your post. If it is true that Colorado truthers are confronting Griffin about their concerns about his preoccupation with cellphone calls, I'm OK with that. None of us should feel inhibited if we have concerns. But there is a real difference between expressing your concerns and propagating doubts, the later of which seems to be your intent.
If you are genuine in your concerns, I suggest you rethink your approach and tone. If you are disruptor, then this message is not for you, but instead for everyone else. The 911 truth Movement has done a pretty good job so far of weeding out some serious trouble. If we truly believe that "the truth will set us free" and that "the facts speak for themselves," then we really don't have much to worry about regarding infiltration. The conscious mindset of the movement is extremely pure and genuine, something that my experience has demonstrated is resilient to deadly sabotage.
Tone it down, dude.
-Mark M.
Basic research- As simple as reading a book
911Peacenik said ....."Likewise, I'm on the fence about CIT, something about which I reserve my conclusions until expert investigators are able to weigh in"
Who are these "experts" you are waiting for? The FBI? The rescue workers? The firefighters? Who? Is the investigation by these authors not worthy of a look? Can you explain to the forum why you are waiting for "experts" to weigh in and yet refuse to even look at the investigation of these authors? Or have you? Can you explain to the forum the "proof" that these authors are "in on it"? The book is free at the library so you can't use P4T excuse of "I don't want to pay for it". Can you explain to the forum how this book is "a pack of lies". You would have to read it first. Have you?
"Combing public records and conducting 150 interviews, Creed and Newman have done a monumental reporting job. Firefight tells the tale moment by moment through the accounts of dozens of participants and eye-witnesses."
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/0891419055
Why were the first
Why were the first responders not allowed to be interviewed after the event. It wasn't as if there was going to be an investigation. I talked with the sister of one of them. he was quite shaken when he found the wallet of one of the children completely intact, not burned. He always wondered about that. Yet we had fire hot enough to vaporize a plane.
jmd you are here to support the official conspiracy theory. At least it is now very clear.
I'm not an investigator
I've watched the CIT video presentations and I've read some criticisms and I'm on the fence. It is what it is. And I never said "pack of lies." Don't make up shit to prove a point, OK?
I have grown to seriously
I have grown to seriously question the motifs of Adam Syed.
LULz
Motivations and pseudonyms
DRG Speaking on using pseudonyms....
46:00 mark -- "Some people have maybe a government job and they would be summarily fired and it would be very difficult to get another job so that's a legitimate case, you have other people who for some other reason uh, uh, of their profession of desire not to uh, release their names. But there are still other people and some of these rather hostile people on some of the Internet sites, and I dealt with some of them in this recent paper that I wrote, who use a pseudonym um, and in some cases I don't know who they are, I don't know their real motivations but it's hard to not suspect in some cases their doing it simply because they don't want to be held accountable for some of the false claims they're making and they don't want us to be able to check to see for whom they work, for whom they're employed.............But in some cases it may be that uh that, that, some of the people that pretend to be truthers, um, are really working for the other side, so I don't know but when people use a pseudonym they have to understand that some of us suspect that."
http://paulsdomain.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=573816
I would hope that wasn't in reference to me, but if it was and for anyone else, my pseudonym jimd3100 is my real name. It's close enough, my name is Jim and that's all anyone needs to know. My name is provided to those I correspond with. Big mystery huh? And as for motivation and who one works for, my job is in government, the same job as some people who were murdered by the anthrax attacks. My colleagues were murdered by the second part of 9/11---the anthrax attacks, so you'll just have to excuse me if I insist that we stop promoting BS and focus on real evidence because not only did they get away with 9/11 and the anthrax attacks they got away with the cover up (which is usually what gets them caught)and turning a truth movement into a lie movement(the Jews did it all, there were no hijackers, the calls are all fake, no plane at the pentagon.and on and on)assists them in getting away with it. So as to who one works for DRG works for DRG, and it would be rather presumptuous of me to suggest that a Big tent approach would be helpful for DRG and his employer. I don't like it when people try to kill me and were successful at killing employment colleagues. I also don't like it when others assist them in getting away with it, because of self interests, or stupidity. Is that a good enough motivation factor? I'm more interested in the truth, and real facts, rather than who someones' employer is and what their full name is.
David Ray Griffin...
Has made phenomenal contributions since the 9/11 attacks. That's why I transcribed this, and this back in 2005, and thought enough of him to make an archive about him.
However, I wish he would stop promoting the work of certain people. I wish he would stop with the theories. I wish he would admit that we don't know exactly what happened on 9/11, or who was responsible (although we have a GOOD idea. 9/11 was a crime, and certain people in our Government and others have earned the title of suspect for that crime).
Of course, I can't control what other people do. All I can do is be the 9/11 Truth Activist I want others to be.
In my opinion, people should listen to what Cindy Sheehan says about how to unify.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
Nice post
We all have a lot to learn -- even Griffin.
From what I can see...
Cheri and Paul are attempting to unify with those individuals that support the likes of Fetzer, et al... (how many of them exist?) If they can listen to people like Cindy Sheehan, and stop with the promotion of things that give people "knee jerk reactions," (like the work of Fetzer, et al), then I don't have a problem with it. If they continue promoting the work of Fetzer, et al... or if Fetzer, et al... are promoted by ANYONE, then I have a problem with it.
Are we a movement that doesn't learn its mistakes? I sure hope not.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
Hmmm
Maybe I'm out of the loop. But I've never heard DRG even utter Fetzer's name in recent years, in-person or on video. I have heard him discredit the "space beam" theories which I assumed was directed to those who propagate those theories. In the Podcast he only refers to Fetzer as part of the history of how the movement developed and his assessment is accurate, Also in the podcast he suggests that people rely on the opinions of the professional groups, which I interpret as being mostly directed to Gage and ae911T. I don't know Cheri at all, so I have nothing to say. Judging from the lack of activity over at Scholars for 911T website, I guess I don't see this as a huge problem. It seems the majority in the movement have already drawn their conclusions about them. If there is anything public that demonstrates Cheri's support of "space beam theory" or "no planes," please post it here for the rest of us. If reaching out to people who believe those theories is a problem, then what does one say about reaching out to people who believe the OCT, which we do all the time? Thanks, Jon.
Wasn't specifically talking about DRG...
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
I hope not. Why does his
I hope not. Why does his name even come up. Is he getting press? Is he still an active problem. Or are we trying to change the subject. Unity is unity as long as those who want to define it are in charge. We don't know what happened. We need to unify around that and never stop questioning. Disrespecting each other makes us all losers.
Thomas Tvedten and Jim Fetzer...
Were just involved in an email string promoting Judy Woods, among other things, and I believe Cheri brought him up during her interview with Gage.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.
What's new.
What's new.
Paul is not trying to do anything!
Paul wants the truth and he believes that we must get involved and sort our differences out.
He does not support disinfo but he thinks CIT have been dealt a bad hand from many. Yes he interviewed Barrett about the Alten comments, that's being fair!
Do not tie Paul Tassopolus with any big tent idea as he is more of a fight tent guy in my experience.
Paul in my book is a great guy, he is admittedly a little new on the scene while some of you may have a little too much baggage it appears:)
Lets continue to try to be reasonable?
Regards John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
I think
the best chance to see the truth is to strongly interact with the universe and to carefully observe the results for as long as is necessary.
http://911artists.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/my-second-interview-with-kevin-barrett/
The bigger the tent, the larger the audience.
Don't believe me? Let's check in with our Alexa.com.
David Ray Griffin should
be working with professional lawyers, judges & crimefighters.
As we all should.
Truth
is not a popularity contest.
Why take down Michael's Post?
It should of stayed, it got a lot of good ideas into the open!
Regards John
Because he violated the rules.
"Calling another user a liar or disinformation agent will not be tolerated."
http://911blogger.com/rules
Brilliant
But this is OK....
BreezyinVA said..."jmd you are here to support the official conspiracy theory. At least it is now very clear."
Yup, Since I don't support idiotic theories backed by no evidence and are insulting to witnesses and family members. I guess, now would be a good time to confess. My Handler is Special Agent Stedenko formerly of the vice squad. Wheelhouse myself and England all attended secret meetings chaired by Cheney and Tenet. We would have gotten away with it to if it weren't for you meddling kids. Oh wait...we did get away with it. Thanks to you meddling kids. I guess the 1000 posts on prisonplanet wasn't a good enough cover.
Now back to reality.......If I really wanted to "ruin" your movement I'd want to get rid of rational sane people, keep them from joining, and welcome fruit loop loonitics. I wonder how I could accomplish this goal?
What are you going on about?
What are you going on about? You know all the answers. Many of us know the questions have not been answered. And your smokescreen gets votes. Typical.
Busted
Just curious.....
If i vote something "down"......why does it jump u-p 2 pts??....
as happened directly above.
(not you Breezy, i agree with you.....& i was writing this as your comment went up. So now you know that the votes were in error....they should have gone down, but went up by 2, instead. I find this happens a lot went i try to "vote"). Is it a 'diebold' system?
Hi M, I think it is because
Hi M, I think it is because others are voting at the same time. When you vote it recycles and others who may have voted a minute before show up all at once. It isn't a problem. The thought police are the problem.
It is all silly anyway. I'll get voted down for answering your question.
John Bursill -
Michael's post was unpublished and is under review by the moderators.
He will be contacted and offered a chance to rewrite the comment so that it complies with the site rules.
As you know, we are trying to maintain civility on the site and unnecessarily inflammatory comments are not helpful toward this end.
We appreciate everyone's patience as we try to sort this out.
Thank you.
Ok..thanks! It was pretty heavy....
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
You missed the point....
...there is no problem with thinking, beliving or theorising about what did or did not happen at the Pentagon.
Stating it is a fact is the problem. You my friend are stiffiling debate, by saying what you think is proven!
We have seen exactly what happens when we are reasonable with our claims like Richard Gage has been,,,success.
John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
The shoddy research of No Planers
Whit said...."Until you can explain why air-traffic controllers were convinced they were tracking sophisticated military craft…"
I don't need to explain it. The air traffic controllers themselves already have. Did you think they saw a little picture of an f-16 on their screen? They saw this at a high speed.....
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Aa77_dc_flight_...
Air traffic controller .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47gP_5_VD0c
Whit said...."until you can explain two 16 foot holes in reinforced concrete purportedly punched by a weak nosecone…"
You no planers like to use this as evidence of a 16 foot hole...it's not....
http://visibility911.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pentagon-hole.jpg
This is what the hole looked like...and it's not a 16 foot hole, the bottom floor is gone.....
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/st911/docs/hole11.jpg
And as for the other hole...ever heard of a wall breaching kit? I don't know what caused that hole I wasn't there, but here is one explanation.....
http://www.rense.com/general70/hole.htm
Whit said...."until you can explain DNA-identified bodies in a crash that vaporized plane, engines, seats and luggage…"
More lies from the no planers.....
engines....
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/pentagon/pentagon-engine...
engines and other debris, vaporized? I think not...all parts of a 757......
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/PentagonDebrisMontagecopy1.jpg/PentagonD...
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
"The airplane had nearly disintegrated, but Dan Fitch's group found several huge cogs, bent and blackened, that weighed a couple hundred pounds each; it took a couple of workers to handle each one. Other objects nearby looked like large gears, and strips of metal that appeared to be fan blades. Workers realized that they were pulling apart the remnants of one of the aircraft's two engines. The aluminum cowling that had encased it all had been torn away, but the guts of the engine were there." page 373
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/089141905...
"FEMA crews used a blowtorch to free the core of the motor from the column in which it was embedded. Then Fitch and several others used pieces of six-by-six to pry the motor loose from the column and push it off the pile. With the help of some Old Guard troops, they rolled the heavy piece of machinery onto a dolly and finally managed to push it outside. The whole effort took the better part of an entire shift." page 425
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/089141905...
That's some excellent "planting" of parts.
Seats and luggage were in the plane, the plane flew into the building..hmmm I wonder where they would be.......
Seats...
"Finally, they found several airplane seats, piled among the usual mounds of upturned office furniture and random wreckage. A couple of the seats still had bodies belted into them, which had already been found and marked for the FBI. Most of the workers inside were conscientious about not gawking, yet the seats attracted a lot of attention. They were the first objects the nonaviation experts had seen that unmistakably belonged to an airplane." page 371
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/089141905...
"When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him."
"It was the worst thing you can imagine," said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack. "I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/sept01/2001-09-14-pentagon-usat.htm
Luggage....
"As crews dug deeper, unmistakeable remnants of a passenger plane were everywhere. Wallets, shoes, jewlry, and the everyday items that had been stuffed into dozens of suitcases were littered throughout the debris."
page 426
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/089141905...
Whit said..."until you can explain the stench of cordite on the scene…"
You mean jet fuel? The stench of jet fuel was more prevelant and these survivors would be more interested in that I imagine....
"Navy Lt. Kevin Schaefer suffered severe burns on his arms, hands, and back, and inhaled jet fuel that damaged his lungs." Pic 9/9
http://www.usatoday.com/news/gallery/pentagon-survivors/flash.htm
"LTC Brian Birdwell.....For those that may not recognize the name, Brian is a Pentagon 9/11survivor."
"The doctor told him that had he not gone to Georgetown first, he probably would not have survived because of the jet fuel in his lungs."
http://usma1961.westpointaog.com/BirdwellLuncheon.htm
Whit said...."until you can explain media reporting no evidence of a plane crashing anywhere near the Pentagon…"
Another outrageous lie put out by no planers using edited clips.
"JAMIE McINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There are still people who don't believe a plane really hit the Pentagon on September 11th. I was there, I saw the wreckage, I photographed it with my digital camera."
"I was surprised to find that my own words are part of the conspiracy presentation. You can see on the Internet clips of me saying on September 11th, from my own close up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane crashing anywhere near the Pentagon. But I was answering a question, and the point I was making was about an eyewitness who thought a plane crashed near the Pentagon. I was saying no, not near the Pentagon. The only plane that crashed was at the Pentagon."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/20/tt.01.html
Here's the clip you no planers don't like to show...it's unedited..at the 2:35 mark the question was asked about a plane crashing NEAR the pentagon, he is answering that question, no plane crashed NEAR the pentagon, ..the unedited clip proves he's telling the truth despite the fact you no planers claim he changed his story and is a liar. He's not. You no planers are with your edited clips and BS. You turned the 9/11 truth movement into a 9/11 lie movement, and some of us are no longer going to sit around and let you get away with it......
Here's the UNEDITED clip...he reported on the plane crash all day long....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjlBpChvzD8
found this laying around somewhere
The CIT Deception - pts. 1-4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKR3Vg6d14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31LTIqcoTUg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNY2x9FbdWA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98EMY_zFt68
________________________
The key to successful truth actions lies in not insulting your target audience or promoting speculation as hard fact.
Very impressive
Wow, that's impressive. The part of Roosevelt Roberts was particular impressive, loose nuke was correct, this explains it clearly..........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31LTIqcoTUg
Guess what kids? There is even a bonus video .....
The CIT Deception - Supplemental Material
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMSQ1YYRkHI&feature=channel
Wow, so transparent it's hilarious.
I wasn't going to bump this thread back to the top with a response to this silly video, but since it's already been done...
That video is truly some Screw Loose Change quality material.
Ironically though, it pulls a new one: Argues FOR a NORTH of Citgo path, while still at the same time maneuvering itself over to the light poles in order to cause all the directional damage.
It is amazing how the anti-CIT brigade will latch onto ANYTHING that, judging a book by its cover, appears to discredit CIT's work. The anti CIT crowd will promote this right alongside the above "CIT Deception" video even though the two materials are mutually contradictory in their claims, simply because the end goal of both materials is to cast doubt on / neutralize the work of CIT.
Seriously. Watching videos like what ZBH posted only serve to reinforce that CIT is on the right track!
No planers are NOT truthers
Contrary to what you and CIT want to promote...the important aspect, and only one that really matters is.....Did a plane hit the pentagon? I'm not going to pretend to give a sh*t if the plane was 10 feet to the north of CItgo, 30 feet to the north, or 5 feet to the south. You can pretend that's what's important not wether the plane hit. The evidence is overwhelming, which explains why every witness CIT has talked to who were there that day, say a plane hit the building, 7 feet to the north or 5 feet to the south......who gives a crap? Everyone isn't going to be exact on the flight path just like everyone is not going to be exact about the color of the plane, but they all agree....it hit the pentagon.
Over and Out
What plane are you talking about?
"everyone is not going to be exact about the color of the plane, but they all agree....it hit the pentagon. "
just curious, what plane you are referring to, if everyone is not going to be exact about the color of the plane.
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
_____________________________________________
I work for the 9-11 First Responders, the 9-11 victims, and all those who are being slaughtered and tortured because of 9-11.
Im not anti-CIT..
.. just pro-truth.
The CIT crew set out with an agenda and used selective testimony to help their pet theory along.
There's a word for purposefully putting out false information to discredit a group or a cause, but it escapes me at the moment..
________________________
The key to successful truth actions lies in not insulting your target audience or promoting speculation as hard fact.
Isn't it ironic that
the title of this thread was about "coming together"? And then one group starts bashing another?
We all need to think about *how* and *why* this happens.
It amounts to a lot of wasted effort with little positive results. Who could ever want that?