Monbiot is such a dick. Notice how he changes the subject to the Pentagon, at that point.

Truthers should use a "cumulative" approach to argumentation, but not what Griffin means by the word. I would begin these debates by destabilizing the official story, not by jumping to alternative conclusions. Start with the compromises of the 9/11 Commission, because that shows we can't trust its conclusions. Then talk about specifics.

Monbiot proceeds here by specious argument alone. There are whole stretches of this "debate" that are a complete waste of time. Who gives a shit "why David Ray Griffin hasn't been killed," George? Who gives a shit "how the bombs would have been planted in the buildings," George? Should we ignore obvious evidence just because George Monbiot doesn't have the imagination of whoever did it? Distraction after distraction.

This is typical of debunking. They don't "debunk" so much as they distract and pose alternative explanations. Could the explosions have been gas lines exploding from the fires from the planes? I guess maybe; but that doesn't PROVE anything.

Great comments in this thread by many...

I thought that Monbiot's answers were really non-answers and it was extremely telling how he wouldn't even acknowledge the simple fact that an eyewitness was talking about explosions in a different building before either of the towers collapsed. That's either denial or willful ignorance.

The idea that activists are still alive therefore they are wrong is also complete nonsense. First of all, how many of us are there? How many would the government kill? And if they did that, it would be pretty obvious that they have something to hide. As if there wasn't enough evidence of that already. Talk about the evidence!

I find that these "debates" are so frustrating because the facts of 9/11 are so obvious that anyone can figure it out if you just put aside the false premise that "it's impossible", "they wouldn't do that", "I don't believe they could do it", etc. This is called argument from incredulity.

The argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed not to be true, or alternately that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead. "I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

It's time to start looking at what is true, instead of what we want to be true. The psychological barrier has to be broken.

The negligence theory has to be ATTACKED for what it is: Absurd.

While any serious investigation of the 9/11 attacks was blocked by President Bush and Dick Cheney for more than a year,[6] a theory of systematic and incredible incompetence emerged: Al Qaeda got “lucky”. Mindy Kleinberg, of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee in an opening address to the 9/11 Commission criticized this idea:

“It has been said that the intelligence agencies have to be right 100% of the time. And the terrorists only have to get lucky once. This explanation for the devastating attacks of September 11th, simple on its face, is wrong in its value, because the 9-11 terrorists were not just lucky once. They were lucky over and over again. When you have this repeated pattern of broken protocols, broken laws, broken communication, one cannot still call it luck. If at some point, we don’t look to hold the individuals accountable for not doing their jobs, properly, then how can we ever expect for terrorists to not get lucky again?”[7]

What happened to those who failed, and what exactly were their failures?[8] Senator Charles Grassley observed that “I can’t think of a single person being held accountable anywhere in government for what went on and what went wrong prior to Sept. 11, it seems that nobody in government makes any mistakes anymore.”[9] In fact, according to testimony given to congress, not one single individual within the CIA, FBI, and NSA has been reprimanded, punished, or fired for the events of 9/11.[10] Not only were no individuals held accountable, 911truth.org observed that “officials who ‘failed’ (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.”[11] A Justice Department official commented about the FBI, “they have basically promoted the exact same people who have presided over the… failure.”[12] As for the military “response” to 9/11, “suspicion of [Pentagon] wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation,”[13] Senator Mark Dayton Claimed that NORAD officials “lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people.”[14] What happened? Promotions.
9/11 “Incompetence”, Sabotage, and Promotions
_______________
Arabesque: 911 Truth

His book, "Day of Deceit" is dry as toast, but damning as hell. Key members of Naval Intelligence knew.

There was also a coded message intercepted on December 4, 1941, but all evidence of the teletyped message has either been destroyed or is locked away deep in an archive;

http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/winds.htm

"There was a Winds Message. It meant War--and we knew it meant War. By the best estimate that can be made from my recollection and the circumstantial evidence now available, the "Winds Message" was part of a Japanese Overseas "News" Broadcast from Station JAP (Tokyo) on 11980 kilocycles beginning at 1330 Greenwich Civil Time on Thursday, December 4, 1941. This time corresponded to 10:30 p.m. Tokyo time and 8:30 a.m. Washington time, December 4, 1941. The broadcast was probably in Japanese Morse code, and was originally written in the Kata-Kana form of written, plain-language Japanese. It was intercepted by the U.S. Navy at the big radio receiving station at Cheltenham, Maryland, which serves the Navy Department. It was recorded on a special typewriter, developed by the Navy, which types the Roman-letter equivalents of the Japanese characters. The Winds Message broadcast was forwarded to the Navy Department by TWX (teletypewriter exchange) from the teletype-transmitter in the "Intercept" receiving room at Cheltenham to "WA91," the page-printer located beside the GY Watch Officer's desk, in the Navy Department Communication Intelligence Unit under my command. I saw the Winds Message typed in page form on yellow teletype paper, with the translation written below. I immediately forwarded this message to my Commanding Officer (Rear Admiral Leigh Noyes, USN), thus fully discharging my responsibility in the matter."

... and email him, asking him to elaborate on this.

________________

JFK on secrecy and the press

and today explosives do not need to be wired up as in the past. Each dynamite package can be triggered off by a radio link to the computer playing the explosion sequence. The fact that the planes ( flying objects ?) made random placed holes in the towers is not a problème either because as it was cerntainly a computer program which was setting of the bombs, the program could be reajusted in real time for any unforseen difficulties.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/explosives.html

There are a lot of flaws in George's account. A complete transcript will help to detect them all.

And the téléviion spire from the north tower should be standing high up ( ~30 floors high ?) like a pencil falling to the ground Just once found television footage showing the spire for a few seconds on the ground standing straight up in the air. Then in about one second itt disintegrated to dust. The Loose Change Final Cut has the spire standing up from the ground but they have shown it disintegrating.

Why is George Monbiot trying so hard not to understand. It goes beyond being stupid.