problems with the “official” explanation of 9/11

I found this in the Metro last week, and I thought a few people on my flist would be interested in it. Here is a link to the electronic version.

9-11: Unquestioned Answers

Nonconspiracy theorist David Ray Griffin takes aim at the official 9/11 story

Quoting from the article:
“However,” he continues, “when the official account of 9/11 is stripped of its halo and treated simply as a theory rather than an unquestionable dogma, it cannot be defended as the best theory to account for the relevant facts. When challenges to it are not treated as blasphemy, it can easily be seen to not correspond with reality.”

0 thoughts on “problems with the “official” explanation of 9/11

  1. 7leaguebootdisk

    Though one of his main points is that the standing order was to not shoot down aircraft, and that NORAD should have been able to shoot them down. The full set of NORAD tapes were released this year, Vanity Fair had an article on them, and it seems that while they did they best you could hope for, they never had a fighter in a shoot position, only had four fighter and no tankers (even one tanker would have meant they could have kept all the fighters up all day, and done supersonic flight) for the whole east coast, and our default is NOT to shoot down aircraft, our main plan (I expect) is mostly for nuke war, and that is shooting down bombers, lots of them. The order to shoot them down was issued 15 minutes after flight 93 was a hole in the ground. I think that with a few decicions and errors going the other way, it might have been possilbe to shoot down one of the DC targeted aircraft

    1. nekodojo

      Now, if you think that article is interesting, you should also check out “loose change 2” (search on or youtube)

      As of right now I haven’t made up my mind whether our government was negligent, or even complicit, in the 9/11 attacks, but I feel it’s my responsibility as an American to keep an open mind to all possibilities. (Certainly wouldn’t put it past Bush and Cheney to look the other way or even facilitate the hijackers, the only question in my mind is if they’re clever enough to pull it off).

      1. 7leaguebootdisk

        Quite a lot of that stuff (in the ones I’ve seen) is crap, these people don’t have my background, I think. Like looking at the “we never went to the moon” people’s stuff, total crap, by people who don’t know anything (stuff is differnet than eath, they must not have gone to the moon!), not to mention that a fake good enough to fool the USSR would have been harder than doing it, in my view.

        At times I think it is a smokescreen to hide things like just who did crash the planes, there is some evidence that most if not all of them had stolen ID, and thus who knows who they were?

Leave a Reply