on July 3, 2005
Like many, I was absolutely slack-jawed while reading Griffin's Book "The New Pearl Harbor". The claims of conspiracy in the 9-11 attacks were unbelievably controversial yet appeared to be very solidly reasoned and researched, and backed up by numberous sources. But then the Commission Report came out and, after reading it, that volume seemed so mammoth and exhaustive that Griffin's book seemed light and sketchy by comparison. While I was still troubled by many suspicious aspects of the attacks, I was much more satisfied with the official explanation that the whole thing was the result of a simultaneous, catastrophic failure of virtually every civilian and military system that was supposed to protect the U.S. from terrorist attacks.
But now Griffin has returned to pull back the curtain to reveal how this supposedly impartial and unbiased commission really conducted their business. The author lays bare their phony cloak of nonpartisanship, their selective examination of only the evidence that supports their foregone conclusions, and their failure to hold anyone in power accountable for what happened. Griffin writes chapter after chapter that patiently and methodically picks apart the methods and conclusions of the comission; what they missed, what they ignored, what they distorted. By the end of the book the 9-11 Commission Report seems like nothing but a shoddy cover-up.
I'd be willing to consider the possibilty that Griffin has got it all wrong but the extent to which you would have to twist and torture the facts and the evidence to explain your way out of the author's incisive conclusions leaves me very persuaded. David Ray Griffin has been called a conspiracy nut (and worse) but I have yet to see any detailed and/or compelling rebuttal to his extensive research. And until I do, I remain convinced of a large scale cover-up and I will never again trust my government to truthfully account for a national tragedy. I invite you to read this book and convince me otherwise.
on December 27, 2005
First I will briefly review Griffin's book, then respond to the 1-star reviewers on this site.
The thumbs-up and thumbs-down:
There are points at which it seems Griffin's theological background does him a disservice, because the tale he spins comes across poorly as a homily. Too often Griffin argues manipulatively, and uses rhetorical tricks unbefitting someone claiming to write a dispassionate expose of the facts. Evermore sad, these machinations are largely unnecessary--Griffin's points ARE rivetting, taken in their entirety. Griffin's scholarship IS generally sound. The connections he makes are, for the most part, logical and difficult to refute. Griffin should have stuck to the facts, acknowledged where his points leave room for debate, and allowed his laying out of the evidence to chew upon readers resistant to the upshot. Griffin too frequently uses cymbals when a metronome would do.
All that said, I have yet to read a solid rebuttal of Griffin's manifesto, or anything countering the inertia built up by his relentless blizzard of facts. I have seen people deflect specific hailstones of Griffin's, but no one has yet succeeded in outshouting the storm.
As for the knee-jerk naysayers: I'm sorry, but saying "US government complicity in 9/11 is impossible because it would be just too, too mean and evil of them!" is not a fact-driven argument. None of us are psychic, or psychologists worthy of mapping all possible rationalizations government members might entertain for complicity in 9/11. Perhaps they believe they are front-ending an inevitable war, amounting to fewer casualties in the long run. We know that the Project for the New American Century put forth an unapologetic call for taking over virtually all of the Middle East, and to hell with civilian casualties and American lives spent in the effort. In short, arguing that "US complicity in 9/11 is too evil to be possible" is a childish, emotion-driven, historically blind sentiment that has no place in a serious review of the facts.
Second, Snopes.com does not offer a thorough discussion of the Pentagon crash. It does not address the issue of confiscated cameras, nor the absence of airplane fuselage or engines or the appropriate number of bodies, nor the dearth of black box recordings, nor the fact that the jetfighter-swoop into the building was supposedly carried out by a pilot whose instructors declared him unfit to fly straight.
Third, the connection Griffin draws to specific Isreali companies and factions (who would hardly have the interests of the Israeli people at heart) is in no way an indictment of "Jews" as a whole, and to suggest otherwise is absurd. Crying "anti-Semitism" in this case is the rhetorical equivalent of arguing that any implication of corruption in, say, The Christian Coalition or The American Family Association amounts to throwing all Christians everywhere to the lions, or any implication of corruption of an American company amounts to hatred of all Americans. Silly, unfair, and pedestrian in the extreme.
Fourth, arguing that "US complicity could not have been possible because SOMEONE would have blabbed" shows an inattention both to how military works (soldiers take orders without question), and to what has happened to people who have tried to "blab." Examine, for example, the wholesale ruin and discrediting of whistleblowers and critics like Paul O'Neill, Richard Clarke, Sibel Edmonds, Colleen Rowley, Ambassador Wilson, UN inspector Scott Ritter, Karen Kwiatkowski, Rep. Murtha, etc. etc. There has to be an audience and haven for "blabbers" for any sane person to take that risk, especially when exposing something so explosive.
Fifth: the argument about the 3 towers (including WTC 7, never struck by a plane) being brought down with explosives is not just about the fact that they DID collapse, but about HOW they collapsed. The South tower fell first, though its fire was nearly out, and the burning fuel almost completely confined to the outer surface of the building. The towers fell inward at freefall speed, generating huge amounts of powdered dust from the top, in easily removable, neat sections. All of these conditions, historically, have only taken place in cases of controlled demolition. FEMA refused to allow engineers to inspect the evidence, and had the steel shipped off for recycling within an astonishingly brief period.
Finally, one need not be convinced of all of Griffin's conclusions to appreciate the damage Griffin does to the credibility of the 9/11 Commission Report. Any outright dismissal of this book without a solid attempt to engage the bulk of Griffin's points is an intellectually lazy, sycophantic move that is itself worthy of dismissal.
on March 7, 2005
This book is arguably the most important landmark in the investigation into 9/11 available on the book market so far. It is a very important, but also truly disturbing, book. For it shows to the reader in meticulous detail that the official investigation led by Thomas Kean and Philip Zelikow into the story about 9/11 presented by the White House has omitted and distorted so many facts that it can never seriously be accepted as the true account of what happened on 9/11.
Only very few people have read the 576 pages of the Kean/Zelikow report and tested the quality of the book. It is therefore of great value that Professor emeritus David Ray Griffin has carried out this task and described in detail how sensitive facts regarding mysterious or even illegal behaviour by senior US executives had been supplied in sworn testimony to the Kean/Zelikow commission by members of the FBI but then ignored in the Kean/Zelikow book. Griffin also explains that no mention, let alone explanation, is given of the collapse of WTC 7 or of the BBC report that six of the 19 hijackers were still alive.
While Griffin explicitly suspects that the Bush administration and the Pentagon have covered up the true 9/11 story, he never claims to know it himself but asks for a new and truly independent investigation. It is this latter feature which greatly contributes to the credibility and importance of this courageous book. I use this book with my history students to illustrate how history can be distorted through omissions and distortions. I warmly recommend this book to all those who are interested in both 9/11 and the subsequent cover up.
Dr. Daniele Ganser, Center for Security Studies, Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, Switzerland
Author of NATO's Secret Armies. Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (Frank Cass, London and New York, January 2005)
on December 28, 2004
First Dr. Griffin wrote "The New Pearl Harbor". The title comes from the neo-con (Project for the New American Century) report about conquering the world using America's military might, but the need for a new Pearl Harbor before that process can become fully engaged. Now, he has taken the 9/11 Commission Report, placed it under a scholarly microscope, and shown that like the Warren Commission Report about the [...] of President Kennedy, there is little, if any validity to the Report in the final analysis. There are so many facts not addressed, and just as many distorted from the truth in the 9/11 Commission Report as to render it a complete [...]. The conflicting interests of the Commission members are discussed, as well as their lack of impartiality. Further, when one sees the magnitude of the unasked and therefore unanswered questions, which any real investigation would have certainly examined, one can only begin to find answers within the omissions, and truth in the clarification of the distortions. Once arriving at that point, it becomes very clear that there has been no real investigation into the events of 9/11, and that some of the key players involved, or at least reasonably suspected of involvement, have been granted an immunity, of sorts, by the failure of the 9/11 Commission to even consider the evidence available about their possible involvement.
Dr. Griffin reports that six of the alleged hijackers are reportedly alive, with the 9/11 Commission simply ignoring that information, and reiterating the list of names of the alleged hijackers given to the public immediately after the attacks. Serious questions are raised by Dr. Griffin about the infamous Mohamed Atta, alleged ringleader of the hijackers, and the information placed in his luggage and intended to be on the plane, such as his will, passport and international drivers license, posing the obvious question of why he would take such items-particularly his will-that he knew would be destroyed by crashing the plane. Of course, there was the partying by Atta and others prior to 9/11, all of whom were purportedly devout Muslims, which simply didn't comport with behavior of religious zealots. The 9/11 Commission simply ignored that information. The Commission also clearly distorted the piloting skills needed by Hani Hanjour to perform a 330 degree turn of Flight 77 so that it would hit the Pentagon. Hanjour had been described as a horrible pilot, yet the maneuver purportedly performed by Flight 77 would have required a highly skilled pilot. The Commission gave contradictory statements about Hanjour's alleged piloting skills, or lack thereof.
The collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 in the World Trade Center posed so many unasked and unanswered questions. To observers, the collapse of the Towers and Building 7 seemed to be very odd, as there was simply no reason for them to fall the way they did. On the contrary, there was a volume of evidence available to the Commission to suggest that they could not have collapsed the way they did as a result of the impact of planes, and subsequent fires. Of course, Building 7 was not hit by a plane. Regardless, the Commission carefully ignored the evidence-even the statement of the leaseholder, Larry Silverstein, that they "pulled" Building 7. His videotaped remarks were not even discussed. The link between President Bush's brother, Marvin, and the security for the WTC was never examined by the Commission, even though Securacom was responsible for the security at the WTC, and Marvin was a Director and shareholder of that company, and his cousin, Wirt Walker, was the CEO of the company. Neither man was ever interviewed by the Commission. Further, the evidence available for forensic analysis, i.e. the rubble of the Twin Towers and Building 7 was removed and sold to other countries without examination.
As to the Pentagon, Dr. Griffin poses the long unanswered question: "where is the Boeing?" The absence of evidence of a 757 anywhere at the Pentagon poses so many questions, again not addressed by the Commission. Although common sense should dictate that the absence of plane wreckage outside the Pentagon creates innumerable questions about the validity of the claim that an airplane hit the Pentagon, the Commission simply ignores this "absence of evidence". Names of witnesses and their statements simply do not appear in the Report.
Considering that the Pentagon is probably the most secure building in the world, and that there had to have been security cameras in abundance, why did the Pentagon release only five frames of film footage of the attack? And, why were those frames so vague and ambiguous? Why didn't the Commission subpoena any and all videos of the attack? "So many questions, so few answers" could be another title of the Commission Report.
There was also an abundance of evidence available about prior knowledge of the attacks on September 11th, including, but not limited to the extensive stock trading with Morgan Stanley--which occupied 22 floors of the WTC--on American and United Airlines stock. These trades were "put options", betting that those stocks would drop, and placed between September 5th and September 10th. Profits in the range of 10-15 billion dollars were realized, but the Commission claimed that it did investigate this trading, but that it was "innocuous". Documentation of those alleged investigations was not contained within the Commission Report.
Although Dr. Griffin does not point the finger at any particular group as being responsible for 9/11, that was not his task in presenting this wealth of information about the failure of the 9/11 Commission. On the contrary, he provides names of individuals providing information that was ignored, as well as those who clearly had something to be gained from the events of 9/11. His book is thorough and presents compelling evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is the written version of a massive cover-up of what really happened on 9/11. Dr. Griffin's book should be required reading for all high school students in America.
on January 23, 2005
When I first learned about David Ray Griffin's previous book on 9/11 (The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11, Interlink Publishing 2004) I was quite impressed by the number of (other) professors endorsing the book. Rather naïve, perhaps, but I soon found that I could well agree with them. As the Princeton professor emeritus Richard Falk puts it in his Foreword to NPH, Griffin writes "in the best spirit of academic detachment" and allows "inquiry to follow the path of evidence and reason wherever it leads."
I was happy to find that Prof. Griffin has continued to display these virtues in his latest book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (Interlink Publishing, 2005). For it is indeed the coupling of evidence and reason that makes this book so enormously important. Not only to everyone interested in 9/11 or US politics or terrorism, but, indeed, to all who care about the future of the international political system, the distribution of the world's energy and other resources and, most importantly, the untold human suffering that the madness called the "war on terror" is causing.
Griffin goes through portions of the 9/11 (or "Kean-Zelikow") Commission pointing out omission after omission, distortion after distortion. He is quite restrained in using the term "lie" although in many cases that is precisely what the Report is about.
The basic question asked by the book could be expressed like this: Given that in addition to the official conspiracy theory of 19 Arab hijackers there exists another, well supported theory according to which elements in the US Government were complicit in the attacks, does the Report in any way address this other theory and try to refute it? The answer is: no, it doesn't. For the most part, the Report simply ignores the evidence against the official story. And where it doesn't ignore it, it distorts it. It leaves dozens of crucial questions, not only unanswered but also unasked. To name just a few: How is it possible that NORAD so badly messed up the chronology of the day back in 2001 and still in the Commission hearing in May 2003? Is it enough just to state their information was incorrect without asking why? How can the Commission ignore Secretary of Transport Mineta's and Richard Clarke's testimonies about the doings of Dick Cheney on that morning? How can the Commission not pursue Mineta's testimony about the plane that was approaching Washington D.C. before the Pentagon was struck when NORAD says there was no advance warning about the second, third and fourth planes? And on and on...
I think it is hard for any responsible AND informed person to come to any other conclusion than that the "war on terror" is, as former UK cabinet minister Michael Meacher puts it, "a bogus" and must somehow be stopped. This will, however, be a very unlikely achievement unless real facts about 9/11, the war's core "justification," become much more widely known than at present. David Ray Griffin has indeed done his share.
I admired Griffin's courage when I read his recent book "The New Pearl Harbor" and I became a fan of his. His new book "The 9/11 Commission Report Omissions and Distortions" is thorough, well argued, and factual, and was even reviewed by a bunch of outstanding cast. I am not surprised that this genre of books is allowed to be published these days, because black outs are much stronger than blatant censorship. Blackouts by the corporate media maintain the illusion of freedom of speech, and at the same time ensures that only few people read these books. Blackouts negate the book and the author and indirectly classifies him or her in the leftist, unpatriotic, conspiracy nut categories. Questioning authority figures has become unnatural to us, it goes against our political socialization training and creates in us discomfort and dissonance. However, Denial is a much more effective coping mechanism for our pathological survival. If you deny it, it doesn't exist, and everyone will live happily ever after.
I would also like to applaud Falk, the distinguished professor from the Council on Foreign relations that has once again reviewed Griffin's new book, and has the courage to go against his buddies and fellows from the CFR that headed the 9/11 commission like Lee Hamilton, Philip D. Zelikow, John Lehman, and Thomas Kean. The problem I have is that it is hard for me to believe what the CFR talking heads stand for, because they tend to argue both sides of the issue to confuse and befuddle people, and give them the impression that democracy is at work, while the synthesis/solution has already been decided by them.
Anyway, and once again Kudos to Griffin!! Another great book and another blackout by the corporate media! Griffin, keep writing and sending your ethical thoughts and decent vibrations into the universe, maybe and only maybe the universe will respond back...............
on April 29, 2006
"The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions" is - and will be - the definitive critique of the 9/11 Commission Report. David Ray Griffin is to 9/11 what Galileo was to astronomy.
Griffin, one of the most precise and credible leaders in revealing the official lies of 9/11, has in this book revealed the Kean-Zelikow report for what it really is: A document that omits, distorts, or invents facts to support the offical myth that 19 Arab-Muslim hijackers thwarted our defenses to destroy skyscrapers and hit the Pentagon with passenger jets.
Unfortunately for the 9/11 Commission (whose staff was far from impartial) there are too many news and eyewitness reports that conflict with the offical myth for that myth to hold up - particularly under the weight of Griffin's scrutiny.
Many will disagree, but I think this book is better than "The New Pearl Harbor". In that book, Griffin basically compiled and organized most of the credible criticisms of the official theory, thereby revealing inconsistencies, conflicts, and holes in the government's narrative. In "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" Prof. Griffin logically and concisely shows exactly what the Commission ommitted, distorted, or outright invented within its report in order to ensure the official conspiracy theory remained intact.
Inconvenient facts and evidence, as well as hard-hitting and very valid questions that were apparently not asked, are introduced by Griffin - leaving no doubt that an independent investigation of the 9/11 crimes reamins to be accomplished.
One of the best parts of this book was the chapter on Flight 77, the 757 that is said to have hit the Pentagon. On that topic, Griffin shows how the Kean-Zelikow report goes off the rails of reality. I don't want to give anything away, but the audacity of the 9/11 Commission regarding Flight 77 is mind-boggling. It would be funny if 9/11 and its effects weren't so tragic and deadly.
For those who haven't read this book, have some integrity and read it before writing a review - unless you're CIA or MI, because disinformation is your job. In which case you ought to resign and reveal what you know....
on May 19, 2005
With the same calm, clear and extensively documented approach of his earlier The New Pearl Harbor, David Ray Griffin issues a devastating refutation of the official 9/11 Commission Report. He calls this book the 9/11 Commission Report -- Omissions and Distortions and his care and scholarship validate its title. For all who are interested in the truth about that horrendous September day, this book is a most important read. Fr. Ed Escwhweiler
on May 5, 2005
David Ray Griffin is a retired professor of theology and philosophy at the School of Theology in Claremont, California. He is a respected scholar and researcher in the academic world. However this book and his earlier one, The New Pearl Harbor, are essential reading for both Americans and Canadians. David raises many questions about the official account of 9/11 in his first book and now in this second one he goes through the findings of the 9/11 Commission which he believes both ignored and distorted the mounting evidence that the official story cannot be the correct one. Things like Bush not leaving school after the first plane hit, the failure to scramble the fighter jets to intercept the planes on time, the demolition type free fall of the three World Trade Center buildings, the put options on the airlines involved three days before the attack, the fact that the bin Laden family members were flown out of the US when no other planes were allowed in the sky, the immediate clearing of the debris of the towers before any investigation could be conducted, - it goes on and on. Griffin spoke to an assembly at the University of Wisconsin recently and the address was shown on C-SPAN. For him there is little doubt now that the Bush Administration was involved - why - probably the oil in Iraq. The responses to the address were shock and surprise but the evidence presented was overwhelming. It is urgent for the people of both United States and Canada to at least become aware of the evidence presented in these two books. People need to make up their own minds but the unanswered questions are deeply troubling.
on July 16, 2005
Why are so many people so afraid to simply look into some glaring inconsistencies about what we have been told happened on 9/11. Do not the thousands of people who lost their lives then and since deserve our time and a truly thorough and indpendent investigation into what may or may not have happened? David Ray Griffin is trying to shake awake a nation hypnotized by its media into believing that the laws of physics and common sense did not apply on 9/11. Read this book and weep for our country and then go out and help those -- like Dr. Griffin -- who are trying so hard to get the truth out.