Griffin Takes Powerful New Approach to 9/11 Truth

Dandelion Salad

by Tod Fletcher
Global Research, March 15, 2008

Review of David Ray Griffin’s latest book

9/11 CONTRADICTIONS by David Ray Griffin is the fifth of his books to examine the official account of the events of September 11, 2001. This brilliant and highly readable book takes a new yet simple approach to the truth about 9/11. It focuses entirely on contradictory statements made by members of the Bush administration, government departments and agencies, and official bodies such as the 9/11 Commission. All the statements that Griffin examines are official claims in direct conflict with other official claims. How could this be? Why would the government keep changing “the official story”? The public, of course, is expected to take all the statements as incontrovertibly true, yet they directly conflict with one another.

And why, if the government pronouncements are contradictory, haven’t members of Congress and the mainstream media launched investigations to determine which are true and which are false, and to ask why are obvious falsehoods about the events of 9/11 being promulgated by the government? I say “obvious falsehoods” because, as Griffin explains in the Preface, “If [Transportation Secretary Norman] Mineta said “P,” that is a fact. If the 9/11 Commission said “not P,” that is a fact. And it is a fact that “P” and “not P” cannot both be true” (p. viii). The subtitle, “An Open Letter to Congress and the Press,” indicates Griffin’s hope that the juxtaposition of the contradictory claims the book provides will stimulate such investigations. But the book is really intended for the public at large, and its clear focus makes it the easiest to read of all Griffin’s books on 9/11. Because of its relative simplicity it is a perfect introduction to the subject.

Drawing on government publications, media reports, testimony from the 9/11 Commission hearings, oral histories from the Fire Department of New York, and other official sources, Griffin documents masterfully 25 of the most serious contradictions, divided into five parts:

“Part I. Questions about Bush Administration and Pentagon Leaders,” reveals the contradictory claims about the activities of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Richard Myers, Donald Rumsfeld and Ted Olson. In this part Griffin shows that Bush’s long stay at the Florida school was initially confirmed and later denied by the White House, that various government spokespersons and the 9/11 Commission could not agree on where Cheney, Myers and Rumsfeld were at key times that morning, and that DOJ Solicitor General Ted Olson’s claims to have received phone calls from his wife on Flight 77 were directly contradicted by the DOJ’s FBI.

“Part II. Questions about the US Military,” explores the many contradictions within government claims about when the military was alerted to the emergencies on the flights, whether the military could have shot down Flight 93, and whether it had envisioned 9/11-type attacks prior to that day.

“Part III. Questions about Osama bin Laden & the Hijackers,” examines the contradictions in official claims about the religious devotion of the alleged hijackers, where the luggage with the Arabic-language flight manuals, attributed to Mohamed Atta, was found, whether cell phone calls from the flights provided evidence of hijackers, and the existence of hard evidence for Osama bin Laden’s responsibility.

“Part IV. Questions about the Pentagon,” spotlights contradictions in the official account of Hani Hanjour’s flying skills, what caused the large hole in the interior C Ring wall of the building, and whether a sophisticated US military reconnaissance plane was overhead during the attack.

“Part V. Questions about the World Trade Center,” exposes the contradictions in Rudy Giuliani’s account of his foreknowledge of the catastrophic collapse of the Twin Towers, in the official claims about explosions in the towers and WTC 7 before they disintegrated, and in official statements concerning the presence of molten steel in the subbasements after the buildings came down.

When examined under Griffin’s microscope, it becomes clear that the “official story” has kept changing over time, just like the stories criminals tell as they are interrogated. As holes in the government’s explanations of the incomprehensible events opened up under questioning, to some degree from the press but primarily from the 9/11 truth movement, they were plugged by new claims. And virtually all of the new claims have been accepted by the press and Congress without asking how they could be true in light of the earlier, contradictory claims. You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to see that when the story keeps changing, doubt is cast on all of its versions. Any police investigator knows this, as should investigative journalists and elected representatives.

Of course, if Congress and the press won’t do their jobs, it’s up to the rest of us. With this authoritative dissection of the conflicting statements of the principal suspects, Griffin has done much of the pre-trial legwork already. The American public should not allow his selfless devotion to truth and justice to be squandered by inaction. This may be one of those things that representatives just cannot do for us.

Link to Amazon:

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries:
© Copyright Tod Fletcher, Global Research, 2008
The url address of this article is:

8 thoughts on “Griffin Takes Powerful New Approach to 9/11 Truth

  1. Pingback: 9/11 Contradictions: When Did Cheney Enter the Underground Bunker? « Dandelion Salad

  2. Pingback: 25 Intolerable Contradictions: The Final Undoing of the Official 9/11 Story « Dandelion Salad

  3. I have would have no problem with the government not telling us everything or even lying to us on occasion if we could trust the government to do what is best for the USA as opposed to what is best for the sponsors of the Neocons and PNAC.

    I DO have a problem with ther government lying us into the Iraq war.

    If this were investigated and it was shown that Bush/Cheney did not deliberately lie us into the Iraq fiasco, I would trust the government again.

  4. Why do so many Americans accept the idea that “sometimes the government must lie to the people?” That’s a more profound question because I think many of us already accept that the government frequently lies to us about many things.

    There is a long history of interventions around the world where the CIA or the Military does things with are illegal, immoral and unethical. What do we accept these things?

    What is it about the American character that lends us to “surrender” to evil deeds done by our government?
    What’s the hidden rationale in our mind?

  5. Unless the events of 9/11 are discussed openly and without apprehension, nothing else is real. When the people who benefited the most from the events of 9/11 were the very people responsible for preventing them, something is wrong. Since these people had ability to prevent, permit or conduct the events themselves, their collective and individual responses to the events must be examined and analyzed to the last detail. Anything less would be cowardice.

    Even a rookie detective will tell you that motive and means are the keys to identifying suspects in a crime. The self-proclaimed goals of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) clearly establish a more realistic and plausible motive to create a “new Pearl Harbor” than can be attributed to any Islamic extremist. As a matter of fact, the events of 9/11 were perhaps the most counterproductive factors in the history of Islamic progress. They resulted in an overwhelming backlash against the many Islamic people around the world.

    Contrast the two motives. For the neocons in PNAC, 9/11 was a dream come true. Their dormant agenda now had an excuse for being implemented. On the other hand, the motive attributed to terrorists for the events of 9/11 was the laughable “they hate our freedom,” ostensibly stemming from the teachings of Islam. In truth, such acts would have violated the teachings of their religion and exponentially added a heavy burden to the daily life of every Muslim. This is not to say that there were no Al Qaeda types involved in the events of 9/11. It merely raises unanswered questions about what Al Qaeda really is and with whom their members work. And if they were actually involved in the events, what were the real reasons for their actions? Their motives, not those attributed to them, have to become part of the public discourse.

    THE RESPONSE TO 9/11: We discuss the Iraq war as if the plans to invade Iraq were suddenly thought of on 9/11. We do the same with the Patriot Act. We do the same with the war in Afghanistan. We do the same for the continual assault on our Constitution. We do the same for the unprecedented rise in government secrecy (which actually started prior to 9/11, with Cheney’s secret energy policy meetings). As a matter of fact, the administration is doing just about anything it wants, in secret, using the excuse of 9/11. This unlimited power is a dream come true for the PNAC cabal. The media constantly repeat the neocon mantra that 9/11 justifies all of this unchecked power. Nothing can be further from the truth.

    9/11 is not the reason the Bush/PNAC agenda took shape, it is the excuse for its implementation. It was not a response to the events of 9/11. It was waiting in the wings for an event like 9/11 to breath life into it much like the bolts of lightening that brought life to the Frankenstein monster.

    The members of the Project For a New American Century had their agenda prepared and published before they propped up an uniformed, inexperienced, failed businessman named George W. Bush as their poster candidate. He had great appeal among the good ole boys and the bible thumpers who were not very likely to vote for the scowling man behind the curtain, Dick Cheney. George W. Bush had not been sitting around for the previous 10 years thinking about foreign policy. Rather, he was being coached on foreign policy by handlers who had to teach him that Africa was a continent and not a country.

    The stated aims of PNAC can be followed from their war plans to their hopes of global military superiority. George W. Bush was not a factor when PNAC was writing its openly published policies. But once the 2000 election was secured, PNAC members became and remain the mainstay of the Bush administration, holding virtually every major position relating to foreign policy.

    However, to this day, PNAC has not been mentioned by any of our corporate news media. Most Americans have never heard of it, and few can name its members in positions of power in their own government. As a matter of fact the chairman of PNAC, William Kristol (Editor of the PNAC publication, the Weekly Standard), is a regular pundit offering analyses of Bush policies on FOX News. Never has Kristol been identified as having any connection to PNAC despite being one of the authors of our current foreign policy. He is regularly presented to the public as an impartial journalist. In fact, not a single government spokesperson has ever been identified as a PNAC member. Talk about media deception!

    When there is any discussion of Bush policy, from the Iraq War to the Patriot Act, we are told that 9/11 changed everything. This is nonsense. The most controversial acts of the Bush/PNAC administration were planned and held in abeyance prior to 9/11. The people who prepared the PNAC agenda did not think they had a chance in hell of their goals coming to fruition. Can you imagine the Patriot Act passing without 9/11 having taken place?

    Reality check: The 800 + pages of the Patriot Act were written prior to 9/11. So were the plans to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq. But PNAC needed 9/11 to take place. They wanted 9/11 to take place. They wrote about 9/11 (their new Pearl Harbor) taking place. What makes you think they had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 taking place?

    As a matter of fact, the book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, by Zbigniew Brzezinski, published in 1998, basically blueprints everything that is going on today as it relates to the military primacy of the US and it’s domination of the world. This is not new stuff. The Bush/PNAC administration is not responding to 9/11. They are in fact carrying out a pre-planned agenda made possible by 9/11.

Comments are closed.