The American Empire and 9/11 - Journal of 9/11 Studies

More documents

Recommendations

Info

in trouble had been observed at 8:15. That would mean thatalthough interceptions usually occur within 15 minutes, inthis case over 80 minutes had elapsed before any fighterswere even airborne. This story suggested that a “stand-down”order had been issued.Within a few days, a second story was put out,according to which NORAD had ordered fighters aloft but theydid not arrive in time, because FAA notification hadunaccountably come very late. Critics showed, however, thateven if the FAA notifications had come as late as NORAD’stimeline indicated, there was sufficient time forinterceptions. 19 This second story did not, therefore,remove the suspicion that a stand-down order had been given.The 9/11 Commission Report, issued in 2004, gave athird account, according to which, contrary to NORAD’stimeline of September 18, 2001, the FAA did not notify NORADabout Flights 175, 77, and 93 until after they had crashed.As I showed in books published in 2005 and 2006, however,this new story contains many problems. 20In August 2006, Michael Bronner, who was an associateproducer for the film United 93, published an essay, “9/11Live: The NORAD Tapes,” which popularized the 9/11Commission’s new story and emphasized tapes supplied byNORAD, purportedly from 9/11, on which it is based. This newstory was further publicized by the simultaneous publicationof Without Precedent by Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, thechair and vice chair, respectively, of the 9/11 Commission.This book and Bronner’s essay caused a minor sensation withtheir suggestion that the account given by the militarybetween 2001 and 2004, which only partly absolved the19 David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions andDistortions (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2005), 139-48.20 Ibid., 155-226. For a briefer account, see “Flights of Fancy: The9/11 Commission’s Incredible Tales about Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93” inDavid Ray Griffin, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call toReflection and Action (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006).6
military from responsibility for failing to prevent theattacks, had been a lie. The new story puts all the blame onthe FAA, except for a little confusion on the military’spart, thereby lessening the grounds for suspicion that themilitary had been given a stand-down order. This new storyhas been widely accepted.However, in my most recent book, Debunking 9/11Debunking, 21 I show even more fully than I had before thatthis new story is incredible. Besides contradicting manywell-documented reports, it is inherently implausible,because it claims that military leaders lied in a way thatmade them look worse than does the truth (as described bythe 9/11 Commission). This new story does not, accordingly,remove grounds for suspicion that a stand-down order hadbeen issued.II. Why Did the Twin Towers and Building 7 of the WTCCollapse?The Bush-Cheney administration has also failed to provide acredible explanation for the destruction of the World TradeCenter buildings. According to the official explanation, theTwin Towers (WTC 1 and 2) collapsed because of the impact ofthe airplanes and the heat of the ensuing fires. But thisexplanation faces several formidable problems.First, WTC 7 also collapsed, and in roughly the sameway. This similarity implies that all three buildingscollapsed from the same causes. However, unlike the TwinTowers, WTC 7 was not hit by an airplane.Second, the fires in these buildings were not as big,hot, or long-lasting as fires in steel-frame high-rises thathave not induced collapses. In 1991, a fire in Philadelphia21 David Ray Griffin, Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to PopularMechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory(Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch, 2007).7
Page 1 and 2: The American Empire and 9/11(full-l
Page 3 and 4: Bacevich mocked the idea that such
Page 5: sources, that contradicted the offi
Page 9 and 10: to sag); straight-down collapse (as
Page 11 and 12: Given all the features that indicat
Page 13 and 14: the Twin Towers---at this writing i
Page 15 and 16: Fourth, there is considerable evide
Page 17 and 18: contradicted by the military’s ow
Page 19 and 20: It was not terribly strange, theref
Page 21 and 22: “The plane is 30 miles out.” An
Page 23 and 24: account). But in addition to the ev
Page 25 and 26: attack on Pearl Harbor,” Brzezins
Page 27 and 28: Immediately upon taking office, bot
Page 29 and 30: such funding would occur only after
Page 31 and 32: democratic forms we still have. If
Page 33 and 34: eporting the latter result, wrote:
Page 35 and 36: level.” These fires could not be
Page 37 and 38: that day. . . . [I]n the last half

The American Empire and 9/11 - Journal of 9/11 Studies

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?