The Brain of David Ray Griffin

While not as hard hitting as I would like, this is probably the closest David Ray Griffin has ever come in an on-line interview for the writer Sam Vaknin. It is amusing to try and watch Mr. Griffin justify his theories, or more specifically lack of theories. For example this part on who blew up the towers:

Q: Did the US Government possess in-house the expertise necessary to control-demolish WTC 7? Surely they didn't sub-contract or farm out the demolition?

DRG: Apart from an investigation, we have no way to know for certain. But the planners probably did hire someone: As explained by ImplosionWorld.com, true implosions, which cause a building to come straight down into its own footprint (as WTC 7 clearly did), are "by far the trickiest type of explosive project, and there are only a handful of blasting companies in the world that possess enough experience . . . to perform these true building implosions" ("Debunking 9/11 Debunking," Ch. 3). If the point of your statement that they "surely" would not have farmed out the demolition is that they would have feared that doing so would result in someone spilling the beans, this is an unrealistic assumption. No one would have been brought into the operation who could not be trusted to keep quiet. And why would someone confess to having participated in a project that killed thousands of fellow citizens?

Of course what he is missing is that while someone may theoretically exist who would commit such a horendous act, how exactly would you go about finding this group of people without giving the whole thing away? I would like to see the RFP for such a proposition.

"Hello, this is United Demolitions Inc., right?"

"Yes it is."

"Hey, would you guys have any problem secretly rigging an office building for demolitions, killing several thousand people?"

"What, are you $&#^ing nuts? What kind of animals do you think we are?"

"OK, well forget I asked."

Griffin also takes his whole "I refuse to make an hypothesis" line so far, that he tries to back away from statements he just made. One of his answers (emphasis added):

DRG: I doubt if anyone was flying the planes that struck the Twin Towers and whatever it was that hit the Pentagon. They were most likely all flown remotely. The evidence suggests that the Pentagon, besides having bombs go off inside, was struck by a missile or some small airplane (which could have been flown by remote control).

And then the very next answer:

Q: If a missile hit the Pentagon, then where is or was flight 77?

DRG: I have never argued that a missile hit the Pentagon.

Griffin also makes another dubious assertion, but as I don't have a copy of his book around I will have to check on it.

DRG: It does appear to have been a case of insider trading (as I reported in "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions," citing the careful study by Allen Poteshman, who teaches finance at the University of Illinois).

I don't know for certain if the reference is in there, but that book came out in 2004. Poteshman's paper did not come out until late 2006, although it was available as a draft about a year earlier.