I Know the Feeling

Truther Dorothy Lorig, on first reading David Ray Griffin:

“I was in my office at the time. I sat there and felt my stomach churning. I thought maybe I was going to be sick."

Yep, Grifter made me want to barf as well.

David Ray Griffin: Stuck on Stupid

As I have mentioned in the past, Grifter has two new books coming out on 9-11; here's a snippet of the publisher's PR for one of them:

Turning next to debates within the 9/11 Truth Movement, Griffin reinforces his claim that the reported phone calls from the airliners were faked....

As I have pointed out in the past, Grifter knows that once you accept the phone calls as real, much of the conspiracy theory garbage becomes untenable.

World's Greenest Truther Strikes Again

David Ray Griffin recycles the same old crap over and over again. I'd say he's still recycling his poop from 2003, but that isn't precisely true, because it wasn't even his poop back then; he was recycling the work of Nico and the Web Fairy and Eric Hufschmid and Jared Israel.

This year being the tenth anniversary and all, he's outdone himself. He has not one, but two dumps headed for the recycling bin. One is titled 9/11 Ten Years Later, and the other basically recycles the title: 9/11 Ten Years On. I mean, the guy can't even come up with new titles anymore!

Titles, hell, he doesn't even come up with new covers. Here's a non-conspiracy book by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan, just released two weeks ago:

I'll be reviewing that book in the next week or so. And here's Grifter's latest dropping:

Well, I suppose it saved him the effort of finding someone to design the cover, thus reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

David Ray is Coming to Town...

I was surprised to find out that David Ray Griffin is not only still vertical, but visiting Seattle this weekend.

David Ray Griffin and 9/11

Saturday, May 28 7:00p

at Town Hall Seattle, Seattle, WA

Dr. David Ray Griffin, author, professor, theologian and author of thirty books will address the reasons for questioning the official account of 9/11 and will respond to Bill Moyers and other critics of the 9/11 truth movement.

I would go and say hello again, but they actually want $15 to attend. Hell, I got into Thor 3D for $11.50. Well that and it is a three day weekend and I will probably out of town.

Griffin On Barrett's Show

I downloaded this a few days ago (MP3 file), but it seemed almost quaint and trite to discuss in the aftermath of Bin Laden's death. David has apparently recovered enough from last summer's stroke to go back out on tour. This year's version is apparently to be entitled, "Why Does Bill Moyers Accept Miracles?" but you can be sure that Grifter will be performing all his greatest hits, including "Flight 77 Didn't Hit the Pentagon" and "The Phone Calls Were Voice-Morphed".

Here's a brief synopsis of the interview:

Opening-13:00: Griffin and Barrett discuss the origin of David's trutherism. He was "late" to the party, not getting into it until 2003 when a colleague turned him onto a website. What site is not discussed, but I suspect it's Eric Hufschid's.

13:00-18:00: LIHOP versus MIHOP. Griffin comes down firmly in the MIHOP camp, stating that the WTC controlled demolition evidence is very strong and therefore LIHOP is no longer tenable.

19:00-30:00: Griffin urges more time be spent on the Pentagon in the Troof Movement, precisely because it is so controversial. Brief discussion of the April Gallop lawsuit.

30:00-End: Faked phone calls. Yep, no kidding, Grifter spends almost half of the interview expounding on his view that the phone calls were faked. We get voice-morphing. We get Deena Burnett's caller ID showing her husband's cellphone was used to call her. And (most annoying of all) we get Grifter's speculation that they were not confident of Todd Beamer's voice morphing and so that's why he didn't want to talk to his wife. No, you lying con artist, that's not the reason why. Beamer explained to the operator that his wife was having a difficult pregnancy, and he didn't want her to lose the baby. Grifter closes up with the Barbara Olson phone calls.

I'd call him a maggot, but that would be an insult to baby flies.

Whole Lot of Shakin' Going On

Over at 9-11 Flogger, in the wake of Eric Larson's takedown of David Ray Griffin and his fantasy about cellphone fakery. That post is approaching 200 comments at this point.

Some of them understand the consequences of accepting that the phone calls were real:

I'm afraid that conceding the phone calls are real is would make the OCT true in many people's opinion, if not a whole lot harder to prove a conspiracy. Is there any plausible scenario how the hijackers could have been on the plane until the very last moment and it still be a conspiracy?

Aye, there's the rub. Remember, only last week we posted a video of Richard Gage, the reigning superstar of 9-11 Troof, saying that Muslims weren't behind 9-11. Now, it's probably true that the Troofers, like the three little pigs, can run to the next house in search of safety from the big, bad wolf. They'll say, well, okay there were hijackers but a) they weren't really Muslims and b) they didn't fly the planes:

Even if hijackers were on the planes, it is far from clear they were in control of those planes for the entire flights, or much beyond the point of hijacking.

No matter how many layers of the onion are peeled away, there's always a conspiracy theory left over.

It's amusing in a way, but also a little sad. We spend our time here poking fun at them, but reading the posts you can see that they really don't see how deluded they are. It's not an internet game to them. They've invested a great deal of time and effort in 9-11 Troof. Granted, some of them seem to have done it with half a brain. It's amazing how much hooey gets recycled in that post. One guy goes on and on about the length of some of the phone calls:

The phone call by Jeremy Glick would not have been interrupted by the crash of the aircraft. Phone call started at 9:37:41. line left open (7,565 seconds). So the call ends at 11:43:46. This conflicts with the official crash time of 10:03 AM.

There is no technical explanation that I know of and unless you can come up with one you should accept that these calls were not made from the plane. At very least this is evidence that the calls were not made from the plane.

Now, how deluded do you have to be to believe that the government would go to all the trouble of faking the phone calls, only to have it blown because somebody forgot to hang up the phone?

Ryan's Rant

A journalist named Robert Parry recently described the Troofer obsession as a "parlor game"; an apt description indeed. Predictably, Waterboy Kevin Ryan goes off on a rant about how for Parry and others in the media, the Troof Movement is a parlor game. All of that is very much pro forma and not terribly interesting.

But then Ryan, warming to his topic, veers into cloud-cuckoo land about Uncle Fetzer. Now, to us debunkers, Jim Fetzer is just a typical idiot Troofer, spouting off the usual BS just like Richard Gage, Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin. Yes, Fetzer's a crank, but the difference is only in degree, not in type. Ah, but to the Waterboy, he's much more:

Fetzer suddenly appeared on the 9/11 truth scene in late 2005, immediately after the publication of a paper by physicist Steven Jones. At that time, Fetzer wrote to many prominent truth advocates, saying – “Steve Jones and I would like to invite you to join us as members of a new society.” Having been known for some dubious contributions to the JFK assassination research community, Fetzer used this new association with Jones to thrust himself into a position of superficial leadership in the truth movement.

Less than one year later, just before the 5th anniversary of the attacks when mainstream media attention was at its peak, Fetzer began speaking publicly about space beams destroying the WTC and other such nonsense. He continued with grandiose claims about theories which had no evidentiary support, as this excerpt from one of his radio shows indicates.

See, to Ryan, Fetzer suddenly started acting like a crazy person when he endorsed Judy Woods' beam weapons from space. And this proves that Fetzer was not crazy, he was deliberately sabotaging the Troof Movement.

Of course, to the rest of us, Fetzer didn't suddenly start acting like a crazy person around the fifth anniversary. He was a crazy person right from the moment he joined the Troofers (and probably well before).

But what I love is the next bit:

What would cause a PhD to say that an unsubstantiated claim of space beams destroying the WTC was “the most fascinating development in the history of the study of 9/11” and that it was “huge?” Why was this claim more fascinating or huge than all the research previously published by the likes of Michael Ruppert, Daniel Hopsicker, David Ray Griffin, Steve Jones, Nafeez Ahmed, Don Paul and Michel Chossudovsky?

Now, you know how it is; on the crazy scale, Fetzer and Wood have pinned the meter. But the rest of those guys are certainly in the red zone. And Hopsicker and Griffin? Hopsicker is the one who got Amanda Keller on tape talking endlessly about "Mohamed" without quite ever getting her to admit that her Mohamed was not surnamed Atta. And Grifter... even the Troofers have caught onto the fact that he's a goofball. Note in particular that Ryan gripes about two claims that Parry highlights as central to 9-11 Troof:

* “Operatives working for President Bush wired 100-plus floors of the WTC towers” with explosives
* “Truthers insist that no plane hit the Pentagon; that Bush’s team attacked it with a missile.”

But on the first one Ryan can only quibble that he and Jones and others don't necessarily believe Bush was behind it. He ignores the second claim, but his respected researcher David Ray Griffin was still pushing that theory as late as 2007 (and will probably start pushing it again, the way he keeps recycling his debunked nonsense from years ago).

Richard Falk: I Was Just Asking Questions

Or as we fondly refer to it, JAQing off.

For anyone who read the blog post in its entirely it should be plain that the reference to the 9/11 issues is both restrained and tangential. What is stressed in the blog is the importance of carefully examining evidence before drawing conclusions about political and legal responsibility for highly sensitive public acts, and the importance for the serenity of the society of achieving closure in a responsible manner. I never endorsed doubts about the official version of 9/11 beyond indicating what anyone who has objectively examined the controversy knows– that there remain certain gaps in the official explanation that give rise to an array of conspiratorial explanations, and that the 9/11 Commission unfortunately did not put these concerns to rest. My plea was intended to encourage addressing these gaps in a credible manner, nothing more, nothing less. I certainly meant no disrespect toward the collective memory of 9/11 in the country and elsewhere. On the contrary, my intention was to encourage an investigation that might finally achieve closure with respect to doubts that remain prevalent among important sectors of the public, including among some 9/11 families.

No, of course he never endorsed doubts about the "official version of 9/11"; he just endorsed "devoted scholars of high integrity" like, heh, David Ray Griffin.

David Ray Griffin, who believes "9-11 was an inside job by the US government"? Here's Grifter in 2006:

Specifically, Griffin believes that the U.S. government orchestrated the attacks.... When asked what the most compelling facts are to make the case that the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks, Griffin names three things. The behavior of Bush at the schoolhouse in Florida ("Secret Service should have whisked him out immediately if we're under attack but he stayed over 30 minutes. ... It's pretty clear evidence that they knew they wouldn't be attacked"), the strange pyrotechnics that brought down the World Trade Center ("fire has never brought down a steel high-rise building") and the poorly planned targeting of the West Wing of the Pentagon ("all the important people are in the East Wing -- it doesn't make any sense").

Griffin believes in all the nuttiest stuff in the 9-11 Troof Movement: that the cellphone/Airfone calls were faked via voice-morphing, that the hijackers are alive, that a missile hit the Pentagon, etc.

I'm Okay, You're a Government Disinfo Plant

Or, the continuing paranoia of the "responsible" Troofers. Fruitcake David Chandler writes about the CIT-heads:

Why, then, the strenuous push to focus the attention of the Truth Movement onto the Pentagon? Does it sound too cynical to suggest that we are being intentionally set up? We must remember that we are in a situation where nearly 3000 people were murdered in a day not counting the thousands who have died since, and millions killed in the resulting wars. If agencies of the US government really are complicit, which the evidence shows to be the case, then the people who really know what happened are playing for keeps. Any movement with real potential for arriving at incriminating truth will certainly be highly infiltrated. This is not paranoia: it is a simple fact. The 9/11 Truth Movement must respond by policing itself and holding itself to the highest standards of intellectual rigor.

A bit late for that, and of course Chandler is hardly an exemplar of the highest standards of intellectual rigor.

Note as well that Chandler goes after the easy target in CIT. There's no mention of the guru of the 9-11 Troof Movement, David Ray Griffin. Grifter routinely gives credence to the "what hit the Pentagon" nutbars. How is that any different from CIT?

How Dumb Can You Get?

Not much dumber than this post over at Flogger:

Hani Hanjour, supposedly on Flight 77, was about 5 feet tall and the other hijackers ranged from 5.5 to 5' 7". They were of slim build.

Captain Charles Burlingame of Flight 77 was over 6 feet, a Navy Captain, weight lifter, and a boxer. The OCT says pilots like him gave up their planes to these puny weaklings with box cutters? The story makes no sense.

How tall is a man strapped in a pilot's seat?

And check out the rest of the post:

here are many ways the 6 foot men on the flights could have overcome them.
1. Take a seat cushion as a shield, and punch the hijackers out.
2. Pour hot tea or coffee in their face, then move in to disarm them.
3. Throw luggage at them, then move in for the tackle
4. Take a scarf or towel and snap them in the face
wrap their hand, then turn the box cutter on them.
5. Two or more passengers could overpower each one of the hijackers
6. Push the snack cart down the middle and ram the hijackers
7. Take a fire extinguisher, spray at the terrorists, then move in.

Any more ideas?

Yeah, I got a couple:

8. Kick sand in their faces.
9. Say, "Boxcutters, haha!" And make it sting.

It's tempting to say, oh, that's just one idiot at Flogger. But look at the post below that by Glenn Zarmanov:

It should be an insult to one's intelligence that a national emergency occurred on 9/11, the date the same as the number for emergency, 911.

Glenn, comparing your intelligence to that of an opossum would be an insult to marsupials.

Meanwhile, over at Troof Action, they are just now coming to the conclusion that David Ray Griffin is either non compos or a fraud.

False dichotomy, people!

Grifter's Latest

I had heard the title, Cognitive Infiltration, and assumed it was going to be about Cass Sunstein's memo. But it turns out that he's just recycling the same old trash:

cell phone fakery is CENTRAL to the thesis in his current book which claims evidence that there were no hijackings - no muslims on board - the hijackers are still alive - and the calls were faked.

No need to invent new snake oil if the rubes keep buying the old stuff, I suppose.

Just What the World Needs, Another David Ray Griffin Book

David Ray Griffin continues his 9/11 conspiracy cottage industry, with a book called, rather ponderously, Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory, described on Amazon as:

Former Chicago and Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, who in 2009 was appointed by President Barack Obama to direct an important executive branch office, had in 2008 co-authored an article containing a plan for the government to prevent the spread of anti-government "conspiracy theories." Arguing that such theories are believed only by groups suffering from "informational isolation," he advocated the use of anonymous government agents to engage in "cognitive infiltration" of these groups in order to introduce "cognitive diversity," with the aim of breaking them up.

Noting that Sunstein's proposal has evoked condemnations from across the political spectrum--not least because it, being similar to the FBI's COINTELPRO of the 1960s, would be illegal--David Ray Griffin focuses on the fact that Sunstein's primary target is the conspiracy theory advocated by the 9/11 Truth Movement. Examining Sunstein's charge that this theory is both "harmful" and "demonstrably false," Griffin uses both satire and overwhelming evidence to show that this twofold charge applies instead to what Sunstein calls "the true conspiracy theory" about 9/11-namely, the "theory that Al-Qaeda was responsible for 9/11."

Although I must say it is rather impressive that he so quickly managed to produce a 288 page book on a little noticed 29 page paper.

The Idiocy of David Ray Griffin

David Ray Griffin attempts to use the McChrystal controversy to focus the attention on what he thinks is important, namely, himself. There is so much wrong with this essay I could go on for hours, but I will just touch on a few points of stupidity.

If the sons and daughters of wealthy and middle-class parents were coming home in boxes, or with permanent injuries or post-traumatic stress syndrome, this war would have surely been stopped long ago.

Uhh, yeah, because nobody in the military is middle-class or anything. Does this idiot realize that John McCain, Sarah Palin and Joe Biden have children in the military?

Although the US government claimed that its military operations in Afghanistan were justified by the need to prevent a second attack, this need, even if real, was clearly not urgent, as shown by the fact that the Pentagon did not launch its invasion until almost a month later.

Bizarrely, after years of claiming that the war in Afghanistan was preplanned, now they are arguing that they took too long. Geez, Dave, maybe it had to something to do with the fact that Afghanistan is a landlocked country 8,000 miles away?

The US war in Afghanistan was not authorized by the UN Security Council in 2001 or at anytime since, so this war began as an illegal war and remains an illegal war today. Our government’s claim to the contrary is false.

Of course what this moron specifically fails to mention is the UN has its own security force in Afghanistan, ISAF, which it authorized in Security Council Resolution 1386. They don't seem to have much of a problem with the US presence.

The public has widely assumed, due to misleading claims,59 that the names of the alleged hijackers were on the flight manifests for the four flights, and also that the autopsy report from the Pentagon contained the names of the hijackers said to have been on American Flight 77. However, the passenger manifests for the four airliners did not contain the names of any of the alleged hijackers and, moreover, they contained no Arab names whatsoever.

Geez, welcome to 2002. Amazingly this whole claim based off of a list of victims on CNN's website manages to get recycled, 9 years later.

David Ray Griffin, the King of Recycling

Here's Grifter's latest:


As you can see, it's just the same old crap in a new wrapper. He's labeled his talk, "Is the war in Afghanistan justified by the events of 9-11?" He throws in some stuff about the UN, asks whether the war will turn out to be another Vietnam, and then goes into his usual spiel about how Osama isn't wanted for 9-11, Barbara Olsen's phone calls, etc.

That made me wonder how many times Grifter can keep on selling the snake oil to the rubes. I mean, the next tour is pretty obvious: "Is the war in Iraq justified..." And then he can go to "Is the Transportation Safety Administration justified..." and then "Is the ban on boxcutters and knives on planes justified..."

Grifter Responds

A group called the Institute for Religion and Democracy put out a press release noting that David Ray Griffin will once again be using church facilities to spread his conspiracy nonsense:

A professor from a United Methodist seminary who argued that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were actually attacked on September 11, 2001 by the Bush Administration is back with another outrageous book.

David Ray Griffin, author of “Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11”, is releasing a ninth book on the attacks, this time alleging that the Obama administration is attempting to undermine 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Griffin’s earlier work was published by Westminster John Knox Press, the official publishing house of the Presbyterian Church (USA), a move that sparked controversy in the denomination. Starting April 23, Griffin is also launching a 15-city lecture tour questioning the justification for the war in Afghanistan. The tour will feature stops at Presbyterian and United Methodist Churches, as well as schools such as Iowa’s Drake University.

Grifter has now responded. It's the usual crapola:

Already at that time, however, my 9/11 books had also been endorsed by professors of economics, history, philosophy, and international law, as well as by former members of the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations, including the CIA, and by a member of the British Parliament (as anyone can see by looking at the "editorial reviews" on Amazon.com). My more recent books have been endorsed by a member of the Japanese Senate, a former US governor, by 9/11 widows (including members of the "Jersey Girls," who were instrumental in getting the 9/11 Commission established), by engineers (including Jack Keller, who has been given special recognition by Scientific American), and by several natural scientists (one of whom was awarded the National Medal of Science24). Does IRD believe that such people endorse silly books?

I can't speak for the IRD, but I certainly believe that those people endorse silly books. Jesse Ventura is the "former US governor", and he's a total fruitcake. I assume that Fujita is the member of the Japanese Senate. The Washington Post recently described Fujita's beliefs as "too bizarre, half-baked and intellectually bogus to merit serious discussion." The Jersey Girls? At least two of them (Lorie Van Auken and Patty Casazza) are crackpots, and I've got my suspicions about Mindy Kleinberg as well. Jack Keller? As usual with the academics among the troofers, his professorship is "Emeritus", and his engineering background? According to Patriots Question 9-11, he's an agricultural and irrigation engineer. Too bad the title "Waterboy" is already taken. The natural scientist is Lynn Margulis, an eminently silly woman.

Note as well, that Grifter tries to have it both ways. When somebody from the government opposes his theories, they're "from the government":

NIST's reports are no better. This is not surprising, because NIST is an agency of the Commerce Department.

But when they agree with him, suddenly this is evidence that he's credible:

Already at that time, however, my 9/11 books had also been endorsed by professors of economics, history, philosophy, and international law, as well as by former members of the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations...

Read it for yourself; it's the usual whining about how the government's own theory is a conspiracy theory, the planes should have been intercepted in ten minutes, Barbara Olsen's phone calls, etc.

Just What the World Needs...

Another David Ray Griffin conspiracy theory book.

Griffin has written eight books on the subject with another on the way: "Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory."

The appointee, a former Harvard professor named Cass Sunstein who now heads the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, co-wrote an academic paper saying government should undermine conspiracy theory groups by infiltrating their chat rooms, social networks and group meetings.

Griffin believes "cognitive infiltration" is the wrong term. "It's more like fascism," he says.

Now personally, I think Sunstein's idea is a silly waste of time, but I am not sure how you get "fascism" out of it. I have studied European history pretty thoroughly and I don't recall a significant portion of Hitler or Mussolini's policies being to send people to dissident meetings and suggesting "you know, you may be wrong". Griffin must be really hard up for material though, if he is going to devote an entire book to a 30 page academic paper in which 9/11 is not actually the main subject.

David Ray Griffin Lies About the Hijackers, Again

I swear Russia Today is becoming "All Truther, all the time". In this clip they interview Griffin, ostensibly about Fujita, but it is really about Griffin's own kooky theories, in which, welcome to 2006, Griffin insists the 9/11 hijackers are still alive.





The most inane part:

Waleed al-Shehri for example showed up (laughter) in Morocco in a press conference. The BBC reported on it. And they said "There is no doubt about the fact that he is the man" because the FBI published his picture around the world and it was the same man. And then there is his brother. And yet when the 9/11 Commission wrote its account they said that Waleed and Wail were the ones probably on flight 11 who stabbed the flight attendant. So they just ignored the fact that these two guys were still alive.

OK, first of all, the BBC did not report on the "press conference" other than to pass on the reports of other who were there. Here is the original report:

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

Now he is protesting his innocence from Casablanca, Morocco.

He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

The BBC did not take a stand on whether he was the right man or not, the only person claiming that was the mistaken al-Shehri. This mixup with the photo was resolved years ago by 911 Myths anyway.

And the BBC itself corrected this 4 years ago:

We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names.

Griffin adds in his brother Wail, acting as if both of them were reported alive by the BBC, but he is not even mentioned in the story. There is a good reason for this, because the mistaken Walid does not have a brother named Wail who was a hijacker. The real Waleed does though, which was confirmed both by his family, and the Saudi government.

Stupid, or dishonest? You decide.

I Will Call Your Offensive Theory and Raise You a Completely Idiotic One

The troofers, in a rare bit of honesty, are actually challenging David Ray Griffin's continued dishonesty over at 911 Blogger. True to form though, the idiots still come out of the woodwork in the comments to promote the missiles at the Pentagon theory, this time with amusing specificity.

I don't give a damn if American Airlines had airphones or not on September 11, 2001, because the large aircraft that flew over the Pentagon did not contain Barbara Olson. Any commercial aircraft approaching the Pentagon would have had its two engines blown off by the six (not five, six) anti-aircraft missile batteries protecting the Pentagon reservation on 9/11. Only military aircraft could fly over the Pentagon without incident.

I Will Call Your Dishonest Theory, and Raise You a Completely Offensive One

Our posts on David Ray Griffin lying about the phone calls from flight 77 have added to quite the spat over on 911 Blogger. Of course this would not be complete without the usual idiotic comments attacking us, as if we were the important ones in this issue, and this rather bizarre attack on the victims. Oddly enough Jon "just think of the family members" Gold doesn't object at all to this part of the comment. I guess he only cares about the family members who weren't in on the plot.

Now, what you say about the existence of airphones on Flight 77 I'd like to see from a source other than Screw Loose Change. You might be right, but I need something more substantial than Screw Loose Change's word for it. However, as I said earlier, it doesn't matter if there were no airphones. There are four unidentified calls supposedly made by passengers on Flight 77, therefore the FBI could say that two of those calls (cell) got through. And as you say, there are other witnesses who affirm Ted got a call from Barbara.

I'm coming to the conclusion that the passengers on Flights 93 and 77 were in on the operation. Since I know that Flight 93 landed at Cleveland, that affirms that those passengers said to have boarded Flight 93 at Newark, didn't! I believe that the voice morphing Griffin believes occurred was actually the real passengers, however those passengers were a part of the operation. In other words Flight 93 followed the Operation Northwoods scenario.

More On Griffin

Pat touched on this, but I thought it deserved further discussion, just how dishonest and offensive David Ray Griffin continues to be. For a couple of years now he has argued that the phone calls on 9/11 were fake, although he continues to change his story on exactly why. Now he is back to the "there were no airfones on flight 77" a theory that he at one point backed away from, and which we have disproved at length. He continues to focus on Barbara Olson, because he insists that it was necessary to the plot since Olson was a minor celebrity, because apparently America would not have been upset that 3,000 people were killed if none of them were television personalities.

From 4:30 in:

In 2004 when they sent their report to the 9/11 Commission, they still had their calls from Barbara Olson in the report. But in 2006 people in the 9/11 truth movement found out that flight 77 didn't have any on-board phones, no seatback phones of any sort. What are you going to do then? So call customers service, and talk to him. And he says "That's right, we didn't have any on-board phones." The Boeing 757s that were made for American, unlike those made for United, were not equipped with on-board phones.

What does the FBI do then? The can't say she called on a cellphone, because it was too high. They can't say she called on an on-board phone because there weren't any, so they change the story again in 2007. And the new story is this, there were no calls from Barbara Olson. You can find this now on the graphic for the report that they turn in, excuse in 2006, for the Moussoui trial. And you find the graphic for Barbara Olson, here is what it says "Barbara Olson, one call attempted, unconnected. And they always say how long it lasted, zero seconds.

Now Griffin is being doubly dishonest here. First of all, if the FBI were somehow trying to cover up the fact that there were no airfones on flight 77, because of that in-depth detective work by the truth movement, why would they still report 8 airfone calls from flight 77. Griffin, with his massive ego, is creating a cover-up, that never happened, just so he can cast himself as the protagonist. The FBI said there were phone calls, and they still say there were phone calls. This has never changed.

Secondly, as Pat pointed out here over 2 years ago, so Griffin has no excuse for not figuring this out by now, there are 5 calls from flight 77 in that report which list no destination. In fact, this was reported way back in the footnotes of the 9/11 Commission Report, which Griffin wrote a book about, so presumably he has actually read this, and just continues to lie.

57.The records available for the phone calls from American 77 do not allow for a determination of which of four “connected calls to unknown numbers” represent the two between Barbara and Ted Olson, although the FBI and DOJ believe that all four represent communications between Barbara Olson and her husband’s office (all family members of the Flight 77 passengers and crew were canvassed to see if they had received any phone calls from the hijacked flight, and only Renee May’s parents and Ted Olson indicated that they had received such calls).The four calls were at 9:15:34 for 1 minute, 42 seconds; 9:20:15 for 4 minutes, 34 seconds; 9:25:48 for 2 minutes, 34 seconds; and 9:30:56 for 4 minutes, 20 seconds. FBI report,“American Airlines Airphone Usage,” Sept. 20, 2001; FBI report of investigation, interview of Theodore Olson, Sept. 11, 2001; FBI report of investigation, interview of Helen Voss, Sept. 14, 2001;AAL response to the Commission’s supplemental document request, Jan. 20, 2004.