efd6eff50eec8f67b30c…

David Ray Griffin, as usual, offers some actual depth of thought regarding this label - which gets pasted on just about anyone who offers an alternative scenario for 9/11.

Here’s a bit of it:

David Griffin Replies to NY Times “Conspiracy Theories 101″

In “Conspiracy Theories 101” (Op-Ed, July 22), Stanley Fish gives an idiosyncratic interpretation of academic freedom, limiting it to the freedom to decide what to study. It does not include, in his view, the freedom to “embrace and urge” a viewpoint in the classroom, because to do this is to “proselytize,” to “indoctrinate,” to engage in “partisan advocacy.”

If universities were to enforce this restrictive interpretation, it would mean that biology professors could not explain their reasons for accepting evolutionary theory rather than “creation science”; physics professors could not profess their belief in (or against) the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory; and so on.

The full reply can be found at:

http://www.mujca.com/griffinandfish.htm

As always, we need to listen to the motivation of the person using the term. If it’s used like an epithet, in order to frame the context for further discussion, that will give a fair idea of what to expect from the conversation to follow.

donilo

I DO believe that certain officials - specifically Dick Cheney - KNEW that something was going to go down in September, 2001. Whether they knew PRECISELY or just GENERALLY, they KNEW. And they made sure to take steps to let it happen.

Given what Cheney and others were engaged in ON 9/11, I think the circumstantial evidence is considerable that they knew precisely what was going to happen on that date - and they let it happen.

All I need to know to make this belief rational is the existence of the Northwoods documents - in which the Pentagon EXPLICITLY considered a plan to fake the shooting down of a US airliner by Cuban military aircraft as a justification for invading Cuba.

If the US government could conceive of that plan, they could conceive and execute SOME sort of plan resulting in what happened on 9/11.

That and the fact that Justin Raimondo considers it rational to believe that Israeli agents were somehow connected to 9/11 by their presence in New Jersey to film the operation, and by reports of their having followed the hijackers around for months, indicates to me that the entire plan was either known to the Mossad or even created by the Mossad and fed to Al Qaeda through possible double agents.

This would explain pretty much everything: the Mossad created the plan, and certain neocons connected to the Mossad in Washington were aware of the plan. That would be all you would need to make such an operation feasible. You would NOT need “thousands of conspirators” - just a handful of people directed the right way without a “need to know” the ultimate consequences of a report labeled “unverified” or the reassignment of some FBI agents away from the hijackers.

The pilot for the “Lone Gunmen” TV series that was aired six months before 9/11 that featured a US government faction that planned to crash a remote-controlled airliner into the World Trade Center in order to stimulate the arms market had it right - they only showed TWO PEOPLE doing that operation. I’d say you need more than that - but how many? Who knows?

If you don’t know HOW it was done, you don’t know how it COULD have been done.

There’s no way he beleives his nonsense, but he is entertaining and there is often a tiny smidgeon of truth to what he says.

it’s just too damn bad that the israeli americans of the AEI have teamed up with exxon to deny global warming.

there’s so much smoke, so little fire… which i spose is to be expected since the people who yearned for a “new pearl harbor” in sept 2000 were shortly thereafter installed in positions powerful enough to put the fire out… with a little help from their friends in the media.