Continuing to expose “Truther” Lies

First, a sincere thanks to JennSierra, formerly of Ford Hard Knox, for helping me get this blog set up.

            Now, continuing from my previous article, here are some more problems with Richard Gage’s claims.   As we see here, Gage himself admits that controlled demolition is outside his area of expertise.  Before any “truthers” claim my source  is lying, it may interest you to know that they got it from the following quote from here: “”Architects and Engineers are trained to design buildings that function well and withstand potentially destructive forces. However, the 3 high-rise buildings at the World Trade Center which ‘collapsed’ on 9/11 (the Twin Towers plus WTC Building #7) presented us with a body of evidence (i.e.controlled demolition) that was clearly outside the scope of our training and experience.” Gage has since removed the last line, but if you read between the lines, the implication is still there.

            Now, switching gears, let’s take a look at David Ray Griffin, and some of his claims in his book  The 9/11 Commission Report: Omission And Distortions, where he lists about 115 things he claims “proves” the 9/11 Commission is lying. The following article titled “DISTORTION OF FACT

A Comprehensive Analysis of The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie by Dr David Ray Griffin,” by Andrew Burfield found here. I will start with claims 1 through 5 for now.

            Here is claim one, from pages 19-20 of Griffin’s book The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions, as found here.   1.   The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers — including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC — are still alive (19-20).”

            However, Burfield makes several very valid arguments on this. He quotes an article here  where four people claim the hijackers stole their identities, which is entirely possible.   Let’s not forget the many spelling variations that many names may have, in ANY language. Simply put, the many cases of 9/11 hijackers who were supposedly still alive were simply cases of mistaken identity. (source ).

            Claim 2 from pages 20-21 of the same book, as found here: “The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta — such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances — that is in tension with the Commission’s claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).”

            Burfield again makes excellent points. First of all, regardless of which religion they are- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc-   not everyone practices their religion to the same degree as other members of the same religion. He also points out that if you want to hide in plain sight, as the 9/11 hijackers did, you are going to want to blend in, which means hiding any extremist tendencies ( source ) .

 

 Claim three from the aforementioned book of Griffins, pages 21-22, found here: “3.      The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).”

            This of course, is just the usual “truther” tendency of misquoting Air Traffic Controller Danielle O’Brien’s statement found here, which they obtained from here: The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane,” says O’Brien. “You don’t fly a 757 in that manner. It’s unsafe.”  As this site http://sites.google.com/site/911guide/griffin23  points out, “truthers” ignore the “it’s unsafe” part.  Hint to “truthers:” Unsafe and impossible are NOT synonymous.  For example, trying to beat a train at a railroad crossing is unsafe, but people do it all the time.  Generally speaking, terrorists intent on killing as many people as possible aren’t going to be worried about safety.  Also, as I pointed out before, although they are often used interchangeably, don’t and can’t actually have different meanings.  Don’t means you have the ability to do something but shouldn’t- driving drunk is a case in point. The law says don’t drive drunk, and rightly so, but one has the ability to do so.  Can’t implies a lack of ability, such as someone telling you they can’t drive a stick shift.

            Claim 4 from pages 23 of DRG’s book The 9/11 Commission Report: Omission And Distortions,  found here: “The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).”

            However, Burfield  points out what a blatantly obvious lie this is on the part of DGR: First, the flight manifests belong to the AIRLINES and none of the airlines have released their flight manifests to the public. Second, as I pointed out, and as we see from this quote here, “On March 30, 2006 David Ray Griffin gave a lecture entitled The Myth And The Reality at Grand Lake Theatre in Oakland, California.”  There’s just one catch as the aforementioned site points out. Go to the footnotes and you will find the following links: www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html,

www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/UA175.victims.html,

www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html, and here

www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/UA93.victims.html.  Clearly, there’s an obvious clue that proves Griffin is lying in the links: They are VICTIM’S lists, NOT passenger manifests ( source ). Hint:  The hijackers are NOT victims.  Also, as we see here, that in addition to not counting the hijackers (for rather obvious reasons), the lists are not complete either.

            Last but not least (for now, anyway) we have claim 5 from page 25 of the same book of Griffin’s, found here: “The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).”  This is, of course a blatant lie that “truthers” keep repeating. The fact remains that, despite their claim that fire has never caused a steel-framed building to collapse, either before or after 9/11, as we see here, here, and here, The Kader Toy Factory in 1993, Lancaster, Penn., Sight and and Sound Theater in 1997, and an Egyptian textile factory in 2000 all did exactly that. In addition, we have the Enigma Business Park fire (source), which occurred on November 1, 2006 in a TOILET PAPER factory and the flames completely destroyed the steel girders ( source ).  Now if burning toilet paper can do that to steel, imagine what burning jet fuel can do.   The following quote from here  makes an excellent point: “Conspiracy theorists will often rephrase their claim from “steel building” to “steel high rise” to “steel skyscraper”, evolving to the extreme of “steel skyscraper in North America over 100 stories” or similar.Using the same flawed logic, one could counter this argument by pointing out that every steel-framed skyscraper that has been intentionally rammed by a Boeing 767 airliner at high speed has suffered a global collapse.Both the design of the Twin Towers and the events that happened on 9/11 were unique in world history. Comparing these events to other dissimilar events is misleading and dishonest.”

      The same site  also makes this statement of fact: “The reality is steel buildings have and do collapse due to fire, and steel buildings are vulnerable to collapse from fire.  This is why building codes in all western countries require that steel structural elements are either encased in concrete or coated in fireproofing material.”

            This, of course, leaves me with the following question for David Ray Griffin (and “truthers” in general):  If fire has never caused steel-framed buildings to collapse, then why do they bother fireproofing the steel?

Here is a very accurate description of DRG’s claims (and “truther” claims) in general:

(picture from here)

Oh, and Maxine has some advice for “truthers” as well:

                         

(picture from here )

Advertisements

Posted May 3, 2011 by Victor Chabala in Mocking Truthers, Real 9/11 Facts

%d bloggers like this: