I won't repeat all the well deserved praises of this book that other reviewer presented earlier. I would like to add a comment. 9/11 is a crime seen. If you want to know the criminal, you can examine the fact leading to the events and go through the evidence, or you can simply see who has benighted the most, and you probably have your prime suspect.

7-8 years after this tragic event and the sole benefactor from September 11 is the US government. The amount of power this president and this government had, is unparalleled in US history. The wire tapping, the Patriotic act, the unquestionable authority that this administration had, is some of these fruits and benefits of September 11. The US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the military basis in Kuwait, Qatar and other gulf states are some other of benefits.

The financial gains and spoils of this event are mind boggling. The insider trading, the 2 trillion dollars which are missing from the war efforts. The contracts awarded to people and governments officials such as Halliburton are huge. The miss-appropriation of money is well documented. The Iraqi oil is probably being stolen by people in this administration. Not to mention the arm sales and the kick backs from the military industry.

The new security deal with Iraq is being negotiated, it will give the American unrestricted access and power. This is one more evidence that is pointing towards the entity that benefited and committed the September 11 attacks.

If you add what happened over the last 8 years since September 11 to the cover ups of the September 11, the incompetence in preventing the attacks, you'll have to demand a new investigation. It if very clear that the US government had the means, the motivation and and the ability to commit such crime. It is no wonder that NO US government employee or official were penalized for the total collapse of every possible defence line against the September 11 attacks.

I won't repeat all the well deserved praises of this book that other reviewer presented earlier. I would like to add a comment. 9/11 is a crime seen. If you want to know the criminal, you can examine the fact leading to the events and go through the evidence, or you can simply see who has benighted the most, and you probably have your prime suspect.

7-8 years after this tragic event and the sole benefactor from September 11 is the US government. The amount of power this president and this government had, is unparalleled in US history. The wire tapping, the Patriotic act, the unquestionable authority that this administration had, is some of these fruits and benefits of September 11. The US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the military basis in Kuwait, Qatar and other gulf states are some other of benefits.

The financial gains and spoils of this event are mind boggling. The insider trading, the 2 trillion dollars which are missing from the war efforts. The contracts awarded to people and governments officials such as Halliburton are huge. The miss-appropriation of money is well documented. The Iraqi oil is probably being stolen by people in this administration.

The new security deal with Iraq is being negotiated, it will give the American unrestricted access and power. it is on more evidence that is pointing towards the entity that committed September 11.

If you add what happened over the last 8 years since September 11 to the cover ups of the September 11 event, you'll have to demand a new investigation

I bought several copies of Griffin's The New Pearl Harbor earlier. I think this 9/11 book, which I bought used through an Amazon seller, would have been great. But while reading it, I found that chapter 2 only had 1 page, there was no Chapter 3, 4 or 5 and Chapters 6, 7 and 8 were printed twice. I am contacting the seller for a refund/replacement, and will try again. I expect it to be as great as New Pearl Harbor.

Having read many books on the 9/11, including the Commission Report and this one, I find this one particularly lacking in a few basic logical premises and also in many basic scientific principles.

First- regard the whole "Free Fall" thing. If you watch the tape of the towers falling, you can see large chunks of debri falling faster as pieces break off of the towers during fall. The accusation that the tower was free falling and thus as purposefully demolished fails by ease of visual inspection. For those citizens without basic science knowledge, an object will fall at the same rate regardless of its weight. The fact that the towers are falling at a slower rate than a piece that has broken off implies that it is not free falling. Dr. Griffin's conclusions regarding this single phenomena can thus be rightly questioned. I must also take this and weigh it against Dr. Griffin's credibility. If he can make such conclusions without really trying to verify them, then perhaps he is of the sort that believes that the "theory" of evolution has yet to be proven, or perhaps he is a member of the Flat Earth Society (unfortunately there are educated folks there too...).

While I could easily make a point-by-point refutation of many conclusions Dr. Griffin makes in this book, I realize that for most conspiracy die-hards, no amount of evidence is enough so I will save myself the time. If you are a critical thinker, then realize this book for what it is: conjecture and conspiracy with no basis in science or logic, masquerading as an impartial "tell all". While the 9/11 Commission Report itself purposefully goes out of its way to avoid pointing the finger (it was written by politicians after all), this book is an extreme and not the answer to what really happened. I recommend Richard Clarke's "Against all Enemies". Mr. Clarke served the presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. He was the Terrorism "Czar" on 9/11 (despite having a zero budget) and while he is only one perspective and not necessarily impartial, he is certainly more factual than a PhD who knows nothing of basic physics or logical rhetoric.

Think on this: "[The 9/11] Conpiracy theorists simultaneously hold two contrary beliefs: a) that the U.S. government is so incompetent that it can miss explanations that the theorists can uncover, and b) that the U.S. government can keep a big and juicy secret. This first belief has some validity. The second idea is pure fantasy. (Clarke 2004)"

-jpl

Having read many books on the 9/11, including the Commission Report and this one, I find this one particularly lacking in a few basic logical premises and also in many basic scientific principles.

First- regard the whole "Free Fall" thing. If you watch the tape of the towers falling, you can see large chunks of debri falling faster as pieces break off of the towers during fall. The accusation that the tower was free falling and thus as purposefully demolished fails by ease of visual inspection. For those citizens without basic science knowledge, an object will fall at the same rate regardless of its weight. The fact that the towers are falling at a slower rate than a piece that has broken off implies that it is not free falling. Dr. Griffin's conclusions regarding this single phenomena can thus be rightly questioned. I must also take this and weigh it against Dr. Griffin's credibility. If he can make such conclusions without really trying to verify them, then perhaps he is of the sort that believes that the "theory" of evolution has yet to be proven, or perhaps he is a member of the Flat Earth Society (unfortunately there are educated folks there too...).

While I could easily make a point-by-point refutation of many conclusions Dr. Griffin makes in this book, I realize that for most conspiracy die-hards, no amount of evidence is enough so I will save myself the time. If you are a critical thinker, then realize this book for what it is: conjecture and conspiracy with no basis in science or logic, masquerading as an impartial "tell all". While the 9/11 Commission Report itself purposefully goes out of its way to avoid pointing the finger (it was written by politicians after all), this book is an extreme and not the answer to what really happened. I recommend Richard Clarke's "Against all Enemies". Mr. Clarke served the presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. He was the Terrorism "Czar" on 9/11 (despite having a zero budget) and while he is only one perspective and not necessarily impartial, he is certainly more factual than a PhD who knows nothing of basic physics or logical rhetoric.

Think on this: "[The 9/11] Conpiracy theorists simultaneously hold two contrary beliefs: a) that the U.S. government is so incompetent that it can miss explanations that the theorists can uncover, and b) that the U.S. government can keep a big and juicy secret. This first belief has some validity. The second idea is pure fantasy. (Clarke 2004)"

-jpl

I will give you a taste of the book:
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).
2 - 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).
3 - The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).
4 - The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).
5 - The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).

If you are serious about researching 9/11 I would recommend; no...you need this book.

I will give you a taste of the book:
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).
2 - 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).
3 - The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).
4 - The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).
5 - The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).

If you are serious about researching 9/11 I would recommend; no...you need this book.

The official conspiracy theory holds that 19 hijackers of Muslim Arab origin under direction of a former CIA operative with kidney disease from a cave in Afghanistan in a secret operation defeated the most advanced air-defense system in the world in a surprise attack. The alternative conspiracy theory holds that men in positions of power within the US political structure, military services, and intelligence agencies--who would stand to gain incredibly more power--planned, enabled, and/or controlled the attacks of 9/11. The alternative theory by necessity also holds that the perpetrators of 9/11 covered up their crime largely through the advocacy of an official conspiracy theory.

...

For my complete review of this book and for other book and movie
reviews, please visit my site [...]

Brian Wright
Copyright 2007

This book belongs in every American classroom, home and office. It should substitue the Bible in hotel suites. It should be compulsory reading for college juniors. Buy ten and give to strangers, colleagues and friends!

It took me months to read The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions-it is so painful. In 2004 I read Griffin's first 9/11 Truth book, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 and cited it as "the book that many of us both feared and hoped for." The commission report book is "worse"-let me say why.

As horrific as these events were, don't we want to believe the official story? That the attacks of 9/11 were so unprecedented that our federal aviation communications, military defense, and government agencies were totally overwhelmed-unable to respond effectively to prevent or diminish the loss of life and destruction of property with four hijacked airplanes targeting government and economic landmarks within a few short hours. What American would not want to believe this account? As difficult as this story is to accept, surely it is preferable to the alternatives: (1) admitting that our defense system was unable to handle such an onslaught; or (2) coming to understand that the attacks were not "the accident" they appeared to be-i.e. that top government leaders may have been, to a degree yet undetermined, complicit in what happened. I understand why we prefer the "official" story. The problem comes with truth. If enough convincing evidence calls into question this story (which Griffin shows has multiple versions, and which has been used to justify subsequent and disastrous foreign policy), then our national nightmare is far from over. Yet, I vote for truth. I recommend Griffin's book to truth seekers.

While both of Griffin's 9/11 books are painful to read, the book on the commission report is moreso-because it reveals many flaws in the official account and thereby builds a possible worst case scenario. Griffin refers to The 9/11 Commission Report as "the Kean-Zelikow Report" due to the expanded and not impartial role of the commission's executive director, Philip Zelikow. Griffin says, "... the Kean-Zelikow Report, far from lessening my suspicions about official complicity, has served to confirm them." [p. 291] Griffin underscores his bottom line: we need a truly independent investigation now more than ever.

I would like to see David Griffin on 9/11 read by Americans of all persuasions. His careful, detailed research and reasoned analyses (never pushing his view, but rather showing readers where credible evidence leads) will teach every reader facts and overarching considerations he/she had not previously recognized in connection with this historic American and global event.

How can we go forward as a nation without knowing what really happened on 9/11? The victims' families and the American people deserve much better than The 9/11 Commission Report delivered. Read Griffin and demand 9/11 Truth now!

David Grifin's analysis of the Kean-Zelikov bipartisan Report of the events leading up to the highjackings of four aircraft on September 11, 2001, is a "must read" for anyone concerned with the subsequent history of the Bush Administration and the "War on Terror." All may not be as we initially were lead to believe: That fundamental Muslims with the desire to bring down America, plotted a massive terror event that culminated in the plane crashes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the fields of Pennsylvania. This conventional wisdom, supported by the media reporting immediately following the catastrophe, and subsequently "documented" by the Kean-Zelikov Report as analyzed in detail by Dr. Griffin is shown to be laced with omissions of fact, distortions of events, and the rewriting of the history leading to and during September 11, 2001.

Dr. Griffin's analysis demonstrates that the "non-partisan" 911 Report is anything but non-partisan. The chief staff person to the committee, Mr. Zelikov, was and is a Republican White House operative who had worked with Condellesa Rice, and who subsequently became a consultant to the Natinal Security Agency. His manipulation of the factual material, his direction of the process toward the pre-concieved conception of the causes of the 9-11 events, and his organization of the material to obscure military and intelligence failures on the part of the US Government is shown by Dr. Griffin to be, if not a complete whitewash of many failures in the US response, at least an inadequate and biased analysis of only some of the available information about the many factors that pre-dated the 9-11 events and followed from them. Dr. Griffin points out the resourcefulness of Mr. Zelikov to obscure factors that might be critical of the Bush Administration, and implies that the conspiracy to highjack planes and bomb America may be wider than the al Quaeda connection.

The text is not a late night page turner. The reader must attend to the facts and compare this text with the original Kean-Zelikov Report if the full value of the information is to be garnered. Spending the effort, however, will yield valuable insight into the workings of the current Administration, the failure of the American media to review what was before thier eyes, and the reluctance of the Republican controlled Congress from 2001 to 2006 to provide the American people with the legislative oversight of the Executive that the Constitution of the United States demands. Dr. Griffen raises more questions than he answers. In so doing, he makes those who read his text aware of the perils we face from the current administration's response.

Jonathan B. Weisbuch, MD, MPH, Phoenix, Arizona

Excellent book by a man who has researched this subject extensively, and has a wealth of knowledge to impart about the inconsistencies and outright lies propounded by the administration regarding the events of Sept. 11. This book completely demolishes the "official" story of what happened that day, and makes clear that a coverup was and is intended in order to sell the populace on never ending war against phantom terrorists to enrich the corporate interests behind the coverup. Must reading for those interested in the subject.

Excellent book by a man who has researched this subject extensively, and has a wealth of knowledge to impart about the inconsistencies and outright lies propounded by the administration regarding the events of Sept. 11. This book completely demolishes the "official" story of what happened that day, and makes clear that a coverup was and is intended in order to sell the populace on never ending war against phantom terrorists to enrich the corporate interests behind the coverup. Must reading for those interested in the subject.

DRG articulately raises obvious questions that the media ignores (or is forced to ignore) regarding 9/11. Whether or not a person believes in the complicity of our government, it is abundantly clear that they went to great lengths to make sure that no truth or clarity was gained as a result of the 18 month "investigation" that resulted in the creation of the commission report, which as DRG states, is really a 500 + page lie. The way that 9/11 has been used as a pretext to mass murder 700,000 Iraqi civilians should make it abundantly clear that suspicions of the complicity of sociopaths within our government in the events of 9/11 are neither unthinkable, nor baseless/unfounded.

I read this book immediately after reading the 9/11 Report and I highly suggest that others do the same thing. Read the gov't version and then Griffin's book and you'll be left ruefully scratching your head and wondering about the vagaries of democracy and truth seeking today.

This book is indeed a must read. Many reviewers have already extolled the strenghts of this book. One of the things I enjoyed most is that this book is written for a lay audience and will be enjoyed by many. Bravo to a well-researched more accurate version of what happened and what is still happening.

I read this book immediately after reading the 9/11 Report and I highly suggest that others do the same thing. Read the gov't version and then Griffin's book and you'll be left ruefully scratching your head and wondering about the vagaries of democracy and truth seeking today.

This book is indeed a must read. Many reviewers have already extolled the strenghts of this book. One of the things I enjoyed most is that this book is written for a lay audience and will be enjoyed by many. Bravo to a well-researched more accurate version of what happened and what is still happening.

A very good book that raises alot of unanswered questions. Where is all of the video from the Pentagon showing a plane striking the building? How does the government account for the 18 foot hole in the Pentagon claiming a plane did this damage? Where was the anti-aircraft missle defense system to protect the Pentagon? Why was the president and vice president not under oath when giving testimony concerning these events? These and many more questions need to be answered by the government. This sounds like another "Moron Commission" cover-up.

A very good book that raises alot of unanswered questions. Where is all of the video from the Pentagon showing a plane striking the building? How does the government account for the 18 foot hole in the Pentagon claiming a plane did this damage? Where was the anti-aircraft missle defense system to protect the Pentagon? Why was the president and vice president not under oath when giving testimony concerning these events? These and many more questions need to be answered by the government. This sounds like another "Moron Commission" cover-up.

David Ray Griffin's recent writing on 9/11 has been a pleasure to read. His OMISSIONS AND DISTORTIONS volume is no different. Griffin is an excellent writer and he remains smart and perceptive when discussing the omissions and distortions (I was thinking of using some other epithets but Griffin best nails the faults of the official report in his title) of the best-selling but utterly worthless Kean/Hamilton/Zelikow cover-up. Griffin points out some real groaners in the official report that must have given some solid chuckles to the cynical, well-paid drones that wrote it. Read and enjoy Griffin's fine, perceptive writing and throw that official report in the bin.

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg War Trials.

"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the state can shield the people from the political, economic, and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the state to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the state." Nazi Propoganda Minister Dr. Joseph. M. Goebbels.

Firstly, I defy anybody to read this with a mind partway open and still believe the official story afterwards. I guarantee you will be unable. Even though David Ray Griffin does not put forward alternative theories, his dispassionate and relentless ripping apart of the flimsy fabric of the official account means that he doesn't need to put forward alternative theories, instead simply sticking to the insistence that the 9/11 Commission cannot be trusted and that a truly independent investigation is needed. It is enough to know without doubt that officialdom is lying through its collective teeth. And if correct procedure were followed, the whole "War on Terra" would be halted in its tracks until the justifications for it (chiefly 9/11) were properly examined.

That this will not happen, and that 9/11 continues to this day to be used as justification for imperialistic aggression and the trampling of civil liberties worldwide is testament to the dishonesty and corruptness of the current regimes in the USA and elsewhere around the world. What is even more disturbing is that, as Griffin shows, Democrats as well as Republicans are guilty, and a (major) side issue of 9/11 is the impression that political "left" and "right" no longer exist except as hooks to distract the masses. A real investigation of 9/11 would also lead on to a real examination of our whole putatively democratic political systems. And this, I think, is another reason why it is highly unlikely that there will be a real investigation. The status quo tends to protect the status quo.

Finally, the implications for the UK are startling, for anyone who has not considered this angle. For David Ray Griffin's books provide ample proof that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by the US government (and others) in order to justify the ridiculous "War on Terra" and things like the USA PATRIOT Act - legislation which was already written and sitting waiting for an event just like this to be unveiled. With this in mind, it is therefore essential that we in the UK re-examine the attacks on the London Underground on 07/07/2005 which have likewise been used as justification for furtherance of the "War on Terra" and the similar erosion of civil liberties in the UK. For those who have relied upon media reports for their knowledge of the July 7 attacks, I urge you to cast aside your skepticism and look at the detail in the same way that Griffin has examined the 9/11 attacks. I can guarantee you will be amazed at the size of the holes in the official fairytale, and the number of questions which have not been answered. There is already sufficient precedent (USS Liberty, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine, Lavon Affair, Reichstag Fire etc) for this type of high-profile false-flag operation to justify war; 9/11 and 7/7 are simply modern examples of the Hegellian Dialectic at work. Put simply: Problem-Reaction-Solution.

It is time to wake up, World. A good place to start is to watch the movie Loose Change, available free online at Google video.

David Ray Griffin has written the most intelligent book on the events of 9/11. He is retired Professor Emeritus of Theology from Claremont College. He has no ulterior motive to risk his reputation. If you read anything about 9/11 let it be this book.
He takes each event, as analyzed by the governmental commission and presents the facts surrounding it. He allows you to make up your own mind.
His books have not been reviewed like authors of his stature usually receive. What is the reason? I am proud to be able to write this little review.

Reading these reviews by people who obviously know little about the collapse of the World Trade Center, and having been exposed to Griffin's quackery, I felt the need to shine some light on this quixotic crusade of Griffin's and others'.

Griffin relies greatly on the standard conspiracy theorist (and creationist) fallacy: Point out apparent discrepancies uttered by different agencies and individuals and that supposedly proves their theory. Ask questions about matters they don't quite understand and unless they immediately receive an answer they find acceptable, that proves their theory. Sorry, but that's a form of the fallacy of Appeal to Ignorance (I don't understand how that works, therefore my theory is right). This is often employed with "God of the Gaps" type reasoning ("I don't understand that, therefore God must have done it"). Only in the case of conspiracy theorists it's "Conspiracy theory of the gaps", used to explain every hard to understand bit of information without showing how the information in question is predicted by the theory in question or how it excludes every other possible explanation. That kind of reasoning is fallacious, and it's not how you prove theories.

Then there are the myths perpetuated by the "Controlled Demolition theorists". You can see some of them repeated in these reviews. The myth that the steel had to have melted has already been pointed out. You don't need to completely melt a support for it to fail. You just need to sufficiently weaken it. Sometimes you hear the "No steel structured building had ever fallen solely due to fire before" myth. Aside from the fact that this claim ignores the minor observation that a jumbo jet also hit each Twin Tower with the kinetic energy of over a ton of TNT each and that WTC7, which burned for seven hours, also housed 42,000 gallons of diesel fuel networked via a web of fuel lines throughout the building, the claim is simply false. The McCormick Center in Chicago and the Sight and Sound Theater in Pennsylvania both were steel structured buildings that collapsed due to fire, in one case after only 30 minutes of fire (in contrast to the seven hours WTC7 burned).

Another frequent myth is that when Larry Silverstein, WTC Manager, used the expression "pull it" in a converstion about WTC7 with a fire department commander, that was demolitions industry lingo meaning to do a controlled demolition of the building. However, aside from the fact that it would make no sense to tell a fire department commander to do a controlled demolition of a burning building (fire departments don't have demolitions teams on standby), this myth was completely exploded when subsequent searches of demolitions websites and interviews with demolitions experts discovered that no one in the demolitions industry uses the expression "pull it" to mean "demolish the building", and that Silverstein was probably (as he himself later said he meant) referring to pulling fire fighting operations from the building, which were in fact pulled after 11 am. The other "pull" reference often cited in the documentary that also quoted Silverstein refers to the pulling down of WTC6 by steel cables, an eight story building only a shell of itself after the Towers collapsed. WTC7 was a 47 story building that could not have been pulled down that way if they tried.

Then there's the ever popular "The towers fell at free fall speed", which is another bit of ignorance (or outright lie). Freefall of the towers would have been 9.2 seconds. Nobody, not even controlled demolitions theorist scientists, seriously maintains that the Towers fell at less than 10 seconds, and even that's shortchanging the collapse times. Based on seismic readings, the towers took from 13 to 16 seconds to fall, and the earlier 10 second estimate was just a wild guess since the dust cloud obscured the top of the buildings making it difficult to visually see when they precisely hit the ground. Don't take my word for it. Watch the videos of the collapses yourselves. You can see large pieces of material falling significantly faster than the collapses themselves. If the collapses were at free fall, then that means those large pieces would have been moving faster than free fall speed, which would have been impossible.

So since no laws of nature were violated in the speed of the collapses, controlled demolition theorists thus have the burden of proving that the buildings shouldn't have fallen as fast as they did without controlled demolition, a burden they've NEVER met. All they tend to do is point out that the building's supports should have provided some kind of resistance. Sure, but how much? A glass table should provide some kind of resistance to dropping a bowling ball onto it from five feet up, but it's still not going to slow it down much. The Towers' structural support system was just not nearly sufficient to provide much resistance to the kinetic energy of hundreds of thousands of tons of mass in motion.

Now who is David Ray Griffin? Though he has opined on everything from forensic science (in opining that the Osama tapes were forgeries) to military procedure (NORAD should have stopped the hijacked flights) to structural enginering (had to have been a controlled demolition for the buildings to fall that way), he has no known expertise in any of those areas. He's a retired theologian and professor of philosophy of religion and member of a self-appointed group of self-described "experts" called the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth", none of whom are identified in their website as having any expertise at all in civil or structural engineering, even though their central claim (the WTC collapses had to have been controlled demolitions) is a structural engineering claim.

Who are the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth"? In a story on recent Osama bin Laden videotapes, it was claimed that "experts" determined that the tapes were forged. The experts in question were the "9/11 Scholars for Truth." The story mainly quoted Griffin, who is no expert on any kind on forensic analysis that would be necessary in order to determine videotape forgeries.

Below is part of the group's self-description on their website and what they're arguing for.

"These experts contend that books and articles by members and other associates have established that the World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions"

The above claim by these self-described "experts" fundamentally involves structural engineering and, obviously, controlled demolitions. Since they put themselves out to the public as experts and scholars, then obviously they are attempting to identify themselves as having some kind of authoritative expertise on the subject. So what exactly are the areas of expertise of these so-called experts?

The organization's site lists 77 "full members". Of those 77, 20 identify themselves as having expertise in physical sciences (so long as you include medicine and mathematics as physical sciences), but 57 don't identify any physical science expertise at all. In fact, "philosophy" appears to be the most commonly cited area of expertise (cited for ten of the individuals).

Of the 20 that are cited as having expertise in hard sciences, the major specialties are computer science (seven), physics (six), and biological sciences (four). Of those with specialties in physics, their areas of professional research and interest aside from their 9/11 pursuits are the following: solar and nuclear engineering, alternative energy, optics, robotics, and astrophysics. One, Jeffrey Farrer, is indicated as having expertise in physics and materials science, but the BYU website only identifies him as being a lab manager. Another, Judy Wood, is identified as having expertise in mechanical engineering. Her CV indicates that her exclusive area of research apart from 9/11 matters has been in the science of dental materials. There is not a single structural or civil engineer or controlled demolition expert among them.

Other active side interests from the 9/11 physicists:

-Steven Jones (co-founder of the group)- Proving the Mormon belief that Jesus visited North America

-Derrick Grimmer- Legalization of marijuana (not an illegitimate position, but it provides some illumination on the tendency towards countercultural quixotic pursuits of these folks)

-Jean-Pierre Petit - Claiming that aliens from the planet Ummo have sent letters to selected people, including himself, and that the US military has a powerful antimatter bomb that they successfully detonated on planet Jupiter (these claims have effectively made him persona non grata in the French scientific community)

David Griscom- Proving the 2004 election was stolen (you think perhaps that might mean he has an agenda against the Bush administration?)

In addition to the 77 full members, there are 138 associate members and 46 "society associates" (unclear as to what these labels mean), in addition to 58 student members. Total number of members, associate members and society associates: 261. Total number of these identified as having expertise in civil or structural engineering: Zero. Total number of these identified as having expertise in controlled demolitions: Zero. Of the student members, total number identified as studying civil or structural engineering: Zero. Total number of articles published in peer reviewed science journals by any of the group's 319 total members arguing that the WTC collapsed by controlled demolitions: Zero. (the organization's co-founder, Steven Jones, has so far only managed to get his article arguing for this published in an obscure Marxist political journal).

Draw your own conclusions as to how authoritative these "experts", and Mr. Griffin are.

This is a tediously refrenced book. Griffin does a great job at exposing this Whitewash Commission. He builds on research done in his previous book, then examines the Commission's fictional narrative, and exposes it!

Did somebody here REALLY post this??:

"Get an engineering degree and you'll understand how fire fuelled by plastic office furniture (and other materials) affects the strength of steel."

Hmmmm....i don't think i need a engineering degree to question wether fire spanning just over 4 floors full of super strength 'plastic furniture' could crumble 2 enourmous steel buildings. Besides, building #7 was never hit by a plane at all!
Maybe the furniture made it implode as well.....that's some kind of furniture!

Furthermore, quote: "Find a video of the collapse and time it--you may be surprised to find that the oft-claimed 10 second freefall never happened."

Hm, yeah it did actually.
Time to watch "Loose change", everybody.

Prior to reading this book, I had questions. This book only confirms that we do not have the whole story and the main reason for that is that much of the story is being kept from us by our own government.

I have read the opposing reviews of this book and all I can say is they have either been written by people who did not read the book, do not have the intellectual agility to understand the book, or are deliberately trying to decieve you about the content of the book. None of them, in any way, reflect the true nature of this thoughtful, disciplined study of the 9/11 Commission Report.

No where does this book say that the towers were dropped by explosives. No where does this book say that two planes were involved in the attack on the Pentagon. It simply states that the Commission, while it's stated goal was to "provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11," falied to even address some very disturbing elements of the "events surrounding 9/11."

For instance, this "exhaustively researched," "truth commission," failed to dedicate one sentence of explanation to the collapse of WTC-7; the 47 story building located two blocks away from the World Trade Center that apparently collapsed in an act of sympathy for Towers 1 and 2. It simply was not mentioned.

If that were all, it would be enough of an indictment of the Commission to warrent further investigation but unfortunately, it goes on, and on, and on, and on, and on.... you get the point.

In an obscene homage to George Orwell, much of what really happened on 9/11 has already been dumped into the Memory Hole. It may be easier for you to forget, but you will be doing America and America's children a truely egregious offense in doing so.

What kind of person do you choose to be? You decide.

"The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions" is - and will be - the definitive critique of the 9/11 Commission Report. David Ray Griffin is to 9/11 what Galileo was to astronomy.

Griffin, one of the most precise and credible leaders in revealing the official lies of 9/11, has in this book revealed the Kean-Zelikow report for what it really is: A document that omits, distorts, or invents facts to support the offical myth that 19 Arab-Muslim hijackers thwarted our defenses to destroy skyscrapers and hit the Pentagon with passenger jets.

Unfortunately for the 9/11 Commission (whose staff was far from impartial) there are too many news and eyewitness reports that conflict with the offical myth for that myth to hold up - particularly under the weight of Griffin's scrutiny.

Many will disagree, but I think this book is better than "The New Pearl Harbor". In that book, Griffin basically compiled and organized most of the credible criticisms of the official theory, thereby revealing inconsistencies, conflicts, and holes in the government's narrative. In "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" Prof. Griffin logically and concisely shows exactly what the Commission ommitted, distorted, or outright invented within its report in order to ensure the official conspiracy theory remained intact.

Inconvenient facts and evidence, as well as hard-hitting and very valid questions that were apparently not asked, are introduced by Griffin - leaving no doubt that an independent investigation of the 9/11 crimes reamins to be accomplished.

One of the best parts of this book was the chapter on Flight 77, the 757 that is said to have hit the Pentagon. On that topic, Griffin shows how the Kean-Zelikow report goes off the rails of reality. I don't want to give anything away, but the audacity of the 9/11 Commission regarding Flight 77 is mind-boggling. It would be funny if 9/11 and its effects weren't so tragic and deadly.

For those who haven't read this book, have some integrity and read it before writing a review - unless you're CIA or MI, because disinformation is your job. In which case you ought to resign and reveal what you know....

It's sad that this book and others like it are so popular. I freely admit that I haven't read it, but based on the reviews here, Griffin is rehashing the same assertions and logical fallicies that have been published over and over again on various conspiracy theorists' websites. Please don't believe everything you read. Please think for yourselves. Find a video of the collapse and time it--you may be surprised to find that the oft-claimed 10 second freefall never happened. Get an engineering degree and you'll understand how fire fuelled by plastic office furniture (and other materials) affects the strength of steel.

Honestly, you all give Bush and Co too much credit to think that they could have pulled this off. Your time and energy would be better spent on holding this administration accountable for the undeniable evils for which it is truely responsible, and has in fact, proudly admitted: Invading Iraq, warrentless wiretapping, and indefinite detention without due process to name just three. Buying into fanastic assertions of people like Griffin just gives the rest of us in the anti-Bush, anti-war, pro-civil rights crowd a bad name.

Instead of this book, try something grounded in reality like "Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush". I'd also recommend everyone who said "5 stars!" read "Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America" (which happend to go to press right around 9/11 -- so it must be PART of the conspiracy, right?)

To date, the despicable 9/11 attacks continue to serve as the Bush administration's primary justification for its ongoing "war on terror". Torturing prisoners? Black sites? Illegal wiretaps? Pre-emptive strikes? The Patriot Act? Granting Halliburton an exclusive contract for post-war reconstruction in Iraq? You name it. We're expected to look the other way since it's all for the sake of "homeland security". Thou shalt not question your administration during wartime.

Oddly enough, the official 9/11 account has gone unchallenged by the mainstream media, despite its numerous inconsistencies; doubters are invariably denounced as heretics and traitors. Understandably, feelings run high when it comes to 9/11 and it takes considerable courage to point out the shortcomings of "the official conspiracy theory".

David Ray Griffin has that courage. His meticulously researched book exposes the official report's glaring omissions and distortions in an (admirably) impartial manner without once succumbing to the temptation of populistic Bush-bashing. Moreover, Griffin repeatedly encourages his readers to draw their own conclusion based on the facts available. After reading this book (and perhaps doing some additional research), you will realize that the Kean-Zelikow 9/11 report is completely biased and fraudulent. Unless you're part of the irrational fringe, you will also find that the 9/11 attacks couldn't have succeeded without governmental complicity. Yes - this is absolutely horrifying, but not without historical precedent (remember February 27, 1933 or Pearl Harbor). Those still subscribing to the official 9/11 conspiracy theory might just be suffering from the "Neville Chamberlain syndrome", unable to accept that governments commit atrocities; if so, this book is just what the doctor ordered.

In a June 2002 speech, George W. Bush said: "I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace." If such is the "logic" of the Bush administration's agenda, then it's only appropriate that the official 9/11 (c)omission's report is replete with fallacies. Until there is a truly independent 9/11 investigation, we'll be forced to sing the same old song:

Black is white
Day is night
Wrong is right
Lies are truth
Slavery is freedom
War is peace...

I had to respond to some of the reviewers who point out that steel melts at such and such temperature, but it weakens before, so the whole story is ok, and this book is wrong. I would recommend they do a couple things:

1) Find a video of a controlled demolition of a building, then compare it to the video of the 3 WTC buildings collapsing. Eerily similar.

2) Get a physics book. The towers fell in less than 10 seconds, which means that they fell at a FREE FALL. That means that the dozens of stories of relatively undamaged building provided ZERO resistance. They didn't even slow down the collapse by one second.

3) Explain how WTC 7 fell in pretty much the same fashion as the twin towers, even though it was not struck by a plane.

4) Explain away numerous live media reports that day (not since of course, we have a new history now) of witnesses hearing 'multiple' explosions while the building were collapsing.

5) Explain why the tower that was hit first, and had more structural damage, lasted longer than the second tower.

Oh, and this does not prove the naysayers wrong necessarily, but before 9/11 and after 9/11 there have been zero steel structured buildings that have collapsed from fire. On 9/11, the offical story is 3 steel structured buildings collapsed when the steel gave way due to fire. According to the naysayers this is all coincidence. Its also coincidence that there were numerous logistical screwups by NORAD etc so that an hour after the first building was struck, a second plane was somehow still able to crash into the Pentagon with nary a shot fired. You know, maybe its just in the police shows I watch on TV, but the investigators usually raise an eyebrow when there's that many coincidences.

The importance of this book has been called out by all the 5 star reviewers and I need not repeat their points.

But I notice that all the 1-star reviewers usually cherry pick one, or at most two, among Griffin's hundreds of points and use a sketchy misrepresentation of those to dismiss the entire work. I understand that Amazon review space is limited. So I would request that a 1-star reviewer step up and write a point-by-point refutation of Griffin's evidence and logic, and get that published, pronto. Isn't the case important enough for you to do so? Put a conclusive end to all Griffin's irrational conspiracy theorizing once and for all please.

One big sticking point to the 1-stars seems to be the steel - "softening" vs "melting" issue. Even if the WTC steel only "softened" (a ridiculous claim on its face, it was basically a paper fire on a few floors), would you have expected a total, symmetrical, pyroclastically explosive 10-second collapse into its own footprint from a building whose support beams were simply beginning to soften or buckle? Is 'softening' consistent with total, nearly instantaneous absolutely symmetrical failure? Does not make sense at all, in fact this entire line of argument serves only to highlight the plausibility of the controlled demolition hypothesis.

But remember that if even ONE major point that Griffin has made is really on target, since we are talking about "the crime of the century" that "changed everything" and launched "perpetual war", then if there's serious doubt raised on even ONE SINGLE ASPECT of the Official Boxcutter Conspiracy Theory, no resources should be spared by mainstream media and the milgov in reopening a complete investigation.

Well, I'm sorry but virtually any one of Griffin's hundreds of observations clears the bar stated above, of warranting a re-opening of the entire investigation. Instead, what do we see? Complete and absolute stone-walling by EVERY SINGLE OFFICIAL ORGAN of media and government.

It is truly scary - not just how savage one rogue USA milgov phony terror unit may have been (after all, perhaps they were just miguided patriots serving what they saw as a higher national good), but more importantly how intellectually bankrupt and gutless the ENTIRE SYSTEM seems to be (especially the corporate mainstream media).

Scary.

David Ray Griffin has done it again with "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions". He has managed to boggle the mind of his readers with his keen sense of logic and perception of the events of 9/11.

In his previous book, "The New Pearl Harbor", Griffin explored the pertinent questions that were on the minds of many citizens in the United States and abroad concerning the terrorists' attacks of September 11, 2001. In Griffin's new book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions", he skillfully dissects the 9/11 Commission's report, like a coroner looking to reveal the fallacies behind this American tragedy. A coroner investigates deaths that occur under unusual or suspicious circumstances -- Griffin does the same and shares his findings with readers of his book.

In "The New Pearl Harbor", Griffin presented readers with a multitude of unasked, unanswered questions pertaining to the 9/11 attacks whereby the World Trade Center was demolished, the Pentagon damaged, and thousands of lives lost. In that book Griffin wrote of his hopes and anticipation for the 9/11 Commission report to shed light on the events of 9/11. After all, as Griffin writes: "the 9/11 Commission was explicitly created as a nonpolitical, nonpartisan investigating body".

Nevertheless, readers of "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" will discover that the truth has been lost - hidden, according to the author, behind "omissions and deceptions". Readers will learn that the 9/11 Commission Report gives credence to Griffin's contentions and suspicions that the American people have been deceived by the US government (politicians) and agencies, like the CIA, FBI, NSA, FAA, and so on -- agencies that are supposed to protect them.

Griffin addresses the 9/11 Commission's report on many fronts: are some of the assumed hijackers alive? Did FBI headquarters hinder and/or block investigations that may have prevented 9/11? Did senior FBI officials intimidate subordinate agents in performing their jobs? Were the Saudi royal families and Bin Laden families given preferential treatment immediately following the 9/11 attacks? Did a Boeing 757 truly crash into the Pentagon (the "missile theory")? How much did the Bush administration know about the events of 9/11? Was Pakistan's ISI (Inner-Service Intelligence) involved and did the ISI's chief, Mahmoud Ashmad order a transfer of $100.000 to Mohamed Atta - the so-called leader of the hijackers? How did the World Trade Center really collapse (the "fire theory" vs. the "controlled demolition theory")? Was the 9/11 Commission report conducted to discovering the truth, or covering up US government involvement? These are just some of the questions that, according to Griffin, the 9/11 Commission report failed to answer, excluded, suppressed or simply lied about in their report.

David Ray Griffin's analysis of the 9/11 Commission Report in his book is masterful; it will lead Americans and others around the world to wonder if the answers will ever emerge from the ashes of September 11, 2001.

I find it sad that so many people are apparently able to read a book that is so riddled with logical and factual errors that it is painfully obvious that the author is maliciously misinterpreting the facts, and yet they still find it a compelling book. Did you check your brain at the door when you started reading this? The flaws are glaring people. If you want a blow by blow of the problems go to:

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/dubious_claims.html

A few key critisisms:

Griffin claims that steel melts at 2800F and the jet fuel only burns at 1200 therefore it couldn't have caused the tower to collapse. First off, it's possible for the fire to get to higher temperatures than that, but most importantly steel loses strength as it heats and at 1200F it's much weaker that at 70F. That can cause the beams to buckle and break as was outlined in _numerous_ serious (and independent) investigations into the collapse by several civil engineering firms. Griffin doesn't even bother to address these reports, he just pretends like they weren't even there. Obviously he was relying instead on the engineering analysis of people like Meyssan WHO DON'T KNOW SQUAT ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER. And neither does Griffin who seems to have less knowledge of physics and chemistry than a smart high-school student.

Griffin claims that the explosion at the Pentagon was not consistent with a plane hitting it. What proof does he offer? Once again you have Meyssan deciding that it doesn't make sense to him. MEYSSAN DOESN'T KNOW SQUAT ABOUT EXPLOSIONS.

"Explosion Dynamics Laboratory
Aviation Kerosene (Jet A) Research at Caltech:

= = = = = = = =

"Hundreds of experiments documented in Nestor, Ott, and the Caltech studies [Exhibit 20D, L, T, P] demonstrate that an explosion can be produced in a quiescent mixture of Jet A vapor in air."

http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/EDL/projects/JetA/facts.html
http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/EDL/projects/JetA/misconceptions.html

The two links above point to Caltech investigations into airplane explosions and fires that completely refute Griffin's claims.

The 9/11 Commission's Final Report is rife with contradiction, and excludes massive amounts of information which should have been included in any full and comprehensive investigation.

Griffin's book is detailed and well-referenced. His references are largely mainstream media sources, as well as researchers like James Bamford and Peter Lance. (Griffin also draws on research by Nafeez Ahmed, and Paul Thompson.)

This authoritative deconstruction of the 9/11 Commission's Final Report will read as a recap to 9/11 researchers, and as an eye-opening, mind-blowing shocker to those Americans who think that the Commission performed in a non-partisan, and all-inclusive manner.

After reading the book, it's hard not to conclude that the Commission had an a priori idea of what the Report would wind up saying, regardless of the existing evidence. Then, the evidence was tailored, or omitted, to build a narrative that reinforces the official "Conspiracy Theory" presented to the world regardng the events of 9/11.

Recommended reading.

The reason why the 9/11 pseudo-report was flawed is Jamie Gorelick's presence on the commission. She's the one who, on Clinton's behalf, created the "wall" that kept the intelligence community from being able to communicate with the law enforcement community; that way, it would be more difficult to get all the facts to prove that the Clintons were taking campaign money from Chinese intelligence in exchange for classified information (see Ann Coulter's _High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton_, Kenneth Timmerman's _Selling Out America_, and Edward Timperlake's _Year of the Rat : How Bill Clinton Compromised American Security for Chinese Money_ for the truth about "Chinagate").

The FAA had repeatedly warned the Clinton "Administration" (pirate ship crew or criminal organization is more like it) to beef up airport security. The "administration" ignored them. There was no way the Bush Administration could have fixed in eight months the mess the Clintons had ignored for eight years.

The only substantial difference between a `conspiracy theorist' and the average citizen is the former is skeptical of the information presented on television and the latter is not.

Concerning September 11, neither side should get too excited, the subject is now history and the narrative will remain intact. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it, as history clearly illustrates, the `truth movement' has no momentum and will remain stagnant and ineffective.

I am not being a defeatist, but suggesting the efforts of the skeptics could be better utilized in different areas, such as countering the massive campaign to disarm Americans. I liked the book, but instead of buying it to convince Aunt May that she voted for the antichrist, why not save up for a gun?

As a big fan of Griffin's "Founders of Constructive Post-Modern Philosophy" I was astonished and saddened by this foray into politics. Since the former book was a collection of other's writings I guess the wool was pulled over my eyes.

I expected this to be a serious and scholarly look at the 9/11 Commission report but it is, as it has been dismissed as, ludicrous conspiracy theory written to prop up the waning anti-war crowd. What a shame. Now that Iraq is exercising self determination what will these people latch on to? There isn't anything left.

If you want to read Griffin at his best read the book where he only contributed a forwarding essay mentioned above.

David Ray Griffen does it again - exposing the bare lies of the junta's public relations bureau: the 9/11 Commission. Don't miss this book. Griffen cooly and rationally demolishes the Federal Mafia's alibi.

First I will briefly review Griffin's book, then respond to the 1-star reviewers on this site.

The thumbs-up and thumbs-down:

There are points at which it seems Griffin's theological background does him a disservice, because the tale he spins comes across poorly as a homily. Too often Griffin argues manipulatively, and uses rhetorical tricks unbefitting someone claiming to write a dispassionate expose of the facts. Evermore sad, these machinations are largely unnecessary--Griffin's points ARE rivetting, taken in their entirety. Griffin's scholarship IS generally sound. The connections he makes are, for the most part, logical and difficult to refute. Griffin should have stuck to the facts, acknowledged where his points leave room for debate, and allowed his laying out of the evidence to chew upon readers resistant to the upshot. Griffin too frequently uses cymbals when a metronome would do.

All that said, I have yet to read a solid rebuttal of Griffin's manifesto, or anything countering the inertia built up by his relentless blizzard of facts. I have seen people deflect specific hailstones of Griffin's, but no one has yet succeeded in outshouting the storm.

As for the knee-jerk naysayers: I'm sorry, but saying "US government complicity in 9/11 is impossible because it would be just too, too mean and evil of them!" is not a fact-driven argument. None of us are psychic, or psychologists worthy of mapping all possible rationalizations government members might entertain for complicity in 9/11. Perhaps they believe they are front-ending an inevitable war, amounting to fewer casualties in the long run. We know that the Project for the New American Century put forth an unapologetic call for taking over virtually all of the Middle East, and to hell with civilian casualties and American lives spent in the effort. In short, arguing that "US complicity in 9/11 is too evil to be possible" is a childish, emotion-driven, historically blind sentiment that has no place in a serious review of the facts.

Second, Snopes.com does not offer a thorough discussion of the Pentagon crash. It does not address the issue of confiscated cameras, nor the absence of airplane fuselage or engines or the appropriate number of bodies, nor the dearth of black box recordings, nor the fact that the jetfighter-swoop into the building was supposedly carried out by a pilot whose instructors declared him unfit to fly straight.

Third, the connection Griffin draws to specific Isreali companies and factions (who would hardly have the interests of the Israeli people at heart) is in no way an indictment of "Jews" as a whole, and to suggest otherwise is absurd. Crying "anti-Semitism" in this case is the rhetorical equivalent of arguing that any implication of corruption in, say, The Christian Coalition or The American Family Association amounts to throwing all Christians everywhere to the lions, or any implication of corruption of an American company amounts to hatred of all Americans. Silly, unfair, and pedestrian in the extreme.

Fourth, arguing that "US complicity could not have been possible because SOMEONE would have blabbed" shows an inattention both to how military works (soldiers take orders without question), and to what has happened to people who have tried to "blab." Examine, for example, the wholesale ruin and discrediting of whistleblowers and critics like Paul O'Neill, Richard Clarke, Sibel Edmonds, Colleen Rowley, Ambassador Wilson, UN inspector Scott Ritter, Karen Kwiatkowski, Rep. Murtha, etc. etc. There has to be an audience and haven for "blabbers" for any sane person to take that risk, especially when exposing something so explosive.

Fifth: the argument about the 3 towers (including WTC 7, never struck by a plane) being brought down with explosives is not just about the fact that they DID collapse, but about HOW they collapsed. The South tower fell first, though its fire was nearly out, and the burning fuel almost completely confined to the outer surface of the building. The towers fell inward at freefall speed, generating huge amounts of powdered dust from the top, in easily removable, neat sections. All of these conditions, historically, have only taken place in cases of controlled demolition. FEMA refused to allow engineers to inspect the evidence, and had the steel shipped off for recycling within an astonishingly brief period.

Finally, one need not be convinced of all of Griffin's conclusions to appreciate the damage Griffin does to the credibility of the 9/11 Commission Report. Any outright dismissal of this book without a solid attempt to engage the bulk of Griffin's points is an intellectually lazy, sycophantic move that is itself worthy of dismissal.

It's hard to believe that a former professor at a university could right this garbage. Most of his so called evidence is purely circumstantial and his conclusions and assertions are like a bad fairy tale. When he does actually use facts to try to prove is argument, he fails miserably. Case and point:

Griffin states in this book and his former book on this subject that because jet fuel burns at only 1200 degrees and steel melts at 1800 degrees the towers couldn't possible have collapsed. Well the fact is that while the melting point for steel may be 1800 degrees (for some steel) the strength of steel degrades rapidly after the temperature reaches between 300 and 500 degrees F. By the time the steel is heated to 1200 degrees F, the strength of steel is only about 5 percent of its nominal strength at normal temperatures. It is very logical that the towers collapsed. They weren't designed to handle those extreme temperatures. These facts I presented aren't any secret. I found the temperatures in an introductory civil engineering text book. It's basic knowledge for engineering students. Check it out for yourself. The book I found it in is "Introduction to Design for Civil Engineers" by R.S. Narayanan, London, Routledge, 2000. p. 110.

The reason Griffen should be ashamed of himself: Clearly he is using his political agenda to not only cloud his objectivity but he uses it to distort facts. The facts about the properties of steel are readily available in thousands of engineering texts and access to these texts should be extremely easy for a college professor. It took me about 15 minutes to find it at my university library. The fact that Griffen is not an engineering professor is not an excuse for his misinformation. Being a professor makes him very capable of doing research and critical thinking. After all he was able to find the melting point of steel and the temperature at which fuel burns. It's not that much of a leap to find the strength of steel at different temperatures; not for a professor.
It's clear that he is distorting facts to fit his agenda.

If there was the tiniest shred of credible (note: I said credible) evidence linking Bush to the 911 plot, don't you think the Democrats would be exploiting that to the nth degree? (They should as well as Republicans if it were actually true) The reason why they haven't is because there isn't any credible evidence. It seems the only people who buy this 911 conspiracy stuff are the airheads posting all the positive reviews for this book. It doesn't take very long to disprove this one. It only took me 15 minutes of research! And I am not even a professor.

I agree though: The 911 report does have serious flaws. It is well written and easy to read but it lacks any teeth. A lot of people made many mistakes, in more than one administration, but they were not put under the microscope. Further investigation is warranted. I think this book does more disservice to a new investigation than not though. Most people in positions of power would probably be embarrassed to admit that they got their inspiration for further inquiry from this book. Most would think they lost their marbles!

This book is best appreciated if one first reads the author's original book on "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11." In that book, he compiles extensive research and systematically raises questions that have not yet been answered.

In this book, he methodically tears apart each aspect of the 9-11 Commission Report, identifying omissions and distortions covering everything from the alleged hijackers to the actual causes of the collapse of the towers to the role of the Secret Service and the CIA and the FBI to the Saudi and Pakistani engagements with America. In part II, he focuses on the Commission's defense of the U.S. military and its evident failures of either complicity or inaction in relation to each of the flights.

In the end, both books point to the Bush Administration and its neo-conservative ideologues and Wall Street/energy company supporters as being those who gain the most from this crime. In most investigations, that would be a starting point.

This is probably one the most important books to come out in the past 5 years. The author analyzes the 911 "Whitewash" Commission Report and points out all the inconsistancies and downright lies it contains. Griffin's book will help people get past the fear; get out of the "Crisis - Reaction - Solution" paradigm into which our society is falling.

Buy this book, read it, then give it to your friends, before we start invading Iran.