|
|
9/11 - The Real Story |
|
Towers of Deception: The Media Cover - Up of 9/11 with DVD
The Towers of Deception provides 26 "exhibits" of evidence proving "beyond a reasonable doubt" that 9/11 was an inside job. It then presents case histories of de facto censorship by mainstream media and examines the psychological phenomenon of denial. |
|
The War on Freedom:
How and Why America Was Attacked, September 11th, 2001
With its double-edged title, The War on Freedom traces the 9/11 plot back years before the Bush administration. The recipe for such an outrage appeared thinly veiled in a 1997 study by Zbigniew Brzezinski, who proclaimed the imperative to occupy Central Asia - although there was no way to mobilize political support, "except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." Done on 911! From there, the plot thickens to the consistency of cement. FBI agents knew in advance all key details of the WTC bombing. The idea of using planes as bombs was first hatched by the CIA itself in 1993. Intriguing business connections between the bin Laden and Bush families. Al-Qaeda was completely infiltrated by Western intelligence, the CIA itself supplied the encryption for bin Laden's communications. Amazing arrangements were made to allow the hijackers to attend flight schools and even terrorist training at CIA facilities in the U.S. An excess of treachery.
|
|
Debunking 9/11 Myths:
Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts
The first conspiracy theories about September 11 began to emerge while the wreckage was still smoldering. Today, nearly five years later, hundreds of books and thousands of Web pages are devoted to the idea that the US government encouraged, permitted, or actually carried out the attacks. These theories claim to be based on hard evidence. But an in-depth investigation by POPULAR MECHANICS, first published in the magazine's March 2005 issue, and now greatly expanded into this book, definitively proves that the evidence most often cited by conspiracy theorists is inaccurate, misinterpreted, or false.
The original article in "Popular Mechanics" caused a huge groundswell of interest, setting off online debates that continue to this day. "Debunking 9/11 Myths" expands that investigation to include the 20 most prominent and persistent claims underlying the conspiracy theories, focusing on concrete, physical facts rather than political hypothesizing. Among the issues examined: claims that air traffic control violated standard operating procedures by not immediately intercepting the stricken jets; that the fire caused by the crashes wasn't actually hot enough to melt steel and cause structural damage in the World Trade Center; that the holes in the Pentagon were too small to have been made by a Boeing 757; and that Flight 93 was actually shot down by an Air Force plane. The fascinating and in-depth findings come from leading experts in all the relevant fields, including aviation, air defense, air traffic control, civil engineering, firefighting, metallurgy, and geology.
|
|
Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory
David Ray Griffin is widely recognized as one of the leading spokespersons of the 9/11 truth movement, which rejects the official conspiracy theory about 9/11. Although this movement was long ignored by the U.S. government and the mainstream media, recent surveys have shown that the rejection of the official theory has become "a mainstream political phenomenon." No longer ignoring the 9/11 truth movement, the government and the corporately controlled media have released a flurry of stories and reports aimed at debunking it. In this his 5th book on the topic, David Ray Griffin shows that these attempts can themselves be easily debunked. Besides demonstrating the failure of Debunking 9/11 Myths (published by Popular Mechanics and endorsed by Senator John McCain), Griffin riddles recent reports and stories put out by the U.S. Department of State, and many other Government and media bodies. Griffin responds to criticisms of these efforts and shows that the charge that is regularly leveled against critics of the official theory, that they employ irrational and unscientific methods to defend conclusions based on faith, actually applies more to those who defend the official theory.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
