The Evolution of the Official 9-11 Story

I transcribed a portion of Dr. David Ray Griffin's speech in Copenhagen of mid-September 2006. This is important to have in your arsenal of basic 9-11 official story information. Many these days are pointing the finger at NORAD or the FAA. We do not know the true facts at this time, but I think a more balanced view would be that the rank of file of both agencies were deceived and made to be confused. Also it is safe to say that the arrangement of confusing circumstances and rules were arranged several months prior to the event.

This is part of the speech Dr. David Ray Griffin gave in Denmark recently in Copenhagen, Denmark, on September 14, 2006

Should the Truth be Revealed or Concealed?

Transcript starts at 20:40 through 35:08 on the video tracker.

We’ve been given three different stories as to what the military did on that day.

Story Number 1 -

The first story is that

We didn’t send up any planes until after the Pentagon was struck and that would have been about 90 minutes after the first sign that the first plane was in trouble – maybe hijacked.

This story was told by General Richard Myers who was the acting chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on 9-11. It was also told by Mike Snyder who was the spokesman for NORAD, so they surely knew what they were talking about.

And yet within a couple of days people were saying ‘that doesn’t sound very good. That sounds like a stand-down. 90 minutes? You generally intercept in 10 minutes. What happened?

So they came up with a second story…

Story Number 2 –

And according to the second story…

‘yeah, we sent planes up but we couldn’t get there on time because the FAA had been so late notifying us…that we tried, but in each case, we got there late.

Well, early members of the 9-11 movement did the math and they said…
‘well look, even if the FAA was as late as you say, which is hard to believe and nobody from the FAA was fired and you know, they would be 20 minutes late or 30 minutes late in notifying – but that’s fine – but even if that were true, you still had time to get there to the second airliner that hit the World Trade Center and certainly the one that hit the Pentagon. We’re talking 30 minutes there. So why didn’t you? It looked like a stand-down, or at least a slow-down order.

So that’s when I [Dr. Griffin] came in to the movement and I wrote The New Pearl Harbor. That’s the story I told, and that’s the problem I pointed out. That book came out almost at the very end of 2003, almost right at the beginning of 2004. And of course at that time the 9-11 Commission was going on and it didn’t complete its work until July of 2004

Story Number 3 –

The final story put in as THE real story in the 9-11 Commission (this is the “new story” that is also written about in the Vanity Fair magazine story of about Sept. 1 2006.

Well, when that [9-11 Commission official report August 2004] study comes out, they have a brand new story. [Story Number 3 is what we in the 9-11 truth movement refer to as “the official story.”]

No, that wasn’t true, and it’s unfortunate that that story [Story Number 2] was told because it made it look like the military did have time to intercept. They admitted that, that those guys who did the math were right. There was time to intercept IF that story was true, but they said ‘no, that wasn’t true. Yeah, there was some notification of the first flight, Flight 11, but the second flight, the one that hit the south tower; the military didn’t know that it was hijacked until it hit the tower. And the Flight 77, the one that allegedly hit the Pentagon, the …you were not notified at 9:24 the way you said. No, you didn’t know about that until after the Pentagon was struck. And certainly Flight 93 about which there’s been considerable speculation based on considerable evidence that the military shot it down…you didn’t know about that flight either. So you couldn’t have scrambled planes, and that’s the new story.

Now, most people didn’t read the 9-11 Commission report. You know – much like the bible – highly praised but seldom read. So everybody assumes the 9-11 Report is definitive, but very few people had read it. So hardly anybody knew this new story. So just a few weeks ago, a story came out in Vanity Fair called “9-11 Live – The NORAD Tapes”, and it emphasized that these tapes that NORAD had developed, uh excuse me, had had all along… My point is that they were fabricated later. Uh… that the tapes disprove the second story and prove this new story, and that’s why the 9-11 Commission is telling the new story – it’s based on the tapes.

So, when you read the Danish translation of The New Pearl Harbor, you won’t know that. To learn this, you have to actually to get my next book.

Now, what are the problems in this new story?

Well, first of all they portray the FAA, the Federal Aviation Authority [Adminstration] as just enormously incompetent that day, from top to bottom. Now, to work for the FAA, you have to pass very rigorous tests. You have to be a very competent person who can react well under pressure, and there all the signs that that’s the truth because the FAA orders scrambles over a hundred times a year. The year prior to 9-11, there were 129, so this is something that they do, you know, about 2 or 3 times a week, and it evidently goes flawlessly, and yet that day, nobody could do anything right. Not the controllers at Boston or Indianapolis – and then when they finally called to Herndon, then people there would sit on it, and then finally somebody might call Washington FAA headquarters and they would sit around debating…

‘Well, okay, 2 planes have already hit the World Trade Center ,

This plane has a bomb on it…

Should we call the military?

Oh gee, I don’t know ‘

I mean, it’s just beyond belief. It’s cartoon stuff. And actually they have made a cartoon version of the 9-11 Commission Report, and that’s highly appropriate… because you know some of that dialog is just comic stuff.

And yet, it’s been believed. America – at least of the Americans are still in this trance of 9-11, and most of our journalists are still in this trance of 9-11, or else their corporate owners tell them they can’t say otherwise – who knows what the real story is?

But until up until just the last few weeks, they’ve not revealed any of the problems in the story. Anyway, that’s one problem with the new story.

Another problem is that the new story is that it is the third story that the military has told. And normally if you have a suspect in a crime and he keeps changing his story, you start getting suspicious.

So let’s take – I’ll use an American name – let’s say Charlie Smith…

They suspect that Charlie robbed this bank Saturday night in this little town.

And so the police come to him and say

‘Charlie, where were you Saturday night.

And Charlie says…

Oh, I was at the movies…

No Charlie, the movie theater has been closed all week.

Oh yeah – Saturday night – that was when I was with my girlfriend.

No Charlie. We checked with her and she was home with her husband.

And Charles says…

Oh, that’s right, I was home reading my bible.

You know. You’re probably not going to believe it

And yet…

That’s exactly the story we have with the military.

They tell the one story..
That didn’t sound right…

Oh, that’s right – we did ...
We tried to intercept but we were late…

No, you could have gotten there on time…

Oh, that’s right …

We weren’t even told about the flights…

Laughter and clapping by audience…

A third problem with this new story (the new story is the final story in the 9-11 Commission report that was supported by the Vanity Fair article, both of which were supposedly based on the NORAD tapes)

Is that it contradicts the second story. (see Number 2 above)

So, let’s take Flight 77..

According to the second story, the military was notified at 9:24 that morning and they scrambled airplanes – they scrambled fighters from Langley Air Force Base at 9:30.

That was on September 18th 2001 – that is when NORAD, the section of the military that protects North American air space, put out this timeline, and then when it’s leading generals came to testify to the 9-11 Commission in 2003 – when the Commission first got started – they told that story again, and they said..

‘Yes, we were notified at 9:24, and we scrambled planes at 9:30 in response to … knowing about Flight 77.’

Well, as I say, the new story, according to the NORAD tapes, is that they were not notified about Flight 77, and that really, they scramble the flights – can’t deny the flights were scrambled – everybody knows that flights were scrambled at 9:30 from Langley – so they couldn’t deny that.

So they said –

‘you [NORAD – the military] scrambled them to go after phantom Flight 11.

So the new story is that the controller in Boston, after Flight 11 hit the World Trade Center, this controller got confused and said…

‘oh no, Flight 11 didn’t hit the World Trade Center . It’s still up and it’s heading toward Washington, and so you military, General Arnold, what you did ... you scrambled those flights to go after phantom Flight 11, a flight that didn’t exist – a ghost flight.’

And us ‘Why didn’t you tell us that in 2003?

And General Arnold says…

‘ uh, oh, I didn’t remember…’

Can you imagine this? This would have been the most embarrassing moment in his life…the one time he finally scrambled fighters on 9-11 was to go after a non-existent plane. He would have been so angry with the FAA because they send him on this wild goose chase after a nonexistent plane… and you know, all these people were killed because…and he forgot. You know, it’s beyond belief – this new story.

Now what does the 9-11 Commission do? Why did General Arnold tell a false story? Not only General Arnold . Other people and in fact the whole military because everybody would have known if that story was false that it was false, so everybody in the Pentagon was going along with this story, everybody in the Bush administration… So I mean this is an enormous lie with lots of people participating in the lie, if it was a lie. And so in my 9-11 Commission Report book, I ask the question – I said all the Commission said was “Arnold’s statement was incorrect.” But that means he either had to be confused just a few days after 9-11 or he was lying. Well, it’s hard to believe he could have been confused just a few days after 9-11, so he must have been lying, but they didn’t raise that question.

But now more recently, they have. So in that article in the Vanity Fair that they used this Michael Brauner to tell this new story. Michael Brauner by the way was one of the producers for United 93 (a movie for TV). They say, well he (Arnold) had to be lying because he listened to the NORAD tapes in 2003 just before he gave the testimony, so if he had forgotten about phantom Flight 11 and forgotten about that they weren’t notified about Flight 77, that would have jogged his memory. And yet he came in and still told the old story. And now Chairman Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton have written a book that’s just come out – last week – called “Without Precedent”, and they this in there – that they’re very upset with the military, and they suspect the military lied.

Now, we can believe the military would lie, but can we believe the military would tell the particular lie they’re accused of telling?

Because here’s what it is..

The old story – remember story number 2 put half of the blame on the FAA – they were late notifying, but half of the blame on the military because the military still had time to get there and they didn’t do it.

The new story puts ALL the blame on the FAA. They didn’t notify the military at all, so now the military is blameless according to the new story. Now if the new story were true, can you imagine that the military would have lied to tell the old story that made them look bad. Not just bad, but made them look like they were guilty of treason against the United States and mass murder. Would these guys have told a lie like that to protect the poor little FAA? It just doesn’t fit with any human psychology, and certainly not with any military psychology that they would have told such a lie, and yet this is the new story and the press is buying it.

The New York Times had a very long editorial in which they summarized this new story as told in the Vanity Fair article, and as we say, they swallowed it hook, line and sinker.


Dr. Griffin goes on to say there are numerous other problems and that the new story is just impossible, and you can read about them in his book – 9-11 Commission Report – Omissions and Distortions.

Comic Book Stuff

As usual DRG is right-on. I have been calling the "Official Report" comic book stuff since the report came out............."I mean, it’s just beyond belief. It’s cartoon stuff. And actually they have made a cartoon version of the 9-11 Commission Report, and that’s highly appropriate… because you know some of that dialog is just comic stuff."....DRG

European 9/11 Citizens Jury

The European 9/11 Citizens Jury is a new project in the arsenal for the final truth concerning the atrocities of September 11th 2001. Its purpose is to organize a major investigation, untarnished by corrupt government influence, in the form of a citizen’s jury to take evidence concerning the terrorist acts of that day, and produce a formal verdict.


Thanks for posting the url Amanda. This could be just what we have been looking for. Do you have any idea how they will choose a jury? That is extremely important for obvious reasons.
Who will do the choosing? Everyone involved will be under close scrutiny especially when they come up with a "Guilty" verdict which will certainly happen.

NORAD cover-story cover-up

Excellent. His analysis of NORAD is very important. How can they get away with this mind-blowing disregard for making a decent cover story. I mean it's like the didn't even try.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

According to Ken Jenkins, his theory is that...

....all the "hijacks" were supposed to hit their targets within 28 minutes of each other....

That would've made the "stand-down" accusations meaningless....the gov't could have convincingly lied that they didn't have enough time to scramble fighters...

But since the plan went awry, and there were delays, this vital part of the plan has been exposed...

Show "Ken Jenkins is a known disinfo agent!" by Jim Jones

You're acting like a git,

You're acting like a git, you know that, don't you?

I noticed you joined us about the same time as Mark Roberts and Ron Weick. Don't happen to be mates, are you?

Word to the wise: no one fooled by lame attempts to cast long time members as dis-info agents.

Get a bleeding clue... because once the annoying-mice are given the heave to, registered trouble makers are next, sunbeam.