David Aaronovitch tells Salon.com "9/11 conspiracy theory" is "the most baroque," slams David Ray Griffin

David Aaronovitch, British author of Voodoo Histories, responds to a recent Salon.com interview question about which widely accepted conspiracy theory he finds the "most implausible" with the following:

"I think 9/11 is the most baroque. I can’t tell you what it feels like to see videos on YouTube of David Ray Griffin addressing people about it — one of America’s leading theologians expressing with absolute certainty the existence of a conspiracy so ludicrous it takes your breath away."

To offer one example of Aaronovitch's explanation of 9/11 in his book, consider this passage from page 257:

"On a more general level, the picture painted by the commission of inquiry into 9/11 was one of an Establishment taken utterly by surprise by the events of 11 September.... In the form it took, the attack was neither expected nor predicted; once it was under way it took some time to realise what was going on, and no one knew what might happen next."

Veterans of this blog will see many factual errors in this characterization, notwithstanding the fact that he is talking about "the picture painted" by the 9/11 Commission, which was underfunded, lied to, and stacked with White House insiders.

If the "Establishment" was caught by surprise, how does Aronowitch explain the multiple pre-9/11 intelligence warnings, insider trading on affected airlines, and revelation of an FBI whistleblower that the government knew the time, date, and targets of the attacks? Or how about the multiple war games exercises that rehearsed the same scenario as that which unfolded on 9/11? Or what about the August 11 PDB? Or, simply, what about the first military notification of hijackings in progress prior to 9am that morning, later changed to post-10am after the military realized how bad their first story looked?

Opportunity to share our evidence

This is an opportunity to enlighten people. We all need to share our knowledge as eloquently and as diplomatically as we can. This is only a plus, because every time, anyone expresses anything regarding that day9-11-01, in a public forum, it raises curiosity, and we have an ample amount of well-researced, and visible evidence correlating with science. We need to bring it to them. It always helps us, in the end. It is also worth mentioning that the supporters of the official story, need to bring actual evidence of their story. We have not seen it.

Sadly another Salon person, was part of the hit piece on the National Geographic, Murdoch owned propaganda.

The most severe form of learning disorders are owned by those that "already know everything."

Aaronovitch reveals himself

to be little more than a sanctimonious egotist. In this lecture, he admits to being motivated by a perverse pleasure he obtains from ridiculing those he does not agree with. A glance at his tripe is all it takes to detect the pompous air of aristocratic, ill-informed self-certainty. Aaronovitch is not so much concerned with elucidating the truth as he is with promoting himself as an authority on absolutely nothing at all.

Ney York Times article today also

Another excellent opportunity, today is an article in the NYTimes, discussing the first responders' health issues, and their "nonexistence" by our own government..

Go to:


The most severe form of learning disorders are owned by those that "already know everything."

Whatever you do

Whatever you do don't hit the Salon.com link. It will take you to some dumb movie add. I had to close my browser to get rid of it and that was on Firefox. Since I didn't read the whole article I cannot comment but if that is anything like his web site I wouldn't bother. From the little I did read on this page this David Aaronovitch is just another paid idiot that hasn't a brain the size of an ant. I can't imagine anyone attacking DRG. What a jerk this David Aaronovitch must be.

Simply More Propaganda

From the article title:

""Voodoo Histories": When smart people believe dumb things: From 9/11 to the moon landing, how conspiracy theories have changed history -- and why we must fight back"

Who is we? The media working in cooperation with government interests?

The continued attacks prove our success. Keep it up.

The official story is the original conspiracy theory - an allegation.

DA is just another soulless tool, DRG

will be Lionized by our progeny.

It's funny that even Sibel Edmonds is recalcitrant about taking a strong stand on THE BIG LIE.

Otherwise her site is excellent. I posted a long, semi coherent rant there just now. If u got an inkling....go give me some back-up....its like a 3 on one now.



David Aaronovitch, "I can’t tell you what it feels like to see videos on YouTube of David Ray Griffin addressing people about it — one of America’s leading theologians expressing with absolute certainty the existence of a conspiracy so ludicrous it takes your breath away."

A theory should be deemed ludicrous or not based on its ability to explain the available evidence. When David Aaronovitch uses the word 'ludicrous' he means that it contradicts he pre-conceived notions of what he thinks is true. Ultimately, this doesn't tell me anything about the theory, it only tells me about the psychological dispositions of David Aaronovitch.

Nevertheless, David Aaronovitch seems to have bought into the largest and most consequential conspiracy theory of recent times. There is this mad, crazy dictator named Saddam Hussein and he his producing and stockpiling all this WMD. Saddam plans on turning over all this WMD to a terrorist outfit like Al-Qaeda. All of this was a fantastic lie(conspiracy theory) that led to the deaths of thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and eventually trillions of wasted dollars. Yet he is worried about 9/11 Truth. What a @$%$#!!!

"...the weapons were the pretext on which the invasion was sold to a lot of people in this country, and was attempted to be sold to the people of the world...If nothing is eventually found, I - as a supporter of the war - will never believe another thing that I am told by our government, or that of the US ever again."
David Aaronovitch,

David Aaronovitch doesn't seem to have taken his own advice.

"The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth."
- Aldous Huxley -

Anyone who knows the invasion of Iraq was based on lies

has to then realize it was all about oil. Given that and even a small amount of research, where one would learn about the proposed Afghan pipeline to the Caspian area and its oil and gas reserves, and the very serious problems with the present official explanations for the three NYC building collapses, the conclusion that 911 was an inside job intended as a pretext to launch these wars is inevitable.

The whole war on terror concept provides an excuse and cover, for those who would, to use our military to gain control of resources anywhere they want, by simply creating a false situation to make it look like there are terrorists there being supported or given safe haven by the government of that region. The key was to get the U.S. public willing to support doing whatever it took as long as terrorism was kept off our shores, and the shock and awe we were treated to on Sept. 11, 2001 performed that task.

This guy David Aaronovitch is either a very lightweight thinker or a stooge.

This is the extremely highly

This is the extremely highly respected British MP, Tony Benn, in the revealing interview with Saddam Hussein, who we now know was telling the truth.


This is the David Aaronovitch response to that interview and typifies the pathetic person Aaranovitch is.He ridicules even the most established figures in British politics in the most asinine,humourless way.


"If I meet a powerful man, I ask five questions: What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And, how can I get rid of you?" - Tony Benn, July 2002.

Tony Benn (switches on tape recorder): I'll just mark this. It is now Sunday February 2, the year is 2003. I'm with President Saddam Hussein somewhere in Baghdad, and I'm on a peace mission.

Saddam Hussein: And welcome to you, my friend from England, Mr Bin Wedgwood. I trust your journey has been comfortable.

TB: It was an early start, Mr President, though I'm often up before dawn back in London. It's my age. And the drive seemed longer than the three hours it actually took because of the car windows being blacked out. But it's good finally to be here and to be able to talk about peace.

SH: Ah peace! What is more precious than peace? How do these wars get started? It is a mystery. Toffee?

TB: No thank you, I have some tea here in my old Thermos. Would you like some? You want me to taste it first? It's just ordinary Typhoo. Can't be doing with these fancy teas. [Pours from flask.]

SH: The Iraqi people very much like Typhoo. They know, as you say, that Typhoo puts the T in England. England is a country that they love. For hundreds of years our peoples were friends. Many things we took from you English. Our plugs, our measurements, our traffic lights, our red telephone boxes, even the design of our bunkers. One million - one million! - Iraqi persons used to travel each week to England to shop in your Oxford Street. I myself used to order many of my finest clothings from Man at C&As.

But what has become of that England? The England of Good Queen Bess, The Tolpuddle Diggers and Neville Chamberlain? Now the peace-loving people of the world call down curses upon the head of Mr Tony Blair, because he has allied himself with the Zionist oppressors and American imperialists. Yet we are forgiving. We are cooperating with the UN. Why should we be attacked?

TB: Well, of course, there is this issue of chemical and nuclear weapons; though I looked it up before I came out here, and it was President Andrew Jackson who first authorised the use of chemical weapons - in the shape of camphor bombs - on the Nez Perce Indians in 1831. So there is a level of hypocrisy here which...

SH: Let me tell you my friend - and through you the world - that Iraq has never possessed such weapons. And those we had, we never used. And even when we used them it was purely in self-defence. And then we destroyed them. Except for some warheads and bombs that got lost. And if President Bush knows where they are then he should come here personally, as you have, and find them. That would be helpful. But he will not, and the world knows why. Because he wants Iraq's oil.

TB: Well, it's interesting you should raise that. America goes to war where there's an oil interest, as we did in the Falklands, because the Falklands was an oil war - there's more oil around the Falklands than there is around the United Kingdom. And, of course, some companies are now bigger than nation states. Ford is bigger than South Africa. Toyota is bigger than Norway.

SH: Bigger than Norway?

TB: Bigger than Norway. And I do not want a world which is safe only for oil companies and motor companies, but which is dangerous for my grandchildren.

SH: I too am a grandfather. I too think of my grandchildren, Raghda and Rana's fatherless children.

TB: Fatherless? What happened to their fathers?

SH: I shot them. But there were others I didn't personally shoot, you understand. Family gatherings in our country can sometimes become, how do you say, over-exuberant. We have much family: uncles, half-brothers, nieces' husbands. And they all want jobs in the secret services or running the Olympic committee. They get angry. Boom! What can you do? But you, Mr Bin Wedgwood, are a courageous horseman, a roaring tiger, for coming here to speak peace.

TB: Mr President. I've got a picture on the wall of my study of Daniel in the lion's den. Have you heard that story? In the Bible there's a man called Daniel, and he went into a lion's den. They said, you'll be eaten up. He wasn't. And my Dad used to say to me, dare to be a Daniel, dare to stand alone, dare to have a purpose firm, dare to let it be known.

SH: Hmmm. That doesn't happen much here. Do you have a final question?

TB: Yes, it's one I put to all powerful men. How can I get rid of y..

"This garbage is proof enough that David Aaronovitch is an arsehole of the highest order,in fact he dissapeared up his own arsehole a long time ago. "

Mainstream #1 Priority: Do Not Let the Muslims Off the Hook.

I have mentioned this before on a thread some months back, but :

Aaronovitch's commentary reflects a position very common to many who obsess on attacking and marginalizing those who seek working, sensible and battle-proof answers to the legion of unsolved aspects of 9/11. The hidden, unsavory facts about the how, the who and the why of 9/11 will at the very, very least, *diminish or dilute* the guilt and blame re. 9/11 which has been assigned to the world's Muslim community by the governments of all major western industrial nations, independent and private organizations and especially the world's mainstream media.

When the *entire* truth comes out (which it absolutely will at some point) we might even find out that the greatest guilt committed by Muslim/Arabs in this entire affair, was by being on the sharp end of some extremely heavy duty coercion on the part of those involved in perpetrating 9/11. The potential "dilution" or even "removal" of guilt, or "letting off the hook", as regards the world's Muslim and Arab community, as a result of 9/11 truth, is a huge and massive problem for those who direct prejudice, enmity or even outright hatred against these groups; the prevention of the emergence/dissemination of 9/11 Truth is seen as a Number One priority in the minds of those who require the continuation of the current and ongoing demonization of, and series of wars against those who qualify, with the accompanying prodigious, astronomical gravy train of taxpayer cash funneled towards the beneficiaries of the wars and security measures that 9/11 so efficiently enabled.

If these groups, against whom the blame has been assigned, are as guilty as the powers-that-be maintain, then any extra, rigorous, independent research into 9/11 would uncover material that might have been overlooked, and would be welcomed with open arms, gratitude and much media hoopla and headline: in other words, if the official explanation is correct and reflects reality, then the new facts uncovered would solidify their case even more. (If this indeed was the case, people who have ceased questioning the basic official premise of 9/11 years ago, and the brouhaha would revolve around minutiae and details concerning, for example, ineptitude and incompetence. However, with each passing week, yet more material which contradicts the official version emerges... and the harder we work to get the facts out, the counter-attacks become more intense. Even thought the most 'scientific' approach they have to offer is name-calling and endless "conspiracy theory" accusations, they, unfortunately have the loudest voice.. the mainstream corporate media.

The hopeful part: of this: Any scenario built upon lies is a house of cards without a foundation. The laws of probability infer that at some point in the future, it will collapse, spectacularly... possibly even at free fall acceleration.

Well-said! ________________ J



JFK on secrecy and the press

minor point of disagreement

You'll never get even a house of cards to collapse at free-fall speeds.
And, you'll never get a house of cards to collapse symmetrically or within it's own footprint once you have a certain height::footprint ratio.
Chaos takes over.. minor misalignments have a cascading effect on the members of the system as they effect each other.
Unless you use explosives to destroy your house of cards, of course.
Otherwise, I totally agree.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
~George Orwell

Evidently Salon stopped the influx of comments at 669



There is a site in the UK called media lens,who profess to monitor the media and correct distortions.Media lens refuse to allow any discussion on 9/11 however this post has been allowed through the net so feel free to make comments,this has a wider audience than you might think.

Mighty oaks from acorns grow.

Sounds familiar

Professing to monitor the media and correct distortions, while refusing to go near the topic of 9/11? That sounds to me like some kind of British equiavalent of FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting).

Fair Contact Addresses...


Good leads here to push a bit. Hope a few of us take the time to try.

Media Activism & Administration: Peter Hart (phart@fair.org)
Shipping/Sales: Sanford Hohauser (shohauser@fair.org)
Managing Editor: Julie Hollar (jhollar@fair.org)
Program Director: Janine Jackson (jjackson@fair.org)
Extra! Editor: Jim Naureckas (jnaureckas@fair.org)
Senior Analyst: Steve Rendall (srendall@fair.org)
Extra! Publisher: Deborah Thomas (dthomas@fair.org)

Contributing Writer: Seth Ackerman
Website Contributor: Gabriel W. Voiles (gvoiles@fair.org)

More here: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=105




11:28 - 09 Feb 2010

Hi all,, I’ll try to respond to the comments of everyone but first I will respond to David’s remarks. Regarding the aim of the article - as Edward Lewis says the article’s focus is on the 9/11 truth movement and its specific claims regarding the events of September 11th 2001. I neither have the time nor the inclination to look into every outlandish scenario proposed by the movement, but since the claims regarding 9/11 are so implausible I don’t have much confidence regarding the claims of much the same people regarding flight 253.

Willful Ignorance..Idiocracy