Elizabeth Woodworth

Foreign Policy Journal: Why the Fuss about Richard Falk's Alluding to Gaps in the Official 9/11 Story?

URL:  http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/01/28/why-the-fuss-the-call-to-arms-against-un-rapporteur-richard-falk-for-alluding-to-gaps-in-the-911-official-story/

Why the Fuss? The Call to Arms against UN Rapporteur Richard Falk for Alluding to Gaps in the 9/11 Official Story

 

by Elizabeth Woodworth

January 28, 2011

A former Princeton international law professor has been condemned by the UN Secretary General and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for alluding to “an apparent cover-up” of the events of September 11th, 2001.

Digital Journal: 9/11 Truth: Time to review post 9/11mentality and face reality?

Note, this is an excellent article, well worth the read all the way through, and perfect for sending to others.

link:  http://www.digitaljournal.com/print/article/299059

 

Opinion: 9/11 Truth: Time to review post-9/11 mentality and face reality?

Posted Oct 17, 2010 by  Bill Lindner
9/11 Truth: As more evidence obliterating the Government's 'official' 9/11 fairy tale emerges, demands for investigation into the truth about what happened that day are growing. When do we review the post-9/11 mentality and face reality?
September 11  2001  was the exclamation mark in modern history which will be remembered  the obvious...
National Park Service
September 11, 2001, was the exclamation mark in modern history which will be remembered, the obvious sign of a drastically changed global dynamic.
 

The public demand -- backed by former senior intelligence officials, former members of Congress and other government officials -- for a real investigation into the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is growing, and there is no sign of them going away any time soon. Why? Because, for many, it's common knowledge that the official story from the 9/11 Commission is admittedly full of lies and false information and has fallen apart.

 

An excellent essay by Elizabeth Woodworth explains the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and how it could be applied to an investigation into the attacks of 9/11. The effects of 9/11 are far from over as the U.S. Government has used those attacks to declare its fraudulent, endless 'War on Terror', and has shrouded itself in suspicious secrecy to keep its illicit actions covered up. There are many good reasons to investigate the attacks, and more evidence continues surfacing showing that the official story is seriously flawed and full of holes. It's important to understand the events of that day and how it has affected us.

Superb Interview with David Ray Griffin on the Collapse of WTC 7

On a related note, Cincinnati 9/11 Truth's hour long public access show (which used to be once a month but has quadrupled to once a week due to viewer demand) focused a sizable segment on DRG's WTC7 book two nights ago; hope to post that here asap. - Adam

Superb Interview with David Ray Griffin on the Collapse of WTC 7
by Elizabeth Woodworth

A compelling interview of David Ray Griffin by George Kenney of Electric Politics is now available for downloading (or streaming).

The interview is 1 hour and 8 minutes long, and should be heard by everyone interested in the state of democracy in America:

The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7

The fact that "Seven", a 47-story building with a base the size of a football field, was in freefall collapse for 2.25 seconds, has now been admitted by NIST, the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology. This admission has enormous implications for the whole official story about September 11, 2001.

Amazon not accepting (positive) responses for reviews on Griffin's new book

I am trying to record my approval of reviews posted on Amazon of David Ray Griffin's new book on Osama Bin Laden, Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?. I get the message indicating that my comment has been processed, but the counters do not increment. Elizabeth Woodworth has reported to me that others are telling her the same thing. Can some others try this and see if they get the same results? The link is

http://www.amazon.com/Osama-Bin-Laden-Dead-Alive/product-reviews/1566567831/ref=sr_1_1_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Here is the interaction:

The question after each review is: "Was this review helpful to you?"
The response button I choose for each good review is "Yes"
The Amazon response is "Thanks for your feedback"
The counter at the top of the review does not increment.

Is this a computer glitch, a mis-understanding of what is supposed to happen, or someone gaming Amazon to keep favorable review counts down?

Regard
Michael Zimmer
http://www.TheProgressiveMind.info

David Ray Griffin’s “The New Pearl Harbor Revisited” rated “Pick of the Week” by Publishers Weekly

David Ray Griffin’s “The New Pearl Harbor Revisited” rated “Pick of the Week” by Publishers Weekly

The nearly 40% of American people who doubt the official account regarding the September 11, 2001 attacks will be gratified to learn that their misgivings have become recommended reading by a pillar of the book trade, Publishers Weekly.

The leading starred review on PW’s “Web Pick of the Week” ( http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6617001.html?industryid=47159 ) is Dr. David Ray Griffin’s newly released “The New Pearl Harbor Revisited”, Interlink/Olive Branch press, 2008.

In its November 24, 2008 online issue, PW writes:

Griffin “addresses many points in exhaustive detail, from the physical impossibility of the official explanation of the towers’ collapse to the Commission's failure to scrutinize the administration to the NIST’s contradiction of its own scientists to the scads of eyewitness and scientific testimony in direct opposition to official claims.

An Evidence-Based Response to Peter Barber regarding his article, "The Truth is Out There", Financial Times, June 7, 2008

Dear Mr. Barber:

I am a professional medical librarian who delivered "best evidence" literature to the public health officers of the British Columbia government for 25 years.

Your article, "The Truth is Out There", is an "ad hominem" approach to a critically serious matter, and it unfortunately fails to deal with the evidence involved.

You will no doubt agree that 9/11 has changed the world. It is a seminal event which has grossly undermined trust and erected enormous barriers between the West and the Middle East. And it has led to widespread mayhem and death in that region. Obviously, questions concerning our understanding of the event are of the utmost importance.

The US government has steadfastly refused to release the evidence which it claims to have. Evidence, which, if in existence, would settle once and for all the questions which are being raised, nearly 7 years later, on the front page of the Financial Times of London.

There were 85 cameras rolling outside the Pentagon, whose film could be offered to save the Times the trouble of running these articles.

Richard Gage 9/11 Architect: Blueprint for truth

Richard Gage 9/11 Architect - Blueprint for truth
From Common Dreams: http://commonground.ca/iss/201/cg201_blueprint.shtml

by Elizabeth Woodworth

More than 300 architects and engineers are calling for a real investigation of the WTC Twin Towers, citing evidence of explosive controlled demolition. After learning of the near free-fall collapses from 9/11 research veteran Dr. David Ray Griffin, architect Richard Gage is now reaching out to the public and his peers to expose the physical evidence that has been surfacing steadily in the professional community, asking questions like, "What mechanism is required to turn 90,000 tons of concrete into powder the width of a human hair?"

Video Book Review: "9/11 Contradictions"

TRANSCRIPT:

David Ray Griffin provides more food for thought with the release of his 5th single-author book on the events of September the 11th... 9/11 Contradictions. (Purchase a copy from 911truth.org here.)

Soon, we will be seven years away from an event scorched into our collective consciousness, (and collective unconscious), but for those of us who have taken the time to revisit that day in our memories and in various forms of media: audio, video, the written word... it hasn't put seven years of distance between us and 9/11, rather, 9/11 has become a historical event known in intimate detail by students in a global, open-university setting.

25 Intolerable Contradictions: The Final Undoing of the Official 9/11 Story

25 Intolerable Contradictions: The Final Undoing of the Official 9/11 Story
Review of David Ray Griffin's book

by Elizabeth Woodworth - Global Research, March 17, 2008

A review of "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," by Dr. David Ray Griffin. Interlink Publishing, March 2008. 368 p. List

At last there is a book about 9/11 that politicians and journalists can openly discuss without fear of being labeled "conspiracy theorists".

9/11 Contradictions advances no theories. It simply exposes 25 astonishing internal contradictions that will haunt the public story of this unparalleled event for all time.

Until now, the persistent and disturbing questions about the day that changed the world have confused and alienated journalists and politicians, because:


  1. The technical issues regarding the collapse of the towers, the failure of the military to intercept the flights, and the relatively minor damage to the Pentagon have been considered too complex for analysis in the media.

However, Griffin’s new book requires no technical expertise from the reader, because each readable chapter revolves around one simple internal contradiction inherent in the public story. "If Jones says ‘P’ and Smith says ‘Not P’, we can all recognize that something must be wrong, because both statements cannot be true."

  • Many who have doubted the official story have offered alternative theories which have been dismissed as "conspiracy theories" by a press which must understandably place a high value on its credibility.
  • However, this book offers no alternative theories to explain the contradictions within the public story. It simply presents the glaring contradictions that have never been probed by Congress or the media, and beseeches members of these institutions come to grips with the reality and lead the charge for a truly independent investigation.

  • The 9/11 issue is six years old, journalists are busy people, and the world has moved on.
  • Though six years have passed, this matter is by no means closed, nor is the trail cold. "The accepted story about 9/11 has been used to increase military spending, justify wars, restrict civil liberties, and exalt the executive branch of the government." Indeed, this reviewer notes, the public story has recently been challenged in foreign forums (Japan Parliament, January 10, 2008, and at the European Parliament building in Brussels, February 26, 2008). The 9/11 Commissioners themselves have cast doubt on the credibility of the Commission Report in their January 2, 2008 New York Times article, "Stonewalled by the CIA." (Ref. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html)

    Continued...
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8374

    Comment: 9/11 Commissioners Kean and Hamilton NYT January 2, 2008 Op-Ed Article: "Stonewalled by the C.I.A."

    Comment: 9/11 Commissioners Kean and Hamilton NYT January 2, 2008 Op-Ed Article: "Stonewalled by the C.I.A."

    by Elizabeth Woodworth, January 11, 2008.

    On January 2, 2008, the New York Times carried an op-ed article entitled "Stonewalled by the C.I.A." by 9/11 Commission Chair Thomas Kean and Vice Chair Lee Hamilton (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html).

    It is difficult to understand why there has been so little follow-up to Kean and Hamilton’s emphatic charges that the CIA wilfully obstructed their investigation.

    The tapes in question were destroyed in 2005, long after the Commission had collected its evidence in 2003 and early 2004.

    This revelation constitutes a new and highly visible public schism between the Chairs of the 9/11 Commission and the CIA, the only agency they thanked twice in the Preface to their official Report.

    Who were those hijackers, anyway? A Telling Story Resurrected

    Who were those hijackers, anyway? A Telling Story Resurrected

    by Elizabeth Woodworth, September 30, 2007

    Abstract: The sole purpose of this short article is to restore to the public domain a highly significant local news story which is no longer available on the Internet. "Fourth Terrorist Suspect May Have Ties to Venice", by staff writers Kimel, Werner, and Crain, appeared in the Sarasota Herald Tribune on Saturday Sept. 22, 2001. It is attached here, in full original print format, showing its source and date. This story should be widely downloaded as contributing evidence for the inevitable new 9/11 investigation.

    According to a local news story which has been scrubbed from the Internet, two of the devout fundamentalist hijackers who “hated our freedoms”, were frequently seen to have indulged the seamier side of those freedoms in the small town of Venice, Florida.

    The locally researched “Fourth Terrorist Suspect May Have Ties to Venice” (Sarasota Herald Tribune, September 22nd, 2001) is significant for three reasons:

    The Military Drills of September 11th: Why a New Investigation is Needed

    A GlobalResearch.ca exclusive.

    The Military Drills of September 11th: Why a New Investigation is Needed

    by Elizabeth Woodworth - 9/27/2007

    Information regarding military exercises is classified and difficult to research. Though there was unusually high and confusing drill activity on 9/11, this strange coincidence has not gained much public notice. This essay quotes military officials from their own magazines, and compares their statements to what the 9/11 Commission wrote about the so-called surprise factor, and also to the Commission's position that the drills aided the response.

    Though both the 9/11 Commission Report and members of the Bush Administration repeatedly stated that the use of planes as weapons could not have been predicted, other official sources indicate that military exercises had been underway to counteract this very possibility.

    1. Was it a Surprise that Hijacked Planes Were Used as Weapons on 9/11?

    The element of surprise has been widely given (and quoted) as the reason why the 9/11 attacks were so successful against the world’s greatest military power.

    Before proceeding to the statements on both sides of the issue, the context for these attacks should be understood in light of three defense procedures which were unusually and significantly changed in the months preceding 9/11:

    1. A May 8th 2001 Statement by the President gave responsibility for coordinating, training and planning all national defense programs related to weapons of mass destruction to Vice President Cheney, whose office was not part of the National Command Authority. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission that he was present and observed Dick Cheney in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center tracking the position of Flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. “Based on Norm Minetta's testimony and other information, it appears that the military have regarded Cheney as a ‘Deputy Commander-in-Chief’. They also understand that he is the real power behind the throne...It appears that Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge of all the many air defense exercises that took place on the morning of September 11, 2001."

    2. The 1997 hijacking scramble protocol CJCSI 3610, which distinguished emergent situations (requiring immediate action between the FAA and the military) from non-emergent situations (requiring decision input from the highest levels of the DoD) was rewritten June 1, 2001, as ordered by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. As a result, the number of fighter-interceptor scrambles fell from the usual average of 7-8 per month before the rewrite, to zero during the 3.3 months before September 11th, and to zero on September 11th itself.

    3. Changes in the dates of annual and semi-annual military air defense exercises resulted in an unprecedented concentration of air drills on September 11th, and included hijackings and drills in which planes hit buildings. These will be explored later.

    The transfer of two line defense roles to senior members of the Bush-Cheney Administration, paired with the concentration of air drills on the day itself, raise serious questions regarding the success of the attacks.

    Continued...
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6906

    President Bush at the Florida School: New Conflicting Testimonies

    (Elizabeth Woodworth is a colleague of David Ray Griffin. In this piece, Woodworth examines media reports about Bush's non-action at the Booker Elementary, and warns about URLs that seem to change like the wind. Please distribute widely. -r.)

    President Bush at the Florida School: New Conflicting Testimonies

    by Elizabeth Woodworth
    July 6, 2007
    www.911blogger.com

    There is a completely overlooked report in the September 1, 2002 Tampa Tribune which strongly suggests an early coverup over how long President Bush remained in the Sarasota classroom after he received Andrew Card’s whispered message that the second tower had been hit.

    Sitting at close range was Grade 2 school teacher Sandra Kay Daniels, whose virtually unknown account of events was published at the anniverary of 9/11, on Sept. 1, 2002, in the Tampa Tribune:

    Don't ask what was in George W. Bush's letter to the teacher whose late father was the son of a former slave.
    "Uh-uh-uh. No, no, no," Daniels says, her voice rippling with don't-go-there warnings about the personal note she received around Sept. 17, 2001. "That will remain sacred."
    Daniels, you see, was standing near Bush last Sept. 11 when White House chief of staff Andrew Card whispered in the presidential ear of tragedies. Precisely what Card said is uncertain, but he reportedly told Bush - who already knew a commercial plane had struck the north tower of New York's World Trade Center - that the south tower also had been hit.
    In that instant, Daniels says, she knew "this wasn't the same person who had sat down in that chair." Bush grimaced and, obviously lost in thought, forgot about the book in his lap.... Bush picked up the book and read with the students for eight or nine minutes.

    ...While Bush was contemplating Card's remarks, Daniels' thoughts were a blur. She knew something was amiss; nonetheless, she had to carry on with the lesson. "I couldn't gently kick him. ... I couldn't say, "OK, Mr. President. Pick up your book, sir. The whole world is watching.' " I know he is the president, but that was my room he was in."
    As he was leaving Daniels' room, he told her only, "There are matters I have to attend to." He didn't explain anything to her class. Instead, he went into the school's media center, where he made a televised statement to a room crammed with reporters, guests, parents and students who had hoped to chat with him. (1)

    Apart from the fact that Ms. Daniels reported having later received a personal communication from the President, this report is not remarkable, until it is compared with two other accounts of Ms. Daniels’ experience that day, both published in large mainstream newspapers within 12 days of her first account.

    David Ray Griffin debunks the official 9/11 story Common Ground May 2007

    David Ray Griffin debunks the official 9/11 story - Common Ground May 2007

    by Elizabeth Woodworth

    David Ray Griffin is a professor of philosophy of religion and theology and a proponent of 9/11 conspiracy theories that implicate members of the US government in the attacks. His just-released book is Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory (Interlink Publishing). Griffin’s 9/11 books include The New Pearl Harbor (2003) and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (2004).

    New testimony from on-the-job first responders provides proof positive that 9/11 was an inside job. Eminent, world-renowned, Whitehead philosopher Dr. David Ray Griffin has been dogging the steps of the 9/11 official theory since colleagues first pointed out discrepancies in 2003.