9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed

Front Cover
Olive Branch Press, 2011 - History - 314 pages
1 Review
?Was the now widely unpopular war in Afghanistan ever justified? Why do many otherwise fact-driven journalist still endorse the official account of 9/11, despite the scientific improbability of several important details? Were some of the phone calls that reportedly came from the hijacked airliners faked? Have American Christians been largely blinded to the truth about 9/11 by accepting a nationalist version of faith?

What people are saying - Write a review

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

Hello. I'm Dr. Sass Cunstein, Special Advisor to the Presidential
Commission on Un-American Discourse and Conspiracy Extremism.
I've reviewed this book, 9/11 Ten Years Later, giving it a
thorough
once-over, and I can assure you it's no good.
It's one of those many unreasoned tomes written by superfluous
cranks who propagate nefariously ridiculous conjectures, spectacularly
inane speculations, and egregiously outrageous hypotheses.
How do people believe in such patently absurd and demonstrably false
theories? Here's how.
Some well-intentioned but cognitively dysfunctional commentators
initiate an "internet site" called www.paranoid_delusion.com or
something like that. Person A starts spouting misinformed inaccuracies
like "It was a controlled demolition!"
Then Persons B and C start agreeing with this, and they loudly
repeat it to three or four other Persons D through F or G, who
hypnotically echo these wildly unscientific statements to yet more
Persons with letter designations and so on, until this closed and
biased network of uncritical articulations feeds into itself, in a
process I have termed "Spastic Sociopsycho-homogenization".
Individually, these persons have what has come to be known as an
"Inebriated Phenomenology", such that potentially corrective
information from outside the corroborational group is rejected (an
Informational Blockade) and only those nutty ideas from inside the
group are mutually amplified and reinforced without regard to logic or
legitimately serious debate, and they devolve into a violent maelstrom
of self-fulfilling polarization.
What do we do about these sorts of problems? Here's one
recommendation.
We could join groups like this under surreptitious names like
FoilHat007 or TruthTalker or something. They'll let us in because at
first we'll act kooky like them.
After we become trusted members we'll insert accurate and true
statements like "It was NOT a controlled demolition" etc. These
utterances will resonate throughout the communicative milieu in a
process I term "Intersociocerebral Noetico-Balkanization" where
certain less politically mesmerized individuals will realize their
errors of judgment and spread their new-found rationality to others of
the group, including holocaust deniers and UFO enthusiasts.
Another method, and one that may be especially useful in preempting
a possible "North American Spring" phenomenon, would be to closely
monitor the usage of social media for potentially violent and/or
inappropriate extremist phraseology. When an instigator of protest or
riot coordinates his activities via handheld device, ameliorative
pharmacological agents are released across the skin barrier, while
therapeutic GPS-Satellite controlled high intensity microwave energy
is directed at his skull, in an antiterrorism protocol known as
"Reformative Placidylo-Vietnamization".
Alternatively, or additionally, we could simply make wacky
conspiracy theories illegal. With special funding through Homeland
Security, cadres of Judicial Assistants in computing centers across
the nation would be kept busy determining on a case-by-case basis,
which theories on a sliding scale were more or less conspiratorial,
and which were more or less wacky, and then levying the corresponding
penalties on the arrested and thus convicted perpetrators.
How about, say, from five hundred to five thousand dollars per
theory-event.
In such a scenario, surely the author of this book which I have so
effectively critiqued, would be charged a substantial fine, indeed.
 

Other editions - View all

About the author (2011)

David Ray Griffin is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Theology at Claremont School of Theology, Professor Emeritus of Religion at Claremont Graduate University, and Co-Founder of the Center for Process Studies. He is the author of "Two Great Truths: A New Synthesis of Scientific Naturalism and Christian Faith", and coauthor, with John B. Cobb Jr., of "Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition". Author of numerous books in philosophy of religion, he has also published two popular books on the World Trade Center attacks: "The New Pearl Harbor: Distubing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11" and "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions".

Bibliographic information