Big church publisher buys 9-11 Bush plot

[Judi Lynn]

Big church publisher buys 9-11 Bush plot
Presbyterian press to release book by conspiracist who blames attack on White House, not bin Laden



It wasn't Osama bin Laden who orchestrated the 9-11 attacks, it was George W. Bush, according to a book to be published this month by the Presbyterian Church USA.

Called "Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action," it is the third book on the conspiracy theory authored by David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of theology at Claremont School of Theology.

According to Christianity Today, Griffin argues in his new book that the Bush administration planned the events of Sept. 11, 2001, so they could provide justification for going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq.

"I became more convinced that if the truth about 9-11 was going to be exposed, the churches were probably going to have to be involved," Griffin told the magazine. "If we become convinced that the so-called war on terror is simply a pretext for enlarging the American empire, we have every reason as Christians to try and expose the truth behind 9/11."
(snip/...)

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=14322

[greyl]

1. Next, is a book marketed to astrologers.

Why can't they find an audience with the rational science community I wonder?

[petgoat]

2. Dr. Griffin and Dr. Fetzer have both written extensively on the philosophy

of science and epistemology.

Fetzer has a Masters and PhD in History and Philosophy of Science

Here's a list of Fetzer's books:

Authored Books:

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE. Causation, Explanation, and Corroboration. Dordrecht/Boston/London: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1981. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 69) xiv + 323 pp.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Its Scope and Limits. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990. (Studies in Cognitive Systems, Vol. 4) xviii + 338 pp.

PHILOSOPHY AND COGNITIVE SCIENCE. New York, NY: Paragon House Publishers, 1991. (Paragon Issues in Philosophy) xvii + 170 pp. 2nd edition (revised and expanded), 1996. xx + 191 pp.

Published in Portuguese translation under the title, FILOSOFIA E CIENCIA COGNITIVA. Bauru, SP,Brazil: EDUSC, 2000. 194 pp.

PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE. New York, NY: Paragon House Publishers, 1993. (Paragon Issues in Philosophy) xviii + 197 pp.

COMPUTERS AND COGNITION: Why Minds are Not Machines. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. (Studies In Cognitive Systems , Vol. 25) xix + 323 pp.

THE EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE: Are Humans the Only Animals with Minds? (Chicago, IL: Open Court, 2005), pp. xx + 272.

Co-Authored Books:

GLOSSARY OF EPISTEMOLOGY/PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE (co-authored with Robert F. Almeder). New York, NY: Paragon House Publishers, 1993. (Paragon Glossaries for Research, Reading, and Writing) ix + 149 pp.

GLOSSARY OF COGNITIVE SCIENCE (co-authored with Charles E. M. Dunlop). New York, NY: Paragon House Publishers, 1993. (Paragon Glossaries for Research, Reading, and Writing) xii +146 pp.

Edited Books:

PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHICAL REASONING. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1984. (American Philosophical Quarterly Library of Philosophy) x + 293 pp.

SOCIOBIOLOGY AND EPISTEMOLOGY. Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985. (Synthese Library, Vol. 180) x + 282 pp.

ASPECTS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster/Tokyo: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988. (Studies in Cognitive Systems, Vol. 1) xiii + 385 pp.

PROBABILITY AND CAUSALITY. Essays in Honor of Wesley C. Salmon. Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster
/Tokyo: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1988. (Synthese Library, Vol. 192) xvii + 353 pp.

EPISTEMOLOGY AND COGNITION. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991. (Studies in Cognitive Systems, Vol. 6) xiii + 301 pp.

FOUNDATIONS OF PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE: Recent Developments. New York, NY: Paragon House Publishers, 1993. (Paragon Issues in Philosophy) xvii + 512 pp.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF CARL G. HEMPEL: Studies in Science, Explanation, and Rationality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000. xxix + 342 pp.

SCIENCE, EXPLANATION, AND RATIONALITY: Aspects of the Philosophy of Carl G. Hempel. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001. xxxiii + 423 pp.

CONSCIOUSNESS EVOLVING. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishers, 2002 (Advances in Consciouness Research) xix + 251 pp.

Co-Edited Books:

PHILOSOPHY, LANGUAGE, AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. Resources for Processing Natural Language (co-edited with Jack Kulas and Terry L. Rankin). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988. (Studies in Cognitive Systems, Vol. 2) xii + 421 pp.

PHILOSOPHY, MIND, AND COGNITIVE INQUIRY. Resources for Understanding Mental Processes (co-edited with David Cole and Terry L. Rankin). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers,
1990. (Studies in Cognitive Systems, Vol. 3) xi -+ 449 pp.

DEFINITIONS AND DEFINABILITY: Philosophical Perspectives (co-edited with David Shatz and George Schlesinger). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991. (Synthese Library, Vol. 216)
ix + 323 pp.

PROGRAM VERIFICATION. Fundamental Issues in Computer Science (co-edited with Timothy Colburn and Terry L. Rankin). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993. (Studies in Cog-
nitive Systems, Vol. 14) xiii + 457 pp.

THE NEW THEORY OF REFERENCE: Kripke, Marcus, and Its Origins (co-edited with Paul W. Humphreys). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998. (Synthese Library, Vol. 270) xiii + 290 pp.




http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/completecv.html

[greyl]

3. So?

Referring to The Bible may be the most popular form of fallacious Appeal to Authority, and marketing a book specifically to Christians which purports to deal with facts surrounding a major event is a bit odd, imo. I'm sure they've done their market research.

[Artdyst]

5. Just as the Bush Admin. has researched what kind of "info" campaign

would be the most effective to undermine people trying to find out the truth about 9/11. Marketing the truth is much more appealing than marketing disinformation/propaganda thru various channels, regardless of who the audience is.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. So, your original argument is effectively demolished.

[greyl]

7. I meant regarding 9/11 and peer review. nt

[John Q. Citizen]

14. Ohhhh. Well why didn't you say so?

Scientific research takes time,

careful review, and redundant experimentation to arrive at a supportable theory.

Newspaper articles, Popular Science articles, and books directed at market segments are much more easily gotten to print quickly and with much less necessity of scientific proof.

One need look no further than the NYT articles on WMD and Iraq/ Al Quida connections to see that.

This book is self admittedly a pop science/hearts and mind effort. I think it's smart because similar pop science efforts to portray scientific research into what happened on 9/11 as "junk science" or "agenda driven" science abounds.

If the climate researchers who initially proposed the human driven global warming theories had undertaken more effort early on in the political arena, they would be miles ahead today. The hydrocarbon corporations did just that and set back the scientific research years, and set back the publics ability to examine the scientific research by years.

This book is intended to open minds to the possibilities that 9/11 was an inside job more than as an academic undertaking. However this will help any serious academic undertaking in that area.

[greyl]

16. Yes, I could have been more clear. :) nt

[Make7]

9. Really?

greyl wrote:

Why can't they find an audience with the rational science community I wonder?

Are you saying that Dr. Fetzer is the audience that this book will be marketed to?

- Make7

[John Q. Citizen]

18. no, I'm saying they already have an academic science audience,

as demonstrated by PB.

This books purpose isn't the purpose you (or greyl) would want it to be. tough luck, eh?

So write your own book if you have something to say...

[Artdyst]

19. Suggested title: "Humility, And How I Achieved It", by Make 7 nt

nt

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greyl]

37. lol

That one fell into your lap.

[Make7]

20. On the subject of 9/11?

The article in the original post reports that Dr. Griffin is the author of this book. Is that incorrect?

- Make7

[Artdyst]

21. Ask the author of the original post. Thanks.

nt

[petgoat]

8. Dr. Griffin is a theologian and a Christian,

and the suggestion that there's somethng dishonest or venal
about his linking of issues of Christian ethics to the
societal consequences of 9/11 is mean-spirited and ignorant.

Dr. Griffin's debut lecture in Madison in 4/05 was entitled
"9/11 and the American Empire: How Should Religious People
Respond?" and was delivered to the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian
Alliance.

http://911review.com/articles/griffin/madison.html

Dr. Griffin's 4/06 lecture in California "9/11, American Empire,
and Christian Faith" analyzed quite shrewdly the quasi-religious
nature of the official story and the Holy War it launched.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060405112622982

Dr. Griffin is acting in the tradition of courageous people
of faith standing up for what's right and true and fighting
evil and lies, regardless of the risk to themselves.

[greyl]

10. I'm well aware of that, yes.

I'm an amateur theologian, and I have a problem with the suggestion that agnostics and atheists have an inferior morality to people who follow the Abrahamic tradition. Add to that the fact that Griffin sites Thierry Meyssan in a friendly way, and the fact that Griffin appears to be in total denial of the imperialist & faith-based causes of terrorism, and I'm led to seriously suspect that Griffin is just another ecumenical apologist who is fulfilling the Rovian role of a diabolical disinfo creator for the Lord.

[Artdyst]

15. How was that DU meetup? We're waiting for your report.

I guess you thought it was more important to try and smear the reputation of Dr. Griffin before you tackle the subject of that DU meetup you said you were going to. Now that you've done your number on Dr. Griffin (whose reputation can only be enhanced by disinformation campaigners), let's hear about that DU meetup, k?

[greyl]

17. I have a magic trick for you. I can make your face turn red.

Refresh the page.

[petgoat]

22. Personally I find secular ethics more compelling than the imagining of

a God and then more imagining of what it wants, so your
characterization of my position as denigrating atheistic ethics
is all wet. In these times, I'm glad when I see any ethics at
all.

Dr. Griffin cites Meyssan in his first book, explaining that
he did not have time to check the research of his sources.
I haven't heard him cite Meyssan lately. He says the
Pentagon/missile controversy is moot because the lack of
Pentagon defenses shows complicity right there.

Griffin appears to be in total denial of the imperialist &
faith-based causes of terrorism

Griffin rightly focuses on the beam in the American eye rather
than the dust in someone else's. Taliban did not invade the
USA after refusing to provide proof of its supposed reason for
doing so, and then lose interest in the alleged goal of the
invasion. Taliban warned us befoere 9/11 of upcomng attacks.
Muslims are not planning to install a system of death rays from
the sky, nor are the engaged in a campaign of global domination.
Griffin's failure to address terrorism does not mean he's in
denial about it. Your irrational invocation of this irrelevant
issue suggests that you are in denial of the gaping holes in
the official story--not only of the 9/11 attacks, but Madrid and
London too.

[greyl]

24. You're misunderstanding.

"your characterization of my position"

I was only speaking of Griffin, not you at all.

"Griffin rightly focuses on the beam in the American eye rather than the dust in someone else's. Taliban did not invade the USA after refusing to provide proof of its supposed reason ..."

When I said "imperialist" I was talking about the USA. OBL, for one, cited the invasion of Lebanon in the 80s as the rationale behind what we call terrorism.

When I said "faith-based", I was talking about both fundamentalist Christians and Islamists. Not Muslims, Islamists.

[petgoat]

33. Maybe you could have been a little more clear. nt

[peacetalksforall]

38. The church involves money, leader(s), and follower along w/doctrine.

A Coulter book involves money (Mellon-Scaife type sourcing), leaders (party strategists and book distribution deputies), and followers.

Is it not just a matter of purpose?

Right wing purpose - control of the people and as much monetary gain as possible - for a few.
This selective church purpose - truth?

What's wrong with that?

[Franknable]

39. if it's as you say, then there's nothing wrong with it, in my opinion.

Like so many things, it depends on "where you are coming from".

[John Q. Citizen]

4. Apparently they have found a a niche in the scientific community as

well.

Hey greyl, how was the DU meet-up? How's about a report?

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Opps, delete wrong thread.

[greyl]

13. Yes, I could have been more clear. :) nt

[greyl]

12. Fuck a niche, I'm talking authentic peer review.

Regarding the meet-up, it was seriously awesome and invigorating. Pepperbear made a great host, and the others that showed up were all charming, intelligent, thoughtful, and beautiful. I left singing Lennon's "how does it feel to be one of the beautiful people?"
Some of topics that came up were Diebold, Lamont, religion, NSA spying, Olberman vs O'reilly, 9/11, Loose Change, The Beatles, the scientific definition of "theory", the cathartic nature of drumming, umm... and sushi. Plus a lot of other stuff. Dupper's son was there, and he said something hilarious: "Trickle down economics is like thinking that feeding rich people better food means that poor people will eat better shit."
In a clamshell, it was great. :thumbsup:

[petgoat]

23. They can't compel people to review the stuff. Professionals are

gutless. I know, I used to be one. I was gutless, and
everyone I knew was gutless.

Controversy is unprofessional.

[greyl]

25. Sure they can. Appeal to their so called "Christian values".

The church publisher is well aware of the money they will make, and how to market the book.

[Artdyst]

26. So far, Dr. Griffin's points haven't been refuted. Truth has a way of

doing that, even to the most rabid Bush apologists (including those who say they don't believe every single word he says about 9/11). Speaking of that, have any of you ever said exactly WHAT you don't believe about 9/11? NO? Wouldn't now be a good time to do that? Aw, c'mon.

[petgoat]

27. So now the Westminster John Knox Press is a money-grubber!

Boy do you live in a world of your own invention!

The motivation for Griffin to use that press is pretty obvious:
the controversy will generate publicity, and his book (and the
ideas in it) will reach a wide audience that would not encounter
it were it published by a New Agey press. Perhaps this time
he can even get it reviewed (his other 9/11 books weren't).

I think his publishers are to be commended; the individuals
involved I bet are risking their jobs.

[Artdyst]

28. Shows how desperate the OCT'ers are to suppress the truth about 9/11. nt

n/t

[greyl]

29. A little bit.

It's the official publisher for the Presbyterian Church, and they want profits, yes.

I don't know why they aren't publishing his next book.

[petgoat]

30. Because it's not about theological issues. nt

[mrgerbik]

31. many members of the government

look to astrology as a means to "predict" the future and plan events around certain astrological phases.

In your mind does this discredit your leadership (who brought us the 9/11 commission) as much as it does these Christian?

[greyl]

32. I haven't heard of any current ones, but I'd bet they exist.

It's known that Katherine Harris have delved into some woowoo stuff similar to that, but I'm not aware of any regarding astrology like Reagan depended on it. I doubt they'd want it to become public.
Imo, it's much worse than simply living true to ones religious faith, so yes, it discredits them.
If you throw in the fundamentalist evangelists like gwbush, the scales tip back again.

Florida – A State of Ignorance?-KatherineHarris

[mirandapriestly]

34. The topic is "Big church publisher buys 9-11 Bush plot "

and, how would you know anything about "the rational science community"?

[greyl]

36. ot: Why make a point of reiterating the topic, only

to try to make a crack about me personally?