Monday, October 6, 2008

Griffin destroys Taibbi over 9/11

Click here to read a discussion between David Ray Griffin, Professor of Philosophy and Theology, author of "A New Pearl Harbor", The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press and more.

And Matt Taibbi, to be fair let's check this guy out (will go on at bottom of the post), Writer for New York Press and Rolling Stone, He toured Eastern Europe as a basketball player/political journalist and... no really, basketball and politics.
Taibbi has been a regular contributor to Real Time with Bill Maher - another "rebel" who apparently refuses to have any evidence talk on his show besides "oh Building 7...", or he might lose his show again...
Oh, and the reason for this discussion he wrote a book about how ridiculous the 9/11 conspiracy theory is - The Great Derangement - which means he believes the official version is reasonable, holy shit lol. (see more at bottom of post, if you call people idiots you can expect something back Matt.)

In general, notice how Griffin answers each question, in a detailed and reasonable manner. Taibbi ignores EVERY response and just goes on to the next thing he doesn't understand, with wrong information at times, and tries as much as he can to ridicule Griffin. (Guess what Matt, if you fail you're the ridiculous one.) Btw, let me re-emphasize he goes to another topic every single time, NOT ONCE bothering to respond to Griffin's information. One reason for that is he obviously doesn't know crap about what happened that day. Anyone who's conscious about language (or just, conscious) is able to distinguish the bullshit from the truth.

What I love about people who believe the official version of 9/11 over the conspiracy research, is they need an answer to all their questions concerning what they don't understand. Why would Bush do this, why would they include Guliani, why this, why that, ffs! Those questions are supposed to be directed at the authorities, not the questioners of authority. And btw, how come there are no questions pointed at the official version, not one. Just take that Commission report and swallow it.

Let's get one thing straight, I am not an endorser of a 9/11 Conspiracy Theory (of which there is some serious bullshit out there too), I am a questioner of the Official version and endorser of 9/11 Conspiracy Research. The question is not why is this or that Conspiracy Theory inconsistent, the question is why is the OFFICIAL version such bullshit!

And yet these silly questions are easily answerable (yet frustratingly fucking stupid).
Confused Matt Taibbi: "In your first chapter, you seem to imply -- well, you not only imply, you come out and say it -- that you think the real reason George W. Bush didn't hurry to finish his reading of My Pet Goat might have been that "the Secret Service had no real fear of an attack." In other words, they knew the plan in advance, and the plan didn't involve an attempt on Bush's life, hence "no real fear." My question is this: if they knew about this whole thing in advance, why didn't they plan to make Bush look a little less like a paralyzed yutz at the moment of truth? If the purpose of the entire exercise was propaganda, wasn't it counterproductive to have the intrepid leader sitting there frozen with panicked indecision, a kid's book about goats in his hands, at the critical moment of his presidency? What possible benefit could that have served the conspirators?"
Griffin wisely dodges this retarded question and turns it around on Taibbi, but I'll answer it instead Matt:
The association of the (untrusted, falsely elected, dumb) President with children in a time of danger doesn't seem useful to the Conspiracy Theorists? And it's an ode to Pan. (try explaining this to the common Joe, or Matt)

Btw the "kite hit steel plane must" was "wrong" and actually kite kit steal playing must. (The speed of how they said it and phonetics still make it f'd up though...)

Let's take a closer look at Taibbi
His controversy, his dad, his Eastern-Europe adventure and his view on puppet Obama (Taibbi's a lefty so let's not waste our time on his views of puppet McCain, or waste time on McCain generally) always a good indicator of how politically aware one is:

The most controversial thing he's done is an article "The 52 Funniest Things About the Upcoming Death of the Pope", which Maher must have liked too, religion is such a hard target to ridicule... lol. Like Maher's focusing on religion with Religulous and ignoring trivial stuff like a False Flag operation on own soil.
His father is Mike Taibbi, an NBC television reporter... (Maybe Matt and Mike know Pan too?)
In 1992 Taibbi moved to Uzbekistan, but was forced to leave six months later after writing articles critical of the country's president, Islom Karimov. While 'cool', I guess it's cooler than criticizing your own government... as a journalist.

He is best known for his coverage of the 2004 US presidential election, I wonder if he noticed it wasn't an election?! I guess not, here are quotes about the 2008 election on Obama (from Rolling Stone 2007): "Written off by the experts at the start of the campaign, Barack Obama is now surging in Iowa - proof that some things in politics are still not rigged" *ERROR* Great, another "journalist" who doesn't know the difference between evidence and proof and has shit in his eyes too, because everything about Obama is rigged.
Though to his credit he's also said "Obama is the best BS artist since Bill Clinton".
He also said
"For most of this campaign season, I doubted that Obama really was that new something. Now I'm not so sure he isn't. Whoever Barack Obama is, there's no doubting the genuineness of his phenomenon. And maybe, who knows, that's all that matters." Oh rly? Glad to see you got your priorities straight lol.
Moving to 2008 he said in an article about: But I'm not sure there is a mask when it comes to Barack Obama. It sounds crazy, but he might actually be this guy, this couldn't-possibly-exist guy, inside and out." My god the powers of perception. And finally (the striking is mine):
"What's confusing about Obama is that he's so successful at projecting an air of genuineness and honesty" He's the most fake wooden politician I've ever seen. The reason McCain is not being discussed is because you have to be even dumber to consider him as president, and I can't go that low.


Ben said...

ITs so mind boggling to me how MANY people still talk about just bush ( a scapegoat of course ) as being behind all evil.

I am crazy to them for questioning 9/11.

JM said...

OK, in his defence Taibbi has written some fairly amusing pieces about Xtian Fundamentalism, and in his extended reply at Alternet he may have brought up some good points as to why 911 Truth may have become a distraction keeping folks away from other important issues (or so he thinks, it's rather patronising to assume that folks don't have the time or energy to consider ALL issues of importance). But here DRG has served up Taibbi's ass to him on a silver platter.

The most offensive thing about MT's attitude (as well as the arrogance to think that he can publish a book about a subject he refuses to address himself, 'an absurdist comedy', thinking himself as either too clever to bother with alternate, quite logical views or seeing himself as an amateur psychologist listening to a 'deluded' client on the couch) is that he seems unable to step back and take a position approaching objectivity, something that DRG presents in each reply he gives.

However, straight off the bat, I am surprised that DRG didn't mention the two (at least) public occasions when Bush told an audience that he had watched the first plane attack on TV before entering the classroom - quite damning evidence as to his lying about the occasion - there was no such live TV coverage.

I could go on, but Tiabbi sums it up about his situation himself (let's take away the implied irony) - 'suddenly I'm the one who looks ridiculous'. Yes Matt, your BS has backed you into a corner and soon when you find yourself in the minority, you're going to be looking for a new job.

dedroidify said...

"I am surprised that DRG didn't mention the two (at least) public occasions when Bush told an audience that he had watched the first plane attack on TV before entering the classroom - quite damning evidence as to his lying about the occasion - there was no such live TV coverage."

Trying to include all the inconsistencies in a presentation is near impossible, that's why it's incredible the official version still is believed by so many people...

JM said...

What I should have said is that there was no live coverage of the first plane hitting the tower that the public saw on TV. We don't know what Bush saw backstage.

No, you can't fit everything in when there's so much that demolishes (ha!) the 'official' BS. Obviously Taibbi's too busy trying to sell his hitpiece book rather than doing any research beyond asking his 'scientist friends' (Popular Mechanics?) what they think.

dedroidify said...

Oh yeah much agreed. Looking at my former comment that seems a little uninviting sorry about that ;).

lol @ popular mechanics. popular & intelligent don't mix much. Obviously indeed, uninformed or in on it, as his daddy's a journalist too. Who knows how deep the rabbit hole goes.