Kall: Oh, everything’s good? We lost you for a minute there.
Griffin: Yeah, it finally worked.
Kall: Oh, good, good. You hit a button on the phone or something that shut off your voice? Hello?
Griffin: Okay, okay, is this better?
Kall: Oh that’s a thousand times better. Yes, you’re here and we can hear you better too. So I just introduced you and I said it’s an honor and a pleasure to have you here. And although I was one of the original signers of the hundred signers of the 9/11 Truth Document, I am not what I would call a "9/11 Truther." I don’t follow all the details of it. And what I did do today as I do every week when I've got a guest coming on, is I’ll post a diary on OpEdnews.com, and I'll ask our readers, tapping the wisdom of the crowds, to help me to come up with questions and one of them, Mark, suggested to just ask you a very general question. If I meet somebody and I talk to them about 9/11, how do I introduce them to the whole 9/11 Truth story, in a way that is going to be persuasive and is going to get them to let down their guard and listen, and start to consider what there is to be considered?
Griffin: Well it’s hard to give a general answer, because as I've written, there are different kinds of people with different kinds of minds. And some people are what you would call paradigmatic thinkers, they’ve got a paradigm of the way the world works. Of course that can be a natural philosophy or in this case, their political, political world, how it works. And they’ll give a priori
objections such as, well, our government simply wouldn’t do such a thing, I know that, or if they had done it, somebody would have talked. So sometimes you have to begin with showing them that their a priori assumptions aren’t necessarily true. Other people are wishful and fearful thinkers. And, they just say, one person said to me, I wouldn’t believe what you are saying even if it were true. Or another person said I simply refuse to believe what you say because I don’t want to live in a country where our leaders would do such a thing.
Kall: It is a horrible thing to even contemplate.
Griffin: It is. It is. And then you’ve got some people, unfortunately a rather small percentage of the people, who are what I would call empirical or data-led minds, and they simply say look, show me the evidence. And those are the ones that at least I’m the best with, because that’s what I focus on is evidence, I do deal with those other questions. But I really think, and I’m more that way, and so I tend to speak to other people who are more that way. And so, if you’ve looked at any of my books, you see they’re just full of evidence that the official story can’t be true. I even titled one of my DVDS, 9/11 Let’s Get Empirical, rather than, avoiding the empirical evidence as a lot of the people who interview me want to do. By just firing a whole bunch of well, why would they do that why would they do that why would they do that kind of questions. And I just say well I don’t know why they would do that you would have to ask them, but what I can show you is that no matter what you’re talking about, you’re talking about the World Trade Center collapses, you’re talking about the non-interceptions, you’re talking about the very idea of hijackers on the plane, I can show you the evidence if you’re patient and you have what some of us call at least a 30 percent open mind, I can show you that there’s no good evidence for what you say for what the official story says and even a lot of very strong evidence against it.
Kall: I’m talking with Dr David Ray Griffin, who’s written seven books on 9/11. The most recent one is The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, 9/11, the Cover Up and the Expose. What’s the cover up?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
