9/11 Book Talk- What Have You Read, what did you think of it? |

![]() ![]() |
Dec 16 2006, 03:44 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog Group: Library team Posts: 1,696 Joined: 15-October 06 Member No.: 77 |
Which books on 9/11 by "non official theory believers" have you read? What did you think of them in terms of:
arguments presented sources cited clarity focus etc. I'll go first: I've read David Ray Griffin New Pearl Harbor 9/11 Commission: Omissions and Distortions Mike Ruppert Crossing the Rubicon Griffin first- NPH I love his clarity of reasoning and skillful writing. New Pearl Harbor was, I thought a very good introductory book. I read it a few years back, so it isn't fresh in my mind. Probably a good deal of the research is pretty dated at this stage for dedicated online truth seekers. Some of it has probably been called into question and/or debunked. That doesn't detract from the work, however. As Griffin points out, his argument is metaphorically more like a cable than a chain. The argument will still hold weight even if some of the individual threads are weak or broken. 9/11 Conmission Superb. Attacks major weaknesses and flaws in the official account. Gets right to what in my opinion is the root of the problem- why we need a new investigation. No theories necessary. Just a great critique of a horrid whitewash. Ruppert Crossing the Rubicon Mixed review. Lots of endnotes; very useful. Wargames addressed- good. Physical evidence left out of the picture by choice (I don't agree with that choice). A lot of bigger picture information (Peak Oil, PROMIS, etc.) which makes it less accessible for someone coming to it as a starting point. I would definitely recommend NPH as a beginning book and CTR as supplementary material. One thing to keep in mind on all of these books is that the information in them is only as accurate and valuable as the sources for that information are (researchers, journalists, official statements, etc.). DRG relies pretty heavily on Paul Thompson 9/11 Timeline. Ruppert is slightly less picky in terms of the "strictly mainstream news" line that Thompson has taken. Both are very good on citing sources, so you can cross check the research for yourself if interested. Finding the original source articles online can be somewhat of a challenge; a lot of them have gone 404. |
|
|
|
Dec 16 2006, 04:00 AM
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Group: Administrator Posts: 7,986 Joined: 13-September 06 Member No.: 49 |
Ahhhh - can't remember titles - arrgghhh - "The New World", about America & Canada in the 18th century (great), 'Founding Brothers' about the founders (great), a big book about Napolean and another one about the Spanish American war (& the Jingoes and Teddy Roosevelt) - forgot the titles. I think the Jingoes book was titled American Empire, or something like that?? It's the definitive book on the subject. "Clash of Civilizations" by Samuel Huntington - worst book I've ever read. I think I'm probably the only person on the planet to actually read it cover to cover - I can't imagine anyone slogging through it because they enjoyed it lol.
And that book about the Neocons and the Bush administration - forgot the title. Not a hit-piece, just inside info about all the players. "Vulcans" in the title. Like I said, I can't remember titles. |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st May 2013 - 08:49 PM |