Well, I didn't really have anything to add, but since you pressed me...
Griffin's presentation was interesting, although I think it would have been a lot more powerful if he had used images and documents to support his
speech. However, to give him credit, his presentation is a summary of the contents of his book and not meant to stand alone.
The content of his presentation was a synopsis of theories and evidences that are already out there, and have been out there for some time now. There
was nothing "new" presented in his speech. That being said, the most important factor here is Dr. Griffin's presentation being broadcast on C-Span,
and such information and evidence like this is filtering out into the mainstream. This hopefully heralds an awakening amongst the greater American
populace regarding the serious questions surrounding 9-11.
For me, the most interesting part was in the Q&A at the end where Griffin was asked:
"An inside job of this magnitude involves the conspiracy of a lot of people. How come there is no leak, nobody cracking, nothing?"
I've taken the time to transcribe his answer below (mainly for folks with dial-up) because I feel it's a very important question, and Griffin,
despite his dry manner, explains it well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Griffin: [...] "So, is it possible that very many people could be involved in a conspiracy and keep it silent for a long time? Well, YES.
Remember the Manhattan Project? A lot of people were involved in that and that was kept secret for a long time...and we've looked back, now we know
that lots of previous conspiracies were kept silent for a long time. America's first attack in Indonesia; we had a full-scale war going on there, and
until a book was published on it in the late 90's hardly any Americans knew about it, it was kept secret for a very long time.
If you add to the fact that [...] many of the people involved are government and/or military employees who take an oath. Like these FBI guys
[referring to two FBI agents who approached Attorney David Schippers, of Clinton impeachment fame, to help them get the story out that the FBI had
prior knowledge of the impending WTC attacks] they've taken an oath of obedience. If they violate that...originally they were evidently hoping that
Schippers could get a trial so they could be subpoenaed, in which case they would
have to testify and that would free them from prosecution.
But if they just come out and talk, then they're prosecuted and sent to prison for the rest of their lives maybe; they can't support their families.
And in some cases, people are told, 'Well, you know Joe, if you start talking about this somebody's gonna get really mad at you and I don't know
how we're gonna protect your wife and kids.' Would you talk, particularly when there's nobody asking you to come forward? Did the 9-11 Commission
make a general appeal and say, 'Please, if you've got any information on this come on this and talk to us.'? No. Nobody was invited other than
government employees. And so, if you go to the mainstream media they ridicule you. So who's going to risk their family's lives to come forward? So,
no, I am not surprised that a rather large number of people could be involved.
Also you know we have previous examples of things that went on, and people who knew got killed. How many people who apparently had some knowledge
about JFK's assassination ended up dead? A lot of people know about that, so they know what can happen. So, no, I'm not surprised.
But the fact is that nevertheless, some people
are trying to come forward - these FBI agents. Sibel Edmunds has been trying to come forward and
tell her story for many, many months now. As I report in my book on the 9-11 Commission Report, she testified to the commission for 3.5 hours. She
told them
very specific things. She's since then written a public letter to Chairman Kean reminding him of what she told the commission, such
as that their Iranian ??? had told them that Osama Bin Laden was planning an attack in the United States pretty soon. The translator who got that
information was told to keep quiet within the FBI. She told the FBI [I think here he means the 9-11 Commission] about that, the other translator told
the FBI [again, the 9-11 Commission] in his 2.5 hours of testimony.
None of that appears in the 9-11 Commission Report. All that you learned of
Sibel Edmunds, one tiny little note says that she has some suggestions that FBI should follow its own policies a little more closely. That's all you
learned from her. 3.5 hours of testimony. So she has been trying to come forward and some other people too, and they've lost their jobs."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a story related to the FBI agents who were threatened with criminal prosecution by FBI Director Robert Mueller if they spoke out about the FBI
prior knowledge revelations.
www.newsmax.com...