Jerry Springer is a moron! How could someone in his position not know who

[BrklynLiberal]

David Ray Griffin is? Someone called into his show today and mentioned Griffin and Springer was "DOH!" He sounded like he had never heard the name before.
You travel internationally andhave a "progressive" radio show..and have never heard of David Ray Griffin!? What the hell does he do when he is not on the air....watch kiddie cartoons?
Springer also believes that Bush is not basically an evil person.
Is he naive, dumb or playing that role again? Is he like Bush...only aware of what his handlers tell him?
:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[rox63]

1. Not to come off as an idiot or anything...

...but who is David Ray Griffin?

[bpeale]

18. Who???

Enquiring minds want to know who this character is ...

[kentuck]

2. Uh..who is David Griffin ??

Sorry...the name doesn't ring a bell with me either....

[Don1]

3. Yes, Springer is an idiot.

On May 5th (I think--I wrote it down somewhere if you want a quote), Springer on AAR said that impeaching Bush would "cripple" the country. And so he concluded it would be a bad idea.

What's up with that?

[MsTryska]

8. I actually agree.....

we'd have to impeach about 6 layers down before we could have a working country again.

[Hippo_Tron]

22. We'd have to impeach the entire line of succession

Maybe going all the way down to Norman Mineta (the only Democrat in the cabinet) would make the country work again, but I'm not all that trustworhty of anybody who works in the Bush administration.

[MsTryska]

23. heee.....i think the number 6 slot in the line

is empty actually.


But I do agree just to be on the safe side, we'd have to exhaust the line entirely.

[sam sarrha]

4. he isnt good on his feet.. he is getting a little better.. but i still

wonder about him... he isnt that good... i am beginning to think the name recognition isnt worth it.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. You guys can be forgiven..you are not hosts of a syndicated radio show.

If you have seen him on C-SPAN you will never forget it.
.................................................................

David Ray Griffin Reveals
Major 9/11 Cover-up on C-SPAN

May 4, 2005
Dear friends,

Prof. David Ray Griffin will appear on C-SPAN 2 (Book TV) this Saturday, May 7th at 2:30 PM EST (11:30 AM Pacific time). In his 80-minute lecture to a standing room audience of 400 at the University of Wisconsin, Prof. Griffin, one of the most respected theologians in the US, discusses his extensive research into the 9/11 cover-up. (View now) This nationally televised lecture aired last weekend and will be repeated Saturday for those who missed it. David Ray Griffin is professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, where he taught for over 30 years. He has authored or edited over two dozen scholarly books.

Two years ago, a trusted friend sent Prof. Griffin an email referring him to the reliable, easily verifiable information on the two-page 9/11 summary from our website, WantToKnow.info. After exploring the links to revealing articles on major media websites and progressing eventually to our 60-page 9/11 timeline and other excellent resources, he became convinced of a major cover-up around 9/11. Putting aside all of his work in theology, Prof. Griffin then devoted himself to writing The New Pearl Harbor, a devastating book which systematically presents a detailed account questioning the official story of 9/11.

Following the publication of the 9/11 Commission Report, Prof. Griffin published a second compelling book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, which convincingly deconstructs the official story presented in the report. These two books have sold nearly 100,000 copies both in the US and abroad. They have been translated into several languages, and have convinced many key people of the need for a truly independent investigation into that fateful day.

As this is the first time that the 9/11 cover-up has received national television coverage, I encourage you to watch this excellent program and invite your friends, family, and colleagues to join you. If you feel so called, email C-SPAN expressing your gratitude and support. We are moving ever closer to the critical mass necessary to force the media to cover this vital issue in news headlines where it belongs. Together, I know that we can and will build a brighter future for all of us. Below are several informative links and a newspaper article (with added links for easy verification) related to Prof. Griffin's lecture on what may be the greatest cover-up ever to be exposed.

With very best wishes,
Fred Burks for the WantToKnow.info Team


View the program online now for free. Windows Media Player required (free download)
http://www.911blogger.com/2005/04/proper-release-of-griffin-in-madison.html

Free audio version of program online. Windows Media Player required (free download)
http://www.septembereleventh.org/documents/drg_cspan.mp3

Biographical information on Prof. David Ray Griffin
http://www.ctr4process.org/about/CoDirectors/CPSGriffin.htm

http://www.wanttoknow.info/050504davidraygriffin
..................................................................
David Ray Griffin

David Ray Griffin is professor of philosophy of religion at Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University and one of the co-directors of the Center for Process Studies. He is the author of God, Power, and Evil: A Process Theodicy (1976) and Unsnarling the World-Knot: Consciousness, Freedom, and the Mind-Body Problem (1998). He is the editor of The Reenchantment of Science: Postmodern Proposals (1988). His next two books will be Religion and Scientific Naturalism: Overcoming the Conflicts, and A Process Philosophy of Religion.
....................................................................
The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11

A philosopher at the Claremont School of Theology, Griffin scrutinizes the time line and physical evidence of September 11 for unresolved inconsistencies. Griffin draws heavily on three similarly skeptical examinations, by Nafeez Ahmed, Paul Thompson and Thierry Meyssan, whose The Big Lie was a bestseller in France, and which the New Republic has called "thinâ€"and thinly argued." Based on these sources, Griffin maintains that a full investigation of the events of that tragic day is necessary to answer such questions as whether American Airlines Flight 77 did crash into the Pentagon (though many will find it impossible to doubt this) and how United Airlines Flight 93 was downed. He claims that if standard procedures for scrambling fighter jets had been followed, the hijacked planes should have been intercepted in time, and that structurally, the collapse of the World Trade Center towers most likely was caused by explosives placed throughout the towers, not from the plane crashes. He strongly implies that the Bush administration had foreknowledge of the attack and sought to conceal what Griffin suggests was the Pakistani intelligence agency's involvement in the planning for the attacks. His analysis is undergirded by the theory that a significant external threat, on the scale of Pearl Harbor, was very much in the interest of the Bush administration, which he believes is intent on self-interested aggressive foreign policies. Even many Bush opponents will find these charges ridiculous, though conspiracy theorists may be haunted by the suspicion that we know less than we think we do about that fateful day.
....................................................................

[Kolesar]

7. David Ray Griffin sounds pretty obscure to me

[Auntie Bush]

10. Thanks for the information/education. I also wasn't aware

of David Griffin...but I had read that article...just forgot the authors name...but knew of the conspiracy charges. Maybe that is what happen to Jerry and many others. I think you are a little hard on Springer.

[ArkDem]

6. Outrageous! Especially since I believe that Mr. Griffin has been

a guest on his TV show.

[Al-CIAda]

9. Springer has brought up the PNAC in the past...

yet does not know who DRG is? The man who wrote the intro to PNAC/9-11 complicity?

I get a sense Jerry just reads off what his handlers give him. He's a showman with no genuine passion, but puts on a good act. Kind of like Ed Shultz.

[Auntie Bush]

11. Some people are good with names...others aren't....but remember

the necessary information. Some people can read a book or article but not remember the authors name. Jerry can't be expected to know every detail...give the man a break.

[blueknight]

12. therein lies the problem between jerry and i,

i like him and want him to do good on his radio show, but,to me, he sounds so uninformed

[CarolNYC]

14. no, no, no

I think you totally misread Jerry Springer. He's acting on his TV show but he's got passion for what he's talking about on his radio show. I must admit I don't get to hear his show much so I can't really comment on how it's going but I love Jerry.

Take a listen to this if you've got 30 minutes or so:
http://207.70.82.73/pages/descriptions/04/258.html

[Edgewater_Joe]

13. So Springer Doesn't Know The Name of a 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist? BFD

Grow up and take the tinfoil off your head.

[cmd]

15. I guess I'm a moron as well

I had no idea who Griffin was until I read this thread. Springer
can turn a lot of people over to our side with his easy to understand liberal messages.

[grumpy old fart]

16. spreading conspiracy theories is probably not a high priority for AAR

So that may have been the problem. But I'm surprised the side show part of Springer wouldn't have had this stored away somewhere. Maybe he was just feigning ignorance to maintain some semblance of respectability.

[MindPilot]

17. What credibility does a theologian have investigating 9-11?

Here's a guy who by definition studies shit that doesn't exist so I'd imagine if a fact is missing, he can just make it up?

First I'd ever heard of him too. And he may be a very good researcher, but I become real skeptical whenever god is involved.

[undeterred]

20. He is a liberal theologian who has done a lot of writing on

the relationship between religion and science and the modern philosophy of science. Think of someone as far away from Falwell and Dobson as you can get. Someone who would be a welcome lecturer at places like Harvard and Yale and the University of Chicago. Someone who has done scholarly research in areas that impinge on philosophy, anthropology, physics, and religion. He claims no particular expertise in the subject matter but I watched the tape of his lecture, and he pulls the whole 911 story together.

Check out the September 11 forum - lots of links to him there.

[undeterred]

19. I think a lot of people do not know yet

Mike Malloy knows because several listeners called him up to tell him.

[sendero]

21. Gee...

... I didn't know either until I read this thread. I guess I'll put on my dunce cap and sit in the corner.

FWIW, I've only listened to Springer a few times, and I don't agree with everything he say nor does he always respond to caller's questions the way I would, but I think he's a net asset.

Let's don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good here.

I don't particularly care for Schulz's trashing of Dean either, but I think there is a place for him in the "liberal" talk radio continuum.

That glass is half full at least - it's better than Limbaugh, and he appeals to folks who would probabyly otherwise be listening to oxy punk.