What do you think?
Rate this book
Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics & Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory
By virtue of his previous four books on the subject, David Ray Griffin is widely recognized as one of the leading spokespersons of the 9/11 truth movement, which rejects the official conspiracy theory about 9/11. Although this movement was long ignored by the US government and the mainstream media, recent polls have shown that (as Time magazine has acknowledged) the rejection of the official theory has become “a mainstream political phenomenon.” It is not surprising, therefore, that the government and the corporately controlled media have shifted tactics. No longer ignoring the 9/11 truth movement, they have released a flurry of stories and reports aimed at debunking it. In the present book, David Ray Griffin shows that these attempts can themselves be easily debunked. Besides demonstrating the pitiful failure of Debunking 9/11 Myths (published by Popular Mechanics and endorsed by Senator John McCain), Griffin riddles recent reports and stories put out by the US Department of State, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the New York Times, Vanity Fair, and Time magazine. He also responds to criticisms of these efforts by left-leaning and Christian publications—which one might have expected to be supportive. Throughout these critiques, Griffin shows that the charge that is regularly leveled against critics of the official theory—that they employ irrational and unscientific methods to defend conclusions based on faith—actually applies more fully to those who defend the official theory. This book, by debunking the most prevalent attempts to refute the evidence cited by the 9/11 truth movement, shows that this movement’s central claim—that 9/11 was an inside job—remains the only explanation that fits the facts.
Paperback
First published May 1, 2007
8 people are currently reading
485 people want to read
About the author
David Ray Griffin
70 books86 followersDr. Griffin, a retired emeritus professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology at the Claremont School of Theology, has published over 30 books and 150 articles. His 9/11 books have been endorsed by Robert Baer, William Christison, William Sloane Coffin Jr., Richard Falke, Ray McGovern, Paul Craig Roberts and Howard Zinn.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
April 25, 2008
I really appreciated this book - it was a meticulously researched, well-reasoned critique of the government's official story. This book put into words what I suspected since that awful day - that the official government story made absolutely no sense. It doesn't matter that none of the other "conspiracy theories" make any sense either. What matters is that the government had an obligation to provide the American people with a valid, reasonable, logical explanation of how such a horrible tragedy could have occured. The government has failed miserably at that task, but anyone who points that out is usually dismissed as a crazy paranoid conspiracy theorist. This book shows that many intelligent, sane, reasonable people are not buying the official story - and with very good reason.
June 6, 2024
Got 1/3 in and stopped. DNF this paperback non-fiction.
The author Mr. Griffith discussed his theory that the
events of 9/11/01 where 4 planes were used as weapons
in the US, to kill thousands of Americans, was an inside
job by Bush-Chaney administration or they looked the
other way. He reported that Bush wanted a war w/ Iraq
& that his response to an attack on American soil would
be justified.
The author explained that a FAA tower maintains
communication w/ NORAD defense. If an air traffic
controller notices a plane losing radio contact with
the tower, or losing its transponder signal, or seeing
a plane go radically off course, the air traffic controller
needs to contact NORAD. Describing the need for an
"emergency scramble protocol" or a "hijack protocol."
(pg. 39)
Military pilots are stationed in various US cities to
provide a 2 plane military escort to such a plane in
trouble. Reportedly 2 military planes were notified
0n 9/11 to follow (& did follow) United Airlines #93,
which eventually crashed in rural Pennsylvania. The
2 pilots received permission to shoot this plane from
the sky, by VP Cheney, because the White House was
thought it's intended target.
Author theorizes Bush-Cheney instructed the military
to 'stand down' and not shoot down any of the 4
hijacked planes.
Griffith overdid his timelines of the events of 9/11 &
it became confusing. He could have condensed this
to enhance the clarity of points he made? He noted
the head of the 9/11 Commission had ties to Condi
Rice and Bush-Cheney and that the Commission
blamed the FAA for incompetence on 9/11. Untrue,
by most accounts. Griffith implied & tried to prove
members of the military lied to the Commission.
He noted World Trade Center 7 also collapsed that
fateful day. I've read elsewhere that 7 housed an
FBI ancillary station, the local PBS station etc.
I did not think the author, in the part I read, proved
his premise.
The author Mr. Griffith discussed his theory that the
events of 9/11/01 where 4 planes were used as weapons
in the US, to kill thousands of Americans, was an inside
job by Bush-Chaney administration or they looked the
other way. He reported that Bush wanted a war w/ Iraq
& that his response to an attack on American soil would
be justified.
The author explained that a FAA tower maintains
communication w/ NORAD defense. If an air traffic
controller notices a plane losing radio contact with
the tower, or losing its transponder signal, or seeing
a plane go radically off course, the air traffic controller
needs to contact NORAD. Describing the need for an
"emergency scramble protocol" or a "hijack protocol."
(pg. 39)
Military pilots are stationed in various US cities to
provide a 2 plane military escort to such a plane in
trouble. Reportedly 2 military planes were notified
0n 9/11 to follow (& did follow) United Airlines #93,
which eventually crashed in rural Pennsylvania. The
2 pilots received permission to shoot this plane from
the sky, by VP Cheney, because the White House was
thought it's intended target.
Author theorizes Bush-Cheney instructed the military
to 'stand down' and not shoot down any of the 4
hijacked planes.
Griffith overdid his timelines of the events of 9/11 &
it became confusing. He could have condensed this
to enhance the clarity of points he made? He noted
the head of the 9/11 Commission had ties to Condi
Rice and Bush-Cheney and that the Commission
blamed the FAA for incompetence on 9/11. Untrue,
by most accounts. Griffith implied & tried to prove
members of the military lied to the Commission.
He noted World Trade Center 7 also collapsed that
fateful day. I've read elsewhere that 7 housed an
FBI ancillary station, the local PBS station etc.
I did not think the author, in the part I read, proved
his premise.
June 29, 2010
The real inside job, the most destructive one, is the control of the US media by covert intelligence agencies. Even if one were disinclined to delve into "Project Mockingbird," "The Mighty Wurlitzer," etc. (representing, to be sure, the tip of the iceburg that has long ago punctured our listing ship of state), the outlines of Control can be clearly be seen in the coordinated ad hominem, fact-challenged smear pieces that Griffin debunks in this book. One can almost detect a single editorial voice: tremulous, hysterical and shrill - subject to Satan only knows what hidden, infernal, tectonic pressures... As Adolph Hitler said in "My Struggle": "How forunate for the leaders, that the people do not think." This goes even for the sickening black-bordered classist piss-fest put out by "The Chronicle of Higher Education" two years ago. "Some views," snorts the subtext, "we are above examining rationally. Some views are worthy only of ridicule." Well, the view in question, that there are more holes in the official 9/11 story than a fucking swiss cheese, has gone mainstream. And it has done so because -guess what, Chronicle - the ordinary people you chortle into your lace sleeves about are actually more diligent scholars than you are, with the emotional fortitude to stare facts in the face, however grim, and arrive at independent conclusions. Of these conclusions, Griffin, in this and his other books, provides a representative selection.
December 20, 2008
A friend of mine is a 9/11 conspiracy guy so I thought that I would check this book out. I read the Popular Mechanics book first and found it to be very lacking in substance. This book does not have that problem. This book loads the reader with tons of facts and references that provide ample evidence to put Popular Mechanics and the official story into doubt. An interesting read, no matter what you think about the whole situation.
November 30, 2012
This book seriously changed my life. It's an exaggeration but I feel like I connected to it because I'm always questioning authority and this book does that. It strengthen my soul to know that such beautiful arguments exist. I love this book. It's a must read for anyone who is interested in proving others wrong.
October 24, 2009
Great book. It sums up the stupidity of 9/11 Truthers.
November 25, 2021
Once again, two of Griffin's gifts are tireless thoroughness and a brilliantly analytical mind.
September 2, 2024
David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking takes on Popular Mechanics' attempt to uphold the official 9/11 story, and Griffin doesn’t pull any punches. If you’ve ever felt like the official narrative didn’t quite add up, this book will resonate with you. Griffin meticulously picks apart the claims made by Popular Mechanics, exposing the flaws, inconsistencies, and, frankly, the lazy logic they used to dismiss questions about what really happened on 9/11.
One of the highlights of Griffin’s takedown is his analysis of World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7). Popular Mechanics glosses over this building's collapse, but Griffin zeroes in on it. WTC 7 wasn’t hit by a plane, yet it fell in a way that looks exactly like a controlled demolition. Popular Mechanics chalks it up to fires, but Griffin shows how that explanation doesn’t hold water. He brings in the 2020 University of Alaska Fairbanks study, which basically torpedoes the idea that office fires could bring down a steel-framed skyscraper in such a symmetrical way.
Griffin doesn’t just stop at WTC 7, though. He systematically goes through the Popular Mechanics book, exposing how they oversimplified or outright ignored evidence that contradicts the official story. Whether it’s the collapse of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon strike, or the failure of air defenses on 9/11, Griffin shows that Popular Mechanics’ explanations are often more about deflecting uncomfortable questions than providing real answers.
What makes Griffin’s book so compelling is how he takes the same claims made by Popular Mechanics and flips them on their head. He doesn’t just criticize; he backs up his points with research, pointing out where Popular Mechanics got it wrong or just conveniently left out key information. If you’ve ever wondered why certain aspects of 9/11 don’t add up, Griffin’s work will give you a lot to think about.
In short, Debunking 9/11 Debunking is a sharp, detailed critique of Popular Mechanics’ defense of the official 9/11 story. Griffin’s deep dive into WTC 7 alone makes it worth a read, but the way he dismantles the entire Popular Mechanics narrative is what really stands out. If you’re looking for a book that challenges the status quo and makes you question what you’ve been told, this is it.
One of the highlights of Griffin’s takedown is his analysis of World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7). Popular Mechanics glosses over this building's collapse, but Griffin zeroes in on it. WTC 7 wasn’t hit by a plane, yet it fell in a way that looks exactly like a controlled demolition. Popular Mechanics chalks it up to fires, but Griffin shows how that explanation doesn’t hold water. He brings in the 2020 University of Alaska Fairbanks study, which basically torpedoes the idea that office fires could bring down a steel-framed skyscraper in such a symmetrical way.
Griffin doesn’t just stop at WTC 7, though. He systematically goes through the Popular Mechanics book, exposing how they oversimplified or outright ignored evidence that contradicts the official story. Whether it’s the collapse of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon strike, or the failure of air defenses on 9/11, Griffin shows that Popular Mechanics’ explanations are often more about deflecting uncomfortable questions than providing real answers.
What makes Griffin’s book so compelling is how he takes the same claims made by Popular Mechanics and flips them on their head. He doesn’t just criticize; he backs up his points with research, pointing out where Popular Mechanics got it wrong or just conveniently left out key information. If you’ve ever wondered why certain aspects of 9/11 don’t add up, Griffin’s work will give you a lot to think about.
In short, Debunking 9/11 Debunking is a sharp, detailed critique of Popular Mechanics’ defense of the official 9/11 story. Griffin’s deep dive into WTC 7 alone makes it worth a read, but the way he dismantles the entire Popular Mechanics narrative is what really stands out. If you’re looking for a book that challenges the status quo and makes you question what you’ve been told, this is it.
December 9, 2017
"The evidence that 9/11 was an inside job is overwhelming."
- D. R. Griffin, 'Debunking 9/11 Debunking', page 1, line 1.
In this book Griffin cautions truthers not to formulate testable theories because doing so may expose them to refutation. Wise advice from a theologian. But here are some of the - let's say - suggestions that he endorses:
Four airliners were taken over by remote control or switched for remote-controlled planes. Air defenses were stood down so that three of the planes could be flown into the WTC and the Pentagon. The fourth, Flight 93, was shot down at Shanksville, PA, possibly to cover up that the passengers from the other three had been transferred to this one.
There were several dozen phone calls from cabin crew and passengers to friends and relatives describing apparent hijackings. No problem: either these calls were impossible or they were faked by "voice morphing".
Enough explosive charges and/or thermite had been secretly planted in the twin towers to cause them to collapse top-down, coincidentally starting at the levels where the planes impacted. It was also arranged for the concrete of the floors to be pulverized to dust.
The attacks were pinned on some innocent patsies: 15 Saudis, 2 Emiratis, 1 Lebanese, 1 Egyptian, and 0 Iraqis, so the USG would have an excuse to invade Iraq.
Borrow a copy, read and marvel!
- D. R. Griffin, 'Debunking 9/11 Debunking', page 1, line 1.
In this book Griffin cautions truthers not to formulate testable theories because doing so may expose them to refutation. Wise advice from a theologian. But here are some of the - let's say - suggestions that he endorses:
Four airliners were taken over by remote control or switched for remote-controlled planes. Air defenses were stood down so that three of the planes could be flown into the WTC and the Pentagon. The fourth, Flight 93, was shot down at Shanksville, PA, possibly to cover up that the passengers from the other three had been transferred to this one.
There were several dozen phone calls from cabin crew and passengers to friends and relatives describing apparent hijackings. No problem: either these calls were impossible or they were faked by "voice morphing".
Enough explosive charges and/or thermite had been secretly planted in the twin towers to cause them to collapse top-down, coincidentally starting at the levels where the planes impacted. It was also arranged for the concrete of the floors to be pulverized to dust.
The attacks were pinned on some innocent patsies: 15 Saudis, 2 Emiratis, 1 Lebanese, 1 Egyptian, and 0 Iraqis, so the USG would have an excuse to invade Iraq.
Borrow a copy, read and marvel!
October 27, 2023
Exactly as the title states with all the details and references. What's Not Covered is the Motivations for the 9/11 False Flag from Every Perspective. James Corbett had a show or two on these behind the 9/11 Conspiracy as More than just a False Flag to precipitate war with Middle East countries we want to Regime Change (those CIA dictators who grew too non-compliant). Now were back with a False Flag attack by Hamas on Israel (what was there to accomplish; start a war?). But the owner of WTC had financial motivations; the computer security system was owned; the DOD was struggling to repel questions of its budget (going where); the CIA and NSA had records to bury; and the many things were stored in WTC 7 which Most Americans didn't know Fell on 9.11.01. This is a very good book; a great book would go much further. I'll keep looking But read this!
July 11, 2025
This lunatic who calls himself "David Ray Griffin" for some reason, makes the most horrendous allegations in this nasty piece of work. Luckily, chatGPT is around to help:
Q: is David Ray Griffin and his 9/11 theories taken seriously?
***
chatGPT: David Ray Griffin is a retired American professor of philosophy and theology who has written extensively on various subjects, including critiques of the official explanations of the events surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks. His views, often associated with the 9/11 Truth movement, propose alternative theories about what transpired that day.
It's important to note that Griffin's theories about 9/11 are considered controversial and are not widely accepted among mainstream academics, scholars, or experts in relevant fields such as engineering, physics, and national security. The overwhelming consensus among experts in these fields, as well as investigations by government agencies and independent bodies, supports the official explanation of the events of 9/11 as a terrorist attack carried out by al-Qaeda.
Academic and professional communities generally adhere to rigorous standards of evidence and peer-reviewed research, which Griffin's theories do not typically meet. As a result, his views on 9/11 are not taken seriously by the majority of academic and scientific communities.
It's always important to critically evaluate sources and information, especially when it pertains to significant historical events like 9/11, and to rely on credible sources and expert consensus when forming opinions or drawing conclusions.
***
So there you have it, - those explosives were placed there by AI-Qaeda, you 9/11 doofers. This was obvious to the educated-classes all along - NATO is not nearly clever enough to hatch such a devious scheme as the one you have accused them of. I trust that this old, malicious, beta version of AI (obviously developed by the Chinese where it is known by 蓋達組織) is no longer in use.
Q: is David Ray Griffin and his 9/11 theories taken seriously?
***
chatGPT: David Ray Griffin is a retired American professor of philosophy and theology who has written extensively on various subjects, including critiques of the official explanations of the events surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks. His views, often associated with the 9/11 Truth movement, propose alternative theories about what transpired that day.
It's important to note that Griffin's theories about 9/11 are considered controversial and are not widely accepted among mainstream academics, scholars, or experts in relevant fields such as engineering, physics, and national security. The overwhelming consensus among experts in these fields, as well as investigations by government agencies and independent bodies, supports the official explanation of the events of 9/11 as a terrorist attack carried out by al-Qaeda.
Academic and professional communities generally adhere to rigorous standards of evidence and peer-reviewed research, which Griffin's theories do not typically meet. As a result, his views on 9/11 are not taken seriously by the majority of academic and scientific communities.
It's always important to critically evaluate sources and information, especially when it pertains to significant historical events like 9/11, and to rely on credible sources and expert consensus when forming opinions or drawing conclusions.
***
So there you have it, - those explosives were placed there by AI-Qaeda, you 9/11 doofers. This was obvious to the educated-classes all along - NATO is not nearly clever enough to hatch such a devious scheme as the one you have accused them of. I trust that this old, malicious, beta version of AI (obviously developed by the Chinese where it is known by 蓋達組織) is no longer in use.
November 13, 2007
Griffin does a terrific job refuting the 9/11 "findings" of the Popular Mechanics "de-bunking" book, as well as the 9/11 Commission. My eyes did glaze over some during the highly technical discussion of the World Trade Center details, but only an absolute, complete, diehard Administration loyalist could come away not accepting that the "official" story is nowhere near the truth, the whole truth and nothing-but-the-truth.
Read
November 30, 2008My first foray into David Ray Griffin was quite enthralling. Kind of makes me want to read the 9/11 Commission Report, and other documents he sought to debunk. Minimal knowledge on the topic is required to follow along.
November 12, 2011
This book was difficult to get through because of the paranoid and scattered style in which it was written. I found the documentary "Loose Change" to be a better summation of the truth movement's arguments.
February 18, 2008
Don't let reason and rationality affect your beliefs.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 6, 2008
some mindBlowin shit! an excellent intro to the convoluted topic of state-sponsored false flag terrorism.
November 29, 2010
Another David Ray Griffin gem. An excellent book to keep for reference when evaluating 9/11 debunker claims.
March 11, 2016
Tne mind of David Ray Griffin against the Pentagon, the State Department, the CIA, Homeland Security, the FBI. He takes them all on and wins in this astonishing display of his reasoning powers.
November 21, 2025
"Mechanics?" Panic!
Pop mag's a grease rag! Fixed. Junk
"science," bunk tactics.
Pop mag's a grease rag! Fixed. Junk
"science," bunk tactics.
December 7, 2007
Amazingly thorough research. What to do, what to do...
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews