By Elizabeth Woodworth, World Policy Journal, January 28, 2011
A former Princeton international law professor has been condemned by the UN Secretary General and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for alluding to “an apparent cover-up” of the events of September 11th, 2001.
On January 11, 2011, UN Special Envoy to Palestine Richard Falk posted on his personal blog an article entitled “Interrogating the Arizona Killings from a Safe Distance.”[1]
Dr. Falk made a tangential point in his blog-post that governments too often abuse their authority by treating “awkward knowledge as a matter of state secrets”.
To illustrate the point, he referred to gaps and contradictions in the official account of the 9/11 attacks, which have been documented in the scholarly works of Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology.
Continues >>
A former Princeton international law professor has been condemned by the UN Secretary General and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for alluding to “an apparent cover-up” of the events of September 11th, 2001.
On January 11, 2011, UN Special Envoy to Palestine Richard Falk posted on his personal blog an article entitled “Interrogating the Arizona Killings from a Safe Distance.”[1]
Dr. Falk made a tangential point in his blog-post that governments too often abuse their authority by treating “awkward knowledge as a matter of state secrets”.
To illustrate the point, he referred to gaps and contradictions in the official account of the 9/11 attacks, which have been documented in the scholarly works of Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology.
Continues >>
1 comment:
The 9/11 story was a package deal offered by the U.S. government to explain or as some may say to explain away the facts of the happening. Very many people in the United States and the rest of the world accepted the official version. Why? Because Bush and Cheney as leaders of the free world and ‘the beacons of light for democracy and human rights in the world’ had declared so. But there has been a lot of technical and expert evidence that contradicts the governmental account.
Such an event is not merely a policy issue with which the U.S. policymakers can play around for their specific objectives but an issue that calls for a thorough investigation to clarify what to many still remains a puzzle. There has been no such thorough investigation.
Richard Falk is one of those who dared to raise questions about the official account, but he is not the only one to do so. However, we should give credit to him for what says and more importantly ask for a thorough independent investigation of a crime that led to two major wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan by the Bush-Cheney administrations.
Post a Comment