Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

David Ray Griffin advocates "a theology for a new world order"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 03:06 PM
Original message
David Ray Griffin advocates "a theology for a new world order"
I am very sad to read this and have tried to sort out truths but its very confusing..I read these atricles and was so upset after feeling so great on Sat.
I am still pleased that Mr. Griffin spoke on c-span But now I wonder about the agenda.
His co-author and fellow traveller Richard Falk is a member of the Council of Foreign Relations{CFR].
Disinfo is so mixed in with real info...What is Truth?


"Probably the elites are playing both sides, preparing a Plan-B, just in case. If 9/11 really gets exposed to the general public as an inside job of the USA, they can blame it on Dick Cheney (see Mike Ruppert) and a few generals and put Hillary Clinton in power. She will give up a lot of US national souvereignity to the UN "so that something like 9/11 can never happen again" (just like Germany lost most national souvereignity after WW2, "so that the holocaust can never happen again")

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id24.html

Quote:
David Ray Griffin, is the author of the book, The New Pearl Harbor, beloved by many in the 911 Truth Movement as providing a definitive 911 skeptics account, even discussing various physical evidence claims pointing to 9-11 being an inside job. Writing his book's forward is Richard Falk. They're often a team, David Ray and Richard, both one world government aficionados (and I don't know about you, but I do admit to finding one world gov't advocates creepy) who work on the same projects and write for the same publications advocating a world government solution. Richard Falk, in fact, is a member of the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations. He's worked on new world order projects for the CFR, like the World Order Models Project financed by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Rockefeller Foundation. What the hell is one to make of a CFR member wanting to expose 9-11? Another frequent writing/project partner of Griffin is John Cobb, former senior economist for the World Bank. Griffin and Cobb founded the Center for Process Studies which received support from the Rockefeller Foundation. Griffin and Cobb have also co-authored some materials with Club of Rome member Herman Daly. Griffin, himself, referred to as the "well known theologian", has some unusual ideas about how humanity should think about God and apparently wants us to revert to some type of mysticism on our path to the new world order. Here's an interview of him talking about it: http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC24/Griffin.htm


David Griffin's response is here: http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id25.html


From the book "Toward Genuine Global Governance" in a chapter written by Mr. Griffin:
Quote:
Our efforts toward global governance must be two-pronged: at the same time as the case is being made for the necessity and possibility of global government, people in various religious and philosophical traditions need to be interpreting those traditions, probably through a combination of retrieval and reformation, so as to reveal and emphasize their support for this transition to world unity. . . My major project at present is, in fact, to develop a theology for a new world order . . . "

The Spirit of Truth is foreign to this material world.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. now that just figures...
Well that explains a lot doesn't it...how Griffin gets on CSpan when no else can remotely have a chance to be exposed on that level.

Living up here in them hills,I can't imagine Hillary gaining power in that fashion without widespread political chaos and balkanization.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graphixtech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. There's more to the story
"Angie" has a well known pattern of destruction within
the 911 Truth Movement. She tears down all things
that have been effective, including key respected activists.
In fact, because of these destructive and divisive tactics,
"Angie" was quickly banned from both the 911 truth alliance
list and 911Visibilty.orgs public forum.

That she is attacking DRG is simply an indicator that
he is being effective. Dr. David Ray Griffin has a
spotless reputation as being a very honorable person,
meticulous writer and a well respected theologin.

This, from 911Visibilty website:
http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-12-11...

" Theologian Asks the Hard Questions About 9/11

by Douglas Todd
Vancouver Sun
Saturday, Dec 11, 2004
Link to Original


David Ray Griffin is one of the most respected philosophers of religion in North America. He is the author or editor of more than 24 academic books, including works co-written with the deans of world religions, Huston Smith and Martin Marty. He has lectured around the world, including at UBC.

Griffin is one of those profiled in the prestigious volume, A Handbook of Christian Theologians. He's painstakingly probed countless philosophical challenges, from the question of why there is evil to the relationship between science and religion, for which he's won numerous awards.

So why did this soft-spoken professor from the high-ranking Methodist-rooted School of Theology at Claremont, Calif., feel it necessary to risk his hard-earned reputation as a religion scholar to write one of the most incredible -- in all senses of the word -- political books of 2004?

Because no one else in mainstream America seemed prepared to do it...

The result? Griffin's book, The New Pearl Harbour: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 (Interlink Publishing, $22.50) has already sold an astonishing 80,000 copies.

Griffin's unflinching analysis of the unanswered questions surrounding the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington has made Amazon.com's bestseller list despite receiving virtually no reviews in North America's mainstream media. That's unlike in Britain, where he's had solid coverage, including a three-page spread in London's mass-circulation Daily Mail.

Personally, when people ask how a group of Muslim extremists could have pulled off the devastating suicide attacks against the U.S., in spite of the country's global intelligence network and massive defence arsenal, I tend to side with the German philosopher, Goethe, who once said: "Why look for conspiracy when stupidity can explain so much?"

But when Griffin, who's known for his careful approach to philosophical problems, poses a series of questions suggesting the administration of George W. Bush had been warned about the terrorist attacks and did nothing, it's enough to make you shudder. The implications would make the Watergate scandal look like a Sunday brunch.

In effect, The New Pearl Harbour fleshes out in 214 pages the question asked in the final moment of Michael Moore's Academy-award-winning documentary, Fahrenheit 911. That's when the filmmaker wonders aloud: What exactly was Bush thinking as he sat in front of a bunch of school children reading a book titled My Pet Goat, knowing two jetliners had been flown into the World Trade Center?

Griffin's book is titled The New Pearl Harbor for two reasons. One, because that's what Bush wrote in his diary on the evening of Sept. 11: "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." But also because members of the Bush administration in 2000 helped author the document, Project for the New American Century, which opined it would be difficult to galvanize Americans to support military expansion in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere unless a "new Pearl Harbor" occurred.

Here are a few of the questions Griffin looks into:

* Why did the Bush administration say it didn't anticipate the Sept. 11 attacks when the CIA and FBI had repeatedly told it al-Qaida was planning to hijack planes and fly them into U.S. targets, including the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?

* Why were standard procedures that could have prevented the tragedy not followed when the four hijacked planes went off course, including immediately sending up jet fighters to shoot down passenger planes that fail to obey orders?

* Why has there been no physical evidence a jet plane crashed into the Pentagon? Independent onlookers say they saw a missile fly into the building. Video evidence shot by a nearby gas station's security cameras was confiscated by government officials.

* Why did Bush, despite knowing about first one, then two, World Trade Center crashes, delay his response to them for up to 30 minutes and instead continue to read a children's book? Why was he not whisked away by his security agents, who are trained to believe he's a logical target of terrorists?

* Who made tens of millions of dollars by betting on the stock market in the weeks before Sept. 11 that shares in the two airlines that owned the hijacked planes were about to plummet?

The Bush administration has brushed off all such questions. For his part, Griffin doesn't argue the Bush administration was actually complicit in the attacks. Some of the professor's fans have regretted his cautiousness, because he won't compile a grand theory about why the attacks may have been allowed to happen. He consistently avoids inflammatory rhetoric.

Griffin, however, has clearly shown the gross inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission, which the Bush administration demanded be restricted to looking only at how to stop another terrorist assault.

Griffin's supporters, including top Christian theologians, say he achieved his key goal, which was to provide an overwhelming body of evidence to show it's necessary to conduct a thorough probe into how the attacks happened in the first place.

In the past month, Harper's Magazine and the New York Times have tentatively started to catch up with Griffin's questions. Harper's, for instance, published a cover feature titled, "Whitewash as public service: How the 9/11 Commission Report defrauds the nation," by Benjamin DeMott, which also asks whether it was sheer incompetence or something else that made the attacks possible.

For his part, Griffin says he's been overwhelmed by the positive responses he's received to his book, which has sold 50,000 copies in the U.S. almost solely by word of mouth. In an e-mail interview, Griffin said he's only received about a dozen denunciations. Many families of those who died in the World Trade Center attack are among his supporters. Two of his many high-placed admirers are Canadians; former Liberal defence minister Paul Hellyer and Michael Chossudovsky of the University of Ottawa.

Griffin continues to believe the religious and philosophical questions he's devoted his career to answering are important, but, as a Christian, he feels a more urgent need to take on the geo-political developments that have elevated the planet onto high alert. Two weeks ago he released a follow-up book with the same publisher, titled The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thanx for info..


I really don't like this new world order jazz and Find it to in line with power elites agenda..

Our efforts toward global governance must be two-pronged: at the same time as the case is being made for the necessity and possibility of global government, people in various religious and philosophical traditions need to be interpreting those traditions, probably through a combination of retrieval and reformation, so as to reveal and emphasize their support for this transition to world unity. . . My major project at present is, in fact, to develop a theology for a new world order . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. the "new world order" need not be an organization
Order is a word, peace is a word, justice, truth, liberty, freeedom, solidarity, republic, democracy, rights... all words.

The question is how you define them.

I'm for a new world order, too. Post-national, post-capitalist, de-militarized, disarmed, confederalized, free movement, sustainable, with liberty and justice for all.

If anything, the disturbing term for me in Griffin's statement is "theology." I think we've had enough of that, personally. :-)

Some 9/11 skeptics are republicans, others are redder than Lenin. So? Does that change anything in our duty to evaluate the evidence on its own merits?

Angie was a real plague to the New York 9/11 group, constantly obstructing and accusing and hurling. Her only contributions, ever, were to cite pretty much everyone who wasn't 100 percent on her line as a traitor. I had the idea of convincing her to go recruit among commie splinter groups, where she'd fit in best and really prosper. You couldn't say foreknowledge or forewarnings or LIHOP around this woman, treasonous as these crimes would be, without inspiring an angry tirade - all that's allowable is "the New World Order blew up the Towers."

Anyways...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Good pt!
either way theology or NWO are labels for a greater abuse of the middle class and the lower classes as the power elites reap and rape every nation for their own quite sinister agenda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dirk39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I'm surprised...
Hello from Germany,

"If anything, the disturbing term for me in Griffin's statement is "theology." I think we've had enough of that, personally. :-)"

Whatelse do you expect from someone, who is teaching theology?

The Left - I'm one of them - among them Karl Marx, does fight for a global democracy for nearly 170 years. Does this make us suspicious?

Only because we don't believe that after capitalism has become global in all brutality that there can't be a way back to protected Nationstates, but only a global democracy after we have removed the Lumpen-Bourgeoisie that has hijacked our planet (as I said I'm a leftist) from power?

I cannot remember a single passage from his book - I did just read Pearl Harbour so far - where he's using his research about 911 in any way to promote any kind of agenda. That he has some political goals and convictions as an academic and that he has even published them before, doesn't really surprise me :-)

"I'm for a new world order, too. Post-national, post-capitalist, de-militarized, disarmed, confederalized, free movement, sustainable, with liberty and justice for all."

I just hope you agree with me that in the Post-national, post-capitalist world, we want to live in, theologists are still allowed to be theologists and maybe some of them will contribute to the peace between cultures and religions we all want?

Proletarians of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains!
(O.K., just to expose me as a part of the jewish-communist world-conspiracy towards a New World Order - if only it would exist!!!)

Dirk

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Sure, I agree...
Edited on Tue May-03-05 11:34 PM by JackRiddler
those annoying theists who think God talks to'em, or talked to some guy in the desert a million years ago who wrote it all down just right, will always be around. Bless'em. Long as their doctrines aren't guiding the political system absent the all-important additional justification in universally apprehensible reason...

I'm all for love your neighbor and God is love. I just prefer "Truth is God."

You make the point that really matters: nowhere in his 9/11 work does Griffin resort to divinities or promote any agenda other than investigating and exposing 9/11.

Welcome, fellow commie. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frederik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
8. "a new world order" and "The New World Order"
There's "a new world order" and there's "The New World Order". A new world order simply means changing the world, in whichever direction.
New world order was a buzz-word in the early nineties, after the collapse of the Soviet union, used by George HW Bush as we all remember in connection with the "crisis in the Gulf". It may also have some more sinister connotations, but I'm not so sure about that. What Poppy meant was probably a world dominated by the US, through US-controlled multilateral institutions. This was pretty much the Clinton adm. (Albright)'s project too. The Bush admin. has abandonned that for a unilateral adventure of conquering the world's energy resources.

After a while they started talking about "global governance" instead, which Griffin also does. Which can also mean a lot of different things, but normally it refers to supra-national organizations like the UN, WTO etc. Which can be good or bad, but in today's world it's more often bad. Some of the UN organizations do some very good and useful work, while the IMF is a tool for the global financial cartel's control of third world nations and corporate takeover of their resources. The purpose of the WTO is to gradually erode the sovereignty of nation-states and open them up for foreign "investment" (corporate takeover).

The New World Order (NWO) with capital letters, conceived as some kind of secret global organization, is a figment of survivalist/militia imagination, in my opinion.

As for Griffin, he said, at the end of his C-Span lecture, that he was in favour of a world parliament, but that others would have different suggestions of what would be the appropriate response to today's global problems. World parliament sounds like a strengthened UN General Assembly to me, which isn't a bad idea, as long as the sovereign nation-state continues to be (or is restored as) the cornerstone of the system. This would indeed be "a new world order".

Daniel Ellsberg is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and he has come out in support of Sibel Edmonds and has said that John Ashcroft may face prison for the 9/11 cover-up, and that the CIA may have been involved. While the CFR is a powerful organization, they have a rather wide spectrum of opinions and interests represented there. David Rockefeller said, in the 70s, that the CFR had become useless for that very reason (which is why he formed the Trilateral Commission). There was a big split in the CFR over Vietnam, with one faction supporting it and another faction against it. One of the things they try to do there, as far as I understand, is to set the parameters of the mainstream debate. And to do that, they need influential people there with a variety of backgrounds. These people don't automatically become "agents" of the CFR simply by being members there, though I wouldn't necessarily trust a journalist who is a member of the CFR to tell me the truth. (Some suspect Ellsberg of being CIA though, but I don't really think so).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
9. This is ridiculous
David Ray Griffin is a good guy with good intentions. So he's an idealist who would like to see the end of nations. So what? So was John Lennon (from the song Imagine: "Imagine there's no countries..."). Let's see those who are so eager to tear the likes of him down do some excellent research on their own first, before they spend their time criticizing 9/11 researchers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. I would ignore "Angie"-- she seems to distrust EVERYONE
I think David Ray Griffin is about as good of a messenger for 9/11 as we could possibly hope for.

As others have pointed out, the "one world" governance concept is fairly innocuous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Spooked 9/11..
I deeply hesitated to even post this info ..cuz we were so thrilled on sat.by Mr. griffin
I personally believe that 9/11 was done by bush /cheny enterprises..

Griffin uses theology and new world order in same breath..that disturbs me..
I want some Truths for a change and am waiting ....Griffin needs to be challanged like everyone else about 9/11 ...
I wish more govt workers would step forward like Sibel Edmunds BUT they are so demonized..so rapidly

disinfo is everywhere and nobody that I know has proof either way as to who is more credible about 9/11 truth movement...

9/11 was done by the govt and the truth seekers mision is bring it to public awareness..conflicts with each other are part ot the process..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Well, we can either distrust people's motives or we can concentrate on
Edited on Wed May-04-05 03:43 PM by spooked911
9/11 truth.

Griffin is a theologian, and a respected scholar. I personally doubt that he is questioning 9/11 as part of some grand plan for a new world order with a theology-based government. Maybe he is, but he is helping the movement.

If 9/11 truth ever gets anywhere, it will cause a major political shift. Maybe Griffin wants to exploit that. Or maybe he is just morally concerned about the government covering up 9/11. I don't know.

For now, I think we should trust him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbeach Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I agree that any light shined on these villains is helpful..
and the list of villains is NEVER ending...

"...but he is helping the movement."
and the truth movement need's help..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dirk39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-06-05 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Couldn't agree more...
Hello from Germany,
after reading The New Pearl Harbour, where he doesn't mention religion a single time, I now did watch the C-Span speech. He is just completely transparent, whenever he talks about religion.
What should religious people think about godless people (like me!)or us?
"They must be communists, so don't listen to what they have to say about September 11!"?

Shouldn't we respect it, if religious people oppose the fundamentalists, and try to work against the neocon agenda, which is using people's religion to turn them into instruments of their global fascism?

It seems to be nearly impossible to not become paranoid or naive in the dark times, we live in, but at least we should try.

Dirk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 26th 2014, 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC