9/11 Conspiracy

John Gravois,"Professors of Paranoia? Academics Give a Scholarly Stamp to 9/11 Conspiracy Theories," CHE, 23 June; Stanley Fish,"Conspiracy Theories 101," NY Times, 23 July; and Ann Althouse,"Stanley Fish takes on the Kevin Barrett Controversy," Althouse, 23 July. The criticism of Kevin Barrett's adjunct appointment at the University of Wisconsin has ignored the fact that there is a community of tenured academics with whom Barrett shares his convictions. He is, of course, more vulnerable than they are.

If we're going to attack those who espouse conspiracy theories, however, I'd say that we should direct primary fire at the tenured theorists. Gravois's article cites Steven E. Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young, James H. Fetzer, a philosopher at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, and David Ray Griffin, a theologian at the California's Claremont School of Theology. Another 50 professors, including historians Joseph Diaferia of CUNY and SUNY and Daniele Ganser of Basel, have joined their group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Jones's paper,"Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" November 2005, sought to lay out the scientific evidence, but Griffin has been the most prolific of the conspiracy theorists. His works include: The New Pearl Harbor; The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions; and, most recently, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action. Other academics, like John B. Cobb, Jr., William Sloane Coffin, Jr., Richard A. Horsley, Catherine Keller, Rosemary Radford Ruether, and Howard Zinn have endorsed Griffin's work. Thanks to Manan Ahmed and Adam Kotsko for the tips.