Again, I understand that Griffin is misled (and misleading). I was simply explaining his motive. It goes very much hand-in-hand with his theology. Process theology and panentheism are rather unusual in their approach and seem to lead ineluctably to conclusions such as Griffin's. His starting point is that the omnipotence of any deity is questionable and that, eventually, one comes to see the personification of both "God" and "Satan" in human endeavours.
His reticence to accept omnipotence as a part of the definition of "God" is probably not too different than that of most of the posters on this board. It's the combination of that philosophy with a search for "Satan" in everything in the world (ending, it seems, with the Americans and their government) that leads him to his "new Pearl Harbour".
In short, he's a nut, but a fairly thoughtful one.
