collected by Riana Robert
Fascinating quotes from various defense experts, respected scholars, Republican officials and intelligence experts about 9/11.
What are some of the high ranking officials and intelligence experts saying about the official story?
Google research of the growing list of 9/11 skeptics of the official story yielded surprising results. Included are a host of high level Republican administration officials, defense experts, intelligence experts, and respected scholars, as well as well-known celebrities who are adding their names to the spotlight on the issue of 9/11. Some are “convinced of U.S. government involvement,” while others, not going that far, are pointing out that “the official story is highly questionable and demands further investigation.”
“Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapses of WTC 1 (North Tower), WTC 2 (South Tower), and the much-overlooked collapse of the 47-story WTC building 7 at 5:21 pm on that fateful day…. If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an ‘inside job’ and a government attack on America would be compelling.”
— Morgan Reynolds http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D. is professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX. He served as chief economist for the US Department of Labor during 2001–2, George W. Bush’s first term.
“… we’ve been lied to not only about the war, but about 9/11 itself. The Bush administration was warned. They were warned by the Clinton Administration during the transition period, they were warned by the intelligence agencies of eleven other nations, they were specifically warned by one FBI agent that Moussawi was planning on flying a hijacked airliner “into the World Trade Center.” They ignored the warnings; more than that, we have mounting evidence that, at least, they made it impossible for those planes to be intercepted.
… My sisters and brothers, that is treason!”
— Col. Robert Bowman (Caltech PhD in aeronautics and nuclear engineering, former director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force under President Reagan, and combat fighter pilot)
“[We] call for immediate public attention to unanswered questions that suggest that people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.”
— Ray McGovern, former CIA intelligence advisor to Reagan and George HW Bush and founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
“… The results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel…. I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F. Why Dr.[Hyman] Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.”
— Kevin Ryan, former department head at Underwriter Laboratories, the company which certified the steel which went into the WTCs upon their construction, and inspected it after the WTC collapses in 2001
“I guess the real story about 9/11 is about what the people are actually saying. I’ve gotten hundreds of emails in response to my columns, and many of them talk about not getting the truth from the government or the media about what really happened at the World Trade Center. I know many qualified engineers and scientists have said the WTC collapsed from explosives. In fact, if you look at the manner in which it fell, you have to give their conclusions credibility.”
— Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury, senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution, research fellow at Stanford’s Independent Institute, and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal
“Why did the President just sit in the schoolroom when he heard the news? Why did he not acknowledge that he already knew what was going on? As a former Minister of National Defense, when the news came out I had to wonder. Why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors being scrambled from Andrews [Air Force Base]?…With a quick action alert they should have been there in five minutes or ten minutes. If not, as the Minister of National Defense, which in the United States is the Secretary of Defense, I would want to say “why not?” …I think the inquiry has been very shallow and superficial. And I would like to see a much tougher, more in-depth inquiry. …why were some members of the Bin Laden family allowed to fly out of the United States? Why? There are so many questions. What is going wrong here? Or was there something going wrong? How much did they actually know? And you get into very deep territory. …I would like to see someone in a position of authority ask these questions and insist on getting answers. At least to why some of the things happened that seem to be, for an ordinary person, inexplicable.”
— the Honourable Paul Hellyer, Canadian National Defense Minister http://www.septembereleventh.org/kc/multimedia/movies/hellyer.mov
“Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9:38 am. Why not? There were standard FAA intercept procedures for hijacked aircraft before 9/11. Between September 2000 and June 2001, the US military launched fighter aircraft on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft (AP, August 13 2002). It is a US legal requirement that once an aircraft has moved significantly off its flight plan, fighter planes are sent up to investigate. …could US air security operations have been deliberately stood down on September 11? If so, why, and on whose authority? The former US federal crimes prosecutor, John Loftus, has said: “The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence.”
— Michael Meacher, Minister for the Environment and Member of Parliament, UK
“Well, this is a big question because it happened in 2001 more than 60 times that fighter[s] went up to check on airplanes that showed some irregularities. On 9/11, four planes for two hours were able to fly around, one hour toward the west and then turn around and come back. The Air Force was not able to intercept them. It’s unimaginable. And the whole story is totally unclear what happened between the Federal Aviation Agency Administration) and NORAD …, a covert operation. And this is a way to brainwash the American people into long, long, ongoing conflict with the Muslim world and all that, the last oil reserves which we need for the next decades before the oil age ends.”
— Andreas Von Buelow, National Minister of Defense and former Minister of Technology, Germany
“The organizers of [the 9/11] attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order – not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction. Only secret services and their current chiefs (or retired staff with ‘influence inside the state organizations’)[have the] ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation of such magnitude. Generally, secret services create, finance and control extremist organizations. Without the support of secret services, these organizations cannot exist – let alone carry out operations inside countries so well protected. …Osama bin Laden and ‘Al Qaeda’ cannot be the organizers or the performers of the September 11 attacks. … [they] do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders. …[Instead] a team of professionals had to be created, and the Arab kamikazes are just extras to mask the operation.”
— Leonid Ivashov, former Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces, and chief of the
department for General Affairs in the Soviet Union’s Ministry of Defense
“It is in fact a criminal offence to interfere with a crime scene and yet in the case of 9/11 all the metal from the buildings is shipped out to China; there are no forensics done on that metal. Now that to me suggests they never wanted anybody to look at that metal because it was not going to provide the evidence they wanted to show people it was Al-Qaeda. …They let it happen, they made it happen to create a trigger to be able to allow the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq and of course what they’re trying to do now is the same thing with the invasion of Iran and Syria. … I’ve seen the results of terrorist explosions, and no terrorist explosion has ever brought down a building. When the IRA put something like a thousand tons of homemade explosives in front of the Baltic Exchange building in Bishopsgate and set off the bomb, all the glass came out, the building shook a bit, but there was no question about the building falling down and it doesn’t obey the laws of physics for buildings to fall down in the way the World Trade Center came down. So you have the comparison of the two, Building 7 compared with the north and south towers coming down and those two things are exactly the same, they were demolished.”
— David Shayler, former MI6 British Counter Intelligence Officer
“I created an organization of faculty and scholars [Scholars for 9/11 Truth] to study 9/11, and we’ve discovered that practically everything the government has told us about it is false. … [Our members include] about 200 with advanced research skills and about 85 physicists, mechanical engineers, pilots, and aeronautical engineers. We’ve discovered that the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition, We’ve discovered that apparently Osama Bin Laden appears to have had nothing to do with it. … the FBI has confirmed they have no hard evidence connecting Osama Bin Laden to the events of 9/11. … We’re trying to find out exactly what happened [on 9/11]; our government has a considerable reputation for telling things that are not true.”
— James Fetzer, professor of philosophy at the University of Minnesota, former Marine Corps officer, author or editor of more than 20 books, and co-chair of Scholars For 9/11 Truth http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=122
“It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes, which are actually a diversion tactic. Muslims are probably not to blame for bringing down the World Trade Center buildings after all.
… the FEMA report says further investigation analyses are needed to resolve this issue, and I agree with that. …they admit there’s only a low probability[of fire causing the collapse], and if you look at the collapse, you see what I have studied: the fall time, the symmetry, the fact that it first dips in the middle. That’s called the kink, which is very characteristic, of course, of controlled demolition. … all scientists now reasonably agree that the fires were not sufficiently hot to melt the steel; so what is this molten metal [found beneath the rubble, still molten weeks after the WTC collapse]? It’s direct evidence for the use of high-temperature explosives, such as thermite, which produces molten iron as an end product.”
— Steven Jones, professor of physics, Brigham Young University (now on a forced leave of absence for the University administrators to “investigate” his professional work) and co-chair f Scholars For 9/11 Truth
[See the story about his forced leave of absence in this issue.]
“There was the extraordinarily high volume of “put options” purchased in the three days before the attacks, with investors betting that stock in United and American Airlines – the two airlines used in the attacks – would go down. There were also a suspiciously high number of put options for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, which occupied 22 stories of the World Trade Center. …U.S. intelligence agencies monitor the market, partly to look for signs of impending attacks. One wonders how information could be much more specific than this. … the United States military neglected to send fighter jets to intercept the hijacked planes. Such interceptions usually occur within 10 to 20 minutes after the first signs of trouble and are routine, happening about 100 times a year. …”
— David Ray Griffin, emeritus professor of philosophy of religion & theology, Claremont Graduate University, and author or editor of some 30 books, including “The New Pearl Harbor” and “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions”
[See the story about him in this issue.]
“Detailed analysis of the debris field, physical damage, and other factors in the alleged impact of a Boeing 757 on the Pentagon building on the morning of September 11, 2001, reveals an almost complete absence of debris expected from such an event. (Elliott 2003) The initial (pre-collapse) hole made by the alleged impact on the ground floor of Wedge One of the building is too small to admit an entire Boeing 757. In order to decide whether or not a Boeing 757 (or aircraft of comparable size) struck the Pentagon on the morning in question, a comprehensive review of all the debris and other physical evidence is hardly necessary. It turns out that a study of the wings alone suffices for the purpose.
Wings that should have been sheared off by the impact are entirely absent. There is also substantial evidence of debris from a much smaller jet-powered aircraft inside the building. We conclude with a high degree of certainty that no Boeing 757 struck the building. We also conclude with a substantial degree of certainty that a smaller, single-engine aircraft, roughly the size and shape of an F-16, did, in fact, strike the building.
— A.K. Dewdney, professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario and founder of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE)
“I called together from 16 to 19 September a group of military, civilian and general aviation pilots. And for three days, we kicked around what actually happened on 11 September. … After three days, the decisions were unanimous. [The report concluded that the flight crews of the four passenger airliners involved in the September 11th tragedy had no control over the aircraft. The military industrial complex clearly, that is, elements of it, were in control.]
… And I wrote my 24-page report up and submitted it to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. On 23 January 2002, it got into the hands of the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, U.S. Marine Corp General Peter Pace. … I got a telephone call, 5 March, from one of his horse holders, who informed me that Gen. Peter Pace had gotten the 24 pages and that he and his Sec. had no comment at this time. …”
— USAF Col.(Ret) Don de Grand-Pre, former chief Pentagon arms negotiator for the Middle East
“[Very] serious questions have been raised, about how much they knew beforehand and how much involvement there may have been. Is an administration capable, humanly and physiologically, of engineering such a provocation?
Yes, I would say that. I worked for such an administration myself, Johnson, ah, President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf not only once, but several times, with a lot of his people hoping it would lead to a confrontation and claiming it had. [It] could have resulted in the lost of many lives in the course of it.”
— Daniel Ellsberg, former military analyst employed by the RAND Corporation, who precipitated a national uproar in 1971 when he released the “Pentagon Papers” which exposed the government’s lies about the Vietnam war.]
“I would like to suggest to you emphatically that the 9-11 truth movement is the most pressing issue of the peace & justice movement today. Here is why. 9-11 has been used to justify “endless war” and a continual rollback in civil liberties that seems to have no end in sight. Yet, 9-11 remains the least examined tragedy in modern American history. …
To date, no one has been held accountable for the massive defense failures on 9-11, or for the bizarre suppression of critical warnings prior to 9-11. Furthermore, we still have no explanation for why the head of Pakistani intelligence, who was meeting with top Bush Administration officials in Washington on Sept. 11, 2001, had wired lead hijacker Mohammed Atta $100,000.00 weeks before. …
— Ed Asner, actor
For a more comprehensive list of experts and their articles and bios, please go to http://patriotsquestion911.com .