http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne ... vel_of.htm
November 3, 2007 at 06:58:31
Former high-level officials challenge the conventional explanation of how and why the Twin Towers came down
by Richard Clark Page 1 of 3 page(s)
http://www.opednews.com
A 2,000 word article, Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report, appeared September 23, 2007 in OpEdNews. (Link provided below.) The article details severe criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by seven CIA veterans and calls for a new investigation. Here follows a brief quote or two from several of the individuals whose testimony is included in the article:
Ray McGovern, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council and 27-year CIA veteran: "The 9/11 Report is a joke." “It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. . . (And there is) evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited.”
William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political, and 29-year CIA veteran: "We very seriously need an entirely new, very high level, and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all." “The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.”
Robert Baer, 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997. During an interview by Thom Hartmann, Baer, after commenting on the financial profits being made from 9/11, was asked: “What about political profit? There are those who suggest that someone in (the U.S.) chain of command had pretty good knowledge that 9/11 was going to happen -- and really didn't do much to stop it -- or even obstructed efforts to stop it because they thought it would lend legitimacy to Bush's failing presidency.” Baer replied: “Absolutely.” Hartmann then asked, “So you are personally of the opinion that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?" To which Baer replied, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it." When Hartmann continued, "And why is this not being investigated?” Baer replied, "Why isn't the WMD story being investigated? Why hasn't anybody been held accountable for 9/11? We held people accountable after Pearl Harbor. Why has there been no change in command? Why have there been no political repercussions? Why has there not been any sort of exposure on all this? It really makes you wonder."
Robert David Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. Second ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 - 1992. Member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. His comment: "I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war. "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_ ... rans_c.htm
Additional statements questioning the official account of 9/11, and calls for a new investigation, by hundreds of high-level military officers (now retired) and other highly-credible individuals, can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com
Here’s some of the evidence that prompts them to call for a new investigation:
1 20-ton sections of steel beams were propelled, laterally, for a distance of up to 400 feet where they lodged in the sides of nearby buildings. (See video footage of this at http://www.ae911truth.org)
2 Molten metal was seen (and videotaped) gushing out the side of one of the twin towers. (Why is this significant? Jet fuel burns at 1800 degrees Fahrenheit while office furniture, rugs and computers burn at an even lower temperature. Iron and steel don’t vaporize until their temperature gets close to 4000 degrees F. So what does burn at a temperature capable of vaporizing steel? Incendiary compounds known as thermate and thermite, which burn at 4500 degrees F. See more about this later in this article.)
3 Various explosions (some quite powerful) were seen, heard and felt by hundreds of people, including many firemen and policemen, prior to the collapse of the twin towers, but occurred well after the airliners collided with the buildings.
4 Huge numbers of extremely tiny iron spherules (formed when steel or iron vaporizes at extremely high temperatures) can be found in most of the 9/11 dust samples. (more evidence for thermite)
5 Many column sections seen in the wreckage of the twin towers were cut at 45-degree angles, and have, close to the cut lines, previously-melted 'drippings' produced when the steel was melted at a temperature much higher than can be produced by an acetylene torch. This kind of angle cut can be used to direct the falling beam inward.
Source for the above information is http://www.ae911truth.org, which is the web site of an investigative organization whose 200+ members are all either professional architects or professional engineers.
If there were no high-powered explosives detonated inside the twin towers, as the official explanation contends, then defenders of that official explanation must provide us with an alternate theory as to how those column and/or beam sections got embedded in the sides of buildings that were 400 feet away. (The compressed air created by floors collapsing one upon the other could provide nowhere near the energy required to propel a 20-ton beam or column section that far.) In addition, defenders of the official explanation must provide us with a plausible fuel source for the temperatures approaching 4000 degrees F. which would have been necessary to vaporize parts of many of the steel beam remnants found in the wreckage.
The evidence for incendiary cutting of steel consists of the video evidence, the forensic evidence in the dust and rubble, and the testimony of eyewitness early responders and survivors who saw glowing molten metal flowing out of window openings. These incendiary events and the forensic evidence strongly suggest that the official story is wrong. The chemistry of the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres that are found in the dust from the rubble, the chemical content of these microspheres suggest that the official story is wrong. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volu ... emistryWTC
So when could the explosives and incendiary materials have been planted?
The official record shows that various floors of each of the twin towers were completely closed off 'for repairs,' for days at a time. Monitoring TV cameras on these floors were disconnected.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html. Owner Larry Silverstein was perhaps in on the deal. Why suspect this? Well, for one thing he received a fabulous insurance settlement, after purchasing the WTC complex just weeks earlier under unusual circumstances. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html. The terrorist attack on the twin towers saved him the immense expense of having the towers demolished in the conventional way. (The towers had many structural problems. Two applications to have the buildings demolished were submitted by the previous owners because of the advanced galvanic corrosion that was taking place at each of the thousands of joints where aluminum parts were mistakenly put in tight contact with steel structural members.) http://redlineav.com/tsg.deposition.contd.2.html
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that explosives and incendiary compounds might have been planted at strategic locations within the Twin Towers. For example:
Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably prevented from doing their job in the Twin Towers five days before 9-11
Various floors in the Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11
There was a ‘power-down’ in parts of the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.
And, as an interesting coincidence, a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade center, thus giving it free reign within the buildings.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html
In addition to these facts, demolition-and-building-collapse experts have raised the possibility of "explosive tenants" -- i.e. tenants in the Twin Towers who might have planted explosives in their own rented office spaces. http://911blogger.com/node/2487
1 | 2 | 3
are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall")
