• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Real plane crashes compared to 9/11 flight 93's disappearing act.

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
239
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I am going to dedicate this thread on analyzing many Airline crashes that slammed into the ground and showing how much of the plane is left to prove it crashed there.

This will be an indepth comparison to the crashsite of flight 93.

Pulkove Airlines flight 612 crashed near the Ukranian city of Donetsk killing all 170 people on board.

As the Tupolev Tu-154 reached 39,400ft. it stalled, went into an uncontrollable spin and slammed into the ground at over 500mph.

Unlike America's flight 93 on 9/11 which somehow does a disappearing act of any evidence of plane......well, let's let the pictures do the talking.

Russian flight safety takes nosedive - Aviation- msnbc.com

Tupolev Tu-154 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

xin_07208032321294211481913.jpg


Tu154wreckage-BBC.jpg


Local residents react standing among the wreckage of the Tupolev Tu-154 at the crash site near the Ukrainian city of Donetsk, about 400 miles (640 kilometers) east of Kiev, in this Aug. 23, 2006, file photo. The crash that killed all 170 people on board.

610x.jpg



The following is a well documented statement from a former aircraft accident investigator who signed a petition for a new investigation into the events of 9/11....


Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career.

Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.
Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. …

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."
 
ua93enginefanponduq1.gif


the exact shaped hole for the flight 93 crash is shown on USGS images to have been there before 9/11


There are MANY live Media reports that say there is NOTHING at the crashsite that shows it was a plane that crashed there.

no plane........nothing!.......



topo_crash_f93.png


shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg


Flight 93 crashsite had no plane, no debris, no evidence.

No reporters were allowed within seeing distance of the scene

Just another amazing coincidence for 9/11.... flight 93 just happend to hit exactly where there already was an indent in the ground proven to be there before 9/11 by dated material from USGS...
 
Last edited:
Here are the images from the flight 93 crash where the plane wasn't there...never was.

Flight93CrashSite.jpg


9301.jpg


AU93_crater.jpg


f93crash.jpg


Flight93CrahSite2.jpg
 
Here is a better comparison of what a real jumbo airbus compares to the site.

ste47.jpeg


911_09.jpg
 
Last edited:
Where are the impact marks from the planes huge engines?

The plane was reported to be upside down on impact.

f93crash.jpg


ua93enginefanponduq1.gif


757radar.jpg
 
Are you asserting that no plane crashed in PA?

Are you asserting that no plane hit the Pentagon?
 
Are you asserting that no plane crashed in PA?

Are you asserting that no plane hit the Pentagon?

To be honest I'm not sure?

Many very prominent people in government have stated that there is no possibility it was a 757.

I can bring up many documented statements.

It is compelling though.
 
To be honest I'm not sure?

Many very prominent people in government have stated that there is no possibility it was a 757.

I can bring up many documented statements.

It is compelling though.

Dude, seriously, instead of saying you can bring up documented statements, BRING UP documented statements.

We don't care what you can or cannot do.
 
To be honest I'm not sure?

Many very prominent people in government have stated that there is no possibility it was a 757.

I can bring up many documented statements.

It is compelling though.

There were obviously multiple planes hijacked and crashed on 9/11. Why fake the hijacking of flight 93?
 
Dude, seriously, instead of saying you can bring up documented statements, BRING UP documented statements.

We don't care what you can or cannot do.

OK I will....in the meantime here is something I found.

The reason the one claimed to be the actual size is high on the building is because it is off the ground at estimated height.

Here is a comparison of what a real jumbo jet should have looked like on video.

This video comparison was put together by a group of Physicists investigating 9/11.

Top image is a recreation of what the real flight 77 would have looked like

911-pentagon-simulation-of-how-the-pentagon-video-should-have-looked-like.gif


This bottom image is what really hit the Pentagon

pentagon_hit.gif
[/
 
I just found this in Russia Today News

This is actually a small cut from a long article....

911 reasons why 9/11 was (probably) an inside job - RT Top Stories

911 Reason why 9/11 was an inside job. Part II. The Pentagon Crash
permalinke-mail story to a friendprint versionPublished 12 September, 2009, 12:28

Edited 21 October, 2009, 09:23

Andrews Air Force Base is a mere 10 miles away from the Pentagon, yet 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began not a single fighter jet had been activated to intercept American Airlines Flight 77.


PART II
Consider the following: On October 25, 1999, a tiny Learjet 35 departed from Orlando, Florida that was carrying Payne Stewart, a professional American golfer. About 14 minutes after departing from the airport, the control tower lost contact with his plane. The air-traffic controllers, following rigid protocol regarding lost aircraft, immediately notified the US Air Force.


According to FAA official transcripts, “At 9:52 a U.S. Air Force F-16 from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at the Englin Air Force was vectored toward the aircraft.”

At 9:54 – just two minutes after the command to intercept had been ordered – the fighter jet had already spotted Payne Stewart's wayward aircraft.

The pilot of the F-16 reported that both engines on the plane were working, but the cockpit windows were covered with condensation or frost, a sign that the cabin had depressurized without the necessary oxygen reserves. Things looked very bad for the occupants of the aircraft.

Both the Learjet and the F-16 were now over the state of Illinois, many miles from the departing point. The F-16 from Englin stopped pursuing the Learjet and landed at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois for refueling and probably a cigarette.




F-16
At this point, two Oklahoma F-16s (Codenamed, TULSA 13) were then vectored to intercept the “accident airplane” by the Minneapolis ARTCC (Air Route Traffic Control Center). Neither pilots of those two planes, which flew within meters of the disabled aircraft, noticed anything mechanically wrong with the tiny aircraft. But still the pilot of the Learjet did not respond.
Minutes later, the TULSA 13 jets handed off the plane to two F-16s stationed in North Dakota (Codenamed, NODAK 32). One of the pilots from this new sortie reported, “We’ve got two visuals on it… the cockpit window is iced over and there’s no displacement in any of the control surfaces…”

Twenty minutes later, one of the jets from the NODAK 32 team remained to the west of the Learjet, while the TULSA 13 F-16 followed the Learjet down.

“The target is descending and he is doing multiple aileron rolls, looks like he is out of control,” the TULSA 13 pilot radioed back to his command station. “It’s soon to impact the ground he is in a descending spiral.”

The plane crashes and all of the passengers, who probably died long before the plane had hit the ground, were killed.

Compare: On Sept. 11 at 9:37 a.m., one hour and twenty minutes after the hijackings were reported, American Airlines Flight 77 slams into the west wall of the Pentagon without ever being followed, intercepted or shot down by US fighter jets.

How does NORAD account for the fact that five (5) state-of-the-art F-16 fighter jets, activated from various air force bases, trailed a tiny wayward Learjet halfway across the United States, yet failed to vector a single aircraft to inspect four commercial jets that were carrying hundreds of passengers across many miles of heavily populated, strategically sensitive territory? It does not compute.

Despite possessing highly sophisticated aircraft that can fly faster than the speed of sound (2,400 km per hour), and shoot down targets from many miles away, the U.S. Air Force opted not to activate a single fighter jet to intercept, tag, or at least investigate, four lumbering commercial jets that had wandered off their courses for periods ranging from 20 to 90 minutes.

“Anytime an airliner goes off course,” says Robert Bowman, a pilot and decorated Vietnam veteran, “or loses radio communication, or loses its transponder signal – anytime any one of those three things happen, the aircraft is supposed to be intercepted.”

“On 9/11, all three of those things happen,” continues Bowman in the film Zero, “and still there was no intercept. Those planes flew for 20 minutes to an hour-and-a-half without ever being intercepted.”

But there was no shortage of fighter jets available, we must assume, since there are sixteen (16) Air Force bases located in the northeast of the United States. So why weren’t the large, slow-moving Boeing jets intercepted?

The official version of the story says that NORAD was notified too late; in other words, the air traffic controllers were not on the ball on 9/11. This argument seems equally implausible. John Judge, a 9/11 investigator for former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, said that 9/11 was the first time in the year 2001 that an air emergency went ignored.

“Sixty-seven times in that year, 2001,” says Judge, “there had been air emergencies. They can get a plane up in 6 to 10 minutes, and scrambled 67 times that year in air emergencies, but there was not an instance where an air emergency went ignored for long periods of time – until 9/11.”

One good explanation for the eerily empty skies over New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 9/11 had a lot to do with a bizarre memorandum (entitled “Aircraft Piracy and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects”) that former Vice President Dick Cheney rammed through the Defense Department on June 1, 2001, exactly three months before 9/11.

Despite warnings from intelligence-collecting agencies that a terrorist strike was becoming an increasing threat (a presidential brief, for example, entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US” landed on George W. Bush’s desk from the FBI on August 6 that makes direct mention of the Al-Qaeda leader wanting to “hijack a US aircraft to… gain release of US-held extremists”), Cheney inexplicably relieves NORAD of its long-standing responsibility to intercept and shoot down hijacked airplanes that pose a major threat on the ground.

In other words, the U.S. generals had their hands tied on 9/11, and could not even scramble jets without a direct order from the Pentagon. That command, of course, never came.

It should be no surprise as to who failed to pick up the telephone at the Pentagon on the morning of Sept. 11. Yes, Donald Rumsfeld. Where was he? Strangely, nobody could find him. Indeed, the official 9/11 Commission report states that the Defense Secretary “was untraceable until 10:30a.m.”

Eventually, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was caught on film shortly after the crash of Flight 77, assisting with the rescue efforts on the lawn of the Pentagon. Although this humanly gesture must be commended, it seems to be completely at odds with Rumsfeld’s most critical job duty, which was to give clearance for NORAD to shoot down or intercept hijacked aircraft according to Cheney’s updated (and short-lived) memorandum mentioned above.

On the lawn of the Pentagon, tending to the wounded was not the right place for the Defense Secretary who should have been sitting near the phone, coordinating our national defenses. And how did Rumsfeld know for certain that another plane might not drop out of the sky, indeed as had been wildly rumored? Wouldn’t his expertise and command have been much more helpful inside of the Pentagon?

Or maybe the absence of any aircraft in America’s skies besides hijacked ones had something to do with a secret exercise that was based upon “the fiction” of a hijacked plane crashing into a building. When did that military exercise occur? Yes, on the very morning of Sept. 11.

“In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence,” reports the Associated Press exactly one year after 9/11, “one US intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings"

“Officials at the… National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency’s headquarters…,” the AP article revealed.

Continued......
 
Creative,

You don't listen. I do not care about what you "find" (most of this echoes what's been heard since 2001). All I care about is the substance behind what you "find".

If you "find" that there is credibility surrounding hypothesis concerning the events of 9/11, then POST IT IMMEDIATELY.

There's a damn good reason why 9/11 conspiracy theorists have gone nowhere, and it has very little to do with their determination, or passion, but how they present their information. With unsubstantiated claims based on fragile foundations.

9/11 Conspiracies are just as bad as the demons they try to struggle with. Their arguments are rarely for "let's revisit this" and more like "what we know is wrong".

If we were to re-open 9/11 and find that the current claims and status quos are factual, then we cannot even begin to consider the theorists to be agreeable, as they've already made their claims and have done their research, and if they're hypotheses aren't proved, then they will never shut up.

It's just the nature of the beast. People still want to see Obama's birth certificate.
 
Creative,

You don't listen. I do not care about what you "find" (most of this echoes what's been heard since 2001). All I care about is the substance behind what you "find".

If you "find" that there is credibility surrounding hypothesis concerning the events of 9/11, then POST IT IMMEDIATELY.

There's a damn good reason why 9/11 conspiracy theorists have gone nowhere, and it has very little to do with their determination, or passion, but how they present their information. With unsubstantiated claims based on fragile foundations.

9/11 Conspiracies are just as bad as the demons they try to struggle with. Their arguments are rarely for "let's revisit this" and more like "what we know is wrong".

If we were to re-open 9/11 and find that the current claims and status quos are factual, then we cannot even begin to consider the theorists to be agreeable, as they've already made their claims and have done their research, and if they're hypotheses aren't proved, then they will never shut up.

It's just the nature of the beast. People still want to see Obama's birth certificate.

I'll be back (likely friday) with well documented statements from people of Government and Military with their disturbing words on 9/11.

Perhaps their words will mean more?
 
I'll be back (likely friday) with well documented statements from people of Government and Military with their disturbing words on 9/11.

Perhaps their words will mean more?

You say that every ****ing time Creative.

Next time you post a thread and are not ready to provide substance to the debate, I am going to consider it an act of trolling.

Rise the **** up, or get the **** out.
 
You say that every ****ing time Creative.

Next time you post a thread and are not ready to provide substance to the debate, I am going to consider it an act of trolling.

Rise the **** up, or get the **** out.

Did I not come back with the links?

Yes I did.

Chill out......lifes too short to waste it being all upset all the time.
 
Dude I have no idea how you haven't been banned yet. You posted this exact same thread who knows how many times. Seriously, you have offered proof of nothing and you never will be able to, no matter how "right" you think you are.

Get a life.
 
Dude I have no idea how you haven't been banned yet. You posted this exact same thread who knows how many times. Seriously, you have offered proof of nothing and you never will be able to, no matter how "right" you think you are.

Get a life.

Well loud mouth.

A huge portion of this country DOES NOT have your perspective on 9/11.

I can post MANY well documented statements from people in Government, Military, Physicists, Scientists, Engineers, Architects, Professors etc that see this completely different from YOU!

Keep your blinders on and be a good little sheeple.
 
David A. Johnson, B.Arch, MCP (City Planning), PhD (Regional Planning), F.AICP – Internationally recognized architect and city and regional planner. Professor Emeritus, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Tennessee. Former Professor and Chair of the Planning Departments at Syracuse University and Ball State University. Elected Fellow, American Institute of Certified Planners (2004). Past President of the Fulbright Association of the United States. Recipient of five Fulbright Scholarships for continued education in Cyprus, India, Thailand, and the Soviet Union. Directed educational projects in Brazil and Portugal. Active in reconstruction efforts in Bosnia and bicommunal peace-making in Cyprus. Former professional planner on the staffs of the Washington National Capital Planning Commission and the Regional Plan Association of New York. Former editorial board member of the Journal of the American Planning Association. Author of numerous journal articles on urban and regional planning theory and history. Author of Planning the Great Metropolis (1996). Co-author of The TVA Regional Planning and Development Program (2005). Contributing author to Two Centuries of American Planning (1988).


"I was dubious of the official explanations from the outset. You see, as a professional city planner in New York, I knew those buildings and their design. I attended and participated in the hearings at the New York City Hall when the buildings were first proposed. I argued for the buildings on the basis that the interior core represented a way of internalizing the cost of mass transit, which in our system is almost impossible to finance through public bond issues.

So I was well aware of the strength of the core with its steel columns, surrounding the elevators, and stairwells. I should also mention that with a degree in architecture and instruction in steel design (my Yale professor had worked on the Empire State Building) I was and am no novice in structural design.

When I saw the rapid collapse of the towers, I knew that they could not come down the way they did without explosives and the severing of core columns at the base. The spewing of debris from the towers where the planes entered also could not have occurred simply with just a structural collapse. Something else was happening to make this occur.

Moreover, the symmetrical collapse is strong evidence of a controlled demolition. A building falling from asymmetrical structural failure would not collapse so neatly, nor so rapidly, as you have pointed out.

What we are faced with is a lie of such proportions that even to suggest it makes one subject to ridicule and scorn. Who could have done such a terrible thing? Certainly not our government or military. Rogue elements in the intelligence agencies? I have no idea.

But I do know that the official explanation doesn't hold water. An open, honest re-opening of the case is in order. A near majority of Americans agrees with this view. Let us keep pressing for an honest investigation."
 
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career.

Member, Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.
Video interview 6/28/09:

General Stubblebine: I am Major General Albert Stubblebine. I am retired Army Major-General. In my last assignment -- my last command -- I was responsible for all of the Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world. I had responsibility for the Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence. They all belonged to me, in my last assignment. …

I was supposed to find out what the enemy was doing, before the enemy did it so that we could take action against the enemy. That's Intelligence, OK, before the fact. So, we always -- always -- rely not on a single piece of data, before we make a statement, but on multiple and the more pieces of data that you have that correlate, the better you know exactly what is going on. …

So I have had a lot of experience looking at photographs. I have looked at many, many different kinds of photographs, from many, many different platforms on many, many different countries, around the world.

Interviewer: OK. So on September the 11th, in 2001, what hit the Pentagon?

General Stubblebine: I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.

Interviewer: What made you believe that?

General Stubblebine: Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel -- vehicle, or whatever it was -- have wings? Apparently not, because if it had had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon.

One person counteracted my theory, and said, "Oh, you've got it all wrong. And the reason that it's wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off." I said, "Fine, that's possible, one wing could have broken off." But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven't met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? OK, one broke off -- there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I've analyzed. Now I've been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because you don't have that evidence. …

I did -- I've never believed that it was an airplane since I've looked at the photographs. Up until the time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it -- NO WAY! …

We pride ourselves with the "free press." I do not believe the "free press" is free any more. It's very expensive. It's very expensive. And the press is saying what they have been told to say about this.

Now, do I have proof of that? No. But I believe that what is being -- what certainly the -- the stories that were told -- all about 9/11 were false. I mean, you take a look at the buildings falling down. They didn't fall down because airplanes hit them. They fell down because of explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7, for God's sake. It didn't fall down to its side. It didn't fall to this direction or that direction; just like the two Towers. …

When you look at the temperatures that you can create with fuel in a gas tank or a fuel tank of an airplane, and then you investigate the amount of heat that would be required to melt -- to melt -- the superstructure of the buildings that came tumbling down, when you put all of that together, the one thing that shows; It does not match the facts. What is it they do not want the public to know?
 
H. Theodore Elden, Jr., B.Arch, AIA – Practicing licensed architect in West Virginia for over 25 years. Now retired. Graduate of Carnegie Mellon University. Member, American Institute of Architects, West Virginia Chapter. Appointed Member of West Virginia State Board of Architects. Former Member, National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), and Member, National Committee, Intern Development Program for Architects (IDP). Professional photographer.


"The primary duty of registered professionals is to protect the public safety. Professionals' intelligence, knowledge and experience provide a delicate connection between science and fact. ...

9-11 was a tragic event for our country, quickly “solved” by our government and propagated by our media, leading our country into fear, anguish, anger, war and unrestrained spending.

Have we, as building professionals, been hoodwinked? Who should better understand the collapse of the World Trade Towers than those in our profession, possibly with the consultation of demolition experts?

As I and millions have reviewed the events of that day, it seems much of the cover story is not true and impossible. As the nation is confused on the reality of that day, have we been making bad decisions ever since?

My web site collects salient information that isolates the demise of the World Trade Towers – linking many experienced, dedicated and articulate technical analysis that show clearly that the World Trade Towers were destroyed by internal explosives and not "fires from the airlines". ...

After hundreds of hours of research, and thousands of dollars purchasing materials and information, this letter outlines my most salient, articulate examples of things that architects should investigate. If I err slightly in any single item, that does not discount this letter. On the contrary, even if only part of these accusations are true, they should be investigated."
 
You do realize copying and pasting is not citing a source.... right?

It requires links! Not just the mumble jumble. Again, if you're a representation of the Conspiracy theorists' tactics for conveying messages, then I am afraid that they'll get nowhere.
 
Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). Appointed by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 - 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. 1990 - 1994.

Article 7/1/06: "The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and Colonel has gone on the record to voice his doubts about the official story of 9/11 - calling it ‘the dog that doesn't hunt.’ ‘I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that's accurate,’ he said."
 
Scott C. Grainger, BS CE, PE – Licensed Professional Civil Engineer and/or Fire Protection Engineer in the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. Owner of Grainger Consulting, Inc., a fire protection engineering firm (23 years). Former Chairman, Arizona State Fire Code Committee. Former President of the Arizona Chapter of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers. Current Member of the Forensic Sciences Committee and the Fire Standards Committee of ASTM International (formerly American Society for Testing and Materials ). Senior Member, National Academy of Forensic Engineers.


"Approximately 50% of my work is forensic. I am licensed in 9 States. In addition to my forensic work, a good portion of my work is in the design of structural fireproofing systems.

All three [WTC] collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform."
 
Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:

"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.

They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.

Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response.

We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now---not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books---so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed.

We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."


"A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible. … There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up. … Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible.…

Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.

I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."
 
Back
Top Bottom