Former MI6 British Counter Intelligence Officer,
"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 forensications 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 that 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 terroristic explosions and so on and no terrorist explosion has ever brought down a building. When the IRA put something like a thousands tonnes of home-made explosives in front of the Baltic Exchange building in Bishopsgate and let 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
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974
Distinguished McKnight University 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,
"I created an organization of faculty and scholars to study 9/11 and we've discovered that practically everything the government has told us about it is false . . . [Scholars for 9/11 Truth members include] about 200 with advanced research skills and about 85 that have affiliations including physicists, mechanical engineers, pilots, 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 9/11/2001], our government has a considerable reputation for telling things that are not true." [Quotes from Dr. Fetzer, appearing on FOX News on Hannity & Colmes]
-- James Fetzer
http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=122
Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, and co-chair of
Scholars For 9/11 Truth,
"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 the best hypothesis, which is the only one they looked at, fire, has only a low probability of occurrence. Further investigation analyses are needed to resolve this issue, and I agree with that . . . they admit there's only a low probability, and if you look at the collapse, you see what I have studied is 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". [excerpts from Dr. Jones appearing on MSNBC's The Situation with Tucker Carlson program.]
-- Steven Jones
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586
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"
"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
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154
Professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario, and founder
of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE),
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-engined aircraft, roughly the size and shape of an F-16, did, in fact, strike the building.
"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 forensications 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 that 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 terroristic explosions and so on and no terrorist explosion has ever brought down a building. When the IRA put something like a thousands tonnes of home-made explosives in front of the Baltic Exchange building in Bishopsgate and let 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
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974
Distinguished McKnight University 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,
-- James Fetzer
http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=122
Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, and co-chair of
Scholars For 9/11 Truth,
"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 the best hypothesis, which is the only one they looked at, fire, has only a low probability of occurrence. Further investigation analyses are needed to resolve this issue, and I agree with that . . . they admit there's only a low probability, and if you look at the collapse, you see what I have studied is 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". [excerpts from Dr. Jones appearing on MSNBC's The Situation with Tucker Carlson program.]
-- Steven Jones
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586
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"
"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
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154
Professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario, and founder
of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE),
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-engined aircraft, roughly the size and shape of an F-16, did, in fact, strike the building.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
