Breaking News 突發新聞 | | Forum 論壇 | | UK News 英國新聞 | | USA News 美國新聞 | | World News 世界新聞 | | Political News 政治新聞 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新聞 | | War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 | | Sports News 體育新聞 | | Multimedia 多媒體 | | Set Homepage 設為首頁

BREAKING NEWS 突發新聞

Saturday, May 24th, 2008 週六， 2008年5月24日

Pakistan Daily 巴基斯坦每日 | Twenty-five former US military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation.  They include former commander of US Army Intelligence, Major General Albert Stubblebine, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Col. Ronald D. Ray, two former staff members of the Director of the National Security Agency; Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, and Major John M. Newman, PhD, and many others.  They are among the rapidly growing number of military and intelligence service veterans, scientists, engineers, and architects challenging the government’s story.  The officers’ statements appear below, listed alphabetically. | 05年前美國軍官的嚴厲批評官方的帳戶9 / 11 ，並呼籲建立一個新的調查，它們包括前指揮官，美軍的情報，少將何俊仁stubblebine ，前副助理國務卿，國防部長，上校夏佳理d 。射線，兩個前同事署署長國家安全局;中校克倫kwiatkowski ，博士，以及重大約翰米紐曼，博士，和其他許多，他們之間的數量迅速增加的軍事和情報服務退伍軍人，科學家，工程師，建築師和具有挑戰性的政府的故事。軍官報表出現在下方，按字母順序排列。

Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD     “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,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, US Air Force (ret).中校羅伯特鮑曼，博士學位“了很多這些信息片斷，兩者合計，證明官方的故事，這位官員陰謀論9 / 11是一群泔水，這是不可能的，說： ”中將中校。羅伯特鮑曼，博士，美國空軍（退休） 。 With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col. Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.與博士學位，在航空和核工程，鮑曼上校擔任主任先進的空間計劃發展下，總統福特和卡特。

“There’sa second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman.  “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.” “還有第二組的事實，不必與掩飾， ”繼續鮑曼上校“ 。一併這些事情證明，高水平的，我們的政府不想讓我們知道到底發生了什麼，誰負責，誰獲得從9 / 11呢？誰掩蓋了關鍵的資料，約9 / 11 ？ ，誰提出了明顯虛假的故事9 / 11擺在首位？當你考慮到這些三件事一起，我認為情況是相當清楚地表明，奇摩高度置於個人在政府當局與所有道路，通過切尼“ 。

Regarding the failure of NORAD to intercept the four hijacked planes on 9/11, Col. Bowman said, “I’m an old interceptor pilot.  I know the drill.  I’ve done it.  I know how long it takes.  I know the rules.關於失敗的激光束攔截被劫持飛機4 9 / 11 ，鮑曼上校說： “我一歲的攔截試驗。據我所知，演習，我已經這樣做，我知道需要多久才能，我知道規則。 … Critics of the government story on 9/11 have said: ‘Well, they knew about this, and they did nothing’.  That’s not true.  If our government had done nothing that day and let normal procedure be followed, those planes, wherever they were, would have been intercepted, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive.” …批評政府的故事，對9 / 11說： '好，他們知道這一點，和他們沒有做任何' ，這是不正確的。如果我們的政府沒有採取任何這一天，讓正常的程序之後，這些飛機，無論他們在哪裡人，會被攔截，雙塔仍然會常委會和數以千計的人死亡的美國人將仍然活著“ 。

During his 22-year Air Force career, Col. Bowman also served as the Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the US Air Force Institute of Technology.  He also flew over 100 combat missions in Viet Nam as a fighter pilot.在他22年的空軍生涯中，上校鮑曼還擔任過該系系主任航空工程和助理院長，美空軍技術學院，他還飛越100的作戰任務，在越南，作為戰鬥機飛行員。

Lt. Jeff Dahlstrom     Former US Air Force pilot Lt. Jeff Dahlstrom wrote in a 2007 statement to this author, “When 9/11 occurred I bought the entire government and mainstream media story line.  I was a lifelong conservative Republican that voted for Bush/Cheney, twice.  Curiosity about JFK’s death, after a late night TV re-run of Oliver Stone’s movie, got me started researching and digging for the truth about his assassins.傑夫中將dahlstrom美國前空軍飛行員中將傑夫dahlstrom寫在2007的聲明，此作者的， “當9 / 11發生我買整個政府和主流媒體的故事線，我是一個終身保守的共和黨人認為，投票給布什/切尼，兩次。好奇肯尼迪的死因後，深夜電視重新運行的奧利弗斯通的電影，讓我開始研究和挖掘真相，他的殺手。

“My research led me to a much more important and timely question: the mystery of what really did happen on 9/11.  Everything that seemed real, turned out to be false.  The US government and the news media, once again, were lying to the world about the real terrorists and the public murder of 2,972 innocents on 9/11. “我的研究，促使我更為重要和及時的問題：神秘的什麼的確發生在9 / 11 ，一切似乎真實的，原來是虛假的。美國政府和新聞媒體，再次說謊以世界了解真正的恐怖分子和市民的謀殺案2972無辜9 / 11 。
“The ‘Patriot Act’ was actually written prior to 9/11 with the intention of destroying the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.  It was passed by Congress, based upon the government’s myth of 9/11, which was in reality a staged hoax.  9/11 was scripted and executed by rogue elements of the military, FAA, intelligence, and private contractors working for the US government. “ '愛國者法案' ，實際上是事先獲得書面同意，以9 / 11與意圖破壞美國憲法和人權法案，這是美國國會通過的，基於政府的神話9 / 11 ，這是在現實中一上演的騙術。 9 / 11是腳本和執行的無賴分子的軍事，安哥拉武裝部隊，情報和私營機構承辦工作的美國政府。

“In addition to severely curtailing fundamental rights of Americans, the 9/11 crime was then used by this administration, the one I originally voted for and supported, to justify waging two preemptive wars (and most likely a third war), killing over 4,500 American soldiers, and killing over one million innocent Afghan and Iraqi people. “此外，嚴重削減的基本權利的美國人， 9 / 11犯罪當時所用的政府，一個本來我贊成和支持，理由發動先發製人的戰爭，二（和最有可能是第三次戰爭） ，造成超過4500美國士兵，並殺害超過百萬無辜的阿富汗和伊拉克人民。

“It was all premeditated.  Treason, a false flag military operation, and betrayal of the trust of the American people were committed on 9/11 by the highest levels of the US government and not one person responsible for the crimes, or the cover-up, has been held accountable for the last six years. “這是所有有預謀的。叛國，虛假國旗的軍事行動，和背叛的信任，對美國人民承諾對9 / 11 ，由最高級別的美國政府，而不是一個人的罪行負責，或隱瞞，已被追究責任，為過去6年。

“After reading fifteen well-researched books, studying eight or nine DVD documentaries, and devoting months of personal research and investigation, I have arrived at one ultimate conclusion: The American government and the US Constitution have been hijacked and subverted by a group of criminals that today are the real terrorists.  They are in control of the US government and they have all violated their oaths of office and committed treason against their own citizens.” “後，讀15 ，以及研究的書籍，學習8或9的DVD紀錄片，抓個月內，個人的研究和調查，我已經到了一個最終的結論：美國政府和美國憲法已被劫持，破壞由一群罪犯今天是真正的恐怖分子，他們是在控制的美國政府，它們都無一例外地侵犯了他們的宣誓辦公室和承諾叛國罪本國公民“ 。

Capt. Daniel Davis     Capt. Daniel Davis is a former US Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director.  After his military service, Capt. Davis served for 15 years as a Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division and then devoted an additional 15 years as founder and CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company.上尉丹尼爾戴維斯上校丹尼爾戴維斯是美國前陸軍防空主任和挪威交通諮詢委員會主任後，他的兵役，上校戴維斯任職15年，作為一個高級經理通用電氣透平（噴射）發動機部，然後用一額外的15年，作為創辦人兼行政總裁輪機技術服務公司，渦輪（噴氣發動機）的服務和維修公司。

In a statement to this author, Capt. Davis wrote, “As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire.  Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed.  Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon?  If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.”在一份聲明中向筆者，上校戴維斯寫道， “作為前通用電氣透平工程專家和經理，然後總裁兼首席執行官渦輪工程公司，我可以保證，沒有高科技，高溫合金引擎，任何有關4架飛機墜毀於9 / 11將完全摧毀，焚燒，粉碎或融化在任何事故或火災。破壞了，是的，但不是銷毀。何處，所有這些引擎，特別是在五角大樓？如果噴氣動力飛機墜毀， 9 / 11 ，這些引擎，再加上翅膀和尾部大會，將有“ 。
Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam, Capt. Davis also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area.裝飾與青銅明星和戰士們英勇勳章，根據消防和紫心受傷，在越南，上校戴維斯也曾任職於陸軍防空指揮耐克導彈電池管制人員為芝加哥-密爾沃基防禦區。

Capt. Davis continued, “Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control.  No way!  With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there’s no way all four of them could!上校戴維斯續說： “此外，根據我的經驗，作為一名官員在挪威作為一個戰術主任芝加哥-密爾沃基防空和作為當前的私人飛行員，是沒有出路的一個飛機上儀器的飛行計劃（所有商業航班IFR預計）不會被攔截，當他們偏離他們的飛行計劃，關閉其轉發器，或停止的溝通與空中交通管制。沒有出路！與極壞的運氣，也許可以一滑，但沒有有沒有出路的所有四個他們可以！

“Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is difficult for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757.  Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled ‘terrorists’.  Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a ‘Conspiracy Theory’ does not change the truth.  It seems, ‘Something is rotten in the State’.” “最後，把話說過頭山和公路和撞毀五角大樓的權利，在牆/地面接口是很難，甚至一個小緩慢，單引擎飛機並沒有辦法為757 ，也許最好的試驗在世界上可以完成，但不這些非技術性的'恐怖分子' 。企圖掩蓋事實，稱他們為'陰謀論'並不能改變事實。看來， '的東西是爛在國家' “ 。

Major Jon I. Fox is a former US Marine Corps fighter pilot and a retired commercial airline pilot for Continental Airlines with a 35-year commercial aviation career.  In 2007, in support of the Architects and Engineers[3] petition to reinvestigate 9/11, he wrote, “On hearing the military (NORAD/NEAD) excuses for no intercepts on 9/11/2001, I knew from personal experience that they were lying.  I then began re-checking other evidence and found mostly more lies from the ‘official spokesmen’.  Jet fuel fires at atmospheric pressure do not get hot enough to weaken steel.  Structures do not collapse through themselves in free fall time with only gravity as the powering force.”主要瓊一，福克斯是美國前海軍陸戰隊的戰鬥機飛行員和一名退休的商業航空公司的飛行員為美國大陸航空公司與35年的商業航空事業。在2007年，在支持的建築師和工程師[ 3 ]呈請重新9 / 11 ，他寫道： “對聽力的軍事（挪威/ nead ）的藉口，沒有攔截對2001年9月11日，我知道從個人的經驗，他們在說謊。然後我開始重新檢查的其他證據，並發現大多更在於從官方的代言人' 。噴氣燃料火災在大氣壓力沒有得到足夠的熱點，以削弱鋼。結構不崩潰，通過自己在自由降落的時間只有重力作為驅動力量“ 。

Commander Ralph Kolstad     Retired US Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot Commander Ralph Kolstad started questioning the official account of 9/11 within days of the event.  In a statement to this author, he wrote, “It just didn’t make any sense to me,” he said.  And now six years after 9/11 he says, “When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.”指揮官拉爾夫kolstad退休的美國海軍高層槍'試點指揮官拉爾夫kolstad開始質疑官方帳戶9 / 11幾天內的活動。在一份聲明中向筆者，他寫道： “這只是沒有做任何意義，我他說： “和現在六年後， 9 / 11他說， ”當一個人開始使用他自己的態度，而不是什麼一被告知，是很少相信在官方的故事“ 。

Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during his 20-year Navy career.  Early in his career, he was accorded the honor of being selected to participate in the Navy’s ‘Top Gun’ air combat school, officially known as the US Navy Fighter Weapons School.  The Tom Cruise movie “Top Gun” reflects the experience of the young Navy pilots at the school.  Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad was further honored by being selected to become a ‘Top Gun’ adversary instructor.指揮官kolstad是一個一流的戰鬥機飛行員在他20年的海軍生涯。早在他的職業生涯，他被授予的榮譽被選中參加在海軍的'頂端槍'空戰學校，正式名稱為美國海軍戰鬥機武器學校。湯姆克魯斯的電影“頂端槍” ，反映的經驗，年輕的海軍飛行員在學校。十一年後，指揮官kolstad進一步榮幸被選中成為'頂端槍'的對手導師。
Commander Kolstad had a second career after his 20 years of Navy active and reserve service and served as a commercial airline pilot for 27 years, flying for American Airlines and other domestic and international careers.指揮官kolstad了第二個職業生涯後，他20多年的海軍積極和儲備服務，並擔任一家商業航空公司飛行員27年，飛行的美國航空公司和其他國內和國際的事業。 He flew Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100 airliners.他飛抵波音727 ， 757和767 ，麥道MD - 80 ，和一架Fokker F - 100客機。 He has flown a total of over 23,000 hours in his career.他飛到總額超過二點三萬小時在他的職業生涯。

Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon.  He says, “At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying.  I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.”指揮官kolstad是特別重要的帳戶，美洲航空公司的航班77據稱，撞向五角大樓。他說， “在五角大樓，試驗的這架波音757客機確實有不少的壯舉飛行，我有六○○○小時的飛行時間在波音公司757和767的，我不可能飛到它的方式飛行路線被稱為“ 。

Commander Kolstad adds, “I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft.  I could not have done what these beginners did.  Something stinks to high heaven!”指揮官kolstad補充說， “我也是一個海軍戰鬥機飛行員和空中打擊導師和有經驗的飛行，低空高速飛機，我不能做什麼，這些初學者沒有。 stinks一些高天堂” ！

He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, “Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings?  Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident?  Where is all the luggage?  Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft?  Where are the steel engine parts?  Where is the steel landing gear?  Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?”他指出，物證在五角大樓的影響，網站，並要求在無奈地“ ，哪裡是損害的牆上，五角大樓從兩翼哪是大的作品始終擺脫在一出事故了嗎？那裡是所有的行李？那裡是英里和英里的電線，線纜，和線的重要組成部分，任何大型飛機？哪裡鋼鐵引擎零件？哪裡是鋼起落架？哪裡是尾節會分解成大塊？ “

But no major element of the official account of 9/11 is spared from Commander Kolstad’s criticism.  Regarding the alleged impact site of United Airlines Flight 93 near Shanksville, PA, he asks, “Where is any of the wreckage?  Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole!  Where is any piece of a crashed airplane?  Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel?  Where is any evidence at all?”但沒有的主要組成部分之一的官方帳戶9 / 11是不遺餘力地從指揮官kolstad的批評，對於被指控的影響，網站的美國航空93號班機近shanksville ，壩，他問： “哪裡是任何飛機殘骸？所有圖片我所看到的，只有一個洞！何處是任何一塊一失事飛機為何是地區封鎖，並沒有檢查所允許的正常的意外人員哪是任何證據，在所有“ ？

Commander Kolstad also questions many aspects of the attack on the World Trade Center.  “How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767?  Didn’t the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767?  The evidence just doesn’t add up.”指揮官也kolstad問題的許多方面的攻擊對世界貿易中心“ ，如何可以一鋼和混凝土建築物倒塌後，擊中一架波音767呢？沒有工程師的設計，它能夠頂住直接擊中，從波音707 ，大約有同樣的尺寸和重量的767呢？證據，只是不添加了“ 。

“Why did the second building collapse before the first one, which had been burning for 20 minutes longer after a direct hit, especially when the second one hit was just a glancing blow?  If the fire was so hot, then why were people looking out the windows and in the destroyed areas?  Why have so many members of the New York Fire Department reported seeing or hearing many ‘explosions’ before the buildings collapsed?” “為什麼二號樓倒塌前，第一次，這已燃燒了20分鐘後，不再直接襲擊，尤其是當第二個1個安打，只是翻閱打擊？如果火勢，使熱點，那麼，為何被人看出來Windows和在被摧毀的地區，為何有這麼多的成員，新的紐約消防局據報看到或聽覺有許多'爆炸'之前，建築物倒塌“ ？

Commander Kolstad summarized his frustration with the investigation and disbelief of the official account of 9/11, “If one were to act as an accident investigator, one would look at the evidence, and then construct a plausible scenario as to what led to the accident.  In this case, we were told the story and then the evidence was built to support the story.  What happened to any intelligent investigation?  Every question leads to another question that has not been answered by anyone in authority.  This is just the beginning as to why I don’t believe the official ‘story’ and why I want the truth to be told.”指揮官kolstad總結了他的挫折感與調查和難以置信的官方帳戶9 / 11 ， “如果一個人作為事故調查，一會研究證據，然後構建一個可能的情況下，以什麼導致意外在這種情況下，告訴我們的故事，然後證據，建立了支持的故事。所發生的任何智能調查？每個問題導致的另一個問題未獲任何人的權力，這是剛剛開始，作為為什麼我不相信官方的'故事' ，為什麼我想真相會告訴“ 。

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski     A Pentagon eye-witness and a former member of the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency, Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, US Air Force (ret), is a severe critic of the official account of 9/11.  A contributing author to the 2006 book 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, she wrote, “I believe the [9/11] Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research.”中校克倫kwiatkowski五角大樓眼證人和一名前成員的工作人員署署長國家安全局中校克倫kwiatkowski ，博士，美國空軍（退休） ，是一種嚴重的批評官方帳戶9 / 11 。貢獻的作者，以2006年的圖書9 / 11和美利堅帝國：知識分子的發言，她寫道： “我相信[ 9 / 11 ]委員會未能深入研究的話題，另一方面，未能運用科學其嚴謹的評估活動領導直至並包括9 / 11 ，未能出示一可信和公正的概要發生了什麼，未能充分研究，為什麼發生，甚至沒有包括一套無法回答的問題，為今後的研究“ 。

She continued, “It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics.  The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics.”她續說： “這是作為一個科學家，我有最麻煩與官方政府的陰謀論，主要是因為它不符合規則的概率或物理。坍塌的世界貿易中心大廈顯然違反了法律的概率和物理“ 。
Col. Kwiatkowski was working in the Pentagon on 9/11 in her capacity as Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense when Flight 77 allegedly hit the Pentagon.  She wrote, “There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact.  Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner.  This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the Secretary of Defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a ‘missile.’ [Secretary Rumsfeld also publicly referred to Flight 93 as the plane that was “shot down” over Pennsylvania.]上校kwiatkowski工作，在五角大樓對9 / 11在她的身份，政治軍事事務主任，秘書辦公室，國防部時，飛行77據稱擊中五角大樓，她寫道： “有一個缺乏有形的碎片就相對標誌的草坪，在那裡我站在只需要幾分鐘的時間後的影響。超出了這個奇怪的缺乏客機碎片，有沒有跡象顯示該種損害向五角大樓結構，人們會期望從影響一個大型客機，這有形的證據，或缺乏因此也可能已明顯向局長國防部[拉姆斯菲爾德] ，誰在一個不幸的失言轉介到飛機的一半陷入五角大樓作為一個'導彈' [美國國防部長拉姆斯菲爾德也公開提到的93號班機作為飛機是“擊落”賓夕法尼亞州。 ]

“I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. “我看到沒有意義的出發點的影響-沒有飛機金屬碎片或貨物被吹對草坪在前面的損壞建設作為濃煙所籠罩，來自五角大樓。 … [A]ll of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident. … … [一]當地僱員，我們凝視在五角大樓當天上午確實在尋找這樣的碎片，但我們所期望看到並不明顯。

“The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. “也是一樣，對於該種損害我們所預料的。 … But I did not see this kind of damage. … …但我沒有看到這種損害。 Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter.  Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.相反，正面有一個相當小的孔，不大於20英尺，直徑，雖然這幌子，稍後倒塌，但仍站立， 30或40分鐘，與屋頂線，其餘相對直。

“The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner.  It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. “現場，在短期內，沒有什麼，我會預計從罷工由一個大型客機。然而，它正是人們會期望，如果導彈已經擊中了五角大樓。 … More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day.” …更多信息，是當然需要有關的事件， 9 / 11和事件領導到那個可怕的一天“ 。

The improbability of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 is a major concern of these officers and a growing number of scientists, engineers and architects.  The building was 610 feet tall, 47 stories, and would have been the tallest building in 33 states.  Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 pm on 9/11.  In the 6 years since 9/11, the Federal government has failed to provide any explanation for the collapse.  In addition to the failure to provide an explanation, absolutely no mention of Building 7’s collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission’s “full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.”該improbability的崩潰，世界貿易中心大廈7是一個重大的關注，這些人員和越來越多的科學家，工程師和建築師。大樓六一〇英尺身高， 47的故事，並會一直是最高的建築在33個國家。雖然未擊中由一架飛機，它完全倒塌成一堆瓦礫，在不到7秒，在下午5點20分就9 / 11 ，在六年自從9 / 11 ，聯邦政府已沒有提供任何解釋為崩潰。在除了未能提供解釋，絕對沒有提及建設7的崩潰，出現在9 / 11委員會的“充分和完全的帳戶的情況下，圍繞2001年9月11日的恐怖襲擊” 。

Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford     Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford, US Marine Corps (ret), an attack pilot with over 300 combat missions, wrote in 2007 to the Michigan Daily,  “Our government has been hijacked by means of a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ and a lot of otherwise good and decent people who are gullible enough to think that the first three steel-framed buildings in history fall down because they have some fires that the fire fighter on the scene said could be knocked down with a couple of hoses and through which people walked before they were photographed looking out the holes  where the plane hit.  One of these, Building 7, was never hit by a plane and even NIST is ashamed to advance a reason for its collapse.  And, miracle of miracles, these three buildings just happened to be leased and insured by the same guy who is on tape  saying they decided to ‘PULL’ the last one to fall.”中校謝爾頓lankford中校謝爾頓lankford ，美海軍陸戰隊（退休） ，攻擊飛行員超過300的作戰任務，寫在2007年到美國密歇根州日報， “我們的政府一直所劫持的手段'新明珠港'了很多，否則良好和體面的人，誰是輕信不夠認為，首三個鋼架建築物在歷史上倒下，因為他們有一些火災消防戰士在現場說，可撞倒與一對夫婦的軟管，並通過其中的人走之前，他們拍照尋找出漏洞的地方，飛機擊中。之一，其中，建設7 ，從來沒有擊中飛機，甚至NIST的是慚愧，提前為理由，其崩潰。和，奇蹟的奇蹟，這三個建築物剛剛發生，以租用和被保險人由同一人誰是在磁帶上說，他們決定把'拉'的最後一次下降“ 。
During his 20 year military career, Col. Lankford’s decorations include the Distinguished Flying Cross, and 32 awards of the Air Medal.在他20年的軍事生涯中，上校lankford的裝飾品，包括傑出的飛行交叉，且32獎項的空氣金牌。

In a statement to this author, Col. Lankford wrote, “September 11, 2001 seems destined to be the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes.  The evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the events, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring of evidence turned up by others that renders the official explanation impossible, may signal the end of the American experiment.  It has been used to justify all manners of measures to legalize repression at home and as a pretext for behaving as an aggressive empire abroad.  Until we demand an independent, honest, and thorough investigation and accountability for those whose action and inaction led to those events and the cover-up, our republic and our Constitution remain in the gravest danger.”在一份聲明中向筆者，上校lankford寫道： “ 2001年9月11日似乎注定要成為分水嶺，一旦我們的生活和最大的考驗，為我們的民主在我們的有生之年實現這一目標。證據共謀在政府帶頭的後續措施事件，未作反應在這一事件中，和驚人的，缺乏任何有意義的調查之後，以及作為無視證據的出現，由他人，使官方的解釋是不可能的，可能預示著年底美國的實驗，它已用來證明所有方式的措施，以鎮壓合法化，在家裡和以此為藉口的表現，作為一個積極的帝國在國外。直到我們的需求，一個獨立，誠實，徹底的調查和問責制，為那些行動和不採取行動，導致這些事件和封面-起來，我們的共和國和我們的憲法仍留在嚴重的危險“ 。

Lt. Col. Jeff Latas     Another harsh critic of the official account of 9/11 is Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, US Air Force (ret).  A former combat fighter pilot, Col. Latas is currently a commercial airline pilot.中校傑夫latas另一苛刻的批評官方帳戶9 / 11是中校傑夫latas ，美國空軍（退休） 。前打擊戰鬥機飛行員，上校latas目前是商業航空公司的飛行員。

Col. Latas is a member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth.  In 2007 he was interviewed by the group’s founder, commercial airline pilot, Rob Balsamo, regarding the group’s documentary video, Pandora’s Black Box, Chapter 2, Flight of American 77, which focuses on the 9/11 Commission’s account of the impact of Flight 77 at the Pentagon and discrepancies with the data from the Flight Data Recorder alleged by the NTSB to be from Flight 77.上校latas的一員，飛行員，為9 / 11真理。在2007年，他採訪了該集團的創始人，商業航空公司的飛行員，搶劫balsamo ，關於集團的紀錄片，影片，潘朵拉的黑盒子，第2章，飛行的美國77 ，該報告著重談到9 / 11委員會的帳戶的影響，飛行77在五角大樓和差異，與數據從飛行數據記錄器據稱是由ntsb是由飛行77 。
In the interview, Col. Latas said, “After I did my own analysis of it, it’s obvious that there’s discrepancies between the two stories; between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information.  And I think that’s where we really need to focus a lot of our attention to get the help that we need in order to put pressure on government agencies to actually do a real investigation of 9/11.  And not just from a security standpoint, but from even an aviation standpoint, like any accident investigation would actually help the aviators out by finding reasons for things happening.”在採訪中，上校latas說， “後，我本來我自己的分析，很明顯有差異，兩國之間的故事;之間的9 / 11委員會和飛行數據記錄器的資料。我認為奇摩那裡，我們真的需要把重點放在了很多我們注意得到的幫助下，我們需要在以施加壓力，政府機構，其實做一個真正的調查， 9 / 11 。而不是只從安全的角度，而是從，甚至1航空的立場，如同任何事故調查會，其實，幫助飛行員所尋找的原因，事情發生“ 。

A highly decorated fighter pilot, Col. Latas was awarded the Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals.  His combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch.  During his 20-year Air Force career, he also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer, as a member of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review, and as President, US Air Force Accident Investigation Board.一個高度裝飾戰鬥機飛行員，上校latas被授予區分飛兩岸，為的英雄氣概， 4個空軍獎章， 4優良服務獎章，和9空中成就獎章，他的作戰經驗，包括沙漠風暴和4個旅遊地點在北部和南部觀賞。在他20年的空軍生涯中，他還擔任過五角大樓的武器的要求，主任，作為一個成員，五角大樓的四年防務評估報告，作為總統，美空軍事故調查委員會。

Col. Latas concluded, “And I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you’ve [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found.  And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don’t accept the excuses that we’re hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation.”上校latas總結說： “我認為我們美國人的需求，需要進一步調查只是為了澄清差異，您[飛行員為9 / 11真理]發現。我認為我們需要獲得在手機上與我們的國會議員和婦女，並讓他們知道我們不接受的藉口，我們正在聽證會，現在，我們要真正的調查做一個真正的調查“ 。

Capt. Eric H. May上尉李家祥每小時5月

Commander Ted Muga指揮官泰德muga

Capt. Eric H. May, US Army (ret), is a former Army Intelligence Officer who also served as an inspector and interpreter for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty team.  He is one of many signers of a petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11.  In 2005, he wrote: “As a former Army officer, my tendency immediately after 911 was to rally ’round the colors and defend the country against what I then thought was an insidious, malicious all-Arab entity called Al-Qaida.  In fact, in April of 2002, I attempted to reactivate my then-retired commission to return to serve my country in its time of peril.上尉李家祥每小時5月，美國軍隊（退休） ，是前陸軍情報官員誰也擔任督察和口譯為中間核力量條約隊，他是一個有很多簽名的一份請願書，要求重新9 / 11 。在2005年，他寫道： “作為一名前軍官，我傾向後，立即911是團結'輪的顏色和保衛國家反對什麼，我當時以為是一個陰險的，惡意的所有阿拉伯國家的實體所謂的基地組織。事實上，在2002年4月，我試圖重新啟動，我當時退休的委員會，以返回到服務我的國家在其時間的危險。 …

Now I view the 911 event as Professor David Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor, views it: as a matter that implies either現在我認為911事件作為教授大衛格里芬的作者，新的珍珠港事件，它的看法：作為一個問題，這意味著要么

A)  passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down of proper defense procedures that (if followed) would have led US air assets to a quick identification and confrontation of the passenger aircraft that impacted WTC 1 and WTC 2, or worse … 1 ）被動參與，布什在白宮通過一種蓄意的立場回落，適當的防禦程序， （如果遵循）會導致美國的航空資產，以快速識別和對抗的客運飛機的影響，世台會1和世台會二，或更糟…

B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East …” b ）積極執行一項陰謀無賴分子的政府，開始與白宮本身，在創造一個壯觀的破壞，這將導致美國成為一個入侵中東… … “

Commander Ted Muga, US Navy (ret), is a Navy aviator, who, after retirement, had a second career as a commercial airline pilot for Pan-Am.指揮官泰德muga ，美國海軍（退休） ，是海軍飛行員，誰，退休後，進行了第二職業作為一個商業航空公司飛行員泛上午。
In a 2007 interview on the Alex Jones Show,  Commander Muga stated, “The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet.  And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult.  And it would take considerable training.  In other words, commercial aircraft are designed for a particular purpose and that is for comfort and for passengers and it’s not for military maneuvers.  And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that.在2007年接受採訪時徐家瓊斯顯示，指揮官muga指出， “這次演習在五角大樓，只是一個緊螺旋下降，走出七零零零英尺。和商用飛機，而他們其實可以在結構上有所處理這個動作，他們是非常，非常，非常困難，並且會採取相當的訓練。換句話說，商用飛機的目的是為某一特定目的，那就是舒適和乘客和它的不是軍事演習。雖然它們的結構是否有能力他們這樣做，它需要一些非常，非常優秀的飛行員這樣做。 … I just can’t imagine an amateur even being able to come close to performing a maneuver of that nature. … …我只是不能想像一個業餘，甚至能夠接近表演了機動這種性質的。
“And as far as hijacking the airplanes, once again getting back to the nature of pilots and airplanes, there is no way that a pilot would give up an airplane to hijackers. “據劫持飛機，再次回到性質的飛行員和飛機，是沒有出路的一個試驗，放棄一飛機劫持者。 … I mean, hell, a guy doesn’t give up a TV remote control much less a complicated 757.  And so to think that pilots would allow a plane to be taken over by a couple of 5 foot 7, 150 pound guys with a one-inch blade boxcutter is ridiculous. …我的意思是，地獄，一個人不放棄電視遠程控制少得多一個複雜的757 。等認為，飛行員將使飛機將要採取的由一對夫婦5英尺7 ，一百五十英鎊球員與1英寸葉片boxcutter是可笑的。

“And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code.  There’sa very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked.  It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over.  And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual. “ ，並在所有4架飛機，如果你還記得，沒有飛機以往任何時候都開關就其轉發給劫持代碼。有非常，非常簡單的程式碼，您提出的在如果您懷疑自己的飛機被劫持。需從字面上來看只是一個分裂的第二次為你把你的手，對中央控制台和Flip它。而不是其中的4架飛機以往任何時候都transponded一劫持代碼，這是最，最不尋常的。 …

“Commercial airplanes are very, very complex pieces of machines.  And they’re designed for two pilots up there, not just two amateur pilots, but two qualified commercial pilots up there.  And to think that you’re going to get an amateur up into the cockpit and fly, much less navigate, it to a designated target, the probability is so low, that it’s bordering on impossible.” “商用飛機是非常，非常複雜件的機器。他們正在設計的兩名飛行員在那裡，不只是兩個業餘飛行員，但有兩個符合條件的商業飛行員在那裡。並認為您將會獲得一個業餘了進入駕駛艙及蒼蠅，更遑論瀏覽，到指定的目標，概率是如此之低，它的鄰國就不可能的“ 。

Col. George Nelson上校喬治納爾遜

“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,” wrote Col. George Nelson, MBA, US Air Force (ret), a former US Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. “在我所有的年直接和間接參與，我從來沒有親眼目睹，也沒有聽說過某型飛機的損失，而飛機殘骸被訪問，阻止調查人員從找到足夠的確鑿證據，以查明積極的牌子，型號，和具體的登記號碼的飛機-在大多數情況下，精確的事故原因，寫道： “上校喬治納爾遜，工商管理碩士學位，美國空軍（退休） ，美國前空軍飛機事故調查員和飛機零件的權力。

“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,” continued Col. Nelson, a graduate of the US Air Force War College and a 34-year Air Force veteran. “政府稱， 4寬體客機墜毀於當天上午01年9月11日，在導致死亡的超過3000人，但沒有一件很難飛機的證據，已製作完成，在試圖找出任何積極的四架飛機。相反，它似乎只是所有可能的證據，是故意保持隱藏的公眾認為， “繼續上校納爾遜，畢業於美國空軍戰爭學院和一個34歲的空軍退伍軍人。
“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. “所有證據現成在五角大樓墜機地點，任何不抱偏見的理性的調查可能只能得出這樣的結論認為，這架波音757客機沒有飛行到五角大樓指控。同樣，與所有的證據，可於賓夕法尼亞州的墜機地點，這是最令人懷疑一客機，造成明顯的孔在地面和肯定不是架波音757客機的指控。 …

“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.” “痛苦和痛心的是，作為無辜生命的損失和揮之不去的健康問題更多的成千上萬，最麻煩和惡夢般的概率仍然有這麼多的美國人似乎不應該牽涉在最令人髮指的陰謀，在我們國家的歷史” 。

Maj. John M. Newman, PhD少校約翰米紐曼，博士

Capt. Omar Pradhan上尉奧馬爾普拉丹

Col. Ronald D. Ray     Maj. John M. Newman, PhD, US Army (ret), is the former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National Security Agency.  In testimony before a 2005 Congressional briefing, he said, “It falls to me this morning to bring to your attention the story of Saeed Sheikh, whose full name is Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, and his astonishing rise to power in Al Qaeda, his crucial role in 9/11, which is completely, utterly, missing from the 9/11 Commission report…上校夏佳理四線少校約翰米紐曼，博士，美國軍隊（退休） ，是前執行主任助理國家安全局。在證詞之前， 2005年美國國會的簡報，他說： “它屬於我今天上午提請你注意的故事賽義德謝赫，其全名是艾哈邁德奧馬爾賽義德謝赫，和他的驚人上升，電力在蓋達組織，他的關鍵作用，在9 / 11 ，這是完全，徹底，從失踪9 / 11委員會的報告…

“The 9/11 Commission which studied US intelligence and law enforcement community performance in great detail, (maybe not so much great detail, but they did), neglected to cover the community’s performance during the weeks following the attacks to determine who was responsible for them, not a word about that in the Report. “ 9 / 11委員會負責研究美國情報和執法界的表現非常詳細的， （也許不是那麼多偉大的細節，但他們沒有） ，忽略了包括社會的表現，在週攻擊事件之後，來決定誰是負責對他們來說，不是一個閉口不談，在該報告。

“The Report does discuss the immediate US responses but the immediate investigation is never addressed, and anyone who has closely studied the post-9/11 investigation knows that the first breakthrough came two weeks into the investigation when the money transfers from the United Arab Emirates to the hijackers were uncovered. “該報告並進行討論，美國立即反應，但立即進行調查，是從來沒有解決，任何人誰仔細研究了9.11調查知道，第一次突破，來兩個星期，到調查時，匯款從阿拉伯聯合酋長國向劫機者被揭發。

“Furthermore, if you have studied that investigation, you know there is no disputing that while investigators may have struggled with the identity of the paymaster, they were clear about one thing, he was Al Qaeda’s finance chief.  For this reason alone you have to ask why the 9/11 Commission Report never mentions the finance chief’s role as the 9/11 paymaster.” “此外，如果您有研究調查，你知道是沒有爭議的同時，調查人員可能有掙扎與身份的paymaster ，他們清楚的一件事，他是蓋達組織的財務行政。基於這個原因，單是你要問，為什麼9 / 11委員會的報告沒有提到財務行政的角色，作為9 / 11 paymaster “ 。

Capt. Omar Pradhan, US Air Force, is a former AWACS command pilot and Flight Instructor at the US Air Force Academy.  In a 2007 statement to this author, Capt. Pradhan wrote, “As a proud American, as a distinguished USAF E-3 AWACS Aircraft Commander (with 350+ hours of combat time logged over Afghanistan and Iraq), and as a former US Air Force Academy Flight Instructor, I warmly endorse the professional inquiry and pursuit of comprehensive truth sought by the Pilots for 911 Truth organization and the PatriotsQuestion911 website.”上尉奧馬爾普拉丹，美國空軍，是前預警指揮飛行員和飛行教官在美空軍學院，在2007年聲明，此作者，上尉普拉丹寫道： “作為一個值得驕傲的美國，作為一個傑出的美國空軍電子3預警飛機的指揮官（ 350 +小時的戰鬥時間記錄超過阿富汗和伊拉克） ，並作為美國前空軍學院的飛行教員，我熱烈贊同的專業調查和追求真理，尋求全面的，由飛行員為911真相組織和該patriotsquestion911網站“ 。

Another senior officer questioning the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, US Marine Corps (ret), Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan.  A highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart), he was appointed by President George HW Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 – 1994), and the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces.  He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the US Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, DC (1990 – 1994).另一高級官員質疑官方帳戶9 / 11是上校夏佳理四線，美海軍陸戰隊（退休） ，副助理國務卿下的防衛總統裡根。高度裝飾越戰老兵（ 2銀星，銅星和一紫心勳章） ，他被任命為總統喬治HW布什供職於美國戰役紀念碑委員會（ 1990年-1 994年） ，和1 992年的總統委員會就指派婦女在武裝部隊中，他是軍事歷史學家和副主任外勤業務，為美軍海軍陸戰隊的歷史中心，華盛頓哥倫比亞特區（ 1990年-1 994年） 。

In an interview on Alex Jones’ radio show on June 30, 2006, Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as “the dog that doesn’t hunt”, meaning it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.  In response to Alex Jones’ question, “Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?”  Col. Ray replied,“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 that’s accurate.  That’s true.”在接受採訪時徐家瓊斯的電台節目於6月30日， 2006年，上校射線所描述的官方帳戶9 / 11 “狗不狩獵” ，意思是它沒有站起來，以審議。在回應徐家瓊斯的問題， “是否安全，或說是準確的聲明說，你的香水味道的東西爛在該國的丹麥，當談到9 / 11 ” ？上校射線回答說： “我很震驚，該陰謀論先進由政府當局可在事實上，真實的證據，似乎並不表明，這是準確的。認為的真實“ 。
“After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government.  It is now time to take our country back,” wrote Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, US Air Force (ret), in a statement to this author. “後， 4 +多年的研究，自2002年退休，我百分之百確信，襲擊2001年9月11日被有計劃，有組織，並承諾由叛逆肇事者已經滲透到了最高級別的，我們的政府，這是現在是時候我們的國家回到寫道， “中校傢伙第razer ，質譜，美空軍（退休） ，在一份聲明中向筆者。

A retired fighter pilot, Col. Razer served as an instructor at the US Air Force Fighter Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program and flew combat missions over Iraq.  He continued, “The ‘collapse’ of WTC Building 7 shows beyond any doubt that the demolitions were pre-planned.  There is simply no way to demolish a 47-story building (on fire) over a coffee break.  It is also impossible to report the building’s collapse before it happened, as BBC News did, unless it was pre-planned.  Further damning evidence is Larry Silverstein’s video taped confession in which he states ‘they made that decision to pull [WTC 7] and we watched the building collapse.’已退休的戰鬥機飛行員，上校razer擔任講師，美國空軍戰鬥機武器學校和北約的戰術領導的計劃和飛行作戰任務，在伊拉克上空。他續稱， “ '崩潰'的世貿中心大樓7顯示，毫無疑問認為摧毀預先計劃。是根本不存在的方式，拆除47層大樓（消防）超過一喝咖啡休息，這也是不可能的報告，該大廈的崩潰，才發生了，作為BBC新聞做，除非這是預先計劃，進一步嚴厲的證據是拉里西爾弗斯坦的視頻錄製的供認，在他國，他們作出這一決定退出[世貿中心7 ] ，我們觀看了樓宇倒塌。

“We cannot let the pursuit of justice fail.  Those of us in the military took an oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic’.  Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid, so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it,” he concluded. “我們不能讓追求正義失敗。我們這些在軍事上採取了宣誓，支持和保衛美國憲法反對一切敵人，外國和國內' 。只因為我們已經退休，沒有作出這樣的宣誓無效，所以這不僅是我們的責任，這是我們的責任，揭露真正的肇事者9 / 11 ，並把他們繩之以法，不管是何等的難，需要多久才能，或有多少我們要遭受這樣做“ ，他得出的結論。

Maj. Scott Ritter少校斯科特里特

Maj. Douglas Rokke, PhD少校道格拉斯rokke ，博士

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer中校安東尼shaffer

Maj. Scott Ritter, US Marine Corps, is a former Marine Corps Intelligence Officer who also served as Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq 1991 - 1998.  In 2005, he said: “I, like the others, are frustrated by the 9/11 Commission Report, by the lack of transparency on the part of the United States government, both in terms of the executive branch and the legislative branch when it comes to putting out on the table all facts known to the 9/11 case.”少校斯科特里特，美海軍陸戰隊，是一名前海軍陸戰隊情報官員誰也擔任首席武器檢查員，為聯合國特別委員會在伊拉克的1991 -1 998年在2 005年，他說： “我，其他人一樣，感到沮喪由9 / 11委員會的報告中，缺乏透明度，對部分美國政府兩方面來看，行政部門和立法部門，當談到把放在桌上的所有事實眾所周知9 / 11案件警示錄“ 。

Maj. Douglas Rokke, PhD, US Army (ret), former Director of the US Army Depleted Uranium Project and 30-year veteran, had this to say about the explosion at the Pentagon on 9/11, “When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile’s impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile.  And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.”少校道格拉斯rokke ，博士，美國軍隊（退休） ，前主任，美國軍隊的貧化鈾計劃和30年的老將，曾這樣說，爆炸大約在五角大樓9 / 11 ， “當你看到整個thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile’s impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile.  And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.”

The 9/11 Commission Report asserts that only three of the alleged hijackers were known to US intelligence agencies prior to 9/11: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi, and Khalid al-Mihdar.  There is no mention in the Report that the names and photographs of alleged hijacker Marwan al-Shehhi and alleged ring-leader Mohamed Atta had been identified by the Department of Defense anti-terrorist program known as Able Danger more than a year prior to 9/11 and that they were known to be affiliates of al-Qaida.  Able Danger also identified Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdar.

In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in 2006, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, US Army Reserve, former Chief of the Army’s Controlled HUMINT (Human Intelligence) Program, overseeing Army Intelligence and Security Command’s global controlled HUMINT efforts, stated: “[B]asic law enforcement investigative techniques, with 21st Century data mining and analytical tools … resulted in the establishment of a new form of intelligence collection – and the identification of Mohammed Atta and several other of the 9-11 terrorists as having links to Al Qaeda leadership a full year in advance of the attacks. …

“After contact by two separate members of the ABLE DANGER team, … the 9-11 [Commission] staff refused to perform any in-depth review or investigation of the issues that were identified to them. … It was their job to do a thorough investigation of these claims – to not simply dismiss them based on what many now believe was a ‘preconceived’ conclusion to the 9-11 story they wished to tell. … I consider this a failure of the 9-11 staff – a failure that the 9-11 Commissioners themselves were victimized by – and continue to have perpetrated on them by the staff as is evidenced by their recent, groundless conclusion that ABLE DANGER’s findings were ‘urban legend’.”
A 23-year military intelligence veteran, Col. Shaffer was recently awarded the Bronze Star for bravery in Afghanistan.  In a 2005 interview on Fox News, Col Shaffer asked, “Why did this operation, which was created in ‘99 to target Al Qaeda globally, offensively, why was that turned off in the Spring of 2001, four months before we were attacked?  I can’t answer that, either.  I can tell you I was ordered out of the operation directly by a two-star general.”

Supporting Col. Shaffer’s statement, Capt. Scott J. Phillpott, US Navy, currently Commanding Officer of the guided-missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf and former head of the Able Danger data mining program, stated in 2005: “I will not discuss this outside of my chain of command.  I have briefed the Department of the Army, the Special Operations Command and the office of (Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence) Dr. Cambone as well as the 9/11 Commission.  My story has remained consistent.  Atta was identified by Able Danger in January/February 2000.” Capt. Phillpott is a US Naval Academy graduate, who during his 23 years of Navy service has been awarded the Legion of Merit, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, three Meritorious Service Medals, the Joint Service Commendation Medal, two Navy Commendation Medals, and the Navy Achievement Medal.

Joel Skousen

Gen. Albert Stubblebine     Former US Marine Corps fighter pilot Joel M. Skousen also questions the official account of 9/11.  After his military service, Mr. Skousen served as Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest.

“In the March 2005 issue, PM [Popular Mechanics] magazine singled out 16 issues or claims of the 9/11 skeptics that point to government collusion and systematically attempted to debunk each one.  Of the 16, most missed the mark and almost half were straw men arguments - either ridiculous arguments that few conspiracists believed or restatements of the arguments that were highly distorted so as to make them look weaker than they really were. …

“I am one of those who claim there are factual arguments pointing to conspiracy, and that truth is not served by taking cheap shots at those who see gaping flaws in the government story … There is significant evidence that the aircraft impacts did not cause the collapse [of the Twin Towers] …

The issues of the penetration hole [at the Pentagon] and the lack of large pieces of debris simply do not jive with the official story, but they are explainable if you include the parking lot video evidence that shows a huge white explosion at impact.  This cannot happen with an aircraft laden only with fuel.  It can only happen in the presence of high explosives.”

Major General Albert Stubblebine, US Army (ret), former Commanding General of US Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), is a strong critic of the official account of 9/11.  In a 2006 video documentary he said, “One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War.  I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job.  I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon.  And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’.  So what did hit the Pentagon?  What hit it?  Where is it?  What’s going on?”

During his 32-year Army career, Gen. Stubblebine also commanded the US Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the US Army’s Intelligence School and Center.  Gen. Stubblebine is one of the inductees into the Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.
“There is a well-organized cover-up of the events of 11 Sep 2001.  The 9/11 Commission was a white-washed farce.  There is evidence that US Government officials had advance knowledge of and are probably implicated in the events of 9/11,” wrote retired military physician, Col. James R. Uhl, MD, US Army (ret), in a statement to this author.

“A huge body of physical evidence has been ignored, suppressed, and ridiculed by the media and by our Government.  Why did WTC 7 collapse?  It was never hit by an airplane and was apparently brought down by explosives.  How could Al-Qaida terrorists have had access and time to plant bombs in a top secret installation?  Why did the 9/11 Commission fail to seek the reason for the WTC 7 collapse?” continued Col. Uhl, a 38-year Army veteran, who served in several theaters of operations, from Viet Nam through Iraq.

Capt. Russ Wittenberg     Capt. Russ Wittenberg, US Air Force, is a former US Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions and a retired commercial pilot, who flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years.

According to Capt. Wittenberg, “The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total BS, plain and simple.

In the 2007 documentary video, 9/11 Ripple Effect,he said “I flew the two actual aircraft which were involved in 9/11; the Fight number 175 and Flight 93, the 757 that allegedly went down in Shanksville and Flight 175 is the aircraft that’s alleged to have hit the South Tower.
“I don’t believe it’s possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist, to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding its design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding — pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G’s.  And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky.  I couldn’t do it and I’m absolutely positive they couldn’t do it.” Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon, Capt. Wittenberg said, ”The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall.  The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous … It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane.  And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building.  There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77.  We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile.”

Col. Ann Wright

Capt. Gregory Zeigler     Another senior officer questioning the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ann Wright, US Army (ret), who said in a 2007 interview with Richard Greene on the Air America Radio Network, “It’s incredible some of these things that still are unanswered.  The 9/11 Report — that was totally inadequate.  I mean the questions that anybody has after reading that.”

Col. Wright is one of three US State Department officials to publicly resign in direct protest of the invasion of Iraq in March, 2003.  She served for 13 years on active duty and 16 additional years on reserve duty in the US Army.  She joined the Foreign Service in 1987 and served for 16 years as a US Diplomat.  She served as Deputy Chief of Mission of US Embassies in Sierra Leone, Micronesia and Afghanistan and she helped reopen the US Embassy in Kabul in December, 2001.

She continued in her interview: “How could our national intelligence and defense operations be so inept that they could not communicate; that they could not scramble jets; that they could not take defensive action?  And I totally agree.  I always thought the Pentagon had all sorts of air defense sort of equipment around it; that they could take out anything that was coming at it.  And for a plane to be able to just fly low right over Washington and slam into that thing is just — I mean, you still just shake your head.  How in the world could that happen?”

Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, is a former US Army Intelligence Officer.  In a 2006 statement to this author, Capt. Zeigler wrote, “I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about 9/11 was false.  That was when I realized that the perpetrators had made a colossal blunder in collapsing the South Tower first, rather than the North Tower, which had been hit more directly and earlier.

“Other anomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers’ names appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive, the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 and WTC 7, the lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon, the impossibility of ordinary cell phone (as opposed to Airfone) calls being made consistently from passenger aircraft at cruising altitude, etc., etc., etc.”

Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11.  In addition to two former senior CIA officials and several US State Department veterans, the signers included Lt. Col. Robert Bowman and Capt. Eric H. May, both mentioned above.

The petition stated, in part, “We want truthful answers to questions such as:

1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?

2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?

3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?

4. Why hasn’ta single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?

5. Why haven’t authorities in the US and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?”

These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11.  As the statements of these twenty-five former US military officers demonstrate, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, deranged, or disloyal Americans.  It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America’s security and the future of the entire world.

See More: USA News

Have Your Say: 25 USA Military Officers Challenge Official 9/11 Account
Please note, only selected comments will be published.

Or discuss this report in our our new forums

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

This entry was posted on Saturday, May 24th, 2008 at 9:39 am and is filed under 9/11 Truth , War & Terrorism News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response , or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

TOP NEWS DISCUSSIONS

LATEST NEWS DISCUSSIONS

Activism & Protest News | Business News | Civil & Human Rights News | Environmental News | Media News | Globalisation News | Web Development News

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan Alternative Energy Art BBC Big Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CIA Climate Change Cover Up Cults Culture Database State David Hicks David Ray Griffin Democrats Demos Drugs Education EU False Flag FBI Fraud Free Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health News History ID Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel Law Marches MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police State Propaganda RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Secrecy Security Space Sports Spying Stephen Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony Blair Torture TV UK News UN USA News Video Voting Warfare White House Wolfowitz World News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version

About | DVD Store | Opinion | Reviews | Special Guests | Webmasters