25 US military officers challenge official 9/11 story

[mhgaffney]

This article speaks for itself.

The officers include at least one Maj. General, numerous pilots (including Top Guns and highly decorated combat pilots) , scientists, engineers, intelligence officers, etc.

You will notice this was posted in the Pakistan Daily -- NOT a US paper. What does this tell us? Why is the US press not covering this?

MHG

USA Military Officers Challenge Official Account of September 11

Thursday, 22 May 2008 10:15 Pakistan Daily

Twenty-five former U.S. military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They include former commander of U.S. 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.


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, U.S. Air Force (ret). 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.

“There’s a 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.”

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. … 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.”


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 U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. He also flew over 100 combat missions in Viet Nam as a fighter pilot.

Lt. Jeff Dahlstrom Former U.S. 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.

“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.

“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.

“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.

“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.

“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.”

Capt. Daniel Davis Capt. Daniel Davis is a former U.S. 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.

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.”
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.

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!

“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’.”

Major Jon I. Fox is a former U.S. 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.”

Commander Ralph Kolstad Retired U.S. 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.”

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 U.S. 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.

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. He flew Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100 airliners. He has flown a total of over 23,000 hours in his career.

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.”

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!”

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?”

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?”

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.”

“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?”

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.”

for the rest go to
http://www.daily.pk/world/americas/9...tember-11.html

[theAPAOps5]

Interesting stuff but still doesn't change my mind on what happened.

[W*GS]

gaffney is merely putting unverifiable names in front of all the same loads of horse**** about 9/11 that he's been spreading for years.

Big ****ing deal.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

25 US military officers challenge official 9/11 story

Hmmm...I wonder if any of these guys have ever done any landscaping work?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

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.”

Millions of people believe this now after Bush. No one has ever shown that the U.S. government (or anyone else) detonated mini nukes at the exact same moment airliners were crashed into buildings in NY and DC and no one ever will because, of course, it didn't happen.

[alkemical]

[Rohirrim]

25 US military officers challenge official 9/11 story

meanwhile, 10,000 US military officers don't.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

25 US military officers challenge official 9/11 story

meanwhile, 10,000 US military officers don't.

Those guys are all afraid to tell "the truth."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Wow - that was a compelling rebuttal of the OP.........................NOT!

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Wow - that was a compelling rebuttal of the OP.........................NOT!

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...52&postcount=3

[elsid13]

instead posting the same BS every day, can you not contain your ravings to single thread

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Wow - this is incredible: So far not one single attempt to address the substance of the OP - just a lot of name-calling and ad hominem attacks.

What is it about this issue that makes otherwise intelligent people irrational?

[BleedingOrange]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html

Here's a nice website that answers several of the conspiracy claims. I have had the unfortunate responsibility to recover two aircraft after crashes (US Air Force) and can say from personal experience that Kolstad has no clue what he is talking about. The damage to the building and wreckage are consistant with what you would expect after a commercial plane slams into a reinforced concrete building and then burst into flames.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Debunking Popular Mechanics' 9/11 Lies

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...rmechanics.htm

[BleedingOrange]

You might want to find a better site. Here's a quote from the article

"One of the most glaring errors in the Popular Mechanics hit piece appears in the 'Intercepts Not Routine' section where it is claimed that, "In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."

As Jim Hoffman points out in his excellent rebuttal, "This bold assertion flies in the face of a published report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts!"

"From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said.""

The 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001 were against external threats/practice scrambles not against civilian planes already over the US. The soviets used to send aircraft towards our borders on a regular basis. Which means there is no glaring error and it would have been easy to follow up and verify the information, but the writer would rather have it appear to be an outright lie. The rest of the article is the same. I could take the time to refute the rest, but would probably be a waste of time.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by BleedingOrange

You might want to find a better site. Here's a quote from the article

"One of the most glaring errors in the Popular Mechanics hit piece appears in the 'Intercepts Not Routine' section where it is claimed that, "In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."

As Jim Hoffman points out in his excellent rebuttal, "This bold assertion flies in the face of a published report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts!"

"From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said.""

The 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001 were against external threats/practice scrambles not against civilian planes already over the US. The soviets used to send aircraft towards our borders on a regular basis. Which means there is no glaring error and it would have been easy to follow up and verify the information, but the writer would rather have it appear to be an outright lie. The rest of the article is the same. I could take the time to refute the rest, but would probably be a waste of time.

You might want to read more carefully.

The original comment you quoted refers to civilian planes - not combat air patrols.

[BleedingOrange]

You're the one who might want to read it again. It says 67 scrambles from Sept 2000 to June 2001. It talks about Combat Air Patrols being diverted or jets scrambled 462 times after 911 to June. The original comment was that the Air Force had only intercepted 1 civilian aircraft over the US in the ten years prior to 911. The article tries to imply that the original statement is a lie base on the 67 scrambles, but as I pointed out, those scrambles didn't involve civilian aircraft over the US.

[ak1971]

man I need to go long on Tin Foil futures.

[mhgaffney]

Originally Posted by BleedingOrange

You're the one who might want to read it again. It says 67 scrambles from Sept 2000 to June 2001. It talks about Combat Air Patrols being diverted or jets scrambled 462 times after 911 to June. The original comment was that the Air Force had only intercepted 1 civilian aircraft over the US in the ten years prior to 911. The article tries to imply that the original statement is a lie base on the 67 scrambles, but as I pointed out, those scrambles didn't involve civilian aircraft over the US.

You are confused.

A scramble is a scramble. It matters not whether the target is a military or civilian aircraft. The scramble protocol is the same.

The official claim in the 9/11 Commission Report is that the FAA failed to notify NORAD about the hijacked planes -- until AFTER the crashes. There is no mention and no discussion about military versus civilian scrambles.

It is a non issue.

I urge you to check out my forthcoming book. It will cover the actual issues -- and will present radar evidence -- PROOF -- that a key part of the official story is a cover up.

You can prepare yourself NOW by studying an accurate animation of the RADES radar data from 9/11 posted on the internet. By all means take a look. This animation includes incriminating evidence that will be discussed in my forthcoming book THE 911 MYSTEY PLANE.

here is the link

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...80422656090975


MHG

[ak1971]

read all about it in my upcoming book..now available on amazon

http://www.amazon.com/FOIL-002-Thick...2028148&sr=8-1

[BleedingOrange]

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

You are confused.

A scramble is a scramble. It matters not whether the target is a military or civilian aircraft. The scramble protocol is the same.

The official claim in the 9/11 Commission Report is that the FAA failed to notify NORAD about the hijacked planes -- until AFTER the crashes. There is no mention and no discussion about military versus civilian scrambles.

MHG

You are the one that is confused. I posted a reference to Popular mechanics that stated only one intercept of a civilian aircraft over the US had been accomplished in the ten years prior to Sept 11. LA posted a rebuttal which claimed this was a lie because the Air Force had 67 scrambles prior to 911. I posted that the 67 scrambles did not make the comment a lie because they were not scrambled against civilian aircraft over the US. I spent 20 years in the USAF and my father retired from the Air Force after 27 years of service. I am well aware of the terms and what they mean. The article he posted was using misleading information to persuade the reader that the original article was wrong.

[mhgaffney]

AK 1971

I posted a real link to the authentic 84th RADES radar data from 9/11.

You just discredited yourself by posting a phony link -- ZERO

Congratulations! I will studiously ignore your posts in the future.

MHG

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Wow - this is incredible: So far not one single attempt to address the substance of the OP - just a lot of name-calling and ad hominem attacks.

There wasn't a single claim made in gaffney's original list that hasn't been hacked to death here and on many 9/11 debunker websites. I'm quite tired of gaffney recycling the same bilge over and over and over again.

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

What is it about this issue that makes otherwise intelligent people irrational?

You're in no position to judge other people's rationality on this issue, considering you've bought gaffney's (and the 9/11 "Truth Movement"'s) utter horse**** completely.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

Congratulations! I will studiously ignore your posts in the future.
MHG

Just how does one "diligently" ignore someone's future posts?

[mhgaffney]

Bleeding,

You are not the only one to come out of a USAF family. My father was a career USAF -- the second ranking officer in the OSI. My brother was also career USAF -- and also retired as a full bird Col.

So this proves nothing.

The fact is that - a scramble is a scramble. This is a routine procedure -- well known to both NORAD pilots and the FAA. You would do well to move beyond that ridiculous Popular Mechanics rag to some serious research.

Check out David R Griffin's book DEBUNKING 911 DEBUNKING. He does a good job analyzing the Popular Mechanics article/book.

The Pop Mechanics book is based on straw man arguments -- phony positions not advocated by genuine 9/11 researchers.

G-d gave you a brain, Bleeding. So use it.

A few years ago the ownership of Pop Mechanics changed. It became a bought and paid for disinfo platform.

Does the name Chertoff mean anything to you? It should.

MHG