Conservatives for 9/11 Truth
By 911wasInsideJob | bio
Most people, when they encounter 9/11 skeptics for the first time, assume that most members of the 911 truth movement
would be drawn from the left of center politically. In fact, most of the strongest and most respected voices speaking
about 911 truth are conservatives-- old-school republicans who speak out of a profound respect for the truth, the
constitution and the rule of law. For example:
Paul Craig Roberts
Paul Craig Roberts was the assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan where he developed the theory of
economics that came to be called "Reaganomics.". Dr. Roberts is Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and
Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former
contributing editor for National Review.
Here is what Paul Craig Robert has to say about 9/11:
"I haven't looked at it very close, but I did go to Georgia Tech and I did learn some physics and I know enough
physics to know that it is strictly impossible for those buildings to collapse in their own footprint, at free-fall
speed except under controlled demolition. Those buildings did not come down the way the 9-11 report says. It is
strictly impossible, in fact, it's a total, the account in the 911 report is a total contradiction to the laws of
physics".
Listen to the entire interview at ElectricPolitics .com (here) http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/02/post.html
David Ray Griffin
David Ray Griffin is professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, where he taught for over 30 years (retiring
in 2004). He has authored or edited over two dozen books, including "God and Religion in the Postmodern World,"
"Religion and Scientific Naturalism," recently he has written several papers and two books about 9/11; "The New Pearl
Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11." And "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and
Distortions"
Here is what David Ray Griffin has to say about 9/11:
"It is, in any case, already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of
the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by domestic terrorists. Foreign terrorists could not have gotten
access to the buildings to plant the explosives. They probably would not have had the courtesy to make sure that the
buildings collapsed straight down, rather than falling over onto surrounding buildings. And they could not have
orchestrated a cover-up, from the quick disposal of the steel to the FEMA Report to The 9/11 Commission Report to the
NIST Report. All of these things could have been orchestrated only by forces within our own government". (read his
paper) http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
Ray McGovern
Ray McGovern had a 27-year career with the CIA as an analyst, spanning the administrations of JFK to GHW Bush. His
duties included chairing National Intelligence Estimates and preparing the President's Daily Brief (PDB). During the
mid-eighties, Ray was one of the senior analysts conducting early morning briefings of the PDB one-on-one with the Vice
President, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and the Assistant to the President
for National Security Affairs.
Here is what Ray McGovern has to say about 9/11:
"There are real doubts in my mind whether they [Cheney and Rumsfield] clue the president in on some very serious
things, 9/11 for example. a lot of bizarre stuff going on there. very troubling. What can be more telling than the fact
that the president was unwilling to see the commissioners alone, he had to have Cheney with him. that's not symbiosis,
that's making sure we've got our stories straight."
Listen to the entire interview at ElectricPolitics .com (here)
http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/01/interview_with_ray_mcgovern.html
Morgan Reynolds
Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D., is professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and former director of the Criminal Justice Center
at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX. He served as chief economist for the US
Department of Labor during George W. Bush's first term.
Here is what Morgan Reynolds has to say about 9/11:
"There is special import in the fact of free-fall collapse., if only because everyone agrees that the towers fell at
free-fall speed. This makes pancake collapse with one floor progressively falling onto the floor below an unattractive
explanation. Progressive pancaking cannot happen at free-fall speed ("g" or 9.8 m/s2). Free-fall would require "pulling"
or removing obstacles below before they could impede (slow) the acceleration of falling objects from above. Sequenced
explosions, on the other hand, explain why the lower floors did not interfere with the progress of the falling objects
above. The pancake theory fails this test.
If we put the murder of 2,749 innocent victims momentarily aside, the only unusual technical feature of the collapses
of the twin towers was that the explosions began at the top, immediately followed by explosions from below. WTC-7, by
contrast, was entirely conventional, imploding from bottom up." (read his paper)
Prof. Steven E. Jones
Steven E. Jones is a professor of physics at Brigham Young University who conducts research in nuclear fusion and solar
energy. Jones has also investigated the hypothesis that the World Trade Center Twin Towers and WTC 7, which all
collapsed nearly symmetrically on September 11, 2001, were brought down by pre-positioned explosives. Professor Jones
describes himself as a life-long Republican who voted for President Bush in 2000.
Here is what Professor Jones has to say about 9/11:
"I have called attention to glaring inadequacies in the "final" reports funded by the US government. I have also
presented multiple evidences for an alternative hypothesis. In particular, the official theory lacks repeatability in
that no actual models or buildings (before or since 9-11-01) have been observed to completely collapse due to the
proposed fire-based mechanisms. On the other hand, dozens of buildings have been completely and symmetrically demolished
through the use of pre-positioned explosives. And high-temperature chemical reactions can account for the observed
large pools of molten metal, under both Towers and WTC 7, and the sulfidation of structural steel. The controlled-
demolition hypothesis cannot be dismissed as "junk science" because it better satisfies tests of repeatability and
parsimony. It ought to be seriously (scientifically) investigated and debated". (read his paper)
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
For more information go to www.9eleven.info
.
|
