QUOTE
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9/11 Investigation
by Alan Miller
http://www.opednews.com
Official Account of 9/11: "Impossible", "A Bunch of Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed"
December 13, 2007 – Seven former senior engineers and scientists of the Federal government have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They are among a rapidly growing number of engineering, scientific, and architectural professionals challenging the government's story.
“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. [1]. With doctorate 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.”
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.
Criticism of the official account also extends to government scientists. “The issue of knowing who was really behind the 9/11 attacks is of paramount importance to the future of our country, because the ‘official’ assumption that it was the work of 19 Arab amateurs does not match the available facts,” writes David Griscom, PhD, a retired government research physicist.
A highly esteemed researcher, Dr. Griscom spent 33 years at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. He is a Fellow of the American Physical Society. He was the recipient of the 1993 N.F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996 Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL. He is the principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work highly cited by his peers.
Dr. Griscom continued, “I implore my fellow physicists and engineers who may have the time, expertise, and (ideally) supercomputer access to get to work on the physics of the World Trade Center collapses and publish their findings in refereed journals … Surely [the] Orwellian consequences of public ignorance constitute more than sufficient motivation for any patriotic American physicist or engineer to join the search for 9/11 Truth!”
The improbability of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 is a major concern 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 p.m. 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.” [Video of the collapse can be seen at http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/WTC7_Collapse.wmv ]
Another senior Federal engineer who seriously questions the official account of 9/11 is Joel Hirschhorn, PhD, former Senior Staff Member, Congressional Office of Technology Assessment 1978 – 1990 and former Professor of Mechanical Engineering. Earlier this year, he wrote, “Many technical analyses cast doubt on the official explanation of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings, including those presented by an impressive new group: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. ...
“When it comes to 9/11, we face the strong belief that only al-Qaeda caused 9/11. But analyses by many experts reveal the collapse of the three WTC buildings was not caused by the two airplanes exploding into the twin towers. Without getting into details that one can spend many hours examining on a number of websites, the general view is that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.”
Dr. Hirschhorn also served as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association. He’s testified more than 50 times before Congress on technology, science, and environmental issues. Prior to his government services, he was Professor of Metallurgical Engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Madison 1965 - 1978.
Dr. Hirschhorn continued, “Like other groups, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth wants a new, honest and comprehensive study that considers all the evidence for controlled demolition. As a former engineering professor with growing skepticism about the official WTC story I share their concerns. First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions. But let us not allow a possible painful truth block the primary task of determining once and for all what caused the collapse of the WTC towers and building number 7.”
Another senior Federal engineer who questions the official account of 9/11 is Enver Masud, MS, PE, former Chief of the Strategic and Emergency Planning Branch, U.S. Department of Energy. An expert in electrical power grid management, he has consulted for the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the United States Agency for International Development in Albania, Czech Republic, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Tanzania. Prior to his employment by the DOE, he served as Director of the Office of Engineering at the Public Service Commission in Washington, D.C.
In a statement to this author, Mr. Masud wrote, “The 9/11 Commission Report is fatally flawed. The major conclusions of the 9/11 Commission Report -- the official, conspiracy theory -- are false. Among its many problems; 1.) It is entirely silent on the collapse of WTC Building 7. 2.) The FBI has admitted it has no hard evidence that Bin Laden was responsible for the attacks of 9/11. 3.) To this day, the hijackers' identities remain in doubt. 4.) Evidence, including the lack of adequate debris, at both the Pentagon and Shanksville contradicts the official theory of Flights 77 and 93. 5.) There is prima facie evidence of the controlled demolition of the WTC Twin Towers and Building 7.”
Continued...
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_al...ior_federal.htm
by Alan Miller
http://www.opednews.com
Official Account of 9/11: "Impossible", "A Bunch of Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed"
December 13, 2007 – Seven former senior engineers and scientists of the Federal government have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They are among a rapidly growing number of engineering, scientific, and architectural professionals challenging the government's story.
“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. [1]. With doctorate 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.”
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.
Criticism of the official account also extends to government scientists. “The issue of knowing who was really behind the 9/11 attacks is of paramount importance to the future of our country, because the ‘official’ assumption that it was the work of 19 Arab amateurs does not match the available facts,” writes David Griscom, PhD, a retired government research physicist.
A highly esteemed researcher, Dr. Griscom spent 33 years at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. He is a Fellow of the American Physical Society. He was the recipient of the 1993 N.F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996 Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL. He is the principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work highly cited by his peers.
Dr. Griscom continued, “I implore my fellow physicists and engineers who may have the time, expertise, and (ideally) supercomputer access to get to work on the physics of the World Trade Center collapses and publish their findings in refereed journals … Surely [the] Orwellian consequences of public ignorance constitute more than sufficient motivation for any patriotic American physicist or engineer to join the search for 9/11 Truth!”
The improbability of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 is a major concern 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 p.m. 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.” [Video of the collapse can be seen at http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/WTC7_Collapse.wmv ]
Another senior Federal engineer who seriously questions the official account of 9/11 is Joel Hirschhorn, PhD, former Senior Staff Member, Congressional Office of Technology Assessment 1978 – 1990 and former Professor of Mechanical Engineering. Earlier this year, he wrote, “Many technical analyses cast doubt on the official explanation of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings, including those presented by an impressive new group: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. ...
“When it comes to 9/11, we face the strong belief that only al-Qaeda caused 9/11. But analyses by many experts reveal the collapse of the three WTC buildings was not caused by the two airplanes exploding into the twin towers. Without getting into details that one can spend many hours examining on a number of websites, the general view is that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.”
Dr. Hirschhorn also served as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association. He’s testified more than 50 times before Congress on technology, science, and environmental issues. Prior to his government services, he was Professor of Metallurgical Engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Madison 1965 - 1978.
Dr. Hirschhorn continued, “Like other groups, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth wants a new, honest and comprehensive study that considers all the evidence for controlled demolition. As a former engineering professor with growing skepticism about the official WTC story I share their concerns. First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions. But let us not allow a possible painful truth block the primary task of determining once and for all what caused the collapse of the WTC towers and building number 7.”
Another senior Federal engineer who questions the official account of 9/11 is Enver Masud, MS, PE, former Chief of the Strategic and Emergency Planning Branch, U.S. Department of Energy. An expert in electrical power grid management, he has consulted for the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the United States Agency for International Development in Albania, Czech Republic, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Tanzania. Prior to his employment by the DOE, he served as Director of the Office of Engineering at the Public Service Commission in Washington, D.C.
In a statement to this author, Mr. Masud wrote, “The 9/11 Commission Report is fatally flawed. The major conclusions of the 9/11 Commission Report -- the official, conspiracy theory -- are false. Among its many problems; 1.) It is entirely silent on the collapse of WTC Building 7. 2.) The FBI has admitted it has no hard evidence that Bin Laden was responsible for the attacks of 9/11. 3.) To this day, the hijackers' identities remain in doubt. 4.) Evidence, including the lack of adequate debris, at both the Pentagon and Shanksville contradicts the official theory of Flights 77 and 93. 5.) There is prima facie evidence of the controlled demolition of the WTC Twin Towers and Building 7.”
Continued...
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_al...ior_federal.htm
