Background
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) 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?
Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) said
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...
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...
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.
Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) said
I started questioning the Sept 11, 2001 “story” only days after the event. It just didn't make any sense to me. 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 didn't add up.
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 could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.
I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!
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?
I also personally knew American Airlines Captain “Chick” Burlingame, who was the captain of Flight 77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon, and I know he would not have given up his airplane to crazies!
And at the Shanksville Pennsylvania impact site, 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?
When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official “story”.
Now, moving on to treason:
On September 12, 2001, in a meeting with his National Security Team, President Bush said
The deliberate and deadly attacks which were carried out yesterday against our country were more than acts of terror. They were acts of war.
In the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3, treason is defined as follows:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Put those two things together: treason consists in levying war against the United States, and the attacks of 9/11 were acts of war.
Of course it is assumed here that we are talking about Americans levying war against the United States. If foreigners wage war against the United States, that doesn't count as treason. If Americans do it, it's treason.
This is not a rhetorical statement or a figure of speech, it is a fact. That's what treason is, by definition. However, most people don't know that the attacks were committed by Americans. They may suspect it, but they don't know it. The situation is still ambiguous in their minds.
There is going to be an Emperor's New Clothes moment, when somebody stands up and tells the truth, in such a way that it cannot be denied. Some people are already telling the truth, but not in a way that carries the necessary force. I have already quoted three examples. Here is another. Captain Russ Wittenberg is a former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. He has flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93 and Flight 175). He said, among other things,
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.
This is true, but it's not obviously true. You have to think about it. You have to be willing to think about it. Captain Wittenberg was not there. He is just saying, based on his professional judgment, what could not have happened.
Sooner or later, someone who was involved will say what did happen.
As the old saying goes, murder will out.
People do have consciences. Sometimes it may not seem that they do, but they do. It's not easy to voluntarily confess to being an accomplice to murder, but it's not easy to live with guilt, either. Somebody is going to take a deep breath, step forward, and tell the truth about what happened on September 11, 2001. In the future that person will be remembered in the history books as a national hero, but at the time it won't be easy. Out of hundreds of people who are in a position to let the secret out, somebody will do it, and then the dam will break.
Everybody will know what happened, even if they don't want to know, even if they have been trying to ignore the evidence.
Daddy, why is the Emperor naked? - As soon as the little boy asked that question, everybody knew what they should have known all along.
When the truth comes out unambiguously, it will affect different people in different ways. For some people it will be a day of vindication - "See, I told you so!" For the ones who have been trying to defend the official story against the "conspiracy theories," it will be the most devastating day of their lives. It will be a worse shock than the 9/11 event itself.
Then the upheaval Zundel predicted will be upon us. This country will boil over.
When the upheaval comes, it will be a Red State thing. It will come from people who trusted George Bush. It won't come from Democrats who despised him all along, nor will it come from militia groups who are already disaffected from the whole system. I'm thinking of some reunion pictures a classmate sent me a couple of years ago. There is a picture of Bill S. He was big kid when I knew him, kind of a Viking type, and he is a big man now. He's an honest blue collar guy, a Texan in the best sense of the word. He was a Tank Commander in the Marines in Vietnam. He doesn't have much use for peace marches, and I don't imagine he writes checks to the ACLU. He has probably never questioned the official 9/11 story. When the Emperor's New Clothes moment comes, and he catches on that the man he trusted is a traitor, look out.
That's where the upheaval will come from - guys like him.
A lot of people may be uneasy about the direction the country is going, but they have no focal point for their anger. Globalization is too complicated to get a handle on. Treason, however, is a simple thing. All that pent up anger is going to find an outlet. When Bill S. comes at you with fire in his eye, you are in trouble. Bill and a million others like him are going to be boiling mad. When he knows he's right, he doesn't back down for anybody.
There will be men with badges on both sides of this.
Men who wear uniforms and/or badges are the ones who are really on the spot. They face the hardest choices. They have the most responsibility. They are supposed to defend the Constitution and enforce the law. When a crime has been committed, they are supposed to do something about it. That is their job. Now they have to decide whether to do their duty, or not.
Not all of them will make the right decision.
Not everybody has a conscience. Some people are absolutely cynical, and they will protect their boss to the bitter end. As far as they are concerned, the Constitution is just a piece of paper, and their oath to defend it is just a formality. In every police department, in every military unit, in every FBI office and Homeland Security office, everybody will have to take a stand: do you support your boss right or wrong, or do you bring the traitors to justice?
Do you adhere to the enemies of the United States, and give them aid and comfort, or not?
Misprision of felony is a crime. Giving aid and comfort to traitors is treason.
In a war crimes trial, "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense. The traitors and everyone who supports them are going to discover the meaning of the old song, I fought the law, and the law won.
Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer said recently,
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.
Somebody from the FBI or Homeland Security may be reading this right now, and you too must take a stand: do you defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, or do you cover up the crime, and thus become an accessory after the fact?
It's time to take our country back - which side are you on?
George Bush went to Sam Houston Elementary School in Midland, Texas. (I happen to know, because I also went to that school. We started the first grade together in September of 1952.) There are a lot of schools in Texas named after Sam Houston. He has the same position in Texas history that George Washington has in American history.
Sam Houston said, "Be sure you are right, then go ahead."
Don't skip the first step.
Before deciding what to think about this page, do your due diligence. Check all the facts. Read 911myths.com too (a site which defends the official story). Think it through. This is not a time for snap judgments. The stakes are very high. Be sure you are right.
Please understand, I am not saying you should believe anything or anybody. Returning to the Patriots Question 9/11 website, there is also a page giving statements from survivors who were there on the morning of September 11. Let's examine it. Here is their lead witness:
William Rodriguez – WTC survivor. An American Building Maintenance employee for twenty years, responsible for inspection and maintenance at the World Trade Center, who held the master key for the stairs. He was the last person to leave the building on September 11 and has been credited with saving many lives. For his efforts, he received the National Hero Award from the Senate of Puerto Rico. Founder, Hispanic Victims Group.
Article 6/24/05: Regarding an explosion in the sub-basement of the World Trade Center North Tower on 9/11, prior to any airplane impact. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and it everything started shaking," said Rodriguez, who was huddled together with at least 14 other people in the office. ... [Editor's note: At this point, Mr. Rodriguez was in sub-basement B1 of the North Tower, approximately 1,100 feet below the airplane's impact point at floors 93 to 98.]
"Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement still rattled the floor, I hear another explosion from way above," said Rodriguez. "Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion."
But before Rodriguez had time to think, co-worker Felipe David stormed into the basement office with severe burns on his face and arms, screaming for help and yelling "explosion! explosion! explosion!"
David had been in front of a nearby freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office when fire burst out of the elevator shaft, causing his injuries.
"He was burned terribly," said Rodriguez. "The skin was hanging off his hands and arms. His injuries couldn't have come from the airplane above, but only from a massive explosion below. I don’t care what the government says, what scientists say. I saw a man burned terribly from a fire that was caused from an explosion below.
"I know there were explosives placed below the trade center. I helped a man to safety who is living proof, living proof the government story is a lie and a cover-up. ...
Wait a minute. Does anything bother you about this story? The first thing that jumps out at me is "David had been in front of a nearby freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office..." Four hundred feet is not nearby. A football field is 300 feet long. Four hundred feet is another hundred feet beyond that. How long would it take a severely burned man to cover that distance if he were out in the open? How long would it take inside a building? According to this story, he got there "before Rodriguez had time to think." No, I don't think so. This doesn't add up.
This does not imply that Rodriguez is totally full of shit. If you have experience with law enforcement, you know how it is with witnesses. Their statements never add up. People don't have photographic memories. You have to use your professional judgment to decide whether they are speaking in good faith, and whether their memories are substantially correct, in spite of discrepancies. Why would Rodriguez and the others say what they are saying if it were not substantially true? (It should be noted that Rodriguez himself did not say "400 feet" - the author of the article said that. It's possible that "400" is a typo. Maybe it should be 40 feet.)
This case has to be approached like any other criminal investigation. You have to look at all the evidence, use logic to evaluate it, balance different witnesses against each other, consider everybody's motives, and figure out what happened.
Be sure you are right.