Why do all of these high level officials question the events of 9/11?

Question

Current U.S. Senator states "The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?"
Current Republican Congressman states that "we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on"
Current Democratic Congressman hints that we aren't being told the truth about 9/11
Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee, has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job
Former Democratic Senator states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog that doesn't hunt" (if you suspect he is a closet liberal, take a look at his bio)
Former director of the U.S. "Star Wars" space defense program in both Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force colonel who flew 101 combat missions, and who is a Catholic Archbishop stated that 9/11 was an inside job (he also said "If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason")
Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director, decorated with the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal stated that "there is no way that an aircraft . . . would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control ... Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a 'conspiracy Theory' does not change the truth. It seems, 'Something is rotten in the State.'"
Former 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer stated that "9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war", and it was probably an inside job (see Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).
Former high-ranking Reagan official and very influential conservative doubts the official story about 9/11
Former Two-Star general questions the attack on the Pentagon
Former Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official finds various aspects of 9/11 suspicious
Former President of the U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board, who also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, and who was awarded Distinguish Flying Crosses for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals, is a member of a group which doubts the government's version of 9/11
Current U.S. Congresswoman, former senior CIA analyst, former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter, former US Ambassador and Chief of Mission to Iraq, former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism, and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (as well as a who's who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11
Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are credible, that "very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that there's enough evidence to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath

Former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice's Inspector General and several senators have called extremely credible (free subscription required), said "If they were to do real investigations we would see several significant high level criminal prosecutions in this country. And that is something that they are not going to let out. And, believe me; they will do everything to cover this up". She also is leaning towards the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job
A 28-year career CIA official says 9/11 was an inside job
A retired 27-year CIA analyst who prepared and presented Presidential Daily Briefs and served as a high-level analyst for several presidents stated that there are indications that Cheney ordered a stand down of the military on 9/11
Former FBI agent says "The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred."
Former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that 9/11 could not have occurred as the government says, and that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to this interview)
Former 6-year Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation and former Professor of Aviation, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering and Aviation says "the [9/11] commission is clearly not talking to everybody or not telling us everything .... Huge discrepancies persist in basic facts .... when we heard the carriers and governments alike saying, “Oh, no one could have foreseen this. No one knew that this was coming. No one knew that there was any risk like this in the world,” is absolutely false....
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
Former ambassador to Iraq is not satisfied with the official story
Numerous high-level legal scholars question the official version of 9/11. As do numerous military leaders.
And many officials from allied governments have also questioned 9/11:
Statement by former President of Italy
Statements by former German Defense Minister and current member of British Parliament
Statement by former Canadian Minister of Defense

Statements of two former MI5 (British intelligence) agents (19 minutes into video)

Statement of a high-ranking general and the former chief of NATO regarding bombs in the Twin Towers (in Danish)

Statement by the commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force; and see also statement of former chief of staff of the Russian armed forces

Answer 1

Everything about the "official" explanation stinks! I find it hard to believe that anyone who has any knowledge of physics, any knowledge of history, any knowledge of The Project for the New American Century, (which is a "non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle...), any knowledge of the Bush family, could take this seriously. Of course it was an inside job!

From the very first pictures I saw coming out of "ground zero", I knew there was something fishy about the whole affair! My first hint was that, while there was still some of the external infrastructure standing and intact, there was nothing left of the central core: no concrete pillars, no rebar, nothing except a big pile of rubble! How could that have possibly been, considering that a building that size would have had to have had an incredibly strong and well built central column. There was nothing, nada, nichts!!! Go figure!

I should confess that I do not like Mr Bush. (As I tell whoever will listen, I can always tell when he's lying because I can see his lips move.) I do not trust Mr. Cheney (and how much has he made from his little war via Haliburton?,) and I certainly don't trust Don Rumsfeld. (Ask him if he eats/drinks anything with Aspartame.) Regarding Mr. Silverstein (sp?), you can ask him how he could have recommended "pulling" building 7, when anyone who knows anything about demolition knows that it takes days or more likely weeks to prepare a building that size for something like that.

From what I've seen, and from the evidence readily available, there is not a doubt in my mind that "the wool has been pulled over our eyes", or at least over the eyes of the great unwashed, who have nothing better to do with their time than sit home and watch "Survivor".

Answer 2

I'll just toss in one tiny tidbit. You asked why the planes were not intercepted and shot down once they deviated from their flight plan if it were not an inside job. Each flight controller is responsible for many planes at the same time. There is no computer that compares actual paths with flight plans. The flight controllers cannot do that job on their own when their main concern was to keep planes at safe distances from each other. Therefore, until someone radios in that there has been a hijacking or that a plane has crashed, the controllers are pretty much in the dark. Even after the first Trade Tower was hit, it was not obvious that there was a terrorist attack. After all, a B-25 bomber struck the Empire State Building in 1947 and that was an accident. Why should the first strike be considered otherwise without corroborating information? After the second strike, all planes were ordered to perform emergency landings at the nearest airport. Only after that was done, could radar be used to identify potential rogue planes for interception. If a plane was still in the air, it did not make it an automatic target. Imagine a commercial plane with the radio giving trouble. The pilot would not necessarily know about it until he tried and failed to send a message. Do you want to shoot that plane down? In addition, at that time, only two fighters in the Northeast area were actually armed. Most of the fighters were on training missions and did not carry ordnance. The two "hot" fighters were too far away from any of the aircraft identified as hostile to get to them on time.

Answer 3

Because it was an inside job.

Aside from the obvious demolitions of the towers and building 7, the stuff that really sticks out is:

Vice President Dick Cheney had complete control of NORAD shortly before 9/11...no president or VP has ever took control of NORAD in it's 50+ year history.

They happended to be running War Games / Terrorist Simulations in the NorthEast the very SAME DAY? If you watch any of the 9/11 videos, you hear the pilots / NORAD guys asking if (WTC attack) it's real or just a training mission.

Bush and Cheney wouldn't go before the 9/11 commission without the other, it couldn't be taped or recorded and none of the 9/11 family members were allowes to be present.

The lis goes on and on, if you have half a brain and question it yourself you'll see it's bogus.

Answer 4

Why was more money (much more) allocated to the investigation of the last shuttle explosion than 9/11 ? Why did the Bush administration fight the appointment of an independent investigator, as Congress initially wanted ? Why
do people continue to bury their heads in the sand, and act as if you are crazy when you point out inconsistencies and major unanswered questions concerning 9/11 ?
Just because someone ask questions and refuses to be another of the country's sheep, does not mean they are mentally impaired. Some of us are realistic enough to know that there are remaining questions, which, if the government answered, could wrap up the entire issue. The rest of you can continue to ignore the things the government is doing, and surrender more of your liberties in the name of "security". I for one, will not.

Answer 5

The folks who slammed the asker of the question should go back to watching your sitcoms and sports, and ignore the real issues of the world. Life must be really nice that way.
I totally agree with JimBob.

Answer 6

9-11 couldn't have occurred without the Bush Administration's knowledge as to how the event and consequences could be used to advance their irrational, insane, inhumane, and immoral policies. They were warned well in advance of the event.

Well done... Keep up the good work. The sun is on your side.

Answer 7

Watch the movie loose change. It is a documentary that shows that 9/11 could have been set up by our government.

Answer 8

You forgot to mention the guy down the street that wears that cute aluminum foil cap because it helps to prevent the C.I.A. from reading his mind and your favorite Aunt what took too much acid back in the 1960's, their opinions on the WTC and 911 count too!!!

Have you ever considered that if there really is a secret dark Government within the Government capable of engineering blowing up the WTC on 911, that asking this question and trying to enlighten all of us to the danger is imperiling yourself and all who you hold dear. Why there is probably a right wing death squad heading over to your house right now....

GET OVER YOURSELF!!!!

Answer 9

The sane people know all this. It is just a shame the insane outnumber us.

Answer 10

Maybe because the whole thing really stinks!