left-panel-lighter-heading
    9-11-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out

    Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7)

    RT TV Show Interviews AE911Truth Experts About ReThink911 Campaign


    Ben Swann, formerly of Cincinnati's FOX19, questions the official story of the collapse of the World Trade Center High-rises

    Ben Swann, formerly of Cincinnati's FOX19, has to admit that World Trade Center Building 7 probably did not collapse due to normal office fires as NIST would want us to believe


    Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7)

    Architects & Engineers:
    Solving the Mystery of WTC 7
    A 15-min Documentary with Ed Asner


    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (4-minute trailer)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence -
    Experts Speak Out - Trailer
    Duration: 4:09


    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (58 minute free version)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence
    Experts Speak Out
    Free 1-hour version


    FOX TV, Fresno, with Richard Gage, AIA

    FOX TV, Fresno,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    CBC the fifth estate unofficial story

    CBC - The Fifth Estate
    "The Unofficial Story"


    The Reality Report with Richard Gage

    The Reality Report
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    CCTV, with Richard Gage, AIA

    CCTV,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    FOX News with Richard Gage, AIA

    FOX News
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    Vancouver Omni TV,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    Richard Gage Live on TV3 - The Masterplan Event

    Richard Gage Live on TV3 - The Masterplan Event


    Read it at AE911Truth.org
    Letters To The Editor
    Send Letter to Your Newspaper’s Editor in Two Minutes Print E-mail
    Letters To The Editor
    Written by Wayne Coste, PE   
    Monday, 09 September 2013 21:23

     

    Slip the WTC Evidence Under the Radar Directly to Your Fellow Citizens with AE911Truth’s New Salsa Platform

    This 12th anniversary of 9/11 presents a unique opportunity to amplify and reinforce our ReThink911.org campaign message by writing letters to the editor on a massive scale.  The 9/11 message is ripe for discussion and timely in light of the march to war with Syria based on questionable intelligence.  Help us reach your newspaper with a short Letter to the Editor.  We are now using SalsaLabs' advocacy platform to help you send letters to the editor of your local newspapers quickly and easily.Writing a Letter to the Editor is now easy


    Newspaper editors are obliged to consider letters sent in by people within their region.  Most public forums allow for 250 or 300 words, but some have a lower limit.  We have a ready-to-go letter that you can tweak before you hit send!  In the current environment, we expect that many outlets will print our letters.  Help amplify the ReThink911.org message.  Our goal is to generate 1,000 submissions in the next few days.


    The main point of our pre-written letter is that Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is calling on Patrick Gallagher, Director of NIST, to establish a technical conference to “Clear the Air” about WTC Building 7, explain its free-fall acceleration, and provide the supporting analysis and computer model inputs that were used in developing their conclusions.
     
    Here are the steps that you need to send a letter to your newspaper’s editor.

    The Letters to the Editor is a very popular section of any newspaper

    Enter your zip code, then click [Get Papers].  A list of newspapers within the specified distance will then be displayed. Enter your zip code
    Select your desired newspaper by clicking on its "button." You can submit this letter to a local newspaper where it has a better chance of getting published, or a regional paper that would reach more readers if it gets published. You can submit the letter to multiple newspapers, one at a time. Select Newspaper
    Read the letter. If you want to enhance it, use the "Talking Points" on the right as a guide for enhancements. Be mindful of the length as 500 words is usually the absolute maximum for a Letter to the Editor. This base letter is 205 words. Read (and edit) the Letter
    Enter the requested information. (If you have signed the AE911Truth petition, some of your information will be pre-populated into the form.) This information is needed because a newspaper's editorial staff usually calls to confirm that you are, in fact, the author of the letter. Click [Send Message]. Enter your name and address

     

    After you submit a letter, let others know that they can quickly add their voice to demand that NIST "Clear-the-Air" about the free fall of Building 7 by submitting a letter to the editor. Post a link to this article on Facebook as well!

     
    Questioning 9/11: Seven problems with Building 7 Print E-mail
    Letters To The Editor
    Saturday, 12 March 2011 01:32

    Questioning 9/11: Seven problems with Building 7

    Dwain Deets

    North County Times, 6/24/2010, http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/letters/article_a89d7d77-3297-58a5-b9f3-d10a28d14769.html

    1. No plane struck the 47-story World Trade Center skyscraper (Building 7).

    2. No evidence of fires in Building 7 for the first 100 minutes after being struck by debris from Tower 1. (Yet fire from the debris is the official explanation for building collapse.)

    3. Sudden free-fall drop of eight stories is finally officially acknowledged. Yet the National Institute of Science and Technology's lead investigator explained months earlier that free fall could not have occurred because that would have meant there would have been no structural components below.

    4. No mainstream media covered the building collapse other than that first day, when Dan Rather said on network TV, "For the third time today, it's reminiscent of those pictures that we've all seen too much ... when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down."

    5. No mention of Building 7 in the 9/11 Commission Report.

    6. The New York Times characterized as "perhaps the deepest mystery in the investigation," a FEMA-report appendix about a steel specimen recovered from Building 7, rather like Swiss cheese, a product of extraordinarily high temperatures.

    7. No mention in the NIST Building 7 Final Report of this mysterious steel specimen.

    Isn't it time for a real investigation?

    Dwain Deets

    Encinitas

     
    Protecting the public from information Print E-mail
    Letters To The Editor
    Saturday, 12 March 2011 01:30

    Protecting the public from information

    Dwain Deets

    North County Times, 8/3/2010, http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/letters/article_c765f5c3-3822-5a36-9a7a-80ecd5cb4b33.html

    We have a federal agency showing disdain for the Freedom of Information Act. Dr. Patrick Gallagher, Director of National Institute for Standards and Technology, denied a request from structural engineer Ronald Brookman, who sought detailed structural analysis information gathered by NIST when they determined the cause of the World Trade Center Building 7 collapse. Gallagher's stated reason for denial was that releasing it "might jeopardize public safety."

    What might jeopardize public safety is not allowing professionals in the building industry such as Mr. Brookman to independently study the NIST analysis of the highly anomalous building failure. A 47-story high-rise suddenly collapses straight down into its own footprint — highly anomalous.

    President Obama embraced transparency and openness in government on Day One of his new administration. Gallagher issued this determination on July 9, 2009, more than five months later — the exact opposite of openness in government. What is the public to make of this?

    And where is our Congress? Not one member of Congress has raised a single word of concern. Does Congress no longer have oversight responsibility? Are you OK with the authorities thumbing their noses at you?

    Dwain Deets

    Encinitas

     
    Can more than 1,000 architects and engineers be wrong? Print E-mail
    Letters To The Editor
    Saturday, 12 March 2011 01:28

    Can more than 1,000 architects and engineers be wrong?

    Dwain Deets

    North County Times, 4/6/2010, http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/letters/article_893b5e84-4a8d-5383-82f7-3d3714c03756.html

    The Freedom of Information Act used to be key to transparency in government. Not any more — at least, not if you ask about Building 7, a 47-story World Trade Center skyscraper that came crashing down on Sept. 11.

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology investigated the collapse of Building 7 and issued their final report. They took a very unusual approach. Rather than examining remnants from the destroyed building, they developed a computer model that they claimed represented the building's characteristics. They theorized what might have been the cause for the collapse, then ran their computer model and claimed it represented what had actually happened. NIST states office fires alone led to the collapse of the building.

    Now, more than 1,000 architects and engineers are asking for a new investigation. They say this defies the laws of physics. They ask for information on the computer model. Was it an accurate representation of the building itself?

    Attempts to use FOIA to get information on the model have been futile. NIST refuses to provide critical information, saying, "release of the information may endanger public safety."

    What? Endanger public safety? FOIA requests shouldn't be refused for such outlandish reasons.

    Dwain Deets

    Encinitas

     
    Public safety paradox Print E-mail
    Letters To The Editor
    Saturday, 12 March 2011 01:25

    Public safety paradox

    http://www.seaonc.org/pdfs/SEAONC_September_2010.pdf

    September 2010

    Dear Editor:

    The complete collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) was highly anomalous—that's why it is critical for building design and construction professionals to understand it. Freedom of Information Act requests for structural-analysis data have been denied because the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Director determined that release of the data might jeopardize public safety. I asked the Director:

    How, in the Director's judgment, is the release of calculations and analysis results—developed at the taxpayers' expense for a building that no longer exists—a threat to public safety?

    His response was:

    The decision to withhold the data was based on the fact that the capabilities of the WTC 7 collapse initiation and global collapse models are unprecedented, in that they provide validated models that can predict collapse of typical tall buildings. If released, these models would provide a powerful tool to groups and individuals interested in simulating building collapses and devising ways to destroy buildings.

    This response from NIST is an insult to building design and construction professionals who are committed to ensuring public safety with high-quality construction. As a structural engineer I have a professional interest in understanding the collapse, and it has nothing to do with ''devising ways to destroy buildings." If the WTC 7 models actually predict the complete collapse of typical tall buildings subjected to office fires, then withholding this information is not in the interest of public safety.

    Independent verification is an integral part of science, so I strongly encourage the NIST Director to reconsider his decision to withhold analysis data. Only independent verification will enable these complex models to be validated.

    Sincerely,

    Ronald H. Brookman, SE

     

     

     
    << Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>

    Page 1 of 3