AE911Truth Makes an Impact at Denver AIA Convention

Editor's note: We have assembled a detailed collection of photos, videos and highlights from the Denver AIA convention at the end of this article. Don't miss it!

AE911Truth founder Richard Gage, AIA, shared the vital 9/11 information with other AIA members at our convention "evidence booth"

A dozen AE911Truth volunteers spent three very productive days with several thousand architects in Denver last month. The occasion? The American Institute of Architects' annual convention, which drew 14,000 architects to the Colorado Convention Center on June 20–21. We were certainly strong contenders for the attention of these technical professionals, and we raised a lot of eyebrows as we shared the explosive 9/11 evidence.

AE911Truth has an interesting history with the American Institute of Architects. We have previously attended AIA conventions in Boston, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., where we were able to reach and educate thousands of architects.

In the past, the AIA has been lukewarm to us – encouraging us to host booths and unofficial presentations and yet refusing to meet with us to discuss the findings of almost 2,000 architects (including six AIA fellows and over 100 AIA members) who have signed our petition calling for a new 9/11 investigation. We preceded this particular convention by sending a series of letters to the president and board of the AIA, which culminated in a comprehensive summary document of WTC evidence.

As we wrote to President Mickey Jacob, FAIA, and the entire Board of Directors, "We are also requesting again a private meeting with the AIA Board to explain our findings. Unless the AIA is prepared to re-visit the evidence, as subsequently uncovered, and adopt a proactive stance, you may find yourself on the wrong side of history as the ‘Official Report' further unravels and the true cause of the collapse of the three towers becomes known to a growing and unsettled populace."

With the help of many dedicated volunteers such as Larry Landon on our Graphics Team, Joe Heller on our Printing Team, and donors such as Nick Guccione, Oleg Kis, and others, we fashioned and distributed booth banners that provided a systematic outline and illustration of the evidence. These banners can be downloaded for only $1 by petition signers.

Architects seem to vary little from the rest of the public in their confusion about evidence that contradicts their worldview. About half of those who stopped by were genuinely interested in viewing the evidence. Most of them took our latest DVD, 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out, and were receptive to the idea of follow-up calls to see what they thought about it. Many of them immediately signed our petition calling for a new WTC investigation!

However, like the general public, about half of the attendees either ignored us completely and walked by, acted with some degree of disdain, or were honest enough to let us know that they disagreed with us. The latter turned into the most interesting conversations, because these individuals were obviously emotionally attached to their positions and usually unable to focus on any given element of evidence for any significant length of time – jumping to some rationalization that they had seen on TV or heard from a friend in an effort to justify not having to take in this new information.

In fact, even very intelligent architects can still believe the most blatant falsehoods, in total opposition to the laws of physics, as needed to keep their "ship of mind" upright. For instance, one architect had no problem with the "free-fall" of World Trade Center Building 7. "Of course … how else is it going to fall? It's so heavy," he said. I answered, "All 82 columns had to be removed virtually at once – and then synchronistically timed, floor by floor, for at least 8 floors (the distance the building dropped in free-fall)." The response? "It's just so heavy – all that weight … the columns just gave in." We dealt with a lot of "magical thinking" from well-meaning architects.

In another astonishing example of denial, an architect from Iowa completely dismissed the devastating information I was conveying, simply because I had forgotten the name of the architecture firm that designed the original Building 7. (Anyone know? It was Emery Roth & Sons.)

Another stated, "It was the Muslims that did it." I responded, "But NIST said ‘normal office fires' brought down WTC 7." I don't care, if it wasn't for the Muslims, then none of this would have happened."

On the other hand, most who stopped by were open to the evidence and came with a willingness to hear new information and promised to review our latest documentary, 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out. Many of them had heard of us, and a few indicated that they had already told colleagues about this vital information.

Some architects eagerly joined us in passing out our literature to other attendees.

By the end of the convention, more than 100 architects who spoke with us expressed interest in signing our petition, a marked example of the growing doubt within the architecture community about the official 9/11 story.

Several hundred brochures and DVDs were handed out to convention attendees. Many recipients will never be the same after they digest the implications of the explosive evidence of the Twin Towers and Building 7. We will never stop – not while we are supported by almost 2,000 architects and engineers, 17,000 other petition signers, and the hundreds of financial donors who sponsor us and expect us to wake up our country's citizens and compel our elected representatives to reinvestigate 9/11.

Sixty people attended our evening presentation. Laura Nieboer, AE911Truth's Verification Team Leader, explained to the architects what they might expect – that "it will be evidence-based, not speculation or conspiracy theory." In fact, we hold tight to our established region of credibility by answering questions like "Who did it?" with answers like "Let's find out exactly what happened, in a real investigation that looks at all of the evidence ignored by NIST, and then encourage a real criminal investigation to uncover those important questions."

“Let’s find out exactly what happened, in a real investigation that looks at all of the evidence ignored by NIST, and then encourage a real criminal investigation to uncover those important questions.”

By the end of the presentation, only one person held on to his belief in the official story. Our work is not difficult – once we get professionals, and the public alike, in front of the evidence.

Licensed professional counselor Fran Shure, M.A., joined me on stage to assist the audience in understanding why it can be so difficult to deal with evidence that is presented. Shure and fellow psychologists Marti Hopper and Dorothy Lorig helped to expose the extent to which many people have attempted to shore up their worldviews in the face of probing questions about the official 9/11 story.

This event was one of our most significant outreach efforts ever made to professionals. We succeeded beyond our expectations in educating hundreds. This result would not have been possible without the support of volunteers like Laura Nieboer, Susie Bonham-Craig, Tom Spellman, Kelly David, and many others who helped staff our booth and reach out to architects at the convention.

The convention was also one of our most expensive – and we are still trying to pay the costs. We have a significant opportunity to reach more professionals at every turn – but we can’t because we don’t have the resources. We are doing our part. Is it time for you to help? Please DONATE NOW. Thank you!