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

    Latest News

    Correction and Clarification: Article: Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Darcy Wearing and Richard Gage, AIA   
    Saturday, 10 July 2010 00:50

    Article: Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee

    Posted Correction


    We incorrectly identified the thermite device illustrated in this article as a "cutter charge.”  But, the device as described in the patent is only an igniter heat source only used to ignite larger charges. It does not in and of itself have the capability of cutting structural steel.

    We would like to also note that neither the authors nor the interviewee, Tom Sullivan, intended to imply that this particular device was used in the WTC destruction. We don’t know exactly what was used.  That is why we need a thorough investigation.  Our intention was to note that the technology for self consuming consolidated thermite cases existed as far back as 1984. In our DVD 9/11: Blueprint for Truth, we do show the 1999 patent for a thermite-based cutter charge which is designed to eject molten copper or iron through the orifice in “hundreds of milliseconds,” and is capable cutting through thicker structural steel more efficiently. This thermite-based cutter charge has distinct advantages over more traditional high explosive cutter charges. From the patent description:


    “A primary disadvantage of explosive shaped charges is that they generate excessive noise and debris upon detonation. This noise and debris can pose potentially serious health and safety hazards to someone using a cutting device which employs conventional shaped charge explosives.

    Thermite-based cutting devices which employ a cutting flame produce virtually no extended shock wave and generate relatively little over pressure. Thermite-based cutting devices do not present the same health and safety hazards which are attendant upon explosive shape charge cutting devices.

    So, this may provide explanation as to why the perpetrators used such devices – if in fact they were used - in these deceptive controlled demolitions. (We do not have much evidence to conclude that they were used in the Twin Towers – whose debris pile was fairly extensively photographed). 

    However, in the case of WTC 7, from which we have not been provided close-up photos during the clean-up process, we do have very interesting documentation from FEMA BPAT Report in Appendix C, along with photos and witnesses of pools of molten metal, which may provide such evidence.  The authors describe severe high temperature corrosion, intergranular melting, rapid oxidation, and evaporation of the ends of steel structural members.  Remember, WTC 7 was not the extreme explosive event that the Twin Towers were.  It was an implosion, during which there are far fewer witnesses describing hearing and feeling the explosions.  So it may be more likely a traditional demolition but using thermite incendiary cutter charges, where as the Twin Towers may have been destroyed with more explosive materials like C4 and the nano-thermitic composite explosives (which have been documented in other articles).

    Also, it is quite conceivable, given the 16 year span of time between 1984 and 2001, that these two technologies could have been combined to produce a thermite based cutter charge whose casing is also made of consolidated thermite. This must still be researched.

    Posted Clarification:

    We used the Hi Ex system as an example in the article of a wireless detonation system that existed long before 9/11/01 and that was capable of stand–off distances of 5 kilometers – eliminating the requirement for “miles of detonation cord” from the actuating device. We had no intention of implying that this was the actual system used by the perpetrators at the WTC high-rises.   A real investigation might reveal such secrets.

    Posted Editorial Comment:


    Next to the discovery of Nano-thermite in the WTC dust, the question of whether such thermite-based devices were used is a side issue -- merely one possible technology that could account for the dozens of observations of molten iron or steel in the debris pile. 

    In the debate about what brought down the World Trade Center, providing the grand "problem-reaction" for which the War on Terror is the alleged "solution," our position is solid on every important point. This is underscored by our critics' noisy attention to small errors such as this. The promoters of, and believers in, the official government conspiracy have always ignored or misrepresented the gross features of the three WTC towers' destruction. Those features -- the speed, symmetry, thoroughness, completeness -- have always pointed unequivocally to surreptitious demolition with explosives as the cause of that destruction. The details of how the demolitions were accomplished are largely irrelevant at this point in time, except that al Qaeda clearly lacked the access to accomplish any variant of them.

    We call, once again, on everyone of conscience to evaluate impartially the evidence on both sides, as best we know it today, and join our 10,000 petition signers in the call for a new, open, subpoena-powered professional investigation, free of conflicts of interest, that will follow the scientific method and the evidence wherever it leads and let the chips fall where they may.

     
    The AE911Truth “Street Ready” Brochures - “Don’t leave home without them”
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Richard Gage, AIA   
    Thursday, 24 June 2010 19:57

    You are talking to this big, burly guy at the water cooler about the collapse of World Trade Center 7. Of course. . . he doesn’t believe you.  He even thinks you’re a conspiracy theorist, or worse.  You need back up.  You’re out-gunned -- and not prepared to deal with the names that you are about to be called. There’s nothing in your briefcase to give him.  You go. . . “Darn!,” or worse,  to yourself.  You say to him, “Just go to EATruth911.com,” but you don’t quite remember the name of the website.  This conversation is just not going your way.

    RE-TAKE . . . .

    Just in time. . .  you remember the stack of  "street ready" brochures that you bought from the AE911Truth Store at 15 cents each -- a small price to pay for the feeling of victory  --  in the office and out on the street.

    Read more...
     
    Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Darcy Wearing and Richard Gage, AIA   
    Thursday, 24 June 2010 18:55

    Having had the privilege of speaking with Tom Sullivan, an actual explosive-charge placement technician, we have some new insights to pass along as to how controlled demolition works, where it started, and the effect that 9/11 had on the demolition industry. Sullivan gained his experience as an employee of the leading firm in this field, Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI).  Sullivan stresses though “I do not in anyway represent CDI and what I have to say is based on my own experience and training,”


    Sullivan attended high school with Doug Loizeaux of the Loizeaux family. The Loizeaux family, through the father Jack, independently started the whole controlled-demolition industry and turned it into a highly profitable business. Sullivan, before he became connected to CDI, was an independent photographer during his early years in Maryland. He would be sent to CD sites and take still pictures of the jobs.  He became infatuated with the CD industry. The time came when he would do both, being the placer of the “cutter charges” on the primary joints, and photographing the jobs for promoting the business. Soon he would switch to full-time employee status of CDI -- as verified by AE911Truth’s verification team.

    "It was very interesting, but also very hard work, long hours, especially in the cold weather," Sullivan reflects. He stated that the days began early, around 6 a.m., and they would work until the sun was down. Sullivan had the experience of preparing a building by placing the cutter charges throughout the primary joints, and then, of course, watching it all come down.

    Read more...
     
    Volunteers Keep the Wheels Turning at AE911Truth
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Mark Graham, Volunteer Coordinator   
    Wednesday, 23 June 2010 17:10

    On the home page of our website, AE911Truth.org, you may have noticed the tab near the top center that says, “Help out.”  If you open that page you will find descriptions of the teams at AE911Truth, and the current projects of these teams.

    You can be in any state or any country, and still volunteer with AE911Truth.  Each of our teams keeps in touch via a weekly conference call, plus phone, email, and a web environment called Basecamp.  If you want to help us complete our mission -- obtaining a real investigation of the destruction of the 3 WTC high-rises, contact us -- as we need more volunteers.

    We have teams working on congressional outreach, fundraising, graphics, marketing, the Online Store, presentations, public outreach, translations, video, writing and more.  There are even some opportunities to be a team leader. Let me introduce you to three very real volunteers who are contributing daily to our success. Here are Darcy Wearing, Marsha Elliott, and Sean Brizendine:

    Read more...
     
    The News Media at War
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Terry Hansen   
    Tuesday, 22 June 2010 22:30

    Ed: As AE911Truth makes many efforts to promote its mission among and through the mainstream media, this article offers some reasons why that has proven to be a daunting and largely unsuccessful effort.

    For many Americans, one of the strongest reasons for accepting the official story about the shocking events of Sept. 11, 2001, is their deep-seated belief in the free press. We are taught from an early age that the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution guarantees us many cherished freedoms, among which is freedom of the press.

    If there were really any serious problems with the official 9-11 explanation, many Americans reason, this information wouldn't go unreported for long in our media-saturated society. Major news organizations such as CNN, Time, and the New York Times would most certainly investigate and report any serious problems almost immediately. Nearly all major American news organizations have embraced the government's version of events with few questions asked. Consequently, many Americans naturally conclude that it's safe to accept the official story at face value.

    There is a very serious flaw in this line of reasoning, however: The United States is at war and, for nearly a hundred years, the U.S. government, major media companies and leading journalists have joined forces with the military during wars and other national emergencies to shape public opinion by carefully controlling what Americans are told about world events.

    Especially since World War I, whenever the U.S. government has chosen to take the nation to war, or to address some other major emergency, it has quietly called upon top journalists and media executives to help overcome anti-war sentiment, promote popular hostility toward a designated enemy, or simply calm public anxieties. This may seem surprising to many readers, so it is worth reviewing a few historical examples of such media-government collusion.

    Because deception is a fundamental technique of warfare, military organizations have sought control over war-related information virtually since the dawn of human history.

    The Chinese writer Sun Tzu put it well in his classic work, The Art of War: “All war is based on deception,” he wrote. “Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity. When near, make it appear that you are far away; when far away, that you are near. Offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike him.” 1

    In modern times, deception has always employed two fundamental stages: censorship followed by propaganda. Censorship deprives the public and enemies of accurate information about what is taking place. Once this information vacuum has been created, propaganda is injected into this conceptual void, thus creating a false but entirely believable picture of events. In the age of mass media, this simply couldn't be achieved without the assistance of major news organizations, journalists, and other communication outlets. Thus, governments nearly always appeal to these organizations for help in this complex task.

    Read more...
     
    Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by David Ray Griffin   
    Tuesday, 22 June 2010 20:10

    Note: Published originally on May 27, 2010 at 911Truth.org. SCAD – “State Crimes Against Democracy”, February 2010 issue of American Behavioral Scientist


    At 5:21 PM on 9/11, Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed, even though it had not been hit by a plane – a fact that is important because of the widespread acceptance of the idea, in spite of its scientific absurdity, that the Twin Towers collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airliners plus the ensuing jet-fuel-fed fires. The collapse of World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) thereby challenges the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center, according to which it was accomplished by al-Qaeda hijackers, even if one accepts the government’s scientifically impossible account of the Twin Towers. This fact was recently emphasized in the title of a review article based on my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7,1 by National Medal of Science-winner Lynn Margulis: “Two Hit, Three Down – The Biggest Lie.”2

     

    1. Why the Collapse of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem

    The collapse of WTC 7 created an extraordinary problem for the official account of 9/11 for several reasons.


    An Unprecedented Occurrence

    One reason is that, because of the collapse of WTC 7, the official account of 9/11 includes the dubious claim that, for the first time in the known universe, a steel-frame high-rise building was brought down by fire, and science looks askance at claims of unprecedented occurrences regarding physical phenomena. New York Times writer James Glanz, who himself has a Ph.D. in physics, wrote: “[E]xperts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire.” Glanz then quoted a structural engineer as saying: “[W]ithin the structural engineering community, [WTC 7] is considered to be much more important to understand [than the Twin Towers],” because engineers had no answer to the question, “why did 7 come down?”3


    Visual Evidence of Implosion

    Equally remarkable, besides the mere fact that this building came down, was the way it collapsed: straight down, in virtual free fall, making the destruction of this building appear to be an example of the type of controlled demolition known as “implosion,” in which explosives and/or incendiaries are used to slice the building’s steel support columns in such a way as to cause the building to collapse into its own footprint. CBS anchor Dan Rather, not one to let a remarkable fact go unremarked, said:

    “[I]t’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen . . . on television . . . , where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down.”4

    Read more...
     
    AE911Truth Booths: Fairgoers Learn What Media Hasn’t Told Them About 9/11
    Print
    E-mail
    Written by Editor   
    Tuesday, 22 June 2010 19:39

    Grassroots efforts in the form of inexpensive display booths are starting to make appearances in community fairs and festivals all over the country. AE911Truth volunteer Scott Beery led off with a bit more ambitious version of an AE911Truth booth, including TV monitors to display the Towers exploding, and Building 7 in freefall. See the article on this booth at the SF Power to the Peaceful Festival, just one of the many public events at which Beery brought the irrefutable 9/11 Truth evidence to the people through the unique features of his custom designed booth, and of course, the dedicated AE911Truth activists who staffed the booth.

    Recently, many individual AE911Truth activists have taken it upon themselves to make the necessary arrangements with festival and fair authorities, and then bring banners and materials to set up their booths on the day of their respective events. In a grassroots fashion, two of these booths were organized, one by John Tobak, in Woodbridge, New Jersey, and the other by Scott Thompson, in Bellingham, Washington. Both had successful 9/11 awareness-raising projects with lots of visitors on the respective days of the fairs.

    A Street Fair in Woodbridge, New Jersey

    On Saturday, May 15, John Tobak, and his friend Charbel Zogheib staffed a booth at a street fair in Woodbridge, NJ. Their 10’ x 10’ booth included an 8’ x 3’ banner: “Hundreds of Architects & Engineers Demand a Real 9/11 Investigation.” The current banner reads “1,000”!

    Between 10:30 am and 5 pm, Zogheib handed out 400 of the “What the Government & Media Are Not Telling You About 9/11” brochures, and Tobak handed out 400 of the “Explosive Evidence” cards. Based on the fact that some people took both Zogheib’s brochure and Tobak’s card, they estimated that they gave AE911Truth literature to approximately 700 people.

    Read more...
     
    << Start < Prev 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Next > End >>