"It does become obvious to most 9/11 researchers, and to anyone who examines the forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony, that operatives with access to the inside of the WTC towers must have been responsible for their destruction," says in the following talking with Pravda Report, architect Richard Gage, CEO and founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which calls for a new investigation.
Architect Gage Gage speaks on the contradictions of the official story regarding 9/11 attacks, and the outcomes of the attacks to the United States and the world. Considering the omissions and obfuscations of the original government investigations, "people of all nations, particularly the families of the victims, deserve to have their questions answered," points out the 9/11 truther.
Lawyer William Veale once spoke - in the documentary The Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of our Republic produced by Mike Berger - on US democracy failure; according to him, US Constitution and Republican principles have been metaphorically reduced to dust, with 9/11 debris as "the buildings of the World Trade Center were the first in history to collapse by fire", an evidence of controlled demolition.
Sixteen years on, architect Gage agrees to lawyer Veale. "While the events of 9/11 were an attack on physical structures and the people inside them, its aftermath was an attack on reason and honest discourse throughout the Western world."
Edu Montesanti: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth points to ten evidences at the World Trade Center that contradict the 9/11 official story. Architect Richard Gage, please explain one by one:
Richard Gage: 1. Rapid onset of destruction.
The Twin Towers collapsed suddenly, without an initial impact or series of jolts. Jolts would be expected in a purely gravitationally-induced collapse following some initial failure. Rather, they each collapse - in the first four seconds, at least - in the exact manner of a classic demolition, where explosives (visible on the videos and heard by witnesses) remove the resistance from the columns simultaneously and synchronistically, timed floor by floor, thus allowing the building to fall rapidly, without resistance.
2. Constant acceleration at or near free fall, through what should have been the path of greatest resistance.
Each of the two 110-story skyscrapers fell almost as fast as a bowling ball dropped from the top of a building. Physicists have clocked their fall at two-thirds of free-fall acceleration.
They accelerated - faster and faster each second - even though they would have had to crush 70,000 or 80,000 tons of structural steel and concrete below the point of jet plane impacts while doing so.
A building cannot fall at or near free-fall acceleration while simultaneously doing all that work. Some other destructive force must be doing the work.
3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions, including from 118 FDNY [New York City Fire Department] personnel.
Hundreds of first responders are on record as seeing, hearing, and experiencing explosions immediately prior to the collapses. Of those, 156 are witnesses who have given "oral histories" recorded by the FDNY fire commissioner.
These recordings were hidden from the public by the City of New York until the City lost a lawsuit in court and had to reveal the explosive evidence in August 2005. Many witnesses described explosions with these words: "like a belt"... "all these explosions"... "all around the building," etc.
Yet explosions are not part of the official narrative, or the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members at distances of 600 feet, or more and at speeds of more than 60 mph.
Thousands of steel framing column sections weighing more than four tons each were ejected laterally out of each of the towers. They flew freely at speeds of more than 60 mph, trailed by thick white smoke clouds, and landed more than 600 feet in every direction. This is readily visibly on most of the videos.
It is not possible in a gravitational collapse. Gravity works downward, not outward.
5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding, pyroclastic-like dust clouds.
Each tower had 90,000 tons of concrete in its 110 floors. Yet none of these floors, each of which was one acre in size, are found in a pile at the bottom following the collapse - as would be expected in a gravitational collapse. Where did they go? The videos show massive clouds - the result of the complete pulverization of the concrete - in mid-air.
This is not the result of the building developing its gravitational energy and then crashing on the ground. What can pulverize 90,000 tons of concrete in mid-air?
6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the "crush zone."
The videos all show isolated explosive ejections - called "squibs" in the controlled demolition industry.
They are obviously the result of explosions, since they are filled with building solids, are ejected at explosive speeds exceeding 160 feet per second, and occur up to 60 stories below the "crushing zone.
7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors, each an acre in size, missing from the Twin Towers' debris pile.
The National Fire Protection Association's Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigation, NFPA 921, alerts investigators to look for High Order Damage resulting in the "shattering of the structure" for evidence of the use of the explosives.
The towers' structural system was completely shattered from top to bottom, broken up, and ready for loading and shipment - the goal of a controlled demolition.
8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles.
Jet fuel and the resulting office fires generally only produce temperatures up to about 1,000°F. While NIST claims that temperatures reached 1,800°F, it provides no supporting evidence of that claim.
Yet steel had melted! But steel doesn't melt until it reaches temperatures of about 2,800°F. This flowing molten metal was observed by numerous first responders and structural engineers.
Also, videos show molten iron/steel flowing out of the South Tower just prior to its collapse. And billions of previously molten iron microspheres were found and documented by the US Geological Survey (USGS) during its toxicological studies.
These microspheres comprised up to 6% of all of the ubiquitous World Trade Center dust in the destructive aftermath. So what melted the iron/steel?
9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams.
If fire and jet fuel can't produce temperatures capable of melting steel and iron, then what can? What can be responsible for the thick white smoke clouds trailing the steel sections ejected laterally out of the towers?
The USGS [United States Geological Survey] inadvertently discovered the residue of thermite, an incendiary used by the military to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.
This material, made of aluminum and iron oxide powders, produces aluminum oxide gas (white smoke clouds) and molten iron, with temperatures exceeding 4,000°F.
The only rational conclusion is that this incendiary is responsible for the plethora of evidence left behind in the destruction of these towers.
10. Nano-thermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
A small team of scientists led by chemist Niels Harrit in Copenhagen analyzed and documented independently-collected WTC dust samples and found dual layered red-grey chips which looked like paint but which contained the ingredients of thermite at the nano scale - a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a hair.
The chips, when placed in a high-tech heater in the lab, produced the same molten iron microspheres as were found in all the WTC dust samples by the USGS and by RJ Lee, an environmental consulting firm.
This is "super thermite," otherwise known as "nano-thermite." It is developed only by federal government laboratories such as the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and yes, by the U.S. Commerce Department's NIST, in concert with the sophisticated laboratories of major defense contracting firms.
The results of the study by these scientists, documented in a 25-page peer-reviewed paper, prove that the towers were not brought down by plane impacts and jet fuel-initiated fires but by a very sophisticated controlled demolition operation.
So does Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth reject the official story, which affirms that 19 suicidal Muslim hijackers perpetrated the 9/11 attacks?
While the evidence that we cite raises many unsettling questions, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth focuses only on the science surrounding the destruction of the three World Trade Center towers that fell in New York on September 11, 2001.
Our mission is to educate the public about the issue and to attain - through our elected representatives - a new investigation into why these three buildings failed. Once we have an official acknowledgment that explosives and incendiaries were used to facilitate the buildings' destruction, it will be up to others to investigate how these devices were placed in those highly secure buildings.
It does become obvious to most 9/11 researchers, and to anyone who examines the forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony, that operatives with access to the inside of the WTC towers must have been responsible for their destruction. But we don't know who they were.
What are the consequences of 9/11, to the United States and the world?
The attacks of September 11th had a devastating impact that continues to resonate around the world.
In the United States, we lost precious civil liberties. Our military invaded two countries, in which a million inhabitants were killed - all because of the destruction that took place that day. Other countries followed us into war, and countless more people have been killed as a result.
While the events of 9/11 were an attack on physical structures and the people inside them, its aftermath was an attack on reason and honest discourse throughout the Western world. Reasonable questions about the collapse of the three towers that were destroyed in New York have not been adequately answered by government officials - and observable facts have been blatantly ignored.
The integrity of the National Institute of Standards and Technology - the federal agency tasked with investigating the collapse the Twin Towers and Building 7 - was damaged beyond repair by the unscientific and fraudulent way in which it went about formulating the conclusions published in its official reports.
Why is it so important to clarify what really happened on 9/11, and what are the biggest challenges Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth faces in finding the truth?
Not only were innumerable lives lost that day, but the course of world history was altered. Thus, people of all nations, particularly the families of the victims, deserve to have their questions answered.
When taking into account the omissions and obfuscations of the original government investigations and all of the overwhelming evidence of explosive demolition that Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth cites, our call for a new investigation is not only a reasonable demand but is also crucial to addressing a controversy that continues to grow as more and more people become educated on the subject.
One of the biggest challenges standing in the way of a new investigation is that many members of the media and government officials resist looking at the evidence. Or, if they look at it, they refrain from acting upon it. While there are many reasons, both institutional and sociological, for why this resistance exists, the end result is that the public continues to be misled and unserved by the entities tasked with keeping us informed and protected.
The resistance can be overcome - and it has been, in various ways, on many occasions. But to achieve a new investigation of 9/11, it's going to take a greater willingness by the media to explore the issues fairly as well as a much stronger dedication to accountability by our elected representatives in the U.S. government.
We cannot move forward from the path that September 11th put us on until we deal with the difficult realities surrounding the event itself and face the truth about what really happened.
Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect of 28 years, a member of the American Institute of Architects, and the founder and CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), a 501(c)(3) educational charity.
Since AE911Truth was launched in 2006, more than 2,850 architects and engineers with verified academic degrees and in most cases professional licenses have signed its petition calling for a new investigation into the destruction of World Trade Center Towers 1, 2, and 7, citing overwhelming evidence that they were in fact destroyed by controlled demolition. The organization also represents more than 21,500 other petition signers in the US and abroad.
During his architectural career, Gage has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings. His most recent project before he became the full-time CEO of AE911Truth was managing the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space and parking structure - consisting of about 1,200 tons of steel framing.
Gage began his quest for the truth about the collapse of the WTC high-rises after hearing on the radio the startling conclusions of reluctant 9/11 researcher David Ray Griffin. Since founding Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Gage has delivered his live multimedia presentation 9/11: Blueprint for Truth more than 550 times in 44 foreign countries and 110 American cities to audiences ranging from four to 4,000. He has appeared in more than 600 radio and television spots.
Edu Montesanti is an independent analyst, researcher and journalist whose work has been published by Truth Out, Pravda, Global Research, Telesur, 9/11 Truth.org, Brazilian magazine Caros Amigos, and numerous other publications across the globe. www.edumontesanti.skyrock.com Contact at firstname.lastname@example.org
The points of view of Biden and Putin do not coincide in the understanding that the relations should be built on a mutually beneficial basis and coincidence of interests