47 votes

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Brings Truth to College Campuses

Focusing on youth as the hope for our future and for continuing the fight for the truth about 9/11, Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth(AE911) is bringing the documentary film "9/11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out" to college campuses across the nation.

The film was recently broadcast on Colorado PBS, earning high praise for both the film and the PBS station's courage in running it.

In a new 10 minute personal video message from Gage, he recalls 9/11 and remembering at first believing the official story. He urges America to restore critical thinking skills.

Contact form HERE to email Richard and have the film come to your campus.

Key points:

- Talks about Patriot Act, NDAA, other new police powers which are a direct result of 9/11

- Demonstrates, explains the idea of free-fall acceleration in simple terms

- Why is it important? Because if we educate ourselves it could prevent the next 9/11

VIDEO: Up Close and Personal, 10 Minutes with Richard Gage
http://youtu.be/K1_RiK2ouqA




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I call your bluff

For someone who admits not knowing the truth, you certainly have a strong opinion that truthers are wrong.

Most people who are not on either side of an issue are usually quiet until they've come to a conclusion.

that may be

most people seem to make up their minds without knowing the whole story. They then blather on mindlessly without ever reevaluating.

All I am doing is showing people that there is a broader context that should be appreciated by people searching for truth. People should be open to being wrong about a few things if new information surfaces.

I would think that open minded people would be interested in discussing such things. I am all for a new investigation. But, People should be cautious not to present as fact what has not been proven.

What is the bluff you are calling exactly?

"...If new information surfaces" What new information?

I must've missed your new information because all I see is you rehashing some of the same exact things you and another already beat to death on other threads not long ago...including things that you've already had explained with supporting information and that both of you repeatedly ignore.

You are going on again about the penthouse collapse of wtc7 trying to paint a picture of deceit on the part of Gage, when the penthouse collapse SUPPORTS demolition.

You are also trying to suggest deceit because Gage didn't show big enough fire, while you completely ignore the explosions (including the ones Jennings described that occurred before the twin towers even collapsed), and that fire shouldn't have even caused such a collapse at all.

You complain about people ~blathering on mindlessly~ without ever reevaluating, when it appears that is exactly what YOU are doing.

Did you even look at the video sharkhearted posted to you above of the first tower to collapse? ...because if you did, you'd see some very interesting things that should make one take pause.

I'll post it again here if you are sincere about reevaluating. Watch it in its entirety, because it shows the collapse from different angles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA

This is the comment where sharkhearted posted it to you.
http://www.dailypaul.com/268247/architects-and-engineers-for...

sharkhearted's picture

Spot on!

And I will repost that video again.

That person must either be blind or brainwashed...to not be able to see the obvious in this very, very damning video.

So obvious that the TOP controlled demolition expert in Europe, took one look at it and said with 100% certainty that controlled demolition was used. Again, it is the MOST plausible hypothesis...yet the government investigators never even bothered to test for it.

And then there is that pesky little issue about cameras filming the events, from multiple angles, Videographic evidence is one of the strongest types to use in court. This video ALONE along with a bunch of expert witnesses....would establish this as fact in a court of law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

sure

I have made the same points before but in all this time no-one has ever directly answered the positions I put forward. Is it at all relevant that gage presents only information that supports his claim and not any that casts doubt? I am not suggesting that he is being intentionally deceitful. Everyone whether consciously or unconsciously tries to build the strongest case they can.

No one here seems to think there is any problem with that. But there is a big problem as it is a huge hangup for people outside of narrow minded groups where everyone already believes what gage is saying. I used to be beside myself how someone could watch 911 videos and not be instantly convinced it was demolition. But now I get it.

I have watched the towers collapse hundreds of times. I have a lot of questions about it all. I cant seem to say enough that I support a new investigation.

Cant you see the situation. In the general public, No one is allowed to ask any questions because they get called nuts. On the daily paul or other truth forum you no one is also allowed to ask questions from the other side because you will be called names and ridiculed.

Someone who honestly supports a new investigation comes to this forum to ask questions about specific details of the truth movement and they get ripped appart. This is seriously such a close minded place.

I argue on behalf of 9/11 truth many places. I come here to take strong arguments that people have made and test them out/ get others perspectives. At least that was the goal. No one around here really seems capable of formal, polite, friendly debate. No one has the humility to ever admit they could be a little wrong about something or that perhaps the perspective is a little wider than they are currently aware.

What new information...are you serious. I have layed it out 50 times. No one seems to be able to focus on a subtlety. The whole WTC 7 collapse and not part of it. The whole side of the building on fire and not the other side with the tiny fires. These are big deals for people outside of the truth movement. It seems to me that if people cared about expanding 9/11 truth they would look at how to present these issues in a balanced way.

Z, you are on to something.

It is true that the Truth Movement, which is mainly the Controlled demo Crowd. is ready to pounce on anyone who has a different view. It is almost like those who can't talk about 9/11 at all, and think your a nut bringing up the subject. I used to be as sure as them. Especially I thought the clincher was a presentation by AE911truth called experts agree, which I forwarded to almost everyone I know. I hope we all would agree in a new investigation; but there is still much accusing of "dis-info agents" etc.
I have been jumped on by those who were where I was only months ago.
There is other information that has to do with other evidence, which I could list. Although , is is tiresome dealing with the closed minded on this forum. I don't dare refute the Know-it-alls that do not want to consider an alternate possibility. I have gotten reamed for it .
The official event is in itself a psyop. We have to be careful not to be so sure other things aren't . Which evidence is plausible , I fear that someone wants to keep us at each others throats and it will bog down the truth and grind it to a halt.

Mikoni

Thanks

Thanks for your insight. That is a good analysis. I think the daily paul community is such a great resource. It is frustrating to see it so close minded on this issue. I hope that we can get people to open up their minds a bit an look at a broader perspective on this issue. That will help drive the discussion in the right direction, toward truth whatever it may be, and hopefully avoid the "bogged down" scenario you mention.

sharkhearted's picture

So who the f-u-c-k are you to discredit a first responder.

Kevin McFadden...a US military VET and a first responder to that day...versus you.

Would like to see whose expert opinion actually survives in a court of law...after that one.

In a related subject in regards to the free-fall collapse (you government paid disinfo agent) I dunno...please physically explain (that NIST even admitted to) as to how WTC7 descended at the SPEED OF GRAVITY for its first 108 feet of "collapse"?

Wow. 108 feet. What happened to 108 vertical feet of this gigantic skyscraper..to allow it to descend with NO RESISTANCE...at the speed which a concrete cinder block drops off a building???

What happened to it? Ah...the silence is DEAFENING.

The burden of proof is upon you.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

a few points...

A. Honestly, chill out a little. If a simple discussion board leads you to swear at someone that doesn't do any good. I am just presenting a different viewpoint for the sake of discussion.

B. I also would like to see what opinion wins in a court of law. Thats why I have said many times that I support a new investigation. I am not saying there are no questions. I am showing people that the issue has not been proven, and therefor should not be presented as fact.

C. You should really read the NIST report on building 7 in its entirety. Ironically AE911 never talks about the actual unique structure of the building. It was built over a giant truss system on top of the con-edison substation. The nist report details how the truss system worked. Where the fire was and how they believe failure of column 79 failed at the truss intersection lead to collapse. They document frefall for 108 feet which is about the area held up by the truss system.

The typical controlled demolition position is that explosives would be necessary to remove 108 feet of the building, but this isnt necessarily true when you look into the details of the structure of the building. If people want to advance controlled demolition they at least have to look at the details of the building and be able to go toe-to-toe with the NIST model and explain in detail why it is inadequate and why explosives are necessary.

No one in the truth movement has yet done this.

sharkhearted's picture

3000 innocent people and first responders are DEAD

6000 of our troops have been killed because of that day.

Hundreds of thousands of family members of both are grieving to this day with more questions raised about the events of 9-11...than answered.

TWO-THIRDS of the 30,000 Ground Zero and clean up workers have developed complications because of their brave work after that fateful day.

In light of the above, and the sense of urgency to solve this horrific mass murder crime, NO, I will not "chill out."

As far as a new INVESTIGATION...that will never happen, as the government will not prosecute itself.

You may have missed it, but an informal and TRULY INDEPENDENT investigation, has been ongoing for many years now, and it includes many peer reviewed papers and numerous volunteer and grassroots efforts from many specialists in the relevant fields...

www.journalof911studies.com

It is only a matter of time before all of this information reaches critical mass.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

If i'm not mistaken

free fall is only possible when there is zero resistance. Structural failure collapse unless aided by something to remove all the resistance to movement would be slower and a-symmetric. Even in the NIST model failure progresses from a connection failure and is a-symmetrical. I did see the model; but I admit I did not read the entire report as such. The WTC7 did fall very symmetrical.

Mikoni

To be specific, the freefall

To be specific, the freefall that occurred, and was admitted to by NIST, was of the exterior shell of one corner of the building. Close observation of the video makes it clear that there was significant collapse of the interior of the structure before the exterior shell begins to fall.

see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=youtu.be&...

It is a false association to conclude that because the exterior surface came down at freefall that this is automatically the same as saying the entire building came down at freefall. They are not the same. If the interior of the structure has already collapsed it is not hard to see why there would be no resistance for the outer shell coming down.

As I have said many times. Lets have a new investigation and get all the info on the table. But I hope people can see that the issue is more complex than often portrayed. There are reasonable explanations for many of these things. Reasonable enough, at least to convince the majority of engineers. If people want to advance 9/11 truth they will have to confront these issues. It will do not good to simply insult people and call them disinfo agents. It may work in making me go away because I dont have unlimited time or patience. But it assuredly wont work with any sort of truly independent investigation that goes over this information.

sharkhearted's picture

Classic controlled demolition

Yeah the elevator mechanical rooms and other rooftop fixtures disappear first as the core is destroyed first, so to pull in the perimeter walls as it comes down on its own footprint..

That's EXACTLY the way it is supposed to happen.

And no, NIST would not admit such a thing at first but only finally...finally...in their final report after being publicly challenged by people like physics teacher David Chandler, that indeed, the top 108 feet of the building descended at the speed of gravity.

Which meant, that below it somewhere...there were 108 feet of the entire structure of the building that offered ZERO resistance.

Also, NIST really should be criminally charged with fraud and obstruction of justice...(for many reasons) but also for simply faking their "model" of the collapse of WTC7 (which is based upon a progressive, asymmetrical collapse scenario)...yet where ALL video graphic evidence of the collapse (cameras don't lie)...shows an almost perfect SYMMETRICAL "collapse". (Translate: "Demolition")

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Doesn't it seem unusual

that supposed fires, or at least smoke, seem to be at nearly all floors at once? I have seen this and other videos. This actually supports Judy Wood's observations of what she calls lathering up. What the hell is burning?
This went on for hours. It is the same color as the "smoke" on each of the towers prior to going down , and up. Does it show "massive fires" or massive smoke?

Mikoni

Gawd please do not start with Judy Wood

I would expect smoke to travel throughout a building's ventilation system and other non-airtight channels, unlike the flames and fire itself.

Let's get Woods out of the way right now. She contends that not enough debris was found inside the footprints to account for all the steel. But that is because the frame was blown outward, not down. If oyu look at this aerial photo you can see the frame cut into pieces like toothpicks for up to three tower-widths away. This is the picture which should be posted anytime someone mentions Judy Wood.

http://busharchives.org/911/wtc.html

Release the Sandy Hook video.

"Get Woods out of the way"? WTF

I would have said the same thing some months ago, with the exception of Know-it-all insults.
I cant believe how some of the 9/11 truth community is so egotistical
and defensive, and insulting, like someone who wants to be the one who voted for the winner of and election at all costs. Don't we all want a new investigation? Don't we all want the truth? I thought I was going to be dealing with individuals with open minds. I know now, I was wrong.
I suspected that I would get some instant bullshit from mentioning Judy wood. Sure enough.
I'm really tired so I wont get into this shit now. But there are more things that happened that day in Manhattan. than pulverizing buildings. If you have gone through all the AE9/11truth stuff, you still owe it to yourself to read Her book before mouthing off. I could say plenty of negatives about Stephen E. Jones too; but why bother.

Mikoni

ONE video supporting you

and we are "cherry picking?" How ab out we talk building 5? Burned and burned and BURNED and burned, never collapsed. In fact, no building has EVER collapsed before or since, the way those THREE buildings, one with no airplane strike, fell on 9-11.
Thanks for the bump, Z.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

no, how bout we talk about the point I raised.

Look, simply moving on to building 5 doesn't answer my question. Do you think it is at all relevant that AE only shows the views with limited fire? is that honest?

How bout another...

Richard Gage only shows this cropped version of WTC 7 collapsing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

He never shows the whole collapse which starts at least 10 seconds earlier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=youtu.be&...

The complete video shows significant internal structural damage to the building occurring long before the video he shows. The more complete video actually looks like the NIST model, which does not support his position so he does not show it. This is another example of cherry picking or bias and is unbecoming of a "truth" movement that is about full disclosure and transparency.

I am fully in favor of a new independent investigation. The point I am making here is that it does little good to "preach to the choir" on these issues when they are presented in an incomplete fashion.

They will / and do / get ripped apart once you get into discussion with people who do not agree with this position. If people want to have success broadening the reach of 9/11 Truth they will have to address these issues.

Bump

for billy the trollstein.

sharkhearted's picture

Richard Gage...and David Ray Griffin...among others...

...deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

"...deserve the Nobel Peace Prize."

That would be an insult in some circles.

all this talk about voting is akin to the heated discussions of the cave.

Gage has paid the price for truth, makes a fraction of what he

was making as a very successful architect, wife left him (amicably) because the heat was too much. Yet he plows ahead every day. It must be exhausting.

I would venture that if 9/11 Truth ends up restoring the Constitution and our republic, Gage will be in the ranks of the new founding fathers, of the Restored Republic, and his face should be nominated for Mt. Rushmore.

Release the Sandy Hook video.

I had the pleasure to meet a former co-worker

She joined my aquaponics meetup, then started vicious rumors that pretty well shut down the good thing we had going. She tried to convince me all of 9-11 truth was bunk because Gage's former co-workers all think he is a kook.
You ever met someone and wondered "Did THEY send you into my life?"
She is gone now. Gee, I miss her..... NOT.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

sharkhearted's picture

Agreed.

And blast away at Teddy Roosevelt's sorry visage and replace it with a true patriot....not a tyrant.

And while e we are at it...consider removing Abe Lincoln and replacing with David Ray Griffin.

Or maybe Naomi Wolf.

Or both.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

David Ray Griffin maybe

but Naomi Wolf? Not in the same league. In fact is she even a truther? Or a lib gatekeeper...

Release the Sandy Hook video.

sharkhearted's picture

Naomi Wolf is an exceptional patriot

Her book The End of America (about the rise of fascism in this country) is spot on.

I have never heard her comment...but, knowing her other literature and writings about drones and losses of civil liberties, I doubt she is without questions on the events of 9-11.

Regardless, I was just saying that some REAL patriots need to be on Mt. Rushmore...not constitution-destroyers like TR.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Okay. I sure wish she would come out on 9/11 truth

The time is fast approaching when we must all take a stand.

Release the Sandy Hook video.

sharkhearted's picture

You are 100% correct. We must all take a stand.

The brainwashing has to wear off first though. It took me ELEVEN years...but now I am here and not going ANYWHERE until justice is served on the real perpetrators, conspirators, and cover-up shills, regarding the events of 9-11.

Naomi seems sympathetic to EVENTUALLY becoming a full-fledged truther.

http://www.infowars.com/naomi-wolf-i-have-911-questions-like...

Also...you might like a new project I recently started (last week!). Very preliminary...but you get the idea. (See the link below).

As, I can tell from your many eloquent comments, you are obviously extremely well-versed and a prescient observer of the 9-11 events, and we need you onboard when we prosecute.

Please sign up. Its going to take all of us likeminded individuals...to make this thing happen:

www.911crimes.org

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Lincoln

Was a tyrant too. So yeah, both need to go.

skippy

Barry Jennings, Beverly Eckert

and all the others who died trying to speak the truth...
This bump is for you.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...