Russia Today covers Richard Gage's efforts in Washington D.C.

9/11 truth still in a cloud of smoke?
16 July, 2009

Eight years after the tragedy of 9/11, questions remain unanswered. A group of experts has convened in Washington to discuss what they think happened. Their theories are in stark contrast to the official version.

The US government said that the World Trade Center buildings collapsed as a result of fires ignited by jet fuel.

But according to members of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth these are lies. The organization is made up of experts and professionals who believe that the real story behind the destruction of the towers is still up in smoke.

Richard Gage the founder, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth told RT:

“No building has ever collapsed due to fire in a high rise building. The Twin Towers were brought down with explosive controlled demolition.”

“We have a free fall collapse in the case of building seven for one hundred feet of its fall, which can’t happen without the columns being forcibly removed as in a typical controlled demolition,” he added.

Volunteers came from all over the country to show videos, hand out brochures, and point out the inconsistencies between government agencies’ explanation of what happened on 9/11 and scientific evidence that seems to prove otherwise.

“We have evidence of high tech explosives found in all of the dust, we have evidence of [thermite] found in the molten iron samples. This can’t happen in normal office fires. They don’t have half the temperature required to melt steel, so where did the molten iron come from?” Gage asks.

Those at the convention seemed to be taking this new information very seriously: they, too, wanted more answers.

“I could certainly find it easy to believe that the truth was covered up,” a visitor said.

“If something other than airplane fuel made the World Trade Centers come down, we need to understand what that was and what caused it,” another echoed.

With this group calling for a fresh look at the attacks that shook America, one question still lingers: who put the explosives there?

“We don’t know who may have put the explosives there or why or how they did it, so we are asking for a real investigation and let the chips fall where they may,” Gage explained.

Gage is just one of more than 700 architects and engineers who say it was a controlled demolition that resulted in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers and now these experts are calling for a new investigation into the September 11th attacks in the hope of uncovering more of the truth underneath all the rubble.

Source ~

The Truth OF 9/11 is Clearing

The tireless members of are blowing away the official smokescreen! The true picture of 9/11 becomes clearer by the week, thanks to all who expose the official narrative as a pack of lies.

And a major part of the true picture is the list of truly relevant questions which demand answers. Revelation->Realization->Refocusing.

9/11 Truth boklet PDFs:


I suspect a correction is needed from Russia Today: I doubt Gage said "dynamite" was found.

Mech Engr P.E.

Good Catch.

He actually clearly says "Thermite" in the video above. They mistranslated it as dynamite. Damn it. Where is journalistic integrity in this world. I will try to contact Russia Today and have them fix that. Hopefully it was an honest mistake and not a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue. Peace. And nice catch.

Many hands make light work...

**Update: With Good News...**

Dear Orangutan

Thank you for your attention to RT.
We have corrected the mistake in the article: 9/11 truth still in a cloud of smoke?

Best regards,
RT team


Mistakes happen. When the translation-bots converted Harrit's paper from Danish into English, thermite became "termite" (many many times). RT needs to hear from us to correct the record.

In my opinion

it isn't that important what kind of explosives were used. That will all come out in the wash if we get a "Real" investigation. Obviously all three buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. By the way, everything else about the "Official Story" is a pack of lies. 9/11 was obviously an inside job. Anyone with half a brain can see that. The "Official Story" is all Orwellian double speak.

He definitely did NOT say that

Play the video. He said "thermite," not "dynamite."

Orangutan, can you correct your post, please?

Also, I don't see all the words in your post at the Russia Today link that you provided. Can you verify the link? Or did you transcribe the words yourself?


Russia Today got it wrong.

I will fix it in this post, but you have to click the "read more" link at the Russia Today site to see the full transcript.

Let the boys know.. The more the better:


Thanks for the post, and thanks for the link. I submitted my suggestion for correction, hopefully they will change it soon. Clarity on this issue is of the greatest importance.

The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry

This is awesome.

This is awesome.

BTW, that's a profile shot of me at 2:12.

Great close-up! One thing

Great close-up! One thing that might appeal to these experts in building engineering is the lack of official understanding about what happened. They should be studying what went wrong to make sure any buildings they build don't contain these "vulnerabilities." I've always been shocked that no one seemed interested in learning what went wrong for future construction. If they truly believe these buildings just fell down then they should be doing theses on this issue. Building codes should "improve."

911 Truth Ends 911 Wars


Just a reminder to the 9/11 Truth Movement community: The 'collapse' of the USSR in 1991 was a rouse. The communists are still in power over there (including the other fourteen republics that constituted the USSR).

This is why in 1992 (after the 'collapse' of the USSR in December 1991) NORAD and NATO were not disbanded. That is why the Russian electorate for some strange reason elected 'former' communists back into office as presidents, including a 'former' KGB officer, Vladimir Putin. That is also why the United States inexplicably wants to place a missile defense shield in Poland. When one understands what is really going on in Russia, the United States' odd movements in Poland becomes a little clearer to see,

For more on what is really going on in the 'former' USSR, see my article at titled, 'The World Trade Center Attacks in Perspective'. The article can be found under the caption Previous Articles at the website.

One can also read my novel, Best Laid Plans, at It is a Cold War espionage novel that, I think, deftly informs the reader of what is really going on in the 'former' USSR today.

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC


I was surprised to speak to a couple architects who still believed that the "jet fuel melted the steel" and that the floors "pancaked." Not even the govt's own agencies any longer claim such things.

And I have an 8th grade physics education while these folks have supposed expertise in physics. Irony of ironies.

"The greater the lie, the more people will believe it." - Adolf Hitler

Credulity and the collapsing towers

As architects, they should have known that the massive heat sinks of each tower would have precluded their collapses for days, not 56 minutes!

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

"they should have known that the massive heat sinks of each towe

"they should have known that the massive heat sinks of each tower"


If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Not necessarily

Architects are schooled in design, not engineering. In building design, engineers are given the architect's design and tasked with developing the construction documents to make the design a reality. In simplistic terms architects design the "looks" of a building and have very little, if anything, to do with its engineering. I don't imagine many architects know what a heat sink is in the context of what we're talking about here. This is not to disparage them at all: this sort of topic is just not part of their training, that's all. When people say architects "design" a structure they do not understand that this does not include engineering the structure: they are wholly different disciplines. A registered architect, for instance, cannot [generally] seal structural drawings for his own building design, only a structural PE can.
Mech Engr P.E.

More than design

Nonsense! Degreed architects take courses in structural analysis, steel structures, concrete structures, etc. Architects don't just sit down and design whatever structure they like. Architects design structures (based on the knowledge derived from their academic course work and experience) they believe will remain standing. Of course, the structural engineer has the last word on the soundness of the architect's design.

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

No, its not nonsense

There is not one such course that you mentioned in the entire Arch. curriculum of a major, 4-year, accredited state university in my home town, for example. I have worked as a mech. engr. on literally billions of dollars worth of industrial projects, all with architects, and have yet to see anything related to structural engineering come from their desks beyond a hand sketch here and there. All I am suggeting is that lay people assign more technical responsibility and knowledge (esp. structural engineering ) to architects than they actually possess. Not a criticism, just a view from the trenches (I'm managing 7 architects right now on a $900 million industrial project). Yes, some do take courses such as you mentioned if they are offered.
Mech Engr P.E.

My home town

The university I cite is the University of the District of Columbia.

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

Why Did We NOT See This on TV

If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Interesting and not very subtle

Who were those people who didn't want to shake Mr. Obama's hand?

Either Mr. Obama's protocol advisor did a really bad job or they wanted to seriously diss the U.S. president.

What is the source of the video?

Thanks for posting this.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Russian Leaders

If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Maybe they've seen "The

Maybe they've seen "The Obama Deception..." :D

I think Obama was introducing, not trying to shake hands

That's what comments at YouTube argue, and it makes sense viewing the video again. The man being introduced looks like Russian President Medvedev, but I could be wrong. Regardless, it looks like Obama is politely pointing to introduce a man to others, perhaps Obama's staff, who then shake the man's hand.

The significance of the RT coverage

I noted the irony of RT is covering AE911Truth and American MSM is not.

They covered it in a very straightforward manner and included as many of the main points as time allowed. The editing was excellent and supportive.
My most profound thanks to Dina and Russia Today.