Richard Gage AIA, speaking about the 9/11Truth at Sacramento Chapter of the American Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics

Coming to Sacramento...
A dynamic multi-media presentation by

RICHARD GAGE, AIA
of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

9/11: Blueprint for Truth
The Architecture of Destruction

Re-examining the Destruction of the 3 World Trade Center High-Rises

"This will be... the first time the evidence of controlled demolition at the World
Trade Center will be presented to an audience of aerospace professionals."
- http://www.ae911truth.org/

This event is open to the public.

When: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Catered dinner at 6:30 PM, presentation at 7 PM

Where: Aerospace Museum of California
3200 Freedom Park Dr. [formerly "E" St., this location is 1&1/2 blocks
McClellan, CA 95652 west of Watt Ave., on the old airbase]

Map: http://www.aerospacemuseumofcalifornia.org/visit_the_museum.html

Tickets, paid at the door: Students $15, AIAA Members $20, Non-AIAA members $25
RSVP's are highly recommended: Michael.Remington@gmail.com
There will be door prizes.
For more information: 916-643-3192

Hosted by the Sacramento Chapter of the American Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics

Info courtesy Sacramento 9/11 Truth Activist Leader David Kimball
http://sac911truth.blogspot.com - http://911TruthDavis.blogspot.com - http://www.911LetsRollInvestigation.blogspot.com/

http://911truthburn.blogspot.

http://911truthburn.blogspot.com

This event will be live video streamed, on a windows media server, and live audio streamed at noliesradio.org

We'll keep you up to date on links.

John Parulis, AE911Truth media services

Sir Richard Gage...

Now THAT has a ring to it!

maybe ...

But, I don't think that it is a good idea to call him that. We have enough PR problems as it is.

It's not...

And he also shouldn't be selling Sofia Shafqat's "work" at his presentations.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Consistency

You always find something negative to say whenever someone supporting controlled demolition is featured.

This is nitpick the and babble technique used at JREF.
Ignore the message and attack the messenger.

If you want to be sneaky about it. Ignore the messenger and attack someone they quoted, it's all the same. Hijack the thread and fill it with negative remarks.

Who do you think you are fooling. Your fan club that votes you up and votes your detractors down?

That's funny...

Because just yesterday in this thread, I said something positive.

I didn't hijack anything... I found out yesterday that Richard Gage is selling Sofia Shafqat's DVD, and I'm pointing out why he shouldn't. Because I care about credibility, and I care about not allowing racists, bigots, people in the "conspiracy theory business," and COINTELPRO to hinder our efforts.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Name calling

and guilt by association are COINTELPRO techniques. Tarnish the messenger any way you can.

You bashed David Ray Griffin for mentioning Mr. Brollyn because the was supposedly anti-Semitic. Mr. Brollyn married a Jewish woman, it doesn't get an more un-anti-Semitic than that.

You did say something good on that other thread but tell me Jon, do you believe Richard when he says "There is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that all three buildings were controlled demolitions" ?

Will he answer or slither? Stay tuned.

Show "I didn't "bash" Dr. Griffin..." by Jon Gold

Jon, Jon, Jon

I am not qualified to understand what Richard lays out in his 2 hour presentation is a classic denial statement. The evidence is clearly stated, extensive, and understandable by any reasonably intelligent person. If after looking at all the evidence you still don't get it, you are one of the 15% in denial.

You just called David Ray Griffin a liar and a bullshitter.
I cannot say what I would like to at this point.

BTW: In the CNN anti Truth Movement hit piece you posted, Brollyn said "I believe there are Israeli elements, that are connected to the Mossad, that are involved in this attack."
There is nothing anti-Semitic in that statement. You are the complete idiot who doesn't understand what you hear.

Show "And..." by Jon Gold

Heat

Jon,

sorry, but the towers with their massive steel heat sinks would not have exhausted their steel's thermal conductivity properties so quickly (WTC 2 came down in a ludicrous 56 minutes!). It would have taken days of burning (and more intense burning than observed at that) to have caused such a calamitous structural failure.

As for Christopher Bollyn (as with many of us), it's forgotten that it was the Ottoman Empire that declared war on the Allies in WW 1, hence when the Allies won, Palestine became a protectorate of the British. Historical Palestine includes BOTH Israel today and Jordan. Many forget that Jordan is also Palestine. All of this area called Palestine (Israel and Jordan) was supposed to go to the Jews, but the British decided that the area east of the Jordan River would be Arab (giving the land to Hashemite Emir Abdullah, elder son of Britain's wartime Arab ally Sharif Hussein of Mecca. That is, the British gave the land east of the Jordan to Saudis, not Palestinian Arabs!), and the area west of the Jordan Jewish. Then the UN comes into the picture and decides to further cut out a portion of the land promised to the Jews and give it to the newly named Palestinians. In other words, instead of giving Jordan (or parts of Jordan) to the Palestinians, the UN takes more territory from the Jews, that territory being the West Bank.

Here's a map of the British Mandate of Palestine (1917-1922). Note that it includes Jordan:

http://middleeastfacts.com/images/flags/1917-1922palestine.gif

For those of us who know the history of Palestine, we know that Palestine includes the territory of Jordan. As usual, the media never reminds us of this fact. I wonder why? Petro dollars, maybe?

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC

WTF ?

Jon.
I think it`s gr8 that you freely admit you don`t understand concepts such as `gravity`and 'resistance.'
More power to you. Good luck with your future schoolin' thing. Perhaps start with a 7th grade physics book.
Or - not to get too Newtonian - but here's a little test. Try dropping an apple on 90 stories of undamaged steel structure. See if it's 'held up' a bit.
Then let us know what happened. Like, the result.
That type of thing.
I've read this site fairly regularly for a couple of years now.
I didn't know you were like this...
Needless to say you've lost a lot of my respect.

Show "Sorry to hear that..." by Jon Gold

Gravity.

Well you obviously don't understand 'Gravity'.
Let's call it even.

Chris

Reading your posts, it sounds like you're saying that the truth movement should be exempt from criticism. Am I correct?

If not, then perhaps be more accepting of people who tell the truth regardless of who it offends.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Show "Truth..." by Jon Gold

You are not correct

There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism but Jon's criticisms are not at all constructive. Like the JREFers, he consistently attacks the messenger and disregards the message.

I have been to many presentations and I have never seen any videos other than Blueprint for Truth being sold. I think Jon may be lying about Richard selling Sofia Shafqat's DVD just so he can bash something.

Jon has stated that he is opposed to putting CD front and center. He does not believe Richard has made the case. He has a habit of attacking controlled demolition in a round about way but his intent becomes more obvious with each occurrence.

He just called DRG a liar and a bullshitter. Do you approve of that kind of criticism?

Show "Would you prefer..." by Jon Gold

Certainty

I would prefer you don't use the word lie unless you're sure.

Are you sure that 'DRG' is lying to you about how much he knows about what Bollyn thinks?

Forgive me if I give more weight, and credence, to Richard Gage's presentation; the subject of this post.

Show "As I said..." by Jon Gold

Bullshit

You haven't got a frikin clue what he knows.

Show "Here's an old write-up..." by Jon Gold

Of something or other..

That long page spends less words on Griffin's sources than it does 'debunking' controlled demolition.

The only relevant information I can find is that an article he had written (that included Bollyn as a source) was printed in Tikkun, a Jewish magazine.

But then, I am one of the complete idiots who doesn't know who Bollyn is.

Show "Here's a nice little write-up..." by Jon Gold

Astronautics and Aeronautics

Sounds good eh? Imagine!

Your claims that the movement and 911Blogger ain't what they used to be, ain't what they used to be :)

Show "As I said..." by Jon Gold

One of the best 9-11 Truth documentaries

When Loose Change 2nd Edition was getting so many organized efforts against it to debunk it, "911 MYSTERIES" hit the scene. For some reason all the debunkers have had a difficult time discrediting 911 MYSTERIES (Maybe that's why Rick Siegel is currently attempting to drag Sofia through the courts with a frivolous lawsuit based on fabricated claims).

I personally have used 9-11 MYSTERIES to wake up more people than any other documentary, website etc. I ask people if they can spare 15 minutes for those that died on 9-11, then watch the first 15 min of 911 MYSTERIES. I know if they watch the first 15 min then they will watch the whole documentary. The movie is extremely compelling and very informative. Sofia's voice over the imagery invites a viewer to digest the information (Daniel Sunjata's voice over the latest LOOSE CHANGE documentary is the best since 911 MYSTERIES).

Richard Gage AIA has used many parts of 911 MYSTERIES in his presentations since the inception of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth because the film is brilliantly composed with tons of valuable and compelling information. He is completely justified to sell her movie at his presentations.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "This..." by Jon Gold

LOL

LOL

911 MYSTERIES is one of the best documentaries. I've used it to wake up so many people.

Peace,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "No t-shirt..." by Jon Gold

Post

Deleted

Does Richard approve of this coronation?

In knowing Richard a little bit, and seeing his work grow over the years, I would be very surprised if he would be comfortable with being called "Sir Richard Gage"...even IF some Brits so annointed him.

I concur FULLY with President Ford here...we have many image problems to deal with and we do not need such emotional drivel to be front page anywhere.

I have no position to feel embarrassed for Richard Gage, but I do, and I'm troubled for any public back-draft possible from such an inappropriate "crowning".

9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

PS: Sofia's 9/11 Mysteries is one of the seminal DVDs and pieces of work ever put together by the 9/11TM.

No it isn't...

She included Eric Hufschmid in it. An obvious racist. When Betsy Metz and I were going to show her movie at the Anthony Wayne Movie Theater, along with 9/11: Press For Truth, Sofia did not want her movie shown with 9/11: Press For Truth because according to her, it was "misleading." Really? Telling the story of the 9/11 Cover-up, and the ridiculousness of the 9/11 Commission from the perspective of the 9/11 families is "misleading?" I think not. We should not support the whole "WE KNOW" Zionists were responsible for 9/11, and all of the world's problems like Sofia and others do.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

I co-Finnished one version of the film

At the time I wasn't aware of the problems. But the film has been shown on some TV channels here in Finland and has also been watched by many on the internet. I don't think people here are so interested in the potential collateral damage stuff.

Interestingly, Hufschid's "Painful Deceptions" was the first 9/11 book I read.

Hufschmid...

Should not be promoted by anyone, and look who is still selling his crap... among MANY other "questionable" items... I am sick to death of the racists, bigots, people in the "conspiracy theory business," and COINTELPRO that participate in this movement. Sick of it.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Hey!

There's a special autographed version!

You know, one thing I admire about Richard Gage is that he does a pretty good job of not associating with opportunistic nut jobs, racists, and mis/dis-info pushers. If a 9/11 researcher is going to focus on the physical evidence, this is how you do it.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Japan, too.

Part of 9/11 Mysteries has been shown on prime-time national TV in Japan, too:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4633271838183936896&hl=en#

Show "That's..." by Jon Gold

hmm

I thought it was quite interesting when it was released. Then I heard some interesting things she said and being one of those pesky 9/11 researchers that disavow certain ideologies seeping into the movement, I stopped promoting it.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Good man.

No room for racists and bigots in this movement.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Specifics please

"disavow certain ideologies seeping into the movement"

Specifics please.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "I'll take" by zombie bill hicks

Once and for all (I hope)

Zionism and Judaism are hardly synonyms --- though believe it or not I was brainwashed into believing they were for many years.

Zionism, in practice as it stands today, is an expansionist political ideology which uses brute military force. In this regard it actually emulates and in some ways transcends Nazism. The Iranian president, for example, was not saying anything racist when he said that Israel is a Zionist cancer; just as tumors grow larger and larger, so do Israel's expansion of settlements at the expense of those who previously lived there. Even Obama pleaded with Israel to stop expanding.

None of us "blame everything" on Zionists either, but just as the US govt and military is responsible for many major ills in that part of the word (and others), so to is Israel's.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

Im well aware

of the difference between zionism and Judaism.

I would venture an educated guess that many who consistently focus on zionism/zionists are hiding something about how they really feel. Would you hand out copies of "The Protocols of Zionism" on the street? Would you go on David Dukes "radio" show? Would you use terms like "Madison Avenue Jews"?

People do those things. Someone people like that even post here. My problem is that this is tolerated. It's not tolerated in the anti-war movement, and it shouldn't be tolerated in the 9/11 truth movement either.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Chris

Funny thing, you mentioned some Jon Gold groupies going around downvoting controlled demolition posts? Now why in the world would they vote down my posts? Heck, that don't even make no sense, homie!

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Now why in the world would they vote down my posts?

Because you're a jerk.

Just kidding, but that was too good a straight line to pass up. ;-)

He's certainly getting around

What's his secret?

Energy, Drive. Committment and Moral Outrage...

...not to mention Sustaining Donors, of which I'm pleased to be one.

Yeah, Steven Jones and Richard Gage are my top two 911 Truth heroes.

At this upcoming Sacramento presentation, in which Aerospace Engineers will be in attendance, it would be useful for local activists to conduct quick interviews of people in the audience, getting their immediate impressions on film after they've seen Gage demolish of the official story.

"Sir" Richard Gage

That's ... ridiculous on so many levels.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Almost as ridiculous as....

supporting trash like the CIT "fly over" theory. Richard needs to wake up and smell the disinfo.

And he needs to do it...

NOW.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Well

The Kennedys, Physical Evidence, and 9/11

"It is the past experience issue that is so diligently ignored by those newly awakened voices of opposition who expend needless energy debating whether explosives were placed in the towers, whether the planes were remote controlled, whether an airliner really hit the Pentagon, or whether maybe Congress will actually do something about any of it. These debates are worse than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. They are expediting the demise of people who could otherwise be constructing life rafts. The proof already exists that the government lied."

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Something...

Ruppert got right imo.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

No

Ruppert and Orkin got it wrong. It's willful ignorance. This tactic is called "appeal to consequences" and it is fallacious.

What the Kennedy video does, is provide absolute empirical scientific certainty that his death was an organized coup d'etat. How? Because (A) Kennedy was killed in a cross-fire and (B) The government covered it up. It stands as the most powerful proof ever established in the Kennedy case. Anybody opposing it looks like a complete freaking liar and an idiot. That is what physical evidence does. It is called forensics, and Ruppert knows damn well how important it is.

No matter how good you look in a suit, or how important you think you are, you will not keep me away from the truth. I will not follow the red herrings until I have my answers.

Explosive demolition research is worthwhile, since it is directly related to the biggest catastrophy of 9/11.

WTC 7 = Kennedy's head.

Materials forming iron-rich microspheres do NOT belong in WTC dust. In fact, the microspheres themselves do not even belong there.

I will not forget about it. I will not move on. I will not exclusively talk about internal contradictions in some bullshit limited hangout memoir instead. Because the darkest secrets are not told to you by your parental government. You excise them surgically.

And most important of all, I will not pretend not to understand the subject matter. I don't believe you don't understand it. I believe you don't believe it. For heavens sake just say so and stop pretending. Stop attacking Richard Gage sideways.

Did you know, Jon, that the Swiss government has explosives all over the country in bridges and roads, due to a "cold war contingency plan"? A scandal erupted when families found out they were living on top of them. At any time before this discovery, such explosives could be detonated and blamed on anyone. It is still unknown what other public structures are pre-seeded with bombs.

Do you remember, Jon, what Alexander Litvinenko said?. It was two years earlier, and it was blamed on Chechnya. It's a bloody game!! Somehow though, we find it all too believable when the Russians do it but not when we do it. Well, I'd say the USA outdid the former USSR again. Bigtime.

..

When did it become a requirement of the 9/11 truth movement to believe in CD? I think its pretty clear how Jon feels about it; he doesn't seem to buy it. And thats where our opinions differ.

I do believe in CD. I think its a worthwhile venture to research it. I think the evidence is fairly damning. But the video of JFKs head snapping back and to the left changed nothing. Is that right? People have focused and promoted the Zapruder film for years and I'd like to know what that has accomplished.

Ruppert has written,

"In my opinion watching one film of the WTC 7 collapse says as much as JFK's front-to-back movement. Please see http://www.wtc7.net/videos.shtml. It is inconceivable that this building was brought down by planes that hit buildings approximately a hundred yards away.

But are there common citizens who believe it?"

"What happened when the LAPD - the primary investigative agency in the assassination -- couldn't make the number of bullet holes and wounds match Sirhan's gun? They simply destroyed the evidence by removing and incinerating all the wood framing and tiles. (Special thanks to Christian, Turner and Probe Magazine for decades of diligent - if fruitless - work, as measured in terms of changing the political system.)

9/11 physical evidence advocates will scream, "Hey, that's what they did with the debris from the World Trade Center! They took away all the evidence and destroyed it."

That's right. That's exactly what they did."

"So, with all of this brilliant and unassailable physical evidence; evidence that any person on the street can look at and say, "That's just amazing. The official version can't be true," which of these conspiracies has been exposed, and how has the machinery of the US government changed, as a result of all the work done?"

"I sponsored an Indiana conference for some of those families. Notes were compared, strategies reviewed. New approaches were made to Congress. In the end, more than fifty members of the House and Senate signed a resolution tied to the appropriations bill calling for the Pentagon to reopen the cases. What happened? During summer recess, the DoD did reopen the cases and, in a matter of weeks, closed them all again with the exact same findings. When a new Congress arrived on Capitol Hill to read the "new" investigations, the deaths were "old business". All told, some of the families had spent as many as ten years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to achieve zero results. I still weep when I think of the hope I brought to some of those families that the undeniable physical evidence would secure them justice.

I could cite a half dozen more cases where the physical evidence was overwhelming---and achieved nothing. But if the point is not made now it will never be made."

All from here: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/112603_kennedy.html

I think its important to consider these points long and hard in tandem with what I wrote above. It's a tricky situation and I would hope that members of this movement could talk about it in a rational way.

I also believe that credibility is an important issue. We shouldnt cite or promote people that will detract from our message when and if we get our day in the sun. I think that's Jon's main issue. He's promoted CD in the past, but were talking Steven Jones, not Eric Hufschmid if you get my drift.

Sorry for the long drawn out post, but I feel that this is important if the movement is to have any kind of future success.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Controlled Demolition is proven fact - not a matter of opinion

This is not a matter of belief. Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is proven fact and CD is the most compelling evidence we have that 9-11 was a black-op. This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition. Just as those who promoted 'directed energy weapons' were ostracized from 911blogger, as well should be those who refuse to acknowledge the absolute proof of Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero.

'Controlled Demolition Deniers' (sorry couldn't resist) need to spend their time at http://www.ae911truth.org until they absorb all the science necessary to learn the truth about the demolition of the 3 WTC towers.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "..." by Jon Gold

belief vs. fact

It's not a matter of belief Jon. It's a matter of fact. Not 'believing' in Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is like not 'believing' in gravity - ludicrous. This movement does not have room for those who do not recognize Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero as fact.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "Hello" by zombie bill hicks

Grandfathered in? Is this a cult?

"waaayy before belief in CD was a prerequisite"

It's not a matter of belief. CD at Ground Zero is a fact. Deal with it.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

P.S. It's time to draw a line in the sand.

Show "ok then" by zombie bill hicks

Are you serious?

I can't believe you would stoop to using family members, survivors and 9-11 first responders to support your claims against Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero zombie. That is really low.

Wow.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Disinformation

Plus, taking my words out of context is a tactic of a disinformation agent.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Out of context?

"This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition." That's what you said. And there are plenty of first responders, survivors and family members who are in this movement that do not subscribe to the CD argument. But that's not OK in your book, is it?

I notice you stop short of outright calling me a disinfo agent, which is clever in its own right, but I think at this point people can see forest for the trees regarding your attacks on the wretched unbelievers.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Out of context

"This is not a matter of belief. Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is proven fact and CD is the most compelling evidence we have that 9-11 was a black-op. This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition. Just as those who promoted 'directed energy weapons' were ostracized from 911blogger, as well should be those who refuse to acknowledge the absolute proof of Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero.

'Controlled Demolition Deniers' (sorry couldn't resist) need to spend their time at http://www.ae911truth.org until they absorb all the science necessary to learn the truth about the demolition of the 3 WTC towers."

This was the full quote, so if you quote me to anybody then please use all my words and do not take them out of context.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

first responders, survivors and family members

"there are plenty of first responders, survivors and family members who are in this movement that do not subscribe to the CD argument"

Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is not an argument. It's a fact.

I am out in the streets almost every week working to expose the truth, and I do it for those who died on 9-11, and for those who are dying because of 9-11. I care for them very much. If there are 9-11 first responders, survivors and family members who are unaware of the science that proves CD at Ground Zero, then Richard Gage AIA should do a presentation just for them. Anyone in the 9-11 Truth movement who is in communication with 9-11 first responders, survivors and family members should make an effort to get them up to speed about CD at Ground Zero. We have a duty to keep 9-11 first responders, survivors and family members educated about the facts regarding what happened that day.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "Some of them..." by Jon Gold

Do they...

Do they consider themselves part of the 9-11 Truth movement? Are they 9-11 Truth activists? If so, then what is their goal as activists? If they do not consider themselves 9-11 Truth activists, then I was not referring to them, so no harm done.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

They're dying.

That's all I need to know.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Why did you bring them into this debate?

What's going on Jon? Why did you bring the dying 9-11 First Responders into this debate? What's that all about?

Seriously,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Who?

Okay, you have my attention. Jon you said "Some of them have sat through Richard's presentation, and still don't believe it." Who, where, when? How do you know? How do you know them? Details please, so I know that you are being honest here.

I've seen RG several times and I can't imagine anyone not understanding CD as a fact.

Truth, Justice, Peace & Freedom

Katy
WeAreChangeLA

Show "You're just going to have to take me..." by Jon Gold

Okay

I get your point. Not that you are saying that I am any such person.

Then when, where and at what presentation? Did you talk with them? Did you know them beforehand? How do you know that they are in the 911 Truth Movement? What part of the presentation did not jive with them. Did they see the whole presentation?
You indicated that there are several, so please be specific about each.

Thanks.

Truth, Justice, Peace & Freedom

Katy
WeAreChangeLA

Show "I know a lot of 9/11 First Responders Katy..." by Jon Gold

I'm not asking who

and of course it is "possible," but you brought it up and I'm asking you to elaborate on your own argument. You indicated that there were several First Responders, who you know, who saw RG's presentation and still do not get CD. I believe that you sat through it and don't get it, but that was not your argument.

Again regarding the First Responders in your argument: When, where and at what presentation? Did you talk with them? Did you know them beforehand? How do you know that they are in the 911 Truth Movement? What part of the presentation did not jive with them. Did they see the whole presentation?

I'm not asking for names. I don't think that you would have made such a statement out of thin air. I'm giving you a doorway to further your position and so that you don't appear to be bluffing. Please please elaborate.

Oh, and since you said it, why did you raise your hand "proudly?" I'm not sure what the "pride" part is about in this instance.

Truth, Justice, Peace & Freedom

Katy
WeAreChangeLA

Show "Bluffing?" by Jon Gold

It was your argument Jon

Truth, Justice, Peace & Freedom

Katy
WeAreChangeLA

I sent the names...

To Erik Larsen, and someone from this site. I am not a liar.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

I don't want the names.

Your sending names to someone, even me, helps nothing. I told you what I want. No one is calling you a lier, just elaborate.

Truth, Justice, Peace & Freedom

Katy
WeAreChangeLA

Harvest

"he asked if anyone still had any doubts, and I raised my hand proudly."

Proudly?!? I'm at a loss for words. How about Richard Gage comes to one of your presentations, maybe about "Press for Truth" and, after asked at the end if anybody still has doubts...... Richard Gage "PROUDLY" raises his hand. How about Steven Jones comes to a first responder fundraiser and "PROUDLY" expresses his doubts whether or not the EPA is to blame.

Sonic booms? [Bazant]

Wireless controlled demolition was common, even in Manhattan on 9/11. See 9:20 in the video below.

Let's PROUDLY express "doubt" at a Richard Gage presentation BASED ON ABSOLUTELY NO SOUND SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT. It's a real DISPLAY OF INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY.

"I really think my son Bobby died from an explosion".

The 12 guys who laced the buiding. Is it a hoax or a joke? If it was true at all, "somebody would have talked" right? Too bad it's not in Perle or Clarke's memoirs. Damn, then it's not on history commons either. It must not have happened then.

Why...it's you and Zombie Bill Hicks hittin' it off about WTC 7, Jon!
Leaked NIST Docs: “Unusual” Event Before Collapse Of WTC 7

Oops...why if it isn't a first responder talking about WTC 7:

Quote: "THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT BUILDING SEVEN WAS A PLANNED DEMOLITION." ...........End quote.

Of course, I have more than pride to support my "doubts". I have actual ARGUMENTS. You are entitled to your opinion Jon. But...I don't know. Your whole demeanor towards this topic has the effluvium of contempt. It is not your doubts I am worried about. It's your agenda which you are barely able to hide behind carefully chosen euphemisms.

Well, anyways, if that is what you sow, that is what you harvest.

lol

You said it, not me.

Also, feel free to point out my "claims against controlled demolition", if you can. I know your reading comprehension isnt the sharpest sword in your armory, but do try.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Educate me

In your own words, what is your view on Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero? (Please do not use a long quote from someone else's book)

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Why?

Is this part of the new application process?

Anyway, I've already expressed my views on CD in this thread. Read carefully, I'm sure you can find it if you try.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

Show "He said..." by Jon Gold

"Did you know Bruno that I

"Did you know Bruno that I have spoken to several 9/11 First Responders who DO NOT believe in Controlled Demolition"

It's not a matter of belief. Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is a fact. Jon, I feel it's my duty to educate others about the facts of what happened that day, and that's why I am in the 9-11 Truth Movement. I would hope that you feel you have a duty to educate 9/11 First Responders about the facts of what happened that day, too.

Peace,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

I've done more...

For the 9/11 First Responders than most people on this planet, and that is NOT an exaggeration.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Our work is never done.

You are to be commended for everything you've done for others. Everybody is to be commended for everything they do for others.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

It matters...

what YOU believe.

The first responders can talk to Bob McIlvaine.

Truth is NOT determined by a competition of suffering.

Good...

Because I believe Controlled Demolition is not a prerequisite for being concerned about the official account of 9/11, and I believe that people shouldn't be attacked for having doubts about it.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

I agree

"Because I believe Controlled Demolition is not a prerequisite for being concerned about the official account of 9/11"

I agree. So now I am talking directly to you and zombie about you and zombie. We are not talking about prerequisites, but rather to veterans of the movement who have been around the block.

Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is a fact. Do you agree?

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Ah, doubt.

Thanks for repeatedly expressing your sincere "doubt" constantly, for example by appealing to the emotions associated with first responders.. and letting us know loud and clear how Richard Gage promotes the work of racists and bigots. I can't thank you enough. Will we be seeing more of these glorious contributions on other threads involving AE911Truth?

They must be feeling so lucky with you around to totally destroy their work with your "doubts" which we, the evil-doers so viciously "attack".

Show "See?" by Jon Gold

You have doubts about CD at Ground Zero?

Richard Gage AIA is not using the work of people who are racists or bigots, so stop insinuating that he is.

You say you have doubts that Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is a fact?

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

"I do believe in CD. I think its a worthwhile venture to researc

"I do believe in CD. I think its a worthwhile venture to research it."

So zombie, to clarify your position on Richard Gage AIA, you 'believe in" CD like a child "believes in" Santa Clause? Or you 'believe in" CD as a powerful tool for waking people up because you have looked at the evidence and now know for a fact that Building 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down in Controlled Demolition?

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Stubborn refusal to see the obvious.

Did you know Bruno that I have spoken to several 9/11 First Responders who DO NOT believe in Controlled Demolition, and BECAUSE they think that's what we're all about, have NOTHING to do with us?

Such people won't be convinced by anything else anyway. Many of those such mentalities probably were in the same crowd who, in July 2004, refused to see that "fat man" Michael Moore's "un-American propaganda movie" Fahrenheit 9/11 (which goes only as far as 'massive incomeptence' re 9/11 itself). After all, according to them, how unpatriotic to suggest the government screwed up, when here we are at war in Iraq fighting the terrorists!

You don't need to get your knickers in a twist over such first responders, just like there's no point fretting over ignorant, stupid, no-hope firefighters such as these. (And by using those words I'm being kind.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

Heheh

I think that thread is getting to you Adam!

For me, it was Dickey's 'Pee Wee Herman' avatar, alternating with the 'family guy'. It's like staring into the abyss.

Like you said, don't fret it.

NIST Baiting

The only way the towers could come down within 90 minutes is with explosives. Those first responders are simply ignorant.

Here we have a growing 9/11 Truth Movement (with a large spike of recent newcomers coming from accredited professions that are germane to the scientific study of 9/11) and NIST refuses to test for explosive residue in the ground zero dust it has stored away? So NIST wants the 9/11 Truth Movement to increase then? Is that why they won't test the dust? Now why would NIST want a growing number of Americans to believe that elements in their government killed 3,000 fellow citizens if it wasn't true? Why wouldn't NIST simply test the dust if they didn't know that it contained explosives?

Back during the Cold War the KGB had a department (Department A of the First Chief Directorate) that specialized in causing citizens of other nations to lose faith in their country by spreading malicious lies. Why is NIST following in the footsteps of the KGB?

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC

Show "Sad." by Jon Gold

Its

fairly obvious to everyone that you didn't address a single point I made.

________________________
In Their Own Words
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein

I could have said it better...

"This movement does not have room for those who do not 'believe' in Controlled Demolition."

Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero is the most compelling tool for the 9-11 Truth Movement, and Richard Gage AIA is doing amazing work educating other to the facts about Controlled Demolition at Ground Zero. Don't forget: those who pulled off 9-11 brought the Twin Towers down in Controlled Demolitions with thousands of live people inside the buildings, including 343 Firefighters and 29 police officers. Controlled Demolition should not be treated as if it is merely a theory worth further research.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

With all due respect

I see this as a defeatist attitude:
"We the people have not been successful in the past with physical evidence so we should try another approach."

Things have changed and the tide is turning. We have the internet to communicate and organize. We have Richard Gage who is gaining credibility and momentum. We have another "back and to the left" but this time we have a Truth Movement that is much larger, passionately dedicated and diverse. Don't forget, about 75% of Americans now know the Kennedy assassination was an inside job because of Newtons first law and that makes things better for us.

The physical evidence is by far the most convincing because you cant deny Newton without looking like an ass.

This presentation for NASA people is very significant, another step forward. The negativity is inappropriate and unsuccessful in it's attempt to shift focus away from the AE911Truth juggernaut. Richard is a special individual, uniquely qualified for the task at hand. I have seen him in action and I am awed by his mental strength, fearlessness, manners and ability to communicate.

Hear Ye, Hear Him

"Richard [Richard Gage AIA] is a special individual, uniquely qualified for the task at hand. I have seen him in action and I am awed by his mental strength, fearlessness, manners and ability to communicate."

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Show "I just wrote..." by Jon Gold

Ah, facebook.

For the record, everyone:

The very day in late July when I posted this blog entry here, which displays the endorsements of many movement intellectuals and researchers for CIT's work, Jon Gold removed me as a facebook friend. I noticed because I'm also Cindy Sheehan's friend on there. When I saw a comment by Jon on her wall, I asked myself "I wonder what Jon's posted today?" So lo and behold, I click on him and notice I'm not his friend anymore.

Now imagine that. One 9/11 activist de-friending another 9/11 activist over a simple difference of opinion over what really happened at the Pentagon.

I have non-truther friends (i.e. musician colleagues, classmates from grade school and high school etc.) who don't buy 9/11 truth, but none of them have de-friended me over it.

Very hypocritical for someone who often speaks of how the movement needs to be unified in common purpose.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

And what has

Michael Ruppert's research changed? Nothing more than anybody else's. I'm well aware of these statements you cited. Ad nauseam. Ruppert is a wise man, but also a bitter man. Richard Gage is not bitter (yet). Let's not spoil his momentum. AE911Truth is approaching the big 1000. It might do something, it might not. But spreading truth is an end in itself. We face off against those out to falsify history. Against those who base new lies on falsified history. We hang around like unpaid bills, pestering those who cover up mass murder with explosives.

The authorities decide. Therefore, Ruppert's point is moot. Physical evidence, witness testimony, it could be Dick Cheney caught blowing up WTC 7 himself with sticks of dynamite Wile E Coyote style. Nothing. Ever. Zilch. Nada. The lights are on but nobody's home.

And about that "there's no room for people who don't accept CD" remark elsewhere..I strongly disagree. There absolutely positively is room for people like Jon Gold and yourself. In fact, I very much appreciate Jon Gold's work. I'm sure many would agree Gold is at the nucleus of the 9/11 truth movement. As long as he leaves Richard Gage the hell alone with those guilt by association attacks. Especially if such are the only significant contributions made to these threads...repeatedly. DRG is not Richard Gage either. DRG has made several serious errors, some of which can be related all the way back to his choice of sources.

It's a snide strategy to attack explosive demolition research without any real arguments. It's bad for the movement, it doesn't help the movement, yada yada yada. I don't like it. Especially not the "I'm not qualified" excuse. Technically I'm not qualified to understand the legal arguments surrounding NYCCAN either. Technically I'm not qualified to say a plane hit the Pentagon. Technically I know nothing about air traffic control. Technically I'm not a specialist in air pollution. Technically........I'd never have an opinion.

Technically, nothing will ever bring justice to those complicit in 9/11 except for a miracle. So who is Michael Ruppert to dictate fruitful avenues of research, let alone denounce it with ad hominems such as those made against Jones and Harrit by him and Orkin? I'm sorry for Ruppert his political adventure with Perot didn't work out. Now he can stop researching 9/11, speak only about energy policy, make bitter comments about activism from a distance and wither away in regret all by himself for all care. Hands off from the people who DO research these issues.

Was nano-thermite debunked yet? Sorry, I'm not aware of it. Anybody who thinks he can, let him come out and say it. Can anybody explain WTC 7 in freefall for 2.25/2.5 seconds? I'm waiting. Years have gone by and all we have is NIST having a laugh at all of us with their "magic building theory". I can't believe some of us would actually have no problems reducing this matter to a footnote. In fact, continuously find new creative ways to marginalize or subtly attack this research and the people doing it. Gage is a hero and you better believe it.

This is not the "controlled demolition movement". But it isn't the "look-how-interesting-and-credible-I-am-because-nobody-attacks-me-movement" either. What happened to those buildings is in dispute. WTC dust is screaming the REAL fate of those buildings. Are we listening? In the case of WTC 7, it is damn near certain it was actually blown up, from both a technical and a common sense standpoint. I, for one, think this is fscking outrageous. I've studied and studied and I can honestly come to no other conclusion. There is physical evidence. There is witness testimony. There is video. Now are we going to address that or are we going to bicker endlessly about PR and strategy?

Are the people who were blown to shit entitled to more explanation than: "collapse" was inevitable? "Sorry, but the steel is gone"? "Those ejections of debris are puffs of air"? "Those explosive chips are paint"? "Those explosive sounds are sonic booms" [Bazant]? "The flowing molten metal is clearly aluminum from the plane"? "The seismic peaks are only from debris falling"? "Freefall or near freefall acceleration through the path of most resistance is a natural phenomenon"? "Cut columns with smoking white ends are from the fire"? "Those iron-rich microspheres are all from clean-up operations, even though Jones found them in a sample shortly after the demolition"?

What a disgrace to science and integrity. I really, really don't care what Ruppert or anybody else thinks about this matter. I read Jon Gold's Sibel Edmunds threads with interest and enthusiasm. ED research deserves the same.

Show "Guilt..." by Jon Gold

It seems to me

as if you are constantly attacking explosive demolition research by looking for negative things to amplify. All under the guise of "protecting the movement".

On explosive demilition research, you prefer to be silent as much as possible, except for the occasional extremely cautious entry on your fact list. When you speak, negative stuff comes out. I don't understand or appreciate this anymore.

Show "If David Ray Griffin..." by Jon Gold

This is not about you

it's about 9/11 truth...wasn't it? And yes, by now, I think we have arrived to the point where I think your doubts about explosive demolition should be attacked. You attack, then play the victim. I'm not buying it anymore.

Show "Pointing out mistakes..." by Jon Gold

Doubts?

Jon, what exactly are your doubts about explosive demolition at Ground Zero? Can you be specific?

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

The Spikes

When you have spikes moving diagonally UP a face of the south tower, then you KNOW it was controlled demolition! Even if NIST employed persons with IQs no higher than 100, that would clue NIST scientists to test for explosives!

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC

Damn

This is an extremely good point. I hope everybody realizes this. Damn Dean. Thanks. I think I remember the specific footage you are referring to. I think Xenomorph911WTC posted stabilized close-ups. I'll look it up to look at it again. How could I not have realized this before.. UP, not down.

ETA: (Not Xenomorph, although he has this footage too)


"Leader follows leader from bad to worse, as though by a malign law of nature. One ruler, evil or stupid or violent, breeds another more evil or stupid or violent."Liz McAlister

How is CIT disinfo?

How is CIT disinfo?

Specifics please.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Bruno,

Isn't it amazing how some of the best pieces of news have their threads get hijacked? Isn't it awesome that Richard Gage is going to be speaking at an event hosted by AIAA?

First this thread was hijacked with the whole "zionist" thing, now that that died down, they're attempting it a second time, this time going on the attack against CIT.

CIT are not disinfo and Craig directly responds to that charge in his latest interview. In case you missed it, check out Truth News Australia's interview with Craig Ranke along with my article.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

Excellent! EOM

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Craig intentionaly misquoted Richard in his OpEd article

Richard did NOT endorse flyover a Craig would have you believe. Richard's positive comment was about the north side witnesses.

Psychology

"I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but........"

"I don't support CIT's conclusions, but......."

I guess because of how maligned Craig and Aldo have ended up being, some others don't want to be dragged into the pseudo-controversy by being labeled a dreaded "CIT supporter"... so to stay above the fray they support CIT's research but stop short of formally supporting their conclusions.

But whatever... observers can draw their own conclusions about the implications of the north side witnesses.

PS I'm curious about this "intentional misquote." Link please?

Deliberate Disinformation

The article focuses on flyover and then intentionally misleads readers by using selected parts of Richard's statement, leaving out the part where he says "eyewitness accounts of the actual flight path" giving the impression Richard endorses flyover. He does NOT endorse flyover.

"The eyewitnesses in all of the most critical vantage points, on the other hand, independently, unanimously, and unequivocally report a drastically different flight path, proving that the plane absolutely could not have hit the light poles or the building. It is a non-controversial scientific fact that a strike from this trajectory would have caused a very different damage path.”

Architect Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth.org), a coalition of over 700 professional architects and engineers calling for a new independent investigation of the destruction of the three skyscrapers in New York on 9/11 (the third was World Trade Center 7), calls the film “long overdue, but worth waiting for” and says that it “deserves serious attention”.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/INDEPENDENT-INVESTIGATION-by-Craig-Rank...

Richard's statement:
"The exhaustive effort by Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis of Citizen Investigation Team to contact, record, document, and analyze numerous first-hand eyewitness accounts of the actual flight path of the airliner at the Pentagon on 9/11 has been long overdue, but worth waiting for. The evidence they have uncovered and compiled in their DVD "National Security Alert" deserves serious attention - particularly in light of what we now know about the explosive destruction of the three World Trade Center high-rises that day."

Craig and Aldo are happy

that Richard endorses their investigation, even if not their conclusion.

It is not a misquote to say that Richard calls the film "long overdue, but worth waiting for" and that it "deserves serious attention."

It is your opinion that they were selectively editing to paint a picture of Richard endorsing something he didn't.

Remember when I posted the initial endorsements thread? Richard was the first person quoted, and his statement was quoted in full.

I realize you have a personal dislike for them because of their "face to the name" thread, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree that they are deliberate disinformation artists.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

The edited quote

gives the reader the impression that Richard endorses flyover.

They were disingenuous and now you are blowin smoke.

Sorry Adam, no sale.

yep

that about sums it up

Richard Gage AIA is a grown man

Richard Gage AIA is a grown man. He can talk to directly to Craig about any discrepancies or misunderstandings. I trust that if there is an issue with the quote, then he would have taken care of it.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

I keep re-reading the quote...

Chris, I keep re-reading the quote and I can't see what you are talking about.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

By leaving out

"eyewitness accounts of the actual flight path" the reader is given the impression Richard endorses all CITs claims and not just that extensive research of the witness establishing the north path.

Not sure

I am not sure that excluding "eyewitness accounts of the actual flight path" changes the context enough to warrant accusations of disinformation. For the same reason, I don't see why Craig would have a problem putting those words back into the quote.

With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org

Ah,

Ah, what would a long thread at 911blogger be without some good old fashioned bickering about CIT? ;-)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

;-)

My bad. CIT is way off topic and the vote tells me my point is not well taken.

10-4

Richard would prefer

that you always put the accolades after his name as in:

Richard Gage AIA

Thanks Petr

Thanks Petr for taking "Sir" off the title. I think this helps.

Now people have to actually read the comments before deciding to have nothing to do with the 9/11 Truth Movement!!!

But, seriously, I appreciate you reconsidering the title without having to ask you to. It shows you are open to making the right choices, even if you overlook something or even make a mistake at first. This is a lesson that can be observed by many of the posters on this website who are too egotistical to consider they might have been duped by bad information, or that they are just plain wrong. And with this unabashed egotistic mindset (the one that thinks they alone have the power to "wake up" the "stupid people/sheeple" because they are so smart/clever/anointed/special/well-read/reasoned/enlightened), this movement could very well be doomed from the inside out ... just like this country ... and for the same reasons ... GET IT?

Consider this truth-seekers, the next time you "wake" someone up, consider that maybe that person can teach YOU something too. Maybe when you weren't looking, you fell asleep for just a little bit.

Just a thought ... none of us know everything all of the time.

Comments

People reading the comments will see passionate and sometimes heated discussion. They will see pluriformity and disagreement. Unlike JREF, were the robots parrot each other and always sing the same song in the same tune. Groupthink, peer pressure, name calling, handwaving, jingoism and blind respect for authority is JREF. How different is this place.

If only we could do away with the unscientific appeals to emotion in the discussion about explosives at Ground Zero....then we could really enlighten the readers instead of shut down and reboot their thought processes. If somebody doubts Gage, let them bring forth scientific objections. Play the ball, not the man. Somehow it always diverts to discussion involving activist strategies. Where is the passion for exact science? Can these people and their work get the respect they deserve?

I can't learn from appeals to emotion. These are for propaganda. Propaganda has its uses. However, I've learned so much from Steven Jones, because he speaks and instructs like the excellent professor he is. Michael Ruppert taught me many things also. I study their work and cross verify it and find a lot of it confirmed. Both are imperfect men. However Jones is much smarter. I think our goal should be to write comments with a desire to learn. Maybe we're having a collective burn out.

Being forced to explain why I'm not in the either CIT/anti-CIT camp is starting to bore me. Having to confront Jon Gold about explosive demolition research saddens me. Having to see 911blogger and the truth movement bashed after all the good things achieved annoys me.

I think I want to read a new paper at the Journal of Nine-Eleven Studies, so I can inform myself and at the same time educate those around me. And then to feel some degree of satisfaction when AE911Truth rubs new facts under the nose of the people of good will, deniers or even traitors. These are bright, sincere, excellent people, and they're doing it from the bottom of their hearts to the best of their abilities.

I've had, and am still having, a good education. I know NIST is lying. I know WTC 7 was "brought down". I know nano-thermite was somehow involved in the demise of these towers. I know this because I don't take the word of experts for it. I did and do my own research. I find some things are incorrect, but to my horror, the central explosive demolition hypothesis cannot be debunked without violating scientific principles. Can somebody rise to the challenge and shake the foundations of my belief with sound and scientific arguments? Can somebody answer my question?

Remember, Bazant won't touch WTC 7 with a ten foot pole, according to dr. Greening. I don't blame firefighters for believing WTC 7 could do this after seeing it happen two times before on the same day. After being told in advance the building was either going to "come down on its own or would be taken down". What a curious, curious thing to tell a firefighter. Now how in the hell would they "take down" the building if it wasn't "going to come down on its own"? Say by deciding to "pull it"?

Sir Richard

Well, I haven't taken that Sir from the title of my post. .. somebody did ... but I do not care.
To me, Richard Gage is inspiring, exact scientist, totally devoted to the issue, very important person for the cause. To me, he is a Sir.

I know what you are saying. The movement might weaken, even if I do not believe so, but the issue is here to stay, until recognized, solved, and properly disposed of.
I am surprised in this debate here that people would "talk to others", instead of "to the issue", to the arguments.

To Jon, I am surprised you do not believe or have doubts about controlled demolition nature of the attacks. Why? Why cannot you or do not want to accept facts?
Let me speculate.
1. It is more interesting, better show, to say that you doubt CONDEM.
2. Personal views politics is behind it.
3. Caught in the immense dimension of the issue - "just cant believe it"

I guess my next question would be, do you believe, or can you accept, that 1 plus 1 equals 2?

Anybody denying condem nature of 9/11 attacks, after 2009 scientific evidence given, is positioning themselves towards the exit end of 9/11Truth issue.

http://NorCalTruth.org

I like the sound of.....

"Sir Graeme MacQueen".......better. Being a Canadian though, maybe the 'Order of Canada' is more....in order.

I can hardly follow a lot of the other comments, the ones that seem to jump on anyone whenever they mention Israeli involvement. Let's just get back on track & go wherever the truth leads!

I'm knida partial to

Supreme Mystic Ruler

but I doubt Richard would think so.

Richard will be speaking to NASA type people. They will get it and that opens up a whole new avenue. This presentation to the Sacramento Chapter of the American Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics adds to his credibility and the credibility of the Truth Movement.

Here here!

Here here!

Wow

all these comments and I was just speaking tongue-in-cheek.

Former NASA Engineer, Dwain Deets, will introduce RG AIA

Former NASA engineering executive, Dwain Deets, will Introduce Richard Gage AIA at the AIAA event.

He was an engineer with NASA Dryden Flight Research Center from more than 37 years.

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html#Deets

Dwain is quoted in David Ray Griffin's new book "The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7" Dwain is on the AE911truth board member and on the writing team.

He is speaking at University of San Diego on October 21st.
Press Release Title: NASA Engineer to Speak on Destruction of WTC7 Buildings
Encinitas resident leader among 900 architects and engineers

David Ray Griffin wrote today:

Dear Dwain,

I've been thinking it would be good if you were to emerge as one of the the major 9/11 truth speakers, sort of the engineering complement to Richard Gage.

I'm glad to see that it's starting to happen.

The San Diego group, as you probably already know, is wonderful.

David

http://911truthburn.blogspot.

http://911truthburn.blogspot.com

Wow. I'm blown away by the warfare on this thread. I came
back here wondering why all the commentary on the announcement, and have to admit that I'm dismayed at the intensity of the infighting, among many I respect. This is a frustrating time for us as a movement. We are eating ourselves here. This has to stop. We were just kicked in the teeth in NY over the NYCCAN decision. Shouldn't we be aligning our energies over helping that team out? I've heard a growing body of attack and counter attack in the truth movement and it's gotten wearisome and disturbing. I could go on with the array of personalities involved, but why add fuel to the fire?

Chill out. Meditate in any way that suits you and re-align with the deepest part of yourselves, and not only ask for but desire -direction.

Enough of the Farrakhan already

Nearly every post on blogger is being spammed by Douglas Hilton

Farrakhan as far as I'm concerned is a charismatic leader, his information is culled from many sources including far right racists, personally I don't need charismatic leaders and I'll do my own research, we are our own leaders, this kind of worship is what we, the human race, should be moving away from in our (r)evolution.

Ok Doug you've made your point (too many times IMO) it's getting boring.

Sure! Good messages.

Thanks. I do like the video, and message from Dennis's wife, apparently British, correct? :] .. like it very much. I do respect and agree with Dennis Kucinich views.

Louis Farrakhan, why can he say the truth about 9/11, but not Mr Mrs Clinton? Why not Gore? Why not others in Democratic or Republican parties ???? What happened?

Farrakhan should be on /official/ national TV from time to time, in a political process.

Americans would like to hear and judge his views. And I will say nothing new - American media are no more free, and impartial. They are owned by the same war, deception oil market corruption corporations, by $700 billion too big to fail failed globalized banks.

Americans need to take back the political process, bring back free elections, fair representation, reform healthcare crime fraud system, end tax and war spend policies, realign the wealth/income distribution towards a middle class and justice, and realign tax spending priorities.

For the sake of prosperity, unity, brotherhood for all.

http://911UnitedWeInvestigate.blogspot.com - http://newsrecord.wordpress.com