Visibilty 9-11 Welcomes Richard Gage AIA - 1,000 Member Milestone

In this episode of Visibility 9-11, John Bursill welcomes Richard Gage, AIA, back to the program.

Richard Gage AIA

This interview was inspired by the recent news that Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth had reached the milestone of 1,000 qualified and licensed members. Gage who is an experienced San Francisco Architect, member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth describes some of the groups recent successes worldwide and talks about his recent tour of Australia, New Zealand and Japan. We hear about the upcoming Press Conference planned next month to announce the 1,000 A & E members to the world, which includes approximately 40 Structural Engineers. Richard also mentions some celebrations that are planned for the A & E members, please see the site for more details

Later in the show Bursill and Gage discuss the recent debate between him and explosives expert Ron Craig and what was learned by the encounter. They also touch on the issue of the CIT “flyover theory” and “what hit the Pentagon”. Gage makes it clear that he does not think that the “flyover theory” is proven and that he does not support CIT. Gage says he does not know what did or did not hit the Pentagon.

Towards the end of this interview Gage joins Bursill in a call for support of and Janice Matthews and they also call for direct financial support for the ongoing work that the Architects and Engineers Group continue to do, day in and day out until justice.

Direct download for this episode:

..until justice.

even if only in the form of what might be called historical justice, and justice to our own intellectual integrity. Then the 9/11 event can SERVE the cause of justice in history, as a great, transformative point of LEARNING. And that does justice to the victims, which, in the grand scheme of things, includes everyone, both those who flat out reject the Big Lie of 9/11 and those who have swallowed the Zelikow myth, hook, line and sinker, but which honours first and foremost the actual victims themselves (the innocents who were murdered..sacrificed without their consent), and their families, and all the many victims generated in turn, in the wake of 9/11, and in the very NAME of those victims (what an OUTRAGE!), and for the cause of "vengeance" (what a disgrace) and of "security" (along with Global hegemonic domination - what arrogance!), all of which has practically SUNK the USA as a powerful force, not just economically, but as a force of authentic Justice, and of Civility in the World.
It all turns on 9/11 truth in history - *unto justice*, in whatever form that may take (let justice be mine sayeth the Lord).

Justice, in other words, takes care of itself, provided we and everyone remain forever committed to the truth and reality at all cost, except at the cost of truth and reality itself, because justice arises from a disciplined truth (a scientific truth), and there is no discipline, and no accountibility, absent a committment and dedication to the truth and reality as it really and truly is! Truth brings justice. And you cannot unring a rung bell..(bonggggg)

Keep on ringing that bell Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and everyone else... until justice. It will come in one form or another, of that we can rest assured (and hopefully sleep at night again!), especially when high school kids, for ALL TIME and in all generations from age to age, can irrefutably and unequivocably PROVE that the official story about 9/11 is flat out FALSE, armed only with some youtube videos (or whatever medium is the latest craze) of 9/11 destruction, a stop watch, and a few basic equations, including Gallileo's law of free falling bodies and Sir Isaac Newton's Three Laws of Motion - while the twin towers of the World Trade Center remain forever conspicuously absent the New York City Skyline. Think about it. Makes the work of Richard and team all the more vital, seemingly to the very cause of history itself! Whoa! Pretty powerful stuff!

Richard, if you are reading this, and I assume you read 911blogger - please, for the love of God, make of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth an eternal legacy with multi-generational continuity, especially now that you are over 1000 members. Something this big and this important cannot be about you, or even one generation - it must go on and on and on, until justice, no matter HOW long that may take..!

Always begin with the end in mind.
On the 11th day, of every month.

Double Your Contribution

I gave $25

I put my 100 USD in...feels good! gets very good mileage for each dollar spent!

Thanks for putting up the chip in:)

Regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Almost all of Hollywood

knows 9.11 is as fishy as the Hudson, so why haven't Charlie Sheen or somebody else given AE911.. BIG BUCKS?

Good question why hasn't someone with big bucks helped?

Charlie Sheen has done great by speaking out and he did do a contest putting up 15k of his own money so he is aces in my opinion but I would like to see someone else who has not yet done something give to ae911truth.

Great support guys!!.. ..."If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?"

It is up to us as individuals to take action and responsibility (it is not up to someone else). Joe has an excellent quote which he often uses: If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Everyone of us can promote AE911Truth. Anyone can do something.

AE911Truth is a JUGGERNAUT

Press Release Email Here--- Fwd. Widely!

Did everyone get their press release email from AE911Truth today? I got mine and am anxious to forward it to tons of selected people... Architects, Engineers, professors, politicians, and media contacts. Anybody! It's loaded with links and embedded video clips. You can write a message on top before sending if you want. Urge them to watch the video clips.

*If you don't have one just go to and subscribe to the Blueprint e-Newsletter and they'll send one out. Or contact me through here and I'll send it to you.


Action Plan - Misprison of Treason - telecon invite

Richard Gage, AIA, and I helped to found a monthly teleconference, which generally happens on the last Wednesday of each month. All those representing a 9/11 truth group or accomplished truth leaders are invited to attend.

In tonight's agenda, I am proposing this following action plan, and of course welcome all feedback, ideas and support. I am hoping a final draft for this plan will be ready by the March 6th Conference: "Treason in America: 911, the Wars and Our Broken U.S. Constitution"

If we can get a draft agreed by our group, we would then have a chance of not only uniting the 9/11 truth movement, but puling in many other citizen activists to confront the 9/11 false flag cover-up. Please feel welcome to make improvements in this draft, or send me a new draft. We got to keep it simple, on one piece of paper, with instructions and universal acceptance for the evidence shown. This is not easy to do, otherwise it would have been accomplished already, but we are trying. If the signatories can include active support by our organizations, the unity of our movement could be contagious, rather than creating in-fighting, disagreeing on details. so keep it simple and strong. thanks for considering this. If you want to join the teleconference group and a truth leader or represent a truth group, email me at - flyby (at} mtdata (dot} com -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We, the undersigned, believe there is overwhelming evidence for treason and cover-up on the crimes that occurred on September 11, 2001, contradictory to 'official' government reports. Hard evidence show that explosives, not fires, caused the 3 World Trade Center (WTC) towers to collapse.

WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper located one block from the Twin Towers was not hit by any plane, but collapsed at 5:20 that evening, imploding in the manner of a professionally engineered demolition. Fire has never ­ prior to or after 9/11 ­ caused any steel frame building to collapse. The steel, which if fully examined could have revealed the effects of explosives, was quickly shipped overseas and melted down. This was an unprecedented violation of federal crime scene laws. Astonishingly, there is no mention of WTC Building 7's collapse in the 571-page 9/11 Commission Report.

The 9-11 commission interviewed William Rodriguez , WTC janitor, who stated, in secret testimony, that he and 14 other people were in a WTC 1 basement office when, without warning, "the group felt a tremendous explosion emanating from somewhere below them in one of the five WTC sub levels and felt the floors tremble and saw the walls crack just seconds before the group heard another distant explosion coming from high above."

More than 118 first responders reported hearing explosions before all 3 WTC collapses. Molten steel and pulverized concrete were found at Ground Zero “remember, hydrocarbon fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel or concrete.” N.F.P.A. 921- 19.2.4 Exotic Accelerants states that molten steel and concrete could indicate the use of exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite. Presence of this accelerant was confirmed by independent researchers, who analyzed WTC dust that was collected by four individuals in four different locations. The results of this study was published in Open Chemistry/Physics Journal, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe." (1)

John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission, disclosed in his book:
“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

Hundreds of contradictions exist that were omitted in the official version of what happened. We demand a criminal investigation to confirm what really happened, and why the cover-up has led the US into disastrous wars.

Besides signing this petition, please write a letter to your local newspaper explaining your reasons for taking such an action, and present it to a Judge or Governor as per US code 18 USC Sec. 2382 (2).

We, the undersigned believe it is the right and the duty of all citizens to take action to demand a real investigation on the officials enacting and supporting the continued cover-up of the 'explosive' crimes on what happened September 11, 2001


(1) Open Chemistry/Physics Journal

(2) 18 USC Sec. 2382. Misprision of treason
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both."


Jonathan: 2 brief suggestions for improvement:

1. "Fire has never ­ prior to or after 9/11 ­ caused any steel frame building to collapse." It would be good to add a word such as "completely." ("to collapse completely")
2. "More than 118 first responders reported hearing explosions before all 3 WTC collapses." This could be made more precise, and in this way we would be protected against various accusations. Here's a suggestion: "More than 125 first responders reported hearing explosions before, or during, the destruction of WTC 1 and 2, and additional witnesses heard explosions in conjunction with the destruction of WTC 7."

The figure of 125 is a convenient number and a very cautious estimate. The figure "118" refers to fire fighters alone. There are about 8-10 additional explosion witnesses (when we use the same collection criteria as in the FDNY collection) in the record of the Port Authority Police Department. I can give you details if you wish.

Graeme MacQueen

A fine point but

I never like the formulation "more than" any number. If we have 118 witness statements then that's 118 period. Of course that's plenty of witnesses to make the case.

ok but

We don't have 118. That's the point. We have more. So let's by all means get the precise number and use it. I get frustrated when people seem not to understand that fire fighters are not the only first responders. If we want to use the number 118, which is a number I came up with in the first place, then make it clear it's for fire fighters, not first responders.

thanks for input


both comments are helpful.. thank you much..

i would like your email address to continue helping us work on the draft, that we plan to have prepared by next teleconference, last wednesday in february.. and hopefully ready for conference in pennsylvania by march 6th..

and of course will be posting a draft before completed here at 911blogger to make as universally strong and acceptable as possible to engage a national campaign and expand the truth movement..

you can email me at - flyby (at} mtdata {dot) com -


Great letter

This letter is well written and convincing. In the paragraph dealing with William Rodriguez, I would make clear how we are privy to a conversation that was "secret". The testimony of WR, while provocative and damning, may be too esoteric for a succinct, high-impact approach. You might consider focusing the argument by stating that irrefutable video and oral testimony shows that violent explosions occurred in the WTC sub-basements, and then describing the most compelling evidence. It is a great approach to directly challenge current and future activists to speak out against state-sponsored false flag terrorism.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.


It should be emphasized that Rodriguez was interviewed behind closed doors - now who asked for that? The Commission already knew his testimony would sink their nonsensical explanations and deliberate hoodwinking of the public. There are more witnesses to the sub-basement explosions, and the Commission never went beyond Rodriguez.

1000 members is fantastic - Congratulations! I sent the information about the 1000 members to a famous physicist who in the past supported the fire/collapse theory, but after the nano-thermite paper no longer does.
Well done.

9/11 notes and rodriguez

perhaps too, we should point out the 9/11 notes confirming william rodriguez testimony:

"William Rodriguez Vindicated by Released 9/11 Commission Notes"

any draft wording for your suggestion is most appreciated..
and your above reply..

(we had a teleconference with richard gage on this yesterday..
and slowly we are getting to a consensus on this campaign..)

Farmer & Kean Quotes

Farmer: (as noted above from his book) "at some level of the government, at some point in time.... there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described... The NORAD air defense tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin."

This is the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission admitting that the Commission both received and promulgated a false story.

Kean: "We to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former NJ Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth.... It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."

So Farmer in '09 just basically rehashed what Kean had already said in '06. It's still a good quote though to pair with.

Access to large audiences and opportunities for publicity...

Building Architecture - the social news site for Architects and related professionals. (almost 3000 subscribers)

Also an online resource for people interested in Engineering. (over 1100 subscribers)

*Registration required to post.


Thank you to all the people nationally and internationally that have kept up the good fight for transparency and justice for those that can not do so themselves. Your perseverance and intolerance to injustice is a path that we all must follow to realize a true republic.

Ron Craig

Great interview, John. Your command of the subject really helped move the interview along.

I have one concern that I'd like to air here. It's about Ron Craig. It's now clear that the idea of "allies" of the govt. attempting to derail us, as Sunstein points out, is not only plausible, but probable. I'm sure there are many who suspect that Ron Craig might be one of these govt. "allies." So the question I'm raising is whether it's to our advantage to debate these people at all? If their mission is to derail us, then they will be very calculating and prepped to accomplish their mission and by debating them we give them the needed platform to execute their mission. Gage admits he is not a professional debater. Ron Craig, on the other hand, appears to be very adept in the art of "debate." It certainly makes for interesting listening, i.e. entertainment, but are there any risks? I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Regarding nanothermite, there is a claim often tossed around that it might have been planted. OK, let's follow that reasoning. If it was indeed planted in the dust by the scientists or some nefarious actor, where did we get it? This stuff is not available to anyone except to those at the highest levels of military research. I think it behooves us to secure as much official documentation and verification that the material we posses is indeed nanothermite, regardless of where we claim we found it or what we speculate it might have been used for. The very fact that we have tiny samples of it should raise some eyebrows in and of itself. This may not be practical, but for example, we could cut a chip in half, give one half to a private lab and the other half to NIST and ask them what it is. Assuming that the separate findings will prove that it is indeed nanothermite, then we can raise the very serious question: "How did we get this stuff in the first place?" Our opponents would then have to produce a "Bruce Ivins" among us, or something similar, to support their claim.

I understand and appreciate Gage's admitted attempt to inject as many points as possible into these "debates," but that may be contributing to a strategy of confusing the issue enough to cast doubts, similar to the BBC's approach in their last hit piece about Osama Dead or Alive. In general I guess I'm an advocate of limiting the topics in these debates rather than expanding them. In this case I truly think less is more.

Independent verification of nanothermite

Dr. Steven E. Jones has stated that more than one independent researcher is studying the samples of suspected nanothermite.

Let's hope that these independent labs will publish their results this year, but publishing can often be a very slow process.

Indirectly, the EPA and USGS labs have already substantiated the presence of the components and residues of nanothermite (some quite exotic, btw) in their reports on the dust.

Whenever nanothermite is presented in a public forum the relevant documents from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere should be cited or hard copies made available to support the claim for its use at the WTC.

While I agree that anyone debating 9/11 truth in the media should be as well versed in debate tactics as possible, it is to our advantage to not engage in pedantic debate tactics as the audience will quickly pick up on this and the information and message will lose much of its power. A simple, sincere and honest approach is what will earn the respect of the vast majority of the viewing public. So, yes, less is more.

I hope that you and yours are well.

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


I have seen the red/gray chips in-person and spoken with one of the scientists who is working with Dr. Jones. He is an independent scientist and is not associated with any lab. As a matter of fact, we have discussed the various obstacles in garnering independent confirmation from scientific labs. One obstacle is money. Paying for this type of analysis is costly. I think it's time to move beyond merely passing out the recent peer-reviewed paper and get busy raising the money to have these tests performed. We have hit a nerve with propagating this discovery, but until we have solid laboratory confirmation, the ground we stand on regarding nanothermite is still a little shaky. There is no NWO, hidden power stopping this from happening. Like everything else in America, it's all about $$$. And I agree that the least we can do right now is to be well documented and precise on the info that we do have. But that's not going to stop our opponents from trying to get us off-topic or simply ignoring it. That's why I feel so strongly about keeping them on-topic, even if it means sacrificing discussing certain points in lieu of time constraints.

I'm glad you agree that less is more in these "debates." I just hope those of us who engage in them see thru the traps to dilute the message and distract the listener and hold our opponent's feet to the fire when they wiggle out of the hard evidence we are now presenting, even if it means not being able to get in all of our points. It's not easy. These guys like Craig are very clever and employ all sorts of tactics to accomplish their aim. But fortunately they are only clever, and not smarter that we are. Onward.

Fund-raising to support credible research

is definitely something we should be doing more of, right along with increasing and refining our public education efforts.

I think that the larger groups in the movement should strongly consider committing themselves to ongoing fund-raising efforts to support specific research projects. Several groups could also agree to pool these funds for agreed upon projects.

The more hard science we have, the more credible we become and the more difficult it becomes to deny the truth.

Three clear pictures of the elephant in the room are better than one.

I hope that you and yours are well.

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

A&E4911T and other groups

Could very easily set up a fundraising NFP for research, education and outreach purposes, by creating a fundraising donation info-package, and getting it out to qualified *wealthy Americans* for which list data bases ARE available. Many of them are true patriots and smart people, who, when given access to the information, and simply asked, even begged, for help, WILL give, and in abundance. "We" could raise literally millions even tens of millions. A national fund raising campaign targeted at wealthy donors, that's my suggestion, and they can write it off as a cheritable donation too!

I think these various groups of the larger and more sophisticated variety, like Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, ought to do just that.

Another idea I've had, is with all these Architects and Engineers, and you have the resources of what amounts to a LARGE Architectural and Engineering COMPANY, like a Bechtel or an AMEC - they're smart people, and very resourceful, as a group. Thus, if they were to form a large protect team, and develope a rebuttal to the 10,000 page NIST Report, working on every aspect as if it's a large protect, then that would make for a very powerful and rather damning statement. Because SOMETHING other than the NIST Report and the 9/11 Commission ought to be considered by future historians when trying to make sense of this latest chapter of historic insanity.. just a thought..
On the 11th day, of every month.

Good ideas. You are in charge.

It is up to us as individuals to make things happen. I like your proposals.
Personally, I have mailed many, many hundreds of information sheets and DVDs to local area foundations, company executives, wealthy homeowners, celebrities, etc. Many big name people in Texas have repeatedly received 9/11 Truth information.

In fact, just this week, a member of our group took it upon himself to mail to George Bush's close neighbors a packet of DVDs and AE911Truth's professional flyers. He came up with the proposal and just acted on it.

He also proposed putting DVDs (marked 'FREE') on the REDBOX kiosks... ...he and other members are acting on this as a personal decision. There is no prodding. It is a self-determined action to take responsibility.
It reminds me of the 186 volitional volunteers for the Alamo against an army of thousands.

me too

"Because SOMETHING other than the NIST Report and the 9/11 Commission ought to be considered by future historians when trying to make sense of this latest chapter of historic insanity"

I think about and pray for that all the time. Thanks to Jones, Gage, Ryan et. al. we are now a force to be reckoned with. It's time to show some muscle.

? What about University students working on Masters...

Often graduate students are trying to figure out what research to do for their Masters. This would seem to be a dang good project. Their name would certainly hit headlines.

This is a cost-effective approach.


Masters level projects and above need to be approved by their faculty advisers. What's the likelihood of that? In Europe, India, maybe. No, I think this one's on us.

Worth a try?

Lets be hopeful of a change in the might be suprised who's willing to be indirectly helpful!

Regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

I think that "approval" in the US is very reachable.

Go to a University sometime and read the titles on the plethora of graduate research papers. (Some are plain dull.) Faculty advisors would be hard pressed to deny this type of research. In fact, a big flap could develop if research on this was suppressed by advisors. For starters, campus papers will print things that the mainstream does not cover...

This is a valid proposal for someone seeking a Masters. Also, there are probably many University professors who would welcome this exposition of truth, because it does not put their own professional credibility in jeopardy. [I used to have a Physics professor always give me a grin, a 'knowing' look of approval. The math is hard to miss on gravitational acceleration.]

well then

maybe I'm wrong on that. It's nice to see the ideas flowing, that's one of the reasons I visit this site.

and BTW did you ever post that Texas A & M article here? If you did, I missed it, and if you didn't, you should have. I'm actually shocked that they printed it and if nothing else this thread has enlightened me to some possibilities. This is really useful for those of us who live in college towns, Thanks Tom. I'll try to circulate it and see if it creates a buzz.

Yes, a long time ago. It broke records for comments.

Evidently, the paper erased all the comments. At the time, it was the most commented upon entry ever in the paper and 90% of the comments were positive. It showed that ranking for over a year until they revamped the website.

AE911Truth is linked to another campus article from that one - (Abby also had posted this news on blogger)

Campus papers are a great venue. Here is a great resource-
Non-students can also submit articles and/or comments.

I agree with graduate

I agree with graduate students applying pressure from within the system. This would be a great place to pit the rationality of academic reasearch against the cognitive dissonance of sleeping citizenry.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Please don't do this!

Independent confirmation of the results of Dr. Harrit et al. will not be helped by the 9/11 Truth movement raising money. The allocation of funds to laboratories occurs through the centralized administration of university research departments. You cannot simply send cash to an academic department or to a specific researcher. This would create a terrible conflict of interest. Any results from such privately funded research should be highly suspect. The experiments performed on the red/gray chips is not prohibitively expensive for a lab already involved in these types of projects, providing the required equipment is available. It is perfectly acceptable for a laboratory to use funds from an existing project to fund experiments to test a novel hypothesis. This is how the nanothermite experiments were done by Dr. Jones and Dr. Harrit, and it really is the only path currently available. To be sure, the NIH, the NSF, the DOE, or the DOD will not fund red/gray chip research. Our money is properly spent on mass awakening through media exposure.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, Dr. Jones.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

please clarify

I've always been under the impression that a huge amount of scientific research is privately funded.

From the American Cancer Society: "the American Cancer Society (ACS) focuses its funding on investigator-initiated, peer-reviewed proposals."

From a web page entitled Who Pays for Science: "Almost 75% of U.S. clinical trials in medicine are paid for by private companies."

I can appreciate that this type of funding may have potential criticisms:

Again from Who Pays for Science: "A pharmaceutical company paying for a study of a new depression medication, for example, might influence the study's design or interpretation in ways that subtly favor the drug that they'd like to market. There is evidence that some biases like this do occur. ..........So what should we make of all this? Should we ignore any research funded by companies or special interest groups? Certainly not. These groups provide invaluable funding for scientific research. Furthermore, science has many safeguards in place to catch instances of bias that affect research outcomes."

Don't you think there might be a model out there to emulate in support of "investigator-initiated, peer-reviewed proposals" regarding WTC dust? Maybe we need to start the "September 11 Scientific Research Foundation." So be it.

You are right. Much private

You are right. Much private funding exists for scientific research. But I would argue that these large groups that fund research have a very general vested interest, such as that of curing cancer or expanding human knowledge. For example, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute funds a lot of biomedical research. By contrast, the 9/11 Truth Movement has a large vested interest in a particular result, which precludes its validity as a funding organization. The repetition of experiments is a worthy goal, but to be intellectually honest, you must be prepared for a negative or positive result.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

I'm prepared

"The repetition of experiments is a worthy goal, but to be intellectually honest, you must be prepared for a negative or positive result."

I'm prepared for an intellectually honest result and I'd wager that Jones et. al. are too. We are a truth movement, right?

I think the pharmaceutical model is more appropriate to what we are all about. IMO our vested interest doesn't preclude the validity of potential research results any more than the research conducted by the pharmaceutical industry on their own products, which is a widely accepted practice. And if our sponsored research is then challenged at a scientific level, all the better, cuz it will be free research (for us) and heighten the level of scientific discussion, and if we win, we really win. I still don't see a downside, unless of course, as you say, we are not intellectually honest. The 911T movement goes to great lengths to try and weed out people and theories that are not intellectually honest because we instinctively know how vulnerable we are.

Hope I'm not boring everyone here.

Richard Gage my friend I salute you.

May the truth bring light where there was once only darkness.