The post Richard Gage on China's CCTV appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

My main focus relative to 9/11 had been on the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers. I had not been able to spend much time on the Pentagon issue. I was initially impressed by CIT’s presentation and, more than a year and a half ago, provided a short statement of support for their efforts.

After making my statement I became aware of more details of the CIT witness accounts as well as the rest of the compelling eyewitness testimony that is available. The vast majority of eyewitness accounts refute the CIT flyover conclusion, as they entail that the plane hit the Pentagon or was flying so low it could not miss.

I was also surprised to learn that 12 of the witnesses that CIT interviewed (including six witnesses to whom CIT refers to as north path witnesses) were in a position to see the Pentagon and all 12 stated that they saw the plane hit the Pentagon. It was clear from this that CIT used improper investigative methods. CIT used and presented only those portions of their witness reports which fit their conclusion. The preponderance of CIT’s own evidence in fact supports the conclusion that the plane impacted the Pentagon. (See Summary and Analysis of “National Security Alert” and other works listed below for these and many additional witness statements that describe the plane as clearly impacting the Pentagon).

Because of these concerns I provided new statements in December 2009 and January 2010 pointing out that my previous statement of support should not be interpreted as an endorsement of their conclusion that the airplane flew over the Pentagon. Despite these statements, CIT has continued to publish my original statement and characterize it as an endorsement of their flyover conclusion. I am hereby now on the record clearly as NOT supporting the CIT investigation at all. In addition, I insist that CIT delete my name from its web site in any and every context in which it might give the impression of support or endorsement of their efforts from me.

I base my present position also on a number of blogs, papers, blogs, and videos that have shed light on the Pentagon Flight 77 issues and on CIT’s work. These papers should be among those studied by anyone seeking the full truth about these matters. Most of these works analyze additional evidence and come to different conclusions than CIT does.

Relevant critiques of CIT and their National Security Alert include:

Summary and Analysis of “National Security Alert”, Chris Sarns, Feb 5, 2011

9/11 Pentagon Witnesses: They Saw the Plane Hit the Pentagon, Video by Jeff Hill, June 14, 2010

Overwhelming Evidence of Insider Complicity, David Chandler and Jon Cole, Dec 2010

“Debating” What Hit the Pentagon by Exaggeration, Name-calling, and Threats, Gregg Roberts, Jan 2011

And critiques that examine CIT’s earlier work “Pentacon” are helpful as well:

Google Earth Exposes Pentagon Flyover Farce or Critiquing PentaCon, by Jim Hoffman, July 2009

To Con a Movement: Exposing CIT’s PentaCon ‘Magic Show’, Victoria Ashley, July 2009

Relevant peer-reviewed papers (posted on Journalof911Studies.com):

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon, Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, (B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.) January 2011

What hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth, Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.), July 2009 (updated Feb 2010)

There was a time in the four years after 9/11 when I simply assumed that the official story of the destruction of the WTC Twin Towers on 9/11 was true. One could say that I “endorsed” the official story based on what I knew at the time, but as I learned more, my opinion of what happened to those buildings evolved radically. John Maynard Keynes, father of Keynesian Economics, once said: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” A similar evolution has occurred in relation to my view of CIT’s work.

I strongly recommend that people who care to research what happened at the Pentagon take personal responsibility for forming their own conclusions by acquainting themselves with a wide range of analysis done by people who have come before them rather than jumping to conclusions based on a skewed selection of evidence and argument, or being unduly influenced by any type of authority figure. Use your own discernment, based on your use of the scientific method to arrive at a coherent theory that you can confidently stand behind.

One of the authors cited above, Frank Legge, PhD., admonishes us to adopt a “prudent approach” to the Pentagon piece of the 9/11 puzzle. In the end he wisely advocates the “precautionary principle” which is to “assert only what we can truly know,” given the contradictory evidence, misinformation, disinformation, and lack of information from official sources, and the difficulty in verifying much of it, years after the fact and with inadequate resources.

Legge concludes that there is prima facie evidence that “the official explanation of the event at the Pentagon is false and that a cover-up exists. He concludes as well this negative hypothesis: that there is “no proof that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon.” And, since officials are holding the cards (videos) as to what did or didn’t hit the Pentagon, Dr. Legge’s recommendation is that investigators “take care to avoid publicly asserting that the 757 did not hit the Pentagon”.

We can all agree that no hijacked plane should have been able to violate the airspace of our nation’s capital and hit the headquarters of the most sophisticated defense system in the world – an hour and a half after the assault began on the Twin Towers.

The 9/11 Truth movement will be more likely to succeed in its effort to educate the public about the Pentagon by focusing on those areas of greatest agreement.

Sincerely,

Richard Gage, AIA

The post Richard Gage Completely Withdraws Support from CIT appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The post AE911 Members Interviewed by Press TV appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

While that press conference was held at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., activists were holding local press conferences in front of federal buildings all throughout the country, including Utica.

Blogger Andrew Steele said he questions the official story of 9-11.

Building Seven was not hit by a plane, collapsing eight hours after the first twin tower was struck.

“Building seven is the smoking gun,” Steele said. “That building fell completely into its own footprint. You can watch on youtube yourself and use your own common sense. Even if you don’t have a scientific background…if you have two eyes, you can see that fire alone did not bring down that building.”

Architect Richard Gage also points to World Trade Center 7, a 47-story building that was not hit by an aircraft, yet collapsed in free-fall acceleration and in a manner consistent with a controlled implosion:

“Government investigators at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have been forced to acknowledge the free-fall descent, an indicting fact, after being presented with analysis by AE911Truth petition signers.”

Other reasons that AE911Truth supporters have uncovered in the course of examining the forensic evidence include:

* The Twin Towers suffered total destruction in 10 to 14 seconds in near free-fall accelerations which can only occur as a result of pre-set demolition explosives.

* More than 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes consistent with pre-set demolitions.

* 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking were pulverized in mid-air, creating the signature dust clouds of controlled demolitions.

* A massive debris field 1,400 feet in diameter, along with the absence of “pancaked” floors, indicates a very explosive destruction of each tower.

* The presence of several tons of molten metal found in the debris is consistent with the extreme temperatures generated by the use of thermite – an incendiary used to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.

* An international team of scientists found nano-thermitic composite material in World Trade Center dust samples, providing hard evidence of the presence of advanced energetic materials in the disaster debris.

“The official FEMA and NIST reports provide insufficient, contradictory, and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers’ destruction,” says Gage. “We are therefore calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials.”

An AE911Truth petition calling for a new investigation was submitted this week to every government representative in Congress. The petition now contains over 1,270 architect/engineer signers – altogether over 10,000 around the world have signed the petition.

The post Former senator, engineers offer evidence of 9/11 demolitions appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Such an historic milestone for liberty could not have occured at a more fitting time than the 4th of July, a time when Americans take pause to celebrate their liberty and reflect on the form of government that guarantees such freedom.

A perfect time to raise an eyebrow at the 9/11 investigation that continually tells us, even to this day, that we must fight more wars and give up more personal liberties.

And, Lehigh Valley locals are, indeed, beginning to speak out about it.

Meet petition signer Lori McFerran, who says she lives “in a small town in eastern Pennsylvania with [her] husband.”  Mrs. McFerran writes of herself in her personal description statement, “I am an editor at a daily newspaper in Allentown, Pa., and have almost 30 years’ experience as a journalist and writer.”

Mrs. McFerran isn’t so sure the 9/11 Commission got it right, stating in her petition, “After hearing the evidence presented by Richard Gage (I listened to the youtube video and heard him speak on Coast to Coast on Tuesday, June 10), I am sufficiently suspicious of the account that was presented by the media about what happened at the World Trade Center in 2001. I fully support a complete and UNBIASED investigation into the events and a thorough scientific evaluation of the evidence at the site.”

The emphasis by Mrs. McFerran that the new 9/11 investigation needs to be unbiased was shared by another local, a Mr. Larry A. Hill of Northampton.

Mr. Hill stated in his petition:

“I have a Bachelor of Arts in History from Penn State University, graduated with highest distinction (top 2%) with a GPA of 3.88. I am a self-taught database programmer by profession. In my studies of History, I reject most, if not all popular conspiracy theories.

I accepted the government explanation of the WTC towers for years. When I saw the AE911Truth video, I was convinced that we were NOT told anywhere near the entire truth about this event.
A truly complete and INDEPENDENT investigation must be done. No one with direct ties to the US government should be involved. Until this happens, trust in our government and the ability of representative democracy to protect us is eroded and undermined.”

One avenue of investigation not pursued by the 9/11 Commission was the possible use of explosives in bringing down any or all of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11/01.  Bethlehem resident Robert D. Grim writes in his petition statement that evidence of controlled demolitions is opening his eyes, stating:

“Though not an architect or engineer, I am a physics buff. I have a solid understanding of the laws that govern the physical universe, and am also well versed in construction methods.

I was a senior in high school when the towers collapsed. I didn’t question anything at first, but I did see the resemblance between the WTC and controlled demolitions. I began questioning the event when a friend who had seen the film “Fahrenheit 9/11″ told me about the theory of controlled demolition. Since then, nearly every piece of evidence that I’ve seen has supported that theory. I want truth!!!!”

On this 4th of July, with now 10,000 signatures officially on the A&E petition, there is truly hope that such a new and impartial investigation might be acheived, the need of which having been attested to locally on the A&E petition by Lehigh Valley petition signers such as McFerran, Hill, and Grim.

The 10,000 figure was reached by adding together the official figures given on the A&E website on Saturday, July 3rd.  An official figure of 1218 was given for “architects and engineers,” and an official figure of 8,787 for “other supporters” on the same day.  Thus, as of July 3rd, there were 10,005 total signers, according to figures posted at the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s official website.

Lehigh Valley residents are reminded that the A&E petition “is open to everyone,” according to the A&E official website.  Therefore, a person need not be either an architect or an engineer in order to sign the petition.  And, indeed, everyone is encouraged to sign.

For more information about the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition, readers are referred to the official website, cms.ae911truth.org.

Read Original Post

The post A&E Petition Hits 10,000 This 4th of July appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.