Good afternoon,
My name is Richard Gage, AIA. I’m a member of the American
Institute of Architects; I’ve been a licensed architect for 22 years; And
I’m the founder of the non-profit organization, Architects & Engineers for
9/11 Truth (AE911Truth).
As a group, we now have more than
1,270 architect and engineer petition
signers. Collectively, we have more than 25,000 years of building and
technical experience. This press conference is being given by our petition
signers and supporters today in 65 [it turned out
to be 67] locations around
the world, including 30 states and 4 countries.
Today, we’re here to inform you that we have uncovered evidence that the
official investigations into what happened to the World Trade Center
skyscrapers on 9/11 were deeply flawed, or worse. The scientific forensic
facts we have discovered have very troubling implications.
For example, a technologically advanced, highly energetic material
has been
discovered in World Trade Center dust from the 9/11 catastrophe.
This follows the discovery, by the United States Geological Survey and
others, of high concentrations of unusual previously molten
iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust.
These microspheres can only have been formed
during the destruction of the World Trade Center at temperatures far higher
than can be explained by the jet fuel and office fires.
Those fires, we are
told by engineers employed by
NIST, the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, were allegedly the cause of the World Trade Center’s
destruction.
The discovery of this advanced energetic material, in the form
of red/gray chips distributed throughout the dust, both explains the
iron-rich microspheres and confirms the inadequacy of the official account
of what happened that tragic day.
Even before the microspheres and red/gray chips had been identified and
brought to our attention, we were deeply concerned about other aspects of
the destruction of these iconic buildings, and how they were investigated.
More than two dozen firefighters, engineers, and other witnesses reported
seeing substantial quantities of molten iron or steel, flowing like lava in
the debris under all three World Trade Center high-rises.
Office fires and
jet fuel cannot possibly reach the temperatures necessary to liquefy iron or
steel. A mixture called thermite, consisting of pulverized iron oxide and
aluminum, CAN generate temperatures above 4000°F - far more than is needed
to melt iron or steel, which melts at about 2750°F.
The energetic material that was found in the WTC dust by an international
team of scientists (led by Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen in
Denmark) was reported in the peer-reviewed
Bentham Open Journal of Chemical
Physics. It consists of nano-engineered iron oxide and aluminum particles
1000th the size of a human hair, embedded in another substance consisting of
carbon, oxygen, and silicon.
The sizes of the iron oxide particles are
extremely uniform, and neither they nor the ultra-fine-grain aluminum
platelets could possibly have been created by a natural process such as a
gravitational collapse or the impact of jetliners. The red/gray chips in
which these particles were found exhibit the same characteristics as
advanced energetic materials developed in US national laboratories in the
years leading up to 9/11.
They have no reason to be in this dust.
Given all
the horrific costs in human lives, lost civil liberties, and trillions of
tax dollars spent in response to the official account of 9/11, there can be
no more urgent need than for our country and the world to find out who put
those materials in the World Trade Center - and why.
This need makes it all the more disturbing that top engineers in charge of
the government’s investigation would avoid dealing straightforwardly with
ALL the evidence that AE911Truth and others have repeatedly brought to their
attention, much of which has been available in the public record since the
beginning.
John Gross, NIST co-project leader, has denied the existence of
- or even any reports of - molten iron or steel at the World Trade Center
(below video).
They stopped their analysis of the towers’ complete and highly energetic
destruction at the very point when the destruction began.
And they have
dismissed or avoided serious analysis of the additional evidence with which
we are concerned, such as:
-
Both Twin Towers were
completely
dismembered and destroyed in just 10 to 14 seconds - which occurs at
near free-fall acceleration. For this to happen, all 47 of their
massive core columns as well as a large fraction of their external
columns would have to be compromised with explosives beforehand.
-
More than 100 first responders reported
hearing explosions and seeing flashes of light at the onset of
destruction. Light flashes indicate explosive detonations. These
witnesses are documented in NYC’s “Oral Histories” by City Fire
Commissioner Thomas Von Essen
-
Multi-ton steel perimeter wall sections
were ejected laterally (below video) at 60 mph to a distance of 600 ft. That speed
and distance indicates that a high-pressure explosion initiated the
ejection.
-
90,000 tons of concrete and metal
decking was
pulverized in mid-air, again indicating explosions.
-
World Trade Center 7, a 47-story
building which was not hit by an aircraft, fell at free-fall
acceleration (below video) for more than 100 feet - a significant fact that NIST’s
Shyam Sunder was forced to admit after being presented with our
research.
Yet NIST has failed to review or acknowledge the obvious
implications of this fact, which is that the columns must have been
explosively severed within fractions of a second of each other.
-
The complete destruction and
dismemberment of Building 7, collapsing in just 6 ½ seconds - which is
near freefall acceleration - through the path of what was greatest
resistance, symmetrically vertical, including 2 ½ seconds of pure
free-fall (zero resistance), is an occurrence only possible with
expertly-placed explosives.
There are other falsehoods and omissions
in NIST’s official report:
-
NIST overstated the severity and
duration of the fires in all three skyscrapers, apparently in order
to more credibly attribute the destruction to the fires, yet without
exaggerating them enough to account for
molten iron or steel. (here
also)
-
NIST and FEMA did not follow the
National Fire Protection Association’s
standard procedures for fire
and explosion investigations and test building debris for explosive
residues.
-
NIST did not test for explosives when
explosive demolition was the most likely hypothesis.
-
NIST’s animated computer model of
Building 7’s destruction, showing the outer walls crumpling inward
like a piece of foil, bears no resemblance to the actual collapse as
seen in the videos.
-
NIST claims that the falling section of
each of the Twin Towers, above the jetliner impact zones, crushed
the much larger and more massive intact lower section.
But [in the
case of the North tower,] video analysis (above) reveals clearly that the
upper [section] disintegrated in waves of explosions prior to any
crushing of the lower [section].
This indicates that the top
sections could not have been the cause of the destruction of the
lower [section].
-
NIST’s technical analysis into the twin
towers’ collapses stops at the “initiation of collapse.” There is no
technical analysis of the structural behavior of the building during
the collapse itself.
In response to our Request for Correction on
this matter, NIST acknowledged that they were “unable to provide a
full explanation of the total collapse.”
In short, NIST’s official technical explanation
is fraudulent and inconsistent with the basic laws of physics. By contrast,
the hypothesis of controlled demolition is consistent with all of the
available technical evidence.
This week, here in Washington, DC, we personally delivered our “9/11
-
Blueprint for Truth - The SF Press Conference Edition,” which included
highlights of the forensic evidence, into the hands of staffers for the
science advisors of every elected representative on Capitol Hill.
In
addition, we have sat down with over a dozen of them and presented in detail
the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition. We have
personally invited over 400 of them to today’s event.
How many Congressional
science advisors are here today? [None].
I urge you to go to our website
AE911Truth.org for more information,
including comments by our members on the problems with the official
investigation.
At this point, we are calling for Attorney General
Eric
Holder to ask a federal grand jury to investigate those responsible for the NIST report, including Lead Investigator
Shyam Sunder and Co-Project Leader John Gross.
We’d like any and all reporters who will be covering this story to know that
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are here to give you any technical
support you need.
Finally, I’d like to thank the thousands of scientists, senior level members
of the military, intelligence and other government officials, pilots and
aviation professionals, firefighters, scholars and university professionals,
9/11 survivors and their family members and concerned citizens here and
around the world for their continuing support.
We also want to thank our growing family of more than three hundred
sustaining financial supporters. We could not do this without you.
Now, I will answer any quick questions you may have.
Keep in mind that most
of your questions will probably be answered during
the Mock Debate - which
will be starting in just a minute.
