Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
July 1, 2008 at 08:58:27

View Ratings | Rate It

AE911 Truth: Letter to Congressman Robert Wexler

by Richard Gage AIA (Posted by Kathryn Smith)     Page 1 of 5 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 
Tell A Friend

Thanks Kathryn!   yes - please sent the letter (attached as .doc) far and wide.  Please find a way to keep the hyperlinks active.  
Team - where can all of you post this letter for maximum mileage?  Action...
Thanks!
Richard

 



http://www.911blogger.com/node/16384
  
    AE911Truth: Letter to Congressman Robert Wexler
ae911truth.org | Richard Gage

(UPDATE: Hyperlinks added, July 1, 2008. -rep)

Richard Gage, AIA
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc.
www.AE911Truth.org

July 1, 2008

Via Electronic Mail to: lisa.white@mail.house.gov

The Honorable Robert Wexler
2241 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Wexler:

My name is Richard Gage, AIA, a 20-year licensed practicing architect and member of the American Institute of Architects. I am founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc.(1), and I am asking for your help in a matter of grave importance to the United States of America.

Just over a year ago, I heard on a radio program new facts and compelling arguments regarding the terrible events at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. I was stunned. After completing some investigation, I realized that we had not been told the truth about the events of that day.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth was born and we began an online petition drive for fellow architects and engineers who are also determined to learn and publicize what really happened to the three World Trade Center Towers that collapsed on 9/11.

We developed a multimedia presentation(2) that exposes the myth of the official explanation using simple, rational forensic inquiry and basic physics. I travel the country speaking to building professionals and others to expose the fallacies. The response to this presentation is the same everywhere I go. A simple show of hands before and after reveals that about 90% of those who believe the "fire-weakened steel" hypothesis come to accept the "controlled demolition with explosives" hypothesis after the presentation. The explanations of the destruction of the iconic Twin Towers and WTC Building 7(3) offered by FEMA and NIST defy laws of physics. This is easy to prove and has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The existing, prevalent physical evidence shows that the explanations offered cannot be true. That such serious inconsistencies remain unaddressed, and that additional questions remain unanswered – even unasked – is untenable. We must pursue them now.

AE911Truth.org operates an increasingly popular website that receives more than a thousand daily visits. We host over 2,000 petition signers(4), of whom more than 400 are degreed/licensed architects and engineers. Our licensed A/E's have agreed to uphold a code of ethics upon obtaining their licensure and they are meeting that obligation today by responding with great courage to the myth that we know as 9/11.

They ask the following questions and document these observations, which are just a few of many that remain unanswered or ignored by those who, at the behest ultimately of the White House, directed the official investigations:

• Why did more than 100 FDNY first responders describe, in great detail, the sounds of explosions and flashes of light that they saw and heard at the onset, and during, the collapse? Why did we not know about these 10,000 pages of FDNY "oral history" evidence until August, 2005 – and only then after a court order for their release? FDNY's own Chief of Safety, Albert Turi, and FDNY's nationally recognized Chief, Ray Downey, the "premiere collapse expert in the country" according to a fellow chief, both spoke of the presence of explosives in the Towers prior to their failures. More than 100 testimonies referring to multiple, violent explosions(5) were ignored by the 9/11 Commission, NIST and FEMA.
• What was the energy source, and through what mechanism was it applied, that pulverized 400,000 cubic yards of concrete(6) into a fine powder that blanketed Manhattan? Calculations show that the energy requirement for this was greater than the available gravitational potential energy of the structures. Is this the same energy source that is responsible for the complete obliteration of more than 1,100 human bodies that were never found?
• How were massive structural steel members hurled(7) from the Twin Towers at 70 mph – some of them landing 600 feet away?
• Why were most windows within 400 feet of each tower blown out?(8)
• Why were virtually no floors found at the base of either Twin Tower?(9) There were originally 110 floors – each of them one acre in size. What explains the disappearance of 220 acres of four-inch thick concrete and steel decking?
• Why were there explosive ejections of dust & gases(10) (squibs) 20, 40 and 60 stories below the rapidly descending "collapse" in each tower? These can be seen in many publicly available videos and show rapidly ejecting pulverized building materials – over 200 feet a second.
• How did the elevated building mass destroy 80,000 tons of structural steel at near free-fall speed(11), and with such radial symmetry?(12) Given the asymmetrical structural and fire damage and the tendency of any disorder to grow over time (as described by the Second Law of Thermodynamics), the falling building sections should have "rolled off" of the intact sections below, resulting in only partial collapses.
• Given that open-air jet fuel fires and normal office fires both burn at a maximum of around 1,500° F., and the melting point of steel is around 2,700° F., what thermal energy source produced the tons of molten metal observed flowing out of the South Tower(13) shortly before its collapse – and also seen for weeks after 9/11/01 in the basements(14) of the Twin Towers and Building 7 by numerous witnesses, including the WTC structural engineer, Leslie Robertson.
• What explains the chemical evidence of thermite(15), an incendiary material found on the ends of steel beams? In Appendix C of its BPAT Report, FEMA documented that "evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure." This is clearly not a feature of gravitational collapse, or jet fuel or office fires.
• What is the source of the billions of microspheres consisting of previously molten iron(17) in all the pulverized concrete of the World Trade Center? The United States Geological Survey, in its "Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust Report," and RJ Lee Group, Inc., in its December 2003 WTC Dust Signature Report: Composition and Morphology, both document these once-molten drops of metal without explanation. These microspheres also contain the chemical signature of thermite, an incendiary material used to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.
• Why did Building 7 start its sudden and uniform collapse(18) at an acceleration rate nearly that of a body in free fall? Video analysis shows the upper portion of the structure accelerating at the maximum rate gravity allows. This can only mean that the structure below offered no resistance. What mechanism can account for the simultaneous failure of the critical number and distribution of columns required to produce this rate of acceleration? NIST now attributes the catastrophic collapse of Building 7 to "normal office fires," with little to no contribution from falling debris or diesel fuel. At this suggestion by NIST, are we to suddenly accept that our understanding of fire science, materials and structural behavior has been deeply flawed? The American Institute of Architects has steadfastly resisted changes to the building codes after 9/11! Here is the potent 5-minute AE911Truth executive summary testimony delivered to NIST(19) on Dec 18, 2007.

On behalf of the more than 2,000 petition signers at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth – and of the thousands of citizens becoming aware of this deception regarding the destruction of these three high-rises on 9/11 – I urge you to spend ONE HOUR of your undivided attention to review the stunning evidence that answers these crucial questions.

Joel Hirschorn, Ph.D., Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, and AE911Truth.org petition signer, states "First, let the technical truths emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political and conspiracy issues."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Regardless of non-response, please put pressure on Congress to answer to this crime.

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

 

Book Recommendations for "911 Commission"
The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Authorized Edition)
by National Commission on Terrorist Attacks

$10.00
Lowest New Price $0.99

Number of pages: 568
Publisher: W.W. Norton

THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT [FINAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES]
by National Commission on Terrorist Atacks

$1.99

Number of pages: 568
Publisher: W. W. Norton

The 911 Commission Report Executive Summary
by National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States

$7.95
Lowest New Price $5.95

Number of pages: 34
Publisher: Waking Lion Press

False Flag 911: How Bush, Cheney and the Saudis Created the Post-911 World
by Philip Marshall

$16.99

Number of pages: 152
Publisher: BookSurge Publishing

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 comments


Gage vs. the Truth

What a grotesque comedy of errors. 400,000 yards (10.8 million cu. ft.) of concrete? The buildings were steel-framed, the poured concrete foundations weren't "pulverized into a fine powder that blanketed Manhattan," and if 220 floor slabs @ ~43,560 sq. ft. each were, then the slab thickness for every floor must have been well over 13". Thousands of yards of broken concrete were removed from the site, and there are no photos of Ground Zero showing all of this fine dust covering the scene, nor were there any reports of it from witnesses. If Gage thinks explosives or thermite did what he falsely alleges, then why doesn't he demonstrate how? He should get about 10 yards (.0025% of his 400,000 figure) of fully-cured 3500# concrete slabs from old sidewalks and patios and pulverize them to a fine powder in less than 20 seconds without leveling a few city blocks in every direction. I'd pay to see it on video, but not from closer than five miles in person. 

Numerous witnesses heard explosions, but there is no evidence that anyone heard explosives. The quantity needed to collapse a tower would have been heard from Montauk to Cape May or even farther and seen clearly in every video, and there would be no debate about whether it was a falling elevator car, exploding transformer, partially collapsing floor, or any of the other explainable, witnessed sources of loud sounds that were heard before the collapses. The largest "massive structural steel member hurled" any great distance from either tower was no heavier than the average SUV, and since 125-250 million pounds of building fell at least one story and collided with the intact building below at a height of 1200 and 1000' respectively (North and South Towers), Gage should tell us what force was present at the time that would have prevented debris from flying a few hundred feet sideways before hitting the ground or another building. And at 70 mph (~100 fps)? Initial velocity of high explosives is at least 15,000 fps, and not even the non-"massive" debris was ejected at more than a tiny fraction of that speed.
Then he switches from explosives to thermite, an incendiary that wouldn't account for the explosions that were heard, and deliberately misleads us by giving the melting point of steel before making the questionable claim that tons of molten metal were seen flowing out of one tower. If this were from columns or trusses, wouldn't a collapse have ensued immediately, instead of a half hour or so later? And why was it  only from one place? It was very likely aluminum from Flight 175 or lead from a battery bank in a UPS system, but it most certainly wasn't the framing of the South tower pouring out of one opening in the exterior of the tower for a brief period of time. Thermite is difficult to ignite with precision, burns straight down unless diverted sideways by bulky devices clamped or bolted to columns or resting on the floor, and only produces heat for a minute or two, so he's undermining his own credibility by citing reports that molten metal was observed weeks later in the basements and associating it with thermite. He mentions Les Robertson, a highly regarded structural engineer who worked on the original tower designs and reportedly saw the molten metal, presumably to add some prestige by association, but the last thing Richard Gage would ever do is sit down and discuss his theories with him in public. Gage has turned down repeated invitations to present his claims on air with Mark Roberts, a very knowledgeable "debunker" of his work, and Robertson is equally in the NIST corner, and has even better credentials, so that just isn't going to happen. Furthermore, chemical evidence of incendiaries is inconclusive in the middle of piles of building material exposed to jet fuel, because drywall and other common building materials as well as jet fuel have ingredients in common with them, and he and his source have offered no chain of custody for their samples and haven't presented chemical signatures of spent thermite or thermate for comparison to them. The only peer review offered by the principal incendiary proponent, Steven Jones, is that his work is included in a new book by David Ray Griffin, a theologian. 
Gage is an architect, but he hasn't presented architectural sections of columns and shown us where any of these alleged explosives or incendiaries could possibly have been hidden on them. Here's a cut through a typical perimeter column in a WTC tower:
As you can see, they weren't close to the exteriors of the towers, they WERE the exteriors of the towers, and in almost every case, they were only accessible through secured, occupied tenant spaces. 40 in the picture is aluminum cladding on the outside, 42 is window glass, 39 is drywall, and 36 is the 14" square steel column itself. At least 60% of each column was outside of the building, and only one face was fully accessible from inside and it was covered with finished drywall. Where do the explosives go where they can't be seen? Above the ceilings or below access floors? 52" high, 3/8" thick (or more) spandrels were welded to the inside faces of all of the perimeter columns at every story completely covering both of those locations. It would not only be difficult to get explosives through them and onto or inside the columns, but spandrels are the least likely place for a column tree to separate in a collapse, and if a large number of them broke apart in that odd location, they'd be even more conspicuous in the debris than cutter charge or thermite cuts in any other part of the columns, although any cut of that very distinct type in any location would have been instantly noticed and reported by the ironworkers and others who handled or even looked at the steel during the 8-month cleanup period, no matter how quickly anyone thinks the steel was scrapped. 236 of these columns existed on the perimeter of each tower, many were broken in the collapses, no one saw evidence of explosives or incendiaries on the ends of them in the debris, and it was virtually impossible to hide charges anywhere on them, or even to get to them secretly, so Gage should really be answering questions instead of asking them.
He has also claimed that the towers fell "too fast," and at "near free-fall speed." Here's a video of the North Tower collapsing:
A complete collapse is shown starting at 1:43 on the timer at the bottom and still in progress at 2:00. Loose debris is clearly seen coming down much faster than the building is, and some of it hits the ground 6-8 seconds before the collapse stops. Was it coming down faster than free-fall speed? What is "too fast" when "g" has just been reduced from >32'/sec^2 to <9.5'/sec^2? NIST has not rigorously calculated scientifically acceptable times for the towers to collapse gravitationally, but Dr. Frank Greening has, and his work is presented here:
This is an inexact science, since all of the variables can't be determined precisely, but Greening's results are considerably faster than the times I've observed on various videos, including the one I just linked to. Gage has claimed collapse times far shorter than those actually observed by any honest person, and has presented one paper by Gordon Ross claiming that the collapses should have self-arrested, a conclusion drawn by very few reputable scientists and engineers and totally rejected by those from NIST, as well as being completely counterintuitive, and he can't even come up with a plausible explanation for how it was done in the unlikely event that he wasn't wrong about this too.
These are just some of my problems with Gage's so-called research, and there are plenty of others, but they amply illustrate why he chooses to make his presentations on the Internet or in front of the "9/11 Was an Inside Job!" set, instead of exposing them to any serious scrutiny. Anyone who's that wrong about that many things would probably do the same.

by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Wednesday, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:07:04 AM

Recommend  (0+)

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Health Insurance Exec Whistleblower Wendell Potter Testifies Before Congress by Wendell Potter

REPORTING FROM HONDURAS: Hondurans Call Out for Help from the International Community by Medea Benjamin

Bush's 4th of July Celebration Posted by Darla

North Korea – Impending Missile Launch May Require US Military Action by Steven Leser

Cynthia McKinney and the Spirit of Humanity Crew are captured and detained by the Israel Navy by Cynthia McKinney

You Don't Have To Eat 10,000 Boxes Of Crackerjack To Become An Ordained Minister! [Satire] by Daniel Vojir

Tampa, FL - UnitedHealth to Enter Funeral Parlor Industry by James Dunham

How the Terminator Can Save the World by Scott Baker

Italy to Declare Independence from U.S. Military by David Swanson

Most Americans stupid as a box of rocks as to overpopulation: On American sustainability--Anatomy of Societal Collapse by Frosty Wooldridge

Go To Top 50 Most Popular

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum