2,107 verifizierte professionelle Architekten und Ingenieure und 17,915 andere Befürworter inklusive A&I Studenten haben die Petition unterzeichnet, die vom Kongress eine neue, wirklich unabhängige Untersuchung fordert.
Die Petition ist offen für Alle.
Dienstag, den 09. April 2013 um 19:39 Uhr
Es gibt leider keine Übersetzung.
Announcing: Top Ten Vote-Getters For the Ad Contest… & The Next Phase of Operation Tip the Planet!
Top Australian News Sites Stream Experts Speak Out
We are pleased to announce that the web editions of The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia’s most respected newspaper, and Melbourne’s The Age began showing 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out in February for free to residents of Australia and New Zealand. The link to our documentary, hosted on smh.tv, The Sydney Morning Herald’s video site, was shared on Facebook over 1,000 times in the first two weeks, signaling another bout of major mainstream exposure for Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
The videos on these sites can be accessed only in Australia and New Zealand, so while you can’t view them from the U.S., you can still help boost the film’s rating on these sites. Just visit the following links:
As we approach this years’ 9/11 anniversary, we are coming closer to another important milestone in the history of AE911Truth. Almost 2,000 architects and engineers have signed our petition demanding a real 9/11 investigation, and our goal is to reach that mark by this September to highlight the launch of our historic Operation Tip the Planetad campaign. However, we can’t do that without your help. If you are a degreed or licensed architect or engineer who has reviewed the WTC evidence and who agrees with our call for an independent investigation, let your voice be heard by signing our petition now.Now is the perfect time to join the hundreds of architects and engineers who have signed the AE911Truth petition for a real WTC investigation.
“If you have already signed the petition, then please inform your colleagues about AE911Truth and ask them to sign the petition. If you’re not an architect or engineer, encourage your friends, family members, and coworkers who may be architects and engineers to sign as well!”
We value all of the supporters who have signed our petition, but the number of…
Editor’s note: This is Part 9 (see Part 8) of an extensive report by 9/11 researcher Adam Taylor that exposes the fallacies and flaws in the arguments made by the editors of Popular Mechanics (PM) in the latest edition of Debunking 9/11 Myths. We encourage you to submit your own reviews of the book at Amazon.com and other places where it is sold. For more information on the topics discussed in this section, see our FAQ on Larry Silverstein and our article that analyzes Barry Jennings’ testimony. (Quotes from Popular Mechanics’ book are shown in red and with page numbers.)
Part 9: Larry Silverstein and Barry Jennings
Larry Silverstein’s “Pull It” Quote
Analysis of Larry Silverstein’s statements about WTC7 reveals that they do not match the sequence of events that occurred on 9/11
PM’s next section deals with another controversial issue in the debate regarding WTC7 – the infamous quote from WTC7 owner Larry Silverstein regarding the building’s destruction. For reference, here is Silverstein’s full quote from his interview with PBS:
“I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.” And they made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse.”1
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth Proudly Announces:
THIS IS THE YEAR WE MAKE IT HAPPEN!
In spite of the fact that the 9/11 truth message has been censored by many in the media, ignored by Congress and the President, and shunned by most academic institutions, polls still show that more than 30% of US citizens doubt the official story about 9/11. Let’s reach out to the rest!
The terrifying specter of drone strikes on US civilians, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act… these are just a few disturbing consequences that continue to follow widespread acceptance of the official 9/11 narrative.
No. The NIST WTC 7 computer animation of the collapse does not even remotely resemble the observations and actual video footage of the destruction in three main ways. A scientifically valid explanation of any phenomenon must account for the key observations.Moreover, a computer simulation does not constitute an explanation. It is merely a tool for determining and visualizing what might have happened if various assumptions are true.
NIST has refused to disclose the computer inputs of its mathematical models. This makes it impossible for anyone to check their work.
1. While NIST admits publicly that the building descended at “free-fall” acceleration, its computer simulation is not consistent with a building that is coming down in free fall.
NIST’s Final Report on the collapse of WTC 7 (NCSTAR 1A, p. 45) states that gravitational acceleration (free-fall) of the main roofline occurred. It began when the point NIST was using  as its marker on the video had descended about 7 feet*. In Figure 12-62 (NCSTAR 1-9 Vol.2 p. 588) the roofline has descended about 10m /33 feet (NCSTAR 1-9A, p. 77) and the columns are still buckling in an irregular manner. Buckling columns provide resistance and would obviously prevent the building from collapsing at free-fall acceleration. The NIST computer model is clearly not simulating free-fall acceleration.