In the lofty auditorium of Northampton's First Churches on October 10, an audience of perhaps 200 listened as San Francisco architect Richard Gage presented evidence that the World Trade Center's Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 were brought down on Sept. 11, 2001 by controlled demolition—by planted explosive charges, not by the impact and resulting fires when the buildings were hit by hijacked airplanes.
Gage, a member of the AIA (American Institute of Architects) with 20 years' experience designing large gymnasiums and mixed-use structures, presented visuals showing that the longest documented skyscraper fires have never thrown a steel-framed building into total collapse, even fires that burned up to 18 hours (the towers fell less than two hours after the planes hit). He also showed that the cave-in from the centers and the straight descent of the towers at free-fall speed was visually similar to textbook cases of controlled demolition.
He showed that tangled fragments of steel girders were ejected as far as 400 and 600 feet from the lower parts of the towers, a phenomenon hard to explain unless they were propelled by active charges. He showed Building 7 collapsing straight downward in clouds of pyroclastic dust though it was never struck by the planes.
And he cited physical analysis purporting to prove that dust containing signature elements from the high-tech military explosive thermite covered New York after the explosion.
Much of the mainstream media has written off this information from Gage and his 900 colleagues in Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth as conspiracy theory, though the group does not put out a theory about who blew up the towers or why. Resolutely empirical, AE 9/11Truth only asks for a new investigation of the towers' collapse that does justice to the physical evidence it presents. Now, in spite of initial resistance, more and more venues are opening; Gage speaks today to an audience of aerospace professionals at the Sacramento Chapter of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Americans faced the appalling fact of President Kennedy's murder and waded through piles of evidence supporting a welter of explanations. They confronted Watergate and evaluated the evidence that the White House was covering up crime, even the banal crime of burglary. They should be able to hear evidence concerning the 9/11 disaster and judge it on its merits. Increasingly, the signs are that they will.