640 Architects and Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation
Evidence of Explosives Found in Destruction of All 3 WTC High-Rises
AE911Truth to Display Evidence at National AIA Convention 4/30 — 5/2, Moscone Center
Press Conference/Speaking Engagement Saturday May 2 at 4 pm, Westin Market Street Hotel
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Phone: 510-292-4710
Site: AE911Truth.org
Email: Contact rg-aia at ae911truth.org
Berkeley, CA, April 23, 2009 – More than 640 Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) are calling for a new, independent investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center high-rises. These building professionals cite evidence of explosive demolition at all three WTC high-rises on 9/11 and document the evidence at their website. Michael Heimbach, assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division, wrote that their claims and conclusion were "backed by thorough research and analysis."
AE911Truth will host exhibitor's information booth #2609 at this year's annual convention of the prestigious American Institute of Architects (AIA). The convention, with more than 800 exhibitors and more than 20,000 participating architects, will take place in San Francisco's Moscone Center, April 30-May 2.
This exhibition will be followed up on Saturday May 2nd with a dynamic multi-media presentation by AE911Truth founder Richard Gage, AIA. Mr Gage will cover the forensic evidence found at the crime scene as well as a review of the omissions in the official FEMA and NIST reports. Join AE911Truth at the Westin Market Street Hotel at 50 Third St. in San Francisco at 4:00 pm on Saturday for this thorough review of the myth-shattering information.
Time magazine acknowledged in 2006 that the 9/11 Truth movement was not a "fringe phenomenon," but "a mainstream political reality." As well, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition signers have been encouraged by President Obama's promise to "restore science to its rightful place."
Join AE911Truth at booth #2609 to review the startling evidence not reported in the media or by agencies in charge of the investigations.
culorut
;)
Nalin & Kane - Open Your Eyes
pkcRAISTLIN
i have neither the time nor inclination to keep discussing this with you as you merely keep jumping from topic to topic every time i refute your nonsense. i just wanted to point out that
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
PNAC the war mongers (Cheney, Rumsfield, Kagan, etc) stated they needed a Pearl Harbor to engage the American people into going to war.
this is completely wrong, shows you havent even read the PNAC document. it says nothing of the sort, and im tired of your ignorant quote-mining ways. the quote you are bastardising here was talking about military technology and certainly wasn't talking about a pearl harbour attack to galvanise the populace into war :rolleyes:
quote:
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor".
"The odd word here seems to be "transformation". What do they mean? Let's look back to the beginning of the same chapter."
quote:
"To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs. Information technologies,in particular, are becoming more prevalent and significant components of modern military systems. These information technologies are having the same kind of transforming effects on military affairs as they are having in the larger world. The effects of this military transformation will have profound implications for how wars are fought, what kinds of weapons will dominate the battlefield and, inevitably, which nations enjoy military preeminence".
"So "transformation" refers to the process of introducing more information technologies into the military. What does 9/11 have to do with that? Nothing at all. In fact, the attacks demonstrated that one of the PNAC's pet schemes, a global missile shield, is entirely useless when planes can become bombs."
this is completely wrong, shows you havent even read the PNAC document. it says nothing of the sort, and im tired of your ignorant quote-mining ways. the quote you are bastardising here was talking about military technology and certainly wasn't talking about a pearl harbour attack to galvanise the populace into war
Actually I have read the PNAC document, many times. It seems you do not understand it and posting ty links from 911 myths proves that your view is the biggest pile of I have ever seen. Talk about a dis-information website. Trying to justify an administration from what they said very clearly shows you are brainwashed and cannot over come the denial.
:stongue:
If you do not want to post in here go right ahead. At least we will have one less ignorant idiot to deal with while discussing the real facts/agenda of 9/11 and the former criminal administration.
Good luck to you.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Actually I have read the PNAC document, many times.
you're either a liar or your reading comprehension level is that of a primary school student. take your pick. nowhere in that document did it call for a 'new pearl harbour attack'. loser.
culorut
Page 51
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.
And page 67
the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor – as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age.
Cannot figure it out yet (loser)? You sound like an idiot trying to justify what you think transformation means when it's a little obvious they were preparing for something they absolutely knew was going to transpire.
This document is/was basically their way of saying get ready, we know it's coming and you will have to abide by our new military future, one which we are presently living in today.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Cannot figure it out yet (loser)? You sound like an idiot trying to justify what you think transformation means when it's a little obvious they were preparing for something they absolutely knew was going to transpire.
How do you know what "they" know? Are you an insider in on their super secrets?
quote:
This document is/was basically their way of saying get ready, we know it's coming and you will have to abide by our new military future, one which we are presently living in today.
Talk about a leap to conclusion. I'm glad they decided to tell us about their super secret conspiracy through some code in a strategic policy document only paranoid conspiracy theorists can read in to.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Page 51
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.
And page 67
the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor – as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age.
Cannot figure it out yet (loser)? You sound like an idiot trying to justify what you think transformation means when it's a little obvious they were preparing for something they absolutely knew was going to transpire.
This document is/was basically their way of saying get ready, we know it's coming and you will have to abide by our new military future, one which we are presently living in today.
:stongue: :stongue: :stongue:
like i said
quote:
your reading comprehension level is that of a primary school student.
should have stayed at school cretinrot. they might have been able to teach you how to read properly. nice try though, it did give me a laugh! i almost feel sorry for you. almost.
Lebezniatnikov
Saying "we're vulnerable to a Pearl Harbor type attack" does not in any way mean they were planning a Pearl Harbor type attack...
Seriously, do you read the things you type?
I hate PNAC - absolutely despise everything they stood for, for reasons both practical (policy) and philosophical. But this argument is stupid, and misrepresenting what PNAC actually wrote makes the legitimate case against them more difficult to make.
You rely on that PNAC document like a holy grail for the truther movement - some sort of smoking gun proving each and every theory that crosses your mind. Yet you've made two problematic poor assumptions: 1. that the document means anything other than what it says - it's abrasive enough at face value, and frankly a loosely-associated group of ideologues couldn't ever dream up anything more insidious (for God's sake, just read Francis Fukuyama, who signed the document and later disavowed the group, but remains one of the most prominent conservatives in the intellectual community - think he would hesitate to out the planning of an attack against the US?) and 2. that PNAC holds any real relevance in the policy or intellectual realm of American foreign policy today. It's a completely disgraced and defunct association, and for you to say that they're somehow involved in a "New World Order" is just laughable. For God's sake, it was a think-tank consultant group even when it WAS a viable organization.
The more you post this kind of stuff, the more I'm convinced that your day job is to stand at the street corner muttering to yourself and warning of all sorts of doomsday conspiracies. Have you been abducted by UFOs as well?
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
How do you know what "they" know? Are you an insider in on their super secrets?
Talk about a leap to conclusion. I'm glad they decided to tell us about their super secret conspiracy through some code in a strategic policy document only paranoid conspiracy theorists can read in to.
Unless you have not paid attention to what the same members of PNAC and the last administration have done you must be living under a fukin rock then. I really do not need to get into details of the they have pulled off because over the years it has been a little obvious what their agenda was and still is.
Joss Weatherby
This thread will be over with in a few months when the nuts move on to the Mexico Flu Pandemic NWO global conspiracy... :p
culorut
quote:
Saying "we're vulnerable to a Pearl Harbor type attack" does not in any way mean they were planning a Pearl Harbor type attack...
Knowing what they are capable of I do not put anything by them and many people like myself agree.
quote:
I hate PNAC - absolutely despise everything they stood for, for reasons both practical (policy) and philosophical. But this argument is stupid, and misrepresenting what PNAC actually wrote makes the legitimate case against them more difficult to make.
Your feelings on a group of individuals should not effect what you base your conclusions on.
quote:
You rely on that PNAC document like a holy grail for the truther movement - some sort of smoking gun proving each and every theory that crosses your mind.
It is not some sort of holy grail, it is just one of thousands upon thousands of things wrong (right in this case) with the official story. Take a pick it all leads to a cover up.
