ref
Master Poster
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2006
- Messages
- 2,685
It's now available in mp3 format:
http://www.ae911truth.org/info/37
Respondents include Richard Gage, Anthony Szamboti (realcddeal at JREF); Kamal Obeid, S.E.; Chris Sarns (Christophera at JREF?); Michael Donly, P.E.; Kevin Ryan.
I just listened through most of it (it's incredibly annoying trying to listen to Gage speak as his is so slow, studders and says UMM all the time, plus all the nonsense).
He are the main points he makes. Some surprising and new ones. The most surprising point he made came right at the beginning. At 02:33 mark he says, quote "There are nowhere near this many architects & engineers (than ae911truth has) supporting the official story, there are only a handful." Excuse me? That has to be one of the stupidest claims ever. Just because the so called official story defenders don't have an online website listing their names and counting their numbers, it doesn't mean they do not support the story. Ridicilous.
Here are the other points he makes:
1. Said no collapses before in reported cases of building fires.
2. Said there was no fire on the top of the pile after the collapse. Why was it so hot underneath the pile.
3. Claims all of the evidence fits together for the evidence of controlled demolition. "Robust science (repeats this term multiple times during the clip), we've got it, we're offering it."
4. Said there is no other possible source for the molten iron (besides thermate) that was found.
5. Claims WTC 7 shows every characteristic of explosive controlled demolition, no characteristics of destruction by fire.
He went on to repeat all the WTC 7 demolition evidence from his site, including the claim that several people reported explosions (Craig Bartmer etc.) He went on to say, that thermate can produce all of these effects, used in conjunction with linear shaped charges. "Without the excessive sound of explosions, thermate is quieter than C4 or other high energy explosives." Didn't he just talk about people reporting sounds of explosions?
6. Said column 79 had 20 minutes of fire availability, fires without fuel available do not have the capability to sustain themselves longer than that. It was a fire protected steel column. Does not accept the NIST explanation (surprise surprise).
7. Claims they have the science based forensic evidence for the explosive CD and the residue of thermate. Because of this evidence, he says: "We don't have to explain how this was done, or who may have been responsible."
8. Said "We are not talking about a conspiracy by Al-Qaida anymore. That is a logical assumption that can be made. We are talking about something else entirely."
9. Said it was an inside operation, and it harvested all these goals that seem to have been well documented prior to 9/11.
10. Talked about other main evidence he believes in, including the good old PNAC document, NORAD stand down and put options.
In short, they repeated all the claims they had made before the NIST WTC 7 report came out. Gage repeated the odd contradiction that people heard explosions, but thermate (they talked about nano-thermate) is so silent NIST can't claim that sounds of explosions should have been heard.
Gage also repeated about a dozen times that they have robust science supporting them, why doesn't Sunder accept it. Gage also repeated about ten dozen times the address of his website, called for people to join his group, sign the petition, and send e-mails to all the architects and engineers they know.
http://www.ae911truth.org/info/37
Respondents include Richard Gage, Anthony Szamboti (realcddeal at JREF); Kamal Obeid, S.E.; Chris Sarns (Christophera at JREF?); Michael Donly, P.E.; Kevin Ryan.
I just listened through most of it (it's incredibly annoying trying to listen to Gage speak as his is so slow, studders and says UMM all the time, plus all the nonsense).
He are the main points he makes. Some surprising and new ones. The most surprising point he made came right at the beginning. At 02:33 mark he says, quote "There are nowhere near this many architects & engineers (than ae911truth has) supporting the official story, there are only a handful." Excuse me? That has to be one of the stupidest claims ever. Just because the so called official story defenders don't have an online website listing their names and counting their numbers, it doesn't mean they do not support the story. Ridicilous.
Here are the other points he makes:
1. Said no collapses before in reported cases of building fires.
2. Said there was no fire on the top of the pile after the collapse. Why was it so hot underneath the pile.
3. Claims all of the evidence fits together for the evidence of controlled demolition. "Robust science (repeats this term multiple times during the clip), we've got it, we're offering it."
4. Said there is no other possible source for the molten iron (besides thermate) that was found.
5. Claims WTC 7 shows every characteristic of explosive controlled demolition, no characteristics of destruction by fire.
He went on to repeat all the WTC 7 demolition evidence from his site, including the claim that several people reported explosions (Craig Bartmer etc.) He went on to say, that thermate can produce all of these effects, used in conjunction with linear shaped charges. "Without the excessive sound of explosions, thermate is quieter than C4 or other high energy explosives." Didn't he just talk about people reporting sounds of explosions?
6. Said column 79 had 20 minutes of fire availability, fires without fuel available do not have the capability to sustain themselves longer than that. It was a fire protected steel column. Does not accept the NIST explanation (surprise surprise).
7. Claims they have the science based forensic evidence for the explosive CD and the residue of thermate. Because of this evidence, he says: "We don't have to explain how this was done, or who may have been responsible."
8. Said "We are not talking about a conspiracy by Al-Qaida anymore. That is a logical assumption that can be made. We are talking about something else entirely."
9. Said it was an inside operation, and it harvested all these goals that seem to have been well documented prior to 9/11.
10. Talked about other main evidence he believes in, including the good old PNAC document, NORAD stand down and put options.
In short, they repeated all the claims they had made before the NIST WTC 7 report came out. Gage repeated the odd contradiction that people heard explosions, but thermate (they talked about nano-thermate) is so silent NIST can't claim that sounds of explosions should have been heard.
Gage also repeated about a dozen times that they have robust science supporting them, why doesn't Sunder accept it. Gage also repeated about ten dozen times the address of his website, called for people to join his group, sign the petition, and send e-mails to all the architects and engineers they know.
Last edited:
