I never thought I would see this on C-Span.
But C-SPAN gave 40 minutes to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth founder to explain why he (and many) thinks that it was highly unlikely that Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed because of an office fire -- the official explanation for the collapse of the only building that didn't get hit by an airplane on September 11, 2001 -- and floated the idea that it was destroyed by controlled demolition. He definitely wants an additional investigation and reports that people that have looked into it already believe that the 9/11 Commission report of the early 2000s was rigged to fail.
His group has 2,000+ architects and engineers across the world that dissent from the official story. (Reminds me of the Dissent from Darwin crowd)
For the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Website Click Here
Watch the Whole Architects and Engineers 9/11 Documentary Here
Watch the Whole Architects and Engineers 9/11 Documentary Here
The fact that a major respectable publication such as C-SPAN is giving them a voice is HUGE.
And let's not forget that -- as Gage himself points out -- we started the longest war in American history because of this event.
I think that's it's an important issue but it's down the priority list if I was POTUS in 2016. The economy and the debt is always first. But I think that it should be pursued.
There are several very smart people that don't believe the official story. In fact, it was Paul Craig Roberts, a former official of the Reagan Administration, that tipped me off to the video in an August 3, 2014 blog post.
Gary North also thinks that the whole thing is fishy.
I'm recently discovering this within the last 10 minutes but Roberts wrote a column reviewing David Ray Griffin's book "Debunking 9/11 Debunking." The column is well worth a read either before or after watching the above video. There is a least one website that sets out to "Debunk" 9/11 truthers, the people who don't believe the official story they were told about 9/11. Griffin's book indirectly addresses them, I assume.
Read Roberts' review first. Then watch the video. Then read North's column.
No comments:
Post a Comment