even if only in the form of what might be called historical justice, and justice to our own intellectual integrity. Then the 9/11 event can SERVE the cause of justice in history, as a great, transformative point of LEARNING. And that does justice to the victims, which, in the grand scheme of things, includes everyone, both those who flat out reject the Big Lie of 9/11 and those who have swallowed the Zelikow myth, hook, line and sinker, but which honours first and foremost the actual victims themselves (the innocents who were murdered..sacrificed without their consent), and their families, and all the many victims generated in turn, in the wake of 9/11, and in the very NAME of those victims (what an OUTRAGE!), and for the cause of "vengeance" (what a disgrace) and of "security" (along with Global hegemonic domination - what arrogance!), all of which has practically SUNK the USA as a powerful force, not just economically, but as a force of authentic Justice, and of Civility in the World.
It all turns on 9/11 truth in history - *unto justice*, in whatever form that may take (let justice be mine sayeth the Lord).

Justice, in other words, takes care of itself, provided we and everyone remain forever committed to the truth and reality at all cost, except at the cost of truth and reality itself, because justice arises from a disciplined truth (a scientific truth), and there is no discipline, and no accountibility, absent a committment and dedication to the truth and reality as it really and truly is! Truth brings justice. And you cannot unring a rung bell..(bonggggg)

Keep on ringing that bell Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and everyone else... until justice. It will come in one form or another, of that we can rest assured (and hopefully sleep at night again!), especially when high school kids, for ALL TIME and in all generations from age to age, can irrefutably and unequivocably PROVE that the official story about 9/11 is flat out FALSE, armed only with some youtube videos (or whatever medium is the latest craze) of 9/11 destruction, a stop watch, and a few basic equations, including Gallileo's law of free falling bodies and Sir Isaac Newton's Three Laws of Motion - while the twin towers of the World Trade Center remain forever conspicuously absent the New York City Skyline. Think about it. Makes the work of Richard and team all the more vital, seemingly to the very cause of history itself! Whoa! Pretty powerful stuff!

Richard, if you are reading this, and I assume you read 911blogger - please, for the love of God, make of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth an eternal legacy with multi-generational continuity, especially now that you are over 1000 members. Something this big and this important cannot be about you, or even one generation - it must go on and on and on, until justice, no matter HOW long that may take..!

Always begin with the end in mind.
____________________________
On the 11th day, of every month.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9nRs8cu5Y&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftruthaction...

Richard Gage, AIA, and I helped to found a monthly teleconference, which generally happens on the last Wednesday of each month. All those representing a 9/11 truth group or accomplished truth leaders are invited to attend.

In tonight's agenda, I am proposing this following action plan, and of course welcome all feedback, ideas and support. I am hoping a final draft for this plan will be ready by the March 6th Conference: "Treason in America: 911, the Wars and Our Broken U.S. Constitution"

If we can get a draft agreed by our group, we would then have a chance of not only uniting the 9/11 truth movement, but puling in many other citizen activists to confront the 9/11 false flag cover-up. Please feel welcome to make improvements in this draft, or send me a new draft. We got to keep it simple, on one piece of paper, with instructions and universal acceptance for the evidence shown. This is not easy to do, otherwise it would have been accomplished already, but we are trying. If the signatories can include active support by our organizations, the unity of our movement could be contagious, rather than creating in-fighting, disagreeing on details. so keep it simple and strong. thanks for considering this. If you want to join the teleconference group and a truth leader or represent a truth group, email me at - flyby (at} mtdata (dot} com -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We, the undersigned, believe there is overwhelming evidence for treason and cover-up on the crimes that occurred on September 11, 2001, contradictory to 'official' government reports. Hard evidence show that explosives, not fires, caused the 3 World Trade Center (WTC) towers to collapse.

WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper located one block from the Twin Towers was not hit by any plane, but collapsed at 5:20 that evening, imploding in the manner of a professionally engineered demolition. Fire has never ­ prior to or after 9/11 ­ caused any steel frame building to collapse. The steel, which if fully examined could have revealed the effects of explosives, was quickly shipped overseas and melted down. This was an unprecedented violation of federal crime scene laws. Astonishingly, there is no mention of WTC Building 7's collapse in the 571-page 9/11 Commission Report.

The 9-11 commission interviewed William Rodriguez , WTC janitor, who stated, in secret testimony, that he and 14 other people were in a WTC 1 basement office when, without warning, "the group felt a tremendous explosion emanating from somewhere below them in one of the five WTC sub levels and felt the floors tremble and saw the walls crack just seconds before the group heard another distant explosion coming from high above."

More than 118 first responders reported hearing explosions before all 3 WTC collapses. Molten steel and pulverized concrete were found at Ground Zero “remember, hydrocarbon fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel or concrete.” N.F.P.A. 921- 19.2.4 Exotic Accelerants states that molten steel and concrete could indicate the use of exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite. Presence of this accelerant was confirmed by independent researchers, who analyzed WTC dust that was collected by four individuals in four different locations. The results of this study was published in Open Chemistry/Physics Journal, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe." (1)

John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission, disclosed in his book:
“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

Hundreds of contradictions exist that were omitted in the official version of what happened. We demand a criminal investigation to confirm what really happened, and why the cover-up has led the US into disastrous wars.

Besides signing this petition, please write a letter to your local newspaper explaining your reasons for taking such an action, and present it to a Judge or Governor as per US code 18 USC Sec. 2382 (2).

We, the undersigned believe it is the right and the duty of all citizens to take action to demand a real investigation on the officials enacting and supporting the continued cover-up of the 'explosive' crimes on what happened September 11, 2001

Signed:

(1) Open Chemistry/Physics Journal
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...

(2) 18 USC Sec. 2382. Misprision of treason
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both."
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C115.txt

Great interview, John. Your command of the subject really helped move the interview along.

I have one concern that I'd like to air here. It's about Ron Craig. It's now clear that the idea of "allies" of the govt. attempting to derail us, as Sunstein points out, is not only plausible, but probable. I'm sure there are many who suspect that Ron Craig might be one of these govt. "allies." So the question I'm raising is whether it's to our advantage to debate these people at all? If their mission is to derail us, then they will be very calculating and prepped to accomplish their mission and by debating them we give them the needed platform to execute their mission. Gage admits he is not a professional debater. Ron Craig, on the other hand, appears to be very adept in the art of "debate." It certainly makes for interesting listening, i.e. entertainment, but are there any risks? I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Regarding nanothermite, there is a claim often tossed around that it might have been planted. OK, let's follow that reasoning. If it was indeed planted in the dust by the scientists or some nefarious actor, where did we get it? This stuff is not available to anyone except to those at the highest levels of military research. I think it behooves us to secure as much official documentation and verification that the material we posses is indeed nanothermite, regardless of where we claim we found it or what we speculate it might have been used for. The very fact that we have tiny samples of it should raise some eyebrows in and of itself. This may not be practical, but for example, we could cut a chip in half, give one half to a private lab and the other half to NIST and ask them what it is. Assuming that the separate findings will prove that it is indeed nanothermite, then we can raise the very serious question: "How did we get this stuff in the first place?" Our opponents would then have to produce a "Bruce Ivins" among us, or something similar, to support their claim.

I understand and appreciate Gage's admitted attempt to inject as many points as possible into these "debates," but that may be contributing to a strategy of confusing the issue enough to cast doubts, similar to the BBC's approach in their last hit piece about Osama Dead or Alive. In general I guess I'm an advocate of limiting the topics in these debates rather than expanding them. In this case I truly think less is more.