It becomes increasingly more difficult to contain my rage and remain polite and civil, but we must if we are to reach those still asleep.
My response to the Herald:

Dear sirs,

Rick Feneley's article is factually incorrect in intellectually offensive. He doesn't even realize that "OBL and 19 hijackers did it" is a conspiracy theory. Any crime committed by two or more people is a conspiracy. Bin Laden has been charged with conspiracy to murder Americans outside the U.S. He has not been charged with 9/11 because there is no hard evidence he was involved.[1] This is not to say he wasn't involved, only that the official story is a conspiracy theory and the use of this term in a derogatory manner demonstrates a total lack of journalistic integrity.

Covering up a crime of mass murder in which Australians have died is a crime. The truth cannot be hidden forever and all who helped hide the truth will be held accountable. The Truth Movement is gaining strength and momentum because we are telling the truth about the controlled demolition of WTC 1, 2 and 7.

After lying about the free fall of WTC 7 in their final draft, NIST was confronted with the truth by a high school physics teacher at a public hearing. NIST was forced to admit that WTC 7 did indeed fall at free fall acceleration for about 32 meters. NIST repeated the analysis of Mr. Chandler and got the same result.This is scientific conformation and it is now a matter of public record.[2]

Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for the NIST report on WTC 7, stated in a technical briefing: [3]

"a free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it . . . there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous."

In other words, the NIST progressive collapse hypothesis does not include a period of free fall acceleration because there is always structural resistance.

The only way to get a building to fall at free fall acceleration is to remove all the supporting structure with explosives.

I respectfully request that you publish a retraction and correction after objectively viewing the evidence presented by Richard Gage AIA at ae911truth.org

Sincerely

Chris Sarns

References:

1] http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

2] NIST NCSTAR 1-A pg 45 [final report on WTC 7]

http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/NCSTAR1Aindex.htm

3] Tech briefing 8-26-08

1:01:48 Question from David Chandler about freefall.

1:03:14 Shyam Sunder: Response

http://nasathermalimages.s3.amazonaws.com/public/video/NIST_WTC7_Technic...

Please watch this video summary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz43hcKYBm4

The article entitled "Fire, not government plot felled third tower" leads a reader to believe that somehow it really was fire that magically severed all perimeter columns at the same time causing WTC 7 to "collapse" with its roof line parallel to the horizon at free fall acceleration.

What was not reported is the scientific fraud conducted by NIST to make this "extraordinary event," caused by "thermal expansion" of girders making column 79 unstable, supposedly making the entire edifice tumble down.

NIST used a black box computer model tweaked with inputs that did not really happen in the real world, to arrive at their "extraordinary claim".

This included fires longer and hotter than what took place. It assumed absolutely no thermal conductivity of the steel beams. (Imagine that steel does not conduct any heat next time you heat needle to pull a sliver from your finger.) It assumed no sheer studs on the girder to concrete floor system, (there were sheer studs) and it assumed that only the steel girders heated, but remarkably not the floor slab directly connected to it.

Why did NIST have to lie with their computer inputs? It was the only way to get the extraordinary thermal expansion of the girder relative to the floor slab, inducing absurd expansions with no sagging in order to "push" the girder off its seat. Yet despite all that , their model fails miserably as their own graphic, with its twisted sides, does not match what we saw.

NIST also assumed RDX to determine the decibel levels. But it was nano-thermite (not ordinary thermite) a very high tech military explosive that was found in the dust. And there were numerous eye witness testimonies of explosions as well as the eutectic steel found by FEMA, all totally ignored by NIST.

Regardless, its impossible to have free fall acceleration of a falling body if there is anything whatsoever in the way, or it simply wouldn't fall "freely". The only way for a building accelerate like this is to have some other force first remove all supports. And the likely force, is that force from explosives, which matches all other known evidence.

So focus on the free fall acceleration and remember what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle said: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

Sorry...sometimes the truth hurts.

Jonathan Cole