Top Scholar for 9/11 truth gets major airtime on a mainstream network
A monumental shift occurred last week, in the fight for an independent investigation of the World Trade Center attacks on September 11, 2001. This past week, for the first time ever, a mainstream media platform actually allowed qualified representatives to speak about the inaccuracies in the official story of what occurred during the attacks.
Until now, 9/11 truth has been disregarded in the mainstream media, if not totally vilified. Finally, there has been an academic presentation on national television about the possibility that we have been lied to about one of the most controversial events in American history. Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth was able to get through to CSPAN for a complete 45 minute interview, where he was able to make his case.
Richard talked about Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group that he and others founded in 2006 to raise awareness about the large number of influential academics who had doubts about the official version of events. Gage said that the mission of the group was to “expose the official lies and cover-up surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 in a way that inspires the people to overcome denial and understand the truth.”
The group put out a special article the day before the interview which was designed to deliver some of the introductory facts in the case against the official 9/11 narrative. The article was called “Are You New to the Evidence?” and offered a huge collection of videos and interviews with testimony from academics.
The host of the interview said that he invited Gage on the show because he frequently gets callers who bring up 9/11 and the case of World Trade Center building 7. The majority of the people to call in to this specific interview seemed very informed and they were taking this issue very seriously. Gage admitted that there were a number of questions surrounding the events that took place on 9/11, but for the purposes of the interview, he kept the conversation strictly focused on the science involved with showing that there was a controlled demolition.