9/11 Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out


Does Corporate Media’s 10 Year Cover-up of 911 and Blocking of a Criminal Investigation Establish Grounds for Accessory to Murder Indictments?


14,000 Architects to be Challenged by the 9/11 WTC Evidence in Denver, CO

AIA National Convention, June 20–22, 2013

Speaker – Richard Gage, AIA – Friday June 21


Muhammad Ali Center,
Louisville, KY

Screens Another Challenger:
9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out, June 20

9 11 Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

San Francisco Bay Area architect Richard Gage, AIA, will present in Denver on Friday, June 21, 2013, 7:00 PM, at the Colorado Convention Center (700 14th Street, Denver, CO, Room 110).

Over 14,000 architecture professionals are expected at the National Convention of the American Institute of Architects. Volunteers staffing the AE911Truth evidence booth will be inviting them to attend the dynamic multimedia presentation on Friday night. Send your Denver friends and colleagues to the events!

If you are in Colorado, please come and bring a skeptical or uninformed friend – especially an architect, engineer, or scientist. There will be an opportunity for questions after the presentation – the toughest questions are welcomed the most!

This classic multimedia presentation provides overwhelming evidence that shows that the official World Trade Center account provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cannot possibly be true. Gage will provide evidence of the explosive controlled demolition of all three WTC high-rise buildings that occurred on September 11, 2001. It includes up-to-date graphics and video and the latest forensic evidence on World Trade Center Building #7 (WTC 7) and the Twin Towers. The examination of the catastrophic destruction of these three skyscrapers will include:

Sudden onset of destruction Symmetrical collapse & progression Isolated explosive ejections Lateral ejection of steel Sounds/flashes and explosions Pyroclastic-like clouds Iron spheres in the WTC dust Molten iron/steel Nano-thermite discovered in the WTC dust ASCE, FEMA & NIST reports Whistle-blowers Destruction of evidence Expert corroboration Foreknowledge of destruction

n 2009, about 50 attendees signed the AE911Truth petition at the San Francisco AIA National Convention over a 3-day period. According to Gage, “This time around, we hope to double that number – we’re going to be more efficient about it.”

Two large screens will also be used to present the evidence to the architects. One of the screens will be showing a looped video of WTC7, alerting viewers to the third worst structural failure in modern history.

Now, let’s get back to the mainstream corporate media’s 10 plus year cover-up of 9/11. As a Primer, it’s important to understand the Legal definition of Accessory. Wikipedia has a decent article on Accessory, which reads:

An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:

  • The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latin for “guilty mind”), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (Latin for “guilty act”).
  • If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.

In some jurisdictions, an accessory is distinguished from an accomplice, who normally is present at the crime and participates in some way. An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being, or will be committed. A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way, or simply by failing to report the crime to proper authority. The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment.

Relative severity of penalties

The punishment tariff for accessories varies in different jurisdictions, and has varied at different periods of history. In some times and places accessories have been subject to lesser penalties than principals (the persons who actually commit the crime). In others accessories are considered the same as principals in theory, although in a particular case an accessory may be treated less severely than a principal. In some times and places accessories before the fact (i.e., with knowledge of the crime before it is committed) have been treated differently from accessories after the fact (e.g., those who aid a principal after a crime has been committed, but had no role in the crime itself). Common law traditionally considers an accessory just as guilty as the principal(s) in a crime, and subject to the same penalties. Separate and lesser punishments exist by statute in many jurisdictions.


In some situations, a charge of conspiracy can be made even if the primary offense is never committed, so long as the plan has been made, and at least one overt act towards the crime has been committed by at least one of the conspirators. Thus, an accessory before the fact will often, but not always, also be considered a conspirator. A conspirator must have been a party to the planning of the crime, rather than merely becoming aware of the plan to commit it and then helping in some way.

A person who incites another to a crime will become a member of a conspiracy if agreement is reached, and may then be considered an accessory or a joint principal if the crime is eventually committed.

In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an “accessory before the fact”. A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an “accessory after the fact”. A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an “accessory before and after the fact”, but this usage is less common.

The legal implication here is that the entire corporate media machine could be brought down if it could be established that they had any knowledge of facts, or conspired to cover–up known facts or evidence to 9/11 criminality, as is fundamentally believed by millions worldwide. The past 10 plus years bears this out and demonstrates at least obstruction Vis-à-vis, a cover–up. Does this explain why many people have been ‘taken out’ because of the threat a real 9/11 Criminal Investigation and what that investigation will now reveal?

Interestingly, the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School describes Accessory after the fact as:

Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years. Source: 18 USC § 3 – Accessory after the fact

Further, any knowledge of 9/11 being a false–flag, as many in the intelligence community will attest to, and then conspiring to orchestrate a ‘Propaganda Campaign of Terrorism’ as the corporate media has done over the past 10 years plus, would be criminal in and of itself, and could even result in Civil Lawsuits for Damages and Injury to millions of Americans being led to believe a lie and encouraged to live in fear.

Let’s not forget the ‘Killing of Bin Laden’ and subsequent death of Navy Seals who ‘knew too much’ and were assassinated under extremely questionable circumstances. Reference: Death of Osama bin Laden

There is ample evidence to support the Assassination Theory of the Navy Seals involved in the made for Prime Time  Osama bin Laden Raid, including the Intellihub.com article Osama Bin Laden Death Myth Continues to Crumble as Seal Team Six Speaks Out posted March 27, 2013 by Derrick Broze.


9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out


Published on Sep 6, 2012

299,061 views on July 2, 2013 at 9:00 AM EST

This is the 1-hour version of our 1 ½ hour groundbreaking documentary 9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out which is available for purchase as a DVD in our online store at http://www.AE911Truth.org or as a download or video-on-demand at http://www.911ExpertsSpeakOut.org

See also the video of the Pledge Breaks by Shari Bernson and AE911Truth’s Richard Gage, AIA – interviewed on air in Denver, CO during this historic TV premiere of 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out”. http://www.youtube.com?watch?v=sksg5w…

Colorado Public Television (cpt12.org), has courageously thrust themselves at the forefront of our nation’s public service media network. CPT12 recently aired this powerful and controversial film as a featured premium during their Summer fundraising campaign. The PBS national website then posted the re-broadcast which quickly became one of their “Most Watched” as well as “Most Shared” programs on PBS.

As millions of people are becoming aware that they haven’t gotten the whole story on 9/11, over 1700 architects & engineers are leading the way at AE911TRUTH, with dozens of these professionals giving testimonials in this documentary, putting their careers on the line in their demand for a new independent investigation. High-rise architects, structural engineers, scientists, physicists, chemists, scholars, educators, firefighters, forensic fire engineers, demolition experts and others also testify in this ground-breaking scientific assessment of the events at the World Trade Center.

The sudden, complete collapse of the third skyscraper, WTC Building 7 at 5:20pm on 9/11 at free-fall acceleration, is now being seen around the world as “the smoking gun” which disproves the official story about 9/11. These experts also introduce additional “overwhelming evidence” for a controlled demolition hypothesis of the three World Trade Center highrises – which raises many disturbing questions.

Please support the organization that made this program possible.

Purchase the full length DVD at http://www.AE911TRUTH.org

This is the shorter 58.5 minute version for promotional use. Please also support AE911Truth by downloading the full length DVD and watch it later or watch it now at http://www.911ExpertsSpeakOut.org

Today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people

than to control a million people.

Zbigniew Brzezinski


9/11: 10 Years Later

Uploaded on Sep 10, 2011 –

6,734 views on July 2, 2013 at 13:45 PM EST

Eight months before the September 11, 2001 attacks, Lyndon LaRouche forecast that the United States was at high risk for a Reichstag Fire event, an event that would allow those in power to manage through dictatorial means an economic and social crisis that they were otherwise incompetent to handle. We are presently living in the unbroken wake of that history.


2013 NEW Loose Change 3rd Edition

This article first appeared at intellihub.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses

  1. Archie1954 says:

    Can’t you just follow the money to see who prospered and benefited from this horrible, evil act? We already know the security industry made a killing from it as did the military (in more ways then one). What about bin Laden? Why did he initially state that he had no part in the crime and then subsequently fall all over himself claiming credit for it? Doesn’t that seem strange to you? How did he benefit? Was he actually killed for his alleged part in this tragedy, to stop him from telling the truth or did he simply die from renal failure or something else? Until a comprehensive and independant investigation is held, we will never know. Perhpas we can get an idea of the truth though by seeing what government officials are preventing such an investigation from occuring.

  2. B says:

    I haven’t even read this article and do not intend to because I’m fully convinced ( from facts) that 9/11 was planned by the united states American government.

  3. 5 War Veteran says:

    There is a serious error above. it reads:
    “Establish Grounds for Accessory to MURDER Indictments”
    Just when is GENOCIDE considered simply “murder”?

    This was a WAR CRIME against the American people by MOUSSAD the Zionist regime and members of the US Government who were well aware and in collusion.
    Those that learned the fact afterwards and refused to act are also considered complicit because of their silence.

    All involved are guilty of CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

    Any questions?

    • elmerjohnson says:

      To send American people to their deaths in 2 buildings by this government, to justify a war with Iraq, that is murder. For the press to be complacent by not investigating or other wise not even reporting, is also guilty of murder!

Leave a Reply

© 2013 Pakalert Press. All rights reserved.