Tell the NY Times: The evidence isn't hard to find, just look and believe your own eyes.

Yesterday New York Times Chief Washington Correspondent David Sanger was the guest on CSPAN’s Washington Journal, where he had this to say about Building 7’s collapse:

“We have not found any evidence so far – that doesn’t mean there’s none there – but we’ve not found any evidence so far to suggest that the building collapses were caused by anything other than the two airplanes that flew into them.”

Sanger was responding to a question from a caller who wanted to know why, despite the massive billboard standing right outside the New York Times Building, the paper of record had failed to “fairly and objectively cover this crucial issue.”

Now with a senior representative of the New York Times on the record saying, “We’ve not found any evidence so far,” it is time to let Sanger and the editors know that the evidence is there. All they need to do is look and they’ll easily find it. Contact the NY Times Today!

Contact the NY Times Today

Last week over 1,000 people contacted the BBC in response to our action alert regarding the BBC’s one-sided article on the ReThink911 campaign. Let’s surpass that level of support today. Please take 2 minutes right now to contact David Sanger and the NY Times editors. Just copy-paste the letter below, or write your own. Please be sure to Bcc us at AE911Truth so that we can keep a count of how many emails are sent.

To: dasang@nytimes.com, washington@nytimes.com, metro@nytimes.com, national@nytimes.com, executive-editor@nytimes.com, nytnews@nytimes.com, editorial@nytimes.com

Bcc: NYTimesOutreach@AE911Truth.org

Dear Mr. Sanger and Editors of the New York Times,

On Sunday, December 23, 2013, you, Mr. Sanger, told a caller on CSPAN’s Washington Journal that the New York Times had not found any evidence so far to suggest that the collapse of WTC Building 7 was caused by anything other than an indirect result of the airplanes flying into the Twin Towers. I am writing to tell you that the evidence is indeed there, and I urge you to look into it. 2,100 architects and engineers have signed a petition at AE911Truth.org calling for a new investigation based on this evidence. The following points are just a few from among the growing body of evidence that overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that Building 7 came down by controlled demolition.

• Building 7 accelerated downward at absolute free-fall for the first few seconds of its 7-second symmetrical collapse.
• However, a building cannot undergo free-fall if it is meeting any resistance from any of the columns below it, as any resistance would slow the building’s descent.
• Therefore, the lower section of the building could not have been “crushed” by the upper freely falling section.
• The destruction of at least 8 stories of the lower section of the building had to have been accomplished by other means, i.e. explosives or incendiaries, to allow the upper section of the building to fall through it in free-fall. Learn more about the free-fall of Building 7.
• There is clear evidence of melted steel at Building 7, first reported on by the NY Times, and incendiaries in numerous dust samples from Ground Zero.

As you well understand, the implications of the controlled demolition of Building 7 are extraordinary, since it is integral to the 9/11 events, and therefore the question of what happened to Building 7 is of the greatest importance. I thank you in advance for taking the time to seriously examine this crucial issue.

Sincerely,