In this seven minute interview, Richard Gage, an architect for 20 years, is given plenty of time to explain the overwhelming evidence that the World Trade Center buildings were not brought down by the impact of the planes and ordinary office fires. Unlike the derision and condescension that typically greets 9/11 truth activists at mainstream outlets, these two anchors seem genuinely curious and open to the uncomfortable facts proving that explosives were detonated inside the Twin Towers.
Transcript of Gage's entire interview on KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno, California is below:
Kim Stephens: He’s an architect experienced in steel structures. Now Richard Gage is touring the country with a controversial message about September 11.
Kopi Sotiropulos: Richard Gage is here to show us why he’s calling for a more thorough investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. Thank you so much for joining us.
Gage: You’re very welcome, it’s great to be here.
Kopi Sotiropulos: Well first of all give us a little bit more about your background.
Gage: I’m an architect of twenty years, a member of the American Institute of Architects, and have been studying steel frame fire proof buildings for about that long.
Kim Stephens: We ask that for clarification because as we get into this we want people to make sure that you’re not just somebody with a wacky idea, you come with some science to you. What is the official reason for the collapse of the World Trade Center towers?
Gage: Well we’re told that the planes hit the buildings, and there was an explosion and a fire, and about a hour and a half later, in the case of the north tower, the buildings collapsed due to structural weakening, due to the fires. The problem is that we don’t have large gradual deformations associated with collapses. And fires in high rises have never brought down a steel frame high rise building at all, ever. And what we have, unfortunately, is the evidence in the twin towers and the third skyscraper to collapse that day, which most people don’t know anything about it. We have the evidence of the ten key features of controlled demolition. In the case of building seven, it collapses straight down into its own footprint, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet. It’s dropping, as you can see symmetrically, smoothly, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet. Two and a half seconds. This is uncanny, there’s forty thousand tons of structural steel designed to resist this collapse.
Officially, the annual Bilderberg meeting doesn’t even happen. There are no press releases, no coverage by the mainstream media, and no swarm of paparazzi outside the hotel door to catch the luminaries as they dash inside. Timothy Geithners’s public schedule was oddly empty for two days, but if he was at Bilderberg, his staff is mum.
If Bilderberg really did happen in Greece last week, it should have been the media draw of the year. When else can you find all the world’s richest people, plus all the world’s most powerful people, checking into a five star resort that is guarded by F-16s overhead and the Greek navy off the coast?
(Yes, two intrepid reporters tried to get close to the action by taking the sea approach – only to be stopped three miles from shore by the Greek navy.)
Besides, if Bill Clinton, Ben Bernanke, Henry Kissinger, Condoleeza Rice, the King of Spain and the heads of Google, the Wall Street Journal and the World Bank did get together in one room, what on earth would they have to talk about?
It’s a question that has more than a few people concerned.
Mere fame will not bring an invite – you won’t find Britney Spears on the guest list. Running a major corporation, university, media empire or a country – those are the kind of credentials required.
Legend has it that Bilderberg is a confab of rich and powerful conspirators plotting ways to fleece the unsuspecting public and thereby become even more rich and powerful. There are reports that George W. Bush made an appearance at Bilderberg before taking office, as did Clinton prior to his successful bid for the presidency, and Tony Blair prior to becoming Prime Minister of Britain. This has led to speculation that these leaders were not so much elected by the public, as appointed by the Bilderbergers.
The Metropolitan of Glastonbury and Head of the British Orthodox Church believes the Bilderbergers represent a “criminal cabal of world Zionism and its efforts to set up a cruel world dictatorship under the headship of Lucifer.”
But former British Cabinet Minister Lord Denis Healy, one of the founders of Bilderberg, said that was “crap,” and that the group’s aims were high-minded. “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.”
A skeptical observer might note that after 55 years of Bilderberg meetings, wars and homelessness are still going strong. What exactly has this coterie accomplished? And if their goals are pure, why the overbearing secrecy?
One answer: If anything more serious than who goes up next on the parasail is being negotiated, it’s a felony and a violation of the U.S Logan Act, which forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. A conviction, of which there have been zero, could bring a prison sentence of up to three years.
There are reports that Bilderberg was responsible for both the EU and the Euro. Paul Joseph Watson reported: “…Belgian viscount and current Bilderberg-chairman Étienne Davignon bragged that Bilderberg helped create the Euro by first introducing the policy agenda for a single currency in the early 1990’s. Bilderberg’s agenda for a European federal superstate and a single currency likely goes back even further. A BBC investigation uncovered documents from the early Bilderberg meetings which confirmed that the European Union was a brainchild of Bilderberg.”
There is also widespread speculation that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama met secretly at Bilderberg in Chantilly, VA last year. Obama’s traveling press corps was loaded onto a plane that they assumed would also contain Obama; it wasn’t until the plane was heading down the runway for takeoff that the reporters realized they’d been conned. They angrily confronted Obama’s spokesman Robert Gibbs, who stated obliquely: "Senator Obama had a desire to do some meetings, others had a desire to meet with him tonight in a private way and that is what we are doing."
Daniel Estulin, author of The True Story of the Bilderberg Group, reported that the 2009 discussion centered around a disagreement about how quickly the world economy should crash. According to Estulin’s sources, we are looking at “Either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty … or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”
Estulin’s previous predictions, based on the same Bilderberg sources, have been eerily accurate. He predicted the housing crash and the 2008 economic meltdown. He says now that unemployment in the US will double by the end of the year, and that there will be another push to enact the Lisbon treaty, which is key to solidifying the power of the European Union as a superstate. The Irish will be forced to vote on the treaty again in September or October, despite having already rejected it.
But his experience quickly soured, as he was followed, found evidence that his hotel room had been searched, and was arrested for taking a photo of the sea. After repeated detentions and angry confrontations with Greek feds, he packed and fled the area. In his final post, six days after his oh-so cheery beginning, he wrote:
“My experience over the last several days in Greece has granted me a single, diamond-hard opinion…we must fight, fight, fight, now – right now, this second, with every cubic inch of our souls – to stop identity cards.
“I can tell you right now that the argument ‘If I've done nothing wrong, why would I worry about showing who I am?’ is hogwash. Worse than that, it's horse hockey. It's all about the power to ask, the obligation to show, the justification of one's existence, the power of the asker over the subservience of the asked.
“I don't care if you don't love liberty. For the love of yourself: fight identity cards. Don't let them happen. STOP IDENTITY CARDS. Stop identity cards. And while you're about it: stop identity cards. And that's all I have to say, you will be delighted to know, about Bilderberg 2009.”
He states "I always desired to serve my country,
ensure basic freedoms and fight for justice and the American way. This
had been my dream since childhood..."
Yet after his experiences in Afghanistand and Iraq, he concludes that none of the people he beat, harrassed and detained, none of the people whose bones he broke, were actually guilty of anything. And now he has formed a group called Vets for Rethinking Afghanistan. Here's his story:
I was on liberty in Australia,
dancing at a club I can't remember sometime around midnight, when it
happened. The music shut off and an announcement came on: "America is
under attack. Head back to your ships." This was the worst--the
impossible. This was September 11, 2001.
Back
at my ship, ambulance sirens blared. Hundreds of Marines stood on deck,
anxiously awaiting word. Someone said the Pentagon had been attacked.
My platoon sergeant stood up and delivered a fiery speech filled with
"No one [expletive] with America!" and "We're going to kick some ass!"
Later that night, the same sergeant turned to me asked me if I was
ready.
Without giving it a second thought, I replied, "This is what I joined for."
Flash
forward to a few weeks ago, as I recalled those words testifying before
Senator John Kerry and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I sat
where a young Kerry was once seated as he awoke the nation to the grim
realities of war in Vietnam. I explained to the committee that I always
desired to serve my country, ensure basic freedoms and fight for
justice and the American way. This had been my dream since childhood, a
way to honor my Mexican immigrant parents who worked tirelessly to give
my family a better life, a way out of an East Los Angeles neighborhood
plagued by gang violence. Yet what I witnessed and experienced during a
seven-month deployment in Afghanistan followed by another in Iraq has
forever shattered this once noble ambition.
As
an infantry rifleman in the Marines Corps, I saw so much of these wars
through nightly patrols. We were trained to approach a point of
interest on foot, coordinating with translators whose sole vested
interest in supplying us intelligence was to earn money and aid. We
would gather information that often proved faulty, and question locals
to the point we felt comfortable conducting a raid. After receiving an
order, we would ransack homes, destroying windows and doors, chairs and
tables, families and lives--detaining and arresting anyone who seemed
suspicious. The problem, of course, was that it was impossible to
distinguish militant Taliban members or Al Qaeda from innocent
civilians. Everyone became a suspect.
For several years now, citizen investigators Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis have been laboring to alert the world to the truth about what happened at the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11/01. My detailed article about their research is here.
I reported last month that Ranke and Marquis (who call themselves Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT) were consolidating their hours of video evidence into a more concise format that edits all the lengthy interviews into a
single 60 minute video called “National Security Alert.”
I spoke to Craig Ranke today; he told me that the new video is nearly complete. As a bit of an appetizer, he has released a nine minute excerpt that focuses on the role of Lloyde England. The new video has been posted at Rense as
well as 911blogger and has already garnered 16,000 views on YouTube.
Here's some background from my previous post for those who need to be convinced that this video is worth their time to watch:
The most riveting segment in the CIT footage is of the interview
with Lloyde England, a taxi cab driver who was photographed numerous
times just after the attack. In all the photos, England and his cab
are on Route 27, on the bridge going over Columbia Pike. The front
windshield of his cab has a big hole in it and the cab is at a stop and
straddling the lanes. A broken light pole lies nearby.
England’s
story is that he was going 40 mph when he felt the jet go over head,
and then the light pole came smashing through his front windshield. He
says he then skidded sideways to a stop, and that a stranger stopped
and helped him remove the light pole from the windshield, and then left
without ever giving his name, or even speaking a word.
England’s
story is suspect because photos show the hood of his sedan untouched
and gleaming like a mirror, although his front windshield was
destroyed. England is quite clear that it was not the smaller section
at the top of the light pole that impaled his windshield, but the big,
40 foot, 247 pound pole. He contends that after it pierced his
windshield, with perhaps five feet of the top end of the pole inside
the cab, that the other 35 feet stuck straight out into the air, not
touching the hood of the cab.
The question is, with the
windshield destroyed, what held the pole up the in air? CIT drove with
England to his property in the country to inspect the cab. They
hypothesized that perhaps the narrow end of the pole had pierced the
back seat or floorboards of the cab, holding it in place and not
allowing it to touch the hood of the cab. But their inspection showed
that there was only an insignificant rip in the rear seat, and no
damage to the floorboards. Although the dashboard was damaged, no part
of the hood, including the edge near the windshield, showed any damage.
What makes the story even more incredible is that England claims
that as he was removing the pole from the windshield, he fell down, but
managed, even as he was on the ground, to keep holding the pole in the
air. Remember that the pole is 40 feet long and weighs 247 pounds,
while England appears to be about 65 years old.
Pressed
to explain how it can be that the pole never touched the hood of the
sedan, England said only “The car speaks for itself.” Unfortunately
for England, the car seems to be saying that his account can not
possibly be true.
In addition, with 13 witnesses saying that
the plane went no where near those light poles, it seems clear that
something else caused the damage to England’s windshield.
The
video with England validates CIT’s practice of keeping the camera
rolling as much as possible, even during casual conversation, as the
most damning statements from both England and his wife came out
spontaneously and unexpectedly. While Ranke and England’s wife were
chatting at the Englands’ home, Ranke told her that they had determined
that the jet never hit the Pentagon, but kept on going, and, amazingly,
she agreed! The audio is hard to hear and she then refused to say
more, but her meaning was clear. Mrs. England, who works for the FBI,
also said that she knows why her husband’s car was not impounded as
evidence, but wasn’t going to tell.
England spontaneously offered
this damning statement: “You gotta understand something. When people
do things and get away with it, you…eventually it’s gonna come to me,
and when it comes to me, it’s gonna be so big, I can’t do nothing about
it.”
CIT also kept the camera running during the 90 minute drive
to see England’s car, and captured a few very interesting statements on
tape. Although England speaks generally and indirectly, in the context
of a conversation about the attack at the Pentagon, his meaning is
clear.
England: I wasn’t supposed to be involved with this,
this is too big for me, man, this is a big thing. This is a world
thing happening, I’m a small man…I’m not supposed to be involved in
this. This is for other people, people who have money and all this
kind of stuff.
Ranke: Your point that these people who have all the money…
England: This is their thing.
Ranke: This is their event.
England: This is for them.
Ranke: Meaning they’re doing it for their own reasons…
England: (with conviction) That’s right. I’m not supposed to be in it.
-----------------------------
Ranke: They must have planned it.
England: It was planned.
-----------------------
England: You know what history is? It’s not the truth. It’s “his story.” Has nothing to do with the truth.
As
someone who has been researching the 9/11 story for two years, and has
experienced mockery, abuse and denials from the government and media,
it was a thrill to hear someone who was directly involved in the
cover-up to admit on tape that it was a big event, a world event,
planned by rich people for their own reasons.
Incredibly,
once Ranke explained that 13 witnesses had all placed the jet at the
north side of the Citgo station, on a trajectory that could not have
knocked down the five light poles, England changed his story and
declared that he was not where all the photographs show him to be, but
actually well north of Columbia Pike – where no light poles were
knocked down.
Ranke showed England numerous photos of himself,
his damaged cab and the downed light pole on the bridge over Columbia
Pike. Even faced with incontrovertible evidence of his exact location,
England resolutely maintained that pictures don’t always tell the truth
and that the accident with the light pole had taken place much further
north.
After watching the 90 minute video of the interview with
Lloyde England, the man is completely discredited. Ranke points out
that England may well be a victim himself, in that he may have been
forced to tell the story of the pole impaling his windshield. But his
story is so incredible, and his protestations that he was not in the
location where multiple photos and videos place him to be on that day
are so absurd, that Lloyde England’s account now stands as perhaps the
most vulnerable point in the edifice of lies that constitute the
official story of the attack on the Pentagon.
Map of the world with signatories to the Convention Against Torture. Dark green = signed and ratified. Light green = signed but not ratified. Grey = not signed.
This is the complete text of part 1. Parts 2 and 3 deal with how the program is to be administered, and can be read here.
The USA is clearly in violation of this convention. Who enforces it and what are they waiting for?
Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention,
the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for
such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a
confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed
or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or
a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind,
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or
with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person
acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering
arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
2.
This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or
national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider
application.
Article 2
1.
Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative,
judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory
under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances
whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal
political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as
a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
Recent Comments