Transcript of Richard Gage explaining controlled demolition on KMPH in Fresno

Is the dam beginning to break? 

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. 

Kim Stephens:  So, what, a forty-seven story building?

Gage:  Yeah, it’s called Building Seven, a football field away from the Twin Towers. 

Kim Stephens:  Okay, so what we’re showing is left, what happened in fact, and right is  controlled, where you are using or the people who made this happen, used demolition, explosive devices.  

Gage:  Indeed, this a direct comparison.  You can see that indeed, almost freefall speed, freefall acceleration, through forty thousand tons of structural steel.  That is uncanny.  So we have 700 architects and engineers demanding a new investigation as a result of this evidence and the evidence in the World Trade Center that is very explosive. Almost every architect and engineer we’ve showed this information to, agrees with us that these are controlled demolitions.  If we can get them to look at the information, because obviously the implications of a controlled demolition are…dark for our country.  Because that means somebody besides Al Qaeda was involved.  Because these have to be easily, three of the most highly secure buildings, outside of the Pentagon. 

Kopi Sotiropulos:  Now if that was a controlled demolition, would there not be any evidence at the ground level of explosives within the debris that’s left?

Gage:  Indeed.  And what we find down there is pools of molten iron.  Several tons.

Kopi Sotiropulos:  What is that doing there?

Gage:  Exactly, what is it doing there?   The first responders see it, the structural engineers see it, it’s documented by FEMA.  The melting of steel.  Normal office fires is what’s supposed to have brought these buildings down.  Along with jet plane impacts.  Jet fuel and office fires don’t produce molten iron or molten steel.  It doesn’t begin to melt until three thousand degrees.  But what we have is, the fires only produce maybe fourteen, sixteen hundred degrees.  So what produced all that molten iron?  Well, it has in it the chemical evidence of a special incendiary, which is thermite, a high tech incendiary used to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.

Kim Stephens:  You found that?

Gage:  Indeed, in all the dust throughout lower Manhattan, we have a four to six inch thick layer of this dust, and throughout it we have evidence of tiny spheres, billions of them, several tons of previously molten iron.  Well how does that happen?  If you have molten iron…the by-product of thermite is molten iron and it’s dispersed through out all this dust. 

Kopi Sotiropulos:  You were allowed to go in and get samples and examine it?

Gage:  Oh, there’s plenty of dust.  A lot of people have this dust, and four of these samples have been sent to physicist Steven Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University. And they find in it, not only these spheres, which others have found too, USGS, RJ Lee, doing toxicology studies.  These spheres have iron, aluminum, fluorine, manganese, very unusual elements associated only with thermite. And there are small chips of unignited thermite as well.  This is very high-tech thermite, nano-thermite, it’s not found in a cave in Afghanistan, it’s produced in very sophisticated defense department contracting laboratories. 

Kim Stephens:  Okay, well, we have an enemy here, we...the finger has been pointed to, this was the work of Al Qaeda, this was the work of Osama bin Laden, at least to get the planes all going into the buildings and into the field in Pennsylvania and into the Pentagon.  Is there no way that they then could still be the enemy that placed those in the buildings first, and then did the incendiary device via a plane second?

Gage:  Right.  Well, what you have to ask is who had access to the buildings?  Did Al Qaeda have access to these highly secure buildings?  Probably not.  Did they have access to sophisticated nano-thermite, where the particles are one thousand times smaller than a human hair?  Probably not.  Somebody else has to be investigated. That’s why we have 700 architects and engineers demanding a real investigation.  We don’t have the whole theory as to how this happened, who did it, why.  We just lay out the facts, like we did last night in the Veterans Memorial Auditorium, and we demand a real investigation, and they’ll find out who, why, how, et cetera. 

Kopi Sotiropulos:  Now let me ask you, I’m person X, I want to place something in one of those buildings.  Where would I carry it, how big would it be?  Is it that visible that I would be spotted by security?  Or could I place it in one of my tooth fillings?

Gage:  We’re talking about several tons of nano-thermite and ordinary thermite.  One would have to have access through security.  So the security company involved for the World Trade Center should be thoroughly investigated.  And it turns out to be Securi-com, Stratesec, somebody should look to see who’s on the board of those companies. Some very interesting individuals turn out to be.  In addition, one would have to have the cover, of say, an elevator modernization, which was in fact going on nine months prior to 9/11, so that there were workers throughout the World Trade Center, that had access to the hoistway which is immediately adjacent to the core columns and beams in the building. 

Kim Stephens:  You’re not trying to freak out the country, but you can’t help but feel a little freaked out by this. 

Gage:  Yeah, you’re getting it. 

Kim Stephens:  Yeah.  And of course this is something we want to talk with you about a whole lot more, and we’re out of time.  But we do have a great deal of information on our website, kmph.com.  Thank you very much for your time today. 

Gage:  You're so welcome.

Kim Stephens:  You’re opening  up a lot to think about.  We'll be right back.

Comments

[psikeyhackr]

Let’s just face some simple facts.

Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. They must also sway in the wind. The people who design skyscrapers MUST figure out how much steel and how much concrete they are going to put on every level before they even dig the hole for the foundation.

After EIGHT YEARS why don’t we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? The NIST report does not even specify the TOTAL for the concrete. The total for the steel is in three places. So even if the planes did it that 10,000 page report is CRAP!

Conspiracies are irrelevant. The Truth Movement should be marching on all of the engineering schools in the country.

Watch that Purdue simulation. If a 150 ton airliner crashes near the top of a skyscraper at 440 mph isn’t the building going to sway? Didn’t the survivors report the building “moving like a wave”? So why do the core columns in the Purdue video remain perfectly still as the plane comes in?

That is the trouble with computer simulations. If they are good, they are very good. But if they have a defect either accidental or deliberate they can be REALLY STUPID once you figure out the flaws.

The distribution of steel and concrete is going to affect the sway of a skyscraper whether it is from the wind or an airliner.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

How much does one complete floor assembly weigh?

You know those square donut floor slabs? They were 205 ft square with a rectangular hole for the core. There was a steel rebar mesh embedded in the concrete which was poured onto corrugated steel pans which were supported by 35 and 60 foot trusses. There has been talk about those things pancaking on each other for years.

But has anyone ever said what the whole thing weighed? Why haven't we seen that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? The concrete alone is easy to compute, about 600 tons. But the concrete could not be separated from the entire assembly, the knuckles of the trusses were embedded in the concrete. So what did the whole thing weigh and why haven't the EXPERTS mentioned that A LOT?

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

So why hasn't Richard Gage and his buddies produced a table with the TONS of STEEL and TONS fo CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? How much computing power do they have compared to the early 1960s when the buildings were designed? I asked Gage about that in May of 2008 at Chicago Circle Campus and he got a surprised look on his face and gave me this LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blueprints. Gravity hasn't changed since the 1960s. They should be able to come up with some reasonable numbers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

[King of planet pop tart]

by the way i know i am not a lizard, it's just a nickname

[King of planet pop tart]

holy shit! the trolls are all over the place. hehe i've seen some total b$ written in the comments but you kids take the cake. Jones is a nuclear fusion expert?

a limited-hangout fake-opposition disinformation campaign???

what the @#$% are you doing besides ranting?

I could go for hours and hours laughing my lizard ass off at u ppl, but hehe i've got better things to do. If you wanna debate me "Student of 9/11" you're free to.

I do have one question, how much are you getting paid to look like a total douche?

[kriss]

thanks for transcript
people are finnaly waking up

STOP this coverup

God bless USA

[student of 9/11]

Note that those "911truth" people also tend to continually chatter about "Able Danger" (ooooooh, scary; a name that came from the lying U.S. government, clearly carefully chosen for public consumption, something at which high-level disinformers are very good), which props up the government's physically impossible lies regarding the demise (annihilations) of the Twin Towers (and, of course, Bldg 7) by casting aspersions at (a hyped-up 'failure' to track) so-called "Muslim hijackers" (as if we suddenly can take the lying government's word about the core fictitious element of The Big Lie of 9/11 -- and there is no better way of helping sustain The Big Lie(s) of 9/11 to than by talking about the false-flag operation's most emotional/hateful [and enemy-creating] fictitious element as if it's real).

Once we know that the government has lied about 9/11, in an attempt to fool us all, we must all be skeptical of all the government's claims which comprise the various elements of the psy-op false-flag operation.

The "911truth" people act like we can just take the lying government's (and media's) word for what hit the towers, and why. They even oppose/disregard/dismiss/ignore/marginalize/suppress all information to the contrary, even when it supports the notion that the towers were wired with a network of pre-positioned explosives! (see, for eg, http://911blimp.net/vid_WTC1explosions.shtml )

When 'both' [sic!] sides "agree" that Muslim hijackers hijacked airliners (a more self-reinforcing lie is hard to think of), and flew them into buildings, people are going to continue to 'think' that they 'know' who/what to blame (and what group it's now OK to mass hate) for the barely confined annihilation of the WTC skyscrapers.

That seems to be how the disinfo works, what "911truth" forces are doing, and why they are doing it: Their tainted, limited 'opposition' to The Big Lie helps keep the most critical element of TBL afloat in the minds of the public, thus taking the heat off the anti-Constitutional anti-democratic renegade U.S. government.

[George in Toronto]

Fact: Bush regime could not have planned the 911 attacks in 9 months in office.Billy Goat Clinton had to have a authorization hand in the whole affair. Check out Marvin Bush's roll in his company security in the 3 WTC bldgs. Notice, his company folded days after Sept 11? Reason ,the 911 attcks are not exposed is because the Democrates-fundedand approved the operation,All the passegers on the planes were flown to canada and put to death.Whole thing stinks and no matter who comes forward--the government will never expose it self--Zionist .If by chance one individual that has worked in planning the operation 911--the person will be assassinated in no time.America is evil :^(

[Erin S. Myers]

To really drive the point home on my response to the 'student's' first comment below.

Yes, student, just so you know, I'll debate you and your studies to some great length if you wish to maintain the position that the combined work of people like Gage, Jones, Balsamo, Aidan, and even (God forbid, snark snark, anyone mention their name) the efforts of CIT... as if nothing really worth investing honest critique and deserved compliment.

Just to give you a fair-game heads up... I feel equally prepared to discuss the state-of-art in modern MSM/MIC psyop (and its limitations), just as well discuss and debate based upon my own studies, the possibilities, probabilities, successes, failures, and limitations of thermonuclear dynamics, electromagnetic dynamics, disassociation by energetic frequency, holographic cloak/projection... so on and so forth.

Yet for now... based upon the preponderance of evidence and/or lack thereof exculpatory evidence demonstrably withheld ONLY BY Authority,

as well a highly inclusive probability calculus....

... the comparatively parochial approach of iron/aluminum incendiary is hardly (in my opinion) making for a wild goose-chase threatening to lead truth seekers catastrophically astray.

Erin S. Myers

[Erin S. Myers]

How is this you say, student?

I line of inquiry, guided and shaped by the most general of engineering and architectural basics, with an arguably 'modest' (comparatively speaking, from a perspective of knowing how much more complex the conversation can get) approach in chemistry dealing with fundamental exothermic reactions given a mind-bending twist in power and speed through little more than nano-particulation assembly and a run down to Radio Shack for the rest of the sequencing system?

This is a rather elegantly feasible line of inquiry into the 'how did they do it' criminal genius of the ACTUAL perps

The pilot's investigation material fits.
The NIST/FBI/FAA positions are understood.
The MSM.
Even (especially) the necessary role of plausible patsies to take the heat of blame.

How exactly your studies lead you to conclude this to be a "limited-hangout fake-oppositio campaign"... 'still leaving UBL holding the bag and the inside perps running scott-free'????

You'll need to expound your theory... just a tad.

Erin S. Myers

[student of 9/11]

Based upon my studies, I'd say that all the chatter about "controlled demolition" and "nano-thermite" is nothing but a limited-hangout fake-opposition disinformation campaign.

While it appears to (and, to some extent, does) oppose the official explanation of 9/11, it doesn't blow it completely out of the water, thus making it seem sane to go on blaming hijackers [sic] for damages which could not possibly have been caused by airliners [sic] (iow, status quo).

The many nano-particles in all that special dust at Ground Zero are evidence of widespread molecular dissociation (aka disintegration), resulting from exposure to nuclear(-like) temperatures.

They are not evidence of the use nano-thermite.

For Steven E Jones, a nuclear fusion expert, to disregard multiple pieces of "nuclear winter" and other evidence of a humongously intense GZ energy surplus, while also denying the possibility of fusion without requiring a large/dirty fission device to trigger it, is nothing but brazen, demonstrably false gatekeeping on his part.

Gage must surely know better, and thus be in on it, too. "Controlled Demolition" does not result in huge pyroclastic debris flows, so much 'dust' laden with nanoparticles, and nanoparticle-producing "hot spots" which persist for 99 days despite constant dousing with water. Never has, never will.

Sustaining doubt in, instead of totally vanquishing and rejecting, the government's blatantly impossible lies is what makes for a good 911 disinformation non-movement. And that's what those "911truth" people are doing.

We needn't be certain of how the towers were annihilated in order to totally reject the notion that that can be blamed on hijackers or Arabs or Muslims (or thermite, for that matter), yet all these people do is advance an inadequate conventional chemical compound controlled demolition theory (but one which still somehow makes it seem possible to go on falsely blaming Osama et al) and "demand a real investigation". Pulled punches are the surest sign of fake opposition.