var VideoID = "14641"; var Width = 600; var Height = 344;
Wow. Thanks to Richard for quickly, clearly, and precisely covering major points. And thanks to Fox Detroit for giving him the opportunity to speak, and for the respectful treatment of Richard and his presentation.
Excellent! Richard looks great in this too.
FOX gets more unpredictable everyday . . .
Great that the dust evidence was referred to and that he wasn't lured off course by claims of alleged KSM confessions of guilt.
Talk about getting right to the point. And he wasn't distracted one bit when the anchor tried to get him off-message. Gage's best four minutes to date.
Way to go, Richard!
we see a significant difference in styles. IMO, both have their places.
I would like to see Secretary of Transportation Mineta's testimony discussed openly in interviews -- I have done so, repeatedly, and Mineta's whistleblower testimony is so very important. Does Jesse include this in his book?
Jesse does talk about the lack of air defenses on 9/11 -- a crucially important point.
Well executed! I'm impressed!
This was a great interview. Mineta's testimony and the lack of air defense facts are critical. They are also free of complicated scientific terms. It's good to see that Steven Jones is expressing the value of expanding the points we bring up in our outreach, ESPECIALLY in public. It only adds more credibility to CD theories, to bring up these more easily provable facts you mention here ProfJones. We don't want to be framed as a 1 smoking gun justice movement. Gage has to be careful to say what we have evidence of. We can also start mentioning what we have proof of.
"We don't want to be framed as a 1 smoking gun justice movement."
Jon: You are certainly welcome to start your own organization supporting your own issues and discuss them elsewhere.
What Jon are you writing to and what are you talking about?
911blogger.com or is it ae911truthblogger.com? I could have sworn this was supposed to be a 9/11 Truth site, and not a site to promote ae911truth.org and all CD issues. I gave up anyway Aidan. You guys win. You win. Congratulations!!! Since you asked though... here is my comment about Richard's interview that I posted on Facebook.
"I thought Richard did well...
Notice Fox's clever opening that had a soundbyte of Bush speaking for the families?
Notice how Huel brought up a multitude of issues to make Richard look foolish... including the "heroic" yadda yadda? Notice how he talked about the Government as the authority... notice the "look" on Huel's face... as if this man he's talking to is "crazy?" Notice that they didn't show WTC7 (reminiscent of Steven Jones on Tucker Carlson)?
If Richard talked about the families... that have called for a new investigation on several occasions... if he talked about the easily discredited 9/11 Commission... or Philip Zelikow and some of the things that he did... and came back to the families and the 9/11 Commission... again and again... "Huel" would have no where to go, and wouldn't be able to make him look "crazy..." He also couldn't point to the Government authority. He could also make Huel look like an idiot by asking him when he ever covered any of the families' call for a real investigation...
Sadly... people look to the pundits (the people they trust) to know how to feel about something. No matter HOW GOOD Richard does. You have to go for blood so to speak. You have to rip these guys apart in a way that isn't aggressive.
That is why when people who are supposedly advocates for 9/11 Justice get precious TV time, they should be more ACTIVIST than author, or "professional."
Hopefully you will understand some of my frustration, and also understand why I'm not on the TV. :)"
Hey Aidan... I made more movies!!!
And this one...
The main problem facing those that desire real justice and accountability for the attacks of 9/11 is the lack of evidence that can be shown to be beyond any reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt concerning 9/11 can and has been artificially created to mislead and misinform the general public.
If I may take some of the points made by Jon Gold concerning Richard Gage's interview on Fox.
Jon says "If Richard talked about the families... that have called for a new investigation on several occasions"
The families and their calls for a new investigation are supported by Richard Gage. The Main Stream Media's standard reply is that there has already been an investigation. The MSM uses the families tragedy to support their fallacious arguments. So the result is "he said she said". The only way to curtail the MSM from using the families in their defense, is to have a family member present, in support of 9/11 Truth, as was shown by the presence of Manny Badillo on the resent National Public Radio interview.
Jon says "if he talked about the easily discredited 9/11 Commission"
The 9/11 Commission absolved itself of explaining the physics behind the destruction of the 3 WTC Buildings on 9/11. As Richard Gage's stated intention for AE911Truth is to focus on the physical evidence concerning the destruction of the 3 WTC Buildings, he investigates and exposes the scientifically fraudulent NIST Reports. The fact that the 9/11 Commission did not even mention Building 7 is always a good point to make.
Jon says Richard should mention "Philip Zelikow and some of the things that he did..."
Philip Zelikow is still a prominent and successful member of the establishment. He continues today with his insidious mission to alter and subvert the words spoken by John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. No one yet has been able to bring this criminal to justice due to public relations, plausible deniability and fostering of reasonable doubt. Again this becomes a "he said she said".
I cannot understand why Jon Gold believes that the 9/11 Truth has become exclusively about Controlled Demolition when it clearly has not. So many factors make up 9/11 Truth such as Put options, stand-down, the war on terror, torture, civil liberties and the CIA groomed wars raging as I write.
What the physical evidence for Controlled Demolition does have, that supersedes most of the other evidence concerning 9/11, which can be endlessly disputed by the inappropriate use of reasonable doubt, plausible deniability and fallacious argument, is the WTC dust evidence. Why is it that this WTC dust evidence has been so expressly ignored?
We all need to get on the same page not just for the victims or their families but for the future of our world.
For a new investigation on 9/11/2006, February 2008, and during the ballot initiative? I don't recall Richard mentioning that. The 9/11 Commission, the definitive account of 9/11, is easily shown to be a farce. 1000x1000 over. Philip Zelikow belongs in jail. WTC7 wasn't mentioned in the 9/11 Report? Really? Not only do we need to get on the same page, but we need to start being accurate with the things we say.
The 9/11 Commission Report fails to mention the total collapse of 47-story steel-framed skyscraper Building 7 at 5:20 on the day of the attack.
You said, "the 9/11 Commission did not even mention Building 7." I can't believe anyone in this movement would honestly suggest that we shouldn't focus on the crimes of Philip Zelikow, or the ridiculousness of the 9/11 Commission's Report which was sold to the world as the definitive account of 9/11. You know... the all encompassing definitive account of 9/11... that if you discredited it... someone like Huel wouldn't be able to bring up the heroism of Flight 93, etc... as a means to make you look foolish because if the investigation into the entirety of the event was flawed, which is putting it nicely, then that brings into question EVERYTHING about the attacks.
Jon Gold: "I could have sworn this was supposed to be a 9/11 Truth site, and not a site to promote ae911truth.org and all CD issues. I gave up anyway"
As of this writing, there are 25 posts on page one of the front page here. 12 are exclusively about CD and 13 are not. Since you're all about accuracy, 13 vs.12 is a majority. And you haven't "given up." Stop lying. You'll be back slammin something about CD. You enter these threads and disrupt the flow of mature commentary and support for the genuine efforts of professionals dealing professionally with serious problems in the account of the destruction of office buildings that took the lives of nearly 3000 people. That makes you a disruptor in my book. Beyond that, I don't know what you are. And yes, I'm risking being banned here for saying that. I don't give a shit. At this point, I'm beyond arguing over the merits of chasing Sunder and Gross vs. Zelikow and Hamilton. It's a fools errand to even get into that debate. I take my cue from Steven Jones' latest comments about the TV appearances of Gage and Ventura; both have done well and both have their place. It seems nearly everyone here sees that except for you. You are either a supportive part of a movement, or you are a movement unto yourself. It's your choice. Most of us here have already made that choice.
It was his role to sound and look a bit skeptical. I don't think he'd have looked differently at someone else bringing up other aspects of a conspiracy.
Also, didn't you notice that he ended by saying "You may be proved right, you may be proved wrong, but It's OK to ask"?
It is a bit too much that you expect architectural professionals not to discuss the powerful evidence of controlled demolition. You understand that that will never happen, no matter how much noise you make about it. So what *is* your point of deploring the efforts of The Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?
You will notice that Fox does not show footage of the destruction of Building 7.
As Richard Gage has made clear on frequent interviews, is that AE911Truth does not promote speculation and their concern is the destruction of the three buildings on 9/11.
kdub says "Mineta's testimony and the lack of air defense facts are critical."
I agree but these topics are not within the stated modus operandi of AE911Truth, which the founder Richard Gage represents.
It is often difficult to get local media affiliates such as Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS to do these interviews. The local media affiliates in all the cities Richard went to were all notified (well in advance) with press releases and other material that informed them about this AE911Truth presentation coming to their town. It was great to see this one TV station in Detroit take the time to interview Richard. Now that the ten year anniversary is coming close we have to double our efforts to get them to do more of these interviews. I also want to thank those radio stations that did interviews with Richard before and while he was on tour.
Take Care Matt
We need to thank Illene Proctor, AE's publicist, for helping to line these things up. Although they were local affiliates, some were pretty tasty, like this one on FOX. A mix of radio and TV interviews.
It is great to know that both AE911Truth and Remember Building 7 are now represented professionally in terms of P.R. and media buys. And now in the case of AE, a distributor for Blueprint - Celebrity Video Distribution.
No matter how you slice it, yesterday (4/18) was a helluva day for 9/11 Truth.
Hello Truthseekers & Truthtellers,
A while back I heard the statement "if you can't get the media to pay attention then become the media". I did something about that statement and took classes to learn how to produce my own program, work with the equipment and learn the editing process. Now, I'll be the first to say I'm no polished interviewer, but I didn't see anyone else taking the initiative to become the media, so I did the best I could with my limited skill level. At least I'm doing something about the controlled media problem in this country and trying to reach people with my local access media program called "MEET THE TRUTH". Over the last two years I have produced almost 2 dozen programs and I have been showing some great truth documentaries and doing some interviews with a number of people who are fighting for truth. My program is 2 hours long and it gets shown twice a week on channel 14. I'm now on the board of directors of my community media center in West Allis, Wisconsin. When Richard Gage came to my hometown of Milwaukee on his Midwest tour I interviewed him for about 20 minutes for my upcoming show. Here's a 2-part youtube to watch of that interview.
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0n_H16SkUY
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BR-DKbq5nI
Take Care Matt
"You may be proved right, you may be proved wrong, but It's OK to ask."
I wish everyone remembered that it was OK to ask.
Great job Richard and kudos to the people (probably volunteers) who did the legwork to get an interview!
Richard Gage has done a brilliant job here with this interview. This is his best interview so far because he is clear, unflustered, concise and eloquent.
Thank You Richard Gage.
I'm so impressed to see how distilled and cogent the choice of words is. Richard really leveraged this few minutes for its true maximum potential.
On topic, balanced in tone - on the one hand with a tone of "sense of urgency", but at the same time not giving off any negative energy of "angry man complaining on TV". Calm and unflustered.
(...and, do I see a new short haircut and glasses? Looking sharp there, RG!)
Hey folks I am planning to compile a list of great webCLIPS like this one as well as webSITES to mass email to folks as well get closer to the 10 year anniversary. If anyone has some other good ones please send to me at my email below. And if you like this idea let me know and maybe I will post a blog on it here at 911blogger, or post it yourself if you wish.
Please send TITLE + LINK
send to: email@example.com
I loved watching this. Richard appears to have moved to a "lean and mean" look, and I like it. Also, the way that he handled himself - way to go, Richard!
This interview makes good grooming material for big-time interviews where the interviewers can maintain their innocence, such as in this one. At the end, the hardest part is dealt with. It is a question of what about congress, the dems, the repubs... Ending with this is our evidence and it calls for a new investigation, and... "Let the chips fall where they may". But it just looked ready for prime time, eh?
Wouldn't it be cool to break into a major network with an interview/ Well, if Fox, maybe CNN.
really good. kept on it. didn't fluster.
point after point after point.
in the heat of live tv, awesome.
Going to worry those PENTBOM boys soon.
I thought RG did well, sticking to his MO and evidence only- pointing to the need for a new investigation