Exclusive: 15 Minute Q&A with Richard Gage, AIA, on Resolution 15-6

Saturday, May 16th, the American Institute of Architects will hold a vote on Resolution 15-6 in Atlanta.

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) Finalized Resolution 15-6: To cause the AIA to adopt a Position Statement in support of a new investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

"Thousands of members of the architecture and engineering professions, including 55 sponsors of this resolution, believe the NIST investigation did not adhere to the principles of the scientific method and as a result the conclusions of the NIST investigation are fatally flawed."

Source: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aiab105884.pdf

May 2, 2015 - Telephone Interview - Transcribed May 15, 2015

Quick 15 Minute Q&A with Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on the upcoming AIA convention campaign this weekend.

Where are you?

RG: We're in London right now! I will be in a theatrical performance written by Peter Neathey which has played in London about 20 times, it's called "7 Seconds" — I play Richard Gage and conduct a live presentation of the evidence for Building 7's key demolition features. It's a couple hours long.

You're in London right now as apart of your tour, correct?

RG: Yeah, we started in Reykjavik on the 11th of April and we went to Copenhagen where we were with Neils Harrit on the stage with around 150 people in attendance. Later on we presented in front of around 950 people in Amsterdam at Delft Technical University—largely students—which was great. Then we're off to Paris, Lavon, and then onto Vienna, Rome, and Budapest. Then we go straight back to Atlanta where the conference is going on with the American Institute of Architects.

Let's get into this AIA stuff -- how did the 55 sponsors come to be?

RG: We have more than 100 AIA members counted among our 2,300 architects and engineers. We realized we could sponsor a resolution, so we got 50 of them to sign the resolution which calls for a new investigation into Building 7. The good news about this is that they have to accept it due to our sponsors, which they did, and on May 16th in a session with 300 delegates a vote will be held. We will have the opportunity to present the evidence for Building 7 and why the NIST investigation is flawed.

So you get to present in front of these 300 delegates before the vote? That's great.

RG: Yes! We have 3 presenters and they get 2 minutes each, but we're a little disappointed that we do not get to actually show Building 7 coming down...we will have to describe it.

Is the voting anonymous? People have been saying that if it is, there would be a better chance of it passing.

RG: Well it's a visual vote, it's very open as to who is voting for what and how many voted and did not for each resolution. It could go both ways. Originally the AIA leadership from the top down bought hook line and sinker of the NIST report. We don't know what the level of openness or discussion was, so among these 300 mid level members I think we would rather have an open vote. I don't think they are going to feel any pressure that might intimidate them in voting openly for the resolution.

What happens if it passes?

RG: I guess it could be amended, but it would be an adopted resolution in writing on their website. I don't know what happens after that, certainly a lot of discussion and hullabaloo will ensue if it passes!

Some say that this could be used to discredit the truth movement by having it rejected by the AIA, which would discredit AE911Truth and the overall message that Building 7 was a demolition and needs to be re-investigated because the NIST report is fraudulent — what do you think about that?

RG: I think that's a risk that we take, you know? Anytime we speak the truth about 9/11 we run the risk of the Powers That Be discrediting or at least trying to discredit us. This is one of those risks and we thought it would be worth taking. At least at the minimum we are bringing the truth about Building 7's uniform, 7 second, symmetrical, free fall collapse, suddenly, on the afternoon of 9/11 at 5:20—which was not hit by an airplane—after witnesses hear explosions. So that information will be given to at least 300 mid level members in this open meeting and that is unprecedented. Now, if they choose to vote down the resolution I don't know what else we could do, but we are presenting at Georgia Tech that night, so hopefully more come to learn more about the controversy.

My good friend goes to SDSU for Mechanical Engineering and his class was assigned to do a report on building failures and his group chose Building 7 — all of their minds have been blown...they're confused as to how it collapsed so symmetrically! Ever since your C-SPAN video and Rudy Dent things seem to have reignited. How's it going since Rudy has jumped on board? He's a former Fire Marshall, 9/11 survivor and FDNY first responder. He's very articulate and his original interview has over 1 million views on youtube.

RG: (Laughter) Yeah that's a phenomenon! And we're just delighted to have Rudy on board of course, he saw Building 7 go down with his own eyes and he was on the towers' pile where he lost brothers. He is quite a force for speaking the truth out there. The video with LeAnn Macadoo who interviewed him is very powerful. We have enjoyed having him on our conference calls and we're strategizing and forming new ways of getting to the fire fighters that haven't been able to speak out yet because of their own internal battles going on. It's been great. I have to go in about 60 seconds, but you can call me anytime.

No problem, one more question before I let you go — recently your 'Solving the Mystery of WTC 7' video on youtube was removed, which was at over 1 million views as your most popular video. None of your other videos were touched and it was just taken off your youtube channel — do you know anything about that?

RG: I sure do. We've been in a series of communications with Google from our attorneys and now they have hired attorneys. We want them to act responsibly and legally with respect to the arbitrary removal of our video. So far it is not going as well as we want it to, they won't even tell us specifically what copyright infringement or spam or commercially deceptive content they have claimed. Obviously they are acting illegally and arbitrarily, but we do believe eventually somehow we will get justice and force them to put it back up. They haven't taken the new one down, but of course we lost the view count which was well over 1 million.

I tried to e-mail you about it when it happened, so I am glad you noticed. Just having a million views gives credibility and helps the video go viral through different youtube channels, so the fact that it was censored is not very cool.

RG: They're just not responsive. A few times they have sent us some lame responses saying basically there's nothing we can do and stating their non-descriptive problems, so we're still continuing that battle too.

Coming up on 15 minutes, I'll let you go now, thanks for this interview and we'll be in contact later. Have a great tour!

RG: Okay. Thank you, Goodbye.


To those in the Atlanta area, Richard Gage, AIA, will be giving his live multimedia presentation 9/11: Blueprint for Truth at Georgia Tech, Saturday, May 16, after the AIA Convention.

Former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney will be joining Mr. Gage at Georgia Tech on Saturday evening.

Link: http://www.eventbrite.com/e/911-blueprint-for-truth-how-and-why-did-3-wtc-skyscrapers-fall-on-911-tickets-16662547127

PS. I had an interview lined up with a Honorary AIA member and Vice President in regards to how the delegation process works and some questions about resolutions, but he cancelled last minute. If I get in touch with him I will share the information here.

voted down

“We are a professional – not a political – organization. But in this case, if we vote “no” on this resolution, we are making a political decision, not a professional one. Thank you very much.” – Daniel Barnum, FAIA

Those were the closing remarks from the lead sponsor of AIA Resolution 15-6, Daniel Barnum, FAIA. Seconds later, the AIA delegates cast their votes. The unfortunate outcome was that an overwhelming majority made the political decision. Resolution 15-6, which called upon the AIA to support a new WTC 7 investigation, was voted down 3,892 to 160, garnering 4% of the delegates’ votes.

The vote came after a number of impassioned statements from supporters and opponents. It was evident that those who opposed the resolution did not fully understand the official explanation of WTC 7’s destruction for which they claimed such adamant support. One architect from New York stated that diesel fuel fires were responsible for WTC 7’s destruction, an explanation that even NIST itself has disavowed.

Resolution 15-6 met the same fate as all but one of the substantive resolutions considered. Even in terms of percentages, the outcome was not that different, with the other four losing resolutions garnering between 6% and 26% of the votes and one being tabled. This does not mitigate our disappointment—nor does it excuse the delegates for their failure to accept their moral and ethical responsibility as architects—but it does illuminate something that we learned: it is difficult to pass even most slightly controversial resolution at the AIA National Convention.

However, that does not signal to us that we should give up on reaching out to the AIA membership. We are pleased to have gained the signatures of another 150 AIA members, seven of whom are fellows of the Institute. We will continue and intensify our outreach efforts with ever more creative and incisive strategies.

We would like to thank everyone who supported and contributed to our AIA resolution campaign. We were able to spark an unprecedented level of dialogue at the convention and gain a much deeper understanding of how we can successfully awaken the architecture community. Thank you.



Sad, but...

Hopefully just bringing the vote up to the floor will awaken a few more people. All it takes is 1 person to change a lot. Look how much Richard Gage, Abby Martin, Jon Gold, Neils Harrit etc have done on their own due to 9/11 truth. Stay positive, even though this is disappointing.


but not unexpected. It still astounds me that to this day, people in this profession still know so little about the greatest failure in their profession. And after reading much of Fran Shure's wonderful article series, I am certain they don't want to know. There still seems to be a deep rooted fear of acceptance so they lie to themselves about imaginary diesel fires to help them sleep at night. Would the vote be different if a loop of WTC 7 coming down played behind the podium? Or David Chandler's excellent video measuring the freefall of bldg 7? Would reason overcome fear? I don't think so. Presuming these were anonymous votes and the delegates were free of executive pressures to vote of their freewill, it's hard to believe they would vote against it unless that many are just that unaware of the facts. If that's the case, then the campaign should run yearlong, informationing every architect firm listed with the AIA across the country, giving presentations in their conference rooms if they'll allow, just like Richard did the very first time. If not in their conference rooms, in the libraries of their hometowns. mail Info packets explaining BOTH sides, implore them to review the NIST report and evaluate their conclusions. If they cannot reconcile them with their own experience, education and professional critique, then maybe we will see a markedly better result at the next convention.

Better luck next year, and the year after that and the year after that, and so on.... the truth doesn't go away, it only grows.

peace everyone

Thanks to the 160

Thanks to the 160 who voted for the resolution.

Yes. Much thanks to these courageous folks!

Stalwarts for Truth.

This vote scenario is kind of like a broken record of past historical significances where a few courageous people try to present scientific facts and common sense against a wave of flat earthers. Of course, finally, in the end or generations later, everyone agrees that the earth is round.

For the people who voted "no". If, later, they really do end up discovering the facts about WTC7, then "how do you live with that?"..."how do you live with the guilt of failing in your duty as a professional and ethical human being?" To me, this kind of guilt would be extremely painful. And perhaps, the "solution" for these folks' pain is to just go numb or become "less aware" or some other type of self-justification.

150 new signatures.

Absolutely. And don't think for a minute that some of those other delegates aren't going to be thinking and arguing and possibly researching the issue on their own when they get home. Fantastic, I say.

More info on the AIA and contact information

"Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the AIA offers education, government advocacy, community redevelopment, and public outreach to support the architecture profession and improve its public image."


The AIA's hours of operation are from 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. You may contact us any time and an Information Central Associate will respond to your query.

Mailing Address
The American Institute of Architects
1735 New York Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20006-5292


Option 1: Contract Documents
Option 2: Information Central
Option 3: Continuing Education System (CES) Support
Option 4: AIA Bookstore
Option 5: AIA Convention


Contract Documents: docstechsupport@aia.org

Information Central: infocentral@aia.org

Membership Services: memberservices@aia.org

CES Support: cessupport@aia.org

AIA Store: bookstore@aia.org

AIA Convention: conventionreg@aia.org


Need Help

Visit the AIA Support Web Page


In the real world..."improve its public image"

Exposing the 9/11 Deception would be the greatest thing they could possible do to -"improve its public image".

But alas, the manufactured version forced into the minds of the unsuspecting prevails.

Not Astute, not even structurally astute

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) is a professional organization for architects in the United States. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the AIA offers education, government advocacy, community redevelopment, and public outreach to support the architecture profession and improve its public image. The AIA also works with other members of the design and construction team to help coordinate the building industry. Source: Wikipedia

In my opinion, the 83,500+ members need to educate themselves on the way to build skyscrapers that don't collapse at free-fall speed from office fires. So far, only 160 members are apparently aware of that "design flaw problem". I also suggest that the remaining 83,340+ members use their institute's prestige and join with the thousands of citizens who are expecting the truth regarding 9/11 and expecting responsibility. Don't wait for someone else to act. Don't let your position be "I was an architect, and they weren't coming after me" . I agree with Orangutan, contact the AIA.

PS If I was a builder, I would hire one of the 160 who get it!

4%? What?

I am stunned. Are their heads in the sand?

“We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” (A. Rand)

The reality of WTC7 and 9/11 may be a hard pill to swallow, but the consequences are worse.

And I thought architects were rational people.

AIA should have to model WTC 7 'collapse'

If the AIA is intent on voting down this resolution, they should have to provide a model for how B7 collapsed in the way it did -- something they will not / can not do. Or they should demand that NIST provide them with the input data -- something they will not / can not do. It is inexcusable that they insist on ignorance about the means by which a skyscraper falls based strictly on politics! It's cowardice and dereliction of duty.

I have been contemplating this vote scenario...

Well, I have been contemplating this vote scenario where the resolution failed by a large margin.

This had been the most important Ae911Truth Campaign ever.

A thing that I have noticed with myself and as a Movement is that we often have high expectations. Understandably so. After all, to me personally, it is a "no brainer" that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. I "got it" easily, even back in 2005 when I first looked into 9/11. Perhaps, sometimes, it is easy to over-estimate the broad public's abilities (ability to observe, willingness to look, ability to evaluate, ability to act with ethical and firm action, ability to utilize higher thinking skills, etc.)

This doesn't mean that we have failed, because we are tenacious as a Movement. Persistent. We have goals and we strive for objectives. We are organized.
However, sometimes we don't reach the target within the timeline we set for ourselves.
(ha!...I had thought in 2006 that things were so obvious, everyone would be "on board" within a few short years.)
But on a positive note: We often do reach an objective, even if it is later than we originally had projected.

A previous Ae911Truth.org campaign which had this type of significance was the endeavor to gain more members back around 2008 when there were just a few hundred Architects and Engineers on board with Ae911Truth.org. (SEE BELOW)

Okay, this may be a little bit of "kitsch", but it is on the "lighter side"...
...With the courage of the old west...See this entertaining 3 minute YOUTUBE video from 2008 regarding THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY in the campaign to increase the number of architects and engineers from just a few hundred to more than a thousand... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qESG8_oyECk

---Delivered by https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpH453BTUJk