Richard Gage on Coast To Coast AM - 6/9/09

special thanks to YouTube user 'FREETHINKINGUK' for uploading (I just made the playlist). Enjoy...

Richard Gage, you were absolutely excellent!

I just listened to all 12 of the segments. Richard Gage was comfortable and totally credible. His command of the subject matter is unparalleled. George Noory asked pertinent questions and Richard handled them with confidence and clarity. The same goes for the questions from the callers. Richard, you are a wonderful spokesperson. This was fantastic exposure for 911 Truth.

Thanks to George Noory and Coast to Coast AM for having Richard as a guest and allowing him to get the message of Truth out to your vast audience.

80 percent of the emails during the show agree with Richard and call for a new investigation. (stated by George Noory near the end of the interview)

Most of all, thank you Richard Gage, for all your hard work and dedication.

I hope Art Bell was listening.

I understand that he has publicly expressed skepticism about the 9/11 truth movement and his belief in the OCT.

Don't know what's about this server

Richard Gage on Coast to Coast Hour 1

Richard Gage on Coast to Coast Hour 2

Richard Gage on Coast to Coast Hour 3

but the links work fine...


Noory is great here too.

That Interview may have got us a million converts.

Haven't heard all of it yet

But so far it's just great. Richard is getting better and better.


Interesting also: I've recently learned of Phil Schneider's story, government engineer and whistleblower. A caller then relates [Part 10] Schneider's account how the Trade Towers were retrofitted with detonable explosives coupled to supports in the elevator shafts

Related testimony

even if true

that will lead us nowhere except alien nation.

Coast to Coast AM

website related to the Gage appearance

Fantastic converse! Long air time! Popular station!

"It is you who are the torch-bearers with respect to that truth.... ...Steel your spines. Inspire your children. Then when the moment is right, rise again...." W PEPPER

I'd give Gage a 6 out of 10

I'd give Gage a 6 out of 10 if we're rating here. Countless times during the interview session he took a long circuitous route through excessive prefacing etc. For instance, he never did answer how the nanothermite could have been applied when asked initially. If he was fully aware of Jones' research, he could have related the painting on of the substance. As for George, he is clearly an agent IMO. He's there as a release valve of tension if you will as well as providing the necessary association with the Truth movement to his 'National Enquirer' type show which airs absolutely everything from past lives to ufos to ancient civilizations living in the center of the earth. Proof of this was when Noory abruptly steered the conversation away from the Nanothermite experts conducting the investigation back to theory and speculation of the Silverstein 'pull' comment. Later, after acknowledging that Gage was hesitant to speculate, a strong and perfect position to take, he continued to badge Richard to do so and asked him over and over again to speculate while never really digging hard enough into the evidence presented by Richard. For Richard, if he's listening, he needed brevity with accuracy for such a radio show. If I could put it down in a formula it would be: direct answer, supporting evidence, contextualize and conclude. That's my two cents.

Doing Radio on this Topic is not as easy as you might think.

It is easy to get sidetracked, loose your train of thought, think that you said something because you were headed there, get flustered, get baited and not know what to say. Noory said that 80% percent of callers were favorable to Gage. Lets give him an 8 or better or better yet you talk to millions on this topic and show us how it is done

Direct Answer, Supporting evidence, contextualize, conclude

Excellent comments Cornelius - I will take them to heart. I think I was a little challenged about how to fill 2+ hours. And I did lose track a few times! I am aware of the options for sol-gel type nanothermite applications.

Thank you!

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

You're doing a heck of a job Mr.Gage

I hope you can team up with Jessie Ventura & really wake some new folks up.


Richard, you always do an excellent job. I especially appreciate the distinction you now more often make between acceleration and speed.

With respect to the sol-gel option, I would like to point out this exchange between Dr. Greening and Prof. Jones:


You imply in your paper that some form of exothermic thermitic material was applied to critical steel surfaces in the Twin Towers, presumably to hasten their destruction. However, you also claim that the thermitic material was in the form of a coating that was typically less than 100 microns thick. To evaluate the maximum heating effect of a 100-micron layer of thermite on a WTC column one needs to calculate the heat energy released to a hypothetical thermite-coated column on one of the upper floors of the Towers, assuming most of the heat liberated by the proposed thermite reaction was absorbed by the column. The result of such a calculation shows that a temperature rise of less than 10 ° C is expected for full reaction of a 100- micron thermite coating on an upper floor core column. I therefore feel compelled to ask why anyone would bother to apply such an ineffectual coating.


First, two of the red/gray chips release more energy than thermite (more than 3.9 kJ/g) -- and indeed more than HMX, a conventional explosive -- have you understood Fig. 30? Second, we note that the chips found may be just thin material that has survived the destruction. Thicker material might have been present and consumed. There are other possibilities. The fact remains that this material exists in the WTC dust, and the central question to me is not HOW it was used, but rather WHO made the stuff and why?

Perhaps you know about it already. It is simply difficult at this point to speculate about the precise application of the red/gray chips.

I find your non-speculative approach to be wise, positive and productive. I'm looking forward for more of the same.

And if you're asked to speculate in an informed manner, I would use Gordon Ross' work. Which you probably also know, but I'm posting here for reference.

Thanks for all that you do, Richard.

Greening does circumstantial denial

as always. Simple statement: Why in the world should we believe that nanothermite or thermite which purpose is to melt/cut steel couldn't do something office/kerosene fires in his state of mind obviously can do?


Circumstantial denial is the perfect term, thanks for teaching me that. :-)

The reason I post it here: learn about counterarguments. This is meant to arm Richard (and Steven, although he has so far destroyed debunkers) for future confrontations. That was the purpose of my blog article about Pileni and that is my purpose here.

Furthermore, Dr. Greening's denial of Newton's third law shows the level of immoral, unscientific obfuscation he is willing to engage in, in order to further his agenda. However nobody is perfect, and I'm sure Prof. Jones (and Mr. Gage) would agree that some criticism (no matter how circumstantial) is instructive and strengthens our case if recognized as such. At least Dr. Greening engages in some brainstorming. You find a leak and plug it. In order to maintain your scientific integrity you simply must entertain the possibility that you are wrong.

It is just that the likelihood of us being wrong has diminished to near non-existent over time!

Lastly, I'd like to point out that explosive 'paint' is never normal. This argument is undebunkable.


and, BTW, I liked that Richard pointed out that gypsum wallboard was made to protect from fires and never ever in history did something to fuel it. Absurd on its face!

I watch Dr. Greening very carefully, and my experience with hundreds of hours of discussions with "debunkers" alarmed me almost immediately if someone uses false arguments or more evil kind of discussion style.

I miss something, a rebuttal of Greenings last 10 false claims in a short way so to say, I did one in german language, maybe I can made it to english.

Back when I watched television, I used to watch

Wheel Of Fortune. I would come up with answers from the couch on a regular basis.

As someone who has been in media, I can tell you that being on the air live adds a level of difficulty.

Richard Gage is an architect who has become a media spokesperson. I think he did an excellent job. Was he perfect? No.

Was it a positive interview for 911 Truth? Yes.

Is there room for improvement? Sure. We can always do better.

I think your message has some pertinent assessments, but it is the tone that makes me recoil a bit.

It has that "I think I could do it much better" tone.

If this is the case, then, by all means, step up to the microphone.

Good interview...

I would give this interview 9 out of 10. I don't think the picture is quite as bleak as Cornelius sees it, although he makes good points.

First of all, I am not convinced that George Noory is an "agent". There were certainly a thousand ways this interview could have been derailed, but it did not happen. A great deal of good info got out. It is true that he has been surprisingly slow to embrace the Truth movement, but he seems to be venturing more deeply into the territory (witness this interview). But that might have something to do with the perception of 9-11 truth by the majority of his listeners. Perhaps the tide is turning, therefore he dares to venture further. The "steering conversation away from nanothermite to pull-it" might have more to do with George's own personality than him being a shill. Every host brings his own personality to the show and the "pull-it" might have been something that has been bothering him personally, so he goes for it.

Second, about specualtion. I think some speculation is needed. Many people have a major blockage to this info unless you can show at least purely speculatively, how something (like wiring WTC for demolition) COULD theoretically be done. I saw a post somewhere where a guy rejected the demolition hypothesis just for the reason that there were too many people at WTC at all times in order to sneak in explosives undetected. But that is precisely the reason why it would have been so EASY. Nobody would ask questions if a truck with "UPS" or "Wonderbread" sign would back up to the docs. Dr. Jones once mentioned something about "20 trips for 10 guys" (or was it vice versa -- 10 trips for 20 guys -- I don't remember?) which is all it takes to set the charges in place. People need to be given an idea how easy it actually is. (Well, preparations, such as planning and wiring might take much more effort, but setting the actual charges would probably not.) Of course, any speculation needs to be clearly pre- and post-faced with a statement that this is just a speculation, that we have no idea how it was actually done, unless we have a real investigation.

Third, I agree with others that Mr. Gage is getting better and better (and so is the website). He is really amazing -- his effort, efficiency and presentation.

Beyond a 1-10 rating scale

Richard, what you are doing is of the utmost importance, and it goes beyond a 1-10 rating scale. You are doing an excellent job, and I'm glad and proud to be represented by you.

Will see you in Seattle on June 27th, and am trying to bring some 9/11 agnostics with me, people who are open-minded, but who have busy lives and have not had time to study 9/11 adequately.

If I can get them there, I am convinced they will see the truth in your talk, the slides, and the evidence.

I cannot thank you enough.

Thank you all for your heart felt support!

I so much appreciate your gratitude. This is very difficult work that I don't feel particularly well suited for. While I do have a passion for it and thoroughly enjoy meeting and bonding with fellow warriors of the spirit I have never before been an activist nor endured the sacrifices of family, sleeplessness, career, income, lifestyle, and biting attacks that seem to be incumbent upon one performing this type of work. I can tell you honestly that it is primarily the gratitude of you who hear and respond and share our message of truth & justice, with your hearts open and full of fearlessness, that keeps me marching. I would not do it without you. I am not a loner. I need you. And it is I who am grateful for each and everyone of you who love your freedom enough to sacrifice deeply for it. You are my inspiration.

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

As I said, you are doing a fantastic job Richard!

You hard work is recognized and appreciated. Thank you for all you sacrifice in order to expose the truth about 911.