New Interview of Richard Gage & Scientific Facts Of WTC Collapse, Video

MUST SEE! All the important facts in 30 min. (Published 25.03.2008)

video.google.com...

Best what I have seen so far...

- I put it here because it goes so well with new video...

Undisputed Facts Point to the Controlled Demolition of WTC 7
by Richard Gage

www.globalresearch.ca...

Quoted:

" Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc., who was hired for the Building 7 cleanup, said that "molten steel was found at 7 WTC." Leslie Robertson, World Trade Center structural engineer, stated that on October 5, "21 days after the attacks, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running." Fire department personnel, recorded on video, reported seeing "molten steel running down the channel rails… like you're in a foundry – like lava from a volcano." Joe O'Toole, a Bronx firefighter, saw a crane lifting a steel beam vertically from deep within a pile. He said "it was dripping from the molten steel." Bart Voorsanger, an architect hired to save "relics from the rubble," stated about the multi-ton "meteorite" that it was a "fused element of molten steel and concrete."

The knowledge that this evidence even exists was denied by one of your top engineers, John Gross, in his appearance at the University of Texas in April of this year. Steel melts at about 2,850 degrees Fahrenheit, about twice the temperature of the World Trade Center Tower 1 and 2 fires as estimated by NIST. So what melted the steel?

[edit on 28-3-2008 by JanusFIN]

reply to post by JanusFIN


When is Mr Gage going to write his own stuff?? It appears to me, all he does is post the same old recycled theories that have been around for years.

Look at his slide show. He is now on his third different version due to all the mistakes he has made.

He is a liar and a thief. He refused to debate Mark Roberts. HE begs for money on his website more so than Rob Balsamo.

IF you are interested in the TRUTH about Mr. Gage....

Go here:

www.ae911truth.info...

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by JanusFIN

 

When is Mr Gage going to write his own stuff??

He is a liar and a thief. He refused to debate Mark Roberts. HE begs for money on his website more so than Rob Balsamo.

You know CO, it's time to drop that tired canard of "making money off 9/11."

If you want to read one of the ASCE reports on the WTC that we've just learned are being officially investigated for being cooked, you've got to pony up $100 for access. Your hero Scheurman is hawking books on debunker cable shows to make a buck.

Give it a rest, finally.

I'm just starting to open my eyes to events of 911 and I find it MOST disturbing. If this was an inside job of so called "controled demolition", who had the know how to go in to the towers and wtc #7 and wire them with charges while the buildings themselves were being used and occupied? Was the technology there to wire the building's DURING construction? Was that a possibility? Has anyone heard of any explosive tech's who died or disappeared mysterily pre 911 and/or shortly after? When those buildings did fall I was with an army recruter and we both were watching the tv and both said at the exact same time that look's like a controled demo. But that was just one feeling at the time, because as most people in america, I was shocked to my core at what I was witnessing on the tv screen. I dont know to much about wtc#7,, wasn't that a gov building? For the life of me I still do not understand how or why that building collapsed. What was in it to warrant a demo? I can see why the towers would act as a juicy target for terrorist/extremist's being that is was pretty much a symbol of american trade and of course WORLD TRADE. Will we ever know for sure?

reply to post by CaptainObvious


I cant defend defend Mr Gage, and I have no will either. In my eyes that guy is speaking with hundreds of voices, and he is the main man in organization. I dont see any lies in here, I think he is doing great work, with all the passion that it needs from all of us.

Putting your self in front of movement is not the easy part. But he takes that place and I respect that. I have no facts against him, and what he say, and do, have many facts backing all his words. What he say many times, is that he is ready for debate and he scream for it, but there is nobody who challenge him. So I dont understand that accusation.

From making money with 911... I dont know if he do. He say that he goes to his work every day... And so what? In capitalism we buy ourself bumber stickers what we want, and I am ready to pay to get the truth out, thats my own opinion, if I want to carry the flag, and I have to pay the price. Everything costs, and truth has no government funds behind it.

Molten steel... How that is possible without explosives? But its not just the facts, its also the understanding, big picture, like he said.

I have seen all shown evidence before, facts doesnt move, they stay. But this "human side" of facts, is I think better way to spread the truth forward, than lectures from "hard facts seminars" ...

...

Originally posted by gottago

You know CO, it's time to drop that tired canard of "making money off 9/11."

If you want to read one of the ASCE reports on the WTC that we've just learned are being officially investigated for being cooked, you've got to pony up $100 for access. Your hero Scheurman is hawking books on debunker cable shows to make a buck.

Give it a rest, finally.

I love this. What I'm tired of is the bunk that people like Gage present. I'm sorry if I have a problem with people making money off of lies of 911. I posted a link to a site dedicate to pointing out the lies & mistakes of Mr. Gage. Since this site started, Mr. Gage has changed his slide show THREE TIMES. Why?

I didn't know you had to shell out 100 bucks for an ASCE report. the NIST report was free. Can you show me where it states that the WTC report is being investigated for "being cooked?" Again, I wasn't aware of that. Unless I read something wrong.

In regards to Mr. Scheurman. Being my "hero". Yes he is a hero. Don't you think so too? Or do you think a pathetic jerk like Gage is a hero?

Scheurman is a man who was THERE at 911. GO back to the thread that was created for some facts.

in part:

Need I go on? If you read the book (or parts of it) He is making the attempt to have codes changed in buildings so that they may protect other rescue workers during highrise fires or other disaters. He does so by refering to the NIST report and goes on somewhat attacking the Port Authority.
Will he make money? Well, since his work is for the GOOD of the people, to help save lives... I hope he does. The man saw his friends die. Have you ever witnessed such a tragedy? If so, would you want there to be a way to possibly help so that such a tragedy not accure? Or minimize the casualties? The book is not all doom and gloom:


In this comprehensively researched and extremely well written book, former FDNY Battalion Chief Arthur Scheuerman combines his 20 year career as a NYC Firefighter with 5 years of meticulously dedicated research to help the reader understand just how and why the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11. The chief analyzes and interprets in clear and concise terms, all the factors which combined to create the largest structural collapse in world history & the largest loss of life on American soil since the Civil War. And he goes even farther than the NIST Federal Investigation did, because he carefully considers the effect of the Port Authority’s immunities and exemptions from building and fire codes on the design, construction and ultimate collapse of the WTC.
—Sally Regenhard, Chair of the Skyscraper Safety Campaign



Arthur Scheuerman has written a book through the eyes of a firefighter and structural engineer. His careful and objective analysis of the facts and images of the Towers’ collapse on 9/11 should be required reading for those who seek answers.
—James Quintiere, Professor of Fire Protection Engineering, University of Maryland


Great book for the engineering and fire service community. This book integrates the many complicated factors in the collapse and clarifies how the fires brought the buildings down.

—Vincent Dunn, Deputy Chief (Ret.) FDNY

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 29-3-2008 by CaptainObvious]

[edit on 29-3-2008 by CaptainObvious]

reply to post by CaptainObvious

I love this. What I'm tired of is the bunk that people like Gage present. I'm sorry if I have a problem with people making money off of lies of 911. I posted a link to a site dedicate to pointing out the lies & mistakes of Mr. Gage. Since this site started, Mr. Gage has changed his slide show THREE TIMES. Why?

And the government and the official story has changed 13 times, whats your point?.

So its the official story that lacks any credibility or even common sense.


[edit on 29-3-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by CaptainObvious


From your posting I could read... Do you really still believe to official story, really? I am just interested, nothing bad against your opinions.

If you dont believe it either, have you give some another theory, what we "ordinary truthers" havent still not figured out?

I am not here to compare any facts, I leave that to experts, and eyewitness, and first responders. For me its more about believe, and the big picture, where this false flag of 9/11 just so perfectly fits.

911 is just another 7/7 or Madrid bombs, Oklahoma or JFK... Bay of Tonkin or burning in Reichtags house. There is so many of them... But I do say that 911 was and is still the worst act in history.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

I love this... I'm sorry if I have a problem with people making money off of lies of 911.

It's childish, and your great fire guy is hawking books and ASCE is hawking it's cooked reports, so really, let it drop. I think to any objective observer it is an obvious smear tactic.

I posted a link to a site dedicate to pointing out the lies & mistakes of Mr. Gage. Since this site started, Mr. Gage has changed his slide show THREE TIMES. Why?

I'll be quite honest with you, I think Gage is a drip. I saw the video, and he's about the worst public speaker I've ever seen. But putting that aside, what he has to say is pretty much standard issue; I didn't hear anything original from him. As for revising his slide show, so what? I assume he's refining his argument. It's a slide show, after all. As for Scheurman, I still think he's a hack, so let's leave it at that, no need for more propaganda about him.

I didn't know you had to shell out 100 bucks for an ASCE report. the NIST report was free.

Learn something new every day! The ASCE reports are behind a subscription firewall. Lowest access fee is $100. Learned that thanks to our dear jthomas, who just threw out the abstracts, and when I went to actually read them, discovered that little impediment. JT never did post the relevant sections when asked, I'd speculate because he'd never seen them.

Can you show me where it states that the WTC report is being investigated for "being cooked?" Again, I wasn't aware of that. Unless I read something wrong.

My pleasure, see this thread. But you've already posted on it, so I hope you actually read the original article. It clearly states that a panel has been formed to address these allegations of influence buying.

To my eyes, a bit more serious than hawiking some truther coffee mugs and your dearly beloved aprons.

Originally posted by gottago


It's childish, and your great fire guy is hawking books and ASCE is hawking it's cooked reports, so really, let it drop. I think to any objective observer it is an obvious smear tactic.

This "fireguy" is bad mouthing the Port Authority and looking for changes in the building industry....to protect people in the even of future building fires. etc. I'm not sure what yo umean by smear tactics. Who is smearing who?

I'll be quite honest with you, I think Gage is a drip. I saw the video, and he's about the worst public speaker I've ever seen. But putting that aside, what he has to say is pretty much standard issue; I didn't hear anything original from him. As for revising his slide show, so what? I assume he's refining his argument. It's a slide show, after all. As for Scheurman, I still think he's a hack, so let's leave it at that, no need for more propaganda about him.

He is removing errors that he is constantly shown he makes. But agreed...Since you think he is a drip...we can stop debating about him. I can't leave it at that...you calling a Firefighter a "hack".

Please explain why he is a hack?

Learn something new every day! The ASCE reports are behind a subscription firewall. Lowest access fee is $100. Learned that thanks to our dear jthomas, who just threw out the abstracts, and when I went to actually read them, discovered that little impediment. JT never did post the relevant sections when asked, I'd speculate because he'd never seen them.

Id be interested in seeing them. Do you have a link to them? If not I can U2U jt for it.

Can you show me where it states that the WTC report is being investigated for "being cooked?" Again, I wasn't aware of that. Unless I read something wrong.

My pleasure, see this thread. But you've already posted on it, so I hope you actually read the original article. It clearly states that a panel has been formed to address these allegations of influence buying.

Your right...now it is looking into allegations. But is it looking into the NIST report? Or the FEMA report? Or the ASCE Report?

I don't want to debate on this thread about that issue...but let me point out this:

Astaneh-Asl, who received money from the National Science Foundation to investigate the collapse, insisted most New York skyscrapers built with traditional designs would survive such an impact and prevent the kind of fires that brought down the twin towers.

Were WTC 1 & 2 traditional designs?

To my eyes, a bit more serious than hawiking some truther coffee mugs and your dearly beloved aprons.

Agreed.... And this is where the "hack" comes into play. He agrees that changes should be made. That the Port Authority should be looked at.

And Rob stopped selling aprons!

Originally posted by JanusFIN


From your posting I could read... Do you really still believe to official story, really? I am just interested, nothing bad against your opinions.

I believe in all the evidence I have been shown. That leads me to believe that we were attacked and thousands killed by a pack Jihadists.

If you have evidence to show differently please present it. I've been reading this stuff for 4 years and havent seen anything.

I am not here to compare any facts, I leave that to experts, and eyewitness, and first responders. For me its more about believe, and the big picture, where this false flag of 9/11 just so perfectly fits.

From the minds of a truther.... Doesn't want facts.

911 is just another 7/7 or Madrid bombs, Oklahoma or JFK... Bay of Tonkin or burning in Reichtags house. There is so many of them... But I do say that 911 was and is still the worst act in history.

I guess for someone that does not want to care facts...this statement would be accurate.

reply to post by CaptainObvious


You get your point, and you think that "official truth" is "the truth"... Ok. Just want to ask that.

BTW, what are you doing here anyway? There is another forum in all MSM websites... (Oh, damn, what a bad joke from me!)

You understand me very, very wrong. I have look facts from day 1, and I remember when 2001 and 2002 when there were no websites for this cause, I, and many others, we took prints from all accusations and evidence, what we found from net, mainly from talking "groups" ... We were shure that those evidence will be chased hardly in that time, and finally, all electric documents would be destroyed with some "Troyan virus" by CIA and FBI.

First "truthers" like me, we were really afraid to get raided by police. And I heard that it happened too, but we win, thanks for Alex Jones and Jeff Rense any many more true patriots, and today the truth is planted for millions of peoples, and websites... They can not stop our message anymore!

For me, answers are not so important, but all questions still are.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

This "fireguy" is bad mouthing the Port Authority and looking for changes in the building industry....to protect people in the even of future building fires...
Please explain why he is a hack?

I'm not sure what yo umean by smear tactics. Who is smearing who?

I find your insistence on harping on DVDs and mugs an obvious smear tactic; it's going low and has zero to do with whatever the argument is at hand.

As for the fireguy, well he's just one of the point guys out there prepping the terrain for the eventual (if and when it ever appears) NIST WTC 7 report. That's petty obvious. It's all being well done; the fire-safety window-dressing, etc., you're always pointing to. But that's what he's up to.

You can access the ASCE report library here. Subsription window is upper left on the database homepage.

Your right...now it is looking into allegations. But is it looking into the NIST report? Or the FEMA report? Or the ASCE Report?

I don't want to debate on this thread about that issue...but let me point out this: ...Were WTC 1 & 2 traditional designs?

Good a place as any, for now.

Well as of now it's the ASCE reports, but they were done by the same forensics engineering team, led by Corley, that whitewashed OKC.

The ASCE report on the WTC was also the basis for the NIST report--obviously, as these same guys went on to do NIST--so there's basically just a name change separating one from the other. This calls into question the whole shebang. Influence buying, corrupted practices, gov't favoritism, hacks-for-hire; it's all being looked into. Frankly it's a no brainer the whole thing, and stinks to high heaven. The real warning siren is OKC and what they did there. If you believe that report, you'll believe anything (rhetorical "you.").

And the questions go far beyond the few soundbites brought up in the article (as per your "traditional design" question, that was just something tossed in there by some reporter's judgment); this is really about the methodology of the ASCE reports being fundamentally corrupt... and then on to NIST, since ASCE was the core of that, and the same guys wrote it.

This is big. You're gonna need more than coffee mugs to contain this one, if the investigation isn't totally derailed (and seeing how these things go, that's a very real possibility probability).

[clean up]


[edit on 29-3-2008 by gottago]

Great video, watch it and tell everyone you know, to watch it.
Great how it answers the question of the "puffs" coming out of the windows, below the collapse.

Originally posted by gottago


I find your insistence on harping on DVDs and mugs an obvious smear tactic; it's going low and has zero to do with whatever the argument is at hand.

You can access the ASCE report library here. Subsription window is upper left on the database homepage.

I'm not sure why you would have to pay for these. I will get in contact with a few of the guys I know and see if it is possible to obtain a copy. If I do get a copy I will see what infringements are placed on it.

Good a place as any, for now.

Well as of now it's the ASCE reports, but they were done by the same forensics engineering team, led by Corley, that whitewashed OKC.

Your post is filled with fantastic accusations without proof. Mr. Corely has been involved with FAR more investigation than OKC and the WTC. Has he "whitewashed" all of them as well? OR is it only the ones he was paid off for?

I admit, outside of watching a PBS documentary, I have not done much research on the OKC. If you have some information that provides the so called white washing Mr. Corely has done...please provide it for me.

Thanks for your information.

CO

I agree that people can take advantage of situations... I haven't done much research on Richard Gage... I do agree that he is just spitting out already thought of material and is discussing what has already been discussed... What I don't understand, and if someone can answer this for me, is why haven't any of the major news channels put this on the air... If they have, please post that info, I'd like to know... Why haven't they gathered all the people who want the truth and interviewed them? All the experts who have spoken out? This is a huge story in my opinion...

Is it because the government controls the media and won't let it out?

You'd think someone like O'rielly and the Factor would have the you know what's to put this on the air... Just don't get it...

reply to post by ElectricUncleSam

Is it because the government controls the media and won't let it out?

Or because the Media controls the government?

They are separate structures with common "interest", you can read this also as Elite government. Do you really think that these talk show hosts pick up their issues by them self? ... Like really? Wow! And still you are here?

reply to post by CaptainObvious


It's not fantastic, read the article carefully. The inquiry is into the ASCE papers on 9/11 that Corley's group put together. They went on to NIST. One leads directly to the other. The accusations concern the validity of the methodology--that is, were these people improperly influenced to find what they were supposed to find? This is all pretty clear; the question is, will the investigation have real teeth?

Also, why do you think Corley is using such obvious smear tactics in his comments at the end of that article? And don't you see the duplicitous circularity of using NIST to support ASCE? He worked on both, what a farce! This is sock-puppet theatre!

"Corley said the society's study was peer-reviewed and its credibility was upheld by follow-up studies, including one by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

"I hope someone looks into the people making the accusations," Corley said. "That's a sordid tale."

As for what's up with Corley and why these accusations are starting to stick, you should look into Kevin Ryan's dissection of ASCE, NIST and how Corley's group shaped the reports; he was the UL whistleblower and has a video out named "The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard of Deception" link here to video.

Ryan makes it very clear what they were up to; the most outrageous part of his presentation is his discussion of NIST tossing out it's own test of the trusses, to discover the amount of bowing of the floors. This was to test their crucial theory that the floor trusses bowed and pulled in the exterior facades, initiating collapse. They set up an experiment: built a section of floor with exterior columns, overloaded it with double weight, left off fireproofing, and burned a fire at 2000 degrees under it for 2 hours, and measured a 2 inch deflection for their trouble. Well, they didn't like that, so they then set up computer models of the same thing, and finally got what they wanted on the ninth try--namely a 54 inch sagging--and this is what went into the report. From 2 inches from an actual experiment already stacked entirely against the true conditions--then pulling 54 inches out of their butts with some computer "modeling" that they had to trick with repeatedly.

Now, what do you think of the objectivity of their methodology?

And as for OKC, just google about the initial news reports--many of them, local and national--that state that the FBI itself had announced they had found unexploded bombs in the Murrah building. Initial reports of one, then updates of two found. They even have footage of them clearing the area when they took them out. And then it all vanished and later you have that nonsense about a fertilizer bomb in a rented truck parked in front of the building. That is simply impossible; no way you can achieve the necessary force to do the damage to the structure. And Corely and his group were the ones called in to write up that fairy tale. Then ASCE, then NIST. Quite a track record. What is fantastic is what actually went on in writing these reports.

[edit on 29-3-2008 by gottago]

reply to post by CaptainObvious


I'm not choosing sides here but:

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
When is Mr Gage going to write his own stuff??

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
He is a liar and a thief. He refused to debate Mark Roberts.

Even Mr. Roberts site is mostly made up of links to others work.

Still trying to remain impartial, just saying, Mark Roberts isn't exactly an expert on anything.