Flickr
Youtube
Facebook
Twitter
| Richard Gage, AIA, on Coast to Coast AM Leads to Surge of Interest |
 |
 |
| Written by Dwain Deets | |||
| Friday, 26 June 2009 00:00 | |||
|
It is impossible to tell which of the future victories by the 9/11 Truth movement will trace back to this single broadcast. Without a doubt, many seeds were sown, and a large percentage will bear fruit. In other cases, the seeds had already been sown, and this Coast-to-Coast broadcast will help turn lukewarm questioners into committed activists. Twenty-two comments were posted at 9/11Blogger.com responding to the story. The story was also covered on 9/11Truth.org. A sampling of the comments that came to the website in the week following the broadcast are shown below. In the case of the last comment, a response back from a member of the AE911Truth team is presented as well:
----- Message: "I see Richard Gage is on coast to coast in the next few hours...at least that's what it says on their site. What a boost this interview could prove towards opening a new investigation. This will send out a really positive message to all who want the truth and I'm sure there will be a helluva lot more professionals wanting to sign your 'petition. I'd just like to wish Richard well and hope that he gets the message out to those who are willing to listen. Terry Walsh ----- Message: "Have you thought about making a page on one of those social networks to try to spread the word and the truth to more people. It might also help with your donations. If you bring more people in, you will get more help :). Might want to look into getting a myspace, Twitter, Facebook account, if you don't already have one." Kelly McCarthy [Kelly, we do have a Facebook page and we have recently established a presence on Twitter.] ----- Message: "Sir, I heard your show tonight on Coast to Coast, and I did not hear any one mention that the speed and the angle that the aircraft hit the towers most of the fuel blew out the building." Tim Thomas ----- Message: "Great show. Your presentation was to the point, insightful and informative. If someone was not convinced, they were not listening. It is very exciting and encouraging to see you get some airtime. We also saw your bit on Fox affiliate recently in Fresno. Wonderful. You are such an important spokesman for our movement. Thank you for all you do. I know it is not the easy road to follow." Ann Capotosto ----- "US Government officially refuting 9/11 theories now (must see)" Message: "Two things, first nice work on Coast to Coast, but George Noory is clearly a "gate-keeper", permitting but managing (like he did tonight) the conclusions of listeners. Second, I just noticed our US government is spending a full scale propaganda effort to refute "conpiracy theories" about 9/11 here: Also, I saw a Youtube clip of an interview with an FBI agent by phone where the "no plane" film maker got him to admit the FBI is relooking at the film footage of the flights hitting the tower, which are contrary to the laws of physics too. The government then is being divided within, but who is responsible for the new anti-conspiracy website above? There is an architect in West Virginia who was presenting seminars on demolition on 9/11 well before you started too, who took a beating in the newspapers." B Williams ----- "One Question Not Asked!" Message: "To Whom It May Concern -- "Heard Mr. Gage on Coast to Coast, and read all that was available of his speech. In addition, I viewed the entire two hour presentation that you have available on your website -- BUT "Nowhere in any of this material does anyone answer the question - Were the planes that were destroyed as they hit part of the assumed "plot"? That is to say, IF thermite explosives had been placed at all of the places designated by Mr. Gage (during or after the completion of the building) HOW AND WHY WERE THE BUILDINGS "DESTROYED" AT THE MOMENT THEY WERE "DESTROYED"? Were the planes "part of the assumed plot"? Is the ENTIRE event to be construed to be a SINGLE HAPPENING? What would have happened to the buildings IF THE TERRIORISTS DID NOT FLY THE PLANES INTO THE BUILDINGS? What "reason"(?) would there be for the buildings to "suddenly explode"(!) if NO PLANES EVER HIT THEM? None of this even begins to explain what MIGHT(?) have happened to Building Seven. Paul Siegel Response back: Mr. Siegel, The hypothesis is that these were deceptive controlled demolitions. That means the perpetrators planned on being able to blame the destruction on the jet impacts. We try not to speculate and try to focus only on the science, but I will hazard a guess for you. If one of the jets missed its tower, that tower would not have been blown up. But, as you noted Building 7 was brought down and was not hit by a jet. It's possible that flight 93 was supposed to hit 7 but that's really speculating. Operations like this are carefully planned. Multiple contingency plans are in place when something goes wrong, as no such operation can be pulled off perfectly in all respects. There's a large body of technical information at http://0x1a.com and a video you may find useful: DVD Quality WMV (433MB) (right click and select "save as") Sincerely,
|
