NEW INVESTIGATION NEEDED TO PREVENT ANOTHER
"9-11", SAYS ARCHITECT
By Peter Duveen
NEW YORK, May 20, 2008--Richard Gage gives the impression of a
meticulous, orderly, punctilious, almost antiseptic professional at
first glance. A member of the American Institute of Architects who is
attached to a West Coast firm involved in the construction of
multi-million dollar projects, Gage has more than likely applied his
public speaking and presentation skills to win over prospective
clients. But on a recent Friday night he utilized these talents in a
different venue, with an underlying passion that transcends the usual
marketing pitch. Gage says he wants to save Americans from the same
type of incident --or worse--that took the lives of 2,700 people in the
World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
perpetrators of the 9-11 attacks, Gage contends, have yet to be
identified. He told a gathering of 150 or so people at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, one of America's premier
engineering and architectural schools, that "they can plan and execute
another one." But "they," according to Gage, are not the 19 cardboard
cut-out Muslim terrorists that the government blames for planning and
executing the attacks. Instead, he points to a much more sinister
source whose participants include officials operating at the highest
levels of the government, and who would therefore have been in a
position to call the shots that made the attacks possible.
Peter Duveen Photo
CAMBRIDGE, MASS.--Using a cardboard
model of one of the World Trade Center towers, architect Richard Gage,
AIA, illustrates the contradictory nature of the
government's explanation of the World Trade Center building collapses
during a presentation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
On the morning of September 11,
2001, the famous twin towers of New York City's World Trade Center were
each hit by airliners about 20 minutes apart. These collisions caused
widespread damage and fires over several floors of each building. But
what followed within the next couple of hours was at least as
startling: the two buildings suddenly and entirely collapsed into piles
of rubble, raining debris on adjacent structures in the process. Then,
in the late afternoon of the same day, another World Trade Center high
rise office tower known as Building 7 also collapsed inexplicably
into its own footprint after suffering only minimal damage.
The official explanation was that the fires ignited by jet fuel from
the colliding aircraft weakened steel and caused the twin towers to
collapse, while the third building fell prey to flying debris and
spreading flames. But closer scrutiny has shown these explanations to
fall short, and a number of researchers, Gage among them, have made the
obvious connection between the buildings’ collapses and a
controlled demolition often used in the construction industry that
would have required carefully placed explosives planted at a critical
number of locations within the buildings, all timed to go off in a
meticulously orchestrated sequence. Muslim terrorists are not likely to
have been able to gain entrance to the high-security buildings that
would have enabled them to implement such a plan, Gage argues.
In his presentation, Gage assembles a vast array of evidence, from
videotaped interviews of firemen, newscasters and other eyewitnesses,
to scientific analyses that demonstrate the insufficiency of aircraft
impacts as the cause of the buildings' destruction. Explosives brought
the towers down, Gage contends, claiming that the evidence is
overwhelming. For example, he cites the following:
▪ Formerly straight steel beams found in the rubble were bent like
horseshoes, without the presence of cracks, indicating that the
deformation could only have been achieved at temperatures approximating
that of a steel forge.
▪ The generation of a vast quantity of finely pulverized concrete
that would have otherwise landed in intact chunks if the buildings had
collapsed only as a result of the fires and "pancaking" of floors upon
one another. "If we are going to have a pancake collapse, show me the
pancakes," Gage says.
▪ The absence of identifiable remains of office furniture and
other contents that would have remained intact in a collapse driven
solely by the weight of the buildings.
▪ The presence in debris of the chemical signatures of explosive
materials such as thermate that could have been used to demolish the
Trade Center towers. Thermate is a mixture of aluminum, iron oxide
and sulfur that upon ignition generates temperatures high enough to
▪ Numerous recorded testimonies regarding the presence of molten
steel in the wreckage of the buildings, with high temperatures
persisting long after the buildings' destruction.
▪ The scattering of fragmented human body parts on the roofs of
adjacent buildings, implicating explosive force, and not a mere
▪ Formation of a huge cloud of dust in the immediate aftermath of the
collapses, composed of finely pulverized concrete and other building
contents, which Gage compared to a volcanic eruption. The conversion of
concrete into powder, along with the suspension in air and transport of
the fine particles, would have required more energy than was available
in a gravitational collapse, says Gage.
▪ Debris that included only relatively short pieces of steel of
no more than a few storys in length. “The structural elements
don’t dismember from each other” in a gravitational
collapse, Gage noted, illustrating what he meant with slides of
buildings that had fallen over from earthquakes, where macro-structures
such as concrete flooring and walls remain intact.
▪ The presence of an interconnected steel infrastructure that would
have acted as a heat sink, drawing away heat from steel directly
affected by the fires, and preventing it from reaching temperatures
that would have weakened it enough to cause a collapse.
▪ Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosives detonated in the buildings before the collapses.
Gage makes many more points to bolster his case. Meanwhile, the
government has invested millions of dollars in a study released by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that only
attempts to show, with not a little hand-waving, that the floors most
affected by the aircraft collisions collapsed solely from the aircraft
impacts and resulting fires. It does not say why remaining structures
below the impact zones, which suffered little or no damage from the
aircraft or fires, had no effect on arresting or appreciably slowing
the fall of the upper portions of the towers. The buildings fell in
their entirety at speeds close to freefall, demonstrating that the
lower portions of the buildings offered no resistance to collapse, a
result totally contrary to any notion of engineering mechanics
On this last point, Gage takes the time to make a simple demonstration.
He picks up in his hands two square models of the top section of one of
the World Trade Center towers. One he allows to fall onto the desk
below. The other falls on top of a model of the lower structure of the
World Trade Center. According to NIST, says Gage, the two should hit
the desk at the same time, but in his model, of course, the lower part
of the tower arrests the fall of the upper section, illustrating the
impossibility of both hitting the ground at free-fall speed. The point
of his demonstration is that the fall of the upper stories should have
been arrested by the lower portion of the buildings, and not have
collapsed at near-free-fall speeds as if the lower portion did not
NIST, Gage says, only carried its investigation as far as determining
whether the floor most damaged by aircraft collisions collapsed, and
takes it for granted that the downward movement of the upper sections
of each tower would be sufficient to trigger the collapse of the lower
portions as well, a result he calls "simply speculation."
"And you're just going to stop there?" he asks, wondering why NIST does not address the second part of the problem.
At the beginning of his presentation, Gage polled the audience, asking
how many believed the World Trade Center structures collapsed due to
the aircraft impacts and the resulting fires they generated. Seven
raised their hands in response. Asked who among them were not certain
why the towers collapsed, 49 replied affirmatively.
At the end of Gage’s presentation, the former number was reduced to zero, while the latter count fell to 11.
Gage ended his presentation with a call to support the non-profit
organization that he established, Architects and Engineers for 9-11
Truth, by signing a petition on the organization’s web site
(www.ae911truth.org), by becoming a member, or by making a financial
contribution. He quipped that he could not support his work of live
presentations around the country and frequent radio appearances by
financing his efforts on the equity of his home.
"We need to get motivated, get into action," he said, warning his
audience that if another 9-11-style event were perpetrated by the same
people who implemented the last one, "the remainder of our freedoms
would evaporate." For this reason, Gage is pressing for a new
BACK TO HOME PAGE